Why are Hasselblad Camera, so expensive

Okay, that was funny. It’s an advert. The reason I know it’s an advert is that I got to the end and no one had asked “Why is the Hasselblad Lunar so expensive?”
 
Because they are constructed from cast iron and held together with ocean liner rivets...

I sold out of 'blads almost a decade ago when I retired, so I cannot really comment more on the recent lines of this exalted breed of MF cameras. I had 500C (2) and CM (1) and a 501 and FOUR ELs (these acquired during an extended period of temporary insanity) and lenses for all of these and several boxes of film backs and other bits and pieces I paid several toes and a kidney for. Lost a fair bit of $$ on the resale of lenses and bits but made almost all of it up on the camera bodies. Gave away the ELs, almost, to someone who ripped them all apart and rebuilt one which he still uses. So a happy ending.

In my case, I disliked having to carry the cameras around and I found I didn't greatly care for the ergonomics, but many are happy with them and go on using them.
 
The video title should have been “Why Are Digital Hasselblads So Expensive?”

While the film Hasselblads were always expensive, they weren’t astoundingly expensive - except perhaps the 205FCC, but still I feel they were always worth it.

Some of my Hasselblad bodies and lenses I bought new in the 1990’s; others a decade later when great bargains were to be had as a consequence of the rush to digital. For the longest time, you could get a decent 500-series kit for under $1000. Don’t know what the prices are today.
 
I watched the video with the sound off to avoid bothering my wife. The impression I got was that they are so expensive because they pay their technicians a good salary in Sweden!
 
Larry Cloetta said:
Okay, that was funny. It’s an advert. The reason I know it’s an advert is that I got to the end and no one had asked “Why is the Hasselblad Lunar so expensive?”
Click to expand...

I don't have a Lunar...but I bought a Stellar many years ago. It was on sale for 700$. I got a big surprise when I found out the Hasselblad engineers had really tweaked the camera and it's firmware with the consequence that I could not update the firmware from Sony. SOL Hasselblad did not produce any firmware updates.

It's still a nice little camera with heft and quality that beats the the regular RX100....except in function at this point.
 
The X2D comes in a little cheaper than the M11, body plus lens. Now look at the features the X2D has the M11 does not. Then add in the superior IQ and color. On this basis I would say that Leica is overpriced. You want to see expensive, check out PhaseOne. I do not know how it stacks up in IQ against the X2D but it is four times as expensive (US$52K vs US$13K) so it ought to be really wonderful.
 
Larry Cloetta said:
Okay, that was funny. It’s an advert. The reason I know it’s an advert is that I got to the end and no one had asked “Why is the Hasselblad Lunar so expensive?”
Click to expand...
why did my Stellar (ie RX100) so expensive. I did find out that Hassleblad engineers tweaked the camera and made it impossible to upgrade with Sony Firmware. That made me angry.
 
This is an advertisement for Blad and their story doesn't justify any point why the Hasselblad is still too high in price. It is never affordable to any general photography person.
I bought my first Hasselblad camera during the year 2000. It was the Blad 203Fe Millenium special edition. I had to save lot of money before I got it. I was able to manage that camera and it was expensive. But HB digital is extremely too high. Even buying a Digital back for an analogue camera is too pricy. That's why I got into Leica M and it is still affordable.

Why anyone like Mont Blanc pen or a Rolex watch??? It is the same thing for Hasselblad Digital I guess!
If you have a good Plastic Bank card with a good micro chip that can allow that check to pass on a transaction . then there's no problem to get this camera!!
 
Cyriljay said:
This is an advertisement for Blad and their story doesn't justify any point why the Hasselblad is still too high in price. It is never affordable to any general photography person.
I bought my first Hasselblad camera during the year 2000. It was the Blad 203Fe Millenium special edition. I had to save lot of money before I got it. I was able to manage that camera and it was expensive. But HB digital is extremely too high. Even buying a Digital back for an analogue camera is too pricy. That's why I got into Leica M and it is still affordable.

Why anyone like Mont Blanc pen or a Rolex watch??? It is the same thing for Hasselblad Digital I guess!
If you have a good Plastic Bank card with a good micro chip that can allow that check to pass on a transaction . then there's no problem to get this camera!!
Click to expand...
There was a small window, around 2008 or so, when Hassies were affordable for mere mortals. At that time everyone believed that film was dead, and film cameras would all soon become doorstops. That's when I loaded up: $250 for an Excellent Plus 500 C/M at KEH, for example. Those days are past, and I'm glad I pounced when I did!
 
Retro-Grouch said:
There was a small window, around 2008 or so, when Hassies were affordable for mere mortals. At that time everyone believed that film was dead, and film cameras would all soon become doorstops. That's when I loaded up: $250 for an Excellent Plus 500 C/M at KEH, for example. Those days are past, and I'm glad I pounced when I did!
Click to expand...
Really, those were the days. I got a 553ELX plus WLF and A12 for about the same amount and I paid just a bit more cash for the older 80/2.8 C attached - I tested all the modes thoroughly and it works great.

A12 backs, or even the old 12 backs, though - crazy expensive these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top