Hasselblad responds to Lunar criticisms: Digital Photography Review

Will Hasselblad become to Sony what AMG is to Mercedes...???

An AMG version is usually 100% of the cost of the stock model - for that you get an extensive engine overhaul and remap, upgraded suspension wheels and tires, custom leather, carbon fibre and other interior tweaks, an exclusive paint job and a body kit.

Compared with the Lunar which for a 500% price premium you get ermm a body kit....!

Hasselblad Lunar or Lunacy?

http://leoedwardsphotography.com/hasselblad-lunar-or-hasselblad-lunacy/

0 upvotes

Be sure to specify your size and color for a complementary pair of Brunomagli's.

1 upvote

Remember that Hassleblad lenses have been Fuji's for some years now.

0 upvotes

When I first learned about a Hasselblad model going NEX so to speak, I first thought "eek", what a regression. Plus, the design isn't something which appeals me either, however that's just a personal thing.

HOWEVER: On a second thought I was thinking, WHEN Hasselblad starts developing lenses for the Lunar series, i.e. E-mount, which would be mountable and fully compatible on Sony's NEX cams, then this is a BIG YES and here we'd be taking good and serious partnership.

0 upvotes

Nevertheless it is good to see, that they finally did correct the misleading comparison of sensor sizes:

http://www.43rumors.com/also-hasselblad-cheats-on-the-micro-four-thirds-sensor-size/

here:

http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/index.php/main-specifications/cmos-sensor/

...at least a step into the right direction.

0 upvotes

Hassablowmey.

0 upvotes

I think its a cool looking camera! Nobody forces you people to go out and buy it, so what are you all bitching about? Ther is really no issue here!

0 upvotes

Cool looking? Yeah! Tastes differs.

BTW - I think HBLD made this camera to get some comments. So - why are you bitching about those comments coming? :)

Seriously - its the worst designed camera I ever gave seen. I would heave been less surprised if I had seen it at April 1.

It looks like a bath tub or a wash basin in a hotel.

And when you know it really is a pimped NEX7, then you wonder - whats the meaning of this joke?

3 upvotes

It seems Hasselblad must have got rid of their engineers and camera makers and just replaced them with some jewellers to make fancy skins for Sony cameras.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

2 upvotes

Indeed. They got rid of most of them in 1996, three takeovers ago. The new owners, UBS and CINVEN didn't take long to notice that there wasn't a single person among their existing staff who could design anything even remotely relevant to the day.

The thing was, those owners at least had (or brought in) some product planners capable of coming up with a tolerable survival plan, the rebranding of desirable Fuji products like TX and GX as xpan and the H system.

There's nothing wrong with that, Blad's roots are as a distribution company, actually making things isn't really their strength, and they never did as well at it as they did selling other people's stuff (truth often sounds like blasphemy, LOL)

Next owner, Shriro, also appeared to have some concept of helping Blad thrive, with the Imacon "merger".

It's just this latest owner, Ventiz, who started talking loud about leveraging the brand. We all knew something stupid was coming, we just didn't know it would be this epic.

8 upvotes

It does looked like that, I'd say it looked rather like American Chopper (or European chopper) Camera Edition.

You know why gun makers turns to nylon and other synthetics for the stock of their rifles... Because it won't warp when wet, and seeing wood on that BlingMaster-7 made me laugh. All they get is something more suited for trophy case than actually going out shooting.

PS: Blad-designer, you need to put two 2 carat D-FL grade diamond on those two dials to make the bling complete. Do we get GIA certificate for that as well?

0 upvotes

it still reminds me of April 1st ! All Fools Day.

0 upvotes

Why??? Just buy a NEX-7, with a CZ lens. Pay half and lose have your money and buy the Sony full frame.

0 upvotes

To Hasselblad: I've give you a $100 for it so I can keep it as a gag.

2 upvotes

Congrats on being the laughing stock of the photographic community! The camera is far more valuable as a joke than anything else. Well done!

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

I think this is one of the dumbest things I've seen as of late. There excuse for the price is building materials? Why build it out of something so expensive, when it's internals are going to be outdated in 3-5 years? With film that would have made sense, because you can use whatever film you like, even when they come out with a better process/whatever, but with digital your stuck with the sensor they gave you, and if you want better you've got to buy the whole camera again. Digital camera bodies are, in a way, disposable. It's the lenses and basic accessories that need to last. Not sure how they missed that.

1 upvote

It's A SONY People - A SONY!! Remember when Fuji & Leica were partners when Fuji had there Finepix 4700, and the Leica had the Digilux it was a Fuji electronics inside, Leica never made the model just the lens, and more people were buying the Fuji 4700 more than the Leica. So I say that since its been about 43 years since 1969 and Hasselblad went to the Moon, SONY Did not. Hassleblad was may for traditional Photography even their H series. Not Calling their Camera Lunar model... It's a SONY.. And for the record I still have the Fuji Finepix 4700 and still using it & it is NOT a 2.0pixel but a 4.0 Pixel..

0 upvotes

You should buy the new Fuji it's a SONY

0 upvotes

He can respond all he wants. It's still just a $1300 Nex 7 in a designer cover.

$6500?

Check the review http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Hasselblad-Lunar-First-Impressions-Review.htm

What a joke. This reminds me of when they were faltering during the infancy of the digital age and they responded by offering their standard cameras in yellow and red faux-leather coverings...

0 upvotes

Just realised why it is called the Lunar, one would have to be a Lunatic to buy one! What an unfortunate mistake!

2 upvotes

I think Luca named it after himself. Heck with Blad's history in the space program, an egomaniac got an opportunity to stamp his name on something, and he jumped at it.

2 upvotes

Forgive them Victor, they know not what they do!

1 upvote

Most maufacturers appear to be a little lost at the moment.

Technology is set to sweep their feature sets away leaving a world where the sensors are better than the lenses and most everything you really need can be had for a few hundred bucks, probably at Walmart. Good news for customers, bad news for formerly premium manufacturers like Hasselblad.

Sony seems to be the on-going winner having a firm grasp on the technology and the consumer marketing headspace.

0 upvotes

sony is not clearly the winner. Citations please? As far as I can tell, the Nex series does not have any significant market penetration compared to the rest of the mirrorless cameras and their UI is a disaster.

0 upvotes

I agree, there is no clear winner. However, Sony does seem to have made some significant in-roads into market share.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1042&message=42576530

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20120922_561587.html

1 upvote

The skin is like a credit default swap, expensive and without value. Destroying a good camera keeping the sensor heat in.

1 upvote

Here's a review:

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Hasselblad-Lunar-First-Impressions-Review.htm

2 upvotes

" I mean, you can just hold it for hours"

Excellent. Its worth a read.

0 upvotes

hehe i read it too

on e minus-side they say

1) its a 6500$ shell to a nex7
2) its 6500$
3) six. thousand. five. hundred. dollars.

0 upvotes

It's quite a feat for a designer to come up with a design that most people around the globe find grotesque. How did he do it, and how did it get approved? I get that Hassy is looking to milk the brand dry, but this design isn't going to cut it. It strikes me as a socialist's caricature of an ugly capitalist's taste.

1 upvote

Unfortunately, this series of cameras may be an admission that the present Hasselblad has no contribution to make any longer to the world of imaging, including in the area of technical services. Really, don't understand what Sony gains from this. As many have suggested, blend Sony technology with a Hasselblad heritage and technical services-give us a new digital camera format-designed for waist level viewing, square composition, using existing Hasselblad lenses (I think another OEM is already on that!), something.

2 upvotes

The Wikipedia page for the Hasselblad Lunar redirects to the Sony NEX-7.

As it should.

2 upvotes

Hasselblad, truly, had a lot of respect, then.

Sony too.

This endeavor at Photokina 2012 saw them wipe it all out, by their own making.

.

1 upvote

Yes and today I took a look at the page of the Lunar:

http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/index.php/main-specifications/cmos-sensor/

...and saw the comparison between sensor size they have made and found what is written here:

http://www.43rumors.com/also-hasselblad-cheats-on-the-micro-four-thirds-sensor-size/

Hasselblad is obviously cheating within the comparison, where they show a "MICRO Four Thirds sensor" (including the TM hint behind Thirds!) with not only too small size, but also a form factor far beyond 16:9 and no where near 4/3!

Sorry, but in my opinion there are no nice words left to describe what they have done this year...

...they seem to have even left the lunar orbit, but not in direction earth.

1 upvote

They missed a compact system camera in the Luca's price range, LOL. The Leica M has a sensor with over twice the area of the "Blad" APS sensor.

1 upvote

As a long time ago traditional Hasselblad owner and user, I'm affraid this new line is doomed to failure...
The goal with Hasselblad is the excellence to photography, not merely the luxe...

1 upvote

Have You seen the ugly comparison of sensor sizes on their Lunar page?

In my opinion it is obvious, that the marketing department has taken the lead and the poor people in the technic department, who formerly made the excellence for establishing the brand, are left behind.

A formerly big balloon now filled with nearly nothing and therefore brought outside the orbit of the earth to stay big...

1 upvote

"What we're doing is designing three cameras – a compact camera, a DSLR and a mirrorless – with the same style"

Ooh yay...cannot wait to see the rest of the range then.
Has there been any, ANY even mildly positive words about this travesty of a camera, anywhere at all?

2 upvotes

I knew the name Luca Alessandrini sounded familiar.

Isn't he the guy who "brand managed" Gitzo into their current straits? Remember the "basalt" (or "dirty fibeglass") tripod?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=10795245

I think that was one of his. How about the "Titanium Traveler", a $2500 limited edition?

If memory serves, he was also the mastermind behind Gitzo's plan to curtail all European manufacturing and outsource the entire product line to China (the move that accidentally created their competitor, Benro, AKA Induro).

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

6 upvotes

He also managed... De Longhi, the firm that makes kitchenware.

Now, his strategy of offering very little and increasing the price dramatically is sound; it's worked well for others and it would have worked well in this instance also if it wasn't for failure to camouflage the source camera and lens better. The comments in response to what he perceived as criticisms sealed the deal, making the launch a complete fiasco.

It's a shame for Hassy, really. The internet is full of "visionaries" and "artists" and "photographers" that are keenly interested in "images" and so on, and lots of these people have time, money, and gullibility. However I doubt Hassy will be able to capitalize on that this time round.

3 upvotes

Best numbers I have, about 2000.

The Luca should skyrocket that to at least 2003, maybe even 2005.

0 upvotes

Gentlemen, I was at the Photokina yesterday, Sunday 23rd. We were 5 Photoenthusiasts, friends altogether. We stumbled upon this Lunar prototype at Hasselblad's phenomenal stand - which by the way displayed a nice black Ferrari cabriolet in it's center - giving a hint about their target group I guess.

Whatever - an interrested customer approached the Hasselblad's representative standing right next to us and asked him "Why should I chose a Hasselblad over the original Sony?".

The Hasselblad's guy responded the following - hold your breath;
1. Well our camera is better looking than the Sony, since we added a fancy grip and fancy colours to it
2. If you buy it you will own a "real" Hasselblad
3. And you have to spend more money on this as for the Sony

I swear to God (and I have 4 witnesses with me) that this was the original response of the Hasselblad guy. If I was younger I would write *facepalm* to comment this :o).

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

7 upvotes

B the same token, more Porsches are sold with automatic than mnaual transmissions. Time change, brands change,

0 upvotes

Gentlemen, Hasselblad has obviously done painstaking research into the market they hope to exploit: the morally bankrupt, attention-starved wealthy. I'm sure they've spent plenty on demographic surveys and this design is in lockstep with their findings. I have been lucky enough to view the wealthy, both in captivity and their natural environment (I live in NYC where M9s, miniature dogs in fur coats, and a myriad other obscenely expensive accessories are paraded around without a moments reflection) and we're talking about the people who are responsible for keeping companies like this is business: http://www.vertu.com/ Whomever thinks that $60+K for a blinged-up nokia or $6K for a blinged-up NEX-7 in this age of unimaginable inequity obviously can't handle the responsibility of the wealth they possess. Companies are realizing this more and more and have no problem offering sparkly mediocrity at astounding prices knowing some grotesque will actually buy it. Viva bad taste! Olé!

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

7 upvotes

The one thing all these folks have in common? Their taxes are too high.

1 upvote

Yes, they are the same brand of self-absorbed fools that wear $2000 designer shoes. However, it certainly sounds like you're all for taking what they have from them simply because of their lack of perspective.

I still believe people should have the freedom to be wise or foolish.

There is no shortage of low-income, self-absorbed fools. They're just not as obvious in crowds.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Thanks for the responses - it's all just a sad state of affairs, really. I didn't mean to come across as judgmental of anyone for what they buy or desire. I'm no fan of price-gouging either, for the rich or poor. Some rich folks buy this stuff and some poor wish they had the money to buy it. It's just confounding to me that people can feel good about squandering small fortunes on such ephemera. But, hell, we all pick our poison. ;)

1 upvote

As an ultra-capable designer myself, I have to be professional about it and state that I don't like the look of the camera.

That said, despite the criticisms of the camera, it's good that Luca has responded to them, because it shows they are listening. Whether listening transforms into something people will buy is a different matter, but just in case it does, here are my main issues with the design.

First and foremost, the appearance of the lens needs to change because it's so clearly "NEX". Not only the styling of that lens, but the colour and material look totally out of place on that body. The body is curvy but the lens is hard-edged. This makes it look as if the designer didn't understand the importance of "following-through" .

The grip looks poorly implemented because visible edges give an impression of strength or weakness. Sticking a piece of wood over the grip is a bad idea. A better idea would be to make the whole grip out of wood - especially at the price.

0 upvotes

There is a big difference between a Leica Panasonic and a full blown Leica, not least being the asking price.

Hasselblad have chosen to ignore that distinction when changing the wrapper of a Sony Nex7, it will be interesting to see how the buying market reacts, not just the commentators.

0 upvotes

As a part of the market, I can tell You that I probably would have bought a NEX 7 if the handgrip where better suited for my hands...

...in particular the distance (ergonomics) between the handgrip and the lens.

Hasselblad may have solved this issue,
but for a price I surely wouldn't pay.
I would rather try to get a grip on Richard Franiec's designs:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/29/Richard-Franeic-Custom-Accessory-Grip-for-Nikon-1-V1

Not worse than Fuji's attempt for the XPro1 and far better than what Sigma showed with the wood brick.

0 upvotes

I think Hassleblad is pulling a less obvious stunt than Sigma with it's SD1 wood edition for 9999.- €:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/10/12/sigmasd1wood

...or Pentax with another gem in the segment of silly (marketing) walks:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=39577531

...and the Hustleblad may have a real good finish for about half the price of the wood edition...

...Hasselblad is not Pentax or Sigma.

-

If one is used to a design of a tool and can afford the price of a complementing device - why shouldn't one buy it?

It is nice to have the choice and the variety - be happy!

0 upvotes

In two years, BOTH Hasselblad and Sony will be bent over a table with their pants down around their ankles by the newest smartphone technology. They are BOTH going to circle the drain, and so will most of the professional photographers lambasting this abortion, when the next generation of smartphones, pursuant to Moore's Law, will magically turn its ignorant and untrained holder into an unsuspecting Bresson shooting a Leica.

In a $39.95 phone with a two-year contract extension.

Frankly, I will be surprised if Nikon and Canon will be around in ten years, given the exploding capabilities of the smartphone, or ANY professional photographer, for that matter.

What Hasselblad is doing here is a thinly-disguised act of desperation. The writing is on the well. Hasselblad should be congratulated for seeing, albeit at the last moment.

1 upvote

I'll start holding my breath now...

1 upvote

You're forgetting something. Most pros are not hired for their cameras but for what they can do with their cameras. The technology may change but the pros will remain.

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting

4 upvotes

Oh yeah. A shiny slab of slippeyr glass with no grip, no buttons or tactile controls whatsoever, and a lens the size of a bugs eyeball.
Of course.

3 upvotes

But then of course when this physical thing previously known as a "camera" is seemlessly implanted in our eyes with an implanted on-board power supply and massive computing power now available at the instant thought in our new hybridized human form factors, then both "smartphones" and "cameras" will be remembered as quaint artifacts as obsolete and queer as a rotary telephone.

Singularity, i.e. the blurring and erasing of the boundaries between "human" and "technology" is officially here. Leica and Hasselblad are now in the business of installing sequins on buggy whips, in a hopelessly doomed attempt to stay relevant as they are being vigorously overran and overwhelmed by the latest dazzling technology. Nothing that Hasselblad could possibly build, given this technological revolution, could possibly be any better than tomorrow's cheap Sony. Therefore, the medium itself can only become an elaborate and sequined art piece.

0 upvotes

I agree that the ubiquity of cameras in smart devices means everyman is a "photographer." But I have a slightly different take on what path that may lead us down. In the 1930s/40s people thought TV and radio coverage of sports (baseball in particular) would kill in-stadium ticket sales. It did the opposite. It created new fans. I hope smart phone cameras will do the same: build an appreciation for photography and increase market size, But that will only happen if the Nikons/Cannons of the world are able to create devices with the significant performance differentiation from in-devices. That has yet to be seen.

If they fail, we'll be in a different paradigm. Cameras will go in the direction of wristwatches, future relics favored by the old, fashion-conscious or the artiste' set ("e" added for affectation).

0 upvotes

Even the carefully-designed really retro-shape of current DSLRs is dictated by what film cameras needed to load and unload film, and not the actual needs of the form factor of digital. So Hasselblad's and Leica's embarrassing "covering-the-microprocessor-with-endangered-animal-skin-and-imported-exotic-wood" is a cynical ploy that they have correctly guessed will appeal to the bigotry and superstitions of the hidebound, moss-backed professional photographers.

This strongly indicates that the profession itself is doomed and an endangered species. You are ALL going to be out of a job in five years!

This open hostility to smartphones and facebook and the various new generation of photographic techniques is exactly the death rattle that professional print journalists were making before THEY became obsolete and virtually extinct a few years back.

0 upvotes

You're still only talking about technology. These changes are not going to spell the end of professional photography. No client has ever asked me what camera i use. They hire me because they know i'll get the job done. The 'job' usually involves organisation, schedules, budgets, travel, lighting, assistants, art directors, stylists... The camera, in whatever form it may take in the future, is not going to get the job done on its own.

Every home may have a microwave oven and everyone can warm up a frozen meal in five minutes, but the world still needs professional chefs.

1 upvote

I think back to late in the film era when the Contax G was launched. It was an expensive, beautifully designed, real camera with fantastic lenses. It was a luxury item, but one of value and good taste and for a time there was quite a cachet to it with Hollywood folks, etc. walking around with them. Many celebrities in the film era were ardent photographers and rolled out their Leicas, Nikon RF, Rollefilex, etc. because they wanted the best, not the busiest.

2 upvotes

I have one of the Contax G2s, but unfortunately its imaging quality is really no better than a $100 Costco Panasonic point and shoot with a "Leica" lens. As I wrote previously, the new wave of technology is simply going to destroy the world of professional photography with a tsunami of technological brilliance that will easily surpass the original digital revolution that killed film.

1 upvote

@BiggerDiggler:
I don't really care if digital consumer sensors will kill professional digital cameras in the future. I'll still keep my film cameras.
If you are not satisfied with the images produced by your Contax G2s maybe you should give me your Contax, I'll make sure to use it like it was meant to be used, and you can keep your cheap Costco Panasonic point and shoot. :)
BTW, the issue is not how revolutionary the technology is or how great the image quality of the sensor is. The issue is using an image to express a feeling and to make a statement. In this digital craze, people forget that an image is not all about resolution, pixels, or latitude.

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting

5 upvotes

I agree with mbpm photography is an art that is expressed by the individual user not the equipment.

2 upvotes

Some of these arguments against my position might make sense, were it not for many (Kurzwell especially) who argue that technological singularity is right around the corner. Where technology becomes smarter and better in all ways that mere human intelligence. I submit there is going to be a technology that will create superior art, too. I see what Hasselblad and Leica have done recently with their designer cameras as a rear-guard, retroactive attempt at a counter revolution, that is doomed to fail. They are trying to keep themselves relevant and viable in the marketplace as they have literally been overran by recent technological revolutions, which only gets cheaper and more profoundly competent by the second.

Kurzwell would probably argue that a physical thing called a "camera" will no longer be necessary in ten years, nor will a thing called a "smartphone." We will become technological hybrids with high-tech implants that will supplant all of our existing form factors.

0 upvotes

BiggerDiggler, no one is arguing against your position however laughable and far-fetched your opinion could actually sound. The core of your statement is actually very true, technology is advancing quickly and is becoming smarter and better, but there's a fallacy in your reasoning thereof. technology and science is ruled by laws that bind them, and therefore it is a finite element or tool, technology can advance only to a certain point. Whereas an idea is substantially connotative, and therefore it is infinite. It is not bound by any rules or laws, rather, it is subjective and expressive.
So, how can you submit a reason that superior technology will create superior art? when the main value of art is to express an idea.
ie: "View from the Window at Le Gras," is true art, and it is by no means better or inferior than the various arts made in the modern age. It does however hold a great historical value.

Now go shoot your Contax G2s before I hurl a lettuce at you, Dr. Kurzwell says so.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

"and therefore it is a finite element or tool, technology can advance only to a certain point."

"So, how can you submit a reason that superior technology will create superior art? when the main value of art is to express an idea."

Kurzwell argues that at the point where intelligence becomes truly artificial (i.e. "singularity"), all bets are off. All present notions of limitations of time and space are suddenly extinct at that point. And at the present speed of technological revolution, he has revised his predicted date for singularity from 20 years away to less than five. And that was last year! Who knows what it will be revised down to this year.

And I WILL be shooting my Contax G2 this week, thank you very much and get this: A freind is certain that he found an genuine Alexander Calder mobile at a thrift store. But in order to get a documented opinion, they need series of Fuji CHROME shots (which of course cannot be manipulated) of the piece before they will generate an opinion.

0 upvotes

lol, watch, 20 years from know you will be amazed that technology will not reach a "singularity." In fact, some people would still be using their Iphone 5 as a collectors item, and photographers would still be using their film cameras, and some would still be using their Tintypes and Daguerreotypes just like they had used it a hundred years ago and still are using it today.
I remember at the turn of the century, in the year 2,000, people thought that technology would be so advance that cars would be completely automated. But, I am still driving my '86 Toyota Corolla and the new cars today sure aren't automated.
Look, I agree with you that we have the capacity to achieve a technological revolution or "singularity" if you will. But, it's not going to happen anytime soon because of three BIG factors:
Culture: the majority of population needs to accept and be accustomed with the advance of technology. Some culture repress the people from this like North Korea, Algeria, Bahrain, Burma.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Secondly, competition: we need to have a more diverse, urgent and competitive mindset in technological advances. The only reason why the USA sent men in the moon was because we were competing against the Soviets. The only reason why USA created the atomic boom was because we thought that the Germans were ahead of us.
Thirdly and most importantly! The economy. In other words, the values and prices of products with the most advance technology. Everything needs to be cheaper! What good will serve a company to produce the most expensive technological wonder if only a few people can afford it? Cost for production would be higher than the revenue, and that's a big loss. That's why we are still stuck in the past. This Hasselbald is NOT revolutionary and it is uber expensive! Which goes to show us that true revolutionary technology is definitely not cheap enough for mass production. And the economy still not good enough to help people afford the bling.
All three factors are crucial.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

1 upvote

But on a lighter note, I am happy that your friend found an genuine Alexander Calder mobile at a thrift store. He is truly a lucky guy.
And I am glad you will enjoy shooting your Contax. I shall reserve my lettuce for a latter occasion, I'll provably make a Romaine Salad or something.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

edit. accidental double post

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

The one thing which really makes me angry about this project (apart from the choice of sensor technology ) is not its look (which I personally like) nor is the choice of materials (I will always prefer wood and metal from plastic and rubber - call me old fashioned ...well I even have a hammer with a wooden handle:)) its the fact that in my mind Hassy had missed the opportunity to put inside truly multi aspect SQUARE sensor. If they had put something slightly oversized say 24X24mm (aka Pana LX7 ) it could have utilized the whole surface of the lens - corner to corner- at any given ratio. This could have been one area where they could really separate themselves from Sony or even other makers for that matter. Not to mention that camera with square sensor would really bring memories of the one used by Neill Armstrong!

0 upvotes

There is one point you missed there, the Sony sensor isn't square.

0 upvotes

But surely they could have order special line even if it meant they would have to pay 300% more for each sensor ! 6K camera surely could cover the extra cost !

0 upvotes

But then again they would have needed to ask Sony to build them a completely new camera to be able to fit that square in. Hasslebad itself didn't want to do anything else but to glue some skin on the camera, make some ugly changes to the camera, and charge 6 times more for it.

3 upvotes

The sensor would be only 0,5-1mm wider and only 8mm higher! So I'm sure they could find the way , especially since in these cameras there is not even sensor shift stabilization!

0 upvotes

Some of the designs are fine, and what some segments of the market want. I'm sure the market will sort them out. And NEX-7 is a good camera to base a product on, even if actually bettered by NEX-6 in Sony's own lineup.

1 upvote

If this is what 'blad thinks is the best way to stay in business... It would have been more honourable to pay off their staff and close the doors.

7 upvotes

They did that a couple of times. They laid off essentially the entire engineering staff with one ownership change, and farmed out all design and production of new cameras to Fuji. Attrition continued until they had to close the doors of their award winning headquarters building. All that's really left is a sales and brand management team. Perfect for Ventiz, that's what they do. They do a 645 whenever Fuji updates the G, and the rest of the time, they order the G in Ferrari red or have it built in a stainless steel limited edition. Believe it to not, Lunar is a direct consequence of their current business model, branding without sense or taste.

6 upvotes

"All that's really left is a sales and brand management team. "

Not for long. A company that's managed like this also d.e.s.e.r.v.e.s to die. What a pity, what a joke. Hope the greedy owners lose all their venture capital.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

I'd buy it if the hand grip was made of lunar rock. Now, you'd think with H's past involvement with NASA that they'd be able to get some from them? At the very least, a hand grip made from solid gold covered with grains of lunar soil.

2 upvotes

How about a Frank Zappa special edition made entirely from Cosmic Debris?

3 upvotes

To all the shrill voices on this thread: You are missing the point. This camera is emphatically NOT built for you! Their target customer is Missy an Trevor, the purchase of which will setback maybe a small part of an hours interest on their trust fund. They will buy it not based on technical prowess, but because it matches so nicely with the teak deck of their sloop "Serendipity"!

I wish the Hasselblad corporation the best of luck with their new lineup, if for nothing more than the history that they did build the cameras used on the moon, for goodness sakes!

1 upvote

Right said. I too think Hasselblad should have not done that sort of "repackaging" but if it's really necessary for some reasons we don't know, the better would have been to create a second-brand in order not to crash the image of the so-serious Hasselblad which is in itself sort of a climax in term of photography.

That said, I won't buy that camera and that's not a reason to give it a kick a sooth my weekly stress as too many of us here did again and again.

Hey, you, don't you have some (good ?) photographs to take with your own gear instead of barking from block to block ?

0 upvotes

WilliamJ@ Your comments make no sense. By the way, where are your photos?

1 upvote

If you have found my comments didn't make sense, it's probably time for you to go back to school.

By the way, one who has just made an answer to "All I want is a digital X-pan. Is it really that hard." by saying "Easy, just add a vibrator." just has nothing to demand to anybody. Understood ?

0 upvotes

@Five Piece, you are missing the point that no one is denying that Blad is aiming the Lunar squarely at the conspicuous consumption crowd. We're just saying that this will hurt Blad, just like it hurt Leica. They lost over 70% of their business in 3 years of Hermes ownership. The new owners turned them around by making a camera that, while still a luxury item and status symbol, also appealed to people who might actually want to take a picture with the thing.

Leica, at least, makes their lizard skinned or jeweled special editions starting with their own camera. And when they do branding exercises, like the Panasonic stuff, they jack the price 20% and add some attractive "Leica styling". This is a 200% jack, for nothing.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

@WilliamJ, you missed why the new owners bought Blad in the first place, to leverage the brand name, or, in plain English, to milk it to death (which, I'm sure, they have a carefully designed schedule for).

A new brand would have simply been an unknown brand with an overpriced, ugly camera. It needed to be a Blad or a Gucci or something, to sell.

3 upvotes

@William, a company that comes out with BS like this is better of dead. A 1100$ camera, ruined, and you charge 6500$ for it. What a good idea.

0 upvotes

BillyJ just dont wants to get fired hehe

0 upvotes

If this had been a camera with a Gucci label instead of a Hasselblad label it probably would sell better and nobody would have minded. It is just the sort of thing one would expect if Gucci ever produced a camera.

1 upvote

It certainly uses more expensive materials, but, like the rosewood SD1, it adds nothing of value to the utility of the camera.

Leica can take a Panasonic camera, restyle it, and double the price. Bundle in Photoshop or something, extended warranty. It's a rip off in some sense, but not such an outrageous one. And taking the high resale value into account its not even such a bad deal.

E5000 for a pimped NEX7 on the other hand .... that's squarely limited to the "more money than sense" demographic of Russian oligarchs.

3 upvotes

"...squarely limited to the "more money than sense" demographic of Russian oligarchs."

The irony being that Hasselblads used to be 'square' and 'limited' in another sense.

I guess this is what we are left with when venture capitalists take over management. Depressing.

2 upvotes

I've wondered if a second defense/response to the response to Hasselblads announcement is coming.

I imagine "To those that don't believe us a second time, here's a third time"

or something like that.

C

2 upvotes

And when will you consider yourself satisfied ? When one will ask YOU mercy on his knees ? When one marketing man of Hasselblad will commit a suicide ? When Hasselblad will fire 14 persons ?

Are you one of these idiots who don't know when it's time to stop ?

1 upvote

so you ARE in the developement team of this camera haha

please tell me which drugs you took when designing it, i wanna enjoy the desing like you did while designing it hehe

0 upvotes

i dont know any article or any review were everyone agreed like how ugly the lunar is.

so many comments telling others how well they discribed the ugliness of this camera ihehe

and suddently it doesnt matter if you should nikon or canon, everything seems good compared to that hb, probably THAT is the mission of this camera.
from now on people will call it the photokina miracle, and we all where part of it :)

maybe they will make a family guy episode about this one day, that would be great haha

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

I've read hundreds of these comments and this is the best one. It really has brought us all together. Amazing.

0 upvotes

Stupid comments ! Stupid as hell from suckers who seem to have found the occasion to be the "brightest" in the lynching mob of the "today's victim". One can criticize when the motive is good and his judgment as fair as possible. But these comments, O! my God, you should be ashame of yourselves both of you.

1 upvote

"todays victim" haha

are you the desingner of this camera ? why so offended when someone (or a lot of people) thinks a desigstudy is ugly?

whats your point? i dont get it

lynching mob ? what are you talking about ? its about design?! who wants to lynch anyone here? they killed themself or do you think its better to shut up if someone shows you a design and askes you to tell if its nice or not. so my answer is hell no its b@&& ugly! because it is, cant you see that?

0 upvotes

So, what's NEX (t) - they must have thought at Hassleblad...

1 upvote

No - it's really a Hasselblad - that's why it still has a non-ISO compatible hotshoe...

0 upvotes

Those are not production cameras and Sony now has ISO hotshoe in their new cameras.

0 upvotes

Yes, Sony has to go back to the ISO hotshot, as the alpha hotshoe is now exclusive to Blad. With their sophisticated styling, incredible value for the money, and the power of that shoe, Hasselblad shall become a world power in photography again.

0 upvotes

Forge a relationship, but do something constructive with it. What can Hasselblad contribute to Sony, experience in medium format digital, technical support, etc.

1 upvote

Right. That must be sort of an experience in a view to collaborate further...

0 upvotes

Looks may not matter, but shall it come with a set of new Hassleblad lenses ?
Always look for cheap body with good lens not the other way around.
It would be nice that new lens can be mounted on NEX7.

2 upvotes

Excellent suggestion ! By doing that, the final camera would transcend the core of it which is a good-but-not-amazing camera. For sure, the result would be excellent !

0 upvotes

Hasselblad lenses? When did they ever make lenses?

1 upvote

The negative response is because it looks pig ugly, dressing it up with designer panels won't fool the discerning. Now if it looked great that would be another story.

5 upvotes

exactly, people are willing to pay 6k for a leica, people would spend 5k for a hasselblad, but not if it looks like @)&$;

0 upvotes

Ugly. Yes, it is.

0 upvotes

Well, I think most people here are forgetting that potential customers for this product don't even know what dpreview is. They don't follow this debate nor do they read any camera reviews. If they decide to buy any camera ( and to them most cameras are pretty equal as far as they are concerned ) they will only choose something which will match their lifestyle. So I don't think Hassy is going to loose sleep over these comments.I also don't think that pro photographers are going to dump their HD-4 just because Hassy has decided to diversify !

2 upvotes

do you have the impression that this discussion is aimed towards hasselblads customers? ^^

bamm ... thats something hehe

0 upvotes

zavart: Very true, what you said.
It is like the 78 year old guy who has - finally - enough money to afford a Porsche, but is hardly able to get into that car.... not to talk about driving it.

Still, the Porsche has some superior technology and some more than just design.

What I really find very disturbing is the fact that you might be right....and that'S a waste of the Hassy name and legacy - because they used to be... just tools

1 upvote

re Andreas-AM I'm afraid that You can not compare Hasselblad to Porsche! Until the digital revolution it was simply small esoteric company devoted to making high quality finely-machined camera bodies and nothing more. With the digital era came different requirements with which only The Big Boys with proper financial resources could adapt. Not even Minolta Yashica Contax or Zenza Bronica were able to deal with that challenge. Hassy knows that it can not rival other photo companies because it cannot produce the sheer volume necessary to do so. Especially since One of the Big Boys is soon going to open the robot operated plant. So the question is how to survive ?By making someting mass produced with no chance of winning or to rather concentrate on craftsmanship of the shell like in the old good days ! Making it in smaller number but at higher price! Only time will tell whether their strategy is going to pay off! In any case for my and Hassy's sake I wish them Good Luck!

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Anyone can google and everybody does it. Even the pimp-taste ones. Good luck, Hasselhoff!

0 upvotes

when the look wins against functionality, there's nothing more to say...
LOSERS!

2 upvotes


Behind the scenes of the Hasselblad H5D advertising campaign Mar 20, 2013	Sony and Hasselblad announce partnership with DSLR on the horizon Sep 18, 2012	Hasselblad announces 24MP Lunar - an 'ultimate luxury' mirrorless camera Sep 18, 2012	Hasselblad introduces H5D medium format camera series and 24mm F4.8 lens Sep 11, 2012

	Samsung NX2000 May 1, 2013
	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V Apr 24, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Apr 24, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Apr 24, 2013
	Ricoh GR Apr 17, 2013
	Samsung NX1100 Apr 11, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 Apr 9, 2013
	Fujifilm FinePix S8400W Mar 22, 2013
	Fujifilm FinePix XP200 Mar 22, 2013
	Canon EOS 100D (EOS Rebel SL1) Mar 21, 2013
	Canon EOS 700D (EOS Rebel T5i) Mar 21, 2013
	Canon PowerShot SX270 HS Mar 21, 2013
	Canon PowerShot SX280 HS Mar 21, 2013

Recommended Photoshop Alternatives?	99
Adobe is WRONG!	91
Are we fooling ourselves?	78
From first effort at street.	69
Not completely satisfied with my X100S	58
Sold my RX100 - this is why	55
All this Adobe flaming	53
M43 and DOF with a fast lens	48
Primes vs Zooms	47
24mp sensor for m43? 3.2micron pixel pitch!	45
When I increase the aperture my screen goes ...	42
Anybody out there who does not use Photoshop ...	42
A99 Short Film "Survival of the Fittest" Hi-ISO	41
Nikon 1 lens road map...anyone?	37
Alternative to Adobe software	35
Nikor 24-120 F4	33
Tempted by the price of the SAMYANG 14mm f2.8 ...	31
Colors in B/W!!!...	30
Who own the copyright and why?	30
X100s exposure inconsistency	28

Your email address:
Your name:

Hasselblad responds to Lunar criticisms

Comments