Litigation Involving Phase One and Hasselblad

[JSK]

I think the closing of the Hasselblad system was a mistake

+1

[EricWHiss]

If airing out all this  Phase / Hasselblad laundry gets a bit hum drum, then maybe one of you could get to another similar topic of why phase don't offer their backs for the Hy6/AFi?   

[Jack Varney]

I come from a life long career in the IT industry where various devices (eg. storage) made by many manufacturers are attached to systems with out regard to being "locked out". Lock out doesn't exist. If you can engineer an interface and make money you just do it.

So, my question is, by whose authority is Phase not allowed to make an interface for any Hasselblad or whatever MF camera? Is this not a matter of access to the interface requirements (and what about reverse engineering) or is there something more sinister here?

[Schewe]

...or is there something more sinister here?

There is something more technical, for sure..."sinister", not so sure (so I defer a specific answer to that ?)...

[jduncan]

+1

I respectfully disagree. I believe they had no option. They could never compete with PhaseOne or Leaf. They had to spend money on the camera and lenses, and PhaseOne and Leaf could invest all the money on the backs. Besides Phase one has the favor or most of the most influential bloggers etc.
My take will be that the mistake was thinking that closing the system was enough. Before closing it, they should have prepared better: invest like winners in the backs etc. The first closed system was a very tiny step forward for Hasselblad. Not enough  to push them ahead. In some aspects I will said they don't even got parity.
If you are running from behind you cannot become number one without risk. Heavy risk in the case of a marathon or technology.
In the other hand they appear to be more willing today, even as the H4D-60 remains a puzzle.

[Jack Varney]

Jeff, the "sinister" was tongue in cheek. If the lock out was based on some legal or government regulation then sinister might apply in light of the EU's many efforts to maintain open competition amongst manufacturers.

[Schewe]

If the lock out was based on some legal or government regulation then sinister might apply in light of the EU's many efforts to maintain open competition amongst manufacturers.

I have no specific knowledge one way or the the other...other than knowing a bit about the "players". (and I got to know the payers pretty well).

Not saying...just saying...
(if you know what I mean).

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Yes, the interview I read was with Christian Poulsen in a Swedish publication. What he said made a lot of sense.

Thanks for your comments!

BTW, I'm sort of astonished how successful Danish firms are in high end audio, digital backs and so on.

Best regards
Erik

If you are talking about Christian Poulsen there some stories to be told...you know Christian used to work at Phase One? That he tried to get Phase One to build a scanner? That he left Phase One with the designs (which were brilliant) to create Imacon? That somehow every time Imacon got bought out, Christian seemed to come out on top finally ending up as CEO of the Hasselblad Imacon Company?

I've known Christian since the old Imacon days and while I respect his engineering prowess, I think there's plenty to question regarding his management skills. I think the closing of the Hasselblad system was a mistake and I'm not at all sure that the "public" reasons for doing so are, well, "all the reasons" it was done. Personally, I think Hasselblad now regrets that move (although this is my personal opinion not based on public information).

So, we'll see. I do actually wish Hasselblad well. I used a Hasselblad (the real Victor Hasselblad AB film camera) professionally for decades. The film Hasselblads are actually having a bit of a come back. I recently sold my 500 CM for almost $1,200. I got a lot less for my 500 ELM. I now use Phase One...from Denmark which was also home to Imacon, and near another Scandinavian country a bit different, Sweden, where Hasselblad came from (now, not so much).

Strange bed fellows...

[markowich]

i have ordered an IQ180 with an H-mount yesterday and my dealer has already received the order confirmation
from phase headquarters....
peter

[carboat]

Also an IT guy and I get your point but good luck dealing with say Apple without their support, heck you can"t even distribute SW for the IPhone or IPad without their approval (never mind having to use Cocoa and Objective-C yuch!)

[Quentin]

...

The only people who win in these kinds of things are the lawyers.

David

I have no problem with that (Im' a lawyer)  

In any event, I'm a satisfied Hassy H4 user, great camera and system, (which is not a criticism at all of the also excellent Phase / Mamiya system)

[Quentin]

+1

That's what I once thought (i.e. that Hassy closing their system was a mistake) but maybe not

Consider this point.  In my view, there is a key difference between Phase and Hassy.

Hassy are camera manufacturers who added digital back capabilities when they acquired Imacon, but fundamentally, the camera comes first, the digital back second.

Phase are digital back manufacturers who added camera capability when they acquired (or merged) with Mamiya, but findamentally, the back comes first, the camera second.

I think that these historic differences still inform the psycology of both companies today.

When Phase release a new series of backs, the camera is secondary  (see Michael's interview piece).  However when Hassy introduce a new product, it is defined by reference to the camera system, such as the H4D, with different digital back options.   These different approaches are a result of the different histories of the two companies and probably explains why Hasselblad see the back as more closely tied to and part of the camera system, a link they want to protect.  

Quentin

[Schewe]

Hassy are camera manufacturers who added digital back capabilities when they acquired Imacon, but fundamentally, the camera comes first, the digital back second.

Phase are digital back manufacturers who added camera capability when they acquired (or merged) with Mamiya, but findamentally, the back comes first, the camera second.

Except, the current relationship of Phase/Mamiya is so new there's not been a Phase One designed camera developed from the ground up yet.

While Phase One had input with Mamiya for the current 645DF, it's still fundamentally a Mamiya. The recent relationship with Schneider for the creation of the leaf shutter lenses is, I think a better predictor of the future direction of the Phase/Mamiya direction. The next camera design will have a lot riding on it and I'm pretty sure Phase will not release it until they get it right, which is a big project.

But the fact remains, Phase is an open system and Hasselblad is closed. Only time will tell which approach ends up better in the long run...I don't think Hasselblad's closure of their system has helped Hasselblad's users and dealers and I'm not sure it's helped their position in the industry.

[Jeremy Roussak]

Also an IT guy and I get your point but good luck dealing with say Apple without their support, heck you can"t even distribute SW for the IPhone or IPad without their approval (never mind having to use Cocoa and Objective-C yuch!)

That's not strictly true: you just can't distribute it via the app store, the platform which Apple owns and controls. There are other sources of software for iOS.

Jeremy

[Kitty]

+1

+1 Kodak is a good example of closed system.

[bcooter]

+1 Kodak is a good example of closed system.

I've unofficially heard one side of  this story, with the group that makes the backs saying why doesn't the group that makes the camera make a better back to compete?

Now I think they did.

I would imagine the group that makes the H-series now says why doesn't the other company make a better camera?

Opened or closed I don't think it makes that much of a difference.  They're tons of h1 and h2 bodies around for any back to go on and I've seen a lot of leaf and phase backs on a hasselblad, but never have seen a Hasselblad CF back on a Mamiya.

IMO

BC

[Ben Rubinstein]

I wonder if the completed and revolutionary new Phase One camera which will eventually turn up will indeed still be open? Given that there are now only two players left in the MFDB world, why would they bother leaving the camera open? I know they say that they are comitted to open platform but I suppose 'blad said the same thing until they closed it...

[JDG]

I wonder if the completed and revolutionary new Phase One camera which will eventually turn up will indeed still be open? Given that there are now only two players left in the MFDB world, why would they bother leaving the camera open? I know they say that they are comitted to open platform but I suppose 'blad said the same thing until they closed it...

I would bet it will since this has been the marketing cornerstone for a few years for Phase One.  The thing about open/closed systems is that it takes more work to close a system.  Hasselblad H2F/H3/H4 are closed because the firmware actively rejects anything that is not Hasselblad. 

[BJL]

+1 Kodak is a good example of closed system.

Canon and Nikon are good examples of closed systems: integrated design has possible advantages along with its disadvantages.

Also what is the closed Kodak system you refer too? In MF, Kodak made only backs, and they were usable with a variety of MF bodies. In 35mm digital Kodak's system was if anything more open than Canon's and Nikon's, in that Kodak made bodies for both Canon and Nikon lens mounts.

[hubell]

I would bet it will since this has been the marketing cornerstone for a few years for Phase One.  The thing about open/closed systems is that it takes more work to close a system.  Hasselblad H2F/H3/H4 are closed because the firmware actively rejects anything that is not Hasselblad. 

Yes, the new Phase camera will be open to all third party backs. Just like the Mamiya/DF today. Sounds magnanimous. The reality is that there are no third party backs from competitors that anyone can or would want to buy to put on the new Phase camera, or the DF for that matter. Even if you could put a Hassy back from an H4D on the new Phase camera, why would you want to? Who would buy an H4D that includes an H4D body to put the back on a Phase camera? People buy Hassy backs today because they want the Hassy camera. They buy Mamiya/Phase cameras because they want a Phase back, and the only game in town is a Mamiya/Phase camera unless you are ok with a dead end camera like an H1 or Contax.