Have Phase One screwed up?

[Guy Mancuso]

I can't speak for Michael but both Jack and I tried to engage Hassy on several occasions for workshops , reviews and such and they have never followed through with us at least, we wish they have to be honest. We like a balanced sheet on our forums but we have some really nice Hassy shooters that participate a great deal. What I can say about David Grover as he has always come and helped people and been a real gentleman and professional both at our place and here as well and for that we are grateful. But not his company that he represents. We wish that was not the case about demos and doing reviews and such.
I can't argue with your other points as well as i do agree whole heartedly. Personally we try very very hard not to get on any soapbox on anything. We have learned a great deal as time has gone by as a forum owners, instructors, photographers and friends to the photo community. In all truth it has taught me a lot and hope I am better for it as a person. I have had my moments no doubt. Also in all truth and I am not just saying this but I do like the Hassy system as I feel they have done some great things lately with there system. I shot V's for years and made me a lot of money. LOL

BTW nice personal comments and thanks and I do speak for Jack regarding anything at our place.

[Steve Hendrix]

I think this forum, as well as GetDPI - being the 2 most prominent medium format public access forums - both have their share of Phase One users and Hasselblad users, and Hasselblad also has excellent manufacturer representation via David Grover. All the input is just a mix of facts and opinions, information and misinformation and seems equitably distributed. I mean there is nothing in the concept of either forum that limits anyone's participation. Same goes for Sinar, Leaf, Mamiya, Leica, etc. It's just a table with seats available for anyone who cares to sit down.

I agree with the sentiments on the camera, etc, but note what Michael said - it has been publicly stated by Phase One that multiple new cameras are in development, but they do take time. Even one single lens takes at least 3 years to successfully bring to market. In the meantime, products like the IQ Series that can be produced still need to be brought to market. Everything doesn't stop because development is ongoing. Much of this technology takes so long to develop it unfortunately gives the impression nothing is being done.


Steve Hendrix

[michael]

Yes, Phase definitely helped Hasselblad with the digital back interface part of the H series. Hasselblad had no digital expertise at the time. Imacon didn't come into the picture till some time later.

That's what the law suit was all about.

Michael

[David Grover / Capture One]

It took Hasselblad six years to design the H series with the assistance of Fuji and Phase One....

Michael,

Please stick to the facts and be a responsible journalist.

Phase amongst many others were asked under the guise of "If we were to produce a new MF format camera, what features would you like to see?".

This was in no way exclusive to Phase One and they did not assist in any part of the mechanical or electrical interface design.

Fujinon (Not Fuji) did assist in the design of the lenses but we have always retained our own lens design department who are responsible for the optical design and specification of the lenses.  The shutter system is exclusively designed and built by us.

I have pulled you up on this comment many times before and frustrated to find I must do so once more.

David

[David Grover / Capture One]

Yes, Phase definitely helped Hasselblad with the digital back interface part of the H series. Hasselblad had no digital expertise at the time. Imacon didn't come into the picture till some time later.

That's what the law suit was all about.

Michael

Michael do not talk about things which you have no information on.

This has nothing to do with the 'interface' you mention, and once again your facts are incorrect.

[David Grover / Capture One]

Guy and Steve,

Thank you for your very kind comments.  I appreciate that a great deal.

David

[michael]

Dave, this isn't the correct forum for this debate. But I'll respond this one time and then this is closed for further public discussion, as it won't do anyone any good to air corporate laundry in public.

I was working with Hasselblad prior to the release of the H1, was one of the first testers of the camera, and also well acquitted with what Phase One's contribution was. If you are not aware of the facts then I suggest you speak with your colleagues at Hasselblad who were there at the time.

I also suggest that you familiarize yourself with the court judgement just handed down. The background to the case tells the tale. Phase One most definitely was an active partner in designing the H1's digital interface and was granted certain rights as a consequence. This is a matter of public record, so please don't try and obfuscate the facts. It does no one any good.

Discussion closed as far as I'm concerned.

Michael

[ndevlin]

Isn't it ironic that nothing provokes vitriol and criticism against a company like the release of an excellent new product?

Frankly, it's something of a miracle that any of these small, boutique manufacturers have survived in the industry, and we should all be glad for it, whether we buy their products or not. 

These backs have been years in the works (really, since the second after the last backs came out), and address, or attempt to address, virtually every major criticism and user demand,  within the limitations of the existing platform.

I myself have been pretty harshly critical of the Mamiya camera that Phase is struggling with as its principle camera host platform since Hasselblad (in an unfortunate, predatory, but probably commercially wise move) closed the "H" system.  But to be fair, the people in Denmark who design and make the backs - which are clearly industry leading within the MFDB world - don't make cameras.  Mamiya is a separate company on the other side of the world. It's Phase's Achilles heal, and make not mistake that I'm sure they are working day and night to bring a better camera to fruition, but it's a long and arduous path, and one unrelated to their back development track. For this reason, the OP is off-base. Phase did not prioritize the IQ series backs over a new body. The two are distinct streams.

Everyday I am glad that I am not in the MF camera business. It's a tough, competitive, overcrowded market with a limited audience and astronomical R&D costs, with the giant Imperial Death Stars of Canon and Sony (and to a lesser extent Nikon) orbiting all too close to them. 

But everyday it makes me kind of glad that there are scientists and entrepreneurs out there brave enough to make these amazing devices.

Koombya.

- N.

[David Grover / Capture One]

Discussion closed so nobody can argue with you?

When you last raised this I checked with the H product manager (still current and with Hasselblad when he conceived the H1) about your claim and he became very angry when I asked him about this.

He stated this was not the case and was concerned this information might be perceived to be true by the public. 

So once again, Phase One, amongst many others were asked for input regarding the H platform.  The interface was helped to be designed by a third party of which have no partnership with any camera manufacturer past and present.  This was a Swedish electronics firm specialising in this kind of project.

You are also incorrect about the court case.

Discussion closed for me to.

David

Dave, this isn't the correct forum for this debate. But I'll respond this one time and then this is closed for further public discussion, as it won't do anyone any good to air corporate laundry in public.

I was working with Hasselblad prior to the release of the H1, was one of the first testers of the camera, and also well acquitted with what Phase One's contribution was. If you are not aware of the facts then I suggest you speak with your colleagues at Hasselblad who were there at the time.

I also suggest that you familiarize yourself with the court judgement just handed down. The background to the case tells the tale. Phase One most definitely was an active partner in designing the H1's digital interface and was granted certain rights as a consequence. This is a matter of public record, so please don't try and obfuscate the facts. It does no one any good.

Discussion closed as far as I'm concerned.

Michael