Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,999   Posts: 1,524,315   Online: 875
      
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 64
  1. #41
    Slixtiesix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    712
    Images
    21
    Personally, I would agree that Hasselblad should come out and sell some digital backs that will fit their 500 series and 200 series. Those suckers would sell damn quick. Actually, thinking out loud, if someone could produce digital "backs" that would fit old film cameras, you would have a pretty good product on your hands.
    My opinion too!

  2. #42
    omaha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    360
    Images
    5
    I don't think the problem is so much the structure of capitalism as it is that the nature and evolution of technology (specifically manufacturing technology) has largely eliminated the value of Hassy's historic core competencies.

    Which is a fancy way of saying that those things that they used to be uniquely good at are not so rare anymore. Lots of companies can produce precision components and assemblies these days. The ability to do so, in and of itself, is no longer sufficient to gain competitive advantage.

    What they are doing is not particularly irrational. If I owned a brand with the "premium" appeal of Hasselblad, I'd do the same thing: Cash in. Milk it. Sell over-priced, "prestige" products to every sucker who is willing to buy, knowing full well that each sell has the side-effect of diluting and diminishing the value of the brand.

    Its not particularly pleasant to watch, but it makes sense.

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Bruxelles, Belgium
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by omaha View Post
    I don't think the problem is so much the structure of capitalism as it is that the nature and evolution of technology (specifically manufacturing technology) has largely eliminated the value of Hassy's historic core competencies.

    Which is a fancy way of saying that those things that they used to be uniquely good at are not so rare anymore. Lots of companies can produce precision components and assemblies these days. The ability to do so, in and of itself, is no longer sufficient to gain competitive advantage.

    What they are doing is not particularly irrational. If I owned a brand with the "premium" appeal of Hasselblad, I'd do the same thing: Cash in. Milk it. Sell over-priced, "prestige" products to every sucker who is willing to buy, knowing full well that each sell has the side-effect of diluting and diminishing the value of the brand.

    Its not particularly pleasant to watch, but it makes sense.
    It only make "sense" if you are a vulture fund/equity. For all others - the company tradition and image, the workforce, and the society at large - that "sense" has huge negative impact. Human history would have been immeasurably poorer had it been driven by such anti-values.

  4. #44
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,587
    I wonder how many of those lipsticked-up pigs do they sell, anyway? Enough to make a strong difference on the bottom line? Enough to make it worth trading brand equity for? I just don't know. Maybe they sell well to the status-conscious newly affluent in China. If so, it looks like the Marxists got what they wanted- a classless society. That is, a society without class.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  5. #45
    omaha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    360
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by I.G.I. View Post
    It only make "sense" if you are a vulture fund/equity. For all others - the company tradition and image, the workforce, and the society at large - that "sense" has huge negative impact. Human history would have been immeasurably poorer had it been driven by such anti-values.
    Human history WAS driven by such values. Its just the way things are.

    A company is not a museum. It does not exist to satisfy our sense of nostalgia, or to perpetuate itself so we can enjoy an artificial sense of stability.

    The environment in which Hasselblad became the company we once admired no longer exists. No amount of wishing it were otherwise will bring it back (either the environment or the company).

    I can look at things like the abomination that was posted at the start of this thread and feel sad that it has come to this. But I don't blame the owners (either former or present) for doing what they can to maximize their value. Things like painting a camera red and then charging double for a "Ferrari Edition" is ridiculous to my taste, but if that's what people with more money than sense want to buy, then who am I to say Hassy shouldn't sell it to them? Same with grafting a wooden handle onto an otherwise unremarkable camera. If the suckers want to buy, that's what I'm selling.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    I wonder how many of those lipsticked-up pigs do they sell, anyway? Enough to make a strong difference on the bottom line? Enough to make it worth trading brand equity for? I just don't know. Maybe they sell well to the status-conscious newly affluent in China. If so, it looks like the Marxists got what they wanted- a classless society. That is, a society without class.

  7. #47
    analoguey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    445
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post

    The thing is, the heart of their market used to be pro photographers, and they've lost much of that market to the high-end DSLRs now; they have their business in big digital sensors priced out of any normal retail range, but even that must be a shrinking market, and it's one that's more vulnerable to commodification than the old film-camera market was. Complex mechanics done with stellar ergonomics have a certain intrinsic value, because they're hard to do together; but if you no longer need the mechanical complexity, the functional heart of your product (the CCD) is a commodity, and all you have to compete on is good ergonomics and a brand name, that's a tough freakin' situation.

    Sure, they probably should "target the large premium market in Asia". But with what kind of product? A high-dollar fancy camera that relies on glitz and status rather than special functionality? That's exactly what this disturbing product is supposed to be, I think.

    -NT
    Quite a few people buying the full-frame DSLRs are hardly professionals. As someone said above - Get them in with body design and stuff, then show difference w optics.

    But seriously, if other manufacturers can make a play without making red coloured super-expensive holgas, surely, hassie can innovate, and think beyond gimmicks.




    - via tapatalk.

  8. #48
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Leica is doing the exact same thing.

    Rich people and vapid consumers are to blame for this, as usual.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  9. #49
    rthomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by PtJudeRI View Post
    Actually, thinking out loud, if someone could produce digital "backs" that would fit old film cameras, you would have a pretty good product on your hands. No need for a preview or functions, just a download port. I'd grab one for my Nikons, no sweat.
    About 15 years ago, a company named Imagek (later known as Silicon Film) "announced" a drop-in digital device for use in 35mm SLR cameras. It never made it to market, and eventually become a classic example of vaporware. Here's a link to one article on dpreview; the company apparently no longer exists.

    Personally, I'm glad such a device didn't become a viable product.

  10. #50
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,257
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by rthomas View Post
    About 15 years ago, a company named Imagek (later known as Silicon Film) "announced" a drop-in digital device for use in 35mm SLR cameras. It never made it to market, and eventually become a classic example of vaporware. Here's a link to one article on dpreview; the company apparently no longer exists.

    Personally, I'm glad such a device didn't become a viable product.
    Well, say what you will, but I would love it if such a device became reality, so that I would never have to worry about being able to continue to use some of my favorite cameras when film is no longer available/affordable. I hope that this event horizon is beyond my lifetime, but it would be nice to have the alternative available should it happen sooner rather than later.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin