What's new
Medium Format Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

I wonder if this affects the CFV?

M.t.c.

I think it is reality that for Hasselblad the V systems is something from the past.
I would even agree with them as far as the needs for modern photography are concerned.

What we would like to see is some respect for a camera system that changed MF photography and was also responsable for giving Hasselblad its outstanding position in the world of professional photography.

The name Hasselblad and the typical design of any V series camera are known by more individuals than any other camera.
Whenever a professional camera is needed as props in a movie a Hasselblad V series camera will be used.

Try to imagine what would have become of the H series if that camera did not get the support of the name Hasselblad in marketing.

Without the succes of the V series starting with the 1600F camera in 1949 till the latest version of the 205FCC and the currently available 503CW there would not be any H series camera.
 
polypal said:
Try to imagine what would have become of the H series if that camera did not get the support of the name Hasselblad in marketing.
Without the succes of the V series starting with the 1600F camera in 1949 till the latest version of the 205FCC and the currently available 503CW there would not be any H series camera.
Click to expand...

Hello Paul
Very well said . I can only agree to what you say , and the responsible managers at HASSELBLAD are hopefully aware of this as well .
Jürgen
 
The CFV is now 3 years old (CFV II is not so different) the price did not move so much. And second hand CFV are about 20% less expensive.

I regret not to have been one of the first to buy it 3 years ago. Numerical seams to move not so fast nowaday.

If no new digital back for Hasselblad-V till jully, I will watch on Phase one (P45 ?) or Leaf productions.
Even if Hasselblad decide to stop V, a new digital back should return cash in 2 or 3 years, the rest of the gear has no value. Hasselblad understand this as they sell digital H with free body and lens.
 
Back to the wheat

If Hasselblad hadn't bought Imacon (or was it the other way around?)a few years ago, I would understand Hasselblad decisions to push the H system and neglect the V.
With so many V cameras around still in perfect shape, Phase One is to my limited knowledge the winner here.
It beats me. Well beyond my comprehension.
Eduardo

blowupster said:
The CFV is now 3 years old (CFV II is not so different) the price did not move so much. And second hand CFV are about 20% less expensive.

I regret not to have been one of the first to buy it 3 years ago. Numerical seams to move not so fast nowaday.

If no new digital back for Hasselblad-V till jully, I will watch on Phase one (P45 ?) or Leaf productions.
Even if Hasselblad decide to stop V, a new digital back should return cash in 2 or 3 years, the rest of the gear has no value. Hasselblad understand this as they sell digital H with free body and lens.
Click to expand...
 
uaiomex said:
If Hasselblad hadn't bought Imacon (or was it the other way around?)a few years ago..........
Eduardo
Click to expand...


Hasselblad did not buy Imacon although it was presented like that.
The owner of Hasselblad the Shriro Group bought Imacon to give Hasselblad acces to digital technology.
Shriro decided to let Imacon management control Hasselblad after Imacon and Hasselblad were joined.
All Imacon products including their excellent scanners are marketed as Hasselblad items.
 
polypal said:
Hasselblad did not buy Imacon although it was presented like that.
The owner of Hasselblad the Shriro Group bought Imacon to give Hasselblad acces to digital technology.
Shriro decided to let Imacon management control Hasselblad after Imacon and Hasselblad were joined.
All Imacon products including their excellent scanners are marketed as Hasselblad items.
Click to expand...

Well, that kind of puts a crimp on what I was going to write. I was just about to say that I wished that Hasselblad didn't buy Imacon to begin with. They took away the "cheaper" lower end but still high quality models and left us with units that cost tens of thousands of dollars. I'm sure the quality of them are wonderful, but they're still very, very expensive.

Now that I know the real story, I still wish the same.
 
The real story is much longer but not something I think is suitable for this thread.

Victor Hasselblad made arrangements for Hasselblad AB to continue after his death.
Mr. Hasselblad sold a well organised financially healthy company to a Swedish investment group.
That was the beginning of an adventure for Hasselblad AB that Victor Hasselblad could not foresee.
 
polypal said:
Mr. Hasselblad sold a well organised financially healthy company to a Swedish investment group.
Click to expand...

I think this was the mistake right here. An investment group is ultimately interested primarily in money, not photography. Finding the proper person or perhaps leaving the company in the hands of management would IMO have resulted in better continuity, and not as with the current situation, the slaughtering of the V and the abandonment of the square.
 
Nobody could foresee what kind of storm would hit photography with the introduction of digital storage of images.

If my memory serves me well Victor Hasselblad sold Hasselblad AB at the end of the seventies.

The investment groups that followed the Swedish not only syphoned all money from Hasselblad AB but left the company with depths.
It is the Shriro group that rescued Hasselblad and gave it a future with the purchase of Imacon.
 
polypal said:
It is the Shriro group that rescued Hasselblad and gave it a future with the purchase of Imacon.
Click to expand...

So you're saying the purchase by Shriro basically saved Hasselblad because of Imacon? Sounds logical. It still doesn't make us feel any better that they basically dumped the V-series though.

Then again, what more could they have added to the V-series that the 503cw doesn't already have? In my opinion, the 203FE was the perfect electronic V-series camera, though I never used one because of the price. Are they still making the 503cw or is it out of production now?
 
As far as my most recent information goes the 503CW is still availble from Hasselblad.
Recent is last week in this case.
The body is made on demand in batches.

Even for Hasselblad camera production is a matter of economics.
Turn over of new V series bodies and lenses is slow.
That means the chances for any new developments like a new line of lenses are not likely to happen.
The biggest competition for Hasselblad V series comes from Hasselblad V series:
Used bodies and lenses seem to last forever.
Even lenses from the C series are still in demand and sell for prices that do not differ much from later CF lenses.
What other camera maker is struggling with competition they made over 25 years ago?
 
Thanks Carsten,

I knew I did not have to wait long for that name to crop up.

Leica buyers are for a large part collectors against buyers of older Hasselblads who actually use their cameras.
I guess there are more Hasselblad cameras from the V series used daily than Leicas although Leica production was about tenfold of that from Hasselblad.

Rare Leica cameras are models made in numbers Hasselblad could only dream of.
A rare Hasselblad from not so long ago is the 2003FCW.
The owner of two of those cameras has about 1/1000 of the total production.
In two years less than 2000 of the 2003FCW were made.
Compared with Leica you can still find a good 2003 FCW body for the price of a decent M3 Leica and I do not mean a black M 3.
A good excuse to start a Hasselblad collection?
 
See my point?

"Used bodies and lenses seem to last forever."
The money seems to be in selling digital backs these days. So expensive they are that make buying the most expensive glass an insignificant purchase.
So, if you manufacture digital backs and you own the technology as well as the brand and the know-how, how in the world would you neglect to produce a money-making digital back for the thousands and thousands of camera and lenses ALREADY THERE? These cameras will outlast your digital backs. Another chance to sell more backs.

Eduardo


polypal said:
As far as my most recent information goes the 503CW is still availble from Hasselblad.
Recent is last week in this case.
The body is made on demand in batches.

Even for Hasselblad camera production is a matter of economics.
Turn over of new V series bodies and lenses is slow.
That means the chances for any new developments like a new line of lenses are not likely to happen.
The biggest competition for Hasselblad V series comes from Hasselblad V series:
Used bodies and lenses seem to last forever.
Even lenses from the C series are still in demand and sell for prices that do not differ much from later CF lenses.
What other camera maker is struggling with competition they made over 25 years ago?
Click to expand...
 
polypal said:
Leica buyers are for a large part collectors against buyers of older Hasselblads who actually use their cameras.
I guess there are more Hasselblad cameras from the V series used daily than Leicas although Leica production was about tenfold of that from Hasselblad.
Click to expand...

Do you have some numbers on production? There is a great deal more traffic in the Leica forum than in any Hasselblad forum I have seen, and I mean people posting photos, and discussing the cameras, from the ancient IIIc right up to the MP, and of course, the M8. I have never seen any numbers which would invite such conclusions. In my experience, it is rather Hasselblad V cameras which sit around unused, often in dealers' dusty showcases, sadly. Leicas tend to find a home.

The Leica has a reputation for being bought by collectors, but when you examine the production numbers, the vast majority of the cameras produced were boring, non-collectible cameras, and only a few were collector's editions, which tended to be produced in runs from a couple to a few dozens, and in the rare case, a few hundred. The regular models were sold in the thousands, if not tens of thousands. Here is one fan-run site which attempts to document all the different models, including production run sizes: http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/Leica/

Anyway, they are both very fine cameras, and take excellent photos. The optics of both are top-notch, and in my humble opinion, their respective strengths and weaknesses complement each other nicely. I know many people who own both Leicas and Hasselblads. I have never quite understood why you appear so critical of the Leica?
 
+1
Just watch to the ones who answers often here: colectors !
There are more pictures here of 1000F or 1600F than pictures made with digital H.

Imposile fact to my mind: The probleme told here is that
1) there is to much second hand Hasselblad-V on the market with film back
2) "Old" Zeiss glasses are ready for digital chalenge
3) most of Hasselblad owner wand decent digital Back for them gears (not the 10 years old refurbished kodak 16Mpix) at an confortable price (9'999 $ ?) Tons of Hasselblad -V body and lenses wait a new start.
4) the actual owner of Hasselblad is a ...digital back producer in Denmark.

So what is the strategical way chosen ?

To manufacture expensive Japanes body and lense to give them free for new digital backs buyers !


--------------------------------------------------------------------
Few Leica colectors gave bad impression to public, but nowaday a great numer of Leica M8 are used every day.
 
Blowupster:

"There are more pictures here of 1000F or 1600F than pictures made with digital H."

Wrong: There are at least as many pictures made with H cameras!


"2) "Old" Zeiss glasses are ready for digital chalenge"

Wrong: Old Zeiss lenses although very good but do not meet digital standards.
Exceptions 120 CF/E/i and 100 mm Planar. The 40 mm IF is a "new" lens!

"4) the actual owner of Hasselblad is a ...digital back producer in Denmark."

Wrong: Imacon never owned Hasselblad.
It is true the owner of Hasselblad decided to let Imacon management control Hasselblad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top