Let the ill-informed, irrational whining begin.
Hasselblad is the narrowest of niche market players. They've diminished their most valuable asset – their brand name – by releasing the laughingstock of the digital camera market.
As a consumer, it would be bad enough for Canon to throw good money down the medium format rat hole developing their own product. To buy a failing company in a shrinking market would be ridiculous.
Canon and Nikon have had well over 50 years to research and consider the medium format market. During the film era, it would have been cheaper and easier to develop a medium format camera and the market segment was much larger. Yet, neither company did so. Today, the market has shrunk and the cost of entry has risen.
This isn't about whether or not Canon (or Nikon) are innovative. Innovation has nothing to do with this decision, it's just common sense.
Thanks for you unfocused reply. Some economic principles are to be discussed:
- The market leader delivers acceptable price and quality, but is never the best
- A Label and its reputation has a value and can be sold, either to sb else or it can be milked until its no longer there
Canon is the marked leader, thats unquestioned. For sure pictures and videos can be taken by ther equipment, but either has their equipment the best specs or performance nor is it the cheapest (50L vs 50 1.4 Sigma). Further its not the most innovative, Examples are the Sig 18-35 zoom, again the 50mm Sigma which is the first affordable non Gauss 50mm, or the much better exmor sensors in the Sony / Nikon bodies. In sensor performance Canon is the worst of the bigger players now, why? Just because the smaller players have to be innovative against the market leader and Canon does not.
As for the label value, in my opinion Canon is milking their label. People do change brand only under really high pressure, because of habit and for high changing costs. Newcomer buy what they see most frequent, and thats Canon of course. To compare with cars, end of nineties, mercedes sold their high quality image by building a new generation of E-Classes in much lower quality, sold "Opel" quality for Mercedes prices. They needed expensive warranty efforts to partly earn back their reputation, and are still not finished until now. Audi for comparision worked 20 years to earn their quality reputation and label value, to reach same prestige levelas BMW and Mercedes have.
The danger for Canon is, that by their non-innovation, high price politics they sell their label now. Whats later, when high end users do the swich in large numbers and newcomers buy whats said to be better it might be quite late. They may shrink as the complete medium format world has by not going digital in time. This may happen, when EF-mount is getting old and new trends are overslept.