Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: The state of MFDB  (Read 20040 times)
James Godman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


WWW
« Reply #60 on: October 20, 2007, 09:34:35 PM »
ReplyReply

From my experience, what people use in school they use after school.  So I think that one good way to help the HY6 stick is to make the rounds at the schools, get an intelligent person to give a concise and thoughtful demonstration of the product, let students and teachers get some hands on time, show beautiful examples of inspired photography, and then give discounts to the schools.  I got hooked on Sinar at RIT, and I know others did too (and I'm happy about it and still use my f).

Another thing that I remember when I was in the market for a 6008, and helped dissuade a purchase, was that there were very few places to rent them if I had a job where I wanted to rent a few additional bodies or lenses.  Hasselblad was always more visible and available.

Great discussion (mostly).
Logged

bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #61 on: October 20, 2007, 11:29:13 PM »
ReplyReply

EPd,

Many thanks for the thoughtful reply.  As I mentioned earlier, I have a Japanese wife and co-incidentally have done some business in Japan with Canon and Nikon.  I have a very small insight into Japanese business culture--just enough to know I have no idea what I'm dealing with!

I very much appreciate your insights into the European business culture, or at least our little corner of it.  Things actually make a lot more sense to me when recent events are considered in this light.

Actually I'm not American either and many of the points you raise about the US have me puzzled too.  But that's a whole other discussion...

Anyway, your comments are much appreciated!  I owe you a beer next time you're in Seattle (and my guess is that owing a German a beer is no small thing!)  

Best regards,
Brad
Logged

TechTalk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 295


« Reply #62 on: October 20, 2007, 11:46:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Fujinon lenses for one, but surely you know that the so called "Hasselblad" H system is more a product of Fuji than of the Hasselblad division of Danish based company Hasselblad-Imacon. The body designs are largely or entirely by Fuji, as well as the lenses being all Fujinons.  Hasselblad has not really designed a new product since the 500 series, since the Xpan was essentially a rebranded Fuji product.

In fact, I would roughly describe the H system as a partnership between
- Imacon for the digital parts
- Fuji for the optical parts
- Hasselblad for its prestigious image and its customer support network.

On using the Hasselblad image for marketing non-Hasselblad designs, note that even purely Imacon products like film scanners are now branded as Hasselblad.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147412\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
1) "surely you know that the so called "Hasselblad" H system is more a product of Fuji than of the Hasselblad division of Danish based company Hasselblad-Imacon" On what evidence do you base this wild assertion? Wait, I can tell you... NONE! Hasselblad has invested a great deal of their money, their reaserch and development employees talent and time, their engineering capabilities and production capacity to making the "H" system a reality. That's why Hasselblad makes the decisions and sets the direction for the system and not their manufacturing partners or subcontractors. Hasselblad has been in full control of the "H" system from the beginning, it was developed with the participation of other companies (this is normal for many products–perhaps most products), but the product belongs to Hasselblad.

Is Fuji an important manufacturing partner? Yes, of course they are! Hasselblad has never been an optical manufacturer. They have relied on Kodak, Zeiss, Schneider, Rodenstock and Fuji to produce lenses for their cameras over the past 50+ years. Currently Fuji produces the optical components (lenses and prism finders) and film magazines to Hasselblad's design and/or specification. Hasselblad produces the bodies in Sweden. Hasselblad produces digital backs and scanners in Denmark. By the way, Imacon does not exist anymore. They merged with Hasselblad and if you don't think that they are now functioning as one company, you really have been sleeping in class. Regarding the lenses, did you know that Hasselblad has an optical design staff in Sweden? Did you know that all of the lens specifications and many of the lens designs originated there?

In your fantasy world, Hasselblad is a few guys in Copenhagen filing their nails and taking credit for all of Fuji's hard work by slapping on a label. The reality is far different. There are a few hundred Hasselblad employees doing R&D, engineering, production and all of the other jobs that you would expect and it appears some you knew nothing about.

2) "Hasselblad has not really designed a new product since the 500 series, since the Xpan was essentially a rebranded Fuji product." Now here is where your lack of knowledge truly shines! It's reason enough to pay no attention to anything else that you have to say, as your vendetta with Hasselblad picks up steam. Apparently the entire 2000/200 series of cameras (1977-2004) escaped your attention. The 205 FCC was especially interesting with built-in zone system computer. The Flex and Arc systems don't get your notice either. Also, Hasselblad has been researching, designing and producing products for electronic imaging since the 1980's. Then there is your fantasy that Hasselblad wasn't responsible for the "H" system design. The only thing you seem to be right about is the Xpan, which is indeed a Fuji product.

3) "The body designs are largely or entirely by Fuji" Your evidence of this? None. The "H" system was six years in development with Hasselblad in charge at all times. Do they have partners in the production? Yes, Fuji is one, but not the only one. What are the revenue/cost sharing arrangements? I don't know and neither do you. Obviously part of the agreement with Fuji allows them to sell the H1 camera and a small selection of lenses under the Fuji label in Japan. The only thing that can be derived from that fact is a contractual arrangement. Anything else is idle guess work from a fertile imagination

4) "note that even purely Imacon products like film scanners are now branded as Hasselblad." Of course they are. The two companies merged. The CEO of Hasselblad founded the company that designed and produced the first Imacon scanners (a really outstanding design for desktop scanners. VERY innovative!). Why shouldn't they be marketed under one unified brand name? They're one company. Your point?

5) You don't really seem to get how the modern world of high-tech products works. I'm typing this on an Apple computer. My data is all stored on a drive from Seagate and all of the data is processed by an Intel processor. In your fantasy world, Apple has nothing to do the product and it should be called a Intel-gate computer. In fact, Apple is the company responsible for the product. They work with partners to develop and manufacture products, but they control the design process, make the design decisions for the finished product and it deserves to be considered their product.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2007, 12:33:03 AM by TechTalk » Logged
TechTalk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 295


« Reply #63 on: October 21, 2007, 12:00:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Understood: in that case my comment is that Fuji is paying most or all of the R&D costs for the non-digital side of the H system, a significant financial contribution even if not money directly into Hasselblad-Imacon's pockets. One possible effect of Fuji's financial resources is the far faster development and release so far of auto-focus lenses than for the Rollei-based systems. Hopefully the broader support of the new Hy6 "team" will help to expand the AF lens selection.
P. S. In case anyone has still missed it,
there is no longer such a company as Hasselblad
and Hasselblad did not take over Imacon, but closer to the reverse. A holding company bought both of them and then merged them into a new company, run by the former Imacon management from the former Imacon offices in Denmark, not the former Hasselblad offices in Sweden.

"Imacon-Hasselblad" would be a more accurate name for this new company.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147434\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
"Fuji is paying most or all of the R&D costs for the non-digital side of the H system" What are you smoking? Can I have some? I'm getting weary of responding to your imagined financial arrangements that you know absolutely nothing about.

And the statement "there is no longer such a company as Hasselblad" is so foolish that it doesn't deserve any response.

There was a merger. They got new management. A money losing company that was about to go under was saved as a result. Don't like their name? Too bad, get over it.
Logged
TechTalk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 295


« Reply #64 on: October 21, 2007, 12:12:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The press release about the merger of Imacon with Hasselblad under the common ownership of the Hong Kong based Shriro group is available here:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0408/04081701...lbladimacon.asp
Never mind the inaccurate talk in the paragraph before the press release suggesting that Hasselblad acquired Imacon, (a claim made in numerous other press reports too): the actual press release makes it clear that
- Shriro acquired Imacon, having already acquired Hasselblad
- The Executive Team of the merged Hasselblad-Imacon company is
-- Christian Poulsen, CEO of Hasselblad-Imacon, formerly CEO and founder of Imacon
-- Tom Olesen, the former managing director (2nd in command?) of Imacon
-- Lars Pappila, formerly president and CEO of Hasselblad.

OK, Hassleblad management got one out of three places on the new Executive Team, but Imacon got two including the top spot.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147472\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This strikes you as news? This is not a revelation. I think that we already know that there was a merger and are aware of the associated details.
Logged
TechTalk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 295


« Reply #65 on: October 21, 2007, 12:17:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
One starting point for web searching on this topic is the name under which this camera is sold in Japan: The Fujifilm GX645AF Professional.

Here are a couple of mentions in official Fujifilm sites, one in English
http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/about/review/index-imaging.php
and two in Japanese
http://www.fujifilm.co.jp/news_r/nrj1000.html
http://fujifilm.jp/personal/filmcamera/med...5af/design.html

Like the last two, a lot of the best information seems to be available only in Japanese, since only is Japan is this camera sold under the Fujiifilm brand name.
Isn't Bernard based in Japan? Any comments Bernard?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147501\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
More incredible revelations, Fuji has had contractual authorization to sell the H1 and a few lenses under the Fuji brand in Japan for about 5 years now. It was announced in 2002 when the H1 first appeared. Thanks for the update.
Logged
TechTalk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 295


« Reply #66 on: October 21, 2007, 12:57:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
TechTalk,

Like you, I don't condone passing off speculation and rumour as fact, of course, but I feel it would be more helpful to the community to correct any misinformation than simply to dispute it.  Wouldn't you agree?

I'd appreciate it if you (or anyone else for that matter) could shed some like on the nature of the relationship between Fujifilm Corporation and Victor Hasselblad AB in the development of the H-series of cameras.  It's an interesting collaboration which is, for better or for worse, changing the face of the medium format photography industry.

All (factual) insight is most welcome.

Best regards,
Brad
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147487\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The nature of the relationship is what it appears to be. Hasselblad contracts with Fuji to supply a portion of the "H" system. Hasselblad contracts with other companies to provide "H" components as well, but Fuji is obviously the largest manufacturing partner.

The financial details are contractual arrangements between the companies. They're not public and I'm not personally very interested or concerned.

The other thing that is obvious about the "H" system, however, is that whatever course it is on–Hasselblad is the captain of the ship and charting the course. Since investment money tends to dictate where decisions are made, if I was speculating, I'd have to guess that there is a good deal of swedish kronor and danish kroner involved.
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2349


« Reply #67 on: October 21, 2007, 02:38:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In the long run it's another blow for Phase One's Capture One (and Aperture et al); the camera, the optics, and the raw converter need to be one single integrated package from a single supplier.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147507\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why do people continue to hammer on this? Yes the communication between the parts need to be optimal and complete. Spec's fully written,etc..

But in now way it absolutely needs to be integrated into 1 single package or being handled by one party. At least not for a smoothly functioning piece of equipment it is not a necessity perse.

How on earth do you think people can develop programs for multiple platforms (like Windows or Mac for instance). Because there are things like API's and SDK's (or simply good documentation of all spec's). All tools to provide 3rd parties with the necessary details to develop add-on products. Why would a camera, lens and digital back be any different in this respect?

Actually this way for the end-user eventually there will be better products and more options, even Microsoft understands this!
« Last Edit: October 21, 2007, 02:51:41 AM by Dustbak » Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3635



WWW
« Reply #68 on: October 21, 2007, 02:50:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
How on earth do you think people can develop programs for multiple platforms (like Windows for instance). Because there are things like API's and SDK's (or simply good documentation of all spec's). All tools to provide 3rd parties with the necessary details to develop add-on products. Why would a camera, lens and digital back be any different in this respect?

Actually this way for the end-user eventually there will be better products and more options, even Microsoft understands this!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You do humor very well

Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #69 on: October 21, 2007, 05:58:44 AM »
ReplyReply

While I must agree that this was the case some years ago, that companies in Europe were mainly product driven, Sinar included, I can assure you that today things have changed a lot, also at Sinar. The latest prove is the Sinar Hy6, which has been "coming out" of an intensive and precise market survey.

The marketing part of those products is another thing, and I agree that here "we" European (Swiss) might or do probably not have the right market approach for the US market.

Thierry


Quote
While I have obvious Rollei sympathies (owner of 6003 for 15 years, and 4 Schneider lenses for it) I must agree with the above. The basic issue is that proud European engineering and manufacturing companies are often "product" driven - that is, they produce what they think is needed. They make what they believe is a great product, and it often is just that. They assume the market will respond positively.

This is in contract to "demand" driven companies, which listens to the market, finds their spot, and respond, and changes quickly if there isn't the market response.

This extends to how they respond to marketing - the product driven companies have histrically a rather relaxed notion to marketing, believing in the end, quality will out. The demand driven companies market as if their business depends on it (which it does).

Given deep enough pockets, the product driven companies can exist just fine for a while, but recent history has them either going bust after 10-20 years of this approach (in today's market), or changing their tune (re: Mercedes).

Demand driven companies (and their responsiveness to marketing needs) are all the rage these days. In fact, one might esay a company can't survive without this attention to marketing.

Companies like Apple are an interesting cross between the two - mostly product driven, but with a savvy way of marketing it. Leica and Sinar are of the old guard, and are slowly catching up - Leica moreso. Sinar is, well, not quite there.

I say that as a follower of the brand, as an interested party wanting their best success. But they still struggle, don't quite get how to get American market penetration,a nd are just not a factor in the US. Maybe in Europe moreso, but here, its  alonely day until one sees their products. I hope fervently this changes... for them and for all their supporters and friends. I just don't know how they plan on staying in the game without more aggressive marketing.

A poor exchange rate doesn't help this to be sure, esp. when coupled with high European labor costs. So I don't know the answer, but gee, I'd really like a $15-20k bundle of camera and back. Really. 

Geoff G.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147494\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2196


WWW
« Reply #70 on: October 21, 2007, 06:07:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
intensive and precise market survey.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147574\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I believe macdonalds did a survey

Asking thinkgs like 'would you like fruit and salads in our stores?'

everyone said yes but no one bought them once they came to market

I think you need to have your own vision and propel it into the market place

I know what I think your vision should be. I am confused as to what 'yours' is.

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #71 on: October 21, 2007, 09:38:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Dear EPd,

It was a kind of "provocative" remark, since I understand well why it is not yet on there homepage.

That's what I hoped to be answered by somebody, and my guess is that many others have thought it as well.

It is indeed "perfect" marketing! But does it not show also that (some) people can easily find their way through the glitter and shining of a webpage and sort it out by themselves, if you and me have understood it?

That is where "we" see things a bit differently, and it might be part of the gap with our friends in the US, and one of the reasons why our marketing is criticized here in this tread.

I have also much difficulties to understand that one needs "pre-chewed" information for all and everything, and even worse, that all and any kind of information is sometimes "swallowed" without any critical analysis. I have myself always been very critical with all kind of information: but then, I am coming from a country which is "miles" away from the US, being born in France where all and everything is always put in question.

To make things clear, I do not say that we are right and that our marketing does not have to change, but that this is an integrated part of our culture and marketing approach.

Best regards,
Thierry

Quote
Dear Thierry,

As for Hassy and the H2F: the H2F is a bandaid for those who feel fucked by Hassy. It should be mentioned under the label "damage control". But since Hassy does not have a place for that in their communication they will not hurry much to bring this news forward. On the other hand you will find everything about the H3DII on their website. I think it is smart communication: push forward what you want to sell and keep an alternative for the unhappy clients at hand. Just in case champagne and kaviar can no longer keep them quiet.

Best wishes,
EPd
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147449\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5073


« Reply #72 on: October 21, 2007, 09:56:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This strikes you as news? This is not a revelation. I think that we already know that there was a merger and are aware of the associated details.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147544\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I made this post because I had stated that the former Hasselblad has been merged with Imacon, with Imacon providing the management team. Someone disputed that claim, suggesting that Hasselblad was still a separate company. Therefore I provided documentation of my previous statement about the merger, along with one correction: Imacon did not provide all of the management team but only two out of three members, including the CEO.

I do not understand why my providing factual documentation to support my previous statements seems to annoy you.
Logged
Streetshooter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #73 on: October 21, 2007, 10:16:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I made this post because I had stated that the former Hasselblad has been merged with Imacon, with Imacon providing the management team. Someone disputed that claim, suggesting that Hasselblad was still a separate company. Therefore I provided documentation of my previous statement about the merger, along with one correction: Imacon did not provide all of the management team but only two out of three members, including the CEO.

I do not understand why my providing factual documentation to support my previous statements seems to annoy you.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147600\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I always had the impression he worked for Hasselblad !  Maybe that explains his rather over the top responses.
Logged
thsinar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2066


WWW
« Reply #74 on: October 21, 2007, 10:33:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Sam!

It is your right to think so, but let me tell you that you are completely out of the reality concerning the "fruits and the salads", definitively.

Best regards,
Thierry

Quote
I believe macdonalds did a survey

Asking thinkgs like 'would you like fruit and salads in our stores?'

everyone said yes but no one bought them once they came to market

I think you need to have your own vision and propel it into the market place

I know what I think your vision should be. I am confused as to what 'yours' is.

S
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147575\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Thierry Hagenauer
thasia_cn@yahoo.com
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5073


« Reply #75 on: October 21, 2007, 11:00:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
1) "surely you know that the so called "Hasselblad" H system is more a product of Fuji than of the Hasselblad division of Danish based company Hasselblad-Imacon" On what evidence do you base this wild assertion? Wait, I can tell you... NONE!
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I base that on various items I have read including articles in photography magazines, but I do not have all the evidence at hand, and I am open to the possibility of being in error on some points. My understanding is the final assembly is done in the Swedish facilities of Hasselblad-Imacon, but a large portion of the previous steps including design leadership are from Fujifilm.

Since you make a number of specific claims about the leading role of Hasselblad and later Hasselblad-Imacon, can you direct me to your evidence? In particular, do you have any evidence for your apparent belief Fuji 645Fujifilm GX645AF Professional is essentially a licencing of a Hasselblad product, rather than having a substantial contribution from Fujifilm?


Quote
2) "Hasselblad has not really designed a new product since the 500 series, since the Xpan was essentially a rebranded Fuji product."
... Apparently the entire 2000/200 series of cameras (1977-2004) escaped your attention.
... The Flex and Arc systems don't get your notice either.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147540\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My wording is apparently confusing; it would have been better to say that from the Xpan and H series forward, design of Hasselblad branded cameras has been done in partnership with Fujifilm, with the latter having the lead role.

I mentioned the 500 series since I believe that the most recent "pure Hassleblad" or "Hasselblad-lead" designs are the latest products in the 500 series, where development continued after it had stopped on the now discontinued 200 series.  I was not at all suggesting that there has been no Hasselblad-lead innovation since the _start_ of the 500 series; my apologies if it sounded like that.

And I was thinking of the now discontinued Flex and Arc systems loosely as part of the 500 series, though I suppose that is inaccurate in the case of the Arc body, which does not use the same lenses as the 500 series bodies if I recall correctly, while the Flex body does use the same CF lenses.

Quote
Also, Hasselblad has been researching, designing and producing products for electronic imaging since the 1980's. Then there is your fantasy that Hasselblad wasn't responsible for the "H" system design. The only thing you seem to be right about is the Xpan, which is indeed a Fuji product.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147540\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That is interesting: which electronic imaging products are you referring to, beyond adding digital back compatibility to some bodies?

Quote
3) "The body designs are largely or entirely by Fuji" Your evidence of this? None. The "H" system was six years in development with Hasselblad in charge at all times.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147540\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
So far we have each stated different opinions on this, with no documentation to back them up. Can you point me to to sources for your claim? Not that I will insist too much or accuse you of errors, lies or mis-information if you cannot; after all I also cannot easily produce citations of all the sources on which my understanding is based.

Quote
4) "note that even purely Imacon products like film scanners are now branded as Hasselblad." Of course they are. The two companies merged. Why shouldn't they be marketed under one unified brand name? They're one company. Your point?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147540\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My point is that although the name of the company producing these scanners is "Hasselblad Imacon", not simply "Hasselblad", and although its management team comes mostly from Imacon suggesting that Imacon is the lead parter in the merger, and though these pruducts come from the Imacon assets of the merger, the product is not branded "Hasselblad Imacon" or "Imacon" but simply "Hasselblad". This is a natural decision given the far greater recognition of the name "Hasselblad", but it indicates that the name "Hasselblad" is being used on products that have no "Hasselblad DNA" in the sense of coming from the resources that the former company Hasselblad contributed to the merged company. From what I have read, a similar thing is happening with the branding of the H system, though with a bit more "Hasselblad DNA" in that case, but with Fujifilm leading the design project.

It would be great to find solid sources on the way this design project actually goes, beyond the vague statement:
Quote
the GX645AF Professional, a 6 x 4.5 format auto-focus SLR camera with interchangeable lenses that was developed in collaboration with Victor Hasselblad AB.
at [a href=\"http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/about/review/index-imaging.php]http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/about/review/index-imaging.php[/url]

I suspect though that in such arrangements, the vagueness is deliberate so that each company can insinuate having a larger role that it actually has. Like the lens design partnerships between Kodak and Schneider Kreuznach, between Sony and Carl Zeiss, between Panasonic and Leica, and between Pentax, Samsung and Schneider Kreuznach. In all those cases I am betting on the Japanese lens producer being the project leader.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5073


« Reply #76 on: October 21, 2007, 11:06:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I always had the impression he worked for Hasselblad !  Maybe that explains his rather over the top responses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147604\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Cynically, maybe the fact that Hasselblad Imacon CEO Christian Poulsen is Imacon's founder explains why the H series is being heavily aligned as a way to sell digital backs. Practically though, it just makes business sense: the digital backs are probably the dominant source of revenue for Hasselblad Imacon, especially given that the lenses are all outsourced.
Logged
TechTalk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 295


« Reply #77 on: October 21, 2007, 12:30:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I made this post because I had stated that the former Hasselblad has been merged with Imacon, with Imacon providing the management team. Someone disputed that claim, suggesting that Hasselblad was still a separate company. Therefore I provided documentation of my previous statement about the merger, along with one correction: Imacon did not provide all of the management team but only two out of three members, including the CEO.

I do not understand why my providing factual documentation to support my previous statements seems to annoy you.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147600\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No one has disputed that Hasselblad and Imacon merged. No one cares if you prove it because everyone knows it. You are the one promoting the weird concept that Hasselblad doesn't exist. Is this supposed to be your proof?

Your "factual documentation" fails to support your "previous statements" that really do annoy me. You won't provide any factual documentation becuase you can't. They're products of your imagination. Your posts make that transparent. You take one piece of general public knowledge, that Fuji manufactures some of the "H" components, and then extrapolate in your imagination things like "more a product of Fuji than of Hasselblad", "The body designs are largely or entirely by Fuj", "Fuji is paying most or all of the R&D costs". Your desire to, in some way, diminish Hasselblad as a company is transparent with gems like "there is no longer such a company as Hasselblad", "Hasselblad has not really designed a new product since the 500 series", "the so called "Hasselblad" H system" and made even more transparent by your insistence on separating Hasselblad and Imacon in your mind (and posts) despite the fact that they have been one single entity for three years–creating your own name for the company "Imacon-Hasselblad" or "Hasselblad-Imacon"  and repeatedly using it, combined with a strange inability to even think of them as working as a team. Oddly, you seem to be unable to bear simply using the name Hasselblad. Your emotions don't seem to allow it. Do you refer to "Cosmo Mamiya", "Scitex Creo Kodak Leaf", or "Jenoptik Sinar"?

You make claims to have knowledge of things that are not in the public domain. You claim to know which company provides funding on specific products. You claim to know whose engineers are doing what work. You apparently either don't believe that Hasselblad has an R&D department or believe their job is to figure out how to stick labels on things. Oh wait, you don't even believe Hasselblad exists anymore!

You know, I'm getting less annoyed and more bored by this nonsense.

Quote
I always had the impression he worked for Hasselblad !  Maybe that explains his rather over the top responses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147604\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have never worked for Hasselblad. You think that it is over the top to challenge someone's fantasies presented as fact?

I happen to like discussing facts. But if you prefer impressions, rumor, gossip and speculation–to each his own.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2007, 12:48:09 PM by TechTalk » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2196


WWW
« Reply #78 on: October 21, 2007, 12:48:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
there was a long post here about stuff i tought could be cool on/in the Hy6 (taking the stick from morgan_moore) that did not have much to do about this thread, sorry   

-axel
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147522\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The thread is the 'state of MF' not who owns hasselblad !

My assesment of the state of MF

Sinar is the best but in a bit of a muddle with some stuff and the communication/distribution of thier great product

Hassy have a limited system that is excellent in both technical and communication terms

Mamiya make a reasonable product that is a bargain trouble is beig the same price ish as a blow away Canon kit they seem to fall into a strange place in the market

Phase grabbed a stronghold on backs and rental and supply and reputation that will last for a few years yet - thier future is less certain

All MFDB makers are threatened by the superb developments in the DSLR arena but there will always be a place for the greater quality that greater size will always bring

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5073


« Reply #79 on: October 21, 2007, 02:13:51 PM »
ReplyReply

I suppose there is little point debating then make since we agree on the main facts about the company being a merger of Imacon and Hasselblad. But abot the name:
Quote
... creating your own name for the company "Imacon-Hasselblad" or "Hasselblad-Imacon"  and repeatedly using it
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I did not create the name "Hasselblad Imacon"; they did. To quote a source I mentioned before, [a href=\"http://www.dpreview.com/news/0408/04081701hasselbladimacon.asp]http://www.dpreview.com/news/0408/04081701...lbladimacon.asp[/url]
Quote
The new company will be called Hasselblad Imacon ...
The Executive Team of the merged Hasselblad Imacon company ...
Though it is often called just "Hasselblad" for short. Then again, "Fujifilm" is often called "Fuji" for short!

And I hope it is clear that I am not basing everything that I said on just the few references that I have given, and that I am not claiming any knowledge not in the public domain. As I already said, my statements are my understanding, probably imperfect, of various public domain sources that I have read over the years, such as discussions of a development agreement between Hasselblad and Fuji that lead to both the Xpan and H products. I do not have all those sources at hand to quote in this discussion, any more than you are citing sources for all your statements, and it is surely not important enough a question for me to search out those references.

I am glad that we seem to agree that the other joint project, the Xpan, also with Fujinon lenses and also marketed under the Fujifilm brand in Japan but under the Hasselblad brand everywhere else, is primarily a Fujifilm product, even though my recollection is that there was little or no mention mention by Hasselblad of Fujifilm's leading role in that system, other than the obvious acknowledgment of the source of the lenses.

Quote
... a strange inability to even think of them as working as a team.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147635\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually my exact point is that the H system is the product of team, drawn from the resources of Fujifilm, Hasselblad and Imacon. I was originally answering a question about Fujifilm's financial support of the system. Perhaps the Imacon part of the team is now the major partner because it is the digital backs that generate the majority of the revenue for Hasselblad Imacon.

In fact my guess is that the combining of  technological and financial resources of these three companies has helped greatly to make the H system the dominant MF system of the digital era so far.

Quote
I happen to like discussing facts.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147635\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Me too, so I ask again, can you point to any sources corroborating your view of the situation? You have implied that all you say is based on information in the public domain.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2007, 02:14:40 PM by BJL » Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad