Why is Hasselblad so expensive!?

Curt said:

Status; there's some on the Moon that are free for the picking. When you think of status cameras what do you think of, Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Kodak, Mamiya, Bronica, Sears, Konica or do you think Hasselblad, Leica, Deardorff, Sony?

I wonder if the sellers think "it's a Hasse, it's got to be worth more, it's a Hasse". The parts aren't any simpler or complex than other brands but it's a Hasse.

Click to expand...

I'd put Nikon and Canon ahead of Sony in camera prestige - if you mean Sony for TVs, then yes. If you mean for audio equipment, there are a million and one brands who produce better audio gear than Sony, most of which have never been heard of outside the audiophile community. Status cameras would also have to include Linhof for analog, and for digital, I'd say BetterLight, Leaf and now Imacon/Hasselblad. But point made.

So where do we find a place for things like a DeGoldenBusch? Is it the photographic equivalent of a Zimmer?

MattKing said:

If the complaint here is that Hasselblads are too expensive because the company is making too much profit, I would ask why Hasselblad isn't in better financial shape. I just don't buy an argument that says Hasselblad could lower prices substantially, and the resulting increased sales would make up for the loss of margin per unit.

Click to expand...

Matt, No. That is not the point that I made. The point that I made was that Hasselblad chose big unit profits (high prices), over market share (with lower prices). It has nothing to do with quality. Look at them now $2k just for a film back! As they are shifting such low volume they have nowhere to go but pass costs onto customers. If they had a bigger market share, for which they would have offered products at lower prices at some point, they would not be in the mess there are in now. Just look at Cannon.

What the "Hasselblad and Leica, etc. are expensive because of quality and innovation" argument fails to explain is therefore how come they got caught out so massively when digital photography appeared on the scene? I mean if they were such a quality forward looking company that had to charge their customes mega bucks to maintain their lead how come they got left behind?. Sounds to me more like a top heavy company with no innovation, that just raise prices to stay afloat, rather than offering compelling innovatinve products that take the market by storm.

Wow, 13 pages and not one mention (unless I missed it somewhere) about the Swedish welfare state.
Not a little of the Hasselblad price goes to support one of the highest living standards in the world. Over 30% of the population works for the government, which provides "cradle to grave" services for its entire citizenry, from schools and social programs to pensions, health care, social services and senior care.
Want to live almost worry free? Lean Swedish and get a job in the Hasselblad plant.
I don't care for their equipment. I didn't like the 500C I had years ago: overpriced, fussy and not all that robust. I much prefer the Mamiya 645 Pro I have now. It's ergonomic, easy and fast to use, with excellent lenses. (But honestly, it sits in the closet. I shoot mostly 4X5 and 8X10.) Dean

Throw it away in 3.4 years...

A point that has only been touched on is the relative longevity of film based camera depending on their period of manufacture.

Sure, there is still "high end" equipment being made, but look at the bulk of medium format and 35mm production. My cameras are 30-40+ years old. They still perform the same as they did when they rolled off the assembly line. Built of metal and finely machined, they were pieces of mechanical and aesthetic quality.

This great new stuff is built of plastics and composites, filled with fragile electronics that if failure occurs, renders the camera just so much expensive junk. Light meter on my Yashica 124 quits? So what. Electrical shutter release on my Super Graphic bolixes up? Heck, I dont even know that it works...

Most "stuff" today is meant for us to consume. That means to "use up" so that we can consume more. I wonder how many film EOS or F100's will still be operable in 30 years...

Viva forever!

I just bought new A12 chrome back from official seller this week. Yes, it is not cheap. Also my 501 cm set was not, when I bought it only 2 years old.
But in some 10, 20, 30 or even 50 years, anyone could repair defect camera. I mean technicians, or maybe wrist-watch-repair guys....
What do You think: would be possible to buy new sensor or some spare parts for D200 in year 2027?
21 years since now...
...my NIKON EM, here on my desk is 21 years old. Serviced last month. In excellent condition now and for 21 next years...

Well, a good part of the reason for the cost of the Hassy 500 system is the entirely mechanical film transport and shutter. You can do this with asian electronics at much lower cost, but greatly reduced longevity and reliability. I've been in the field and fired an electronic shutter with no response. That's why I went back to good reliable mechanical cameras. I shoot medium and large format. I prefer no electronics controlling the camera function.

sjperry said:

Well, a good part of the reason for the cost of the Hassy 500 system is the entirely mechanical film transport and shutter. You can do this with asian electronics at much lower cost, but greatly reduced longevity and reliability. I've been in the field and fired an electronic shutter with no response. That's why I went back to good reliable mechanical cameras. I shoot medium and large format. I prefer no electronics controlling the camera function.

Click to expand...

I dont think so. Lots of brands sell mechanical cameras. Holga for instance. Electronics actually add to the price of kit, not reduce it.

Ok, this is the thread that just will not die! So, if any future generations happen upon this thread, I will just add one more MAJOR reason for why Hasselblad is so expensive. While most other Asian lens makers use statistical analysis and tests say every one lens per 100, thousand or whatever for quality control, Zeiss tests every single lens. Furthermore, Zeiss MTF charts are based on actual production lenses, not some theoretical best case scenerio. Hasselblad actually state in an early 90's product catalog that if any lens does not meet its MTF chart, they will replace it! Now, that sort of Manufacturing and Quality control is EXPENSIVE. With each camera being hand assembled by one person, each magazine insert being custom adjusted to each back(the reason for matching serial numbers) and the above, these cameras where never made like a mass produced product.