Why did Hasselblad move away from Carl Zeiss?

[Alan Edward Klein]

Does Sony simply license the Zeiss name?? I have no idea. Zeiss has been involved in pretty amazing stuff over the years.

I have a Sony RX100iv P&S camera. The lens says Zeiss on it. I assume Zeiss manufactured it for Sony. Whether they did or not is beside the point. Sony uses Zeiss. I think that's help them sell their cameras. I do have to say the photos for a 1" sensor is very good. They look great on my 75" 4K HDR TV (it's a Sony too. and make great prints. How much of that is because it's a Zeiss lens, I don't know. But I'm very happy with it.

 

[Mark J]

I'm certain that Zeiss design them, but less sure about the manufacture, given that they haven't made the 35mm gear on-site since the early 90's ( or before ), and I don't believe Cosina make any autofocus housings.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

The H-System ended in stagnation while the V-System was abandoned entirely

Good summary of the corporate ownerships. Hasselblad's official web page still shows the H system as a current product. One body even accepts a film back, they write. Do you have any information about the H becoming an orphan?

https://www.hasselblad.com/h-system/

(Please no debate that dig. "full frame" can do everything and only posers and rich dentists buy digital medium format.)

 

[Pieter12]

Good summary of the corporate ownerships. Hasselblad's official web page still shows the H system as a current product. One body even accepts a film back, they write. Do you have any information about the H becoming an orphan?

https://www.hasselblad.com/h-system/

(Please no debate that dig. "full frame" can do everything and only posers and rich dentists buy digital medium format.)

The H series digital cameras were developed in conjunction with Fuji. Hasselblad and Fuji have since parted ways and I don't believe you can purchase a new H6D anymore. The word is the H is dead and the X is the future of Hasselblad at the moment.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I just want to correct some rumors and half-truths circulating in this thread regarding the company history. In 2003 Hasselblad was bought by the Hong Kong based Shriro Group, which in the following years, pushed Hasselblad more into the direction of digital solutions by concentrating on the H-System and buying Imacon, but also keeping a core production line of the classic 500-System, while gradually abandoning the 200-System. By presenting various digital back solutions (CFV), the company emphasized its ongoing commitment to the V-System.

In 2011 Hasselblad again changed ownership when it was bought by the German investment group Ventizz. This is where the drama really stated to unfold. The H-System ended in stagnation while the V-System was abandoned entirely. Instead, Hasselblad presented a series of Hasselblad labelled Sony Cameras (Lunar etc.) for a hilarious price, without offering any additional benefits apart from more stylish looks.

In 2015 Hasselblad was gradually taken over by DJI. This ended the "Sonyblad"-era and the company developed a range of new innovative products. With the X-System, Hasselblad presented a new, compact but very capable medium format system. It also started to offer new digital backs for the V-System.

Thank you for this summary.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Good summary of the corporate ownerships. Hasselblad's official web page still shows the H system as a current product. One body even accepts a film back, they write. Do you have any information about the H becoming an orphan?

https://www.hasselblad.com/h-system/

(Please no debate that dig. "full frame" can do everything and only posers and rich dentists buy digital medium format.)

No hard facts, since am I not a business insider with any ties to the management, but the current H6D was released in early 2016 and since then, the H-System has seen hardly any progress. This is remarkable as Hasselblad used to introduce a new H-Model every 2-3 years. As Pieter also observed, Hasselblad is concentrating its marketing on the X-System and it has become apparent that the H-System may gradually and silently vanish from the product portfolio. Currently the shop does list the H6D as "sold out", but this may not necessarily mean "discontinued".

 

[itsdoable]

I just want to correct some rumors and half-truths circulating in this thread regarding the company history. In 2003 Hasselblad was bought by the Hong Kong based Shriro Group, which in the following years, pushed Hasselblad more into the direction of digital solutions by concentrating on the H-System and buying Imacon, but also keeping a core production line of the classic 500-System, while gradually abandoning the 200-System. By presenting various digital back solutions (CFV), the company emphasized its ongoing commitment to the V-System.

In 2011 Hasselblad again changed ownership when it was bought by the German investment group Ventizz. This is where the drama really stated to unfold. The H-System ended in stagnation while the V-System was abandoned entirely. Instead, Hasselblad presented a series of Hasselblad labelled Sony Cameras (Lunar etc.) for a hilarious price, without offering any additional benefits apart from more stylish looks.

In 2015 Hasselblad was gradually taken over by DJI. This ended the "Sonyblad"-era and the company developed a range of new innovative products. With the X-System, Hasselblad presented a new, compact but very capable medium format system. It also started to offer new digital backs for the V-System.

Some corrections to the corrections?

The IEEE article has a good summary of Hasselblad's digital and financial transition (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5986497/) , which GG12 was nice enough to link on post 41, as some people may not be able to access it.

But in summary:

1948 - 1st camera
1976 - sold to Swedish investment company Säfveån AB
1984 - bough by Swedish corporation Incentive AB
1985 - starts investment in Digital imaging
1996 - Sold to UBS Capital (Swiss) / Cinvan - ditches digital group and contracts with FujiFilm
2002 - Digital/Analog H-system
2005 - purchased by Shiro Group (Hong Kong), and purchases Imacon the next year
2011 - purchased by German equity group Ventizz
2015 - DJI becomes majority share holder

Up until 1995, Hasselblad was well capitalized, and had a healthy research project into Digital imaging with their Dixel 2000 well received and used by journalists. Incentive withdrew the capital and sold Hasselblad, so when UBS took over, it had no research budget. The new owners ditched the digital department and contracted with Fujifilm, and the rest was history.

Hasselblad was well down the H path before Shiro pick it up. However, Shiro did make it a closed system.

 

[Mark J]

Wow, that's interesting, thanks for that. No wonder there were difficulties between Zeiss and Hasselblad in '98. They were already working with Fuji.... It may be that the 300 I worked on was the last lens Zeiss designed for Hasselblad ?

 

[Slixtiesix]

Some corrections to the corrections?

The IEEE article has a good summary of Hasselblad's digital and financial transition (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5986497/) , which GG12 was nice enough to link on post 41, as some people may not be able to access it.

But in summary:

1948 - 1st camera
1976 - sold to Swedish investment company Säfveån AB
1984 - bough by Swedish corporation Incentive AB
1985 - starts investment in Digital imaging
1996 - Sold to UBS Capital (Swiss) / Cinvan - ditches digital group and contracts with FujiFilm
2002 - Digital/Analog H-system
2005 - purchased by Shiro Group (Hong Kong), and purchases Imacon the next year
2011 - purchased by German equity group Ventizz
2015 - DJI becomes majority share holder

Up until 1995, Hasselblad was well capitalized, and had a healthy research project into Digital imaging with their Dixel 2000 well received and used by journalists. Incentive withdrew the capital and sold Hasselblad, so when UBS took over, it had no research budget. The new owners ditched the digital department and contracted with Fujifilm, and the rest was history.

Hasselblad was well down the H path before Shiro pick it up. However, Shiro did make it a closed system.

Well, seems like 1996 was the year of destiny for Hasselblad.

 

[itsdoable]

Well, seems like 1996 was the year of destiny for Hasselblad.

Yes, and to the OP thread, it was UBS/Cinvan that decided to use FujiFilm, I believe Incentive was still using Zeiss. It was a business decision.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Well, seems like 1996 was the year of destiny for Hasselblad.

2007 to 2010 was the year of Hasselblad destiny since I bought up both of my Hasselblads and all the lenses at bargain prices for high quality equipment.

 

[Slixtiesix]

As 2008/2009 was also the time the last batch of 503CW bodies was manufactured, this is adding to the picture. Who was going to buy a new camera when the used market was flooded with high grade equipment at a fraction of the price.

 

[buildbot]

Zeiss also would not make auto-focus lenses.

Tangent, Zeiss did for Sinar in 2005ish:

https://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/consumer-products/downloads/historical-products/photography/sinar-zh/en/datasheet-zeiss-makro-planar-4120-zh-en.pdf

https://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/consumer-products/downloads/historical-products/photography/sinar-zh/en/datasheet-zeiss-planar-2880-zh-en.pdf

 

[asota]

...just came across this. I have nothing substantive to add other than to say, "What a thread!". Wow.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have owned Hasselblads since 2007 and the longer the company has been away from the Hasselblad family, the more lost it appears to be getting. I have been told that the company has taken to withholding 200 series and 2000 series parts for sales or repairs and making V Series repairs harder to obtain just because it can, not to any business reason.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I have owned Hasselblads since 2007 and the longer the company has been away from the Hasselblad family, the more lost it appears to be getting. I have been told that the company has taken to withholding 200 series and 2000 series parts for sales or repairs and making V Series repairs harder to obtain just because it can, not to any business reason.

Seriously,
I find it hard to believe what you have been told, but if you have proof I'll become a believer. What's your source? This sounds like something a repair person would say when they can't find a source for spare parts or doesn't want to make an effort to.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Seriously,
I find it hard to believe what you have been told, but if you have proof I'll become a believer. What's your source? This sounds like something a repair person would say when they can't find a source for spare parts or doesn't want to make an effort to.

The two Hasselblad repair people at Samy's Camera on Fairfax in Los Angeles.

 

[mshchem]

No one gives a hoot about parts except for the Camera Rescue folks. These guys have a lot of stuff that otherwise would have gone to the dump.
No one cares, except for us nuts.

 

[dave olson]

To understand you must first realize that Hasselblad has no ties to Sweden. A mainland Chinese company owns it. Look at the current bodies, and lenses, and see where they are made. The mystic that Hasselblad created for itself is gone. If you want a "real" Hasselblad you'll need to buy into the "V" system.

 

[RezaLoghme]

Doesnt that apply to a number of camera brands, e.g. by what is/was made by Cosina?
That is why Leica is now a monopolist in the top league analog sector.

 

[itsdoable]

To understand you must first realize that Hasselblad has no ties to Sweden....

 

[neilt3]

View attachment 373715

That can just mean they had a hand in assembly.
Maybe they get a semi assembled camera delivered from another country and just slap the top plate on with their badge ?
Ok , they probably do a bit more than that , but most of the components would be made abroad, and just a bit of assembly is required as the semi assembled components arrive from a variety if countries.

 

[JPD]

I have a Sony RX100iv P&S camera. The lens says Zeiss on it. I assume Zeiss manufactured it for Sony. Whether they did or not is beside the point. Sony uses Zeiss. I think that's help them sell their cameras. I do have to say the photos for a 1" sensor is very good. They look great on my 75" 4K HDR TV (it's a Sony too. and make great prints. How much of that is because it's a Zeiss lens, I don't know. But I'm very happy with it.

From the instruction manual for the Sony RX100 III:

ZEISS lens​

The camera is equipped with a ZEISS lens which is capable of reproducing sharp​

images with excellent contrast. The lens for the camera has been produced under a​

quality assurance system certified by ZEISS in accordance with the quality​

standards of ZEISS in Germany.​

It's a sharp short zoom lens, but not made in Germany, and they took some shortcuts since the raw images are heavily distorted that they need to be digitally manipulated to look good. The JPGs straight out of the camera look great, though. Good camera for the money.

 

[Sirius Glass]

To understand you must first realize that Hasselblad has no ties to Sweden. A mainland Chinese company owns it. Look at the current bodies, and lenses, and see where they are made. The mystic that Hasselblad created for itself is gone. If you want a "real" Hasselblad you'll need to buy into the "V" system.

That sums it up very well.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Why did Hasselblad move away from Carl Zeiss lenses for their new H-system? Was it because of AF technology? Or did Carl Zeiss refuse to manufacture the H lenses for Hasselblad? Did Fuji offer them a deal they could not refuse ..... ?

Just curious ....

according to a Carl Zeiss rep at Photokina, it was because Carl Zeiss was upset thatHasselblad went to Fuji for the H-system development, which meant they would get their lenses there too.