Steve
No idea on sales but it is an indisputable fact that, as I said, the global installed user base of Hasselblad systems far exceeds those of Phamiya. Please do not dissimulate regarding the so called openness of your system. If you did have an open system then Capture One (a chargeable and very nice software package) would recognise hasselblad raw files just for a starter.
David, if you are referring to the digital back portion of the system, it is not a fact, it is a disputed claim on your part, based on ....? If you only mean the camera system, there may be more installed Hasselblad cameras (but do you mean H series? V series? All Hasselblad cameras combined?), but then again, are you also counting all Mamiya/Phase cameras? Mamiya RZ? Mamiya RB?
Either way, I took your meaning to be installed Hasselblad H systems, like an H4D (or any system with a Hasselblad/Imacon back on it), compared to any system with a Phase One digital back. In this case, there is no question that there are far more installed users for Phase One. I think 2009/2010 sales may have been close. However, in 2011, I am pretty confident sales are in favor of Phase One, based on record sales for Phase One (and also for us).
I don't know what you mean about your open system comment. You brought up that Phase One is not open because a Hasselblad closed back will not fit on Phase One's open platform camera. And this is the fault of Phase One? Excuse me?
And, just for the record, I haven't ever made a really big deal about "openness", "freedom of choice", "closed systems", etc. Phase One uses that to its marketing advantage in reaction to Hasselblad becoming a proprietary system. No reason for them not to, and there certainly are valid points to it. However, Phase One wasn't really saying much about open systems until Hasselblad made this decision. So it has never really been presented as a feature, but rather, as a competitive response. Even when I sold Hasselblad the most I said about the situation was that it was "unfortunate" that Hasselbld chose this path, however they felt this was the best direction for them. I've never really disputed whether that was the most appropriate or optimal path forward for them.
Even though I sell Phase One products, I have taken the position of not having a dog in the "open vs closed" fight. It is what it is. Phase One remains on the path of offering digital backs for any camera that will accept them and also offering a camera that will accept any digital back on the market made for it. That is ..... pretty open. Hasselblad has taken a proprietary (closed, to some...) path and does not create cameras or digital backs that work on any other system than it's own (without 3rd party adapters, etc). That is the way it is - make your choice.
But I agree (and have in the past) that you could make a lot of open vs closed arguments and Capture One not being open to Hasselblad files could indeed be one of them. Sometimes closed vs open comes down to - is the party that does not have access willing to agree to the terms of the party that does? Or was the decision to not offer that access part of the strategy from the start? These questions often remain unanswered. The biggest issue was the initial decision, which pissed off many existing Hasselblad H users with Phase/Leaf/Sinar backs who found that lenses were being introduced that they could not use with their system. Since they already bought in, they had a fair gripe. But they were the "collateral damage" of the decision. That is largely in the past - these days, it's very clear where you're headed with either system, so new buyers have the choice in front of them, rather than getting caught up after they've made their investment.
Steve Hendrix