Tastefully done! I like it.
I think what happened was Hasselblad looked at Leica and said: we can do better. Leica creates special limited editions by changing a bit of paint, or adding a different type of leather or adding an engraving and then charging more for the product. Hasselblad said: well, let's let the customer decide which fopperies they want their camera built with. You want carbon fiber? you got it. Walrus tusk? no problem. Jewels? here you go.
People are willing to pay a premium for the red dot on a panasonic. What Hasselblad didn't realize that charging 3x to 5x the price over the Sony was too much of an insult to swallow.
Maybe this is like 'The Sixth Sense'..... 'we see dead product lines'.
Those tanks looked like beer kegs to keep the pilots happy.
For about the same price, you can get the Sony RX-1 which is FF. They are about the same size.
I'm excited about this lens and will add it within the next few months.
I don't understand all this negativity towards the D750. It looks like a wonderful mid-range FF camera. It is an evolutionary product. Kudos to Nikon!
I was hoping for the 'Tsar Nicholas Commemorative Edition' with an ermine pouch, Faberge' designed shutter button, and mahogany storage box.
mgatov: My concern, like many here, is the fact that a subscription service gives way too much control to Adobe. They can change their pricing structure on a whim. Introduce as low of a price as you need to so your competition can't weather the storm, and then ladle on the gravy with price increases when you are the last man standing. Isn't that what monopolies do?
I remember in the earlier days when Adobe charged $450 for a set of fonts. They are the definition of unbridled greed and I have no trust in them. I will stay with my purchased copy of Lightroom, thank you very much.
Did you understand what I said?
Kaj E: A small step in the right direction. The final solution is to start selling the software again instead of renting it.
Adobe would get their customers back.
Sandy, you are assuming that they wouldn't have more sales if it weren't just for rented software.
My concern, like many here, is the fact that a subscription service gives way too much control to Adobe. They can change their pricing structure on a whim. Introduce as low of a price as you need to so your competition can't weather the storm, and then ladle on the gravy with price increases when you are the last man standing. Isn't that what monopolies do?
I'm not sure this a bad thing. It sounds like Apple is giving away the next generation of Aperture and will be updating it for free.
Just when I thought Hasselblad couldn't do anything more to debase themselves......
And folks were kvetching about the price of the Sony RX-10...
There is a god in heaven and the universe is balanced again. Now all Hasselblad needs to do is put Luca Alexandrini into the unemployment line and they can put this episode of 'suckery' behind them.
The reality is that with the proliferation of cell phone cameras, there is always someone on the scene to take a picture... whether it is a natural disaster or an accident, or even a war. As long as there are people present, there will be pictures available.
I'm sure it will appeal to someone's 'Inner Fop.'
Size is an issue that impacts other concerns. I accept the smaller screen size because I want a smaller phone to carry around. Until someone comes out with a holographic or foldable display, we make our choices and live with the constraints. First and foremost... I want a phone... small, high quality, seamlessly integrated and rock solid. The iPhone 5s gives me all of that. The camera works well enough for me. If I need more, I'll carry the RX100 around. It was a good review and told me what I needed to know. Thank you.
This is a 'poor man's Hasselblad Lunar." It is an ergonomic shell wrapped around an NEX.
I am so embarrassed for them.