Large amount of P1 backs for sales

[pschefz]

Mine does also, on static subjects located reasonnably close to the center of the frame.

On the Fuji vs X1d lenses, I have no first hand experience, but Lloyd Chambers seems to think that the Hasselblad lenses have much less sample variation.

Cheers,
Bernard

i tested the X1D twice, both times with the 45 and 90, and the first time i did a head to head between it and the A7RII with the 24-70 GM....i was mainly interested in the 45 and returned the camera thinking to myself that i would be able to save a lot of money, there was simply no difference or improvement of the 10K system over the 5K zoom....the 90 definitely looked better and showed a definite step up....this was against the A7RII not III (not out at that point)....this was an early firmware and the camera just did not seem ready to actually work with....
i ended up testing the X1D again once firmware were supposed to improve overall performance...again, 45 and 90, this time the 45 looked more like i expected from a system like this.....but 2 lenses within a few months, both provided by hasselblad knowing that they would be the ones handed out to photographers to judge the system by and night and day between them.....
this on top of still serious issues with actual handling of the camera (lags, crashes, errors and just overall sluggishness) made me (reluctantly) turn to fuji....
it seems like digital lloyd is the only person who actually had an overall bad experience with the fuji system? i honestly havent seen any review with similar findings....
the GF line is by far the smallest run in the fuji lens production but they seem to focus on it to make sure their top end really is top class.....and they can easily afford to do so....i also havent heard about any sample variation within their other lines?

[pschefz]

Hi,

The guy just spent a few tens of thousand dollars on an system that is supposed to deliver 100 MP of detail, having a focusing system that is supposed to compensate for camera rotation.

We don't have 100 MP on mirrorless yet, although Phase already uses the new sensor for aerial imaging.

The existing mirrorless systems allow you to select the focusing point freely, so there is no need for True Focus.

One interesting issue that was quite obvious in Neil's images that the 150 mm lens is not well corrected for axial chroma. The straight image with True Focus activated has green fringing:


The next image with True Focus engaged and a camera rotation has magenta fringing:


After that it seems that Neil tried magnified live view and got no fringing:


These samples show that the HC 150 lens is not well corrected for axial chroma and that focusing may not be accurate enough to avoid axial chroma.

An interesting question may be: Would Neil achieved a better image with a 50MP camera like the X1D or the GFX?

Jim Kasson has run a lot of tests on his GFX lenses and it seems that they are very well corrected. My guess would be that X1D lenses perform at the same level.  It may be that GFX lenses have more sample variation than X1D lenses, but it seems that all lenses Jim got were pretty good.

It also seems that most lenses are pretty decent. Obviously, no lens can exceed the design criteria. Jim Kasson has developed a lens screening method. I put some of my lenses trough it and all three were pretty OK.

https://blog.kasson.com/lens-screening-testing/examples/good-100mm-lens-on-p1-p45/
https://blog.kasson.com/lens-screening-testing/examples/ok-60mm-lens-on-phase-one-p45/

The third lens was the Sigma 24-105/4 Art at three different focal lengths. I don't think that Jim Kasson has a public link to that lens, but he felt it was quite OK.

To sum it up a bit...

• I don't think that old film era lens designs are a good match for today's digital sensors. They may deliver good results, but axial chroma is probably not corrected well enough.
  
• Modern focusing systems allow for critical focus anywhere over the frame. Older systems have a single focus point and using that focus point for of axis focusing does induce an error. Hasselblad has developed a complex solution around the issue with "True Focus".
• Modern, EVF based, systems use the sensor itself for focusing. A simple and good solution.
• Both the X1D and the GFX are designed around the sensor. In all probability they are designed around 2018 sensor technology /li]
  

I would argue that it makes a lot of sense for newcomers to MFD to spend their money on systems that are designed for 2018 sensor technology than on systems designed for film around the turn of centuries.

Best regards
Erik

when i tested the X1D first, they handed me a H6 as well....i have never been a big fan of that camera to begin with but it really did blow my mind a little that here was the hasselblad rep, giving me 2 options H6 50 and X1D both with the same sensor, one costing 3?x as much as the other and you would be able to guess which one should be more expensive.....regardless of price, i could not come up with a single reason why anyone would go with the H6?
no matter how limited the AF of the X1D (compared to dslr and such) but it still is years ahead of the H and i wont even get into size, weight or mirrorslap and what all that does to detail and focus....

[Bo_Dez]

when i tested the X1D first, they handed me a H6 as well....i have never been a big fan of that camera to begin with but it really did blow my mind a little that here was the hasselblad rep, giving me 2 options H6 50 and X1D both with the same sensor, one costing 3?x as much as the other and you would be able to guess which one should be more expensive.....regardless of price, i could not come up with a single reason why anyone would go with the H6?
no matter how limited the AF of the X1D (compared to dslr and such) but it still is years ahead of the H and i wont even get into size, weight or mirrorslap and what all that does to detail and focus....

It isn't 3x cheaper any more, they brought the price of the H-50 down.

I like the X1D but I would still choose the H for the time being. There are lots of reasons but here are a few - It is quick to operate and is a very reliable and stable system. It's been around a long time and the bugs were ironed out long ago - at least all the bugs I have ever had. It focusses very well, despite what people who have never owned it or don't have the experience using it might tell you. Trufocus works well. The ergonomics are very good. It's a more bulky camera but the design is such that it doesn't feel like it and it is very comfortable to hold on days long shoots. It is well balanced especially with the longer lenses which you can hand hold with very high resolution without issue. Despite the size it can be used like a point and shoot camera because it is well designed, even the pop up flash is something I find useful from time to time. But the main reason is the modularity. The view finder is MUCH better, it may just be the best of any camera I have tried, It's big and bright and very good for manual focussing. It has a ground glass you can mark up with your clients layout and shoot with through your prism, and you can swap the prism for for chimney finder which is even brighter and is a useful compositional aid, or you can take it off altogether which is useful for very low angles, not something you have a work around with an X1D. It is the last remaining hybrid platform and I can shoot film and digital with the one kit and without even moving the camera or taking it off the tripod. Then of course there is the IQ side of it - The possibility of using the larger sensor, now 100MP. Then there is the modularity benefits of using Hasselblad camera with a Phase One back, that's fairly significant factor in my opinion and use.

I'm interested in the X1D but at the moment it's like trying to replace your computer with an iPad. That's more of a possibility for some users than others. But the X2D could really shake things up and I am watching very closely at how it develops.

[pschefz]

It isn't 3x cheaper any more, they brought the price of the H-50 down.

I like the X1D but I would still choose the H. There are lots of reasons but here are a few - It is quick to operate and is a very reliable and stable system. It's been around a long time and the bugs were ironed out long ago - at least all the bugs I have ever had. It focusses very well, despite what people who have never owned it or don't have the experience using it might tell you. Trufocus works well. The ergonomics are very good. It's a more bulky camera but the design is such that it doesn't feel like it and it is very comfortable to hold on days long shoots. It is well balanced especially with the longer lenses which you can hand hold with very high resolution without issue. Despite the size it can be used like a point and shoot camera because it is well designed, even the pop up flash is something I find useful from time to time. But the main reason is the modularity. The view finder is MUCH better, it may just be the best of any camera I have tried, It's big and bright and very good for manual focussing. It has a ground glass you can mark up with your clients layout and shoot with through your prism, and you can swap the prism for for chimney finder which is even brighter and is a useful compositional aid, or you can take it off altogether which is useful for very low angles, not something you have a work around with an X1D. It is the last remaining hybrid platform and I can shoot film and digital with the one kit and without even moving the camera or taking it off the tripod. Then of course there is the IQ side of it - The possibility of using the larger sensor, now 100MP. Then there is the modularity benefits of using Hasselblad camera with a Phase One back.

I'm interested in the X1D but at the moment it's like trying to replace your computer with an iPad. That's more of a possibility for some users than others. But the X2D could really shake things up.

i have worked plenty of times with the H over the years, never really liked it.....not that any of my fuji 680, 690, 670, mamiya RZ, 645 were completely perfect but i liked working with them better....

the lack of modularity is definitely a drawback for me with the X1D but i guess that is the point of the camera....and for people who are invested in the H system, the X1D does offer that smaller body.....i just dont see many people walking into this situation and coming out with the H at this point.....even if it was the same price.....
that is the problem hasselblad is facing....more people want a much more compact, faster camera offering the same IQ at a lower price with more features.....and the X1D (to some degree) does offer that.....and investing (R&D) in the H system is probably becoming more and more expensive and difficult....and fewer people want it.....
i dont see the X2D getting more modular (yet?) unless hasselblad kills off the H at the same time....which is only a matter of time of course but not quite there yet probably....
fuji does not have any of these issues....removable finder? no problem, "chimney finder"? yep....the GFX has nothing in house to differentiate itself from....so a moveable LCD is a no brainer....maybe the back isn't the sveltest but having more room for more buttons and a focus joystick is just something people are used to and actually want.....
no matter how you look at it: the H6 body with finder (no sensor/back) costs more then the X1D or GFX right now....that is a tough thing to sell....

[Bo_Dez]

i have worked plenty of times with the H over the years, never really liked it.....not that any of my fuji 680, 690, 670, mamiya RZ, 645 were completely perfect but i liked working with them better....

the lack of modularity is definitely a drawback for me with the X1D but i guess that is the point of the camera....and for people who are invested in the H system, the X1D does offer that smaller body.....i just dont see many people walking into this situation and coming out with the H at this point.....even if it was the same price.....
that is the problem hasselblad is facing....more people want a much more compact, faster camera offering the same IQ at a lower price with more features.....and the X1D (to some degree) does offer that.....and investing (R&D) in the H system is probably becoming more and more expensive and difficult....and fewer people want it.....
i dont see the X2D getting more modular (yet?) unless hasselblad kills off the H at the same time....which is only a matter of time of course but not quite there yet probably....
fuji does not have any of these issues....removable finder? no problem, "chimney finder"? yep....the GFX has nothing in house to differentiate itself from....so a moveable LCD is a no brainer....maybe the back isn't the sveltest but having more room for more buttons and a focus joystick is just something people are used to and actually want.....
no matter how you look at it: the H6 body with finder (no sensor/back) costs more then the X1D or GFX right now....that is a tough thing to sell....

I agree it's a harder sell for the H and XF, that is what this thread has largely been about. If something like the X can give me what I need in a smaller, more affordable package, with more features, then I'm taking it. It may be limited now but it's only the beginning, like when the iPad first came out it was super limited but is now becoming a viable replacement - for some it already is. The Hasselblad V-D concept is their answer to modularity and I think that looks very interesting, but maybe they will just develop a more modular X. We'll see. But I think rather than Hasselblad shooting them selves in the foot, on the contrary, I think they have potentially shot ahead of Phase One, and between Fuji and Hasselblad, they are likely to eventually take a fair bit of Phase One's market unless they have something up their sleeve. That's not something I thought I'd ever say a few years ago. I agree that people want smaller, compact, fuller featured and more affordable cameras, and higher res medium format cameras that are easier to shoot, and I think the GFX and X1D are the future of these cameras.

[eronald]

Pschefz

The GREATEST ADVANTAGE of both XD and Fuji systems is that Phase is not present in this market to set excessive pricing by bribing the "pro" dealers with a huge margin, which also protects rental. So the absence of Phase allows an XD to be sold at 1/2 of the price of an equivalent MF SLR solution.

As soon as Phase enter the market, Hasselblad will start raising prices again. Fuji want to sell to japanese amateurs and they like Pentax will stay where they are.

Edmund

[BJL]

I have a question related to modularity and price. One obvious appeal of the body+back approach is being able to upgrade just the "sensor unit" at the back, rather than replacing the whole body, which suggests a cost advantage for sensor upgrades. But the Pentax 645 already messes with that cost comparison, and my guess is that a complete mirrorless body does not have a lot more in it than a digital back, and might inherently cost not much more; not enough to offset the initial extra cost of the MF DSLR body unless you upgrade the back many times.

However, I have not been able to find good cost comparisons: Hasselblad and Phase One prefer to talk about complete back+body purchases rather than back upgrades. Can anyone fill me in on the relative costs of the 50MP 44x33mm options:
- Fujifilm GFX (with EVF) [$6,500?]
- Hasselblad X1D-50c [US$9,500?]
- Hasselblad H6D-50c, back only [$14,500 - $8,000 = $6,500 if you can buy H6D body + VF + back and sell the body+VF at full price?!]
- Phase One IQ3 50MP back []


And are there other aspects of modularity? (The Fujifilm GFX offers some VF modularity.)

[jsiva]

Pschefz

The GREATEST ADVANTAGE of both XD and Fuji systems is that Phase is not present in this market to set excessive pricing by bribing the "pro" dealers with a huge margin, which also protects rental. So the absence of Phase allows an XD to be sold at 1/2 of the price of an equivalent MF SLR solution.

As soon as Phase enter the market, Hasselblad will start raising prices again. Fuji want to sell to japanese amateurs and they like Pentax will stay where they are.

Edmund

This stuff is McKinsey grade strategic insight, wasted on a public forum.  This should be paid for consulting to the MF industry.

[pschefz]

I agree it's a harder sell for the H and XF, that is what this thread has largely been about. If something like the X can give me what I need in a smaller, more affordable package, with more features, then I'm taking it. It may be limited now but it's only the beginning, like when the iPad first came out it was super limited but is now becoming a viable replacement - for some it already is. The Hasselblad V-D concept is their answer to modularity and I think that looks very interesting, but maybe they will just develop a more modular X. We'll see. But I think rather than Hasselblad shooting them selves in the foot, on the contrary, I think they have potentially shot ahead of Phase One, and between Fuji and Hasselblad, they are likely to eventually take a fair bit of Phase One's market unless they have something up their sleeve. That's not something I thought I'd ever say a few years ago. I agree that people want smaller, compact, fuller featured and more affordable cameras, and higher res medium format cameras that are easier to shoot, and I think the GFX and X1D are the future of these cameras.

this is exactly what this thread is about and i dont think hasselblad has shot themselves in the foot at all....on the contrary...they pulled their head out of the noose.....if it is hard to justify paying 8K for a H body without sensor, it seems crazy to do the same for a phase body....
in reality we should stop calling hasselblad hasselblad and start calling them DJI....who make incredible products, their drones are insane across the line, i am very confident that they will bring some great stuff to the discussion....and i doubt we will have to worry about crazy high pricing.....their high end drone line and lenses could be a lot more.....hasselblad started it with the X1D, fuji with the GFX, the line is drawn in the sand.....i doubt the 100mpix models will be more then 10k.....and it will go from there.....

the modular approach, keeping the sensor separate from the body, not so sure it works.....there is a reason we buy iMacs and laptops and sell then 2 or 3 year later.....connections, drives, all tech changes so fast, if i see a fw800 port nowadays, i just dont know what to with it anymore.....the used market it getting more and more sophisticated, it gets easier and easier to sell the stuff fast to people who want it and use it....and sell it on again.....

[landscapephoto]

I don't think that the new mirrorless MF cameras (X1D, GFX) are for the same people than the older ones. We don't have a situation where a photographer will upgrade from a H5 or XF camera to a X1D or GFX. We have a situation where the photographers with H5 or XF keep what they have and don't upgrade and plenty of new customers buy the X1D or GFX. 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

An interesting question...

Hasselblad essentially reduced pricing on the H6D50c to X1D + HX5 level.

It is quite probable that existing H6D and FX owners don't switch to the X1D or the GFX. With the H6D, users can buy an X1D or GFX and continue using their existing lens system.

It is interesting to see how Phase One responds. But, they may live in a different market than Hasselblad. My understanding is that Hasselblad would not survived without DJI investments. So, sales of the existing systems were obviously not sufficient to keep the company afloat.

Phase One may have a different business model. The question is of course if the existing customer base buys into the coming 150 MP sensors. Phase One survived competition from Hasselblad, Pentax 645Z and Leica S.

Best regards
Erik

I don't think that the new mirrorless MF cameras (X1D, GFX) are for the same people than the older ones. We don't have a situation where a photographer will upgrade from a H5 or XF camera to a X1D or GFX. We have a situation where the photographers with H5 or XF keep what they have and don't upgrade and plenty of new customers buy the X1D or GFX.

[Jim Kasson]

I don't think that the new mirrorless MF cameras (X1D, GFX) are for the same people than the older ones. We don't have a situation where a photographer will upgrade from a H5 or XF camera to a X1D or GFX. We have a situation where the photographers with H5 or XF keep what they have and don't upgrade and plenty of new customers buy the X1D or GFX.

I few months after I started using the GFX, I sold all my H-series cameras and lenses, and the V-series lenses as well.

Jim

[landscapephoto]

I don't think photographers using H series cameras for a living are likely to use an X1D of GXF with their H lenses. They lose AF and, in a commercial settings, that is probably not an option. Just as well: I don't think the very limited selection of lenses for these cameras makes the X1D or GFX a viable alternative for most professional users. I believe that the market for mirrorless MF is mainly rich amateurs.

Then, the professional photographers I know to use medium format cameras use them in a studio setting for the tethering function. One needs the central shutter high-speed flash sync. The others mostly do product photography and do not need a high pixel count, so they did not upgrade from the H4 or even more ancient models. They will be compelled to upgrade when firewire dies on them, but not before.

The rental market also appears to have changed in the past two years. It used to be that one could rent medium format cameras and the full selection of lenses in every large city in Europe. I may be mistaken, but the offer appears to have shrunk considerably (only for medium format, not for lights, etc...). You can rent the X1D or GFX, but mainly from rentals catering to advanced amateurs. Using the rental market as a proxy, I therefore believe that medium format has lost market share for the kind of production where a pro is likely to rent (not the one doing product shoots all day in a studio, it makes business sense for these to buy or lease). I think this was to be expected, since 24x36 has become sufficient for the majority of this kind of shootings (except, maybe, when flash is needed outside).

[Juanito]

Pschefz

As soon as Phase enter the market, Hasselblad will start raising prices again. Fuji want to sell to japanese amateurs and they like Pentax will stay where they are.

Edmund

I disagree. The X1D has been the biggest seller in Hasselblad's history. If anything, they'll continue to drive the price down so that they can increase their customer base and market share. DJI didn't buy Hasselblad just to sell to the handful of pros who need 100 mp files to deliver to clients. They want to grow their business, not keep it small.

Besides, I fail to see how having more competition in the market will somehow drive prices up. Fuji came into the market at a $6,500 price point. Hasselblad followed suit to stay competitive. If Phase wants to keep up, they're going to have to deliver a mirrorless camera at a similar if not lower price point. Either that or they just stick to the high end pro market and watch its competitors gobble up the MF market and eventually push them into irrelevance.

[pschefz]

I disagree. The X1D has been the biggest seller in Hasselblad's history. If anything, they'll continue to drive the price down so that they can increase their customer base and market share. DJI didn't buy Hasselblad just to sell to the handful of pros who need 100 mp files to deliver to clients. They want to grow their business, not keep it small.

Besides, I fail to see how having more competition in the market will somehow drive prices up. Fuji came into the market at a $6,500 price point. Hasselblad followed suit to stay competitive. If Phase wants to keep up, they're going to have to deliver a mirrorless camera at a similar if not lower price point. Either that or they just stick to the high end pro market and watch its competitors gobble up the MF market and eventually push them into irrelevance.

this
there is no way DJI will raise prices...prices will go lower...mostly because the next sony nikon bodies will come to 60 or 80 mpix, are pretty amazingly close in IQ now and offer a completely different level of speed....fuji and DJI know this very well and will make sure IQ still has a leg up, speed and functionality somehow gets closer to the sony/nikons and prices stay within reach.....which in turn makes any H or phase system trying to catch the top top top end at 50K even harder to swallow.....

[Juanito]

I don't think that the new mirrorless MF cameras (X1D, GFX) are for the same people than the older ones. We don't have a situation where a photographer will upgrade from a H5 or XF camera to a X1D or GFX. We have a situation where the photographers with H5 or XF keep what they have and don't upgrade and plenty of new customers buy the X1D or GFX.

I did just that. My H5 is now for sale on ebay in case you're interested. ;-)

Once you shoot with the X1D, it's hard to stick with the heavy, clunky, slow, H series cameras. The only thing thing the H has going for it is that you don't have the blackout after every capture. That's annoying when you're trying to photograph people. The H isn't any faster mind you but the optical viewfinder allows you to stay connected to your subject. Granted, if you're a pro who shoots glued to C1, then then X1D isn't a complete solution, but then again, nothing is.

[pschefz]

I don't think photographers using H series cameras for a living are likely to use an X1D of GXF with their H lenses. They lose AF and, in a commercial settings, that is probably not an option. Just as well: I don't think the very limited selection of lenses for these cameras makes the X1D or GFX a viable alternative for most professional users. I believe that the market for mirrorless MF is mainly rich amateurs.

Then, the professional photographers I know to use medium format cameras use them in a studio setting for the tethering function. One needs the central shutter high-speed flash sync. The others mostly do product photography and do not need a high pixel count, so they did not upgrade from the H4 or even more ancient models. They will be compelled to upgrade when firewire dies on them, but not before.

The rental market also appears to have changed in the past two years. It used to be that one could rent medium format cameras and the full selection of lenses in every large city in Europe. I may be mistaken, but the offer appears to have shrunk considerably (only for medium format, not for lights, etc...). You can rent the X1D or GFX, but mainly from rentals catering to advanced amateurs. Using the rental market as a proxy, I therefore believe that medium format has lost market share for the kind of production where a pro is likely to rent (not the one doing product shoots all day in a studio, it makes business sense for these to buy or lease). I think this was to be expected, since 24x36 has become sufficient for the majority of this kind of shootings (except, maybe, when flash is needed outside).

the only time anyone i know has used an H or phase system is rental....this goes for the last 10(?) years...before that people (including myself) actually owned these things....product and high end car advertising is probably the exception....for all commercial (advertising, fashion, catalog, celebrity...) photography DSLR and lately mirrorless has replaced MF systems for years....one of the reasons is that budgets have been trimmed left and right and it just makes more sense to buy a 3K camera and charge a rental fee and have the thing paid off with a few jobs...much easier then trying to do the same with a 30/40/50k system that is 2 generations old once paid off and really offers no real advantage other then the "wow, we are shooting with a hasselblad" on set....
which brings me to another point: almost everybody i know and most people coming up whose work i admire shoot film....in commercial setting....hipster/analog trend whatever it is or whatever you want to call it....people are doing it and art directors and agencies are eating it up....having a film project going and/or having that pentax 67 on set is the way to go these days....
it used to be that the H or phase systems were sitting on set and everything was really shot with a 5D (I,II,III).....nowadays everything is shot with nikon (and slowly) sony and still a lot of canon.....but the hasselblad on set will be a 500.....and if it is a hasselblad it definitely is a 500 and not a H6 with film back....not retro enough! lots of polaroids (instax is ok) and there I even heard of someone shooting old digital cameras (?!) as in bad old casio and who knows what first gen digitals "for the look"...
mainstream photography sites providing instructions on how to make wet plates for large format shooting!

[pschefz]

Granted, if you're a pro who shoots glued to C1, then then X1D isn't a complete solution, but then again, nothing is.

very good point.....a friend of mine is dying to use my GFX for a job, he has played with it but he only shoots tethered to C1....and in reality his 850 and A7RIII are getting him what he needs by a mile....
he was also the last person i talked to who was "forced" to shoot a rented H on a job....he had the "yearly medium format itch" just before that and was pretty excited to work with it again....problem is that since the last time he had worked on a job with an H system, the world has turned...and he had gotten the 850 and his sony.....and he got to play with the GFX....i dont think a single frame from the H made it into the final edit....

[Bo_Dez]

I did just that. My H5 is now for sale on ebay in case you're interested. ;-)

Once you shoot with the X1D, it's hard to stick with the heavy, clunky, slow, H series cameras. The only thing thing the H has going for it is that you don't have the blackout after every capture. That's annoying when you're trying to photograph people. The H isn't any faster mind you but the optical viewfinder allows you to stay connected to your subject. Granted, if you're a pro who shoots glued to C1, then then X1D isn't a complete solution, but then again, nothing is.

Yeah I've been shooting Hasselblad with a Phase One back for a long time. I am set to buy the X2D and make the switch but I will likely keep the H for the time being and run the systems see by side. That also means using Phocus instead of Capture One but really, a raw developer isn't enough to keep me from switching. All I need is a reliable tether connection and the basic exposure colour and curves palette to be honest and Phocus seems pretty decent these days.

[Bo_Dez]

the only time anyone i know has used an H or phase system is rental....this goes for the last 10(?) years...before that people (including myself) actually owned these things....product and high end car advertising is probably the exception....for all commercial (advertising, fashion, catalog, celebrity...) photography DSLR and lately mirrorless has replaced MF systems for years....one of the reasons is that budgets have been trimmed left and right and it just makes more sense to buy a 3K camera and charge a rental fee and have the thing paid off with a few jobs...much easier then trying to do the same with a 30/40/50k system that is 2 generations old once paid off and really offers no real advantage other then the "wow, we are shooting with a hasselblad" on set....
which brings me to another point: almost everybody i know and most people coming up whose work i admire shoot film....in commercial setting....hipster/analog trend whatever it is or whatever you want to call it....people are doing it and art directors and agencies are eating it up....having a film project going and/or having that pentax 67 on set is the way to go these days....
it used to be that the H or phase systems were sitting on set and everything was really shot with a 5D (I,II,III).....nowadays everything is shot with nikon (and slowly) sony and still a lot of canon.....but the hasselblad on set will be a 500.....and if it is a hasselblad it definitely is a 500 and not a H6 with film back....not retro enough! lots of polaroids (instax is ok) and there I even heard of someone shooting old digital cameras (?!) as in bad old casio and who knows what first gen digitals "for the look"...
mainstream photography sites providing instructions on how to make wet plates for large format shooting!

The film comment is probably the most interesting and relevant today I find. It's popularity is continually growing and it's getting to the stage where in some segments of the market it's what is becoming most common. To the point if you're not shooting film then you're not really keeping up.

The H is the last remaining system that allows you to shoot film and digital with the one system and going forward, once we've consumed all the legacy Contax 645's, RZ's, Mamiya 7's and Pentax 67's, then what? Theses cameras are already getting crazy expensive.