- Joined
- Jan 26, 2005
- Messages
- 205
- Format
- Medium Format
Satinsnow said:Another Pissing match..
I have no more time for you, if you can afford a Blad system, then have at it, if you can't then shoot what you can..
The camera don't make the image, you do, this is getting really old...
And please don't forget, my opinion has just as much meaning as your does..
Bye, bye, have a great eveing..
Dave
antielectrons said:Dave, clearly you need to sit down and take a deep breath. Nobody is having a "pissing match". I have never said I cannot afford a blad. In fact I have owned several in the past. I got rid of them and now own an SL66, which is not much cheaper....
antielectrons said:Yep, Louis Vuitton is definately overpirced! The Chinese knock out near identical replicas for peanuts. MacDonalds sell garbage. Hasselblad dont. That dosent mean they should be charging as much as they do. Quality and price go hand in hand up to a point. Hasselblad choose to keep their kit prices expensive.
avandesande said:I think that the law of diminishing returns is at work here. Squeezing that last 5% of 'trickness' or quality out of anything (car,watch, camera, wine) costs a disproportionate amount of money. Some people are willing to pay extra for that little bit of betterness.
The rest of us don't care or can't even tell the difference.
Again. To you. Don't buy it then.antielectrons said:Yep, Louis Vuitton is definately overpirced!
So now you're advocating that a fake is of acceptable quality. You're pretty inconsistent with your standards of quality.The Chinese knock out near identical replicas for peanuts.
I see you're not comprehending the analogy examples.MacDonalds sell garbage. Hasselblad dont. That dosent mean they should be charging as much as they do.
Whose point? Yours?Quality and price go hand in hand up to a point.
Yes, they do. That's their price for their quality. If you don't like their quality, don't buy it.Hasselblad choose to keep their kit prices expensive.
isaacc7 said:Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that the manufacturing of the "V" system had stopped and that only the the Fuji based "H" system was being made. I don't think that there's anything going on in Sweden any longer... I'll google a little and try to find out more...
Isaac
Satinsnow said:Okay, fine with me, I don't care..
The last two SL66's I owned were no where near the quality of the blads I had..
So be it, I really don't give a rip..
When it comes down to it, you and I have differing opinions, Shoot what you got.
Bye Antielectrons..
gr82bart said:Again. To you. Don't buy it then.
So now you're advocating that a fake is of acceptable quality. You're pretty inconsistent with your standards of quality.
I see you're not comprehending the analogy examples.
Whose point? Yours?
Yes, they do. That's their price for their quality. If you don't like their quality, don't buy it.
Art.
raucousimages said:Hasselblad's are machined by hand out of metal and some of the finest glass ever made. Not stamped tin and injection molded plastic. They last for years and along with Leica are the best supported camera systems in the world. If you want that quality you pay dearly for it, and yes part of that cost is the name. My Honda runs just fine but it is no comparison my Porsche and I know I paid a lot just for the name. I have a 501 and a SWC, I wont sell them. I hope to see my grandchildren using them. If you think I am an arrogant snob you are damn right. I have worked hard to be able to afford the best and I find that those people who complain about fine things don't own them. By the way Bronica never went to the moon.
JBrunner said:When my RZ got stolen MF was no longer my prime focus, but I found myself still wanting to shoot MF occasionally. I could not justify a Hasse or RZ for the little bit of MF shooting I still do.
So I got a Hasselbladski- a Kiev, a Hasse knock off from the Ukraine. I found it to be a capable camera for a good price and it satisfies my MF urges. It is also quirky, makes funny noises, and doesn't exactly fit together like maybe it should. It also smells funny. Sort of charming in its own way. At a glance it looks just like the "blad. It can take good pictures. It hasn't broken. Would I bet a job on it? No way.
Hasselblad is built for professional work. The kind of work where a camera breaking can cost far more that the repair. The kind of jobs where bodies are taken as a back up, despite the proven reliability of the gear. The rate on a just a few days can eat up a big hunk of the cost. Depreciation takes care of more. It is probably not the camera for a casual shooter on a budget. There are all kinds of cameras for almost any format and price range out there.
The market has born the price of Hasselbad equipment for a long time. If the market couldn't bear it, they would have disappeared long ago.
Now the market has changed. How they deal with it- time will tell.
david b said:In case someone out there owns the H1 or H2, the 16-32 film back for this camera has just gone from $1000 to $2000. That's correct....$2000 for a film back!!!
Don't believe me? Check B&H.
The 200 series is discontinued, the 500 series is not.arigram said:Hasselblad's V system catalog of 2006 includes the 501CM, the 503CW, their colored series,the 555ELD, the 203FE, the 205FCC, the 905SWC and all the past lenses, backs and accessories.
That's not an indication of anything as they also have printed an X catalog...
(reporter): Is it true that the V series cameras will be phased out as current inventory is depleted? Is it the end of the era at Hasselblad for pure mechanical cameras?
Jack S: No.
Id like to elaborate, but its kind of like answering Do you still beat your spouse?
I can only think of about 2 reasons we would stop building any product:
1) Our customers dont want it any more and stop buying it
2) We cant get the parts or components required to build it
I field lots of questions like this. My stock answer is that we are in the photography business. We will design, build and sell what we feel the market wants, so long as we can do so at a profit. We will then use a large percentage of these profits to design whatever the market wants next. That is what being a technology company is all about.
David J said:I shoot a Hasselblad 503cw and have a few film backs and a couple of lenses, (all purchased used, 'cept the polaroid back) but I don't think I can afford this system anymore. Prices for new equipment are insane. $425 for a proshade and $780 for a simple film back. How do they justify these prices? The technology is over forty years old. Heck, I can buy a Nikon D200 cutting edge digital camera for the price of two Hasselblad film backs.
David J said:PS: I take my film in to a commercial developer who, I found out, develops the film, then scans it into a computer, and then prints it on paper. Doesn't that defeat most of the reason for shooting film? Should I find someone who actually does it the old fashioned way? Would it matter?
raucousimages said:... My Honda runs just fine but it is no comparison my Porsche and I know I paid a lot just for the name...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?