Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Hasselblad Bankruptcy?  (Read 23435 times)
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1007



WWW
« Reply #80 on: May 27, 2009, 01:57:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: arashm
While we're at it; can I please also ask for a D3 style Hi-Res screen on the back, and a vertical grip?Huh
Am I asking for too much  
thanks
am

Not at all.  
Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
Kitty
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


WWW
« Reply #81 on: May 27, 2009, 02:09:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I believe Hasselblad H is one of the best system no doubt.
David, do you have shutter actuation life for H body?
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1007



WWW
« Reply #82 on: May 27, 2009, 02:15:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Kitty
I believe Hasselblad H is one of the best system no doubt.
David, do you have shutter actuation life for H body?

Thankyou!

100,000 is the recommended service check.
Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
wollom
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


« Reply #83 on: May 27, 2009, 04:46:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
This is a deeply irritating statement.  Do you think that all the people in Hasselblad (many who built the V system) went out of their way to build a camera that did not appeal to the modern working professional?  It is as Hasselblad as any other product that has left the factory.  We innovated at the start and we continue to innovate now.  Otherwise we would have fallen by the wayside like Contax, Bronica, Rollei etc etc..

David
David,  anyone knows that talking about "the modern working professional" as if it encompasses all photographers, is nonsense.  When the H series cameras first appeared some of us 'professionals' tried it and decided that if a medium format version of a 35mm camera was required the H might do; but a Pentax 67 was probably better.  

I've posted before on about the deficiencies of camera systems that required rotating the body of the camera for horizontals and verticals.  And until the introduction of the 28mm lens and the coming H60 'real' full frame back "the modern working professionals" haven't had the tools that old fashioned professionals had 30 years ago.

In the automotive world it's not uncommon for a chassis developed for one application to be adapted as a quick response to a change in demand. Then there's time to develop a purpose-designed platform.  The H isn't a bad camera; it's just nowhere near as good as it could be.

And as for Contax etc falling by the wayside; the brands maybe; the cameras? Perhaps it's time you got outside more...

Cheers

Wollom
Logged
Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #84 on: May 27, 2009, 04:49:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
Not at all.  

David,

Is this a hint or tease?
Logged
PeterA
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123


« Reply #85 on: May 27, 2009, 07:52:27 AM »
ReplyReply

David - keep smiling you are talking with fanatical eccentrics in the main..

I dont know if I am using different bodies made on Mars - but I shoot with 200 and 500 and H series blad bodies - the H series is by far ..I mean very very far a superior engineered body in every respect. My only gripe is that I have to maintain a 205TCC for fast focal work with F/FE/Cfe  series lenses - I want a focal plane H series body. Only other complaint is that I prefer a 6x6 world..sorry it is my dirty little secret - 645 is too 35mm for me - Anyone who prefers teh 200 or 500 series body cqan not be serious! - As for Cfi/CFe/ V mount lenses - thre is a Cf adaptor for the H series which allows thier use - so if you are silly enough to see a difference between Ziess and Fujiblad  - and dont need DAC or a genuine wide  or metadata ..well thats catered for as well - I know I use one ...LOL

did I mention that I would like a focal plane body ? hmm..( is ok - there adaptors to use my lovely F/FE lenses with Contax/Mamiya ) but seriously, I just feel dirty and cheap using anythign except a blad hahahahaha

Logged
georgl
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 140


« Reply #86 on: May 27, 2009, 10:07:41 AM »
ReplyReply

What I meant with "ordinary 645-system with central shutter" was that it is ordinary EXCEPT for the central shutter, I have no idea how reliable it is but I would prefer it to the gigantic, loud and vibration-prone fp-shutters anytime. I have no doubt that it is electronically controlled and therefore much more precise than the old mechanical Compur! But the electronics and the extra features of the H-system are not my problem, the integration of the whole system is well made and much better than the other 645-systems - propably a secret of it's success!? I'm not talking about all changes made in contrast to the old V-system, I'm not a traditionalist, it was a huge opportunity to change basic problems of this system. I'm talking about the unnecessary changes the fate of the skilled craftsmen in Göteborg and the result, especially in materials (outer plastic shell, the inner sheet-steel-construction of the viewfinder, buttons...). That was always the first thing anybody noticed when handling a Hasselblad 200/500 in comparison to any other system of the last decades - not only the feeling, but also the actual robustness after decades (yes, I've seen broken plastic-camera-shells myself and know about mechanical properties)! Modern plastics have many advantages but it's not the perfect choice for hq-camera-systems! No, the mechanical design/material/assembly isn't better than a Mamiya anymore, they can be lucky that Mamiya and the other (cheaper) MF-systems had so much trouble integrating digital technology - build-quality isn't an argument anymore for Hasselblad in favor of the others (like it was for 50 years)!

It's like the discussion about lenses, they're not actually bad (in fact, I find every comparison with 35mm-systems or 10MP-Leica ridiculous), they're just not as unique and designed/manufactured to the uppermost standards anymore - you can find the same properties and performance with Mamiya, too. But Hasselblad is the upper-end, if you're not satisfied with certain details of those >>10k$-systems, you're in trouble!

Maybe you're seeing it from an entirely different perspective, but I think diversity is important and we don't need another "me too", "works fine for most users" and it makes my heart bleed that a system like the Hy6 seems to disappear (not because of high-manufacturing costs or missing buyers!) and other big names become "exchangeable". I've seen it with other industries, they slip slowly into mediocracy, cut costs where consumers don't seem to bother. But after years of working this way, people start to realize what they lost - when it's already too late!
Logged
Nick_T
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 88


« Reply #87 on: May 27, 2009, 03:57:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: georgl
What I meant with "ordinary 645-system with central shutter" was that it is ordinary EXCEPT for the central shutter, I have no idea how reliable it is but I would prefer it to the gigantic, loud and vibration-prone fp-shutters anytime. I have no doubt that it is electronically controlled and therefore much more precise than the old mechanical Compur! But the electronics and the extra features of the H-system are not my problem, the integration of the whole system is well made and much better than the other 645-systems - propably a secret of it's success!? I'm not talking about all changes made in contrast to the old V-system, I'm not a traditionalist, it was a huge opportunity to change basic problems of this system. I'm talking about the unnecessary changes the fate of the skilled craftsmen in Göteborg and the result, especially in materials (outer plastic shell, the inner sheet-steel-construction of the viewfinder, buttons...). That was always the first thing anybody noticed when handling a Hasselblad 200/500 in comparison to any other system of the last decades - not only the feeling, but also the actual robustness after decades (yes, I've seen broken plastic-camera-shells myself and know about mechanical properties)! Modern plastics have many advantages but it's not the perfect choice for hq-camera-systems! No, the mechanical design/material/assembly isn't better than a Mamiya anymore, they can be lucky that Mamiya and the other (cheaper) MF-systems had so much trouble integrating digital technology - build-quality isn't an argument anymore for Hasselblad in favor of the others (like it was for 50 years)!
I'm sorry that some skilled craftsmen in Gothenburg lost their jobs. The reality was that Gothenburg was losing millions and millions of euros back then and it had to change.

Oh and lets put this to rest, the H body is not made of plastic, It's made of steel and alloys ie metal.

Quote
It's like the discussion about lenses, they're not actually bad (in fact, I find every comparison with 35mm-systems or 10MP-Leica ridiculous), they're just not as unique and designed/manufactured to the uppermost standards anymore -

"not actually bad" High praise indeed (not).

The fact is that the HC lenses either match or out-perform the Zeiss glass of old. That's a fact.

Nick-T
« Last Edit: May 27, 2009, 03:58:03 PM by Nick_T » Logged

Carsten W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 605



WWW
« Reply #88 on: May 27, 2009, 04:17:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nick_T
The fact is that the HC lenses either match or out-perform the Zeiss glass of old. That's a fact.

Perhaps in MTF charts and so on, yes, but there are still crowds of old photographer lamenting the loss of the Zeiss look. There is no way really to know what would happen if they were to offer Zeiss AF lenses side-by-side with the HC line. Maybe most people would stay, maybe most people would switch.
Logged

Carsten W - Recent Photos
paul_jones
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565


WWW
« Reply #89 on: May 27, 2009, 04:51:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nick_T
I'm sorry that some skilled craftsmen in Gothenburg lost their jobs. The reality was that Gothenburg was losing millions and millions of euros back then and it had to change.

Oh and lets put this to rest, the H body is not made of plastic, It's made of steel and alloys ie metal.



"not actually bad" High praise indeed (not).

The fact is that the HC lenses either match or out-perform the Zeiss glass of old. That's a fact.

Nick-T

while i dont like all the design aspects of the h1/2 etc, its streets ahead of an old clunker like the v system. also, i remember the v system being incredibly unreliable- there where always heaps in for repair and the the hassy dealer here.
ive always thought the whole love of the V-system was a well crafted marketing exercise.


paul
Logged

check my new website
http://www.paulrossjones.com
BobDavid
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1090


« Reply #90 on: May 27, 2009, 09:23:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Having migrated from a Mamiya AFD to a Hasselblad H2F I can say that the Hassey is in a completely different league. I've tested Mamiya glass against HC lenses. The 35mm Mamiya is a joke compared to the HC 35. The last iteration of the Mamiya 80 f/2.8 before the digital version is not up to the HC 80 in terms of contrast, color, and to a lesser extent, falloff. The latest version of the Mamiya 120 macro, prior to the D version, is an excellent performer, although it's manual focus while the HC 120 macro is auto focus. The Hassey viewfinder is bright, the Mamiya is not so bright. The option of using a waistlevel finder on the Hassey is a terrific option, especially for copystand work. The H cameras are highly customizeable/programmable. I've been impressed with Hasselblad's commitment to R&D in hardware and software. Customer support is excellent. In terms of price versus performance, Hasselblad is competitive. My biggest complaint is that if something goes wrong with the camera or back, it has to go to Denmark instead of somewhere in the U.S. That's a bummer...
Logged
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1007



WWW
« Reply #91 on: May 28, 2009, 12:18:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: wollom
And as for Contax etc falling by the wayside; the brands maybe; the cameras? Perhaps it's time you got outside more...

Cheers

Wollom

As much as I would like to be writing this from the comfort of Hasselblad's evil underground lair, I am actually on one of my 200 travel days outside the office, on this occasion in the Russian Federation meeting photographers.

I certainly agree that the H camera is not for everyone (you can't please all of the people all of the time I accept) but the 1000's of users who have invested in the system I believe are not stupid and would not have done so if it didn't serve their needs admirably and not just 'good enough'.

David



Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1007



WWW
« Reply #92 on: May 28, 2009, 12:26:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: georgl
I'm talking about the unnecessary changes the fate of the skilled craftsmen in Göteborg and the result, especially in materials (outer plastic shell, the inner sheet-steel-construction of the viewfinder, buttons...). That was always the first thing anybody noticed when handling a Hasselblad 200/500 in comparison to any other system of the last decades - not only the feeling, but also the actual robustness after decades (yes, I've seen broken plastic-camera-shells myself and know about mechanical properties)! Modern plastics have many advantages but it's not the perfect choice for hq-camera-systems!

It's like the discussion about lenses, they're not actually bad (in fact, I find every comparison with 35mm-systems or 10MP-Leica ridiculous), they're just not as unique and designed/manufactured to the uppermost standards anymore - you can find the same properties and performance with Mamiya, too. But Hasselblad is the upper-end, if you're not satisfied with certain details of those >>10k$-systems, you're in trouble!

Georgl,

I feel I am flogging a dead horse here and perhaps should not continue beating my head against a brick wall.  Anyway, if you are passionate about the engineers at Goteborg as you say then you do them a disservice by continuing to spread misinformation, which travels fast on the internet.

As stated earlier in this thread and about 1000 times myself, the H camera is built in the same way as the V system.  Alloy chassis with a steel casing.  No difference there.

As you confidently state 'fact' about Hasselblad lenses I assume you have taken a large selection with an H3D camera and corresponding lenses from other manufacturers and performed multiple tests and comparisons.  I would love to see the results.  Please post them.

The H lenses perform equally and in most cases better than their Zeiss counterparts.  But I am sure you saw that on your tests also?  Have you actually picked up an H lenses and examined its construction?  I don't believe you have as otherwise you would not draw this conclusion.

The 'unnecessary' changes were not so.  Unfortunate very much so.  But I would prefer Hasselblad to be in business for another 50 years, if not longer.

Best,


David

Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1007



WWW
« Reply #93 on: May 28, 2009, 12:30:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: carstenw
Perhaps in MTF charts and so on, yes, but there are still crowds of old photographer lamenting the loss of the Zeiss look. There is no way really to know what would happen if they were to offer Zeiss AF lenses side-by-side with the HC line. Maybe most people would stay, maybe most people would switch.

Crowds?  I am sorry Carsten but on my travels I of course meet the odd photographer who brings up the old Zeiss question which again is quickly laid to rest when they see reuslts for themselves.  But angry mobs of placard waving protesters just does not figure anymore.  If you can prove me wrong with a couple of images then please do so.

I actually saw some images two weeks ago shot with a Contax and a Hasselblad CF back.  I was really suprised how much CA I saw in the shots compared to my daily reference of HC lenses.

Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
David Grover / Phase One
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1007



WWW
« Reply #94 on: May 28, 2009, 12:31:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PeterA
David - keep smiling you are talking with fanatical eccentrics in the main..

I dont know if I am using different bodies made on Mars - but I shoot with 200 and 500 and H series blad bodies - the H series is by far ..I mean very very far a superior engineered body in every respect. My only gripe is that I have to maintain a 205TCC for fast focal work with F/FE/Cfe  series lenses - I want a focal plane H series body. Only other complaint is that I prefer a 6x6 world..sorry it is my dirty little secret - 645 is too 35mm for me - Anyone who prefers teh 200 or 500 series body cqan not be serious! - As for Cfi/CFe/ V mount lenses - thre is a Cf adaptor for the H series which allows thier use - so if you are silly enough to see a difference between Ziess and Fujiblad  - and dont need DAC or a genuine wide  or metadata ..well thats catered for as well - I know I use one ...LOL

did I mention that I would like a focal plane body ? hmm..( is ok - there adaptors to use my lovely F/FE lenses with Contax/Mamiya ) but seriously, I just feel dirty and cheap using anythign except a blad hahahahaha

In Phocus 1.2 there is a square crop option built in, so consider it solved.  


Logged

David Grover
Business Support and Development Manager, Software.
PeterA
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 123


« Reply #95 on: May 28, 2009, 01:45:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you David,
that was very funny.
Logged
Carsten W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 605



WWW
« Reply #96 on: May 28, 2009, 03:17:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
I actually saw some images two weeks ago shot with a Contax and a Hasselblad CF back.  I was really suprised how much CA I saw in the shots compared to my daily reference of HC lenses.

Which Contax lenses are you referring to?
Logged

Carsten W - Recent Photos
Carsten W
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 605



WWW
« Reply #97 on: May 28, 2009, 03:24:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
In seven years with Hasselblad I have never met a user who didn't buy because of the colour of the camera?

I note that you didn't answer the question. Every other camera is not black, some are grey, some have brown accents, and so on.

While I understand that the H3DII is almost certainly the best digital 645 camera ever built in almost every way, Hasselblad seems to have forgotten how to stroke photographer's egos. In a fact-based world, this is not serious, but a lot of the passion for Hasselblad is not there any more. People get excited about the excellence of the results, but not about the camera itself. The viewfinder, yes, but not the shell. I think Hasselblad needs to re-learn this. If you pick up a V camera, and then you pick up the H, there isn't the same feeling.

Marc (fotografz) showed how handsome the camera's basic shape is when he posted photos of his "black" H in the getdpi forums. The two-tone brown really is a nasty choice. I do have to admit to really liking the little H symbols in the rubber on the focusing ring of the lenses though. Clearly someone still gets it. You can build the best camera, or you can build a legend. The V camera was a legend. The H not so much. It is just a good tool.
Logged

Carsten W - Recent Photos
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2373


« Reply #98 on: May 28, 2009, 03:33:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
Crowds?  I am sorry Carsten but on my travels I of course meet the odd photographer who brings up the old Zeiss question which again is quickly laid to rest when they see reuslts for themselves.  But angry mobs of placard waving protesters just does not figure anymore.  If you can prove me wrong with a couple of images then please do so.

I actually saw some images two weeks ago shot with a Contax and a Hasselblad CF back.  I was really suprised how much CA I saw in the shots compared to my daily reference of HC lenses.

Everything has more CA than the HC lenses with DAC applied. I have not seen any lens that outperforms HC lenses in that area. I too once kept my CF lenses to use on the H but over 2 years ago I sold the whole lot and never looked back. The only ones I ever hear rambling about the CF lenses are either those that aren't using HC lenses or the ones that are in the early stage of using HC lenses.

With regard to looks and handling. I found the 500 having the ergonomics of a brick. The H is much better in handling but if anything I would like Hasselblad to have a close look at the D3 or D300 and see how that handles. The H doesn't fall as nicely in your hands as the Nikon. With the Nikon my right-hand thumb falls exactly in place and the body becomes part of my hand/arm. With the H there is no indent at the right places making me work much harder to hold the camera for longer periods of time. I much rather have them look at that than the colors to be frank. Or what about the contact for a remote release that in between the grip and the lens which can only be reached with Japanes  (read very small, long and sensitive) fingers? There is a dozen of things I can think of to make the H a much nicer camera, the color setup is not one of them.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 03:09:56 PM by Dustbak » Logged
wollom
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


« Reply #99 on: May 28, 2009, 04:26:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: David Grover / Hasselblad
...Hasselblad's evil underground lair...


David

The idea of a lair might be more plausible if the camera bodies were black!

But seriously, David, I'm glad you're prepared to duke it out here.  

While I've got your attention will you mention to the happy elves in the H labs that non-optional software cropping of the output of the 60mpx sensor when using HCD lenses throws away the great potential for panoramic or closer-to-square crops that use the maximum 'good' image circle and sensor real estate?  Ideally leave it up to the photographer to decide how much of the image circle is good enough; or or at least provide a smart cropping tool that allows any crop with a 60mm diagonal.

Wollom
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad