Fair enough, Steve. I think the problem I have with all of this is that it is fine for pros and corporate photogs who can reclaim these costs against tax and recover them from clients. But for the amateur like myself, even if we can afford the back, can we afford to run it thereafter? (a bit like being able to buy a Ferrari but then being too skint to buy tyres for it). When in truth, a little more thought in the design process (like the infamous internal battery swap) would make the thing easier and cheaper to service. I am quite pleased with Hasselblad at least inasmuch as they produced the CFV-39 at what is a pretty reasonable price for us 500 users - a lot cheaper than a P45, for example. But I haven't asked them how much they charge to replace the battery, yet, I have to admit
John
I'm not sure how the internal battery change came to $2,500 from that one thread. And without recalling the details, it doesn't sound right. Internal battery replacement for a USA-based customer is $600. Because yes, they will have to open the back - just like everyone else besides Leaf, even Hasselblad, though I don't know for sure - and yes, they will clean it, inspect it, re-calibrate it, etc.
It is $600, not $2,500.
The design of products must take into account not just serviceability, but optimization of functionality, quality, etc. Sometimes there are conflicts. It is a non linear equation.
John, I hear you about not just affording the purchase, but also the potential upkeep and surrounding accessories. That is sage advice for someone considering a system like this.
I do feel while the CFV-39 is a great value ($5k less), but it is only made for one system (which can affect costs). A P45+ can go on many different cameras (and I won't get into the feature comparison, long exposures, etc). And we have P45+ refurbs coming in near the same price as a CFV with full warranty.
Steve Hendrix
Steve Hendrix