Two New Models

Discussion in 'Medium Format' started by colin_elliott, Oct 18, 2007.

  1. Interesting announcement by Hasselblad.

    They have just introduced 2 new cameras.
    Not so much "new" as they are revisions to existing models.

    An H3D 39 Multi-shot and a film only(!!) revised H2.. at approximately 20% less
    than than the original H2.

    Seems that Hasselblad (like Kodak's recent announcement) see a future in film
    cameras.

    Wasn't it just a few months ago that the HD 39 was launched onto the market?
     
  2. Colin,

    the HASSI-FUJI-BLAD is much more interesting to be sold as an digital camera. There is much more "air" in it for the manufacturer and dealer. So why should they step back for film?

    Cheers
     
  3. The market for MF cameras is shrinking and MF cameras have to compete with 24x36 format digital SLR. This is most profitable on the high end where the smaller formats can not reach. Hence, the H3D Multi Shot capabilities. On the lower end it makes sense to have a MF camera which is not fully integrated with the latest digital backs, but can go with older digital backs or film backs. That camera could be somewhat more economic, then. In fact, this is the H2 (rev.). Of course the H2 can take digital backs as well, but connected by a synch cable. The aim is to haul photogs with older digibacks to the Hasselblad system, I think.
     
  4. Roland,

    24X36 digital is no competition for MF digital.
    It is like trying to make 35 mm film meet MF film quality.
     
  5. I think Hasselblad is smart keeping one of its legs in the film business. They still have all the machinery, and tooling to do them, it'd be more expensive to retire them than to keep the operational.

    Also, film is about to become a niche market. Fine arts and thinking amateur photographers will keep it alive. I think they (Hasselblad) know this too, and they surely won't miss the chance to sell high profit margin cameras to these crowds.
     
  6. There's more than enough film cameras to go around on eBay. What's Hasselblad thinking?
     
  7. I agree with Paul.Format size is as important as it was in film.
    Many photographers still loves to shoot films and the amatures
    also gave a boost to it.Hasselblad got it right.
     
  8. "Why should they step back for film?"

    Wolf, I don't think they are stepping back.

    My reference to Kodak's announcement comes after the results of a European survey of Professional photographers showed that 67% continue to shoot with film and that 55% preferred shooting with film over digital.

    I think it's a smart move for Hasselblad, however, I think the original H2 would be the more desirable camera in case one does enter the realm of digital. (similar to the 203FE being preferred over the 202FE for its ability to accept shuttered lenses).
     
  9. Could the preference for shooting film be attributed to the fact that there is a lot less post processing to be done in film vs digital?
     
  10. "... there is a lot less post processing to be done in film vs digital?"

    Huh? Darkroom work is darkroom work, whether twiddling with an enlarger or sitting in front of a LCD panel. Pressing that shutter button is only half the process regardless of the kind of sensor in the camera.
     
  11. I thought Michael Reichmann made a very sensible comment to this development:

    "11 October, 2007 - Hasselblad Drops the Other Shoe

    In a move which surprises no one, Hasselblad has announced that they have discontinued
    the H2 camera. This leaves the company only selling cameras like the H3D with removable
    but included digital backs, something which Hasselblad confusingly calls a DSLR. And, no
    other brands of digital back will interface with an H3D series body.

    They have simultaneously introduced an H2F model, with the F standing for Film. (Some in
    the industry think that F is the first letter of another word). The H2F lacks the digital
    interface that the original H1 and the H2 had, and can only be used with digital backs via
    a sync cable. This is the case with the older Hasselblad C series cameras, and when a back
    is attached to a technical or view camera. The H2F will apparently cost some 20% less than
    a discontinued H2 did when it was available. And parenthetically, a couple of calls to
    dealers verified that there appear to be no H2s left in the wholesale pipeline, at least in
    North America.

    So, almost exactly one year after they first threatened to do so, Hasselblad has turned the
    H series camera into a closed system. It is not longer possible to purchase a new H series
    Hasselblad camera with a digital back interface. Therefore anyone who currently owns an
    H series Hasselblad and a medium format back from another manufacturer will not be
    able to buy a new body in future, in the event their current H1 or H2 fails, which will mean
    having to abandon their back. Similarly, anyone who wants to buy into the Hasselblad
    system will now only be able to do so if they are willing to use it with a Hasselblad back.

    Whether this turns out to be a wise decision for the company or not, only time will tell. It
    may well be that to ensure its survival Hasselblad has to sell high margin backs along with
    lower margin bodies and lenses. Allowing backs from other manufacturers to interface
    with their cameras reduces their revenue potential. Is this good for consumers? I don't
    think so. Is it good for the company's bottom line? Maybe. The marketplace eventually will
    determine this."

    The original text can be found here:
    http://luminous-landscape.com/whatsnew/
     
  12. I was thinking that the more (Ford) bodies you made the lower the cost. Regardless if you put the premium package in or not.

    Quote "The H2F lacks the digital interface that the original H1 and the H2 had, and can only be used with digital backs via a sync cable."

    On another note, gee working with sync cables is a real downer. Heaven forbid having an digital upgrade option that included them.
     
  13. Robert,

    With film, that kind of work (processing and printing) used to be done by the lab, freeing up the photographer to do other things.

    While with digital, the work is usually done by the photog himself.
     
  14. It really is dirty dirty dirty corporate strategy that will backfire BIG time on ImaconBlad.
     
  15. I am curious to know how the H3D will prevent any "other" digital backs from being able to be used? Is this done electronically only?

    Will it void any and all warranty? Surely, a company out there could find a way to overcome this. It's like Canon digital bodies. They will accept Sigma and any other brand lens that has the Canon mount. Why hasn't a company such as Canon prevented buyers from using any lens on their camera other than Canon lenses? Surely this would cause Canon lens sales to skyrocket.

    Where there is a will ( and a demand ) there is always a way ( and an adapter ) so I'm curious to know how all of that will actually work to prevent other backs from being used.
     
  16. "I'm curious to know how all of that will actually work to prevent other backs from being used..." Given the cost involved - most new purchasers of digi backs will go with the one ( and now only) back that will work with the body and lenses,over time ImacnB;ad end up with dominat market shares in Digiback - because of teh installed H customer base - thats the plan man.
    ImaconBlad make cameras/bodies/digibacks nad have greater combined margins because they rly less on external manufaturing than others and have more scale and scope in the competitive space.
     

Share This Page