digital hasselblad xpan

[david distefano]

since the sensor size at pano  would be about 1680 i thought it would go here.

 with the intro of the hasselblad lunar going over like a lead balloon, hassalblad should really look at a digital xpan model with the dual ability to shoot both ff or pano, just like the film version.  people don't need faux leather or bling, just a well made camera that you can use to create images. this camera i think would have a wider customer base than the lunar. i know i would rather pull this type of camera out of my pocket than the lunar.

[HarperPhotos]

Hi David,

In 1998, Hasselblad began selling the XPan, a camera designed and made in Japan by Fujifilm. So your question should be directed to Fuji.

Looking at some of the innovative cameras Fuji have come out with recently I think your wish will come true but it wont have the Hasslblad name on it.

As we have seen with the Lunar Hasselblad have lost there way.

IMO

Cheers

Simon

[Petrus]

With film it was possible to make all kinds of formats relatively cheaply. Producing a special panorama sensor would be prohibitively expensive (say $100000 apiece). So a panorama camera would have to use existing MF sensor, which means there would be absolutely no sense in crippling it to use only panorama format. Thus we have panorama cameras already, they are called mid format digital backs/cameras, with super wide angles and cropping in post...

Besides with the possibility of flawless stitching we now have there is even less reason to make specialist panorama cameras for mostly landscape work. If there was one, photographers would in all likelihood shoot verticals with them and stitch those...

[HarperPhotos]

Hi Petrus,

Total agree with your points. Fuji does seem to beat to there own drum when it come to sensor design you just have to look at the new Fuji X-Pro1 with it X-Trans CMOS sensor. Maybe in the future that might screech it out? Who knows but a panoramic digital range finder camera would be nice.

Cheers

Simon  

[design_freak]

I wrote two months ago that they probably just change the logo on Fuji XPRO1. It seemed to me then about as weak as the camera painted with red paint. Now I would like to make it so. XPRO1 is a work of art in comparison with Lunar. Scandinavian design - less is more!

[bcooter]

Hi Petrus,

Total agree with your points. Fuji does seem to beat to there own drum when it come to sensor design you just have to look at the new Fuji X-Pro1 with it X-Trans CMOS sensor. Maybe in the future that might screech it out? Who knows but a panoramic digital range finder camera would be nice.

Cheers

Simon  

Simon,

The thing I don't like about the digital world is it seems there are only a few sensors and sizes.  The mfd speciality camera guys seem to be locked into just one (maybe 2) sensor makers.

I'd love to see fuji make a panoramic camera and might even buy one, though I'm not really sure what I'd do with it, it would be kind of fun.

As you say, all these questions need to be directed at Fuji, or I'd add Nikon, Sony, Canon because it seems it takes a lot of resource to make something different.

Maybe even direct them at RED because they really seem to be into a world of make it and they will come mindset.

IMO

BC

[FredBGG]

I very much doubt that Hasselblad will come out with an Xpan Digital.

This is for many reasons.

Mainly though it is because of the logistics involved in developing a sensor.
The format of the sensor would be problematic to make unless two FF sensors could be stitched together.
Either way Hasselblad does not have the resources or the money to develop this.
Hasselblad does not design or manufacture sensors.

If anyone were to do this it would be Fuji as they own the design the xpan was a clone of.
IF Fuji were to make it they would no longer market it other than under their own brand. Fuji
is clear about it's intentions to make high end cameras to drive the brand presitge and drive sales of
their high volume cameras.

However there is another thing to consider. many manufacturers are going in the direction of stitching
for panoramic cameras. Done well this would pretty much cover most landscape use.

Going back to Hasselblad they are all hell bent on their "pimp my camera" thing.
It is surprising that they have not already canned that project seeing the universally terrible reception the Lunar
received. It looks like it was their last ditch effort to become profitable and was the plan Ventiz had when it bought Hasselblad.
Rather strange move by Ventiz that owns no other consumer brand company or luxury brand company. I think it is glaringly obvious
that Ventiz had no expertise in this area. Also Hasselblad became so full of themselves that they though reversing the buisness model of the Ferrari Hasselblad would work.
They simply did not realise that people would pay the extra money for the Ferrari colors and logo on a blad..... no one will pay for
a huge markup someone elses camera with the Hasselblad logo on it.

So to sum it up.
Hasselblad can't make an Xpan
After the Lunar fiasco no one will be thrilled to buy something made by someone else with a blad logo on it, even if they don't pimp it up.
Hasselblad needs more that what can be made profit wise from a high end niche camera.

Sadly I don't see Hasselblad being around much longer unless they find a visionary with deep pockets.
But even then I don't think that the Leica rebound could apply to Hasselblad simply due to the
ergonomics of their core product. Simply put... it's too big to be a broad selling luxury.

[FredBGG]

Maybe even direct them at RED because they really seem to be into a world of make it and they will come mindset.

IMO

BC

Red is in a very different market. The cameras are a really small fraction of the production costs in feature films.
Also keep in mind that the high end red products are very tricky to use. I worked on a production where one was used.
It pretty much needed it's own doctor, shrink and shaman to keep it happy. Feasible with a big crew

For a luxury photography product like the xpan that is primarily a landscape camera it needs to simply work, and work on the road, in the jungles and on the mountains.

[bcooter]

Red is in a very different market. The cameras are a really small fraction of the production costs in feature films.
Also keep in mind that the high end red products are very tricky to use. I worked on a production where one was used.
It pretty much needed it's own doctor, shrink and shaman to keep it happy. Feasible with a big crew

For a luxury photography product like the xpan that is primarily a landscape camera it needs to simply work, and work on the road, in the jungles and on the mountains.

As things converge I don't think RED is a 100% completely different market.

http://www.red.com/shot-on-red/photography

RED does seem to think out of the box.  They have a roadmap they haven't met, but the thought of a 6xwhatever wide format sensor is interesting.

Not all RED's are used on 30 million to 100 million dollar projects.  We have three REDs (two R1 with the mx sensor and one Scarlet).

Actually this image is a 4k still image from the Red1.



We use the R-1's most of the time, on nearly every shoot and if the project permits or requires use a very good steadycam operator and his focus puller with the second R1.  The scarlet we use as a B cam or for smaller areas.

It takes a learning curve, but we've never had an R1 go down working around the world in 110 F weather to 20 F weather.  (knock on wood).

I now find the R1's much easier to set up and use than the Scarlet, but everyone works differently.

Also the price of an R-1 and Scarlet is equal to or less than most MFD cameras.

For processing Cinex is as easy to use as C-1 or lightroom.  

FYI i've never seen any camera, digital or film that has the dynamic range of the Reds.

IMO

BC

[david distefano]

it seems that this idea is a no go and many of you feel that hasselblad my be on its last legs. i love my v system and shoot both film and digital, but i do believe that the company has made many mistakes. first and foremost was breaking the hasselblad tradition of non- obsolescence. the sinar/rollie hy6 body is so similar to the hasselblad v system that hasselblad could have kept the v body style with the improvements needed to equal the hy6. this way those with the v system could still upgrade their system as they see the need and the pros would still have their needed tools for their job. by going in a completely different style hasselblad management just threw away about 50 years of tradition that built the hasselblad name. 

[K.C.]

by going in a completely different style hasselblad management just threw away about 50 years of tradition that built the hasselblad name. 

Actually that happened years ago when they lost their Swedish ownership.

[FredBGG]

Actually that happened years ago when they lost their Swedish ownership.

The real problem was that Hasselblad had problems trying to advance the v-system. While the older v-system cameras were quite reliable the newer V-system cameras
with focal plane shutters etc had some real lemon problems. This happened to them at the worng time and resulted in profitability problems and Hasselblad asked their far east distributor with deep pockets to come to the rescue.

The classic Hasselblad was a film back (not rocket science) and a box with a mirror and focusing screen.
The lens... the real image maker... was made by Zeiss and the film by Kodak. Times changed and it was difficult for Hasselblad to make the transition.
The huge boost 35mm DSLRs got from digital made it tougher for Hasselblad as a MF cameras was not as essential as it was previously.

Anyway the problems started before the passage of ownership to Shriro (or however it's Spelled).