The $11,500 Hasselblad HV! Oops, I mean Sony A99!

The $11,500 Hasselblad HV! Oops, I mean Sony A99! 


The new Hasselblad HV. A DSLR that offers no compromises with tough as nails build, jaw dropping beauty and is already a proven winner because it is indeed a Sony A99! All for $11,500! Woohoo!

Yes, this was announced 3-4 days ago or so but I had to wrap my head around this one and decide if I even wanted to give it exposure. Then I figured..well..why not, not many, if any, will buy one of these anyway! I mean, restyling a NEX-7 could have been cool as the NEX-7 is a cool camera. Restyling the mighty mite RX100 could also have been cool, as it is one hell of a pocket camera. Hasselblad accomplished to screw both of those up and turned the “could have been” into “Damn..we screwed up”.  The slow selling Lunar and Stellar prove that one.

But fear not, Hasselblad is forging on with the Sony morphs with the new Hasselblad HV 99 mainly because they had to as it has been in the works for a long while already.

I call this new Hasselblad the “HPV 99” (there really is no 99 in the name, nor a “P”) because it is the Sony A99 with a new coat of paint and cosmetics at an almost $9000 premium, which to me sounds like a big old genital wart on the camera industry. Yep, should be called the HPV 99.

Yes, that is correct… the now older A99 that sells for $2700 can be had for $11,500 featuring the same shape, sensor, image quality, speed, and using the same Sony lenses for $11,500 US. Basically, we get a wooden case and fancy styling for our $9k and nothing more. Oh yea, “tough as nails” build quality.


Someone at Hasselblad has either lost their minds or they are trying to only sell 50 of these worldwide. 

Like I said, I can see them blinging out the small and cool and capable mirror less cameras. Hell, even I held the Lunar and Stellar and liked the Stellar (RX100) quite a bit but could not bring myself to pay $3500 for a $600 camera, no matter how cool it looked and how good it felt.

The HPV 99 comes with a pelican style case because Hasselblad KNOWS that us photographers always like to carry our camera not in a bag or with a strap, but in a suitcase. 


But why is Hasselblad giving this treatment to a fat bulky DSLR that will use the same fat bulky Sony DSLR lenses? I mean, who here would pay $11,500 for a Sony A99 with a new coat of paint when you can get a standard black A99 for $2700?!?!? This is not the same as Leica with their special editions as Leica is not taking an OM-D E-M1 that sells for $1600 and pimping it out with a Leica logo, blinging it out and charging $8,000 for it. Leica does not take a Fuji X-E2 and throw a coat on it and charge $7500. Leica takes their own premium M design and puts out a special edition here and there with very few units being made. What they do with Panasonic does not count as even when they give this treatment to the Panasonic P&S cameras they come in at a $200-$300 premium yet offer longer warranty, better software and better aesthetics.


I am just confused as to what Hasselblad are doing but maybe I am cranky because I did not have my morning cup of coffee. One one hand Hasselblad seem to want to be like Leica yet at the same time they have no clue how to go about it. But I am here to offer my help to them.

Hasselblad..DESIGN YOUR OWN MASTERPIECE OF A CAMERA that lives up to the Hasselblad name. When you do that you will have something special. 

I am sure the HV will be beautiful, solid and extremely well made. But it is still an A99 any way you slice it. My question for you is..who here will be ordering the Hasselblad HV? $11,500 can buy you an amazing camera and a few lenses  – say a Sony A99 with $9k left for glass 😉

Vote in the poll below and feel free to comment!


[polldaddy poll=7778774]


    • No as I am not interested in the A99 or any DSLR. So for me, no. Maybe for others. Ill post it in the morning in case anyone is interested. If I were into DSLR’s Id consider it…MAYBE.

  1. As of November 15, 2015 B&H is offering a $8,500 discount on these babies, the A99 is 1,700 and Hasselblad is $3,495 I feel sorry for the ones that paid the extra 8,500 I considered but decided to get me a Leica M-P 240,

  2. You forgot that the Zeiss 24-70 F2.8 is bundled, so it is actually more than $2.700 of value. Oh, and plus a second battery ;)…

  3. As a proud owner of the Hasselblad H5D-60 I couldn’t be more disgusted with Hasselblad trying to bust into the 35mm dslr market and the point and shoot market. Its almost like that time when Leica tried to make a worthy medium format camera….OOOPPPSSS!

  4. Perhaps for the pimp who otherwise take a perfect premium car, but order it in pink, with golden rims and leopard interior just to demonstrate how much surplus of money they have and to which extend they can afford to ignore bourgeois dress code.

  5. As far as I can tell the Hasselblad folks aren’t holding a gun to anyone’s head to buy this. Whether the pricing is “fair” or exorbitant is probably more a viewpoint of a potential buyer (or non-buyer) than anyone
    here can judge. I think the Leica S system is absurdly overpriced too, but I made a rational decision not
    to consider acquiring one. I don’t care if others buy it and I hope they’re happy with their purchase. It’s a shame to see a well respected brand stoop to this type of offering, but it’s not the same Hasselblad company that brought us the classic C series. New money expects new return, so I can only hope that
    this same type thing doesn’t happen to Leica.

  6. I remember Hasselblad cameras back in 1974, they were then the premium film camera, big, 120 film format, and expensive. I was contemplating about buying one, but finally decided to go with the Leica M4, with a 50 mm Summicron. Both Hasselblad and Leica were in the dog house when the Japanese camera companies dominated the market for the next 35 years. Then in 2009, Leica came out with the M9, which at that time was a game changer, a true FF CCD sensor, and with a RF system that was backward compatible with most old M glass, this camera saved Leica with huge sales worldwide along with new M lenses that would take full advantage of the CCD sensor.

    Hasselblad never had the vision or luck that Leica had, it is sad, but then even Kodak is not with us anymore.

  7. Here’s an idea… why doesn’t Hassy license Leica cameras, change the knobs and skin and double the price? At least we’d have a Leica underneath.

  8. They could have come out with their own mirrorless FF like the Sony A7 using Leica M mount and that would be the start of something beautiful. Brains must have been frozen over.

  9. Ahhh, denial. Leica’s longheld practice of creating “collector versions” of various models may be slightly different than Hassy’s unfortunate practice of rebadging Sony’s, but it is no less cynical. Luckily for Leica, there have been a seemingly endless stream of well-healed collectors ready and willing to snarf up whatever Leica offers — even at wildly elevated prices. Let me be brutally honest: The practice of artificially limiting production in an effort to make a product instantly “collectible” is nothing more than corporate narcissism and grandiosity. It’s an admittedly well crafted marketing scheme trumping common sense. But it’s a marketing scheme nonetheless. It’s one thing when a product is truly difficult to make from a core function POV. Limited wines, very old single malt whisky, craft beer, tourbillon watches, Zeiss lenses, the Bugatti Veyron, all fall into this legitimate category. But the only two differences between Leica and Hassy is that Leica typically starts with a cooler and more expensive camera, and Leica has been successful with their limited stuff, where the ill-conceived Hassy scheme is doomed to fail. Otherwise, both product practices come from exactly the same cynical mindset.

    I guess it’s hard to fault Leica for continuing to take the money that these rich customers blithely throw their way for what is essentially well-packaged jewelry in the shape of a rangefinder. Or maybe, as a marketing director (my day job) who values authenticity, faulting them is precisely the right thing to do.

  10. I think the customer Hasselblad has in mind is the kind of (multi)millionaire who only wants to spend money on “the best” and naturally wants the “best” camera, but doesn’t know too much about photography. (There must be a few out there.)

    He (and it will be a he) may be aware that Leica and Hasselblad are more exclusive brands than all these Canons and Nikons that everyone has. He has probably already bought a Leica, because they are “the best” (as confirmed by their high prices), but can’t get to grips with manual focus etc so all his photos are rubbish.

    So what’s he to do? He could get a top-of-the-range Canikon, but where’s the exclusivity in that? This is where the current Hasselblad range fits in. They have the name and the super-high prices that mean they must be “the best” (as far as these customers are concerned) – BUT – they work just like ordinary cameras with full auto modes so taking pictures is easy! The origins of what’s inside the shell probably matters very little to this customer. The high prices also guarantee exclusivity, and the over-the-top styling means they will get noticed which is also important.

    I would hazard a guess that Hasselblad will be advertising them not in photo magazines but in the kind of in-flight magazines you get in First Class cabins (in amongst the adverts for cosmetic dentists and Bentleys).

    They are not aimed at “proper” photographers any more than super-yachts are aimed at proper sailors.

  11. Why not they make an Panasonic version of Leica M9? Same RF, sensor and lens mount and everything only uglier package and style on camera 😀 Then sell it for 1200$

  12. It is a niche product. Also as far as I read it has solid aluminum chassis as opposed to the original magnesium alloy + plastic. This makes the difference between 800$ iPad and 150$ Huaweii tablet. So Hassy are not far off. What is a problem is that these nice cams come far too late a99 is now in its sun setting phase and these cams cost a bit too much. If it has been released same day as a99 or couple of months later with say 1000$ premium it would have totally made sense.

    • iPad has Apple infrastructure, software and her experience. Worth its $500-$800 price, while the Huawei is OVERPRICED at $150.

  13. As its next move, Hasselblad puts a wooden handle on Leica MM and sells it for $100,000. There’s enough people in the world that would buy it solely for its obscenity.

  14. The product is so insane and embarrassing, and it likely even damages the reputation of Hasselblad. Among the endless existing cases of price differentiation (Chevy vs. Caddy etc.) of which many at least a have a little bit of customer value this is the most outrageous by far.

    Perhaps they have to pay dealers to put them on display and dealers only take them on commission rather than buy any inventory. Perhaps they never sell enough units and only a fraction of the procured and modified bodies to recover the investment in marketing and stock.

    Who had the idea and for what?

    Is it empirical marketing research, sponsored by an excentric millionaire, by Sony themselves or by an anonymous group of luxory brands, to test how far one could go in creating and selling an obviously and excessivly overpriced, outdated and ugly luxury item?

  15. Come on, Steve, it is exactly the same as what Leica are doing with the Monochrome–i.e, parting a fool and his money. They are both repainting an existing camera and adding a ridiculous premium as a result. The fact that one camera is made by another company is splitting hairs. It is fundamentally the same bs!

    • If you mean the Gibson Monochrom, then maybe, but even that is a stretch as the Gibson Monochrom is limited to a very small number of units that will surely go up in value.

      If you are referring to the standard Monochrom, well that camera is expensive, and probably a few are owned by fools, however I would guess that the vast majority of Monochrom owners are rich or at least financially comfortable enthusiasts who bought them for the image quality, not the bling.

      Good thing too, with no red dot or branding visible (without looking HARD), the Monochrom DOESN’T HAVE ANY BLING.

  16. Not withstanding a new CEO, we the public have no idea what entails the co-operative contract between Sony and Hasselblad. As horrified as all of us are with the resultant products, we could still witness further comedic products in future such as pimped out RX1s, and A7rs selling at 3x – 5x their original retail prices.

    Since the passing of their V series cameras (500c/m, EL/m, and Superwide), it is no secret Hasselblad has changed from being camera maker to re-branding specialist, taking Fuji’s very fine 645 medium format platform into their present H series cameras.

    Now they cement their ‘Coach maker’ status with these dressed up Sonys. Certainly a rather sad chapter in the history of Hasselblad. They need to wake up from this debacle and find a way to get back to designing and making serious cameras.

    If indeed the present owners can afford to throw money on redressing ‘end of life’ Sony models, surely they can afford to hire good camera designers? They NEED TO KNOW DRESSING UP STOCK CAMERAS FROM OTHER MAKERS AND CHARGING OVERPRICED PREMIUMS HURTS THE HASSELBLAD BRAND.

  17. Steve you hit the nail on the head, Hasselblad hasn’t done anything for a long time so they took a look at Leica being the most luxurious of the small cameras and they figured they would go for the DSLR title thinking they could justify the price because Leica does; but we all know Leica offers a very unique product.

  18. Just bought a Hasselblad 503 CW with to leaf shutter Zeiss lenses .. seems to me the better investment and much cheaper also

  19. The Hasselblad company has been sold many times, like Leica, Pentax, and others. These original companies ceased to exist, and those who buy them see value only in the name (ie. brand) so they can put a famous name on something to sell.
    The modern Leica products still have some ties to the old Ernst Leitz designs, but most others have lost all the DNA, and certainly the original company philosophy. Having loyalty to a brand name based disconnected history makes no sense.

  20. I expect that Hasselblad made enough money on their special edition NEX 7 and RX100 to justify the expense of making the new case/frame for the A99. I like the look of it myself, but would not buy one. Why?because even the original A99 with lens is well above my hardware budget. However if Hasselblad can make money remaking Sony cameras, more power too them. It at least increases the pool of people willing to spend money on lenses a little. The more people buy lenses the more choice we will get.

  21. So love your blog Steve, and agree with many comments made about this “Hasselblad”. However I don’t think your usage of language referring to HPV was appropriate.
    Of course you had no ill intentions, but there are a large number of HPV virus strains that cause far more serious and often fatal diseases than warts, including cervical cancers in women and oropharyngeal cancers in men and women.
    I hope this raises awareness of parents who should bethinking of their their pre-pubescent female kids and considering immunisation

  22. Hi Crinosil,

    I will still have a problem paying twice the price for Mercedes with bling, when I can get essentially the same ‘performance’ at the half the price. So any which way, a $2 bling on a perceived-excellent product or $2 bling on a perceived-mediocre product is still a $2 bling.

  23. As H.L. Mencken quipped: no one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public. Hassleblad has simply extended that principle to the world. If there are people who will actually buy one, why wouldn’t they make it?

  24. Some week ago people on the Internet fora complained about the 3000+ dollar price for the Nikon Df..

    Well this Hasonyblad makes my Nikon Df feel like a Bargain !

    Furthermore these are all signs of the last stage of Hasselblad as a company, the end
    It’s a shame that the management decide to breakdown the immense History of the Hasselblad by these
    rediculous moves.

    • Your Df is a bargain. $3000 for a smaller, lighter and better-looking D4. That sounds like a pretty good bargain to me.

  25. Oh dear. I can hear my 501CM weeping softly upstairs. I don’t think it will ever want to be seen in public again after the recent Hasselblad bad joke product launches. Rarely has a proud heritage been so brutally squandered. The sooner somebody puts this company out of its misery the better.

    • I couldn’t agree more Colin. I still use my 20 year-old Hasselblad 501’s on a regular basis and they continue to produce superb 24 x 24’s from my wedding and portrait work. I have also backpacked these tough guys in sub-zero cold and 100 degree heat for my nature work and they have performed almost flawlessly. Sadly, it appears whomever has taken control of the operation has decided to sell snake oil instead of cameras. Very disheartening indeed.

  26. It’s the eternal “a fool and his money are easily parted’.

    Words fail me. It’s not illegal… and if companies can get away with making shin, shiny bling, fine.

  27. Actually, the Hasselblad ad says that the camera suitcase can stand these temperatures. Take the camera out of the case and it’s a different story.

  28. Back when film ruled the day, one would look for 500CM used. The best was to get a “Doctors” camera. Someone with a lot of money buying a camera they really do no what, but rather think they do. This is a bit like that, only it just dumb.
    You can buy a Sony A99, A7, A7R and carload of lens and case.

  29. To be fair to the new CEO of Hasselbald, this project was already well under way before he took the reigns. Let’s see what happens from here on out.

  30. Well, I am not sure who is going to buy this camera “though as nails” (by the way I’ve seen a lot of broken nails, lol) but sure I know that this century Hasselblad is not going to go to the moon…, not with this management.

    • You are missing something all right 🙂

      The Leica is a leica creation that is a 100% original, nothing else like it on the planet amazing camera. It is THEIR OWN design and product. They made 35 (THIRTY-FIVE) special editions for those who want something special.

      This Hasselblad is NOT a Hasselblad creation as it is a Sony A99. The innards are 100% Sony A99. The SHELL is a hassleblad design. Nothing original or groundbreaking. This is NOT a limited run special edition but a full production run camera. At $11,500. Again, this IS a Sony A99 in fancy clothes. The M Monochrom is a special nothing else like it camera made by Leica, not Sony, Fuji, Olympus.

      • Your quote: ‘Monochrom in a special limited edition color of chrome and black with a special Ralph Gibson signature on the top and a special edition 35 Summilux FLE. A fancy box and strap topped off this kit. Normally a Monochrom and a 35 Summilux would run you $13k so this one was more than double the cost of a normal set. It doesn’t do anything different but it sure is pretty!’, which is similar as ‘Nothing original or groundbreaking’.

        Only point you have is ‘Their own design’, to be clear, I am not undermining either technology, I love Sony and dream about Leica, but critical about the price difference which is obnoxious for cosmetic design. It might be acceptable if Ralph Gibson signs each camera with indelible ink or carves it out. It is probably carved out by machine or at best some in-house artists.

        Yep, missing something again 🙁

        • Core thing your missing….camera and lens made by Leica based on Camera and Lens designed and made by Leica…. So if Mercedes takes one of their cars and blings it out and sells it for twice the price, thats fine…..but what if Mercedes takes a Ford Mondeo changes the seats, carpet and paint job…slaps their logo on it and tries to sell it for 3 times the price? Maserati tried that with a Chrysler K car a few years ago…. Man was that thing ugly….. That’s the difference.

          • Hi Crinosil,

            I will still have a problem paying twice the price for Mercedes with bling, when I can get essentially the same ‘performance’ at the half the price. So any which way, a $2 bling on a perceived-excellent product or $2 bling on a perceived-mediocre product is still a $2 bling.

        • Well 100% made by Leica or not or 100% Sony branded by Hasselblad.
          You can look at it anyway you want, but 28.000 dollar or 10.000 or even 7500 dollar for a monochrome cannot be justified by any technology or what.

          It is all about Ego nothing more or less.

          Leica makes fine optics but beside the S2 all Leica digital camera’s deliver not the high level technology you expect regarding the price. The consumer Leica’s are more expensive than the OEM Panasonic. The LCD on the M8 and M9 were outdated at their announcement and the EVF of the M240 idem dito and cannot be upgrade, yeah it will be a M250

          And last but not least, the Monochrom is small, small, small, small niche which I can appreciate and has not the CMOS sensor from the Belgian Startup.

          Everybody knows that the Sensor FF is one of the High Cost element of an D-camera, but Leica choose not only a niche player but also a startup with no market experience nor presence !
          Nikon, Sony, Canon are clearly the market leaders in CMOS Sensors and can make them for a cost-efficient price and make the numbers to make the profit needed for the next generation development and factories.

          Many reviews and technical test, like DXO, show that leica’s Belgian CMOS cannot compete with the 24Mp’s from Nikon, Canon and Sony.

          Leica simply can’t make the numbers with the M, so the price will stay High, not because they are technology leaders, not because they are cost-leaders but because they have a insane loyal customer base

          That’s why they can ask 28.000 dollar for an M240 which isi n the base already to expensive

          Hasselbad doesn’t have that customer base in DSLR….

          • Oh my goodness but I wish I had consulted Mr. Van Den Broek before I bought a Leica. I could have saved myself soooo much money. And all the frustration of dealing with such insanely incompetent products. Heavens, the images are dreadful. I am beside myself. If only I had listened to Van Den Broek!!!

          • And even worse, Van Den Broek says everyone knew that Leicas were no good, apparently except me. I feel like such a fool.

          • You mean my Leica Monochrom isn’t justified? Stupid me, and here I was thinking that it was a joy to use and produced incredible image quality.

      • Your really reaching Steve. The RG Monochrome isn’t anything original or groundbreaking or a “nothing else like it” camera. It’s a monochrome in fancy (uglier) clothes.

        At least with the Hassleblad you could argue that it’s a better camera than it’s foundation.

        • Hi Bragg,

          I really respect Steve’s opinion but not necessarily agree to all of them. I hope by the word ‘reaching’ you don’t mean I am being rude. I am not really arguing on behalf of either of the abominations and really don’t understand why one asinine product gets praised and the other thrashed.

    • Who said that the Leica Monochrom was overpriced? expensive yes but worth every penny unlike the Hasselblad which is just in pure rip off territory. I am by no way rich and own a Leica Monochrom for which I had to sell all of my other camera gear and lenses just to get the body but its simply the best camera I have ever owned and its made by Leica – not a re skinned Sony like the Hasselblad.

      • Hi Paul,

        By no means I am saying Leica monochrom is overpriced, I have not used it and not qualified to make such judgement. I was referring to the price difference (15K) between ‘base’ monochrom and the special edition which is overpriced.

        • Hi FHU,

          Ah yes I know what your saying re the limited edition silver Leica Monochrom that too in my mind is in rip off territory for what you get but it will most probably retain its value much better than the Hassalblad.
          I got the 1.5 dioptre by Leica because of my failing eyes as I get older which I thought for £110.00 UK was way overpriced esp when you consider the same thing by Zeiss for the 15mm finder cost me £15.00 UK that’s a £95.00 difference. Personally I just don’t think it is worth the money Leica are asking for it – but you have no choice.

  31. Can someone please put the bullet proof claim to the test?
    I’d even be fine if they could put the tough as nails claim to the test. Sonyblad, meet hammer….

  32. I think this is great for Sony. I won’t defend the pricing, but then again, I don’t have that kind of money. But I could see how $11k to some people seems like $1k to me. The Sony a99 is a fine camera, and I think that it is deserving of a new chassis, coat of paint, knobs, premium grip and boxing. And I don’t mean to quibble over a couple thousand dollars, but this camera comes with the excellent Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 lens, and that costs $2k today. So the markup is really $6700, not $9000. I’m just saying that people out there can afford this camera and if they buy it, they are getting a great camera. Price is just relative.

    • Yes, I agree that the A99 is one of the best full frame DSLRs on the market, superb camera with some stellar lenses available. So $6700 mark up for some build and bling and logo. I guess if one wanted a bulletproof A99…

  33. Sad, sad, sad.
    Hasselblad have totally lost the plot her. I honestly think the special edition Leicas are a bit showbiz. But kinda make sense if people see them as some kind of investment. But at least it’s LEICA’s they are tarting up to that extreme and not somebody elses cast offs.

    This is honestly just a complete joke. When I was a junior designer I remember going to photography studios and seeing guys in action using Hasselblads and getting some superb results back.

    But this… over $7500 just for a new coat of paint and some shiny knobs. Ooh… and a Hasselblad logo. They must honestly think we’re complete mugs.

    Taking cars as an example… we all know that Audis, VWs and Skodas all share common components. But does an Audi S3 cost over 4 times as much as a Golf GTi?

    Audi S3 £30,640
    Golf GTI: £26,225

    Nope… thought not. Case rested.

    Am guessing the people at Phase One must be laughing so hard they can’t breathe.

  34. What Hasselblad is doing is an absolute embarrassment to the legacy and pedigree of what was once a pioneer in the technology of photography. And to be so transparent about it when everyone knows their new releases are inexpensive Sony’s in new skins. Mind boggling.

    That said, as a Leica fan (still LOVE my M9) – they’re not off the hook either, dressing up Panasonic product and selling for hundreds more with a red button.

  35. Looks already like what Leica is doing with their LeicaPana’s! Same camera, but different model name, red button, nice package and ready for sale is the 100% profit item! No development costs at all

    • Not even close to what Leica is doing, as I have already stated here. Leica does this with their P&S range..D-Lux. The D-Lux comes in at a $300 or even $400 premium over the Panasonic but you get longer warranty, better software and nicer aesthetics. Leica does not recreate a Fuji X-E2 and call it an MX and charge $7500 for it. Hassleblad mark up is insane and well beyond Leica’s $300-$400 difference. Leica also makes their own cameras, Hasselblad no longer does this.

      • Nah…it’s the kind of the same thing…But, Leica is just more reasonable in their pricing and bundling ….. It’s still basically slapping your name and a little cosmetics on someone else’s product…and reselling…. Unlike Fujifilm which sold Nikon DSLR bodies, BUT with their own sensor and firmware….I could almost live with this approach if Hasselblad at least rework the electronics and software..and the cameras shot better…..but at least for the Loony and other Hassony’s they were just cosmetic jobs with a ridiculous price. …..

        • Yes, no offense to Steve but Leica does the same thing, just at a different level. Admittedly, what Hassey is doing here is borderline obscene.

          Leica have for decades, not just with the digital cameras, rebadged other manufacturers’ products. For many years Minolta was their partner in crime with Minolta producing the R2-R5 cameras I believe, as well as the CL and several optics.

          It seems like the pattern is simply to rebadge products that are outside of their wheelhouse – the M environment.

          Funny, Minolta became Sony and now Hassey is copying them as well.

      • It’s basically the same… both take another company’s camera in a size below their in-house products, tart it up, and leverage their brand recognition to sell it for ~2x the price. What’s different is the size below Leica is P&S, while the size below Hasselblad is a DSLR. Here the price seems more outrageous because 2x a full frame camera + premium lens is a lot more (in $) than 2x a small P&S, but the profit margins (in %) are likely similar (that, of course, is why they do it in the first place! They need high margin products to help subsidize their in-house low volume stuff). And Hasselblad does a lot more redesigning of buttons/surfaces/materials than Leica does with its Leicasonics.

      • The Hasselblad HV kit should rather be compared to the Leica D-Lux 6 G-Star selling for $1.190.00!

        Compare that to the regular Panasonic Lumix LX7 Selling for $299.00. To make a similar kit one can add Panasonic’s own standard case for $75.00, leather neck strap for $30.00, a Lomography leather wrist strap for $11.00 and Lightroom 5 for $135.00.
        Together that’s $550.00. Don’t need or already have LR5? (Not an option with the Leica compacts.) Then $415.00 is enough.

        Conclusion: The Leica G-Star RAW camera is more than twice expensive than the regular Panasonic camera with comparable kit. Without LR5 many already have the price difference is almost three times. About as much more expensive as the Hasselblad HV is compared to a similar Sony A99 kit.

      • Right now at B+H, the Panasonic LX7 is $299 and the Leica D-Lux6 is $799. That’s 2.6 times the price of the Panasonic. The Leica may look more expensive, but the Panny looks more ergonomic. Warranty? You could throw the old Panasonic away and buy a new one and STILL have money left over. Software? Okay, I’ll give it that. The prices were different when they came out, but this is what they sell for today.

        Sorry, Steve. I didn’t mean to be rude. But I have real respect for Leica and therefore have always been disappointed with how they rebrand and drastically mark-up Panasonic P+S cameras. The Leica D-Lux series is for rich people who really want a red dot. Anyone who cares about camera performance would buy an RX100 instead.

    • Leica and Panasonic are sharing technologies with Leica involved in the design and approval of the lenses they put on these Panasonic-Leica joint cameras. Hasselblad is simply using Sony technology and Sony-Zeiss lenses, changing the body to make it look and feel different and then charging a premium.

  36. This is the first really interesting “fake” : it could resist to temperatures as low as -40 celsius grad. that’s much better than every other camera actually on the market (a camera that could be used on the Everest without any problems is a good thing for “extreme” photographers…)

  37. Could it be the people at the direction are not making photography at all, just drawing financial curves on a board expecting to be re-hired trimester after trimester ?

  38. It’s a real pitty, they could be designing and engineering great cameras, they have the brand, the history, but they think we are all fools, they should fire all the directive and marketing staff….

  39. Anyone who does buy this Camera must be mad is all I can say, mind you I am starting to think that the people at Hasselblad who ok’d this release must be mad too, and if this is the road that they intend to stay on maybe its best if they went bust.

  40. I have no problem with Hasselblad soaking some rich imbecile who only cares about the logo on his camera. If they can invest that money in making better pro cameras I say good for them. Keep doing it!

    • The problem is that they are not making any new cameras. No one is doing what they are doing..for a reason. But maybe this one will be a shocker and sell well. There are millions of millionaires in the word. How many of them are into cameras? Not sure. How many will buy a Leica S2 or M system or Medium Format rig? Quite a few. How many will buy a rebadged Sony A99? Not so sure on that one. Either way it is still a Sony A99 and those who buy a camera for the prestige are probably not into Sony cameras.

      • You have to think if that even if youre some shallow millionaire and just buying a camera for the name, you would go with a Leica….they are Smaller, lighter and have that ranger finder chic …. And then, instead, if your a millionaire that actual likes taking pictures then, you probably have GAS like the rest of us and so have Leica cause they take good pictures…and DSLRs from Nikon, Canon and/or Sony … And an E-M1… And an A7r….And a GR … And maybe a few medium format cameras….heckeven one or two of these from Hasselblad…… And, of course, all the quality lenses for every one of your cameras……BUT, BUT, BUT, if your that Millionare photography enthusiast, I’m willing to bet that like the rest of us you won’t buy one of these, or the other, Hasselblad / Sony abominations….. Because, I’m thinking, like the rest of us, you probably don’t like having your intelligence insulted either.

        • I agree.

          If I was rich I would splurge on a Leica M and maybe 3 really nice lenses, just because I enjoy photography and never had the chance to use a real rangefinder and Leicas are beautiful. I would also buy an OMD EM1, Fuji XT1, Fuji X100S and a bunch of nice Oly and Fuji lenses. Maybe also a Sony 7r and the 55.

          I would NOT pay a silly sum of money for a fancied up Sony camera with a Hasselblad logo on it. That’s just incredibly stupid. Then again, I know about camera equipment and understand the difference — maybe Hasselblad’s buyers do not.

          But since I’m not rich I will be choosing just one compact system camera in next year; probably a Fuji I think. Really like what they’re doing lately.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.