The curious thing about these $40,000.00 camera is are there enough professional photographers who actually have day rates high enough that will pay for a $40,000.00 camera that will be obsolete in 2 years, or is Hasselblad really depending on super-rich amateurs because I don't think many doctors and lawyers who used to be the mainstay of Hasselblad's customer base will be shelling out $40,000.00 for a camera to shoot pictures of their kids or summer vacation.

The Royal Ontario Museum has been using digital Hasselblads for a few years now to photograph artefacts. It's all studio work and each shot must be exhibition quality. It's impressive to see the results. I suppose when the time comes to replace their current gear they'll be looking at something like this.

I'm sure a well endowed or public institution can for such a purpose afford a Hasselblad digital. I was questioning in today's economy just how many professional photographers can justify such an expenditure.

BTW many museums to do very high resolution digital copies of art work also use scanning backs on 4x5 view cameras like those made by BetterLight to copy art work, as well as other brands of high resolution medium format digital MF backs. But there are only a few hundred such institutions, hardly enough sales to support an industry even at the high prices charged for MF digital backs and cameras. I suppose catalogue photography like that done for L.L. Bean and Lands End are also justifications for the high cost when thousands of photos of products are needed.

Hi David,

That $40,000.00 Hasselblad is now obsolete a week later, ha !

Now you must have the new 60.48 meg Phase One digital at
only $42,000.00 .

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-9312-9523

http://www.phaseone.com/Content/p1digitalbacks/P65plus/Introduction.aspx

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/p65-announced.shtml

Buying more lottery tickets,

Best regards,

My response remains the same that it is not something any but a very few of those photographers who are professionals can consider as being a justifiable cost except in very rare and unusual circumstances. If you take the US Labor statistics or even the professional photography association figures which are typically ego inflated, photography generally is still not a business that generate a gross that justifies that high an expenditure for a camera and especially for a MF digital Back but for a few individuals.

And for that matter there are really very few uses of a digital photograph that demand that kind of very high resolution.

With (35mm) body dSLR's already announced with 24 megapixel resolution at 1/10 the cost and more to come in the next few months, if I were invested in Hasselblad or Phase One, especially in this economy, I think I would be seriously looking at my options.

But of course any automobile driver likes to dream about a Ferrari. The funny thing is that ordinary folks like myself could own a Ferrari back in the 50's, but those days are no longer, so dreaming now is less fun when its unattainable.