kdemas
Enjoy Life.
I understand, to a point, what they're trying to do. They point out other manufacturers do similar things, like Leica, but they contend that's just a re-paint and not a "different product" like they're offering.
I can see some wild aesthetics being attractive to some, I can even see myself thinking a radical design would be kind of neat. What Hasselblad isn't understanding, I believe, is that the 6 times the price for the EXACT same performance, regardless of packaging, will lead to ridicule from almost any photo enthusiast. They have gone the re-branding road before, think X-Pan, but the X-Pan didn't cost 6 times as much as the differently badged Fuji offering.
I think the niche they're going after is wafer thin. The same people who buy the diamond encrusted iPhones for thousands of bucks. And to be clear, if someone wants to spend that, I have no problem with it. I do think creating a radical looking camera that is merely just a shell over a rather affordable camera is eliminating a very large potential audience.
They could have made the exact same design, with SOME performance differentiation (even custom software with expanded features) and priced it at Double the Nex 7 and there would have been more people biting.
Too bad. I like the idea of breaking the aesthetic mold, being a bit of a design whore myself. This is just too far out in the price category to be taken really seriously and to appeal to the younger audience they're trying to attract.
I can see some wild aesthetics being attractive to some, I can even see myself thinking a radical design would be kind of neat. What Hasselblad isn't understanding, I believe, is that the 6 times the price for the EXACT same performance, regardless of packaging, will lead to ridicule from almost any photo enthusiast. They have gone the re-branding road before, think X-Pan, but the X-Pan didn't cost 6 times as much as the differently badged Fuji offering.
I think the niche they're going after is wafer thin. The same people who buy the diamond encrusted iPhones for thousands of bucks. And to be clear, if someone wants to spend that, I have no problem with it. I do think creating a radical looking camera that is merely just a shell over a rather affordable camera is eliminating a very large potential audience.
They could have made the exact same design, with SOME performance differentiation (even custom software with expanded features) and priced it at Double the Nex 7 and there would have been more people biting.
Too bad. I like the idea of breaking the aesthetic mold, being a bit of a design whore myself. This is just too far out in the price category to be taken really seriously and to appeal to the younger audience they're trying to attract.