Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: geesbert on May 11, 2014, 10:47:09 am
-
http://photorumors.com/2014/05/11/is-hasselblad-in-financial-trouble/
i must say well deserved. I don't mind if there are idiots who buy lunars, but I do when they are failing on their customer base. When i had to get my Hassselblad repaired (broken shutter / baffle) it took them 2 months to do. it even took them two weeks to get me an estimate. totally unacceptable for a professional camera. Additionally the repair was very expensive, but that would be ok if it was done within a couple of days, but as I am relying on my cameras for my business and they claim to offer professional tools, they should also offer professional service.
I can only imagine how pissed off H-user were, when they closed the H system.
-
Hi,
Could be true, or just a rumor. I would not be to surprised if Hasselblad would be acquired by another company, if anyone would see a market in MFD.
Best regards
Erik
http://photorumors.com/2014/05/11/is-hasselblad-in-financial-trouble/
i must say well deserved. I don't mind if there are idiots who buy lunars, but I do when they are failing on their customer base. When i had to get my Hassselblad repaired (broken shutter / baffle) it took them 2 months to do. it even took them two weeks to get me an estimate. totally unacceptable for a professional camera. Additionally the repair was very expensive, but that would be ok if it was done within a couple of days, but as I am relying on my cameras for my business and they claim to offer professional tools, they should also offer professional service.
I can only imagine how pissed off H-user were, when they closed the H system.
-
I can only imagine how pissed off H-user were, when they closed the H system.
But they re-opened their system lately with the H4x (which can even be bought without trade-in now) and nobody noticed.
-
True, but all of the H1 and H2 users I know had already sold off their system in the meantime. Good decision to open the system but far too late.
-
I smell consolidation. Frankly, I would be sorry to see Hasselblad disappear as the cameras are nice, they're kindof the Apple of MF, but it's clear that in MF Phase are as competent at business, ergonomics and innovation as Microsoft in computers.
Edmund
-
I dislike these type of rumors. It flies in the face of journalistic standards, where multiple sources are verified before publishing.
This type of rumor is hurtful and honestly who would like this type of comment directed towards them or their business?
There is not a single brand made that I haven't heard a negative rumor, sometimes the guy behind the camera counter, sometimes on the web, but most of those rumors were wrong.
I've heard Canon medium format rumors for 8 years.
I think we all tend to forget that behind a brand name are the people that work. It's not the brand, or the venture capitalists that concern me, but it is the human capital that gets damaged when these rumors grow.
Everybody is entitled to an opinion,but it's just that . . . an opinion.
I have my own opinion about equipment and if I honestly reflect back, more than 1/2 of my views change with time.
This section of the forum has developed a strange tone. About 1/3 of the participants complain mightily about the cost of specialty cameras, though most of the same people haven't purchased, or used one in 5 or more years, some never.
I don't get it, because buying any camera is an elective. No client, no person I know forces anyone into purchasing one brand, or format.
The advanced amateur or professional uses what they think is best and I've never heard of anyone buying a camera with the thought it would be worse that what they currently use, or a wasteful purchase.
IMO
BC
-
The one caveat in the article is that the CEO who was responsible for the Lunar was replaced; glad to see that that happen.
By the way, did I say open the damn H system!
Most photographers I know that shoot SLRs, including my fiancée, would rather use a Hassy H than a DF+. They go with with the DF+ because it is too much of a hassle to buy into the H system when you prefer a P1 or Leaf back.
Joe the H system is 'open' for the H1/H2 and recently the H4x so that you can use Phase One / Mamiya Leaf / Sinar on them.
We have many clients that choose to use their Phase One / Mamiya Leaf backs on their current H systems or purchase the new H4x and new lenses.
I really do not mind what system a prospect or client wants to put a Phase One / Mamiya Leaf on , it is their choice. We encourage people we are speaking with to make arrangements to try the various bodies including legacy systems such as the V or Contax.
The biggest advantage of going with the DF+ is the increased integration with C1Pro / Capture Pilot to control specific functions of the body, current(1/1600 LS) and future lens roadmap and also the cost when bundled with a digital back purchase or upgrade. You can get the DF+ (Li-Ion battery grip/80MM LS for $4000 vs paying $7200 for an H4x body and VF (no li-Ion grip) and no lens.
So it is not really much of a hassle , it is just more expensive.
Lance
-
All hail Sonyblad.
-
I´m with Cooter, I wish they will continue to give us additional options in MF. I did not understand there latest products like lunar and always felt it has been a fatal move trying to force H users to buy into the digital part of HB and also restrict the use of viewfinders and HCD lenses by closing the system for off brand backs. We use our Leaf backs with H, RZ and LF. I can only speak for us, we ended up buying some used spare H bodies instead of buying new cameras, lenses and viewfinders. Others dropped the H completely and went for the DF - no need for a crystal ball, but well deserved- hmmm.
As for the complaints of the OP, as a professional photographer you have to accept that your equipment can fail at any moment, usually not timed conveniently so you need to have a backup strategy including occasional longer repaid times. My experience with the HB service has been OK so far, but indeed not really fast, especially if it has to go "home".
Cheers, Ulf
-
As for the complaints of the OP, as a professional photographer you have to accept that your equipment can fail at any moment, usually not timed conveniently so you need to have a backup strategy including occasional longer repaid times. My experience with the HB service has been OK so far, but indeed not really fast, especially if it has to go "home".
Cheers, Ulf
So does that mean, I need a backup for my backup, just for when my main system is in repair for two months?
Anyway, this was the final reason for me to ditch Hasselblad.
BTW, it didn't have to go back to sweden, but even if, within Europe mail is fast. no reason to keep customers waiting for such a long time. My dealer told me they hardly ever get anything back from Hasselblad within 6 weeks.
-
All hail Sonyblad.
That will be something.
I agree that the speculation is dangerus: It could become a self-fulfilling prophecy, It could be marketing from some unscrupulous lad.
In the other hand, Hasselblad gets a bad rap for the closing of the system in the fora, but it is full evident, at this stage (years and years of works and still no definitive camera by face one) that Phase One was having an expensive free ride on Hasselblad's back.
The reason they failed is not because of the "close" itself but because they did not perform the necessary investment to leverage the transition.
It was like "I close the system the others go broke and I get all the people".
That will never happened: Starting from the control that Phase One has over the media to the weakness of the Hasselblad backs of the day.
If that was not enough, Hasselblad has not fixed the communication problem they have. They build like a million different marketing projects that they quickly abandon. They seem unable to actually execute. Few months ago I was joking with a member of this forum about his new Hasselblad camera, it has been shipping for months but Hasselblad's webpage still listed the camera as not disponible.
Then it came the Sony rebranded debacle. Not only is nonsense, but they continued on that direction. But the truly telling part is that they don't apear to have win anything of this madness: The H5D-50C does not show any special deal with Sony.
I have been talking the same point from the beginning of the "close".
Best regards,
J. Duncan
-
Seriously. Sony should pick up the pieces for a pittance and build a spankingly awesome MF system out of it. All the basics are in there.
As a Mamiyaleaf owner, I would really welcome some strong competition in the market.
-
Seriously. Sony should pick up the pieces for a pittance and build a spankingly awesome MF system out of it. All the basics are in there.
As a Mamiyaleaf owner, I would really welcome some strong competition in the market.
Synn has a point:
Instead of Hasselblad selling rebadged Sony 35mm cameras with Hassy casings, Sony could resell rebadged Hasselblad H5's with Sony tech inside :)
I'm sure that if Hasselblad can make wood handles, Sony can engineer a digital back to wrap around their sensor ;)
Edmund
-
I think the next 5 years will be interesting. The last 5 have been already.
The camera market must grow. That's the nature of the beast.
-
I been talking to employees at Hasselblad several times and honestly they are not so happy about the Lunar etc cameras as well, but this decisions are over their heads. With around 100 people at Hasselblad they have to work hard to keep the pace of developments. So you can never compare them to larger companies like Canon or Nikon. I have compared the cmos against a 50Mp and I can say the files are much "cleaner" in all ISO, and I know they have news coming for Photokina this year. I do hope that Dalsa will answer to Sony with a larger chip in the size of todays 50 or 60Mp, I think Dalsa must to be able to survive...
-
Given that mfd Hass is a FujiBlad, if things were that bad, I would expect Fuji to pick up the H system and leave the Sony projects alone.
-
Given that mfd Hass is a FujiBlad, if things were that bad, I would expect Fuji to pick up the H system and leave the Sony projects alone.
Maybe fuji could be an interesting partner for Hasselblad. They do have sensor technology and they build good mirror-less cameras with a personal touch, appeal and quality.
Tools that people love and that are not just more of the same.
They could get some synergies from being big on the high end.
But Sonny, seems to me, could benefit more. They have been unable to really master the 35" SLR market. Owning MF could give them the prestige they need.
Let see how this goes.
It's important to stress that there is no solid evidence about backing this rumor. It could be a ill intended smear, directed to cut H5D-50C sales that could be "Stellar"
Best regards,
J.Duncan
-
the very few times I have needed service in the US from Hasselblad, it was done very quickly and I have only praise for their efforts.
As a brand, Hasselblad is huge and it may go through another transformation but the brand will live on.
-
I'd love to use my SWC if they made a $3000 FF 6mp to 8mp back for it. I use Pentax 645D for MF digital. But my workhorse cams are Leica M and Fuji X. The $30K to $40K Hassy and Phase cams are for you landscapers. They are out of the budget of us lowly street photogs.
-
These goofy cams Hassy came out with are made by camera fondlers and marketed to camera fondlers.
Leica perfected what is needed in a good street cam eons ago. Although it looks like Leica is headed off-track with some of its new offerings.
-
...survival of the fittest. If Hasselblad sinks, so be it. I will say that in many situations, a 36MP 35mm CMOS matches the capabilities of a 40 MP 36 X 48 CCD, while in many instances a CMOS lags behind.
The Nikon 14-24mm is a miracle of science. One of the best, if not the best, ultra wide angle lenses available. A Digitar 72mm mounted onto a pancake camera with a mulit-shot back provides the best repro files I've seen--micro contrast, sharpness, color accuracy, etc. The Olympus EM1 with fast primes is the best walk around camera I've used.
What it all boils down to is whether or not a piece of equipment or a system pays the bills and justifies its cost. Otherwise, any of the above items, excepting the Oly, are tools for pros or hobbyists with disposable income.
I am not sure $35K cameras have a bright future. Apple's first GUI computer, Lisa, cost $10K--it failed to find a market. Mainframe computers are not as common today as they were 20 years ago. As time marches on Moore's law proves itself again and again.
-
I dislike these type of rumors. It flies in the face of journalistic standards, where multiple sources are verified before publishing.
This type of rumor is hurtful and honestly who would like this type of comment directed towards them or their business?
There is not a single brand made that I haven't heard a negative rumor, sometimes the guy behind the camera counter, sometimes on the web, but most of those rumors were wrong.
I've heard Canon medium format rumors for 8 years.
I think we all tend to forget that behind a brand name are the people that work. It's not the brand, or the venture capitalists that concern me, but it is the human capital that gets damaged when these rumors grow.
Everybody is entitled to an opinion,but it's just that . . . an opinion.
I have my own opinion about equipment and if I honestly reflect back, more than 1/2 of my views change with time.
This section of the forum has developed a strange tone. About 1/3 of the participants complain mightily about the cost of specialty cameras, though most of the same people haven't purchased, or used one in 5 or more years, some never.
I don't get it, because buying any camera is an elective. No client, no person I know forces anyone into purchasing one brand, or format.
The advanced amateur or professional uses what they think is best and I've never heard of anyone buying a camera with the thought it would be worse that what they currently use, or a wasteful purchase.
IMO
BC
But if it wasn't for rumours then all the half brained techno bloggers would have nothing to write about, or even worse, that might have to resort to addressing themselves to issues of real life rather than preening themselves in front of an adoring, and totally imaginary audience.
-
...survival of the fittest. If Hasselblad sinks, so be it. I will say that in many situations, a 36MP 35mm CMOS matches the capabilities of a 40 MP 36 X 48 CCD, while in many instances a CMOS lags behind.
The Nikon 14-24mm is a miracle of science. One of the best, if not the best, ultra wide angle lenses available. A Digitar 72mm mounted onto a pancake camera with a mulit-shot back provides the best repro files I've seen--micro contrast, sharpness, color accuracy, etc. The Olympus EM1 with fast primes is the best walk around camera I've used.
What it all boils down to is whether or not a piece of equipment or a system pays the bills and justifies its cost. Otherwise, any of the above items, excepting the Oly, are tools for pros or hobbyists with disposable income.
I am not sure $35K cameras have a bright future. Apple's first GUI computer, Lisa, cost $10K--it failed to find a market. Mainframe computers are not as common today as they were 20 years ago. As time marches on Moore's law proves itself again and again.
Gotta correct you there, the $300 Samyang 14mm 2.8 is even better then the Nikon, somehow. I don't know how they did it.
-
Gotta correct you there, the $300 Samyang 14mm 2.8 is even better then the Nikon, somehow. I don't know how they did it.
Thats bullcrud. I tested it with a Nikon D800E and the 14-24 and the Zeiss 15mm. The Samyang was only "better" in situations where you want to use f2.8 and do not want to do any distortion correction (which is absolutely severe on the Samyang). Hence, the Samyang is great for shooting stars at night wide open. It is also good for landscape applications where you do not mind the heavy distortion and can control the nasty flare.
The lowest distortion 14mm lenses I tested were the Canon 14mm L II and the Zeiss 15mm. The Zeiss is stunning. Basically no CA to speak of (which is high on the Canon) and also almost as much low distortion as the Canon (which had the lowest). The Nikon 14-24 @ 14mm was also superb.
So the Samyang was made good (sharpness) by just forgetting about correcting it for distortion. The flare can get very nasty too.
As it is usual in photography, if you want improvements in all aspects of image quality you have to pay a LOT more for it. Nothing new there.
-
I hate wide angle, but love the Canon 14mm 2.8 II
-
But if it wasn't for rumours then all the half brained techno bloggers would have nothing to write about, or even worse, that might have to resort to addressing themselves to issues of real life rather than preening themselves in front of an adoring, and totally imaginary audience.
It's complicated. I used to be paid very good money to write a rumors column for a trade magazine. So I would go to a press conference or schedule an interview, and while I'd be having a quiet chat with this or that CEO, he'd call me by my name, feed me some info on a competitor, I'd confirm it with someone else, and then it would get run as a "rumor". Of course it would be about as related to unsourced information as a photograph of Kim Kardashian sitting in the first row of a movie première is a paparazzo unplanned image.
Another standard trick is that you have embargoed or off the record information, you feed it to a rumors site, and then suddenly the bare facts are public knowledge and you can run your detailed and carefully prepared long piece and scoop the competition. This latest tactic is a standard resource for mainstream journalists who want to run a story about a corrupt politician (they do exist), but don't have the balls to take the story public. An interesting variant is the leak by the cops to a rumors page, with an off the record briefing to the mainstream press, allowing them to build the momentum to take down a "protected" criminal.
Edmund
-
It's complicated. I used to be paid very good money to write a rumors column for a trade magazine. So I would go to a press conference or schedule an interview, and while I'd be having a quiet chat with this or that CEO, he'd call me by my name, feed me some info on a competitor, I'd confirm it with someone else, and then it would get run as a "rumor". Of course it would be about as related to unsourced information as a photograph of Kim Kardashian sitting in the first row of a movie première is a paparazzo unplanned image.
Another standard trick is that you have embargoed or off the record information, you feed it to a rumors site, and then suddenly the bare facts are public knowledge and you can run your detailed and carefully prepared long piece and scoop the competition. This latest tactic is a standard resource for mainstream journalists who want to run a story about a corrupt politician (they do exist), but don't have the balls to take the story public. An interesting variant is the leak by the cops to a rumors page, with an off the record briefing to the mainstream press, allowing them to build the momentum to take down a "protected" criminal.
Edmund
Point taken and I was probably being a bit simplistic, I even write for a magazine or two myself but they are of the non boat rocking type that have no wish to stem their advertising revenue stream. Yet I think there is a difference between magazines and web blogs with the former carrying some authority if only because if it was not read then it wouldn't exist. Any of us can set up a blog for peanuts and pontificate to the world without any form of peer review (be it the editor or market) and it is a great tonic for the ego, but they carry little weight and are so numerous as to be meaningless.
I know all this because I am as guilty as the next man! -Latest blog re travel. (http://inkplusimages.com/wp/)
:)
-
It's really interesting to see how many people expect the world for $2.59. Before the 33x44 50mp Sony sensor, dmf was just expensive. Now everyone expects 35mm pricing. Watching the comments on a few other blogs, people have unreal expectations. Hasselblad has done a horrible job marketing the H system. PhaseOne did their IQ260 World Tour last year, and from what I saw, it got a fairly good turn out for folks. Locally, Glazers did a presentation with John Keatley on the H5 and it sold a couple of kits. The interest is out there, but I don't see Hasselblad doing what it needs to in order to get sales.
In some ways, I would like the H4x to be cheaper, sold in a kit with a 120 back and the 80mm lens. But then since Hasselblad doesn't make an open system digital back to offer as a 'next step', they'd need to.
-
It's really interesting to see how many people expect the world for $2.59. Before the 33x44 50mp Sony sensor, dmf was just expensive. Now everyone expects 35mm pricing. Watching the comments on a few other blogs, people have unreal expectations. Hasselblad has done a horrible job marketing the H system. PhaseOne did their IQ260 World Tour last year, and from what I saw, it got a fairly good turn out for folks. Locally, Glazers did a presentation with John Keatley on the H5 and it sold a couple of kits. The interest is out there, but I don't see Hasselblad doing what it needs to in order to get sales.
In some ways, I would like the H4x to be cheaper, sold in a kit with a 120 back and the 80mm lens. But then since Hasselblad doesn't make an open system digital back to offer as a 'next step', they'd need to.
nobody is asking for a db for 2.49. what people are asking for is db that really reflects the cost of manufacturing as pentax has done. pentax showed that a well made body with a 50 mp sensor has no reason to sell in the $30k price range. hasselblad and phase one, with their 50 mp cmos sensor which is the same as the pentax, cannot show why their iteration should cost 3 times the price of the pentax. the sensor is 1.5 times the surface area of the nikon and sony 36mp sensors. so lets for the sake of argument triple the sensor cost and the electronics and body over the 2 36mp dslr's. what a shock, we have the pentax 645z camera. if hasselblad was smart they would compete with the pentax price point.
-
Thats bullcrud. I tested it with a Nikon D800E and the 14-24 and the Zeiss 15mm. The Samyang was only "better" in situations where you want to use f2.8 and do not want to do any distortion correction (which is absolutely severe on the Samyang). Hence, the Samyang is great for shooting stars at night wide open. It is also good for landscape applications where you do not mind the heavy distortion and can control the nasty flare.
The lowest distortion 14mm lenses I tested were the Canon 14mm L II and the Zeiss 15mm. The Zeiss is stunning. Basically no CA to speak of (which is high on the Canon) and also almost as much low distortion as the Canon (which had the lowest). The Nikon 14-24 @ 14mm was also superb.
So the Samyang was made good (sharpness) by just forgetting about correcting it for distortion. The flare can get very nasty too.
As it is usual in photography, if you want improvements in all aspects of image quality you have to pay a LOT more for it. Nothing new there.
Based on my usage, 2 years with the 14-24 on a D800E, it still amazes me how good the 14-24 can be. At night, even F2.8 can work unless you are after foregrounds closer than around 12 feet. Coma aberration is non-existent especially @ F2.8, which is where I want it to shoot night shots mainly the Milky Way or Star Freezes. I have a couple of friends that shoot with me, both use Canon and both have the Samyang, Rokinon, Bower 14mm F 2.8 and I have to agree for the price it's a very good lens. The images I have seen at 20MP from 6D's still show considerable corner softness wide open and coma aberration (butterfly wings on stars towards the edge).
Flare can be a killer on both, but I would give the considerable edge to the Samyang here. The 14-24, seems to look for flare and when it gets it, the shot is ruined. 14-24 flare especially at night is totally destructive. You have to watch the moon movement to make sure the lens doesn't pick up any moon and start to flare during a night stack shoot.
Boy this got off track from the OP.
Paul
-
Hi,
We had the Pentax 645D for a long time, priced just a little bit above Nikon D4 and Canon DX. Now the 645Z is almost here with an even lower price tag. The old 645D was a very good camera and the 645Z will also be avery good camera.
It is very obvious that the sensor cannot be very expensive if it is offered for around 8K with a complete camera. Keep in mind that Pentax still with all certainty makes a profit. So it is quite probable that the sensor cannot cost more than 2k$. Also most of the R&D has done by Sony.
So very clearly MFD prices are not motivated by cost of technology. It is in a sense similar to the Hasselbling products, Hasselblad takes perfectly good Sony cameras (NEX 7, RX100 and Alpha 99) add some cosmetic changes and sellt at 3-7 times the original Sony price. Better camera?
Now, there is an other side of the coin. A company like Hasselblad or Phase One need to feed a lot of people.
They could, with certainty, produce at much lower prices and sales would be much higher at those prices. But, to do that they would need to expand production, which would be very expensive. Without expanding production they cannot make ends meet with much lower prices.
Very obviously, a digital back could be made for as little as 4-5K. A digital back is essentially just a sensor mounted into a metal box, a display on the back and some electronics to integrate with the different MF systems. So anyone could make a low price MFD, and sell a lot of them, but the only backs we can buy come from Phase One (including Leaf and Mamiya) or Hasselblad. I don't know if there are still Sinar backs and backs from Jenoptik. It may be that MFD is not lucrative enough for competition to develop.
Best regards
Erik
It's really interesting to see how many people expect the world for $2.59. Before the 33x44 50mp Sony sensor, dmf was just expensive. Now everyone expects 35mm pricing. Watching the comments on a few other blogs, people have unreal expectations. Hasselblad has done a horrible job marketing the H system. PhaseOne did their IQ260 World Tour last year, and from what I saw, it got a fairly good turn out for folks. Locally, Glazers did a presentation with John Keatley on the H5 and it sold a couple of kits. The interest is out there, but I don't see Hasselblad doing what it needs to in order to get sales.
In some ways, I would like the H4x to be cheaper, sold in a kit with a 120 back and the 80mm lens. But then since Hasselblad doesn't make an open system digital back to offer as a 'next step', they'd need to.
-
The complete lack of understanding of how businesses work, shown in some posts here is astounding.
Has any of you taken a look at Ricoh's financials? Cameras are bundled under "Other". It is such an insignificant business that they can afford to take parts form existing DSLRs, slap on an outsourced sensor and sell it below cost without affecting their bottomline even a little bit.
Companies like Phase and Hasselblad have ONE main revenue stream. Selling cameras. They aren't even remotely capable of engaging in similar sales tactics.
-
I remember being told not to buy Apple shares when they were $17 because they were in financial trouble. Those guys knew nothing also.
Are there any companies that aren't in financial trouble? Consumers may buy new cameras every year but I certainly don't.
I am only recently getting into Hasselblad and also use Canon. Even though the Blad is 8 years old the images are incredible compared to 35mm.
I am looking forward to further upgrades as everyone races to sell their kit.
-
Synn,
Take a breath. Close your eyes.
You were having a bad day. Happens to all of us. Hope you feel calmer now.
You do make an interesting point: Ricoh have a degree of freedom because for some reason their corporate structure allows them to run the camera division as a hobby.
But I have been told that Kyocera was doing the same, their president was a photo fan so he indulged in a photo hobby called Contax which folded when he died.
Maybe some successful business people enjoy photography as a hobby.
Edmund
The complete lack of understanding of how businesses work, shown in some posts here is astounding.
Has any of you taken a look at Ricoh's financials? Cameras are bundled under "Other". It is such an insignificant business that they can afford to take parts form existing DSLRs, slap on an outsourced sensor and sell it below cost without affecting their bottomline even a little bit.
Companies like Phase and Hasselblad have ONE main revenue stream. Selling cameras. They aren't even remotely capable of engaging in similar sales tactics.
-
Synn,
Take a breath. Close your eyes.
You were having a bad day. Happens to all of us. Hope you feel calmer now.
You do make an interesting point: Ricoh have a degree of freedom because for some reason their corporate structure allows them to run the camera division as a hobby.
But I have been told that Kyocera was doing the same, their president was a photo fan so he indulged in a photo hobby called Contax which folded when he died.
Maybe some successful business people enjoy photography as a hobby.
Edmund
I am having a wonderful day, thank you. My post was factual and a warm summer's day compared to the usual grumpy posts that you make.
If you can spare the personal advise and stick to only the latter part of your post, which is factual and valid, that would be wonderful.
-
The complete lack of understanding of how businesses work, shown in some posts here is astounding.
Has any of you taken a look at Ricoh's financials? Cameras are bundled under "Other". It is such an insignificant business that they can afford to take parts form existing DSLRs, slap on an outsourced sensor and sell it below cost without affecting their bottomline even a little bit.
Companies like Phase and Hasselblad have ONE main revenue stream. Selling cameras. They aren't even remotely capable of engaging in similar sales tactics.
Knowing Japanese companies, it is certain that Ricoh is making a profit from every body they sell. The actual manufacturing cost of a 645z, including sensor and all, must not be much higher than 2,500 US$.
I'd be surprised if the sensor cost more than 1,000 US$ in large quantities.
So yes, Ricoh can achieve this thanks to the smart leveraging of their existing IP assets, but why as a photographer would I have to be happy to pay 4 times more to P1/Hassy simply because they decided not to deploy a similarly smart strategy?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Knowing Japanese companies
Sony sold the Playstation 1, 2 and 3 (for a few years) at a loss, in case you didn't know.
As a photographer, you are free to choose whatever tool that you feel is worth your money, whatever the business model of the company is.
That being the case, the medium format manufacturers (Phase, at least) does seem to have a sustainable business model with the prices they charge, so it's quite clear that a segment of the market considers their solutions to be worth the money.
For example, everything from a $900 Hamilton to a $7,000 TAG Heuer uses the same $120 ETA Valjoux movement. Yet they all have their customer base.
We are mixing two different arguments here, frankly. Why companies do business like they do and why customers choose what they want to choose are two separate things. Combining them into the same discussion will lead us nowhere.
-
The complete lack of understanding of how businesses work, shown in some posts here is astounding.
Has any of you taken a look at Ricoh's financials? Cameras are bundled under "Other". It is such an insignificant business that they can afford to take parts form existing DSLRs, slap on an outsourced sensor and sell it below cost without affecting their bottomline even a little bit.
Companies like Phase and Hasselblad have ONE main revenue stream. Selling cameras. They aren't even remotely capable of engaging in similar sales tactics.
It's like the Women's Institute in here - people on their soap box spouting business advice to HB based on a totally fictional rumour that has no factual basis other than he said, she said.
Regurgitating the same old unsubstantiated rubbish is not great for any party, especially HB. I for one would shudder at the thought of a Phase One only MF world as IMO that would spell disaster for the format given P1 recent history. Employee owned company???
Let's just assume this rumour was started to drive traffic to some lonely bloggers site and we can all carry on, business as usual. I for one can't wait to see what HB has at Photokina this year.
-
I find it amusing that people discuss here the end of the Hasselblad camera line on the basis of a simple rumour while the only fact we really know is that Phase One was sold to Silverfleet Capital 2 months ago (http://www.silverfleetcapital.com/media-centre/news/silverfleet-capital-to-invest-in-phase-one-as/). ::)
-
My information is that the rumours are exactly that.
My sources tell me that the owners have just laid out a long term for the company and have lot's of exciting things in the pipeline so I think we can lay this one to rest.
(Cross posted to DPI)
-
I think that at the end of the day, rumors makes the Internet a little bit more fun. :D
Eduardo
My information is that the rumours are exactly that.
My sources tell me that the owners have just laid out a long term for the company and have lot's of exciting things in the pipeline so I think we can lay this one to rest.
(Cross posted to DPI)
-
To David and Erik's points, it doesn't matter what the raw material costs of a digital back. Phase and Hass have to maintain a price point no matter what chips get put in it. If they put out their 50mp CMOS product at $15k, how many people, who have already written you a giant check, would they piss off, and how much would they devalue everything else they have put out over the last few years? Toss in the markup that a dealer takes, which has to be more than $2k based on the cost of doing a sale (even if it's just one guy handling this level of client, he's got to make a sizable wage). The ecosystem that mf requires, loaners, demos and rentals, has a cost, and that has to balance out against the sales.
Until Pentax can match the level of service, support and rental inventory across the world, they need to keep their price as low as possible.
-
To David and Erik's points, it doesn't matter what the raw material costs of a digital back. Phase and Hass have to maintain a price point no matter what chips get put in it. If they put out their 50mp CMOS product at $15k, how many people, who have already written you a giant check, would they piss off, and how much would they devalue everything else they have put out over the last few years? Toss in the markup that a dealer takes, which has to be more than $2k based on the cost of doing a sale (even if it's just one guy handling this level of client, he's got to make a sizable wage). The ecosystem that mf requires, loaners, demos and rentals, has a cost, and that has to balance out against the sales.
Until Pentax can match the level of service, support and rental inventory across the world, they need to keep their price as low as possible.
yes, what you say is true in some ways, but on the other hand how many more customers will they have if they compete with the pentax price point. do you want to keep your status and lose potential customers (those that do not make up the 5%ers) who want to enter mfdb arena. these new customers only choice will be pentax. they must price aggressively and compete for those new customers. i know people disagree, but for less money today you get a considerably more powerful computer for a lot less than you payed 2 years ago. not the same in mf digital backs. hell a s/h p25 which is 10 years old are trying to be sold for $4k to as high as $7k. based on the pentax 645z price a p25 should be no more than $1.5K. hasselblad and leaf are in some ways trying to compete with their specials on 40mp camera at $13k which is still a $4k premium and 10mp smaller. from 2011 to 2012 professional photographers who used in their business mfd cameras decreased by 25%. you can't tell me that the nikon d800 and the high prices for mfdb's didn't play a major role in that decrease. what will happen when the nikon/sony 54mp sensor camera is released?
-
yes, what you say is true in some ways, but on the other hand how many more customers will they have if they compete with the pentax price point. do you want to keep your status and lose potential customers (those that do not make up the 5%ers) who want to enter mfdb arena. these new customers only choice will be pentax. they must price aggressively and compete for those new customers. i know people disagree, but for less money today you get a considerably more powerful computer for a lot less than you payed 2 years ago. not the same in mf digital backs. hell a s/h p25 which is 10 years old are trying to be sold for $4k to as high as $7k. based on the pentax 645z price a p25 should be no more than $1.5K. hasselblad and leaf are in some ways trying to compete with their specials on 40mp camera at $13k which is still a $4k premium and 10mp smaller. from 2011 to 2012 professional photographers who used in their business mfd cameras decreased by 25%. you can't tell me that the nikon d800 and the high prices for mfdb's didn't play a major role in that decrease. what will happen when the nikon/sony 54mp sensor camera is released?
Computer technology has a mass market to support companies (some of which are barely breaking even on their desktops). DMF doesn't, won't and can't scale to that size. Glass will always be expensive (image circle size and IQ), zoom lenses are extremely limited, and there is no such thing as a 400mm (in 35mm equivalent) lens being produced. You remember those netbooks running linux, and how everyone thought that Apple was going to fail because they kept their laptops priced at $1k for the basic Macbook? The perceived market for dmf is just that, a bunch of folks wishing they could afford it. The home grown dmf back discussed on here was interesting, and while I'd like to see it succeed, until people put money in, it's just a bunch of talk.
The question is why do photographers need dmf over a camera like a D800/A7r. What does the Phase or Hass systems give them that they can't get cheaper with 35mm gear? The $13k specials from Phase and Hass serve a specific need - to offload inventory of quality products at a 'discount' while keeping the perceived value high. Personally, I would highly recommend the high MP 35mm gear over a 40MP dmf system unless there is a specific need that can only be done with dmf. Hass and Phase need to take care of their existing customers, and that includes not devaluing their existing investment.
Pentax needs to worry that the market clamoring for the 50MP CMOS will sustain their business for a while and it's not limited to a few thousand units. If the Pentax doesn't sell well, at what point will they pull back to a Japan only business?
-
To David and Erik's points, it doesn't matter what the raw material costs of a digital back. Phase and Hass have to maintain a price point no matter what chips get put in it. If they put out their 50mp CMOS product at $15k, how many people, who have already written you a giant check, would they piss off, and how much would they devalue everything else they have put out over the last few years? Toss in the markup that a dealer takes, which has to be more than $2k based on the cost of doing a sale (even if it's just one guy handling this level of client, he's got to make a sizable wage). The ecosystem that mf requires, loaners, demos and rentals, has a cost, and that has to balance out against the sales.
Until Pentax can match the level of service, support and rental inventory across the world, they need to keep their price as low as possible.
I guess I can pick at your facts - H4D40 promotions were all over the place at 10K+ Euros, over the past few years. The H5D was a price rise, but the H5D50 as a direct substitute for the H4D40 (yes, 25% more MP after a few years) can surely be sold at the *same* price without (m)any complaints from existing users.
As for opinions of the level of service, we may be so lucky as to have honest and helpful, seriously valuable dealers on this forum such as Doug and Steve, but there are also a good number of useless and snotty idiots out there, and in those areas Pentax will doubtless sell well. I have no doubt that Doug and Steve will fare well in the future, the goodwill they have now acquired is their biggest asset.
Re pricing and demand for the Z, Pentax seem to have been around for longer than Phase, selling well regarded consumer, prosumer and pro cams, and I'm sure they are big boys and can do the maths quite well. As Synn pointed out, they have a big corporation footing their bills so they can afford to invest a little without asking their bankers, and also they have real weight with Sony because of the huge number of smaller sensors they purchase.
Regarding the rental model, well I guess I would prefer to pay $8K for a Pentax or $5K for a used Hassy on this forum, or $125 for a rental Pentax, rather than pay $500 a day for a rental Phase IQ250. But then I don't get paid $10K a day or whatever for Kate Moss to smile for me :)
YMMV :)
Edmund
-
As for opinions of the level of service, we may be so lucky as to have honest and helpful, seriously valuable dealers on this forum such as Doug and Steve, but there are also a good number of useless and snotty idiots out there, and in those areas Pentax will doubtless sell well. I have no doubt that Doug and Steve will fare well in the future, the goodwill they have now acquired is their biggest asset.
I fully agree, we're spoiled buy the folks who hand out here, dealers and end users alike. Doug and Steve add product knowledge that makes owning a system a lot easier, and I think that Pentax will have a dealer learning curve. Customer experiences will partially dictate overall sales, and dealers are the major variable left out there.
-
Interesting thing: Lotsa people here chastising Phase and Hassy for their prices and championing the Pentax.
Yet to see anyone putting their money down for a 645Z though. Meanwhile, plenty of active posters are Phase and Hassy owners ;)
-
Interesting thing: Lotsa people here chastising Phase and Hassy for their prices and championing the Pentax.
Yet to see anyone putting their money down for a 645Z though. Meanwhile, plenty of active posters are Phase and Hassy owners ;)
Several guys who own Pentax 645D have posted here, they seem satisfied customers.
I don't think deliveries of the Z have started yet. You can go and take some more pictures, we promise to call you back when the big shootouts and comparison reviews start coming in.
Edmund
-
Several guys who own Pentax 645D have posted here, they seem satisfied customers.
I don't think deliveries of the Z have started yet. You can go and take some more pictures, we promise to call you back when the big shootouts and comparison reviews start coming in.
Edmund
Way to not get (Or pretend to not get) the point.
I prefer to be called back by someone who uses a medium format system or at least has some decent experience with a current generation system in the recent past.
-
Hi,
Those promos got me interested in actually buying into MFD, but I got good advice that a P45+ would suit my needs better. Also, lenses for the H-series are not exactly cheap, while used V-series lenses are available at low prices. So I am in V-series and P45+.
A good dealer is obviously helpful, I would agree that Doug and Steve are most knowledgeable, honest and helpful. But, I was shooting SLRs and DSLRs for something like 40+ years and never needed a dealer. There is something called the manual.
Regarding sales of the Pentax 645D, some very happy owners posted on it here. I also got the impression they were selling well in Japan and possibly other places.
Obviously, the Pentax 645D has hard place in the market, competing head on with the Nikon D800/D800E and the Sony A7r. It also seems to have some issues with shutter related vibrations a problem it has in common with A7r. That kind of vibration would be most noted by landscape photographers, but far less in handheld shooting or using flash in studio. Leaf shutter system don't have that problem. A way to fix this seems to be electronic first curtain, but it seems the 645Z doesn't have that feature.
Electronic first curtain is great, by the way. Using live view, the shutter needs to be cycled before exposure, with electronic first curtain in live view exposure can start immediately and vibration free.
The Pentax 645Z is a new camera offering similar capabilities to top class DSLRs at a not much higher price. It also offers a live view implementation that is probably very good.
Ricoh also relaunches the 645 lens line, so it seems probable that they try to be a significant player in the market.
Personally, I guess that competition from high and DSLR and mirrorless will intensify. Zeiss, Sigma and may be even Sony are introducing high quality lenses for full frame 135 digital, and next generation sensors will probably be around 50+ MP.
MF backs for technical cameras will always make a lot of sense.
Best regards
Erik
I guess I can pick at your facts - H4D40 promotions were all over the place at 10K+ Euros, over the past few years. The H5D was a price rise, but the H5D50 as a direct substitute for the H4D40 (yes, 25% more MP after a few years) can surely be sold at the *same* price without (m)any complaints from existing users.
As for opinions of the level of service, we may be so lucky as to have honest and helpful, seriously valuable dealers on this forum such as Doug and Steve, but there are also a good number of useless and snotty idiots out there, and in those areas Pentax will doubtless sell well. I have no doubt that Doug and Steve will fare well in the future, the goodwill they have now acquired is their biggest asset.
Re pricing and demand for the Z, Pentax seem to have been around for longer than Phase, selling well regarded consumer, prosumer and pro cams, and I'm sure they are big boys and can do the maths quite well. As Synn pointed out, they have a big corporation footing their bills so they can afford to invest a little without asking their bankers, and also they have real weight with Sony because of the huge number of smaller sensors they purchase.
Regarding the rental model, well I guess I would prefer to pay $8K for a Pentax or $5K for a used Hassy on this forum, or $125 for a rental Pentax, rather than pay $500 a day for a rental Phase IQ250. But then I don't get paid $10K a day or whatever for Kate Moss to smile for me :)
YMMV :)
Edmund
-
Hass and Phase need to take care of their existing customers, and that includes not devaluing their existing investment.
They have in the past largely had that in their own hands with trade in - up deals. That has strangled the S/H market and artificially kept those prices high. Good for existing customers I agree but that strategy has massively restricted the customer base they have and is now coming back to bite as 35mm comes up to meet them in quality and pixel count. New customers must be increasingly hard to convince to make that investment and have the makers protect it.
From the discussions on this forum many are also of the opinion that the protection offered has not been, shall we say, generous.
-
Hass and Phase need to take care of their existing customers, and that includes not devaluing their existing investment.
actually neither company is obligated to protect the value of the equipment that they sell. a home is a real investment and who is there to protect the homeowner from devaluation. a mfdb is a tool not an investment. you buy it for what it can do for you not what its value will be in 3 or 4 years. as you say the market is small for mfd photography. well why is that? its because of the outrages prices for the new equipment. i'm not talking about good quality lenses, but the digital backs. as i said earlier, ebay is a very good barometer of what these s/h digital backs are really worth. see the items that do sell like the p25+ for $3k. that is what people will pay so that is all it is worth and no wishful thinking will make it other wise. so in effect, not withstanding what hasselblad or phase one say, the pentax 645z will become the de facto price point for a 50mp sensor in a mfd camera.
-
Interesting thing: Lotsa people here chastising Phase and Hassy for their prices and championing the Pentax.
Yet to see anyone putting their money down for a 645Z though. Meanwhile, plenty of active posters are Phase and Hassy owners ;)
Maybe that's why Pentax are sitting on their hands re full frame, they want to maintain a clear division between their prosumer models and the 645 which a FF would blur. Such a shame as the K5 was a solid little camera and maybe the K3 is too, if they could have incorporated all the plus points of these cameras into a FF then I'd have certainly stuck with them.
-
I dislike these type of rumors. It flies in the face of journalistic standards, where multiple sources are verified before publishing.
This type of rumor is hurtful and honestly who would like this type of comment directed towards them or their business?
There is not a single brand made that I haven't heard a negative rumor, sometimes the guy behind the camera counter, sometimes on the web, but most of those rumors were wrong.
I've heard Canon medium format rumors for 8 years.
I think we all tend to forget that behind a brand name are the people that work. It's not the brand, or the venture capitalists that concern me, but it is the human capital that gets damaged when these rumors grow.
Everybody is entitled to an opinion,but it's just that . . . an opinion.
I have my own opinion about equipment and if I honestly reflect back, more than 1/2 of my views change with time.
This section of the forum has developed a strange tone. About 1/3 of the participants complain mightily about the cost of specialty cameras, though most of the same people haven't purchased, or used one in 5 or more years, some never.
I don't get it, because buying any camera is an elective. No client, no person I know forces anyone into purchasing one brand, or format.
The advanced amateur or professional uses what they think is best and I've never heard of anyone buying a camera with the thought it would be worse that what they currently use, or a wasteful purchase.
IMO
BC
I agree.
There is no information in that article, and while I don't know anybody who actually liked the disguised Sony's called Lunar, etc, it did not make Hasselblad a joke - as the article suggested.
Hasselblad MF cameras and backs are great products.
I could imagine they lost money on the rebadged Sony's....
So, someone tries to buy Hasselblad and spreading rumors to lower its value?
One cannot just take an article like the quoted one at bare face value.
For Hasselblad's future:
Hopefully, Hasselblad unloads all the non-Hasselblad rebadged products and goes back on course.
No problem if they created a sort of pocket MF camera (if you remember the Plaubel Makina - Wim Wenders used it extensively to create his photographic work), now that I could get.
But they shouldn't any take an ice pick to their brand.
-
I dislike these type of rumors. It flies in the face of journalistic standards, where multiple sources are verified before publishing.
This type of rumor is hurtful and honestly who would like this type of comment directed towards them or their business?
There is not a single brand made that I haven't heard a negative rumor, sometimes the guy behind the camera counter, sometimes on the web, but most of those rumors were wrong.
I've heard Canon medium format rumors for 8 years.
I think we all tend to forget that behind a brand name are the people that work. It's not the brand, or the venture capitalists that concern me, but it is the human capital that gets damaged when these rumors grow.
Everybody is entitled to an opinion,but it's just that . . . an opinion.
I have my own opinion about equipment and if I honestly reflect back, more than 1/2 of my views change with time.
This section of the forum has developed a strange tone. About 1/3 of the participants complain mightily about the cost of specialty cameras, though most of the same people haven't purchased, or used one in 5 or more years, some never.
I don't get it, because buying any camera is an elective. No client, no person I know forces anyone into purchasing one brand, or format.
The advanced amateur or professional uses what they think is best and I've never heard of anyone buying a camera with the thought it would be worse that what they currently use, or a wasteful purchase.
IMO
BC
+1
-
I dislike these type of rumors. It flies in the face of journalistic standards, where multiple sources are verified before publishing.
This type of rumor is hurtful and honestly who would like this type of comment directed towards them or their business?
There is not a single brand made that I haven't heard a negative rumor, sometimes the guy behind the camera counter, sometimes on the web, but most of those rumors were wrong.
I've heard Canon medium format rumors for 8 years.
I think we all tend to forget that behind a brand name are the people that work. It's not the brand, or the venture capitalists that concern me, but it is the human capital that gets damaged when these rumors grow.
Everybody is entitled to an opinion,but it's just that . . . an opinion.
I have my own opinion about equipment and if I honestly reflect back, more than 1/2 of my views change with time.
This section of the forum has developed a strange tone. About 1/3 of the participants complain mightily about the cost of specialty cameras, though most of the same people haven't purchased, or used one in 5 or more years, some never.
I don't get it, because buying any camera is an elective. No client, no person I know forces anyone into purchasing one brand, or format.
The advanced amateur or professional uses what they think is best and I've never heard of anyone buying a camera with the thought it would be worse that what they currently use, or a wasteful purchase.
IMO
BC
As the devil's advocate, I would like to say that the fact that the rumors site does not publish its sources doesn't imply *they *don't verify the information, or that facts do not merit discussion. This is called "source confidentiality", or if you prefer the "deep throat doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Throat_(Watergate))". As an example, US dronestrikes and targeting are often discussed in the media, although information is never sourced officially, especially when random civilian victims are involved.
A good number of publicly held camera companies have in the past years published detailed accounts without major problems accruing to them or their dealer network, although Olympus did have some issues due to disclosures by a vindictive ex-employee (http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-02-16/the-story-behind-the-olympus-scandal).
In my opinion, the timely publication of Hasselblad's accounts would immediately quell any untrue or indeed malicious rumors about its financial status ...
There is a role for "unattributed" material. Of course, no material is launched without some intent, and I would agree with you that like drones, rumors are malicious instruments that can cause substantial damage to their targets, and even possibly imply collateral damage :P
Edmund
PS. As I wrote somewhere else, when I was employed and paid to edit "rumors", mostly everything I wrote was sourced from firms competitors or ex-employees, and verified before publication. But never attributed. And yes, the sources always had ulterior intent, but this did not invalidate the information itself.