Hasselblad H4D-60 with 80mm Lens

For a mere $41,995 you can have one of these babies.

 

http://www.calumetphoto.com/item/HA1516/?t=CM01&a=CM01

<p>In my opinion at least, that utterly <em>transcends</em> insane.........</p>

<p>For that kind of money, you could buy a repo'd house and set up a studio!</p>

<p>Yeah, but it's not meant for photo duffers. It's meant for people to make money with it. Just like a dump truck, backhoe, or printing press.</p>

<p>No different than having latest car or newest computer hardware. Significant premium on the latest generation.<br>

I would imagine at that price level, the body and lens would be nearly free.</p>

<p>This triggers a question that's been on my mind. Does anyone know how Hasselblad is doing financially since moving into the digital field? Are these very high priced cameras selling and to whom? I assume that the market is made up of photographers whose clients are big time spenders(?). Have their cameras with all the sophistications been well received? I understand the lenses are made by Fuji and the bodies by Hasselblad in Sweden. It looks like Hasselblad has made a huge investment in a very high tech camera. I wonder what the future holds.</p>

<p> </p>

Its for those who actually make a good living at photography....unlike most of us who participate in this forum :).

<p>Doug, A Chinese firm, Shriro, has majority share of Hasselblad, last I heard. I wouldn't say that clients are big time spenders so much as demanding of quality images. I have only one colleague that owns an H2D, the rest of us rent them for assignments. I have no idea how they are doing financially, but I think Shriro has pretty deep pockets, and Hasselblad has become the defacto camera of its type.</p>

<p>Thanks for your comments, Michael. You mentioned a colleague who owns an H2D while others rent the new Hasselblads. I can only assume that these cameras offer superior results with all the latest features. The H4D-60 seems quite amazing in this respect. I've always worried, though, that a lot of such features mean future maintenance problems - things that break down over time. I have a 501cm that's solid as a brick but, of course, does not have the options of the latest Hasselblads. Hasselblad has always been noted for high quality products. Based on your experience, or that of your colleague with the H2D, can it be said that the digital Hasselblads are manufactured with the quality standards of before?</p>

 

<p>Hasselblad has one thing in common with Stella Artois: "Reassuringly expensive".</p>

<p>I don't get the feeling that Moore's Law is applicable to Medium Format digital systems. They are remaining stubbornly costly - even the latest Mamiya AFDIII-Leaf combinations cost far more than I would have expected, by extrapolating from the ZD back of a few years ago.</p>

<p>Some people confuse digital MF with consumer equipment and that's wrong. At $42K these are tools of the trade for professionals. Just tools that are part of what the photographer needs in order to produce images that will satisfy expectations of his customers. Many don't buy these, but rent them per project or lease them for a 3 year period, not unlike a car. Pros who make movies, pay many times as much for their equipment. <br>

Digital Hasselbalds are not manufactured as before. Hassy also created a real problem for their customers when backs, lenses and body must be calibrated to each other. I read about a pro who first purchased a H3 outfit and later added a H4, but they aren't interchangeable! Unlike with the V series, he cannot mix lenses and backs which creates serious problems at the studio. <br>

Although it may not be a true representation of reality, here is what these guys experienced on their African Safari with a Hasselbald lens:<br>

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/locations/namibia-equipment.shtml</p>

<p>Some people confuse digital MF with consumer equipment and that's wrong. At $42K these are tools of the trade for professionals. Just tools that are part of what the photographer needs in order to produce images that will satisfy expectations of his customers. Many don't buy these, but rent them per project or lease them for a 3 year period, not unlike a car. Pros who make movies, pay many times as much for their equipment. <br>

Digital Hasselbalds are not manufactured as before. Hassy also created a real problem for their customers when backs, lenses and body must be calibrated to each other. I read about a pro who first purchased a H3 outfit and later added a H4, but they aren't interchangeable! Unlike with the V series, he cannot mix lenses and backs which creates serious problems at the studio. <br>

Although it may not be a true representation of reality, here is what these guys experienced on their African Safari with a Hasselbald lens:<br>

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/locations/namibia-equipment.shtml</p>

<p>"Some people confuse digital MF with consumer equipment and that's wrong. At $42K these are tools of the trade for professionals. Just tools that are part of what the photographer needs in order to produce images that will satisfy expectations of his customers..."<br>

Any good that is available to the average consumer IS consumer equipment. They may be tools of the trade for some, but just a hot camera for others. Some "need" the larger sensor - some just want to impress the client. I recently read where Lecia gave the S2 to a celebrity free since he was an avid collector. <br>

Give it time and it will significantly decline in value and be surpassed by the next hottest MF gear.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Re the new HD4-40<br>

I don't think Christian Poulsen (previous CEO) would speak down to photographers like this new man Hansen does in this press release. Young photographers won't know about medium format (MF)??<br /> <br /> I think an abject, unreserved apology is needed for the ,000's of young and brilliant photographers out there.<br /> <br /> Poulsen flew the photographers' flag - someone desperately needs to grab hold of this 'new' guy and teach his The Basics of PR.</p>

<p>I beg to differ.</p>

<p>The previous CEO seemed to have only one thought on his mind: how to flog the most of his digital backs. Why, he even said once that the H-cameras weren't much to his liking! That, while he was closing down the V-System. He perhaps wanted to build Canon and Nikons, with his electronics inside (of course).<br>

That he deflated the Hasselblad brand by, how to put it ..., not showing to care about photographers a lot didn't appear to be a big bother to him.</p>

<p>The new CEO at least seems to recognize what it was people once valued about Hasselblad.<br>

Yet, it really is too early to tell.</p>