A Hasselblad camera is not a reward for having achieved a successful career. A Hasselblad camera is the tool with which you build your successful career to begin with.
There is never any time like the present to start building for the future. And if you think 35mm is good enough for this stage of your career, then you’d better hope that your clients are also willing to settle for “good enough”. The best clients, however, are almost never willing to settle for “good enough”. And why should they, when there are photographers out there who can provide the best? And providing the best is what Hasselblad and the new H5D are all about.
Even before actually giving you any news they go on about how you can't be taken seriously if you don't have a Hasselblad and that you with a 35mm are inadequate.
Excuse me if I break the news to you Hasselblad, but it's about the photographer and just about any high end camera of any format is more than adequate.
It looks like they are going after photographers before they know better.
Hey but we can all sleep at night because they now have a more durable eyecup. Improvement no 11 on their hardly impressive list.
• New compressed RAW files for faster and smoother workflow
• Even better focus correction with True Focus II
• Print-ready JPEG mode for quick preview and printing
• New Camera Configurator
• New improved grip surface
• Larger and more ergonomic buttons
• Larger, easier to read display style
• New menu and graphics design
• New programmable buttons
• New and improved weather sealing
• New, more durable eye cup
• New sensor unit safety lock
• New and faster processors for more rapid internal communication
• Support for new capture modes
• New and more accurate focus algorithms
• New motor drive algorithms
• New compressed RAW files for faster and smoother workflow
• Even better focus correction with True Focus II
• Print-ready JPEG mode for quick preview and printing
• New Camera Configurator
• New improved grip surface
• Larger and more ergonomic buttons
• Larger, easier to read display style
• New menu and graphics design
• New programmable buttons
• New and improved weather sealing
• New, more durable eye cup
• New sensor unit safety lock
• New and faster processors for more rapid internal communication
• Support for new capture modes
• New and more accurate focus algorithms
• New motor drive algorithms
So
a "Direct Print Button"
better handle
bigger buttons / display (current H4D users must be getting older, huh?
The early Sony and Nikon 24MP cameras were a shot across the bow. The strong medium format contenders in the $10k-$20k space put Hassy in a VERY dangerous place. And I am sorry (for them) to say that the D800 is ripping them a new one.
Yes, if you need ULTRA shallow DOF, going to MF is nice. If you absolutely, positively need to print wall-sized posters, the 40-80MP backs are where you need to be. But in the past 4 years, I think I've seen one SI swimsuit photographer shooting MF. I've not seen a MF camera on a common fashion shoot in forever. Lagerfeld is shooting his Hassy, but I doubt he paid for it. Peter Hurley is shooting a Hassy for his headshots, but he said they GAVE him one last year.
It is abundantly clear, that 24MP cameras are easily good enough to get 90% or more of the work done, and the 36MP D800 is an abundance of riches.
Karl Johnston
Posts: 7,234
Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada
SPV Photo wrote: Well sure, I think everyone would shoot with it! But would you pay $20K for it? (Or whatever they're going for)
If I was shooting for the best, consistently, and could justify it...hell yes. If I had the money sitting around, hell yeah. Hasselblad to me has an air of mystique, I've always wanted one. Is it practical? Well practicality is subjective.., it's general knowledge that just the camera doesn't make the image and blah blah blah. It's a luxury, every new camera body or lens is. Any car will get you from point A to point B but if that were absolute ..why would anyone buy a luxury car?
I think hassy has to stay in their luxurious position, if it goes for the general market like Nikon or Canon appeals to it will lose its the ability to invoke an audience with the element of luxury, allure, mystique, elite. It's all well and good that you and I know we can shoot with just anything but for the peace of mind of clients with high expectations it would likely be more reasonable to expect their contractor was working with equipment that could stand up to anything...but if you were shooting for big clients, consistently, and could justify it..I doubt you'd think twice about buying the best you could justify in order to keep them, if it were their requirement....even if you knew you could make do with something lesser.
if i had the funds and thought people would be impressed by it sure i'd buy one! but i don't know if it would be as responsive and fun to work with as my 5d mk II.
i experienced lust in my heart when they came out with that red version.
and how about more dynamic range rather than more megapixels? seems like the work needs to happen at the sensor.
Fred Greissing wrote: Here is the very first part of the announcement:
A Hasselblad camera is not a reward for having achieved a successful career. A Hasselblad camera is the tool with which you build your successful career to begin with.
There is never any time like the present to start building for the future. And if you think 35mm is good enough for this stage of your career, then you’d better hope that your clients are also willing to settle for “good enough”. The best clients, however, are almost never willing to settle for “good enough”. And why should they, when there are photographers out there who can provide the best? And providing the best is what Hasselblad and the new H5D are all about.
Even before actually giving you any news they go on about how you can't be taken seriously if you don't have a Hasselblad and that you with a 35mm are inadequate.
Excuse me if I break the news to you Hasselblad, but it's about the photographer and just about any high end camera of any format is more than adequate.
It looks like they are going after photographers before they know better.
Hey but we can all sleep at night because they now have a more durable eyecup. Improvement no 11 on their hardly impressive list.
Company's will say anything to sell their product.
twoharts wrote: if i had the funds and thought people would be impressed by it sure i'd buy one! but i don't know if it would be as responsive and fun to work with as my 5d mk II.
i experienced lust in my heart when they came out with that red version.
and how about more dynamic range rather than more megapixels? seems like the work needs to happen at the sensor.
PTFPhoto wrote: The early Sony and Nikon 24MP cameras were a shot across the bow. The strong medium format contenders in the $10k-$20k space put Hassy in a VERY dangerous place. And I am sorry (for them) to say that the D800 is ripping them a new one.
Yes, if you need ULTRA shallow DOF, going to MF is nice. If you absolutely, positively need to print wall-sized posters, the 40-80MP backs are where you need to be. But in the past 4 years, I think I've seen one SI swimsuit photographer shooting MF. I've not seen a MF camera on a common fashion shoot in forever. Lagerfeld is shooting his Hassy, but I doubt he paid for it. Peter Hurley is shooting a Hassy for his headshots, but he said they GAVE him one last year.
It is abundantly clear, that 24MP cameras are easily good enough to get 90% or more of the work done, and the 36MP D800 is an abundance of riches.
I know the Nikon fanboys are not going to like hearing this but I doubt Hassy gives 2 shits about the D800. Professionals know its not about MP and are not going to go running to Nikon just because they are shooting higher MP. Phase One and maybe even Pentax are more a concern for them and have been chasing them down for some time. The Phase One AF is worlds better and dynamic range is just as good for less money.
They are entirely different tools and anyone who can afford or justify a MDF setup will probably have a DSLR as well. If a client needs wide dynamic range and amazing color reproduction they use their Hassy (or rent one) but if a client needs fast action, low light, or weather proofing they may grab a D4.
AJScalzitti wrote: I know the Nikon fanboys are not going to like hearing this but I doubt Hassy gives 2 shits about the D800. Professionals know its not about MP and are not going to go running to Nikon just because they are shooting higher MP.
Tail wagging the dog. I don't think Hassy is particularly worried about losing CURRENT users to DSLR. That makes little sense for a current owner to dump their MF system, and move to DSLR unless their needs change. What I believe HAS happened is that users like me, who've toyed with the idea of moving to MF have much less incentive to do so.
I had fully expected to move to MF this year. Likely the Pentax or Mamiya. And fundamentally because I couldn't see paying $8k for the D4x, when I could spend a few more dollars and get into a larger sensor. I watched the videos, did the research, and had money in hand. Then the rumors of the D800 started to spread. And I told my friend that if Nikon put 24MP in the new camera I'd jump there and skip MF. The dynamic range is not significantly better from what I've seen between the Pentax/Mamiya and the D800. DOF is obviously different.
AJScalzitti wrote: Phase One and maybe even Pentax are more a concern for them and have been chasing them down for some time. The Phase One AF is worlds better and dynamic range is just as good for less money.
So I've heard.
AJScalzitti wrote: They are entirely different tools and anyone who can afford or justify a MDF setup will probably have a DSLR as well. If a client needs wide dynamic range and amazing color reproduction they use their Hassy (or rent one) but if a client needs fast action, low light, or weather proofing they may grab a D4.
Yes they are certainly different tools. The question for me, and I suspect many other 35mm shooters who had an itch to move to MF, is whether the compromises in the D800 are significant enough to warrant spending another $10k-$30k on a body, and another $10-20k in glass. If I was shooting full time for commercial clients and knew I'd make that money back quickly, I'd have still considered it. But for me at least the D800 answered my needs 100% based on what I am currently shooting.
None of those upgrades tell me anything about how it will take better pictures...I was recently completely insulted when I did a wedding with my Canon 5D Mark II and made the drastic mistake of not charging my batteries. I had to fall back My Canon 30D and using 17-40 F4L rather than 24-70 F2.8L.
I was shocked when most of the pictures they liked best were shot on the 30D not 5D mark II. I actually caught myself trying to explain to them why they should like the shots from the 5D2 better.
Point is clients may or may not notice the technical differences if you get the right shot.
AJScalzitti wrote: I know the Nikon fanboys are not going to like hearing this but I doubt Hassy gives 2 shits about the D800. Professionals know its not about MP and are not going to go running to Nikon just because they are shooting higher MP. Phase One and maybe even Pentax are more a concern for them and have been chasing them down for some time. The Phase One AF is worlds better and dynamic range is just as good for less money.
They are entirely different tools and anyone who can afford or justify a MDF setup will probably have a DSLR as well. If a client needs wide dynamic range and amazing color reproduction they use their Hassy (or rent one) but if a client needs fast action, low light, or weather proofing they may grab a D4.
I'm a professional that has been shooting for 30 years. Film and Digital from 8x10 film to 35mm and just about everything in between. I have owned Hasselblad and Phase One.
I have to say you are wrong about dynamic range and color sensitivity.
The Nikon due to a far more advanced sensor is better at both.
I'm no Nikon fan boy either. I had Canons until quite recently.
I can assure you that Hasselblad is worried about the D800 as well as other cameras both Nikon and Canon have coming out soon. Just look at the wording of their announcement....
Regarding the Phase One AF... I owned one. It was way over rated, cranky and unstable. It's basically based on the 645AF from many years ago. Don't recommend a Phase One 645AF to anyone.
Even the current 645DF body (that I also owned) has problems and many phase one owners dislike it.
Now that said I do like medium format, but find that today your better off with a combination of top of the line 35mm digital and medium format 6x8cm film than with 35mm digital and MFD. This is because the difference in look between MFD and top of the line 35mm digital has pretty much gone away. On the other hand larger MF film really has a different look, especially if you throw in 8x10 film..
That said if you are printing with a wide format high end inkjet to sizes of 40x60 inches and then looking at them close up then you will see a resolution difference with the advantage being with an 80MP IQ180.
See this comparisson... made by the owner of an iq180
Fred Greissing wrote: Here is the very first part of the announcement:
A Hasselblad camera is not a reward for having achieved a successful career. A Hasselblad camera is the tool with which you build your successful career to begin with.
There is never any time like the present to start building for the future. And if you think 35mm is good enough for this stage of your career, then you’d better hope that your clients are also willing to settle for “good enough”. The best clients, however, are almost never willing to settle for “good enough”. And why should they, when there are photographers out there who can provide the best? And providing the best is what Hasselblad and the new H5D are all about.
Even before actually giving you any news they go on about how you can't be taken seriously if you don't have a Hasselblad and that you with a 35mm are inadequate.
Excuse me if I break the news to you Hasselblad, but it's about the photographer and just about any high end camera of any format is more than adequate.
It looks like they are going after photographers before they know better.
Hey but we can all sleep at night because they now have a more durable eyecup. Improvement no 11 on their hardly impressive list.
In a sad, odd way, this ad sounds like a last gasp before the death knell. Their lead sales point isn't their photographic superiority, but that their name gives you a sales pitch of apparent superiority. It's like an old dame who claims men once fought to take her hand so you should value it now when she offers. On resolution, Leaf and Phase One have them beat (in single shot solutions, anyway). The D800 has better latitude and colors. What does Hasselblad have?
An expensive name.
And now a bunch of nifty new buttons and eye cups. Oh, and the ability to save JPG's. Wow, I'm so impressed. My iphone can't do that!
I use 35mm digital but I am not so blind as to not see the benefits of MF. If the same technology of the D800 is put into the next 645 sensor 3 times the size of 35mm then what will happen to all of those DXO charts?
I would like a Blad for the leaf shutter lenses with 1/800S sync speed and larger prints you can get from MF. Phase One may be better because it has both focal plane and leaf shutter that you can select as required, and the backs are more third party friendly.
The guys I know that have Blads and Phase One can easily justify the cost by the work they do. If you can't then not is the problem of the camera maker.
Pathetic launch, I'd say game over except for those who already have lenses.
Yet as soon as I can Nikon D800 welcomes me.
There are some times that the generous mpx backs can produce a better file for huge repros, yet how many frames are missed that might have been the exceptional ones? That is my case, always looking for the frame that is between expected frames. MF will not keep up there. The price is so far out of line that they are digging their own grave, now even closer to the point where they will be pushed live into the hole.
I have seen so many shit photos taken with Hasselblads - it's almost like people who don't know what they're doing try to make up for it by spending $40k on a camera and hoping it will somehow magically transform their photography....
And now Hasselblad seem to be admitting this is the case
When I got out of the Marines in the 90 I had been shooting 35 MM and decided to go medium format. I dabbled in the 645 range for a while. I was shooting wedding and really loved and still do love that part of the photography business. Several wedding photographers told me that if I was going to make a name for myself I needed a Hassey. I purchased a 500CM and began to shoot. Was not crazy about it so I put it on a shelf and purchase two RZ67 PRO II's. I used those until 2002 when I went digital.
SoCo n Lime
Posts: 3,202
Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
-B-R-U-N-E-S-C-I- wrote: I have seen so many shit photos taken with Hasselblads
on the flip side ive seen lots of amazing 16 bit file photographs created. enhancing and giving the user more options for presenting than a full frame or aps camera
i would have one any day
the money is worth the upgrade if you can afford it
the reason why people dont like them so much is cause they cant afford the price tag
it like the apple haters cause they see it as over priced machinery
Fred Greissing wrote: • New compressed RAW files for faster and smoother workflow
• Even better focus correction with True Focus II
• Print-ready JPEG mode for quick preview and printing
• New Camera Configurator
• New improved grip surface
• Larger and more ergonomic buttons
• Larger, easier to read display style
• New menu and graphics design
• New programmable buttons
• New and improved weather sealing
• New, more durable eye cup
• New sensor unit safety lock
• New and faster processors for more rapid internal communication
• Support for new capture modes
• New and more accurate focus algorithms
• New motor drive algorithms
Well, I have some sympathy for the poor copywriter who was given that stuff and had to try to make it sound attractive. Let's face it: few photographers in the last 60 years have ever bought a Hasselblad because of the features on the body. What matters is the lens and the film/sensor. What kind of ad should they run? "Admit it: you lust after our lenses and our (or some third party's) backs. And you're forced to buy one of these things to sit in between them to hold them in the right places, and we've come out with a new one, so please buy it!", or something?
SoCo n Lime wrote: on the flip side ive seen lots of amazing 16 bit file photographs created. enhancing and giving the user more options for presenting than a full frame or aps camera
Probably true. Shot well, they can deliver some amazing shots.
SoCo n Lime wrote: i would have one any day
Awesome. Still not sure if I'd want one or not.
SoCo n Lime wrote: the money is worth the upgrade if you can afford it
For YOU. Perhaps not for others. It's very difficult to attach "worth" in an abstract way. If someone is shooting HS senior portraits and offering $20 8x10s, it's REALLY hard to say a Hassy is worth it. Similarly to someone delivering only to the web.
SoCo n Lime wrote: the reason why people dont like them so much is cause they cant afford the price tag
Patently false. I could walk out of my office right now and buy one, and a slew of lenses if I chose to. But I don't choose to. Has zero to do with what I can afford. For me, the value isn't there.
SoCo n Lime wrote: it like the apple haters cause they see it as over priced machinery
Again, terribly presumptuous. I hate Apple as a company. But I have an iMac, MBP, iPhone, and iPad. Why? Because they are best of breed tools for me to run my business. I also have Dell, HP, and other gear because they are best of breed for what I need to do. Is Apple overpriced? Yea probably. Does that stop myself or others? No. There are many reasons to dislike Apple. Them having overpriced products is but one small reason.
LMAO...I can see how the "pretension" would erk' some people but it's not a new concept to marketing a product. Frankly I think Hassey had to put it that way to draw the battle lines between their stuff and the everyman's 35mm DSLR. If only Mamiya had the guts to do the same...
Real pro's find the products they need to get the job done, regardless of client perception. I've used my PhaseOne kit exactly 10 times over the past year, vs everyday for the Canon.
When I got out of the Marines in the 90 I had been shooting 35 MM and decided to go medium format. I dabbled in the 645 range for a while. I was shooting wedding and really loved and still do love that part of the photography business. Several wedding photographers told me that if I was going to make a name for myself I needed a Hassey. I purchased a 500CM and began to shoot. Was not crazy about it so I put it on a shelf and purchase two RZ67 PRO II's. I used those until 2002 when I went digital.
Funny how somethings never change.
I shot with the RZ for many years. Great camera, great format.
Shot two ad campaigns for L'Oreal with the RZ.
| 
| 
| edu