The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

So, where is the Leica S2?

LJL

New member
While all of this number of employees and stuff discussion is very interesting and quite informative, not sure just how relevant it will be if Leica is unable to price their products, and service the professionals they are targeting so that folks actually buy the gear. All the trained techs and assembly folks in Leitz-Park will matter little if the S2 is priced too high to get anybody interested in buying it.

On the flip side, if Leica takes a much more aggressive approach and prices the S2 to really get it into the market, then all those folks and techs and stuff may be useful to help service things at the level that professionals need. (The best is to just have the gear work properly all the time, and not need to be going back for adjustments/fixes, like the M8 when it came out.)

I really do not think it is so important as to which company has more employees (Hasselblad or Leica or Phase or whomever). If they put out a great, reliable and affordable product and service the buyers properly, they will be able to gain market share. If they build it well, and it does not break, they do not need lots of service folks. If they have to handhold users through all sorts of quirks and things, then maybe a big service group is important, but that will not sell well into the pro user community that just wants gear to work whenever they need it to. Just my thoughts on some of this.

LJ
 
The last number I had was 60 employees left in Göteborg (that's the only HQ, R&D-department and production site they have - I'm sure there are some more in their distribution network).
http://www.hasselbladhistorical.eu/HS/HSGot.aspx

Correct me if I'm wrong.
No problem!

Sweden is not the only HQ and production site we have. You are missing Copenhagen in Denmark which has R&D for digital capture, scanners and software with production of digital capture units and scanners. Also, management, finance and sales.

Add to that offices in UK, Germany, France and the USA.

Its easy to find here...

http://www.hasselblad.com/about-hasselblad/contact-us.aspx

We also don't assemble anything for Fuji - they assemble for us. ;-) As stated many times before Fuji assembles the lenses for us (the shutter is made in Sweden). They have no other involvement in the H camera except for the optics in the viewfinder.

Best,


David
 

Forrest Black

New member
LJ said it more eloquently than I could.

The real challenge facing Leica is whether to market the S2 to the Patek Phillipe crowd (cameras as jewellery) or the Hilti crowd (cameras as tools).
 
Last edited:

LJL

New member
Forrest,
Since Leica has more than one camera in its line-up, it may be possible to do both....sell to the jewelry crowd and sell to the pro user crowd. There may be some confusion over who is in which group, but folks can self-select. The R10, and even the M8 may be more of the jewelry crowd. (I said "may", not saying that they are.) The S2, from its inception and initial marketing by Leica, has really been targeted (they say) toward the pro user group. If they stick with that, build, price and service it accordingly, it could become a very good market segment for them. If they get into the fancy skins and stuff that seems so much more prevalent with the M8 line for example, then they will not be as successful as a camera for professionals that really need and use the gear. As I have commented before, I want my gear to work, all the time, and get out my way. I really do not care what brand it is, or how fancy it looks. I want it to work for me. (I was a PJ a long time ago, and "pretty" was anathema to what gear should be. One wanted reliable gear, and many of us even blacked out the names and stuff to make it more generic looking and attract less attention.)

LJ
 
H

Howard Cubell

Guest
LJ said it more eloquently than I could.

The real challenge facing Leica is whether to market the S2 to the Patek Phillipe crowd (cameras as jewellery) or the Hilti crowd (cameras as tools).
The only market in which Leica has had any traction in recent years is the Patek Phillipe market. That market is beyond completely dead, with no turnaround in the short or medium term. In past recessions, the market for luxury goods was somewhat immune as the very affluent continued to spend freely. Not now. As a result, I expect the S2 to be DOA, even if it comes out of the gate without any major hardware/software glitches like occured with the M8. (What are the chance of that happening?) The pro medium format digital market consists of people putting down very serious money, by their terms, for tools that they depend upon for their livelihood. I just can't imagine them dropping $50k on a brand new camera system by Leica of all companies.
 

georgl

New member
"Sweden is not the only HQ and production site we have. You are missing Copenhagen in Denmark which has R&D for digital capture, scanners and software with production of digital capture units and scanners. Also, management, finance and sales."

You mean Imacon, which was bought by Shriro? How many employees do they have? 50? 100?

The offices don't count, they don't have R&D and manufacturing.

That's why I care:

When I started with medium-format, I've tested nearly all systems - one was different: impeccable lenses, manufacturing/material quality, it simply was a class higher than others - that was Hasselblad - the 200series was too expensive, so I took a 501CM.
Several hundred highly skilled, experienced people manufactured them in Göteborg. And then? The company was sold (I think several times within the last two decades?), they fired most employees and killed nearly their entire system (200 series + Zeiss-lenses) and instead of developing a AF 200 series they came up with the H1...
What's this camera about? Is it a Mamiya, a Bronica? The handling, the buttons, the plastic, the lenses...

http://www.stefanheymann.de/foto/h1test/h1pict-0017.jpg

http://www.stefanheymann.de/501cm/bilder/picture-0040.jpg

This is a very nice site, you can see dozens pictures of the H1 and 501CM in comparison - please don't tell me the H-System wasn't about cutting costs... A very sad thing

Aren't these components made by suppliers close to Fuji (or Fuji itself) and then assembled in Sweden (the viewfinder and film back even has a "Made in Japan"-sticker)? Maybe just a false impression, but it feels very "Japanese" to me (like Canon and Nikon have certain similarities too) - completely different (and much cheaper) than the controls of the 200 series.

It's not bad, it was the first well integrated digital-mf-system around. But that's not a Hasselblad anymore. It's not unique anymore and I wished that Hasselblad also had someone who invest's money and saved their staff & know-how. So it's time that a unique company offers a "unique" MF-system for professionals again - hopefully the Leica S is such system.

But anyway, we're already way too much off-topic. Where's the S2? Hopefully they show some nice samples on 20th February!
 
Last edited:
Imacon and Hasselblad are one and the same now and have been for over four years!

R&D and manufacturing are both in Copenhagen and Goteborg with tight synergy between both. The office in Copenhagen has 80+ employees.

The H system is neither a Mamiya or Bronica, its a Hasselblad. As for cutting costs, this was not the case with the millions of dollars that was invested in the R&D of the H system.

As with any modern successful company (read profitable when I say successful) you simply have to outsource some of your component manufacture. To build everything inhouse was killing Hasselblad slowly with costs per camera too high to make a viable business. Simply raising the price would drive people away - more so in this day and age.

Ill say it once again...

Lens design is from Goteborg, Sweden.

Central Lens Shutter design, R&D and manufacture are from Goteborg, Sweden.

Lens manufacture (but not the shutter!) is by Fujinon, Japan which I am in no way ashamed about. We chose the best partner for the job.

The only other part Fuji contribute to is the optics in the viewfinder and some parts in the film cassette.

Correct it is the first well integrated medium format system. If we did not do this then there would be no more Hasselblad. Look at the sales figures of the 200 series and you will see this was not a system the majority of working professionals wanted. There will always be customers for it to some extent, but to make a viable business so we can stay successful? No.

It still is a unique camera for many reasons and the people at Hasselblad (I count myself as a Hasselblad employee even though I started at Imacon) are as passionate about this system today then as any in the past.

Best Regards,



David

PS Apologies to the OP for somewhat hijacking their thread.
 

stephengilbert

Active member
David,

Instead of apologizing "to the OP for somewhat hijacking their thread," why not start a new one? I'm sure Hasselblads are wonderful and the company has many, many employees, but I don't really care, and people who want to read about Hasselblads won't know that this thread has become a Hasselblad thread.

Steve
 
Hi Steve,

I only feel I have to jump in when information is incorrect, otherwise it tends to run like wildfire.

As for starting a new thread, I agree with you and think most will find it uninteresting! :)

Ill leave it there.

Thanks,

David
 
O

Oxide Blu

Guest
...

The H system is neither a Mamiya or Bronica, its a Hasselblad. As for cutting costs, this was not the case with the millions of dollars that was invested in the R&D of the H system.
I have a very clear memory of when AF was migrating to MF cameras, in the mid-90's, and Hassy saying (at that time) they could NOT produce an AF camera to compete because an AF Hassy body would have to be tagged at close to $15k, and Hassy felt the market would not be willing toss out that much coin for a MF AF body, not even a Hassy.

So when you say cutting costs was not the case I'm inclined to think different. I suspect every aspect of Hassy AF, the designed, the suppliers chosen, the materials used, all of it is a consideration in how to cut costs to stay competitive. Not doing so would be like voting for a stimulus package without reading it.

I agree with you regarding Fujinon optics; they can be world-class, second to none.
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-known member
I dont care where something is made as long as that something is made well and it works. I am a fan of Leica - but lets not kid oursleves - the S2 is vapourware until it is released and proven.

From my point of view Leica has not improved one iota from the company which released the M8 with its quirks and bugs. I look forward to the day that they can produce great gear in scale and volume delivering unit cost reductions which would allow them to compete against other proven product offers at price points that one could take seriously.

Quality or Value is not an absolute measurement it is a relative measurement. You get this set of features for this price. Given an infinite price point - companies can deliver stupendous quality. However ther eis no infinite price and balancing cost against feature sets and then delivering at a price point which equals value to teh buyer is teh challenge in a competitive world.

Successful companies understand this basic business principle.

As for Hasselblad H series - it pioneered a feature set and capability in MF that revoluitonised expectations about a modern MF camera body. The viewfinder alone is a treasure and pleasure to work with - nothing compares to its useability and functionality in MF land.

Unlike the S2 - every other MF camera can be used with a film back - be it 645 or 6X6. I think that whilst not fatal - the S2 has already got a serious deficiency in its design. Regarding ultimate picture making quality - we will see but there is no doubt that the implementation of the KodaK chip will have much more to say about quality than the posted flat MTF curves.

I look forward to the S2 being a success but wouldn't bet large on this as a certainty.
 
O

Oxide Blu

Guest
I dont care where something is made as long as that something is made well and it works. ...
That's kind of the way I look at it, too, except that I also apply the criteria of whether or not the company will be around to back the product. The S2 is speculated as high as $20k on release. :eek: I'm hoping the latest digital camera technology is not really going to be a choice between a new dSLR body and a new BMW Mini Cooper. :D
 

georgl

New member
"I dont care where something is made as long as that something is made well and it works"

A very common argument but these two factors cannot be isolated. It's the skill of the employees, their education, their motivation, their wages, even the infrastructure or enviromental laws which leads to these products. A very unconvinient fact to many people who want to outsource/off-shore production to workforces which are cheap, not organized, have no enviromental restrictions...

"As with any modern successful company (read profitable when I say successful) you simply have to outsource some of your component manufacture."

A very common misconception, brought up by business-people (not engineers!). The most succuseful companies have a very high vertical range of manufacture. It's about taking responsibility - you manufacture it yourself, you have it in you hands - quality, efficiency, costs...
Outsourcing costs lots of money, because it's really hard to control and when you want quality, you have to pay not only the wages/materials for the supplier but also his margin, management...
Somebody came up with Patek Philippe...they nearly manufacture everything themselves!
Leitz also produced had a nearly vertical production and never was more efficient, but now Leica has to pay sometimes ridicously high prices for components, just to asure quality (the suppliers usually don't work for consumer industries anymore, they focussed on aviation, mechanical engineering...) and even then it causes lot's of trouble finding new suppliers for new components and creating a long-lasting relationship.

But anyway, that's a completely new and very complex topic on it's own - but after working for small and very big companies who made everything themselves or outsourced production I can asure you that the new owners from Hasselblad simply didn't want to pay for these people.

Rollei and Mamiya came up with AF-Systems before Hasselblad did, and they (were) even smaller companies and they didn't cut costs on materials or outsourced production (ok neither of them had the standard of old Hasselblads).

So to come to an conclusion, Hasselblad (+Imacons digital-department) have about 140 employees?

I'm sorry, but I get highly suspicous when an investor buys a company, builds an entirely new building for millions, throws it away, fires about 80% of the employees in R&D and production and comes up with an entirely new system which doesn't share most of the qualities Hasselblad made unique.

To get back on-topic:
Having 100 people in R&D, being able to invest this much money and having this experience in camera/lens-design is a real advantage of the S2 over the other systems, I hope they'll take their chance.

Tomoroww they will propably realease new information, also about their S2-service-concept.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I don't get the argument Georgl.

The H works. Your "off-shore verses make it yourself" business theory doesn't alter that one way or the other. It works, that's all that users like Peter care about. Besides, ALL of these back makers rely on outsourcing ... none of them make the most important componet: the sensor.

If a camera works and is relatively cost effective I'd go that way if the alternative was a camera that also works, but was priced like a Patek Philippe watch. That's just common business sense. Much as I'd like it, I can't afford to be a poser, or subscriber to lofty theories that don't translate into cost effective, real world benefits.

Please link me to the info that shows that Rollei and Mamiya had "production" AF before the Hasselblad H. As far as I know the first AF MF camera in production was the Contax 645. If at purchase time, it wasn't in production then it was useless as far as I'm concerned. I moved from Contax 645 to Hasselblad H simply because the AF was way better.

What qualities that made Hasselblad unique are you talking about? The ones that put other MF cameras out of business for not keeping up? IMO, if Mamiya hadn't linked up with the market leading Phase One they'd also be in or near the dust bin now, especially after their "make it yourself" digital back debacle or self contained MFD/SLR stumble.

As far as I'm concerned the H camera is an extension of the V system ... modular, accepts film backs if you select the H1, H2, or now the H2F. Accepts a waist level finder, is backward compatible with all 500 series lenses ever made.

In short, and IMO, none of these companies can cater to a handful of luddites and stay in business.

My only concern about the S2 is that it isn't modular. It is what it is. If it meets your needs then fine, go for it. But even if I got one, I'd need another MFD solution to use on my view camera and any tech field camera. Then I'm forced to support two different systems. Been there done that with MFD. NOW that is REALLY expensive.

And looming on the horizon is the game changing "RED" factor. All modular. Very innovative. Sensors for any need and pocket book.
 

georgl

New member
I was in a hurry - so please kindly overlook all the grammar/spelling mistakes...

One last thing:

I had this discussion before on another place, somehow the relationship between Hasselblad and Carl Zeiss was damaged and we will propably never find out why (I suspect the usual stuff: cutting costs, not willing to pay for new developements...) and they switched to Fuji.
The Fuji-lenses aren't bad at all, most of them seem to reach the quality of their Zeiss-counterparts - but you also have to keep in mind that most of these lenses are 20 years older and have to cover a bigger image circle - a comparison in terms of design/manufacturing skills is therefore very risky.

After seeing their (Zeiss) production facility (the most sophisticated in the world) in Oberkochen I understood what makes them so special - it's incredible what they're capable of and we tend to forget because we have usually old designs or rebadged Cosinas in mind when thinking of Carl Zeiss as a photographer. Have you seen how advanced their new designs are, what they did to produce the Zeiss TPP or their cine-lenses? THAT's second to none.

But Leica seems very close and I don't think Hasselblad can come up with lenses of the S-quality without reuniting with Zeiss again.


Maybe your asking yourself: What does he try to say, what's his point?

BECAUSE of the technical background, because of the 100 employees in R&D, because their experience and the huge investment their making to develop the S-System we can expect a lot from it, something that cannot be copied or imitated that easy.

Why I'm so sensitive about this whole production, workforce etc. thing?

I've seen many bad things happening in the industries I have worked in, which looked quite similar (at least from my perspective) to the things that happened to Hasselblad. Many good friends lost their job, despite being more skilled, more qualified, more effective, more motivated just because some stupid things in the management were decided which killed the whole company years later. We're heading into the wrong direction, that must have been become clear the last months to everyone.
And therefore we shouldn't underestimate the things Mr Kaufmann is doing with the S2 -I handled it already for a few minutes and to me it seemed more than promising!

I thought Hasselblad had so much potencial, transferring their uniqueness into the digital world - a 200AF-system with new Zeiss-AF-lenses but instead they came up with something that looks/feels/handles like a "me too"-645-system

I'll stop here, I'm sorry that I came up with all these things and dragged the whole thread off-topic.
 

Erik Five

Member
You didnt get the memo? Panasonic bought Leica and they went away from the MF and the S2 will now be a 4:3 camera called the L2.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Georgl,

You are perfectly correct to believe that companies make mistakes and change ownership and rise and fall..these are just facts of life.

You make some funny comments abotu 'greedy shareholders' and the economics of outsourcing - I wont bore you or anyone else with a simple refutation of each of your points except to say as a general rule:

...rest assured if something doesn't work it won't sell and there will be nothing to worry about soon enough.

Leica are to be congratulated for bringing out a new camera in a new format with a new line of lenses - if they make them well enough and they price them well enough - then they will succeed. If they don't ? well - back to the drawing board -:)

Enough with the slander of Hasselblad I like many others here shoot with V systems and H systems in film and digital - strengths and weaknesses are well understood.

Pete
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I was in a hurry - so please kindly overlook all the grammar/spelling mistakes...

One last thing:

I had this discussion before on another place, somehow the relationship between Hasselblad and Carl Zeiss was damaged and we will probably never find out why (I suspect the usual stuff: cutting costs, not willing to pay for new developments...) and they switched to Fuji.
The Fuji-lenses aren't bad at all, most of them seem to reach the quality of their Zeiss-counterparts - but you also have to keep in mind that most of these lenses are 20 years older and have to cover a bigger image circle - a comparison in terms of design/manufacturing skills is therefore very risky.

After seeing their (Zeiss) production facility (the most sophisticated in the world) in Oberkochen I understood what makes them so special - it's incredible what they're capable of and we tend to forget because we have usually old designs or rebadged Cosinas in mind when thinking of Carl Zeiss as a photographer. Have you seen how advanced their new designs are, what they did to produce the Zeiss TPP or their cine-lenses? THAT's second to none.

But Leica seems very close and I don't think Hasselblad can come up with lenses of the S-quality without reuniting with Zeiss again.


Maybe your asking yourself: What does he try to say, what's his point?

BECAUSE of the technical background, because of the 100 employees in R&D, because their experience and the huge investment their making to develop the S-System we can expect a lot from it, something that cannot be copied or imitated that easy.

Why I'm so sensitive about this whole production, workforce etc. thing?

I've seen many bad things happening in the industries I have worked in, which looked quite similar (at least from my perspective) to the things that happened to Hasselblad. Many good friends lost their job, despite being more skilled, more qualified, more effective, more motivated just because some stupid things in the management were decided which killed the whole company years later. We're heading into the wrong direction, that must have been become clear the last months to everyone.
And therefore we shouldn't underestimate the things Mr Kaufmann is doing with the S2 -I handled it already for a few minutes and to me it seemed more than promising!

I thought Hasselblad had so much potential, transferring their uniqueness into the digital world - a 200AF-system with new Zeiss-AF-lenses but instead they came up with something that looks/feels/handles like a "me too"-645-system

I'll stop here, I'm sorry that I came up with all these things and dragged the whole thread off-topic.
You are correct in one thing sir ... I do ask myself what is he trying to say, what's the point ?

Nor does it seem that are you sorry for continuing with the luddite ramblings since you continue to do so.

Nor did you answer the simple question as what uniqueness you may be referencing?

This whole elitism thing does get pretty sickening after awhile. Many of us are fighting for survival, and using benchmarks such as five figure lenses like the Zeiss TTP is truly out there in outer space. If the S2 is priced near Pluto it'll be admired on forums like this, discussed to death as the elite choice of the well healed that makes all those who don't have one inferior photographers in some way, and then sit on the dealer's shelf waiting for it's inevitable obsolescence.

Already it's being deified, and we don't even know how it actually functions when the excellent MTF charts shake hands with the sensor, how fast the AF really is in real world applications ... or how much it will all cost in body parts ... which I suspect will be an arm and a leg at minimum.

All I can say is that it better be the cat's meow for enough Pro shooters to rush to the cliff's edge and dump all their current gear wrapped in bundles of $100 bills.

Currently, my preference is to wait for them to go bankrupt from impulsively bad business practices ... then buy my S2 at a dime on the dollar. :ROTFL:
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
You guys are forcing me to go to PMA and actually get the S2 demo presentation. LOL

Keep twisting my arm , BTW I am putting everything on Black this time.
 
Top