What now for 503CW digital backs?

Now that Hasselblad have have discontinued the 503 camera, will the digital backs be discontinued as well ? Also, what is the consensus

on second hand prices for backs such as Phase One and the CVF series, will they go up?

 

Cheers.

<p>There are a number of backs that will work on a V camera. There are so many 500 series cameras made and in use, I seriously doubt any of the back makers will not supply their backs in V mount well into the future. As example, Phase One and Leaf still offer backs for the long discontinued Contax 645 camera.</p>

<p>Hasselblad may well discontinue the CFV/50, so getting a new one will no longer be an option ... but they currently still make the H5D/50 which uses the same sensor, so it may be awhile before the CFV/50 is no longer available ... or not, since what Hasselblad will do these days is anyone's guess.</p>

<p>Leaf backs are an excellent alternative, and some even offer an internally rotating sensor that allows landscape or portrait orientation without rotating the V camera.</p>

<p>I also doubt that V mount backs will go up in price ... maybe the exception will be the CFV/16s and 39s. IMO, if anything, the prices for used V mount backs will stabilize or go down as more folks move to 645 cameras more suited to digital backs, or to higher res 35mm DSLRs.</p>

<p>-Marc</p>

<p> </p>

<p>My opinion is, that Hasselblad did the most unethical approach to the MF market by closing the H-system and then by stoping the CF backs and replace them with the CFV backs.... Clearly, they judged that the market would consider their products as superior and would choose them than those from competitors and then they could blackmail the customer, using trade in policies as media, for future upgrades... <br /> What they clearly did by discontinuing the CF backs (which had interchangeable camera fitting) was to make sure that the customer would only be able to keep his investment as long as he uses a V body... If a customer would have a CF back, he could any time buy a Mamiya 645 or Contax 645, also buy an adapter for his MFDB and another for his lenses and ...keep all the IQ that his lenses and sensor provided while at the same time having a much more modern and flexible "black box" which would provide him a secure path to the future and with more choices too!!! They even denied the opportunity of their own customer to buy an H4X and fit his MFDB back on it and use a V to H adapter for his lenses... Noooo.... as with the H system, "<em>you can't upgrade your back only or your body only..., neither you can use film and digital if you wish..., you can't even have a back-up body for your MFDB if you are a pro... You have to buy another camera"!</em><br /> My advise Jake, is to give them another six months... to put H4X into production (you can't demand from a maker to keep making a system (i.e. the V) that has not enough customers to support it), reintroduce the CF backs and the adapters, stop withdrawing from the market what they take as part exchange and face the competition in direct! Otherwise, buy yourself a used Mamiya AFD or Contax 645, keep your lenses and turn that into digital.. They (Hass) have no disadvantage as far as IQ is concerned... With their current policy, not only they damage the whole MF market, not only they discourage customers, not only they loose their customer image, ...but they loose money too!!! Practically they are taking their own eyes off! Regards, Theodoros. http://www.fotometria.gr <em><br /></em><br /> P.S. As far as future prices are concerned..., don't worry... they will drop to a surprising low level (!!!) ...especially the CFV backs! In fact the best offer a current owner will ever have, I suspect it will come from Hasselblad itself for a brand new H... and then the customer will fall into the trap forever, while his "part exchange" will never see the market again...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Hasselblad did the most unethical approach</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

It might be considered a misguided marketing attempt, but this has nothing to do with ethics.</p>

<p>OK John, I'll take the word back... I must add however, that if one has in mind to "blackmail" the customer later (by repeatedly changing the camera technology or introducing lenses that don't work with past (same-mount) bodies) and takes advantage to the fact that the customer has invested a large amount of money to an extend that changing to another system is out of the question... there are many that don't find this kind of policy "ethical"... OTOH, P1 does the same thing (as Hasselblad) when it comes to part-exchange, (keeps the new product overpriced - doesn't discount the difference to the "new" customer - (in reality "new" customer pays the included value of part exchange discount without giving anything to part exchange) and then the part exchange disappears from the market... I think that there are plenty who don't find much ethics into this policy either... Regards, Theodoros. http://www.fotometria.gr <br>

P.S. ....Do you know what they offer me to part exchange my Imacon 528c for a 200MS? ....about double than what the 528c would ever get into the S/H market just to destroy it! And it's still more money than the (better) Sinar Exact... Now how do I convince Sinar that they have to add an adapter for Contax 645 too and keep my 528c as a back up to an "Exact"? (they seem to have misjudged the demand, while there is no multishot "open system" left to the market other than theirs), ...or perhaps it's best to keep fingers crossed and wait for (another) one that is fed up with Hasselblad and decides (instead of the "part-exchange") to sell me his MS back while he will change for an "open system" solution himself. </p>

<p>Sounds painful!</p>

<p>Back to the original question, I personally do not think that stopping the 503CW will have a significant impact on the digital backs prices. The 503CW was only a small part of the market as the backs can be used on any V series cameras like 500C/M, 501CM, 555ELD (a LOT of them), 501C etc . . .<br>

I also doubt that the prices will plunge suddenly as there are still many V series around with perfectly happy users trying to save to afford a digital back.<br>

Regarding ethics, I disagree with John. I know it is a sad truth today that the word "ethics" has disappeared from the company's jargon but this was not always the case. Bill Hewlett (to mention one of many examples) built HP on teaching ethics to his employees. This is how HP became very successful and respected all around the world. This was, of course, destroyed by a line of marketing dumbos and crook CEO's after he was gone. So was the reputation of HP.<br>

It is sad that people like John believe that ethics has nothing to do with the way a company operates. It is sad that they don't even know that this had not always been the case. <br>

We, the consumers, have the choice to not buy products made by a company using un-ethical methods (yes, Hasselbad does it) and they will be punished for their greed.<br>

No, John, this is not "misguided marketing attempt", it is greed, stupidity, short-term view and un-ethical.</p>

<p>Paul, said it all, .....NO? Very well said Paul, it's the decisions made by "golden boys" of crap that lead legend firms of man kind achievement to vanish... The difference of today and "<em>then", </em>is that "<em>then", </em><em>photographers where making cameras for other photographers... while today, "stupid golden boys" think that they can direct a photographer's mind in what he wants... </em>and them not being photographers (or being stupid camera users that have no relationship with photography as an art whatsoever), ...they lead (historical) makers to take "their own eyes off". Theodoros. http://www.fotometria.gr</p>

<p>Its difficult to know what to do now that Hasselblad have adopted a business strategy that appears so draconian. </p>

I wouldn't worry about this at all. Someone will continue to make a high quality digi-back that is accessable to V users. As

for Hasselblad, what were they supposed to do? How many people do you think were out buying new film Blads.

Photography is moving on, and it's becoming more and more difficult to even find a good lab to process work that is cost

effective unless you're doing your own. I have two full work sets of V system HBs here each with 2 bodies and wide-

normal- tele kits and accessories. I still use them occassionally for certain things and am not selling them either, but

seriously we have moved on. I don't find any fault with Hasselblad, they too are moving on.

<p>But of course some one else will benefit from their ...naive decisions Dave! ...One that has no competition anymore (being left alone in the market), that will (like Dracula) shuck the blood off the owners that will decide to stay with the system! Theodoros. http://www.fotometria.gr</p>

 

<p>Is it really true that if you have a H4D camera with a 31mp back, you can't use a 60mp back on it? You would have to upgrade the camera as well?</p>

<p>Jake,<br>

Yes, unfortunately it is true. Every H3/H4/H5 is paired (artificially) with a single digital back and not only you cannot use a different back (like a 60 instead of the original 39 for example), but you cannot share a back between two identical bodies.<br>

The pairing is only an electronic gimmick to force users to buy as many bodies as backs and to keep companies like PhaseOne or Leaf out of the H market as Hasselblad does not publish the interface information required to make a back compatible.</p>

Wow, I thought you could at least keep the camera and upgrade it with a higher mp hasselblad back. So if you upgrade

you can only keep the lens? I can understand upgrading a DSLR body every few years, but having to change a MF body

is very different. It's just a box with mirror essentially.

 

Are there any advantages to the photographer at all, or is it just one calculated way to force the photographer to spend

extra money. It seems unfair.

I just saw that PhaseOne do a H fit IQ 140 and IQ180?

<p>That's for the H1/2/2F/4X bodies Jake... By the way, <em>they don't sell the H4X... you have to trade your H1/2/2F and pay something like 5000 to get one (so that they can keep you in the "system" and black mail you again and again)!</em> Also, if you get a S/H H1/2 and decide to use an "independent" MFDB on to it, you'll most likely "loose your brains" with all the bags, termites and digital ghosts that will hit you... P1 does make backs for the H1/2/2F/4X <em>after they won in courts against Hasselblad.... </em>Note that the prices for S/H H3/H3II/H4D/H5 are much less (if you consider the cost of the included MFDB) than getting an "independent" H1/H2... IN THE MEAN TIME P1/Leaf (one brant) are having a real party being the only MFDB supplier in the market... So, <em>either side... you are under blackmail and have to decide which blackmail you prefer! ...</em>Both are "killing" the trades they "buy" (they don't buy them, you pay for it - they get it for free) back, so that you don't have an alternative! In reality MFDB market has turned into an insane "monopoly market" of crooks that rip you off... <br>

All the "market" that you practically see on the web, (you know, "my IQ 180 this... my H4D50 that..." are in reality "image makers" of two sites that take advantage of the "photographers dream" and make lots of "thin air money" on your back... Pros (or artists) don't use stuff like that... (that's why you'll never see "great pictures" from 80mp back owners or H4D60 owners), they buy S/H equipment or D800E and shoot the hell out of it... Theodoros. http://www.fotometria.gr<br>

P.S. Do you know what's the difference between a P25+ and a P180+...? <em>About 15% of resolution.. nothing more nothing less!!! </em>All the (most important) rest is equal. Yet, some "gadget collectors" are paying many 10ths of thousands to buy 15% of resolution while an old 22mp back would provide more resolution than any MF film ever did! No wonder why old back and film users <em>do better photography!</em></p>

Theodoros, you have a good point here. Yes I agree that the online marketing via YouTube etc is becoming transparent

now. I feel lucky to still shooting with a 503CW film back. Though, the MFDB are useful in many applications, it's the toss

up between P1 and H system second hand, because I'm looking for MF 645 auto focus with SLR ergonomics. But that

said, I may just have to get a DB for my 503 for the time being. I currently also use a D3 ( amazing) and a D800.

 

The MF dealers are μαλάκας........lol.

<p>That's about it Jake..., my advice is to look for an as large as possible sensor area S/H MFDB, with "fat enough" pixels to serve your lenses well and superb IQ, pay as less as possible and try your back to have an interchangeable adapter for other cameras... If you change the "black box" for a modern 6x4.5 one and keep your lenses as you should, you'll improve nothing of your images... SO LET IT DIE! - you can do that (change the body) later... (after it dies). I do believe that MF users are all about <em>modularity (that Hasselblad introduced (!!!)) and they are smart enough to </em><em>condemn any attempt of crooks to blackmail them! ...</em>And yes! ...the MF makers, they are "μαλ..." that! Theodoros. http://www.fotometria.gr</p>

<p>My my, such vitriol.</p>

<p>Frankly, one will view each move by a company through the glasses of their own needs, real or perceived. So will the companies making the hardware.</p>

<p>I've been doing this MF/film/digital back thing for a long time now, and some folks are leaving out the trials and tribulations of the good old days while only focusing on the pollyanna aspects ... personally, I do not miss the fussing with misfitting camera/backs, and the mutual shifting of blame and finger pointing at each other by the back makers or camera makers. Had to add shims for critical register for one camera, which then didn't work on the other camera due to production variances. So much for fast swappable backs.</p>

<p>This isn't an isolated issue, but a well know one to anyone that has dealt with it. Even the almighty Apla cameras often require shimming the latest greatest P1 backs ... they even made a video on how to accomplish it ... which isn't easy. </p>

<p>I see it as different philosophies in making a system ... with the choice being up to the user. Hasselblad chose to integrate the whole system, if you think that wasn't needed, there are other choices.</p>

<p>I preferred it over the " not so good old days" since the only other system camera I used the H4D/60 back on was a well calibrated view camera with a sliding mount made by Kapture Group.</p>

<p>Integration and individual camera system calibration allowed them to include things like focus adjust that takes into account any micro-minor focus shift while stopping down, and True Focus APL which is still unequalled by any camera company, let alone MF cameras.</p>

<p>The H is modular in that you can use a different viewfinder (Mamiya 645 and Phase One cameras can't), the back can be used on tech cameras, and untethered with the H4D/60 and H5D/60 which now uses a battery. The H can be used with V lenses via the CF adapter, can use H 24mm to 100mm lenses on the HTS/1.5 Tilt Shift Adapter ... which a the modularity that is very useful. </p>

<p>BTW, you can't get a P1 back for your Hasselblad V and use it at will on another platform ... the factory has to change the mount ... so how's that open/swappable? I guess it's open to be used on another camera of the same make. BTW, you can get a second body for your H back ... however, you have to send in the original camera and back so they can calibrate the new camera to it, like the original.</p>

 

<p>Pricing is a fluid subject ... however, having priced out many different systems over the years, I found that the H camera and back together were often close or the same price as a back alone from other makers.</p>

<p>Nothing is perfect, but the H system is a nice camera, with great versatility and improved feature set and reliability that comes with sticking with doing one thing well and not splitting limited resources to end up not doing anything well. </p>

<p>Ethics have little to do with anything here. It is decisions made to assure survival ... and continuing to make low demand products like the V camera is just sucking resources ... but then again so is the Lunitic Camera debacle which I see as far more damning than the discontinuation of the V. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Marc,<br>

Although I agree with some of your well researched points, I believe you are mistaken in a few areas, particularly the one making some of us so upset.<br>

If it is true that the early digital backs had alignment problems, that has dramatically changed. I have been using P1 and CFV's on MANY different 500 systems (including 500C's) without ever having a problem, even using the most accurate lenses like the Zeiss 100mm or the 180mm.<br>

You are mistaken when you thing that Hasselblad pairs mechanically a H with a second back: you fall for their false advertising. They do not: they simply modify the firmware in order for the body to "accept" a different back. This is where we disagree, where I (and many others) think it is not only a dumb marketing decision but it is unethical.</p>

<p>Paul, this isn't my first digital rodeo.</p>

<p>The reference to digital precision alignment was a historical context as to why Hasselblad went the integrated route ... at least partly.</p>

<p>My friend was a Phase One dealer for a number of years, and matching them to a Contax 645 was often fraught with issues. I had the same issue with a Kodak back on a Contax ... Kodak blamed Contax, and Contax blamed Kodak ... later I had issues with a Imacon back on a 555ELD ... in short it wasn't all peaches and cream. </p>

<p>I also never said that Hasselblad mechanically pairs a second back to an existing camera ... I said that Hasselblad will provide a second body for your Hasselblad back. As far as I know, they will not provide a second H back for an existing camera ... at least I've never heard of such an offer ... ever. </p>

<p>In the firmware of each HD camera is the calibration code which they store for any service work. Seems like a lot of trouble to go through to pull the wool over unsuspecting photographers ... and to what end?</p>

<p>As I said, one can accept the integrated philosophy, or buy something else. I almost moved from Hasselblad when the Leaf AFi (Leaf's Rollei HY6 variant) was introduced. To my surprise they could not mount my Leaf Aptus 7s back on the new camera, and told me there was no way it would ever happen. To add insult to injury, the trade amount for my 6 month old Aptus 7s was less than half of the retail that I ended up selling it for.</p>

<p>I could go on and on and on and on ... but I can say it all ended when I just stuck with the H system and went about making photographs rather than screwing around with equipment. </p>

<p>I retired just recently, sold most all of my H gear, and rewarded myself with a Leica S2 and CS lenses ... kept the Hasselblad HTS/1.5 and HC 100/2.2 to use on the S. The Leica is also an integrated system.</p>

<p>To each his own.</p>

<p>-Marc</p>

<p> </p>

Marc, what are you saying here? On top you say that the Leaf is an excellent choice, then down here you are dismayed.

Which one is it... Unless I am missing your point.

Leaf back vs Jenoptik/Leaf camera system, Dave?<br>They made quite good backs. The Hybrid 6 was a bit of a disaster, with too many companies involved, each wanting to distinguish themselves and their version of the product from the other companies involved and their versions. Apparently so much so that you couldn't use existing Leaf backs on the Leaf variant.

All sounds like ball ache to me.

<p>Thank you Mr Bakker.</p>

<p>Jake, it was!</p>

<p>Dave, don't confuse what a company does in terms of cameras verses their offerings of digital backs. In fact all of the backs made today are excellent including Leaf (which was once owned by Kodak, and is now owned by Phase One) ... each differing only in how they better fit different photographer's needs and budget. BTW, the Mamiya branded digital backs were/are made by Leaf.</p>

<p>Along the way, each company has met with criticism because they either did something or didn't do something that some photographers disagreed with. </p>

<p>In general, the majority of photographers do feel that the Hasselblad H camera is the best over-all system camera. IMO, the HY6 could have challenged that had they come to market in a better, more photographer friendly way. The Phamiya camera is, and has been, Phase One's weak link no matter how many band-aids they slap on it. Of course, anyone associated with the brand will deny it, but that tune will change when and if P1 gets their rumored new camera to market. So, it makes people mad that they can't put any back on any H camera, and that the one legacy Hasselblad that could take any back with the right mount, the 503CW, is now discontinued. The only concession they made was the H4X, which is a low production run camera for them, thus not easy to get, nor inexpensive. </p>

<p>What is quite interesting is that Leica has taken a lead in user friendly offerings (unfortunately, not easy on the bank account). First off they made a ground up new S camera with no legacy baggage to contend with ... made it dual shutter with lenses that sync to 1/1000, or focal plane to 1/4000 with a flip on a switch ... BUT then made a fully functional H to S adapter with AF and full electronic interface ... and just recently introduced a fully functional Contax 645 to S adapter for the range of Zeiss AF lenses from the Contax 645 system! Boy do I wish I had kept my Contax 350/4 APO.</p>

<p>- Marc</p>

<p> </p>