Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: PeterDendrinos on August 15, 2007, 07:34:59 am
-
Has there been any credible word from hasselblad on a tilt or tilt/shift lens for the H series?
Pete
-
Nothing official yet, but there's every indication that Hasselblad will have a T/S lens available in the near future.
That's the good news. The bad news is that it will be designed to ONLY be usable with an H3D, In other words, if you own and use an H1 or H2, and don't use a Hasselblad digital back, you're out of luck.
The reason for this is that the lens will reply on optical corrections done in software. That software will be built into their digital backs, rather than made available as part of their raw processing software.
One can ask oneself why Hasselblad has taken this route. If one were to be cynical it would be easy to assume that it is an attempt to force photographers to use Hasselblad backs rather than those from Leaf, Phase or Sinar. Because, if Hasselblad really wanted to serve the interests of their camera owners, past and future, they would make the lens work with all models of the H series cameras, and make the software component part of the raw processor, something like what DXO does.
Simple business logic then requires one to speculate – will Hasselblad make more money providing a lens which can be used by all H series owners, or by making a desirable lens that forces users to buy their expensive (high margin) backs? The same goes for their 28mm ultra-wide lens, which only works on the H3D.
I suppose that Hasselblad's management thought that this was an approach that would yield strong sales among new H series buyers because a line of lenses that require the use of a Hasselblad back might force more back purchases. Existing H series owners moving to digital, likewise. Those that already have another brand of digital back; the hell with them. They're almost certainly lost as potential Hasselblad digital back owners anyhow.
But that was before the Hy6 camera and a resurgent Mamiya. Hasselblad is no longer the only game in town. I therefore believe that this might well prove to be a business decision that Hasselblad's management comes to regret.
Sorry to hijack your question with my little soapbox speech, but as a Hasselblad owner (two H bodies, 5 lenses and a non-Hasselblad digital back (and a film back), I am a stakeholder in the company, and am incensed by this flawed buiness strategy. I hope that exposing it to as many people as possible can do something to bring the company to its senses.
Michael
-
I support your logic and might add that I too am extremely disappointed in this decision if indeed this is what is going to happen. I really would love to have T/S options for my MF setup and have been waiting to see what Hasselblad comes up with. At one point I thought i was going to be stuck when Hasselblad was the only player. However, if Hasselblad does what you state below, I am going to reconsider my options at that time and re-evaluate the Hy6 and Mamiya options. The H1/2 system is fairly new and to basically abandon this line for those of us who made the investment -- in part due to stability, is really not a good business practice (at least in my mind) in the long-term.
I am curious how other Hasselblad owners or folks considering making the move feel about this. Mark
Nothing official yet, but there's every indication that Hasselblad will have a T/S lens available in the near future.
That's the good news. The bad news is that it will be designed to ONLY be usable with an H3D, In other words, if you own and use an H1 or H2, and don't use a Hasselblad digital back, you're out of luck.
The reason for this is that the lens will reply on optical corrections done in software. That software will be built into their digital backs, rather than made available as part of their raw processing software.
One can ask oneself why Hasselblad has taken this route. If one were to be cynical it would be easy to assume that it is an attempt to force photographers to use Hasselblad backs rather than those from Leaf, Phase or Sinar. Because, if Hasselblad really wanted to serve the interests of their camera owners, past and future, they would make the lens work with all models of the H series cameras, and make the software component part of the raw processor, something like what DXO does.
Simple business logic then requires one to speculate – will Hasselblad make more money providing a lens which can be used by all H series owners, or by making a desirable lens that forces users to buy their expensive (high margin) backs? The same goes for their 28mm ultra-wide lens, which only works on the H3D.
I suppose that Hasselblad's management thought that this was an approach that would yield strong sales among new H series buyers because a line of lenses that require the use of a Hasselblad back might force more back purchases. Existing H series owners moving to digital, likewise. Those that already have another brand of digital back; the hell with them. They're almost certainly lost as potential Hasselblad digital back owners anyhow.
But that was before the Hy6 camera and a resurgent Mamiya. Hasselblad is no longer the only game in town. I therefore believe that this might well prove to be a business decision that Hasselblad's management comes to regret.
Sorry to hijack your question with my little soapbox speech, but as a Hasselblad owner (two H bodies, 5 lenses and a non-Hasselblad digital back (and a film back), I am a stakeholder in the company, and am incensed by this flawed buiness strategy. I hope that exposing it to as many people as possible can do something to bring the company to its senses.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
IMO, What would be more useful is IF Hasselblad were to offer an H-series FlexBody usable with the entire range of HC lenses. Unknown is what size image circles for coverage with movements applied.
-
Nothing official yet, but there's every indication that Hasselblad will have a T/S lens available in the near future.
That's the good news. The bad news is that it will be designed to ONLY be usable with an H3D, In other words, if you own and use an H1 or H2, and don't use a Hasselblad digital back, you're out of luck.
The reason for this is that the lens will reply on optical corrections done in software. That software will be built into their digital backs, rather than made available as part of their raw processing software.
One can ask oneself why Hasselblad has taken this route. If one were to be cynical it would be easy to assume that it is an attempt to force photographers to use Hasselblad backs rather than those from Leaf, Phase or Sinar. Because, if Hasselblad really wanted to serve the interests of their camera owners, past and future, they would make the lens work with all models of the H series cameras, and make the software component part of the raw processor, something like what DXO does.
Simple business logic then requires one to speculate – will Hasselblad make more money providing a lens which can be used by all H series owners, or by making a desirable lens that forces users to buy their expensive (high margin) backs? The same goes for their 28mm ultra-wide lens, which only works on the H3D.
I suppose that Hasselblad's management thought that this was an approach that would yield strong sales among new H series buyers because a line of lenses that require the use of a Hasselblad back might force more back purchases. Existing H series owners moving to digital, likewise. Those that already have another brand of digital back; the hell with them. They're almost certainly lost as potential Hasselblad digital back owners anyhow.
But that was before the Hy6 camera and a resurgent Mamiya. Hasselblad is no longer the only game in town. I therefore believe that this might well prove to be a business decision that Hasselblad's management comes to regret.
Sorry to hijack your question with my little soapbox speech, but as a Hasselblad owner (two H bodies, 5 lenses and a non-Hasselblad digital back (and a film back), I am a stakeholder in the company, and am incensed by this flawed buiness strategy. I hope that exposing it to as many people as possible can do something to bring the company to its senses.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You know I've often wondered why Hasselblad took the route they did with the 28mm. Does anyone know why they cannot correct the 28mm lens in the raw processor ? Am I right in thinking this lens will only work on the H3D because the lens will not transmit the data to another body, i.e. H2 ? It's pretty obvious now why this route was taken.
As Michael pointed out, there are and will soon be other alternatives to choose from. Upsetting loyal customers is not a sensible thing to do when there's competition around.
Barrie Watts
-
IMO, What would be more useful is IF Hasselblad were to offer an H-series FlexBody usable with the entire range of HC lenses. Unknown is what size image circles for coverage with movements applied.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133443\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Now that would be really nice. It should not be too difficult to rebuild the Flexbody towards H and HC. I would definitely be swapping my V-CF Flexbody. I just wish they would check out the 'Bendyblad' design and implement it that way.
On the part of the image corrections, I agree that it would be much more sensible to integrate the lens corrections of the new lenses in a separate plug-in or develop a SDK for parties like Iridient and Adobe.
It will bring back a lot of goodwill towards Hasselblad and probably add more sales of the 28 and possible T&S (or other software corrected lenses). On the part of digital back sales, my guess is it will make no difference. I doubt they sell more digital backs because of the corrections but I am sure they sell less 28mm's because of it.
-
The Hassy tilt/shift is already out, I had a demo and this was part of the interesting and new innovations wriiten into the software.
-
Can you elaborate on what was out? Focal range? I assume the innovations in the software were related to the H3D closed system and not the after image processing software?
The Hassy tilt/shift is already out, I had a demo and this was part of the interesting and new innovations wriiten into the software.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133470\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
As Michael pointed out, there are and will soon be other alternatives to choose from. Upsetting loyal customers is not a sensible thing to do when there's competition around.
Barrie Watts
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133452\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Whether Hasselblad's decision to make the H3D series of cameras a "closed system" with the 28mm lens and presumably the forthcoming T/S lens(es) is wise or foolish is not one that any of us can effectively judge. The wisdom of that decision will be rendered in the marketplace by people voting with their wallets. None of us is privy to that type of sales information. It is entirely possible that Hasselblad is selling 2x or 3x or 4x more digital backs now than last year, and whatever it might be losing in camera and lens sales is more than made up by the profits from the digital back sales. Moreover, this is not a business decision that can be evaluated in the short term. Over the past 12 months, there has been a convergence in the quality of the digital backs and the raw processing software that is used with them(ACR and Lightroom). This is accelerating. Each back has its slight advantages and foibles, but they are all amazing tools. If Hasselblad can leverage a unique lens offering(e.g., a T/S) to "force" you to buy its back and camera if you want to use that lens, I can understand why it would. (It's not personal, Michael, it's strictly business.)
As for brand "loyalty", come on. We are talking about tools here, not spouses. If you can get a better tool, you do it. Anyone who goes out and buys a Hy6 and a full complement of lenses because he is "mad" at Hasselblad is out of his mind. He may buy the Hy6, but I hope it is because he is satisfied after careful research that the Hy6 is a better tool for his specific needs all things considered(including software, warranty and service).
-
I was ready to buy an H body for my aptus 75 and put it hold to test the Hy6. If everything is equal I will skip Hasselblad because of the closed system.
Hy6 and a full complement of lenses because he is "mad" at Hasselblad is out of his mind. He may buy the Hy6, but I hope it is because he is satisfied after careful research that the Hy6 is a better tool for his specific needs all things considered(including software, warranty and service).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133488\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
quoted to wrong poster... will re-post
-
Whether Hasselblad's decision to make the H3D series of cameras a "closed system" with the 28mm lens and presumably the forthcoming T/S lens(es) is wise or foolish is not one that any of us can effectively judge. The wisdom of that decision will be rendered in the marketplace by people voting with their wallets. None of us is privy to that type of sales information. It is entirely possible that Hasselblad is selling 2x or 3x or 4x more digital backs now than last year, and whatever it might be losing in camera and lens sales is more than made up by the profits from the digital back sales. Moreover, this is not a business decision that can be evaluated in the short term. Over the past 12 months, there has been a convergence in the quality of the digital backs and the raw processing software that is used with them(ACR and Lightroom). This is accelerating. Each back has its slight advantages and foibles, but they are all amazing tools. If Hasselblad can leverage a unique lens offering(e.g., a T/S) to "force" you to buy its back and camera if you want to use that lens, I can understand why it would. (It's not personal, Michael, it's strictly business.)
As for brand "loyalty", come on. We are talking about tools here, not spouses. If you can get a better tool, you do it. Anyone who goes out and buys a Hy6 and a full complement of lenses because he is "mad" at Hasselblad is out of his mind. He may buy the Hy6, but I hope it is because he is satisfied after careful research that the Hy6 is a better tool for his specific needs all things considered(including software, warranty and service).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133488\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Of course Hasselblad have every right to make whatever product they want and market how they see fit to suit their own business model. I've personally been using their equipment to earn a living with for the last twenty five years and have invested a great deal of money in their products over this period. It's just that I don't like being manipulated into buying something because of their marketing strategy. I mean 'Full Frame' and 'DAC' come on, it might impress some people but not me. I bet Victor Hasselblad is turning in his grave. Some of my Hasselblad gear is over forty years old and still working fine, and is made of metal too.
Hasselblad or whoever owns them these days have got a business to run and have every right to do it their way. On the other hand I've got every right to buy the equipment that feels right for my needs. As long as we've all got a choice that's all that matters.
Photography for me is more than just a business, the equipment more than just tools.
My own two cents of course.
-
I was ready to buy an H body for my aptus 75 and put it hold to test the Hy6. If everything is equal I will skip Hasselblad because of the closed system.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133490\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not sure I follow the logic of rejecting the H system as a "closed" system so that you can buy into another closed system, the Hy6. Nonetheless, if you don't need a wide angle lens, the Hy6 may be a fine choice.
-
Of course Hasselblad have every right to make whatever product they want and I mean 'Full Frame' and 'DAC' come on, it might impress some people but not me. I bet Victor Hasselblad is turning in his grave.
My own two cents of course.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133498\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Have you tried DAC with the H3D and the 28mm lens? Did you compare it to the Mamiya 28mm lens with no DAC?
-
Have you tried DAC with the H3D and the 28mm lens? Did you compare it to the Mamiya 28mm lens with no DAC?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133500\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No I haven't. Thankfully for the sort of work I do I don't need to! I don't use Mamiya either. But DAC isn't anything new is it.? I've been using DxO for my Nikon lenses for some time, and it would seem to me to do the same sort of thing. Although I stand to be corrected on this assumption. If Mamiya got DxO to plot their 28mm and support it I'm sure it could be as impressive as the Hasselblad version.
-
I think one of the reasons is that you have a more finished image coming from the camera with less demanding processing, letting photographers be photographers not computer operators. And maybe its part a marketing issue as they don't want the world seeing uncorrected images on a regular basis and that leading to criticism of the brand.
As for me the new system is unsuitable as I need a back to use on other cameras anyway. Being invested in the H system, changing brands is a big decision which I would be unlikely to make without a good financial reason, especially at the same time as I update the DB, which is a finance stretching event without contemplating a complete outfit change.
David
You know I've often wondered why Hasselblad took the route they did with the 28mm. Does anyone know why they cannot correct the 28mm lens in the raw processor ? Am I right in thinking this lens will only work on the H3D because the lens will not transmit the data to another body, i.e. H2 ? It's pretty obvious now why this route was taken.
As Michael pointed out, there are and will soon be other alternatives to choose from. Upsetting loyal customers is not a sensible thing to do when there's competition around.
Barrie Watts
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133452\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
No I haven't. Thankfully for the sort of work I do I don't need to! [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133504\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Then, why did you make an accusation that was not founded on anything other than a personal agenda? How do you think Victor Hasselblad would feel about THAT?
-
Nothing official yet, but there's every indication that Hasselblad will have a T/S lens available in the near future.
That's the good news. The bad news is that it will be designed to ONLY be usable with an H3D, In other words, if you own and use an H1 or H2, and don't use a Hasselblad digital back, you're out of luck.
The reason for this is that the lens will reply on optical corrections done in software. That software will be built into their digital backs, rather than made available as part of their raw processing software.
One can ask oneself why Hasselblad has taken this route. If one were to be cynical it would be easy to assume that it is an attempt to force photographers to use Hasselblad backs rather than those from Leaf, Phase or Sinar. Because, if Hasselblad really wanted to serve the interests of their camera owners, past and future, they would make the lens work with all models of the H series cameras, and make the software component part of the raw processor, something like what DXO does.
Simple business logic then requires one to speculate – will Hasselblad make more money providing a lens which can be used by all H series owners, or by making a desirable lens that forces users to buy their expensive (high margin) backs? The same goes for their 28mm ultra-wide lens, which only works on the H3D.
I suppose that Hasselblad's management thought that this was an approach that would yield strong sales among new H series buyers because a line of lenses that require the use of a Hasselblad back might force more back purchases. Existing H series owners moving to digital, likewise. Those that already have another brand of digital back; the hell with them. They're almost certainly lost as potential Hasselblad digital back owners anyhow.
But that was before the Hy6 camera and a resurgent Mamiya. Hasselblad is no longer the only game in town. I therefore believe that this might well prove to be a business decision that Hasselblad's management comes to regret.
Sorry to hijack your question with my little soapbox speech, but as a Hasselblad owner (two H bodies, 5 lenses and a non-Hasselblad digital back (and a film back), I am a stakeholder in the company, and am incensed by this flawed buiness strategy. I hope that exposing it to as many people as possible can do something to bring the company to its senses.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Michael,
Come on Michael... give it a rest already. Closed system? You can still acquire 6 types of Hasselblad backs for use on many medium and view cameras. How is that closed? The 28mm lens is presently proprietary to the H3D. I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that Hasselblad is now a closed system because of one lens. You really need that lens? Then buy it and the camera that works with it.
If you were a little less critical of Hasselblad (still trying to figure out your MO on this one) you might be privy to information concerning the the status of the tilt/shift lens. But publicly bashing any company won't make you and friends there.
And as a bitter and unhappy stake-holder, why not demonstrate your displeasure and divest of your Hasselblad holdings? That should really 'teach' Hasselblad, eh?!
Alternatively, you can put your bitterness aside and buy the 28mm and the HD3 and get on with it. Because quite frankly, being bitter and trying to tell anyone how to run their business is in no one's best interest.
Of course, just my opinion.....
-
Hasselbald wishes to capture the back buyers from Phase and Leaf and lock them into a Hassleblad upgrade cycle which would yield $10K per user every two years like the Canon upgrade cycle for the 1Ds.
Is this good ? Is it bad ? The company will get more solid, yielding more flexible pricing and more lenses and accessories. It has advantages for the dealer network, and so users will be able to get on with their jobs with more solid support. Photographers gain peace of mind about where their next piece of kit comes from. There will be a thriving used market with obsolete models.
On the other hand, this is just a commercial strategy and so the squeeze on the current owners (eg. Michael) by denying them access to new lenses is no fun and not really technically grounded. A strong financial incentive would have done the job equally well, and maybe avoided bitterness from the existing userbase.
Edmund
-
PSP = 1 post with no info about him? Makes you wonder what kind of job he has during the day?
Michael,
Come on Michael... give it a rest already. Closed system?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133547\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Well the difference between the fact that Canon upgrades its high end models every couple of years is different compared to the Hasselblad strategy. Unlike Hasselblad, Canon's new lenses (with the exception of the EF-S) are compatible with all of their SLR (EOS-EF mount) cameras regardless of if it is the 1D, IDII, IDs, IDsII, IDIIN, IDIII, D30, D60,10D-30D, digital rebel series, and even their film cameras. I would have no issue if Hasselblad upgraded their backs every 2 years based on improved technology.
Hasselbald wishes to capture the back buyers from Phase and Leaf and lock them into a Hassleblad upgrade cycle which would yield $10K per user every two years like the Canon upgrade cycle for the 1Ds.
Is this good ? Is it bad ? The company will get more solid, yielding more flexible pricing and more lenses and accessories. It has advantages for the dealer network, and so users will be able to get on with their jobs with more solid support. Photographers gain peace of mind about where their next piece of kit comes from. There will be a thriving used market with obsolete models.
On the other hand, this is just a commercial strategy and so the squeeze on the current owners (eg. Michael) by denying them access to new lenses is no fun and not really technically grounded. A strong financial incentive would have done the job equally well, and maybe avoided bitterness from the existing userbase.
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133566\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Then, why did you make an accusation that was not founded on anything other than a personal agenda? How do you think Victor Hasselblad would feel about THAT?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133544\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Wow, don't some people get touchy over somebody expressing a personal point of view! I don't have an 'agenda' of any kind I can assure you. Just a personal point of view, and this is a forum where people can air them.
I've never criticised anybody for using any item of equipment if it suits their needs. It's their money and they spend it on what they want. I know the new 28mm lens is great because I've seen it in action. I just don't believe much of the marketing bull that we are fed these days.
-
Yes, this is exactly the difference between H and C.
Canon sells the new model camera based on its increased capabilities compared to the old one.
On the other hand Hassleblad is selling $5K bodies and $3K lenses, while Phase and Leaf are selling $20K backs for those Hasselblad bodies and lenses, so a feeling of jealousy and greed is understandable
The right way for H to do it would be to provide a better back and financial incentives to move to an H back (eg. competitive upgrades). But they still cannot make much better backs than Leaf or Phase (in fact some would say they're less good, which is why photographers are using Leaf and Phase). And they cannot provide the financial incentives because they don't have the necessary cash flow.
All these problems will go away when Fuji finally buys out Shiro. At that point they will have access to much greater technical and financial resources, and proprietary sensor design and fabrication.
Edmund
Well the difference between the fact that Canon upgrades its high end models every couple of years is different compared to the Hasselblad strategy. Unlike Hasselblad, Canon's new lenses (with the exception of the EF-S) are compatible with all of their SLR (EOS-EF mount) cameras regardless of if it is the 1D, IDII, IDs, IDsII, IDIIN, IDIII, D30, D60,10D-30D, digital rebel series, and even their film cameras. I would have no issue if Hasselblad upgraded their backs every 2 years based on improved technology.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133571\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Michael,
Come on Michael... give it a rest already. Closed system? You can still acquire 6 types of Hasselblad backs for use on many medium and view cameras. How is that closed? The 28mm lens is presently proprietary to the H3D. I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that Hasselblad is now a closed system because of one lens. You really need that lens? Then buy it and the camera that works with it.
If you were a little less critical of Hasselblad (still trying to figure out your MO on this one) you might be privy to information concerning the the status of the tilt/shift lens. But publicly bashing any company won't make you and friends there.
And as a bitter and unhappy stake-holder, why not demonstrate your displeasure and divest of your Hasselblad holdings? That should really 'teach' Hasselblad, eh?!
Alternatively, you can put your bitterness aside and buy the 28mm and the HD3 and get on with it. Because quite frankly, being bitter and trying to tell anyone how to run their business is in no one's best interest.
Of course, just my opinion.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133547\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have no intention of "giving it a rest". I have no idea of who you are or what your agenda is, but I can tell you that I am not alone in my displeasure with Hasselblad's flawed new marketing approach.
As I wrote, with two H bodies and five lenses, and a $30,000 investment in an MF back in H mount, I am a stakeholder in the company. When that company does something which is against my interests I have every right to be pissed, especially when it is done not for technical reasons, but simply as a means of potentially boosting revenue at the expense of its installed customer base.
I will be pleased to debate Christian Poulsen on this matter publicly, and I offer him an open platform here to discuss his business strategy and help convince us that it is correct. I have a soapbox here, and don't hesitate to use it on issues which I regard as important, but I'll gladly share it in any way that he deems appropriate.
As for the rest of your argument, there's little by way of fact, only posturing. It's not just one lens, it's now two, and Poulsen has made it clear publicly (I was at the Photokina press conference and also interviewed him privately afterward) that building lenses with software control required in the back was the company's future direction.
Poulsen may see this approach, which includes not allowing any other backs to interface with new H series cameras, to be one which will maximize Hasselblad's margins, because clearly high margins are in the backs, not bodies and lenses (otherwise the company wouldn't have such a huge debt load). But, I maintain that it's a flawed strategy likely to disaffect a loyal user base built up over nearly sixty years. I've been using Hasselblads both professionally and personally for more than half that time, and I can tell you that I have never seen a user community as pissed off with a company as I do now with Hasselblad. And pissed off customers are definitely not good for business.
A closing thought. Hasselblad's situation is not analogous that of a Nikon or Canon. Hasselblad sells its products to an extremely small segment of the photographic market. This consists of a few tens of thousands of professional photographers around the world, and an even smaller number of well-heeled amateurs. The dealer network is tiny, and via the Internet and a handful of professional journals this small community is kept abreast of developments of interest. Punters may read the reviews superficially, but anyone spending north of $50,000 for a body, back and lenses tends to do their research, speak with their peers, and make an informed, well-researched decision. Their accountants won't let them do anything less.
That being the case, I am trying to do what I can to help people (such as the original poster in this thread) appreciate the pros and cons of Hasselblad's current business and marketing strategy – at least as I see it. People are then free to make their own decisions. But when a company spouts nonsense like their "Full Frame" campaign, and cynically freeze their installed user base out of new product offerings, someone has to stand up and say that the emperor isn't very completely dressed today.
Michael
Ps: If you think that I will keep my mouth shut for the privilege of an early review of a lens, you obviously don't know anything about me.
-
IMO the bad thing blad did was move the goalposts.
When I bought My H body and eyelike back - the whole system worked with that back
There was no hint of change - blad even waffled on their site about the whole 40 year system being compatible with the lense coulper thingy
They played on the safety of the investment
Then the position was moved so now I have two choices if I want to run a full system
Change system or change back.
No other manufactuer has ever done this to its client base as far as I am aware
No one ever thought a nikon lens would work on a canon etc (it does!)
For me however an incomplete H system is still the best system available.
It will become extra frustratin if a T>S lens is released - but the money in the back will not persuade me to change unless Blad offered an AMAZING trade in
IF another manufactuer brings out a decent system with Mams lens range (incliding a mover) , Hs brightnes and flash synch and multipoint AF I will drop blad as soon as I can afford to
The HY6 is a new system but fails on most counts in terms of what is missing from the blad semi system
S
-
especially when it is done not for technical reasons, but simply as a means of potentially boosting revenue at the expense of its installed customer base.
(otherwise the company wouldn't have such a huge debt load).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133591\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
At the risk of being flamed as usual...
I disagree with the first statement and I think other H2/3D users will as well.
If it is purely done to boost revenue then I am clearly stupid for buying into this system - is that what you are saying?
The integration and 'locked' nature of my H2D has provided a tighter camera with useful additions like the DAC (which is totally different to DXO, period) and simple benefits like having one set of batteries and chargers. I could go on... but all of us H users have repeated the benefits many times over.
The Hy6 is pretty much as closed as the best deals are going to be found with the Leaf AFi or a Hy6 with Sinar back. So changing from Sinar to Leaf on a Hy6 platform will be more costly than staying with the back (Sinar or Leaf) of your choice.
Plus the comment of Hasselblad having a huge debt load keeps popping up and is based on what??? There is no evidence I can find googling the net and one of H's dealers (pprhendrix I think) also strongly disagrees with you on this statement. If you have evidence then please show it, as I would like to see it as I am too a 'stakeholder' in the company.
I must be a stakeholder in lots of companies. Lucky me! Ill start asking them for dividend payments.
Jo S.x
-
The Hassy tilt/shift is already out, I had a demo and this was part of the interesting and new innovations wriiten into the software.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133470\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Could you elaborate as to details on this lens and the demo, please....?
-
Could you elaborate as to details on this lens and the demo, please....?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133596\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes please!! I haven't seen news of one anywhere????
-
I have no intention of "giving it a rest". [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133591\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think this is all getting to be a bit tiresome and seems only to serve in getting peoples hackles up. This debate has been rehashed up, down, left, right, - since the H3D and 28 were introduced. All the points have been made over and over, ad nauseum. Each camp has it's valid points - each it's very definite biases. We're talking about tools here and we each make our own decision as to which to use regardless of what's said here, I suspect. There's really nothing new here in this thread that I haven't read in previous discussion except that NOW there may be a new T/S lens. That in itself IS worth discussion (wasn't that the original poster's request?) - personally I'm ecstatic that someone, anyone, has actually invested the time and money to bring one to market. So, shall we all agree to disagree and move on?
Richard
-
That in itself IS worth discussion (wasn't that the original poster's request?) - personally I'm ecstatic that someone, anyone, has actually invested the time and money to bring one to market. So, shall we all agree to disagree and move on?
Richard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133599\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes!
-
The integration and 'locked' nature of my H2D has provided a tighter camera with useful additions like the DAC [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133595\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I dont see why these great things are connected to locking the system
A Nikon TTL flash may work better than a vivitar but a vivitar still works on a nikon
Nikon sell more flashes becuase it offers a better product than vivitar
BLad should sell more back than phase on simlar grounds
Of course they are free to do as they please
S
-
PSP = 1 post with no info about him? Makes you wonder what kind of job he has during the day?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=133569\")
Wonder no more John....
[a href=\"http://peterschafrick.com/]http://peterschafrick.com/[/url]
Anything else I can help you out with today John?
-
Wonder no more John....
http://peterschafrick.com/ (http://peterschafrick.com/)
Anything else I can help you out with today John?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133607\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Threadjack:
On another note Peter, your photography of liquids is in a league of its own, you are truly a master of your art. Thanks for sharing your website with us.
-Axel Bauer
-
At the risk of being flamed as usual...
I disagree with the first statement and I think other H2/3D users will as well.
If it is purely done to boost revenue then I am clearly stupid for buying into this system - is that what you are saying?
The integration and 'locked' nature of my H2D has provided a tighter camera with useful additions like the DAC (which is totally different to DXO, period) and simple benefits like having one set of batteries and chargers. I could go on... but all of us H users have repeated the benefits many times over.
The Hy6 is pretty much as closed as the best deals are going to be found with the Leaf AFi or a Hy6 with Sinar back. So changing from Sinar to Leaf on a Hy6 platform will be more costly than staying with the back (Sinar or Leaf) of your choice.
Plus the comment of Hasselblad having a huge debt load keeps popping up and is based on what??? There is no evidence I can find googling the net and one of H's dealers (pprhendrix I think) also strongly disagrees with you on this statement. If you have evidence then please show it, as I would like to see it as I am too a 'stakeholder' in the company.
I must be a stakeholder in lots of companies. Lucky me! Ill start asking them for dividend payments.
Jo S.x
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133595\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No flaming, just, hopefully, reasoned discussion. Addressing your points....
The only substantive difference between between what DAC does and what DxO does is that DxO does it go correct residual optical defects in lenses. DAC is intended to correct optical deficiencies that were intentionally left in the lens so as to reduce manufacturing and design costs. Source – publicly made statements by Hasselblad at Photokina.
Your statement that "changing from Sinar to Leaf on a Hy6 platform will be more costly than staying with the back (Sinar or Leaf) of your choice" is factually incorrect. A Hy6 body will not cost $30,000. And, unlike in the Hasselblad situation, Hy6 prisms, lenses, and accessories will not be rendered unusable if one changes between Leaf and Sinar backs (or possibly others as yet unannounced).
Hasselblad is a private company (owned by Shiro Group) and thus their finances are not public. But, from a press presentation made by Poulsen at Photokina it was clear that though things seem to be improving, there is still substantial headway to be made to turn Hasselblad around financially.
I get your jibe about "stakeholder", but possibly you are unaware of the usage of the term in financial circles. It refers to those that who, though not shareholders, have a stake in the success or failure of the company. This includes company workers as well as those with a strong vested interest in the company's products.
I'll also take the opportunity to address the point made by another poster that this issue has been rehashed many times. I've hardly mentioned it once since reporting on it nearly a year ago, after Photokina. But it does come up whenever new lenses are discussed, and that was the case when someone posted a question about the new T/S lens, which started this thread.
It seems to me fair game to bring to the attention of anyone interested in this new lens that only those with an H3D will be able to use it, and that the tens of thousands of photographers with H1 and H2 Hasselblad have been frozen out, unless, of course, they decide to sell their Phase, Leaf or Sinar backs and purchase a new body and back from Hasselblad.
Not a closed system huh?
-
PSP = 1 post with no info about him? Makes you wonder what kind of job he has during the day?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=133569\")
John,
Wonder no more... my day job:
[a href=\"http://www.peterschafrick.com/]http://www.peterschafrick.com/[/url]
Anything else I can help you out with today?
Best.
Peter.
-
Yes, please help us with information of Hasselblad's tilt/shift solution. Thank you.
-
Yes, please help us with information of Hasselblad's tilt/shift solution. Thank you.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133630\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not on this foum I won't.
What I will say is that I don't believe there is the perfect camera. Presently, if you need movements on medium formant, you need a view camera. If you need the H 28mm lens, then make the investment.
Hasselblad has decided to offer some pretty neat fatures with the incorporation of camera and back... and I'm sure more will follow.... how they do it and the decisions they make are entirely up to them.
It's quite laughable that Michael wants to debate Poulsen... debate what? If Michael wants so desperately to use the 28mm lens, then he should get the H3D. Simple really. He went from the Contax 645 to the H series. So what's so wrong with having an H3D in his camara bag?
-
It seems to me fair game to bring to the attention of anyone interested in this new lens that only those with an H3D will be able to use it, and that the tens of thousands of photographers with H1 and H2 Hasselblad have been frozen out, unless, of course, they decide to sell their Phase, Leaf or Sinar backs and purchase a new body and back from Hasselblad.
Not a closed system huh?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133620\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If you could approach this with an open mind at this point(sure!), I think you would find that you actually have an excellent option. If the new 28mm lens and T/S lens are really that critical to your style of shooting, why not consider selling your P45+ and trading in your H2 body for an H3D. You might actually make money in the process. I firmly believe that you would find that the H3D-39 produces digital files that are the equal of the P45+. There are many who have done the comparison and reached that conclusion.
-
This LINK (PDN) (http://www.pdngallery.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=006622#000000) is a good example why I would not consider shooting Hasselblad at this time. I still have issue's with my Leaf aptus, but I can make it work in the long run. Until Hasselblad can fix the issues I would not even consider them. I shoot both architecture and people and need one back to handle both.
P.S. Thanks PSP for the link.
-
This LINK (PDN) (http://www.pdngallery.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=006622#000000) is a good example why I would not consider shooting Hasselblad at this time. I still have issue's with my Leaf aptus, but I can make it work in the long run. Until Hasselblad can fix the issues I would not even consider them. I shoot both architecture and people and need one back to handle both.
P.S. Thanks PSP for the link.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133661\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Oh please don't bring that guy into this... there's nothg wrong or needs to be fixed with Hassleblad backs or lenses. I've heard his story and also heard Hasselblad's end of it as well. Until you hear both sides, please don't base your decision on one's persons bitterness.....
Respectfully,
P.
-
What did Hasselblad have to say? I have been looking at other solution, and asked Hasselblad with no answer?
Oh please don't bring that guy into this... there's nothg wrong or needs to be fixed with Hassleblad backs or lenses. I've heard his story and also heard Hasselblad's end of it as well. Until you hear both sides, please don't base your decision on one's persons bitterness.....
Respectfully,
P.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133666\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Oh please don't bring that guy into this... there's nothg wrong or needs to be fixed with Hassleblad backs or lenses. I've heard his story and also heard Hasselblad's end of it as well. Until you hear both sides, please don't base your decision on one's persons bitterness.....
Respectfully,
P.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133666\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Indeed...
Many people tried to help him on the FlexFrame user group with real answers and he wasn't too polite about it.
Jo S.x
-
It is very easy to figure it out, that Michael has the means to move to another system with little or no harm at all. If I am correct, Michael's point is from the photojornalist perspective, but as a very active photographer himself, he gets emotional about it.
It's up to any of his readers to believe in his honesty or not.
Regards
Eduardo
---------
If you could approach this with an open mind at this point(sure!), I think you would find that you actually have an excellent option. If the new 28mm lens and T/S lens are really that critical to your style of shooting, why not consider selling your P45+ and trading in your H2 body for an H3D. You might actually make money in the process. I firmly believe that you would find that the H3D-39 produces digital files that are the equal of the P45+. There are many who have done the comparison and reached that conclusion.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133658\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
John,
Wonder no more... my day job:
http://www.peterschafrick.com/ (http://www.peterschafrick.com/)
Anything else I can help you out with today?
Best.
Peter.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133623\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nice imagery! You are definitely an asset to this forum !
Edmund
-
Nice imagery! You are definitely an asset to this forum !
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133678\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Flattery will get you everywhere! ;-)
Thanks for the kind words Edmund.
Cheers!
-
Nice imagery! You are definitely an asset to this forum !
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133678\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Which back do you own Edmund and what kind of work do you do?
-
Which back do you own Edmund and what kind of work do you do?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133687\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I own no back. Yet. I will have one within two months. I have Canon equipment, an 1Ds and 1Ds2, but the 1Ds is doing all the work. I shoot runway fashion a few times a year, and much more rarely editorial. Sometimes I sell a print in a gallery or direct.
Mostly everybody in the industry speaks to me due to my camera profiling and blogging activities; for instance Christian Poulsen of Hassleblad gave me an hour of hist time at Photokina. Very bright and charismatic guy who has practiced commercial photography, and also understands the technical aspects of digital imaging but still gives the biggest weight to the marketing issues. Reminds me of Steve Jobs
Edmund
-
This LINK (PDN) (http://www.pdngallery.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=006622#000000) is a good example why I would not consider shooting Hasselblad at this time.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133661\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I would have to work quite hard to get a file that bad from my H3D, the image seems very fuzzy and unsharp, something I don't experience at all with either of my lenses (35 included.)
To me it looks like he's either done something wrong, or just got a "lemon" camera.
-axel
-
Michael,
If you were a little less critical of Hasselblad (still trying to figure out your MO on this one) you might be privy to information concerning the the status of the tilt/shift lens. But publicly bashing any company won't make you and friends there.
And as a bitter and unhappy stake-holder, why not demonstrate your displeasure and divest of your Hasselblad holdings? That should really 'teach' Hasselblad, eh?!
Alternatively, you can put your bitterness aside and buy the 28mm and the HD3 and get on with it. Because quite frankly, being bitter and trying to tell anyone how to run their business is in no one's best interest.
Of course, just my opinion.....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133547\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
And in my opinion, those who lie down in the road tend to get run over.
It is in everyone's best interests for there to be as much competition as possible. A closed system discourages this. I don't own Hasselblad kit, and their current strategy makes it pretty certain I never will.
Quentin
-
And in my opinion, those who lie down in the road tend to get run over.
It is in everyone's best interests for there to be as much competition as possible. A closed system discourages this. I don't own Hasselblad kit, and their current strategy makes it pretty certain I never will.
Quentin
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133704\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
How does a supposed 'closed' system discourage competition?
Canon and Nikon can be considered closed systems - as well as Olympus. Why the fuss over Hasselblad?
Look here - some photographers have complained about the lack of features in medium format compared to 35mm. So when a manufacturer steps up to the plate and offers as good or better features, they complain as well.
Has no one thought that perhaps Hasselblad will eventually be competing directly with Canon and Nikon? And you need a proper integration between back, camera and lens to do that. What is so terribly wrong with that? It's an incredible piece of gear, the H3D. It can be argued that other medium format manufacturers are years behind the H3D because they lack that integration. IF Hasselblad has, like Michael and others state, made a terrible mistake, then only time will tell. Until then, comments relating to this remain opinions rather than fact.
Hasselblad's management and leaders have more respect in my books than any individual member on this forum. I tend to believe that their decisions are well thought out. They have more at 'stake' than a few H bodies.
You still have plenty of choices within the Hasselblad family and outside the Hasselblad family. How is offering an integrated medium format camera lessen competition?
I don't own a Mamiya, nor a Leaf or Phase back - but because I don't doesn't mean I'm obligated in some way to ridicule them.
Best,
P.
-
Who said anything about ridiculing them?
Its called "feedback". Companies are supposed to use it to assist in making decisions about their future direction. My feedback says "you got it wrong" but they are free to disagree.
Quentin
-
Who said anything about ridiculing them?
Its called "feedback". Companies are supposed to use it to assist in making decisions about their future direction. My feedback says "you got it wrong" but they are free to disagree.
Quentin
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133709\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
How on earth can you give feedback when you don't own the product?
I'd bet that Hasselblad (actually any company) values the feedback of their actual customers more than those who are not customers.... and I bet those decisions were made based on customers feedback long before products are even announced.....
-
And in my opinion, those who lie down in the road tend to get run over.
It is in everyone's best interests for there to be as much competition as possible. A closed system discourages this. I don't own Hasselblad kit, and their current strategy makes it pretty certain I never will.
Quentin
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133704\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
How much time have you spent actually shooting with an H3D?
-
One of my main reasons for going with Mamiya and Phase was due to the closed nature of the H3D.
I am new to MF and that idea simply scared me off.
How many others took their 30-40k elsewhere for similar reasons?
Mamiya has had its problems but leaf and phase will have no choice but to strongly promote the platform.
-
Hi,
I would think that what DAC can correct for is vignetting, distorsion and possibly chromatic aberration. Correction of each of these defects is quite easy and would be specific for each lens.
These problems are easily corrected in many tools. Lightroom unfortunately does not have distorsion correction, which is a very bad thing I hope Adobe will fix ASAP if not sooner. :-)
Not fully correcting for the above problems would probably make it much easier to produce a lens.
It is also conceivable that software could improve on sharpness, by using some kind of deconvolution. This kind of deconvolution is possible in DxO and DxO has also methods for determining the needed deconvolution.
My opinion is that Hasselblad is depriving their customers the option of using the best combination of software and sensor technology. I think that Hasselblad should left the H3 open and fully integrated with the older systems. Hasselblad could then say that you need to use Hasselblad backs to fully utilize some advantages of the system.
Best regards
Erik
No flaming, just, hopefully, reasoned discussion. Addressing your points....
The only substantive difference between between what DAC does and what DxO does is that DxO does it go correct residual optical defects in lenses. DAC is intended to correct optical deficiencies that were intentionally left in the lens so as to reduce manufacturing and design costs. Source – publicly made statements by Hasselblad at Photokina.
Your statement that "changing from Sinar to Leaf on a Hy6 platform will be more costly than staying with the back (Sinar or Leaf) of your choice" is factually incorrect. A Hy6 body will not cost $30,000. And, unlike in the Hasselblad situation, Hy6 prisms, lenses, and accessories will not be rendered unusable if one changes between Leaf and Sinar backs (or possibly others as yet unannounced).
Hasselblad is a private company (owned by Shiro Group) and thus their finances are not public. But, from a press presentation made by Poulsen at Photokina it was clear that though things seem to be improving, there is still substantial headway to be made to turn Hasselblad around financially.
I get your jibe about "stakeholder", but possibly you are unaware of the usage of the term in financial circles. It refers to those that who, though not shareholders, have a stake in the success or failure of the company. This includes company workers as well as those with a strong vested interest in the company's products.
I'll also take the opportunity to address the point made by another poster that this issue has been rehashed many times. I've hardly mentioned it once since reporting on it nearly a year ago, after Photokina. But it does come up whenever new lenses are discussed, and that was the case when someone posted a question about the new T/S lens, which started this thread.
It seems to me fair game to bring to the attention of anyone interested in this new lens that only those with an H3D will be able to use it, and that the tens of thousands of photographers with H1 and H2 Hasselblad have been frozen out, unless, of course, they decide to sell their Phase, Leaf or Sinar backs and purchase a new body and back from Hasselblad.
Not a closed system huh?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133620\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Mamiya has had its problems but leaf and phase will have no choice but to strongly promote the platform.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133742\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Leaf is introducing its Afi shortly, so I guess the ball is in P1's backyard... and from here I can't see who's playing...
-
I totally agree that the more the back/camera/lens combination is integrated the better a system can work. This part of the Hasselblad strategy is probably sound and has not been in discussion by anyone as far as I know.
The argument that Hasselblad 'closed' its system just to be able to get a better integrated solution for us I find balony. I find it a bit insulting when that is used as an argument to defend closing their system.
It would have been not too difficult for Hasselblad to supply third parties with either development kits or specifications on how to communicate with their equipment. Maybe they will eventually, after they made sure all their own products are compatible with each other (eg. CF39 with the H3).
This would make it interesting for third parties to develop for Hasselblad products as well. Yes, one could argument that they might also make products that compete with Hasselblads. This would give more flexibility and options to photographers, I don't see where this is wrong (for photographers I mean)?
BTW. The Hy6 appears to be going exactly the same route.
-
If Hassy was really worried only about quality issues I could understand not making the newer lenses compatible with older systems.
That said, if that was their only concern why not open the h3 specifications?
-
My opinion is that Hasselblad is depriving their customers the option of using the best combination of software and sensor technology.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133752\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
What?!
The best combination of software and sensor technology combination is the H3D, whether you use wide angle or not, no? I would argue that an integrated solution is superior. Do you not think an H3D/with H lens is a superior camera to say an H1, with a V series lens with a non-Hasselblad back? I don't think so!
If you haven't already noticed, Hasselblad is in the camera and back business. They have the ability to therefore develop unique benefits with this integration. This deprives their customers of nothing. Instead it gives their customers the opportunity to take advantage of these benefits. All while still allowing anyone without a Hasselblad back to still use the Hasselblad camera and the majority of their lenses.
There seems to be a lot of displeasure that Hasselblad is pushing the envelope and providing real solutions & benefits to photographers. I still don't understand this.
-
Patrick,
I think you are reading selectively, most people do aplaud most of the things Hasselblad does however some things are not well received.
The motive behind closing their system has nothing to do with bringing solutions or benefits to photographers. The same solutions and benefits will be there when they would provide open specifications or developer kits.
Actually an open system would potentially provide more solutions and benefits.
-
Patrick,
I think you are reading selectively, most people do aplaud most of the things Hasselblad does however some things are not well received.
The motive behind closing their system has nothing to do with bringing solutions or benefits to photographers. The same solutions and benefits will be there when they would provide open specifications or developer kits.
Actually an open system would potentially provide more solutions and benefits.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Who's Patrick?
I disagree. An open system, as presently being described, can not provide as many potential benefits and in such a slick package as an integrated solution can. Again, think of a H1 with V lens, on a Phase/Leaf back, compared to an H3D.
Back to the original post then... if you need movements on medium format, there are presently solutions. View camera, Flex and Arc Hasselblad bodies... and I believe a t/s adaptor is available (I don't recall where, nor what bodies it fits). There may be other solutions... anyone?
Hasselblad is apparently also working on a solution, but nothing, as far as I know, has been announced. I would guess by Photokina 2008 there could possibly be something announced.
Fingers and toes crossed!
-
I understand the decision of making an integrated system. But does an integrated system has to be a closed system? NO. The only point of closing the system is to avoid people putting PhaseOne and other back in their hasselblads. This decision of closing the system has nothing to do with quality. There's a lot of people using open systems like Mamiya/h1-h2 with phaseone and this integrated super H3D is still not better.
-
I understand the decision of making an integrated system. But does an integrated system has to be a closed system? NO. The only point of closing the system is to avoid people putting PhaseOne and other back in their hasselblads. This decision of closing the system has nothing to do with quality. There's a lot of people using open systems like Mamiya/h1-h2 with phaseone and this integrated super H3D is still not better.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133843\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, one of the points of the H3D is to sell more H3D's. What's your point? An objective of business is to capture market-share.
Do you think, even for a moment, if Phase or Leaf had a camera they wouldn't look for proprietary solutions/benefits?
This is called differentiation. It's what sets one apart from one's competition. It's one way to grow, succeed, and profit as a business.
The Mamiya with a Phase back is not better than the H3D and H lenses?? Really?? Have you shot with both and compared the files?
-
Patrick,
I think you are reading selectively, most people do aplaud most of the things Hasselblad does however some things are not well received.
The motive behind closing their system has nothing to do with bringing solutions or benefits to photographers. The same solutions and benefits will be there when they would provide open specifications or developer kits.
Actually an open system would potentially provide more solutions and benefits.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It may appear to be true that the interests of photographers are best served by the manufacturers offering fully open systems, but IMO that is naive and short sighted. The reason is that unless Hasselblad, Leaf, Mamiya and Sinar can get sufficient market share to sell enough BACKS, not cameras, there is a serious risk that they will fold just like Contax, Pentax and Bronica. Without robust sales of digital backs, who was next? Mamiya? Hasselblad? Gee, who is left standing? Do you think Sinar would ever have invested in the Hy6 platform just to sell Hy6s? I am not at all intrigued by a future in which the only one selling backs is Phase One, and everyone is sticking them on used cameras that we buy off of eBay. How do those "options" look? I think we are much better off with a healthy Leaf selling a closed AFI, a healthy Sinar selling a closed Hy6, a healthy Mamiya selling a closed solution with its inexpensive back and the ZD Camera, and a healthy Hasselblad selling the H3Ds. Loads of good options. You want a Hasselblad H2 for your Phase back, go for it. The only thing you cannot use on it is the 28mm lens and perhaps the forthcoming tilt/shift lens. You really need them? Get over it and buy an H3D. Life ain't perfect.
The most vocal bashers of Hasselblad appear to be Phase One users, which is really ironic because the best thing that could happen for photographers would be for Phase One to lose half of its market share to the other players. That would make the other players strong and encourage them to make the R&D investment to improve their backs and develop new lens offerings. So, if you really care about the future of the medium format digital back and camera community, support it by buying a back or digital camera from Hasselblad, Leaf, Mamiya or Sinar.
-
It may appear to be true that the interests of photographers are best served by the manufacturers offering fully open systems, but IMO that is naive and short sighted. The reason is that unless Hasselblad, Leaf, Mamiya and Sinar can get sufficient market share to sell enough BACKS, not cameras, there is a serious risk that they will fold just like Contax, Pentax and Bronica. Without robust sales of digital backs, who was next? Mamiya? Hasselblad? Gee, who is left standing? Do you think Sinar would ever have invested in the Hy6 platform just to sell Hy6s? I am not at all intrigued by a future in which the only one selling backs is Phase One, and everyone is sticking them on used cameras that we buy off of eBay. How do those "options" look? I think we are much better off with a healthy Leaf selling a closed AFI, a healthy Sinar selling a closed Hy6, a healthy Mamiya selling a closed solution with its inexpensive back and the ZD Camera, and a healthy Hasselblad selling the H3Ds. Loads of good options. You want a Hasselblad H2 for your Phase back, go for it. The only thing you cannot use on it is the 28mm lens and perhaps the forthcoming tilt/shift lens. You really need them? Get over it and buy an H3D. Life ain't perfect.
The most vocal bashers of Hasselblad appear to be Phase One users, which is really ironic because the best thing that could happen for photographers would be for Phase One to lose half of its market share to the other players. That would make the other players strong and encourage them to make the R&D investment to improve their backs and develop new lens offerings. So, if you really care about the future of the medium format digital back and camera community, support it by buying a back or digital camera from Hasselblad, Leaf, Mamiya or Sinar.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133847\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Alleluia brother!
Can I get an Amen!!
-
Actually an open system would potentially provide more solutions and benefits.
This may be true but I don't believe it offers any benefit to Hasselblad beyond a little
goodwill from current Phase/Leaf back owners.
I'm of the opinion that the desision to 'close' the system is primarily a business decision
and I don't have a problem with that. (of course,I'm a renter and not an owner of any
MFDB system so perhaps my opinion would be swayed if i were in the owner camp)
As mentioned earlier,the MFDB market is very small and I think Hasselblad is leveraging
their technology towards an endgame of securing a bigger slice of the small pie.
Their will be 'collateral damage' and some ruffled feathers to endure in the short to mid term
but down the road I don't doubt their decision will be sound one for Hasselblad.
When Canon introduced the EOS system some 15 years ago they were a distant second
to Nikon. They chose to change the lens mount and,as a result,totally shut out all their
existing user base from migrating to the EOS with their lenses Needless to say people
were massively pissed at the time but withing a couple of years,after the dust had settled,
it was pretty clear Canon had made the correct tactical move.
I think we can see a certail parrallel in the direction Hasselblad has chosen.
Mark
-
I understand the decision of making an integrated system. But does an integrated system has to be a closed system? NO. The only point of closing the system is to avoid people putting PhaseOne and other back in their hasselblads. This decision of closing the system has nothing to do with quality. There's a lot of people using open systems like Mamiya/h1-h2 with phaseone and this integrated super H3D is still not better.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133843\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Pure speculation from here onwards:
One could aruge that both form a business/revenue perspective and also a quality perspective, it would be impossible for Hasselblad to do what they now do without closing their system.
On the earnings bit, developing what Hasselblad has done (complete state of the art medium format system and software lens correction), would not be possible without getting "a cut" from digiback sales. The price of the system would possibly be too high and other digiback makers would have no incentive to share the costs unless mamiya/others where charging as well.
On the quality perspective, letting third party back makers (p1, leaf, etc.) loose on lenses that are not optically perfect and relying on software correction, may reflect poorly on blad if such third party did not do the job properly.
As I said all pure speculation, and I have no clue what the R&D costs and per unit costs are for a H-series parts, but HB may have to go the route they are taking to make it all "come together."
Lastly my H3D does wonders every day (also pure speculation on my part )
-axel
-
So, if you really care about the future of the medium format digital back and camera community, support it by buying a back or digital camera from Hasselblad, Leaf, Mamiya or Sinar.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133847\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
+1
-
Who's Patrick?
I disagree. An open system, as presently being described, can not provide as many potential benefits and in such a slick package as an integrated solution can. Again, think of a H1 with V lens, on a Phase/Leaf back, compared to an H3D.
Back to the original post then... if you need movements on medium format, there are presently solutions. View camera, Flex and Arc Hasselblad bodies... and I believe a t/s adaptor is available (I don't recall where, nor what bodies it fits). There may be other solutions... anyone?
Hasselblad is apparently also working on a solution, but nothing, as far as I know, has been announced. I would guess by Photokina 2008 there could possibly be something announced.
Fingers and toes crossed!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133840\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sorry Peter
I am thinking of the current H3. The only thing Hasselblad should do is provide the communication protocols and other necessary data so 3rd parties can develop backs for the H3 or develop software that have the lens corrections of the 28. They can (should) charge for such a developer kit as well. This approach would not compromise the H3D package whatsoever.
-
Sorry Peter
I am thinking of the current H3. The only thing Hasselblad should do is provide the communication protocols and other necessary data so 3rd parties can develop backs for the H3 or develop software that have the lens corrections of the 28. They can (should) charge for such a developer kit as well. This approach would not compromise the H3D package whatsoever.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133863\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You can use other backs on an H camera. No problem.
I believe there have been some elequant posts on the advantages & reasons why HB should proceed as they are with cameras like the H3D....
-
It may appear to be true that the interests of photographers are best served by the manufacturers offering fully open systems, but IMO that is naive and short sighted. The reason is that unless Hasselblad, Leaf, Mamiya and Sinar can get sufficient market share to sell enough BACKS, not cameras, there is a serious risk that they will fold just like Contax, Pentax and Bronica. Without robust sales of digital backs, who was next? Mamiya? Hasselblad? Gee, who is left standing? Do you think Sinar would ever have invested in the Hy6 platform just to sell Hy6s? I am not at all intrigued by a future in which the only one selling backs is Phase One, and everyone is sticking them on used cameras that we buy off of eBay. How do those "options" look? I think we are much better off with a healthy Leaf selling a closed AFI, a healthy Sinar selling a closed Hy6, a healthy Mamiya selling a closed solution with its inexpensive back and the ZD Camera, and a healthy Hasselblad selling the H3Ds. Loads of good options. You want a Hasselblad H2 for your Phase back, go for it. The only thing you cannot use on it is the 28mm lens and perhaps the forthcoming tilt/shift lens. You really need them? Get over it and buy an H3D. Life ain't perfect.
The most vocal bashers of Hasselblad appear to be Phase One users, which is really ironic because the best thing that could happen for photographers would be for Phase One to lose half of its market share to the other players. That would make the other players strong and encourage them to make the R&D investment to improve their backs and develop new lens offerings. So, if you really care about the future of the medium format digital back and camera community, support it by buying a back or digital camera from Hasselblad, Leaf, Mamiya or Sinar.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133847\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I own a CF39 and a Leaf A17 so I guess I helped a bit here. Before, I have used only Leaf. I have never owned a PhaseOne though I came very close to buying a P30+ or P45+. The offer I received from Phase was truly fantastic.
It would be nice to be able to use the CF39 on the H3 or to use the 28.
I am not so sure the MFDB market will get healthier the way you are describing it.
-
Sorry Ray, don't agree. Why should hassie give away something they created, something wich is unike to them????? Canon doesn't sell their 5d sensor to nikon or Coca cola doesn't give their secret to pepsi. hasselblad back's offers us the utmost freedom there is in use( you yourself are using it on two complete different platforms, try that with a P1). This is all some sad people screaming about fried air.
As an other poster said already, if you want a 28mm, go for the H3d or go get a mamiya.
Hasselblad owns the back and the camera and are entitled to chose the way to go they like.
I myself us a CF39 and 384 back on 5 different platforms and are very happy i have chosen hasselblad over P1 or leaf.
Al this comotion is about one lens at the moment and probably some more in the future that nowbody forces one to use it. Put a 24mm on an Alpha or other wide camera and one is ready to go. Most people who are complaining over the matter are even not in the market to buy a 28mm or so, they even do not posses a newer back or H body.
The Hy6 platform is still thin air and will be surely closed to, one way or another... so why always nagging about hasselblad.
At this moment tyey produce the finest medium format system with the finest backs ( they are at least equal to those of the competition)available. So for those who chose P1 or other, sorry, bad luck. On my nikon I can not use the wonderfull canon 24/108 IS either, but do you read sad, wining storries about that????? i don't think so.
-
Yes, one of the points of the H3D is to sell more H3D's. What's your point? An objective of business is to capture market-share.
Do you think, even for a moment, if Phase or Leaf had a camera they wouldn't look for proprietary solutions/benefits?
This is called differentiation. It's what sets one apart from one's competition. It's one way to grow, succeed, and profit as a business.
The Mamiya with a Phase back is not better than the H3D and H lenses?? Really?? Have you shot with both and compared the files?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133845\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I switched from the H1 to Contax and now I'm on Mamiya with a P21. A lot of photographers were waiting for this Hasselblad 28mm. I'm my case, and with the crop factor of the p21, the 28 mm was very interesting. I liked the H1 very much but I could not buy the the lens I needed because I WAS LOCKED. Why, because my back wouldn't correct the lens? Please don't make me laught. It's like Hasselblad is telling professionals how to correct and proccess their images. Do you really think this lens can be only corrected with Flexcolor?
In other cases, like the people who bought the H2 just before this lens was presented? Don't you think they have a good reason to be in this anti-hasselblad position they are now?
I could understand that these lenses like the H system are not compatibles with the V system (well they actually are but not from Hasselblad's will) but why not H1 or H2 compatible? It's like Hasselblad is cleaning up the house. Canon is an integrated system but you can use any lens from any kind because the system is open for others, but the H3D is just compatible with Hasselblad gear because they won't even give the code for further development.
And about the quality, yes, mamiya with phaseone has better color, contrast (and bokeh) than hasselblad/imacon.
-
What?!
The best combination of software and sensor technology combination is the H3D, whether you use wide angle or not, no? I would argue that an integrated solution is superior. Do you not think an H3D/with H lens is a superior camera to say an H1, with a V series lens with a non-Hasselblad back? I don't think so!
If you haven't already noticed, Hasselblad is in the camera and back business. They have the ability to therefore develop unique benefits with this integration. This deprives their customers of nothing. Instead it gives their customers the opportunity to take advantage of these benefits. All while still allowing anyone without a Hasselblad back to still use the Hasselblad camera and the majority of their lenses.
There seems to be a lot of displeasure that Hasselblad is pushing the envelope and providing real solutions & benefits to photographers. I still don't understand this.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133824\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
With all due respect, this is simply rubbish. The H series digital interface was originally designed by Hasselblad as a result of considerable colaboration with Phase One, and of course Fuji who does the actual manufacturing. Phase likely knows as much about H back interfacing as anyone, so to imply that the best sensor / software combo is unique to one company simply has no basis in fact. And of course both Hasselblad and Phase use the identical Kodak sensor, which makes that point moot.
Enough said, except, why does what you write sound like it was written by a Hasselblad copy writer?
Michael
-
I switched from the H1 to Contax and now I'm on Mamiya with a P21.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133867\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sorry, but that's hilarious!!
-
Sorry Ray, don't agree. Why should hassie give away something they created, something wich is unike to them????? Canon doesn't sell their 5d sensor to nikon or Coca cola doesn't give their secret to pepsi. hasselblad back's offer you the utmost freedom there is in use( you yourself are using it on two complete different platforms, try that with a P1). This is all some sad people screaming about fried air.
As an other poster said already, if you want a 28mm, go for the H3d or get a mamiya.
Hasselblad owns the back and the camera and are entitled to chose the way to go they like.
I myself us a CF39 and 384 back on 5 different platforms and are very happy i have chosen hasselblad over P1 or leaf.
Al this comotion is about one lens at the moment and probably some more in the future that nowbody forces u to use. Put a 24mm on an Alpha or other wide camera and you are ready to go. Most people who are complaining over the matter are even not in the market to buy a 28mm or so, they even do not posses a newer back or H body.
The Hy6 platform is still thin air and will be surely closed to, one way or another... so why always nagging about hasselblad.
At this moment tyey produce the finest medium format system with the finest backs ( they are at least equal to those of the competition)available. So for those who chose P1 or other, sorry, bad luck. On my nikon I can not use the wonderfull canon 24/108 IS either, but do you read sad, wining storries about that????? i don't think so.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133866\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That is right Raf. I don't deny the Hasselblad has a right to make the business decision to close their system but I don't like it when it is being sold as technically necessary. Just come forward and call the animal by its right name.
Keeping technology proprietary is one solution. Licensing to 3rd parties is another thing which has also proven itself as a strategy that can reap many benefits. I never mentioned Hasselblad should give it away.
Can I use my CF39 on a H3? I don't think so. To get myself another Hasselblad back or a Mamiya with 28mm that is odd. When the T&S comes out I hope I would be able to use it with the CF39, that is a lens that would have me interested (depending on the amount of tilt and shift and the flexibility of using both of them).
Anyway, every choice has its pros and cons.
-
Sorry, but that's hilarious!!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133869\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I supose this is the kind of reply we (because there's a lot of people reading this you now?) can get from that kind of people who has nothing to say.
Hope your fingers aren't burning now because your shots are actually quite good man!
-
So , there is one lens one is not able to use........ but we have the digiflex with 17/35mm wich gives perfect results.... so why the fusssssssss???????????
They sell it as they like. It is their propperty.
In the good old days, when there wass a huge difference between amateurs and professionals, everybody was mad about hassie because they were so expensive...... It is never OK for some people.
If one really needs a 28mm corrected as with the hassieH3d, you simply buy the camera. Otherwise, one is just wining about the fact that it's bussines isn't making enough monney to afford it...and one should not be crying about that but acting to get more and better business. I have said this on more forums, when you have to ask for the price, you cannot afford it. Nowadays a lot of people are using Digibacks that actually have to hurt themselves (financially) to afford them. I have never heard a good working and money making photographer complain about such matter.
-
With all due respect, this is simply rubbish. The H series digital interface was originally designed by Hasselblad as a result of considerable colaboration with Phase One, and of course Fuji who does the actual manufacturing. Phase likely knows as much about H back interfacing as anyone, so to imply that the best sensor / software combo is unique to one company simply has no basis in fact. And of course both Hasselblad and Phase use the identical Kodak sensor, which makes that point moot.
Enough said, except, why does what you write sound like it was written by a Hasselblad copy writer?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133868\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The H3D is arguably a better camera because it can do truly useful things that no other MF combination presently can. That is a fact. Your displeasure about not being able to have the benefits of certain H3D features speaks volumes about how much value it has.
Sensors are only part of the equation - come on Michael, surely you know as much. Files from a Phase back look different are ARE different than from a HB back. And I'm not getting into any discussions are to which is 'better'. They are different and some like one better than the other... for a variety of reasons.
My writing? I'll take that as a compliment......
-
I find this conversation very useful. Currently agonizing between H3D and H2/P45....
-
So Ray, there is one lens you are not able to use........ but you have the digiflex with 17/35mm wich gives perfect results.... so why the fusssssssss???????????
They sell it as they like. It is their propperty.
In the good old days, when there wass a huge difference between amateurs and professionals, everybody was mad about hassie because they were so expensive...... It is never wright for some people.
If you really need a 28mm corrected as with the hassieH3d, you simply buy the camera. Othrwise, you are just wining about the fact that your bussines isn't making enough monney to afford it...and you should not be crying. I have said this on more forums, when you have to ask for the price, you cannot afford it. Nowadays a lot of people are using Digibacks that actually have to hurt themselves (financially) to afford them. I have never heard a good working and monney making photographer complain about such matter.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133874\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hey, why be so aggressive ? I hope your photography is better than your spelling !
Pete
-
If the Hasselblad camera/digital sensor system they are marketing is really superior, Hasselblad would do better to keep their system open and let the consumers decide. They are making a large number of consumers angry (including current customers as well as folks who have considered moving over to an H system) with their elitist attitude and the fact that they have changed their direction and support for newly introduced systems a few too many times over the last several years. However, by leaving the system open and letting consumers know they do have a choice and options, over the long haul they may actually win over more customers who in the end might prefer to own a single unit for all the advantages that might bring. In the end the quality of the product is what is going to dictate sales if people feel good about the company they are buying from. Mark
With all due respect, this is simply rubbish. The H series digital interface was originally designed by Hasselblad as a result of considerable colaboration with Phase One, and of course Fuji who does the actual manufacturing. Phase likely knows as much about H back interfacing as anyone, so to imply that the best sensor / software combo is unique to one company simply has no basis in fact. And of course both Hasselblad and Phase use the identical Kodak sensor, which makes that point moot.
Enough said, except, why does what you write sound like it was written by a Hasselblad copy writer?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133868\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
If you really need a 28mm corrected as with the hassieH3d, you simply buy the camera. Othrwise, you are just wining about the fact that your bussines isn't making enough monney to afford it...and you should not be crying.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133874\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
At the risk of pushing this thread beyond its useful life, I have to say that arguments like this are really specious. How do you know what someone can or can't afford? How do you know the state of their business? Really!
And even then, it's a hollow argument. I can afford to buy an H3D, and a 28mm and a T/S. But, I won't because I already have an H1 and an H2. I'd buy both the 28mm and and T/S in a flash, but being forced to pay $30,000 for another body and back, which I don't need, makes it an exorbitant additional expenditure. That's the crux of the issue.
Why is this so hard for people to understand? Or is the game of arguing for the sake of it so appealing that common sense and civility no longer have value?
Michael
-
I find this conversation very useful. Currently agonizing between H3D and H2/P45....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133878\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree, though after this thread I'm no longer agonizing. H3D seems to be where the industry is headed, and where I'm going to head.
-
Sorry to all who feel offended and certainley did not wanted to be agressive by any means, but i just wanted to explain what i feel about the fuss. Only the first phrase was an answer to Ray's post( I know Ray already for some years now, and we see eachother from time to time).
I am sure most of us do not have to check their bank accounts before buing a back but most of those do not complain about being unable to use one 28mm lens.
You are wright Micheal, it is a lot of money for using the H3d. But isn't there an alternative that is even of a much better quality. Ray and myself are both using a Digiflex with the wonderfull nikon 85mm TS. I myself also us some super rotators which offer even more value for my money.
All my studio work that requires tilt/shift is done on a self adapted Sinar P2 view camera. If i had to shoot lots of interiors i would simpley buy a cambo DS or Arca swiss camera. These offer much more and better image quality then hassie will ever be able to.
At the moment there is one lens we cannot use, maybe another in the future.... so why making such a big deal about it?????? I to am using a CF39 wich is not compatible with the 28mm but there are alternatives enough to make my day a shiny one.
There are many tools you can use to obtain better quality then with the one lens you cannot use. :rolleyesOh Yes, about my spelling, i am really sorry but as a not that bright minded belgian i only serve customers in 4 different languages and until now we were able to communicate without the help of translators or other.
-
It's like Hasselblad is telling professionals how to correct and proccess their images. Do you really think this lens can be only corrected with Flexcolor?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133867\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nope, but then again a magazine testing an uncorrected or poorly corrected HCD28 lens taken with a Leaf/P1/etc. back vs. a Mamiya 28 lens on a Leaf/P1/etc. back, would seem like a risk to me from a sales and marketing perspective... one I would not take if it ended up with the test showing my product as inferior because of a third party.
-
Hey, why be so aggressive ? I hope your photography is better than your spelling !
Pete
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133881\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No worries Pete,
I know Raf for a while, I know how to read what he is saying and feel not offended or agressively approached in any way.
I know I have to make more money, my wife is telling me the same thing
-
At the risk of pushing this thread beyond its useful life, I have to say that arguments like this are really specious. How do you know what someone can or can't afford? How do you know the state of their business? Really!
And even then, it's a hollow argument. I can afford to buy an H3D, and a 28mm and a T/S. But, I won't because I already have an H1 and an H2. I'd buy both the 28mm and and T/S in a flash, but being forced to pay $30,000 for another body and back, which I don't need, makes it an exorbitant additional expenditure. That's the crux of the issue.
Why is this so hard for people to understand? Or is the game of arguing for the sake of it so appealing that common sense and civility no longer have value?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133883\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Like all newer technologies, if you need or want to stay current, there's a price to pay. Every time I buy a new Mac, inevetibly a few weeks later, a better one comes out!
I recall you tested the Contax and HB years ago, and decided to go with the Contax, and now you have an H1 and H2. I recall you owned a Kodak back at one time - I don't recall which backs you compared it to, but I'm sure that it was expensive to convert to Phase. The industry people call this progress! :-)
Don't get me wrong - I agree, it can be expensive to change over.
-
Well, this has been fun guys, but i would like to return to the original question for a moment. I am to understand that Hasselblad is in fact putting together a tilt/shift lens. Can someone say what the length of the lens will be? What else is know about it? Any time frame?
Pete Dendrinos
-
........forces users to buy their expensive (high margin) backs? The same goes for their 28mm ultra-wide lens, which only works on the H3D.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This was stated in the earliest post. As per my knowledge, Hasselblad backs sell for LESS $ than Phase One, they both use same Kodak sensors. Since you are so quick to point that Hasselblad IS making huge profit with their back, so Phase One should be making obscene profit with their backs!!
As I recall from your last fall's rant @ how Hasselblad done us wrong song, you also pointed out that Hasselblad does not know how to run their business & they are loosing money & will go under in near future. That argument was rebuked and argued succesfully that it is wrong by various suppliers of Digital backs. So now you are stating that HB is making too much money in less than 9 months since your post? My... now that IS a fantastic business model we all should strive for.
If you find Peter's post written by HB copy writer, than do guess what all the readers of LL thinks/thought of your affiliation with Phase One.
I respect what you do for the free forum & your "for sale" DVD tutorials, but really ........
-
Well, this has been fun guys, but i would like to return to the original question for a moment. I am to understand that Hasselblad is in fact putting together a tilt/shift lens. Can someone say what the length of the lens will be? What else is know about it? Any time frame?
Pete Dendrinos
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133920\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There is no question but that it will happen; the only questions are how soon and at what focal length? There is a Hasselblad dealer conference in September in the US, and possibly there will be an announcement at that time. No one who knows for sure is talking. However, everyone is assuming that it will only work with the H3D cameras.
-
...... Phase likely knows as much about H back interfacing as anyone, ....Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133868\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Obviously NOT as much as Hasselblad or Phase One would have made their +/- series to be compatible with H3 camera system.
Earlier this year you eluded that Phase One will make some BIG announcement, but it never came. It was implied they will announce their affiliation/acquisition to produce some MF camera. Kinda like Leaf & Sinar are doing, any news on that front?
-
At the risk of pushing this thread beyond its useful life, I have to say that arguments like this are really specious. How do you know what someone can or can't afford? How do you know the state of their business? Really!
And even then, it's a hollow argument. I can afford to buy an H3D, and a 28mm and a T/S. But, I won't because I already have an H1 and an H2. I'd buy both the 28mm and and T/S in a flash, but being forced to pay $30,000 for another body and back, which I don't need, makes it an exorbitant additional expenditure. That's the crux of the issue.
Why is this so hard for people to understand? Or is the game of arguing for the sake of it so appealing that common sense and civility no longer have value?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133883\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't understand the argument. There is no need for you to be out of pocket if you want to move to the H3D-39 so that you can take advantage of the 28mm and the T/S lens. You can probably sell your P45+ and trade in your H2 for an H3D at zero out of pocket cost. Do the advantages of being able to use the 28 and the T/S lenses outweigh any possible disadvantage that you may perceive to using a Hasselblad back v. the P45+? Only one way to find out. Test the H3D-39 and evaluate it for yourself with an open mind.
-
SeanBK,
You have so mischaracterized what I have written that I can't even begin to rebut it. The big lie technique of debate is simply not worth the effort to refute.
Michael
Ps: If you knew anything about the MF back business you'd understand that though the margins are very high by most measures, they need to be because the market is so small. But don't let reality confuse you.
-
If you find Peter's post written by HB copy writer, than do guess what all the readers of LL thinks/thought of your affiliation with Phase One.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133941\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Is Michael actually accusing me of not writing my posts myself? Yikes!
If so, I find it hilarious, and yet quite offensive.
Michael, was that what you meant - that HB is writing posts on my behalf??
-
Phase likely knows as much about H back interfacing as anyone...
Enough said, except, why does what you write sound like it was written by a Hasselblad copy writer?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133868\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If Phase knows as much as Hasselblad then why when you enter Live Video on a P45+ do you have to first set the camera to T and open the shutter??? On a H3D the whole process is automatic.
Why do you write like a Phase One copywriter?
Jo S.x
-
Is Michael actually accusing me of not writing my posts myself? Yikes!
If so, I find it hilarious, and yet quite offensive.
Michael, was that what you meant - that HB is writing posts on my behalf??
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133947\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No, not at all, and I regret that any such inference was taken. I was just commenting about your unwavering and seemingly uncritical adherence to the Hasselblad party line.
Michael
-
I don't understand the argument. There is no need for you to be out of pocket if you want to move to the H3D-39 so that you can take advantage of the 28mm and the T/S lens. You can probably sell your P45+ and trade in your H2 for an H3D at zero out of pocket cost. Do the advantages of being able to use the 28 and the T/S lenses outweigh any possible disadvantage that you may perceive to using a Hasselblad back v. the P45+? Only one way to find out. Test the H3D-39 and evaluate it for yourself with an open mind.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133945\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, but then if next year Leaf brings out a superior back, or Sinar, or god forbid Phase One does, what am I to do? My path is closed. That's the whole point. A Hasselblad system is now a closed system, whereas in the past the user had choice.
I guess it all depends on whether you believe in and support open systems, or closed systems. The trend in many industrious in recent years has been for open systems, and most consumers find them to be advantageous.
I believe in and vocally support open systems and decry closed ones, no matter who makes them.
Michael
-
If Phase knows as much as Hasselblad then why when you enter Live Video on a P45+ do you have to first set the camera to T and open the shutter??? On a H3D the whole process is automatic.
Why do you write like a Phase One copywriter?
Jo S.x
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133948\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Let me see.
I criticized Phase One soundly and pointedly about their extremely poorly implemented Live Preview, and yet you accuse me of sounding like a Phase One copywriter.
I fail to understand your logic. Maybe you can explain.
On second thought. Don't bother.
Michael
-
Let me see.
I criticized Phase One soundly and pointedly about their extremely poorly implemented Live Preview, and yet you accuse me of sounding like a Phase One copywriter.
I fail to understand your logic. Maybe you can explain.
On second thought. Don't bother.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133953\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It simple.
You say that Phase One knows as much as H Interfacing as Hasselblad. Yet they cannot do a simple thing like commanding the shutter to open.
If you are making a statement which is very black and white then you should check your facts first, like any good journalist.
Hopefully you can now understand my logic.
-
As I said, don't bother.
I'm almost done with this conversation as there doesn't seem to be much more that can be added beyond opinion and speculation.
Michael
-
No, not at all. I was just commenting about the unwavering and uncritical adherence to the party line.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133950\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Riiiight... of course, what else could that have meant. Silly me and those who thought otherwise.....
Oh, here's a good one....
While reviewing some earlier reviews of yours, I happened across an interesting comment from you.
You said, while comparing digital backs; ..."my personal style of working is geared more toward the advantages of an integrated single piece solution...."
What could be more of an 'integrated single piece solution' than the H3D?
I'm not here to defend Hasselblad or bad mouth any manufacturer. But I question why you do?
Michael - you have your opinions, but many do not always agree with everything you say. And you regularly reject any reasonable argument which opposes your views - you have a nasty habit of spinning & attempting to convert your opinions into absolute truths - and a history of taking what others say completely out of context.
Over the years you've managed to develop quite a following... might I suggest it's gone a bit to your head?
Good night all.....
-
Yes, but then if next year Leaf brings out a superior back, or god forbid Phase One does, what am I to do? My path is closed. That's the whole point. A Hasselblad system is now a closed system, whereas in the past the user had choice.
I guess it all depends on whether you believe in and support open systems, or closed systems. The trend in many industrious in recent years has been for open systems, and most consumers find them to be advantageous.
I believe in and vocally support open systems and decry closed ones, no matter who makes them.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133951\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I am sure that you remember that it was not so long ago that similar, quite heated arguments were waged over the merits of open systems v. closed systems when Epson started to use chipped ink cartridges, effectively forcing you to use Epson inks and freezing out third party ink suppliers like Media Street. Look where we are now. Epson as well as Canon and HP are all using closed systems and the furor has subsided. And guess what, no one really cares anymore because the products are so good. My prediction is that the same will happen in the MFDB market. I, for one, would rather use a more complete, well integrated, closed system that provides me with certain important functionalities(a 28mm lens and a T/S lens) than an alternative that happens to be an open system.
-
Just to come back to topic as well?!?
7 or 8 months ago I had a short conversation with the manager of the Hasselbad lens department.
I got to talk to him when I called regarding the barrel correction software.
He was very adament that no tilt/shift lens was in the pipeline. He also said that the market
was too small to warrant 2 years of development.
Who knows, maybe he was lying.
cheers
Marc
-
If Phase knows as much as Hasselblad then why when you enter Live Video on a P45+ do you have to first set the camera to T and open the shutter??? On a H3D the whole process is automatic.
Why do you write like a Phase One copywriter?
Jo S.x
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133948\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If I'm a locksmith who has designed a lock, does that mean I have the key to open *your* lock ?
BTW it would be about time that the back makers and camera makers agreed on back/body protocols. Of course as Hasselblad seem to be moving all the intelligence into the back it might be that the body will soon be too dumb to do anything at all by itself -
Edmund
-
Yes, back to topic;)
2 or 3 years ago, before choosing the Hassy V solution, I asked myself about the use of shift/tilt with a H Hassy. So I had the naiv idea to send an email to Hasselblad asking if there were plans to release a H Flexbody or T/S lens for their H system.
TO my surprise, I got a very nice email back from a techn, asking me what i thing would be the really necessary T/S lens addition for the H Sytem, if only one only lens would be build. I asked for a 28 or 35mm shift (and tilt?) solution, and a short telephoto (like a 85mmPC Nikkor but for MF) T/S for tabletop.
So I had the impression that they were really considering a T/S solution.
But that was a while ago, and their developpment agenda probably has changed since.
Even if I consider that a dedicated T/S for the H3D only with the necessary software correction (recognizing the degree of tilt and shift automatically) would be their best way to go, I'm quite happy that I stay with my old-fashioned 503CW and Flexbody for tabletop shootings.
tom-
-
Riiiight... of course, what else could that have meant. Silly me and those who thought otherwise.....
Oh, here's a good one....
While reviewing some earlier reviews of yours, I happened across an interesting comment from you.
You said, while comparing digital backs; ..."my personal style of working is geared more toward the advantages of an integrated single piece solution...."
What could be more of an 'integrated single piece solution' than the H3D?
I'm not here to defend Hasselblad or bad mouth any manufacturer. But I question why you do?
Michael - you have your opinions, but many do not always agree with everything you say. And you regularly reject any reasonable argument which opposes your views - you have a nasty habit of spinning & attempting to convert your opinions into absolute truths - and a history of taking what others say completely out of context.
Over the years you've managed to develop quite a following... might I suggest it's gone a bit to your head?
Good night all.....
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=133958\")
Ah, so I'm the one taking things out of context? I see. Somewhat like you taking a [a href=\"http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/ixpress.shtml]four year-old review[/url] of a back that had a separate cable-attached hard drive, and which I was comparing to the all-in-one Kodak DCS Pro back. Sure. These are really similar concepts. Spin. Did someone say spin?
As for "bad mouthing" manufacturers, I challenge you to point to a single instance of this, anywhere at any time that wasn't related to specific deficiencies on the part of the company or product. And I also never engage in ad hominem attacks, unlike some.
Have I been critical of manufacturers? Of course. That's my job. That's what a critic does – apply critical judgement and criticize when warranted. Canon continues to refuse to put mirror lock-up in an easy to use control, and they should be flogged for ignoring something which users have been asking for for years. Hasselblad has created a new system that closes current and potential owners out from choosing their own back solution. I therefore criticize them for this because it's an approach that I regard as counterproductive and against the best interests of their installed user base. Phase One deserves a booby prize for their totally wretched screens on previous generation backs and such a poorly implemented Live Preview on the Plus backs, and are totally in the dog house for taking more than three years to produce simple rubber grommets for their exposed connectors.
In case no one has noticed, I happen to own all three products; from Canon, Phase One and Hasselblad. These are the tools that I use every day. No one gave these to me. I purchased all of them at retail and easily have more than $100K invested in them. Notice that these are the products that I currently criticize, when warranted. I don't complain about Leaf. I don't criticize Nikon. I don't bad mouth Mamiya. Why? Because I don't use them and therefore am not in a position to form reasoned judgments. Think about it.
I have no problems with people that disagree with me. But I expect reasoned debate, where the pros and cons of a given situation are freely aired. That's what this forum is about. But when people make accusations that are not based on fact, and when people start name calling instead of putting forward well presented arguments, I get disappointed and annoyed.
Now, if anyone has any further comments based on the merits of Hasselblad's product and marketing strategies, these are welcomed here. Otherwise this thread seems to have run its course.
Michael
-
I have no problems with people that disagree with me. But I expect reasoned debate, where the pros and cons of a given situation are freely aired. That's what this forum is about. But when people make accusations that are not based on fact, and when people start name calling instead of putting forward well presented arguments, I get disappointed and annoyed.
Now, if anyone has any further comments based on the merits of Hasselblad's product and marketing strategies, these are welcomed here. Otherwise this thread seems to have run its course.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=134002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've found that reasoned debate is not possible as your posts demonstrate, to me at least, that you are not a reasonable man.
I believe any manufacturers product and marketing strategies, contrary to what you might think, have nothing to do with anything except give you the opportunity to scream like a child that hasn't gotten his way.
There's a big difference between offering constructive criticism and what you call 'criticism.'
If you really want to do something Michael, perhaps become a board member or part of the management of one of the companies you criticize - it might be more constructive.
Sorry for getting personal, but just responding to your comments as constructively as I can.
I will agree that this thread has indeed run it's course.
-
Let's move on.
This thread is now closed.
Michael