Stupidest, most overpriced, most poorly executed camera in thelast two years

RichA wrote:
No, not the Pentax K-01, but this Sony. The more I thought about it,
the more I realized the fixed lens was the silliest idea they could
have had and there was NO reason for it. There are no design
constraints with mirrorless, you can design lenses that almost touch
the sensor, if you need to. However, Sony blew it big time by being
the first out of the blocks with a FF mirrorless (Yes, I know Leica
has one, but they are MF lenses) and they made the monumentally crazy
decision to have a fixed lens. They could have creamed off lots of
(for a mirrorless FF) Nikon and Canon customers, even at $2800. Now,
they are stuck with another curiosity.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/son...ts/sony_dscrx1



Hi,

How about the new Hasselblad, which is a Sony camera with a few goodies
glued on and the name Hasselbad attached, at an incredibly high price.
As I have said in other contexts, you can put a sign on a cow's forehead
saying, "I am a racehorse", but it is actually still a cow.

Mort Linder

In article , Mort
wrote:

RichA wrote:
No, not the Pentax K-01, but this Sony. The more I thought about it,
the more I realized the fixed lens was the silliest idea they could
have had and there was NO reason for it. There are no design
constraints with mirrorless, you can design lenses that almost touch
the sensor, if you need to. However, Sony blew it big time by being
the first out of the blocks with a FF mirrorless (Yes, I know Leica
has one, but they are MF lenses) and they made the monumentally crazy
decision to have a fixed lens. They could have creamed off lots of
(for a mirrorless FF) Nikon and Canon customers, even at $2800. Now,
they are stuck with another curiosity.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/son...ts/sony_dscrx1



Hi,

How about the new Hasselblad, which is a Sony camera with a few goodies
glued on and the name Hasselbad attached, at an incredibly high price.
As I have said in other contexts, you can put a sign on a cow's forehead
saying, "I am a racehorse", but it is actually still a cow.

Haven't kept up with Hasselblad, which one is the new one?




--
Sandman[.net]

On 2013-05-27 22:28:28 -0700, Sandman said:

In article , Mort
wrote:

RichA wrote:
No, not the Pentax K-01, but this Sony. The more I thought about it,
the more I realized the fixed lens was the silliest idea they could
have had and there was NO reason for it. There are no design
constraints with mirrorless, you can design lenses that almost touch
the sensor, if you need to. However, Sony blew it big time by being
the first out of the blocks with a FF mirrorless (Yes, I know Leica
has one, but they are MF lenses) and they made the monumentally crazy
decision to have a fixed lens. They could have creamed off lots of
(for a mirrorless FF) Nikon and Canon customers, even at $2800. Now,
they are stuck with another curiosity.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/son...ts/sony_dscrx1



Hi,

How about the new Hasselblad, which is a Sony camera with a few goodies
glued on and the name Hasselbad attached, at an incredibly high price.
As I have said in other contexts, you can put a sign on a cow's forehead
saying, "I am a racehorse", but it is actually still a cow.

Haven't kept up with Hasselblad, which one is the new one?

This Sony monstrosity. It certainly isn't an H4D-60.
http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/

--
Regards,

Savageduck

Sandman wrote:
In article 2013052722573975249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

Haven't kept up with Hasselblad, which one is the new one?

This Sony monstrosity. It certainly isn't an H4D-60.
http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/

So it's a NEX-7 with an Hasselblad logo? Too bad. :/


Did you look at the price tag? That is really too bad. The fall of the
mighty.

Mort Linder

In article , says...

Sandman wrote:
In article 2013052722573975249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

Haven't kept up with Hasselblad, which one is the new one?

This Sony monstrosity. It certainly isn't an H4D-60.
http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/

So it's a NEX-7 with an Hasselblad logo? Too bad. :/


Did you look at the price tag? That is really too bad. The fall of the
mighty.

I dunno. Leica does something similar with Panasonics--not to that
extreme though--and Leica has hardly "fallen".

On 2013-05-29 21:30:46 -0700, "J. Clarke" said:

In article , says...

Sandman wrote:
In article 2013052722573975249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

Haven't kept up with Hasselblad, which one is the new one?

This Sony monstrosity. It certainly isn't an H4D-60.
http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/

So it's a NEX-7 with an Hasselblad logo? Too bad. :/


Did you look at the price tag? That is really too bad. The fall of the
mighty.

I dunno. Leica does something similar with Panasonics--not to that
extreme though--and Leica has hardly "fallen".

Neither Leica or Hasselblad have issues with their premier lines, just
as some or the exotic and luxury car manufacturers will always have a
waiting list for their cars. So, hardly a fall.

While both Leica and Hasselblad build some fine cameras with their
prime models, when it comes to rebadged they can be hard to swallow.
The Leica/Panasonics are at least not priced at an impossible premium
for the badge. That Hasselblad Lunar is an overpriced piece of
pretentious bling and it deserves to die in the trenches.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article , Mort
wrote:

Haven't kept up with Hasselblad, which one is the new one?

This Sony monstrosity. It certainly isn't an H4D-60.
http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/

So it's a NEX-7 with an Hasselblad logo? Too bad. :/

Did you look at the price tag? That is really too bad. The fall of the
mighty.

Indeed, but this kind of rebranding is not uncommon. It's like the Aston
Martin Cygnet, the small hatchback they released back in 2011 just to
conform to some EU emission regulations. The Cygnet was a Toyota IQ with
a new grille and that's pretty much it. It cost three times as much as
the Toyota, in spite of being identical.

The price difference between the Hasselblad and the NEX-7 is even
larger, but Hasselblad insist they have the same margins on the Lunar as
on their other cameras and that they're just using better quality
material. I don't know what that's supposed to mean. Given the name - is
it space safe? Will NASA use it on the moon?



--
Sandman[.net]

In article 2013052921484029560-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

On 2013-05-29 21:30:46 -0700, "J. Clarke" said:

In article , says...

Sandman wrote:
In article 2013052722573975249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

Haven't kept up with Hasselblad, which one is the new one?

This Sony monstrosity. It certainly isn't an H4D-60.
http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/

So it's a NEX-7 with an Hasselblad logo? Too bad. :/


Did you look at the price tag? That is really too bad. The fall of the
mighty.

I dunno. Leica does something similar with Panasonics--not to that
extreme though--and Leica has hardly "fallen".

Neither Leica or Hasselblad have issues with their premier lines, just
as some or the exotic and luxury car manufacturers will always have a
waiting list for their cars. So, hardly a fall.

While both Leica and Hasselblad build some fine cameras with their
prime models, when it comes to rebadged they can be hard to swallow.
The Leica/Panasonics are at least not priced at an impossible premium
for the badge. That Hasselblad Lunar is an overpriced piece of
pretentious bling and it deserves to die in the trenches.

What about Hasselblad's claim about the margins on the Lunar not being
higher than their other models (or even other brands, interestingly)?

They stress that it's not a rebranding, that yes, the Lunar contains
components from Sony but it's supposedly

http://tinyurl.com/cz9njlv
"...we're not robbing people by making a huge profit on the camera.
Our profit margin is the same as everyone else's; we're just using
more expensive materials."

Still, ¤5,000 is amazingly expensive. It's what I paid for my D3s when
it was released.


--
Sandman[.net]

In article ,
says...

In article 2013052921484029560-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

On 2013-05-29 21:30:46 -0700, "J. Clarke" said:

In article , says...

Sandman wrote:
In article 2013052722573975249-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

Haven't kept up with Hasselblad, which one is the new one?

This Sony monstrosity. It certainly isn't an H4D-60.
http://www.hasselblad-lunar.com/

So it's a NEX-7 with an Hasselblad logo? Too bad. :/


Did you look at the price tag? That is really too bad. The fall of the
mighty.

I dunno. Leica does something similar with Panasonics--not to that
extreme though--and Leica has hardly "fallen".

Neither Leica or Hasselblad have issues with their premier lines, just
as some or the exotic and luxury car manufacturers will always have a
waiting list for their cars. So, hardly a fall.

While both Leica and Hasselblad build some fine cameras with their
prime models, when it comes to rebadged they can be hard to swallow.
The Leica/Panasonics are at least not priced at an impossible premium
for the badge. That Hasselblad Lunar is an overpriced piece of
pretentious bling and it deserves to die in the trenches.

What about Hasselblad's claim about the margins on the Lunar not being
higher than their other models (or even other brands, interestingly)?

They stress that it's not a rebranding, that yes, the Lunar contains
components from Sony but it's supposedly

http://tinyurl.com/cz9njlv
"...we're not robbing people by making a huge profit on the camera.
Our profit margin is the same as everyone else's; we're just using
more expensive materials."

Still, ?5,000 is amazingly expensive. It's what I paid for my D3s when
it was released.

The question is whether they are using more expensive materials where it
affects function or durability, or are they just putting a gold shell
around it?

In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote:

What about Hasselblad's claim about the margins on the Lunar not being
higher than their other models (or even other brands, interestingly)?

They stress that it's not a rebranding, that yes, the Lunar contains
components from Sony but it's supposedly

http://tinyurl.com/cz9njlv
"...we're not robbing people by making a huge profit on the camera.
Our profit margin is the same as everyone else's; we're just using
more expensive materials."

Still, ?5,000 is amazingly expensive. It's what I paid for my D3s when
it was released.

The question is whether they are using more expensive materials where it
affects function or durability, or are they just putting a gold shell
around it?

Yeah, I had that thought too.

In the end, the target group for this is surely Hasselblad owners that
doesn't want a Panasonic in their go-bag, but want to flaunt their
camera brand even when on vacation


--
Sandman[.net]