Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[EoinC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Okay, so now we've heard the news about a new appointment to the Hasselblad team. And many have tossed in their comments. 

 

What has all this to do with "Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D"?

It's all part of the fine art of digression.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[LocalHero1953]

It's all part of the fine art of digression.

And is usually a sign that the original thread topic has been beaten to death

[almoore]

As noted earlier, one of my positions is heading the strategy portfolio of an offshore drilling company. I don't need to be a driller to fulfill this function. Do Hasselblad exec's have to qualify as credible photographers to hold their positions?

 

I accept your point, although if your employer was citing your supposed drilling prowess (as Hasselblad cite MT's photography) in a press release as part of the justification for appointing you, then it might provoke questioning. Also, if you had a past history as a shouty blogger with a tendency towards lashing out at things you don't understand within the offshore industry, then it might have prevented you from being employed in the first place.

 

I realise that the Hasselblad Foundation is now separate from Victor Hasselblad AB, but the two are still intimately linked and both have a long association with photographic work of the highest quality. That link doesn't sit comfortably with the appointment of MT in an allegedly influential role, given his loudly professed contempt for the art world that he feels has unjustly rejected him:

 

https://blog.mingthein.com/2014/08/08/questioning-the-art-market/

 

The Foundation has a history of rewarding artists via the annual Hasselblad Award that reads like a roll call - Tillmans, Paul Graham, Mikhailov, the Bechers, Calle - of everything that MT despises. It would be a shame if the ongoing link between the Foundation and the camera manufacturer was jeopardised by a shift in philosophy at the latter.

Edited March 30, 2017 by almoore

[phovsho]

That blog post is very revealing.  

[gpwhite]

And is usually a sign that the original thread topic has been beaten to death

 

 

to Wattsy,  I think if you met Ming and worked with him, your understandable cynicism would be melted. Whereas he has the confidence of a professional politician, he does know what he is doing and explaining. Ming, in a phrase, is not Fake News.

 

But the larger point here is the key...  there is no comparison between an X1D and an SL. I think I understand how this notion got traction, given the particular spins of review artists like Lloyd Chambers, but in fact the two systems cannot  really be compared, IMHO.

 

BTW, when I speak of the SL system, I refer principally to the R glass that Leica must hold in very high regard,,,  not those SL monsters developed to provide annuities to orthopedists. 

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

And is usually a sign that the original thread topic has been beaten to death

+1

 

Time for a new topic Leica S008 verses Nikon D5x

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...

BTW, when I speak of the SL system, I refer principally to the R glass that Leica must hold in very high regard,,,  not those SL monsters developed to provide annuities to orthopedists. 

 

 

Well, the more I use them, the more I come to rely on the SL native zoom lenses. They simply perform better, or at least on par with, the R lenses (or most M lenses for that matter) and they give me access to all of the SL's features.

[YellowBelly]

+1

 

Time for a new topic Leica S008 verses Nikon D5x

Let's hope we're comparing S008 vs XF IQ3 100

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Well, the more I use them, the more I come to rely on the SL native zoom lenses. They simply perform better, or at least on par with, the R lenses (or most M lenses for that matter) and they give me access to all of the SL's features.

But there a brick

[scott kirkpatrick]

I realise that the Hasselblad Foundation is now separate from Victor Hasselblad AB, but the two are still intimately linked and both have a long association with photographic work of the highest quality. That link doesn't sit comfortably with the appointment of MT in an allegedly influential role, given his loudly professed contempt for the art world that he feels has unjustly rejected him:

 

https://blog.mingthein.com/2014/08/08/questioning-the-art-market/

 

The Foundation has a history of rewarding artists via the annual Hasselblad Award that reads like a roll call - Tillmans, Paul Graham, Mikhailov, the Bechers, Calle - of everything that MT despises. It would be a shame if the ongoing link between the Foundation and the camera manufacturer was jeopardised by a shift in philosophy at the latter.

 

The blog post is quite insightful about the low likelihood that MT's output will ever be a hot seller in art galleries or on museum walls.  He appears to have an Asperger's (no longer a PC term) attitude to complete control of his craft at a deep level, which makes him a great advisor to Hasselblad AB.  But his attempts to provide an emotional storyline to his pictures are not very compelling. I would assume that his deep understanding of the cameras would fairly naturally extend to the businesses of developing and selling them. (Selling, at least.)  Moving in the other direction, from selling to understanding photographers' needs, is harder.

 

The Hasselblad Foundation exists to give back to the photographic world from the continued success, which is certainly not assured, of Hasselblad AB.  Hasselblad AB is now Ming's job.  Let's worry about that.

 

scott

 

P.S.  I suspect that he doesn't feel that the art world has "unfairly" rejected him. I read the blog post to show some understanding on his part that he simply lives in a different world than they do.  

Edited March 30, 2017 by scott kirkpatrick

[jaapv]

I accept your point, although if your employer was citing your supposed drilling prowess (as Hasselblad cite MT's photography) in a press release as part of the justification for appointing you, then it might provoke questioning. Also, if you had a past history as a shouty blogger with a tendency towards lashing out at things you don't understand within the offshore industry, then it might have prevented you from being employed in the first place.

 

I realise that the Hasselblad Foundation is now separate from Victor Hasselblad AB, but the two are still intimately linked and both have a long association with photographic work of the highest quality. That link doesn't sit comfortably with the appointment of MT in an allegedly influential role, given his loudly professed contempt for the art world that he feels has unjustly rejected him:

 

https://blog.mingthein.com/2014/08/08/questioning-the-art-market/

 

The Foundation has a history of rewarding artists via the annual Hasselblad Award that reads like a roll call - Tillmans, Paul Graham, Mikhailov, the Bechers, Calle - of everything that MT despises. It would be a shame if the ongoing link between the Foundation and the camera manufacturer was jeopardised by a shift in philosophy at the latter.

The way I read this blog post is that he complains about the gallery system of selling fine art, feeling it curbs expression through commercialism, rather than against specific photographers.

[almoore]

The way I read this blog post is that he complains about the gallery system of selling fine art, feeling it curbs expression through commercialism, rather than against specific photographers.

 

The way I read it is that he feels personally wronged by the people he believes unfairly get to define what is and isn't art. There's not an awful lot of ambiguity to this:

 

I’ve...met with a number of galleries and buyers both locally and internationally – some of which were quite famous and representing very well-known names in the industry...and the conclusions I’ve come to are both rather grim and extremely depressing...it makes me believe that what is commonly perceived as ‘fine art’ photography is in reality no more authentic than the images created to spec for a commercial client. In reality, there’s nothing different at all – other than the level of pretentiousness...My work will not be conventional fine art photography as defined and censored by the art establishment...we have now figured out why the great artists were never popular in their lifetimes: it’s because they didn’t fit in with the current expectations or gestalt of their time. They were ahead of their peers. But once the world caught up, they found their place – and then were imitated and sought after by the establishment in turn. The cycle continues. I know where I want to be in it

 

His conclusion combines a startling degree of arrogance with sheer self-delusion. But, if you think he's right, now is the time to buy his 'Ultraprints' - think of their immense value to your descendants once the art world catches up with his greatness.

[LocalHero1953]

If you draw your own line between art and non-art, and then declare that your work falls on the art side, I suspect you've taken a wrong turn somewhere. Better to just decide what you want to do and be unfazed whether others call it art or not.

 

Since MT, in his article, seems particularly worried by galleries that won't buy his stuff, or won't exhibit it for sale, I think he should be more concerned about whether it's commercial enough rather than whether it's art .

 

But AFAIC good luck to him in his new job.

[wattsy]

The blog post is quite insightful about the low likelihood that MT's output will ever be a hot seller in art galleries or on museum walls.  He appears to have an Asperger's (no longer a PC term) attitude to complete control of his craft at a deep level, which makes him a great advisor to Hasselblad AB.  But his attempts to provide an emotional storyline to his pictures are not very compelling.

 

Ming states in the comments following this blog piece that he has "mild Asperger’s syndrome" though I'm not sure that should preclude him from being a successful artist. Many of his comments serve to reinforce the bitterness that runs through the blog piece (at one point he hints that at least part of the problem might be that he is Asian). It is a pity he seems to feel that the art world owes him recognition because his commercial work – watches, industrial stuff – is very accomplished and appears to have opened many doors for him outside the gallery/art scene.

 

His conclusion combines a startling degree of arrogance with sheer self-delusion. But, if you think he's right, now is the time to buy his 'Ultraprints' - think of their immense value to your descendants once the art world catches up with his greatness.

 

 

It is a remarkably arrogant position to take – at least so publicly. Nothing wrong with believing in your art but to even hint that you might be some kind of 'unappreciated in your time' artistic great like Vincent van Gogh or El Greco is simply incredible.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited March 30, 2017 by wattsy

[wattsy]

But the larger point here is the key...  there is no comparison between an X1D and an SL. I think I understand how this notion got traction, given the particular spins of review artists like Lloyd Chambers, but in fact the two systems cannot  really be compared, IMHO.

 

 

I think that both being new systems and "high end" mirrorless at a similar price point will inevitably lead to comparisons being made. I'm a strong believer that a bigger negative (and sensor) provides a different look but with the Hasselblad being 'only' 44mm x 33m and the 35mm framed SL having access to some lenses of the highest quality (including the bucket sized 50 Summilux ) is the difference so stark that the systems shouldn't be compared?

Edited March 30, 2017 by wattsy

[almoore]

It is a remarkably arrogant position to take – at least so publicly. Nothing wrong with believing in your art but to even hint that you might be some kind of 'unappreciated in your time' artistic great like Vincent van Gogh or El Greco is simply incredible.

Time will tell. We should reconvene the thread in three hundred years time to see how his 'Ultraprints' are getting on.

[wattsy]

Time will tell. We should reconvene the thread in three hundred years time to see how his 'Ultraprints' are getting on.

 

 

Might be sooner if Ming becomes the surprise winner of the 2018 Hasselblad Award.

Edited March 30, 2017 by wattsy

[almoore]

Might be sooner if Ming becomes the surprise winner of the 2018 Haselblad Award.

That's a very good point. Expect an official announcement soon to acknowledge the measurable supremacy of the Hyperprint over lower resolution - and therefore obviously inferior - alternatives.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Peter H]

......................

But the larger point here is the key...  there is no comparison between an X1D and an SL...................................

 

 

Given that probably the vast majority of cameras are sold to people who buy them for the pleasure they'll get in using them for taking photos that they like rather than as professional tools of the trade, any two cameras can be compared by anyone who is considering how to spend their next dollop of cash on their enthusiasm/hobby/pastime/art. 

 

Surely it's disingenuous to fail to see points of comparison between a small medium-format camera and a big small-format camera , made by interestingly comparable and venerable brands and costing similar-sized piles of money.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Wow!  what do we learn from the pile-up of interest in this one rather contrived thread?  Not unlike the tsunami of comments that Ming's original blog post generated.  You can read the blog post in 15-20 minutes, but the comments will require several evenings (and are interesting).

 

I'm hoping that he will be allowed public statements on the "strategic direction" in which he hopes to push Hasselblad.  One good thing is that I can't imagine anyone to whom the Leica strategy of luxury alongside of excellence would be less appealing.  Executed skillfully by Leica it has kept Leitz/Leica alive through some rough patches.  Executed with clownish incompetence by Hasselblad, it nearly finished them.  Let's hope that one is off the table.  It hasn't seemed to occur to Phase, the other 100 MPx provider.  So where does he want to go?

 

scott

Edited March 30, 2017 by scott kirkpatrick