Leica and Hasselblad

[bruno_menilli1]

Hi

 

Does anyone feel that Leica's planned entry into the medium format arena with their S2 will have an effect on

Hasselblad's thinking - will it force them to not only lower more prices but to speed up the introduction of

products that were planned for release 'sometime' in the future, or perhaps to bring out product that weren't

planned to be introduced at all ?

 

My hope is that Hasselblad will bring out a full frame back for the many, many thousands of users of the older V

system that want to use their wide angle lens fully, and which would also have the effect of tying those

customers more into hasselblad ?

 

Bruno

[benny_spinoza]

I suspect that a full frame digital back for the V system will made someday, but the price would far exceed what a non-professional can afford, unless that person was very financially well off. I wonder how many professionals would buy a full frame V back, when there are so many other systems, including the autofocus systems from Hasselblad. I'm not a professional, but I believe that the Leica S2 will be a very big headache for Hasselblad.

[bengt_ljungkvist1]

Bruno,

I wonder that too! As a dedicated amateur Hasselblad owner I feel deserted by Hasselblad. Which amateur can participate in Hasselblad´s onesided attention to the proffessionals, with their digital multidollar H1, H2 and H3 equipment? Hardly anyone, I think. So we amateurs have to be content with at the most 60 or 75 or 120mm lenses

(crop factor 1,5 for the CFV back). Hasselblad would gain a lot by introducing a full frame digital back, the technology seems to have come that far, at a reasonable price of course.

Bengt

[bob_sunley]

Well the S2's sensor is only 30x45mm, a long ways from a "full frame" 56x56mm one, and smaller than the H3's 36x48mm. Once they get the costs of a 56mm square sensor down to a point when they can make a back and retail it below $40k us, they will probably make it. A full frame sensor is almost twice the area of the H3's and would cost at least 10x or more to make. Not to mention the increase in speed of the onboard processing to handle the data.

 

I doubt the S2 will retail for much less than an equiv Hasselblad.

[jenny_jaques]

Bengt says: "As a dedicated amateur Hasselblad owner I feel deserted by Hasselblad." That's because, yes Bengt,

we have been deserted by the current owners of "Hasselblad".

 

I have even discontinued the email newsletters from "Hasselblad", because they address their "professionals" as

being only those on the H system train.

 

We have simply been disenfranchised by all of the statements, literature and promotions currently coming from

“Hasselblad”.

 

I imagine someone who would turn in his grave, should he know what has happened .. in his name.

 

However, I am totally satisfied with the superb quality of today's film. Fuji Velvia 50! Portra 160/400! Rollei

Infrared, Ilford, Kodak, Efke, Maco and Rollei B&W! ... wow! ... yummy!

 

Besides, unless you have the megakit to benefit from mega-megapixel images, to deliver mega-images, what's the

point anyway !?

 

See ya - Jenny.

[Ed_Ingold]

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a full-frame 56x56 mm square sensor. The square format is essentially dead but too dumb to fall over. The <i>raison d'etre</i> for a square format is to accommodate vertical and horizontal compositions without the need (nor easy ability) to turn the camera to one side. The Hasselblad "H", various Mamiya 645 iterations and the defunct Contax are configured to make it easy to turn the camera. In any case, a rectangular sensor is more efficient in the sense that most images are cropped for printing or publication, discarding about 50% of the useable area on a square sensor.

<p>

The term "full-size" is relative. The cropping factor of a 36x48 mm sensor is only 1.1x, which is too close to unity to matter. Furthermore, a 22 MP sensor gives nearly twice the useable area of the current 16 MP 36x36 mm square sensor (which has the same pixel density) when cropped to 8x10 proportions.

 

I personally like the square format, and it is the only type of Hasselblad I own. The CFV digital back is superb, and if I need a real wide-angle view, it's easy to slip on a film back.

[frank_bunnik]

Edward is right. Hasselblad is concentrating only on the H system. Sad for some of us but true. Given the very high quality of the H system, bodies, optics and digital backs, it's recent lower pricing and the fact that the Leica S2 still has to materialize and that Leica and electronics have rarely, if ever, matched well, I would not expect the S2 to be a big contender in the digital camera market. Knowing Leica, it will be too expensive for what it offers. I also seriously doubt that Leica has the financial means to keep up in the digital competition. Seeing how fast the digital H backs are being "upgraded", I think it is a joke to announce a digital camera almost a year in advance.

[benny_spinoza]

Hasselblad never really targeted non-professionals. But non-professionals with some money could afford a professional film camera. Of course, with high-end digital technolgy, the story is different. The cost is in the sensor, not in the future use of film for a film camera. To a professional, this represents a savings because there is no film and scanning cost. To the non-professional, it is too expensive because they can't justify the upfront cost of a $25,000 or more digital camera just to take personal photographs. So its not that Hasselblad has forgotten about the little guy....its just that they were never in the market to satisfy the little guy, although the little guy could afford a film Hasselblad. But high-end digital products are out of the reach of the little guy. They are only for the big guys and gals.

[ken_wayne1]

"Hasselblad never really targeted non-professionals."

 

They should have. Missed opportunity. Non-professionals are people too. I'm very grateful for them. They buy a lot

of Hasselblad from me! So you non-pros...please know you're loved!

[q.g._de_bakker]

Without the "little guy", and non-professionals, buying Hasselblad film cameras, Hasselblad would never have

survived for as long as they did.<br>The "little guy" and non-professional however started buying 6 MP 35 mm based

DSLRs the moment they became available, are now buying the second tier DLSRs, will continue to do so in the

future (maybe; depends on what carrots the industry will dangle in front of their noses).<br><br>The move to first rate

digital came at a price: the technology is hugely expensive. It still is.<br>And

that split the market: on the one hand low quality, but cheapish, driven by gadgetism and consumerism (that "little

guy's" motivation to switch from his affordable film Hasselblad to low cost and low quality digital had nothing to do

with considerations concerning quality or such. The only things that seem to matter are ease of use, and "oooh,

what a nice gadget!"-sentiments). On the other hand high quality, but at a price.<br>The price of high quality digital

could come down, if only the masses would jump on it. But the masses rather have 16 MP hybrid thingies that can

call mum, tell them when to change underpants, and let them play the latest video games.<br>So blame

the "little" "guys and gals".

[ty_mickan]

Hasselblad has a legendary V series camera which they have all but abandoned imo. The Leica is not a systematic camera, which just makes it a very expensive disposable camera. Please Hasselblad, or Phase One, or Leaf, FULL FRAME 6x6 for the V.

[stephen_pitts]

Agree with almost all of the statements above, except to note two things.

 

First, there are lots of rumours of a full frame square back -- not by Hasselblad because it won't fit onto the H3

camera, etc. -- but by other developers for the Large Format Industry who would apparently desire such a size

sensor on the back of their now Meduim-sized view cameras. We'll have to see with this terrible economic

environment...

 

Second, I'd like to add one comment to Q.G.'s: yes, the customer is ultimately responsible for their actions and

hence the shape of the current industry. However, as a customer of both Leica and Hasselblad (and with significant

financial resourses), Hasselblad has definately changed direction since its earlier days. They are not really

interested in progressing their digital backs except those that are fully integrated with their cameras (I own and like

the CFV, by the way). It may be a matter of economic necessity. Frankly, it seems Phase One is more focused on

backs for different camera users. Anyhow, its amazing to look back at around 2001 to see the enormous diversity of

equipment and lenses back then compared to the current situation where the economics of digital capture has

produced a very thin line of products indeed.

 

I personally hope that Leica succeeds with their new camera because it will represent the perfect market positioning

of optimal lenses and a beautifully designed ergonomic SLR with a very powerful (and meaningful) resolution.

[david_henderson]

All I can say is that if there had been an affordable ( say under £8K) full frame back for the Hasselblad V system them I'd have bought one instead of a dslr. I do not consider the CFV an adequate alternative and the prospect of using digital for some shots and film for anything wider than 60mm is inelegant and involves maintaining two workflows for a project or trip- out of the question as far as I'm concerned. I did not get the impression from Hasselblad -though of course I spoke only to the owned UK Distributor- that they viewed the hybrid system with much enthusiasm and commitment. If QG is right about the significance of the smaller user to Hasselblad, it will be interesting to see where a focus on the H series gets them longer term.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Stephen,<br><br>I do not disagree with what you say about the current Hasselblad company.<br>Just mentioned

how things came to be (and that includes how the old Hasselblad company came to be run by the current

management). The market split along two lines:<br>- consumers, who liked gadgets more than quality, and were not

prepared to pay an extra cent to get something better. This group funnily/alarmingly enough, included amateur

photographers who previously used MF, and pros, who proclaimed that the (then also expensive) 2 MP professional

cameras were quite good enough... Still unbelievable, but nonetheless true.<br>- professionals who did know that the

prosumer crap was just that: crap. And also knew that if you wanted to use the emerging technology, and still get

acceptable results, amounts of money in the US$50K order of magnitude were what had to be invested. Things

simply did cost that much.<br><br>High quality digital still costs heaps of money. Mainly, because those people

who before said that their 2 MP Nikons were more than good enough are still insisting that the miniature sensor

format 35 mm based DSLRs are good enough. Why, nowadays they even think that these bits of wired plastic beat

MF film! Fools... (Good to see, isnt it, that from all people it now is Leica - the company who had to protest that the

miniature format they use can compete with larger, more sensible formats ever since they first made a camera - who

acknowledges that you need a larger sensor to creat quality images? Finally they admit how wrong they were, all

these decades. Better late than never ;-) )<br>Meanwhile the consumer-industry is making people believe that

anything is possible, and that as long as it is made in China, everything will cost next to nothing too. If not, if you are

expected to pay more than just one weekend's worth of drinking money, so the believe is, you are being ripped off by

ruthless companies that rather forget about the "little people" in favour of their huge profit margins.<br><br>Small

users, the "little people", cannot afford present day Hasselblad company's products. They are not in the prosumer

league, nor meant to be. Technology still isn't cheap enough to have these products mix in the consumer market (the

one where all those Canons and Nikons are traded like hot cakes, wave after wave, one generation after the other, in

quick succession. Talk about ripping off the "little people"? Look there.)<br><br>So no, David: i do not believe that

the present day Hasselblad company is considering the small(er) user. They can do nothing to keep the company in

business. Even with reduced price levels, the thingies they can offer can not compete in the prosumer-market; can

not compete in the market where all the money is.<br>So until the technology becomes more affordable, small

users/the little people will not be the target market of companies like Hasselblad, Franke & Heidecke, Sinar, Leaf,

Phase One, or any other company moving in the quality segment of the digital imaging industry.<br><br>And as

long as the prosumer is looking at Canons, Nikons and the like, and not venture into the 'quality segment', spending

their money there, there are not enough returns on investment, not enough potential to allow making the technology

cheaper.<br>The Leica thingy is a step in the right direction. It (using the pull that the Leica name has) can lure

people away from the 35 mm based DSLR market, and make them see the light - and spend money in the correct

segment.<br><br>The Leica thingy however will not be a success. Two reasons. It is still too expensive to draw

more than just interested looks. And it's not modular.<br>That last thing will be the thing that 'does it in'. People

expect to see 'improvements' in technology (more features, more MP) every 6 months or so. Crazy, but that what's

they are trained to expect, and so they do.<br>Canons and Nikons are cheap enough (well...) to throw away when a

new model with 2 extra MP and more sophisticated menu features comes along. The Leica however is not.<br>And if

you do not want to toss your investment completely, you need a way to upgrade. Companies like Hasselblad and the

others mentioned before offer such an upgrade path (still not cheap, but possible.) Though Hasselblad is moving

dangerously close to the edge, in fact have jumped off the cliff by announcing their upgrade paths will no longer be

offered. Not very sensible at all (to put it nicely). They should have kept the back a separate entity from the body,

and help their customers (the "big people") protect their investment.<br><br>But back to the "little people". Most do

by now indeed like their "16 MP hybrid thingies that can call mum, tell them when to change underpants, and let

them play the latest video games" so much that they are to be considered 'lost for ever'. The rest will not even be

tempted to buy cheap backs, like the CFV. The sensor is not big enough... <br>Well no. No sensor is big enough. A

big enough sensor would blow even the "big people's" budget. What are these "little people" thinking...?!<br>So they

hold out, do not spend money to enjoy what they at present can. They do not spend money that would allow making

the technology cheaper. They just complain.<br>A full frame sensor (square for Hasselblad or Rollei, 6x7 for

Mamiya) is longed for by many, many people. But when it arrives, only very few of these 'longers' will spend money

towards one. Why, their Nikon, or even iPhone, will do fine, will it not?<br>So where is the incentive to produce

backs for all those used cameras that are out there?<br><br>(And here the rant ends. For now. ;-) )

[benny_spinoza]

Well....the market will determine the winners and losers. These are interesting times. The sad thing is that there are

fewer and fewer high quality film cameras for the "little" guy to choose, and high-end digital cameras are too

expensive for all but the well-heeled or professional. The beauty of the Leica film M or Hasselblad V system is its

simplicity of use. When scanning my 35mm (from a Nikon) and MF film (from a Hasselblad), the ones that I turn into

an 8 by 10 (or 8 by 8) are almost always the MF scans from my Hasselblad (although the Nikon scans are good

too). There is a real magic to MF. It will be a sad day when Hasselblad kills off the V system. Oh well...sorry for

getting off topic.

[Robin Smith]

I don't agree that Leica will fail because it is not modular. As long as the lenses fit any future body then there is no

problem. Even if a new body is expensive it is not any more expensive than an equivalent version from the

competition, especially if the quality of the lenses and ergonomics are superior. Also, it seems to me that digital

imaging sales will undergo a severe slow done soon when sufficient resolution/quality has been reached to cater to

all realistic needs. In small format terms this has pretty well been reached already, although it is not there yet in MF,

but I see no reason to believe this will not happen reasonably soon.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Robin,<br><br>That is the very consumerism mentality i was talking about. If only the sensor needs upgrading, why throw away a perfectly good body? Would you have done that in the film days, every time you ran out of film in your camera? Do you?<br>So why would you, why would it make sense when instead of film, there is a sensor in the camera?<br>And how could that be an affordable way of managing the tools you have available? People complain about the digital recording thingy being too expensive, yet don't blink an eyelid when they are asked to toss away thousands of dollars, because some idiot decided to fix the thing that will need upgrading inside a thing that will not.<br>Why people accept that is beyond me. The only reason i can imagine is - like i mentioned before - that they were spoon fed consumerism from the moment they could first try to eat solids. Have we really already forgotten the great idea that a modular, 'system' camera was? Is it really that bad that we would even consider spending "big people" money on such a proposition? Please tell me it is not...

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

The OP is too funny. How could anyone imply that Leica will be cost competitive with anyone!

[steve_larese1]

Film.

[jenny_jaques]

All this hype about how THIS Leica S2 thing is going to affect Hasselblads 'thinking'. Have I missed it, or has

no one actually mentioned Sinar? Go take a thorough tour of http://www.sinar.ch/ , where it seems they are leaps

and bounds ahead of both Leica AND Hasselblad.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Jenny,<br><br>You have missed it.<br>You're not right that this is about this Leica thing is going to affect

Hasselblad. It is about whether or not this Leica thing will have a chance to succeed or not (not).<br>You're also not

right (sorry! ;-) ) about Sinar being ahead. As far as digital capture is concerned, they are just another company

trying to flog high-end digital backs. And for the rest, they still are the (excellent) view camera maker they always

have been.

[benny_spinoza]

Isn't one of the main differences between the upcoming Leica S2 and the other systems with digital backs is the weather sealing and robustness factor? It seems to me that if one is going to shoot in a dusty or moist environment, then the systems with removable backs will suffer. Don't they have cooling fans that will suck in dust? And the interface between the back and body is not weathersealed. Also, the Leica S2 looks more like a 35mm SLR....easy to hand-hold.

[Robin Smith]

QG

 

I agree it is ridiculously wasteful, but as you know, many (fools?) are upgrading their cameras every year - so all I'm saying is that in the present market it does not seem to matter much and that replacing the sensor by buying a new camera seems par for the course.

[35mmdelux]

"Little people" rule!

[stephen_pitts]

Q.G.,

 

Your point on modularity is obviously very persuasive. Without it, depreciation costs (whether self induced or from

brain washing) are enormous. Anyhow, your judgment on the success of the S2 maybe will be correct (I sincerely

hope not -- but it is a really, really bold move) so I've placed an order for everything when it becomes available

(apparently, it starts with two lenses). I know that there are already a lot pre-orders in the UK for it (not enough to

determine its ultimate success or failure, but not a bad sign). Paradoxical behavior perhaps? No, I really appreciate

exceptional equipment and what it can do. I want the advantages of autofocus -- along with the Leica image quality --

here to be able to take easier shots of my children (or animals) in action (I do the prefocus method a lot with my M8

and Hasselblad, but its success rate is much lower than a really good autofocus). Exceptional equipment allows

you to achieve the maximum results from your photographic pursuits. Indeed, I just managed to pick up some used

(but mint) imagon lenses for my Hasselblad -- I'd been looking for such a set for years. These are exceptional in a

different way, of course.

 

Anyhow, what I miss most about photography before the immense onslaught of the DSLR was the amazing diversity

of equipment, thought, debate, etc., that frequented the field (although now I do think some of it is returning). Nikon

even developed a camera system for underwater with three specially corrected lenses (can't do that with digital

economics precisely because it cannot be made into a modular system). Moreover, photographers had to know much more in general what they were doing (you can see it sometimes by the some Photonet posts which run like "How do I turn on my camera?"). The images themselves were much more of a true photographic recording. Lastly, there was defnately a lot of pride people felt in their cameras of old because it had lasted them for such a long time.

 

Perhaps now with the pixel size of 6 microns (80 lp/mm) -- coming close the practical resolution of the very best lenses -- these latest digital sensors will begin to have reached some point of maturity and depreciation (and its natural defense: modularity) will begin to become less of an issue.

 

Cheers,

 

Steve