The photography industry is so drastically different today than it was just ten years ago that if you’re going to survive, you absolutely have to be dynamic and ready to adapt to the things quickly. You have to find your niche and go for it full force or risk failure. Hasselblad is doing this with their form-over-function Lunar and Stellar. Yet I’m left thinking… Hasselblad, I’m not certain you thought this latest set of moves through. I’m not certain you know what’s happening to your brand. I’m not certain this is where you need to be.
I think I can put myself in Hasselblad’s shoes pretty easily. Based on the moves they have made in the last year, I feel like I have a decent hold on what happened to get them to this point. Here is my guess:
- Due to the economic downturn, consumers started spending less money, especially on high-priced “luxury” items.
- Hasselblad saw a decrease in sales. Decrease enough, and for long enough, that they got worried. They reorganized their US distribution and partnered with Broncolor to try and stem the tide.
- Knowing this won’t be enough, Hasselblad decides to expand their market. But the only way to go was something far cheaper. Wanting to save their “high quality” brand status, they needed to keep prices higher, but not out of reach.
- Hasselblad partnered with Sony to save money on researching and developing their own cameras from scratch. To save even more money, their partnership only allowed them access to cameras that had been on the market for a certain amount of time.
So here we stand now, with Hasselblad’s access to older, but still petty good, Sony cameras. Put a little lipstick on them, and voila! Cheaper, smaller Hasselblad. Simple, effective and guaranteed to earn them lots of money.
Except I’m not convinced that any of that is true.
If Hasselblad had slightly more foresight and invested in their own R&D early on and produced 100% Hasselblad original compact cameras, I’m pretty sure we would all be singing a different tune today. But they didn’t. In fact, it’s painfully obvious how not original their cameras are. The image quality produced from a Hasselblad Stellar is absolutely no different than the original Sony RX100. By the time the Lunar hit the market, Sony already had a better version of the NEX-7 on the market. Not only are you paying more, but you’re paying more for technology that’s already on its way out. You’re paying 100% for name recognition in a market where specs and performance are king.
Let me compare the decision to a different industry. What if we took a cheap but well-performing car... Say, a Toyota Corolla. Let's say this car retails for $18,000 or so, which is pretty low these days. Here it is:
It's a fine car, has its particular audience and performs pretty great. Now, lets say Lamborghini partnered with Toyota in an attempt to broaden their audience and sell to more folks. They took a Corolla design, but jazzed it up a bit. Added some wood accents, and tossed the Lamborghini logo on it. The end result is the Lamborolla, a clever mix of high-selling and luxury, all for the low-low price of $60,000:
Except it's not clever. It's stupid, it's ugly and it causes irreparable damage to the Lamborghini brand. What is the difference between this farce and the Hasselblad Lunar and Stellar? There is none. It's exactly the same situation (except Lamborghini is too smart to make such a terrible decision).
The way Hasselblad is talking about their new cameras scares me. They are daring to tell me that the Stellar is unlike any camera on the market when it is quite obviously not. They aren’t even trying to hide the fact that it is just a re-skinned camera, but simultaneously trying to convince me that it is special and truly original.
And I don’t think there is a soul out there that is buying their lie (literally and figuratively speaking).
My main point is that I’m concerned for the welfare of Hasselblad in the future. Their current strategy is highly indicative of a bold move to prevent their own collapse, yet the decision to go with just decorating existing cameras is damaging the one thing Hasselblad relied on to make money: their reputation. They are dramatically cheapening a reputation that can’t afford to be cheapened.
Even though these cameras have no direct link to a standard Hasselblad H5D, the feeling of discontent with the cheaper cameras will spread to the overall feeling of the brand, eventually cheapening arguably the best medium format camera on the market. That’s a side effect Hasselblad simply cannot afford to let happen, and yet they created the environment where this snowballing cause and effect situation cannot be avoided… unless they right their ship- and soon.
Hasselblad, I really like that you’re trying to widen your audience. It’s the smart thing to do when the walls are closing in on you. However, the way you have decided to go about gaining more customers will not only fail, but will drag the only thing that you have down with you: brand value. You need to stop your present course, reassess what Hasselblad really stands for, and bring us more affordable cameras that match that. Right now, your brand is highly conflicted and confusing to consumers. This is the absolute worst place for any brand to be, and you need to address the situation immediately if you plan to survive past the next five years.
[Hilarious Corolla Photoshop by Noam Galai, Originally Published on JaronSchneider.com]
I really don't understand who is making this decisions inside Hasselblad. It's probably one of the most stupid things I've seen in ages, they even beat Leica (in stupidity)
At least Leica is making their own cameras.
True, overpriced with terrible performances and outdated but they still make them.
I really don't understand why Hasselblad is doing so, it looks like this company is ruled by old farts who still believe they are in the 90s.
get a clue what your talking about el cheapo... don´t be envy because you can´t afford one.
Oh yeah, I really envy a camera that has a sensor au pair with the DSRLs of 10 years ago for the price of two Canon 1D X.
Do we want to talk about the new Leica X Vario as well? :)
Well... leica did the same thing with Panasonic zoom cameras. They didn't even bother to change the design. They just put a new logo on it.
Well Emil, thing is Leica at least put their own menu interface and processing algorithm so the output IS different from the Panasonic counterparts (even if they have the same sensor, lens, and processor).
With Hasselblad there's none of that. Still same awful Sony NEX interface, same algorithm, sema everything. They haven't even bothered looking under the hood, and that just makes it all that much sadder.
Not true. Panasonic makes some of the bodies. They too are suffering from getting "Vivitar'd"...
leica is making a ton of money.... so they can´t be that stupid.
hasselbald has not such a bright future.
'they even beat leica in stupidity'. ouch.
Another car analogy would be when Cadillac put its logo on chevy compacts and called it Cimarron... except the Cimarron wasn't built as well as a Sony...
hasselblad is dead in 5 years...
Very optimistic....
Someone will buy them out of bankruptcy and make even shittier cameras with Hass'y logos on the side.
Thanks for this article. True, so true. Some small additions...
The Lunar actually tried to have an original design. It's some sort of enhanced design that people can love or hate. But the stellar is a really cheap and crappy approach. It's really, like someone called it recently a pistol handle bolted to a plastic camera... Not more. It's hideous.
Furthermore ... the Lamborolla example is not far off. In fact Bristish sports car maker Aston Martin partnered with Toyota and is selling the iQ super mini rebranded for 3x the original price (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_iQ#Aston_Martin_Cygnet).
The problem starts, when companies with a great heritage are being bought by private equity investors who want to see ridiculous profit margins (this usually happens after the engineers failed to look at any profit margins whatsoever).
And you're right – I strongly believe that these overprices cheap Sonys will water down the heritage and have a negative effect on their pro series (however – I think the "Ferrari" version of the H4D is clearly nort making it much better either ...)
lololol this is gold jaron!
Thanks dude! I just couldn't get over this last night. Had to get it down on paper and have my say.
Hasselblad is currently in a really bad position. The market for genuine "luxury" camera systems (like Leica, Arca Swiss, Alpa etc) is too small. At the same time, the pro-sumer and point-n-shoot market (Canon, NIkon etc) is too large. This puts Hasselblad right in the middle and they appear to have no idea what to do next.
If they want to do what is necessary to be taken seriously as a luxury brand then they have to downsize and be ready to cater to an extremely small market. On the other hand, if they want to be taken seriously by mainstream pro-sumer and point-n-shoot photographers then they have to stop all of the luxury nonsense and offer something more practical. They're damned if they do, damned if they don't.
I can only foresee one way out of this situation and it's totally radical. They can go back to concentrating on making film cameras and use their brand name to expand into film, paper, chemistry, enlargers etc. If they were to take this radical step, then they'd be the main company positioned to service the potentially robust hobbyist/artist film photography market that is getting ready to arrive as a negative response to digital. In other words, digital imaging is now becoming so commonplace that it's inevitable that many photographers will rebel and go back to film. Hasselblad's name and history puts them in the PERFECT position to meet the demands of this future market.
This is as misguided as their current approach, if not moreso.
That's like saying that digital in audio will cause a rebellion and people are going back to vinyl. Digital is opening up a wider audience as it makes the technology more accessible to everyone who wants to live in an instant world. Film is a niche and the writing is on the wall for it. You just have to look at all the film varieties out there that are being discontinued.
In 2008, I advised Fuji to offer a camera system that would compete with Leica. At the time, common perception was that the idea was crazy. But today in 2013, Fuji has done pretty well with their new rangefinder.
Today, a lot of people might think that a return to film would be crazy for Hasselblad. But 5-10 years from now it might not sound like such a bad idea.
Oh it was you! In 1983, I advised that kid Steve to pursue with his apple-ish robot machine... That punk made his way
LOL :-)
except the fuji x cameras aren't rangefinders of course, they just look like one- kind of a big difference ;-)
That's right, it's not a an "actual" rangefinder. I probably should have put the word rangefinder in quotes. I meant that it was originally designed to appeal to the market of consumers that enjoys the old-fashioned rangefinder design (which is generally considered Leica's territory) as opposed to the consumers that tend to prefer SLRs (Canon/Nikon territory.)
the "" implies the difference is trivial - which leads to the conclusion you've never used a real rangefinder - really? if not a lecia, try an old mamiya. the fuji's are not a rangefinder, they just look like one - totally different ethos that's not even coming close to competing with leica, honestly i don't think Fuji have ever competed with leica in its home rangefinder turf, only in the 'pretty looking and pretty expensive POS digital' side market. BTW, I mean POS as 'point and shoot' but I accept theres multiple meanings for the acronym ;) BTW I think you're right about 'blad they should totally be partnering with ilford or buying kodak's film division. rerelease the H2 as an 'entry level' film body and officially partner with phase one to do the digitial side of things rather than wasting more r&d competing with them (or not).
Hi jrtbloke,
You're right about the old Mamiyas, I love those cameras. BTW - there's a new interview with Dr. Kaufman, of Leica, where he sums up exactly what I meant by the "rangefinder" market in my previous post:
"We believe that only Fuji makes money because they had the good idea to copy us. Fuji's CEO said in an interview to a reporter Reporter: We are
devices that resembles Leica because our customers love it!"
Read more on LeicaRumors.com: http://leicarumors.com/2013/07/22/interview-with-dr-andreas-kaufman-2.as...
Foot, insert mouth: http://www.factmag.com/2013/07/22/vinyl-sales-up-33-5-in-first-half-of-2...
Yea I was just about to mention that vinyl albums have had an ABSURD resurgence thanks to the hipster scene and audiophiles preaching the gospel that is analog and tubes.
"Even with the welcome boost in sales, it should be noted that vinyl
sales still have a fairly infinitesimal impact on the overall market,
making up only 2% of the 142m album sales clocked up in 2013 so far."
Microsoft has more market share in the smartphone market, that's how
small it's presence is.
You somehow missed the point in Mikes argumentation.
I agree a thousand times. If they could some how manage to partner with Fuji and Ilford, and then buy out Kodak's Intellectual Properties and patents and start making diverse range of film/emulsions and papers, then they could be in a great position to cater to the small hobbyist and college student market.
Hell I still shoot film, infact i need to load up some of my Ilford Delta 100 into my 4x5 holders for a project.
Unfortunately as Leica have proven there are a lot of stupid people in the world that buy into this crap. Look at all the companies that have done this and still exist.
Only Leica can do such things, they've been cultivating an audience for the photo-luxury segment for many decades. Also they design and make their own cameras and fantastic lenses. And when they partner with pure luxury like hermes, they both are doing what they know how to do better. They also have managed to successfully market rebranded panasonic cameras.
It's natural that some clueless directives at hasselblad want to emulate that, but they fail to understand their own brand. Hasselblad has been known for rugged professional products of excellent mechanical quality and great zeiss lenses. These new cameras are exactly the opposite of that legacy, purely cosmetic flair for clueless millionaires.
If they wanted new markets there are many ways they could have gone. A digital X-pan comes first to mind. They could also let fuji make it for them, and I know many who would run to get in line for one of those.
The worst part is that their problem is not only the sony LUNAcy, they've been shooting themselves in the foot for some time. Closing their system to 3rd party digital backs and sticking with a smaller sensor has only put PhaseOne in a better position in the small medium format market.
It's very sad, but I think we'll see the hasselblad brand go the polaroid way. The only question is how long will they last.
Don't worry, Walmart will buy the brand.
I alwys wondered why the red epic is not a hasselblad product.
Stay with what you're good at is a better tip to Hasselblad.
The Lamborghini-"enhanced" Carolla would actually make more sense than the Hasselblad-styled Sony camera. At least with automobiles, a lot of what people pay for is for the fit and finish and even the materials of the fit and finish. Consider what Lexus is, relative to Toyota.
But with cameras, while everyone appreciates nicer materials and/or cosmetics, the guts are the paramount concern. And fit and finish in the sense of ruggedness, ergonomics and such. So Hasselblad Lunar and Stellar are like putting lipstick on a pig...
...but even worse, because the NEX-7 and the RX100 are in no need of lipstick.
What Hasselblad is doing is like if Bang & Olufsen took a pair of Sony's high-end speakers and added on wood trim that had no bearing on the acoustic performance of those speakers.
Hasselblad is basically trying to expand their market by milking the dumbest of their customers and/or the dumbest customers around. They're basically taking the H.L. Mencken quote "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people," and basing their corporate strategy on that sentiment.
And as we all seem to agree, will probably prove it false.
Hasselblad, the new Vivitar...
hahahah love the lambo photo :))
Perhaps they should ask sony to try to cut costs down on their digital backs and make medium format more affordable to compete with the growing sensors of the top competitors.
I see this as a future progression with sensor tech coming down in price and ZOMG-TEH-MEGAPICKLES boom.
If a company could bring down digital MF backs to a "reasonable" price to compete with pro DSLRs then they might have a good niche. The people who buy a D800 for fashion/portrait/product photography would prefer the benefits of a larger sensor at a competitive price.
If I could get a 20-40mpx MF back for $4000-8000 I'd dump all my DSLR gear in an instant.
Same here.
Following the car analogy, Aston Martin did that with Toyota and released Cygnet. It was a fail.
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01544/aston-martin-cygne_154...
Original car:
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRA0CaRdLGXP5A20T-3...
As unfortunate a choice of rebrand as that was, it did have a very reasonable purpose, to lower the average CO2 emissions across Aston Martins' range.
If the price were not ridiculous for the badge factor, I'd totally rock this little commute-n-scoot.
Dear Owners of "H":
Please do us and yourselves a favor. Please sell "H"
to someone who cares about cameras and their users. That would free you
up to use your capital in other ways, than trying to push "H" into the
highly profitable consumer electronic goods market as you have.
Clearly, you do not understand the history of "H" and how you are
destroying the brand. I suggest having a hard difficult conversation
with Fuji who has a history with "H", building some lenses and the XPAN
for "H." Alternately, perhaps a conversation with Phase One is a good
idea to have them role the MF cameras into their line-up. Just imagine
the cash you would have by selling "H". Then you could start or buy
another company to make all the electronic trinkets you desire to
market. TYVM.
Aston Martin Cygnet... that is all.
Call me crazy, but I think the problem is indicative of a deeper problem. I think the big camera companies are killing photography inadvertently. DSLRs have been pushed to a general market that has everyone becoming a photographer. This is great for expanding profit margins for camera companies, but it puts pressure on the professional photographer. The pro photographer has to justify his costs versus the project manager's neighbor's kid who is willing to give away his work for photo credit because he is trying to get his name out. Sometimes the cheap route is taken. Pro photographer doesn't get paid, New high-end camera doesn't get bought. High-end cameras don't get sold. Camera company gets desperate. Enter smartphone market with higher and higher resolution cameras. Nokia just announced a 40 megapixel camera on phone. It won't take long before the average consumer realizes they are sick of carrying around the big DSLR and opt for the phone/camera combo. So then the big camera companies will have lost their cheapo market and they will have effectively killed their high-end market in pursuit of their cheap-end market. I predict the big camera manufacturers will be hurting before too much longer. And as someone who has invested in these companies' equipment, I can't say I won't watch it with a bittersweet sense of karmic justice.
This!
I GOOD photographer does not have to justify anything if their work is unimpeachable and shows talent.