Hasselblad joining in the fray: It looks like Hasselblad is joining the ranks of Sony, Olympus, and Kodak. Hasselblad's True Zoom is made for the Motorola Moto Z. The True Zoom is...

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

It looks like Hasselblad is joining the ranks of Sony, Olympus, and Kodak. Hasselblad's True Zoom is made for the Motorola Moto Z. The True Zoom is designed to change the Moto Z cellphone into a more "standard" style of camera. I think it is only a matter of time before other manufactures catch on about the cellphone market. Thoughts?

James Slick Loc: Pittsburgh,PA

From everything I've read, (bear in mind I have no experience with this device..) It's either a mediocre or worse device. A small P&S may be a better option for someone looking to go beyond their phone cam. YMMV!

repleo Loc: Boston

Another nail in the coffin. ???

SteveR Loc: Michigan

It depends on the level of photography that people want. If they want photos for their cell phones and the internet, then cell phones will probably do well enough. One aspect of the cell phone is that they're handy. However, how much control does a cell phone give you over your photograph? Anybody interested in photography at all will go with a DSLR. There will always be a core base who will use DLSR's. I have a cell phone and haven't taken a photo with it yet.

PhotoArtsLA Loc: Boynton Beach

Hasselblad charges $100 for a lens shade for its $3,100 80mm lens. Getting involved on the flip side of their high end market is a bit strange. That said, it looks like this device is an add-on for the phone, offering a decent zoom lens and so forth at only $299. Hasselblad just wants to make a buck in the cell phone market involving a niche phone they will not have a problem supplying.

When your DSLRs rise to a discounted price of $44,995, you are not selling many of them, and so, other profit streams become necessary.

I picked up the Hasselblad 50c back for my 503CW when it was on a terrific sale at only $10,000. Yesterday, my Blad system arrived from California and so it will be fun testing the thing out.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

PhotoArtsLA wrote:

I picked up the Hasselblad 50c back for my 503CW when it was on a terrific sale at only $10,000. Yesterday, my Blad system arrived from California and so it will be fun testing the thing out.

Nice!! Post some photos for us. I have an old Yashica and liked the medium format, even though it was not the quality camera that you have. I got some nice photos with it.

James Slick Loc: Pittsburgh,PA

SteveR wrote:

It depends on the level of photography that people want. If they want photos for their cell phones and the internet, then cell phones will probably do well enough. One aspect of the cell phone is that they're handy. However, how much control does a cell phone give you over your photograph? Anybody interested in photography at all will go with a DSLR. There will always be a core base who will use DLSR's. I have a cell phone and haven't taken a photo with it yet.

In this case It's an add on to a phone, and it costs more than (insert any brand here..) than a P&S camera. I use my phone camera for snapshots. But any contemplating this "mod" for their phone would be better served by buying a standalone P&S camera. (at least right now). Obviously it's not a serious photography tool, (Even if it does have the Hassy brand). When I was a kid in the I had a bicycle that was AMF. AMF briefly owned Harley-Davidson......My Bike wasn't a Harley Davidson!

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Err... anyone here heard of marketing?

License a BIG name, stamp it on your whatever and sell three times as much if not more.

ONLY 299.00??? That is the price of most 'smart phones'!!!

Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally cheap indeed.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

So who actually makes it....., Samsung?!?!
SS

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Who knows.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

James Slick wrote:

From everything I've read, (bear in mind I have no experience with this device..) It's either a mediocre or worse device. A small P&S may be a better option for someone looking to go beyond their phone cam. YMMV!

Furthermore, today's inexpensive pocket cameras generally offer more features and have easier controls than phone cameras.

repleo Loc: Boston

$299 to be able to say ' here's a quick shot from my Hasselblad...' There could be plenty of takers.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

repleo wrote:

$299 to be able to say ' here's a quick shot from my Hasselblad...' There could be plenty of takers.

At best, will only impress fellow photographers. The average, non-photographer will likely respond with, "your Hassel what?!?"

James Slick Loc: Pittsburgh,PA

rook2c4 wrote:

Furthermore, today's inexpensive pocket cameras generally offer more features and have easier controls than phone cameras.

I have a P&S Samsung that is about the same size as this add on, uses a microSD card and charges from Micro USB (therefore it's as easy to take with my phone as this Hassy Mod and phone.) Naturally, being a camera, the controls are more natural. All at a Wally World price of $89!

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

repleo wrote:

Another nail in the coffin. ???

I don't believe it is for DSLR's but maybe for point and shoot. The newiPhone 7 has twin lenses - a wide angle and a telephoto. The telephoto shoots optically up to x2 then up to x10 using software. It also enables the user to shoot RAW and process in LR. Just how much processing can be achieved remains to be seen, but most point and shoot users are happy with JPEG. Android/iPhones are also handy for close focus, so they do cover a lot of bases for a lot of people. But those of us who use DSLR's/mirrorless won't be able to replace our cameras with mobiles just yet.