Hasselblad Lunar mirrorless camera delayed till the summer

AP reports that Hasselblad have delayed until the summer the release of the Lunar - their first mirrorless  interchangeable lens camera based on the Sony NEX-7. The camera was supposed to start shipping this month (April). Maybe Hasselblad realized that they will be re-introducing an almost 2 years old camera (the Sony NEX-7 came out in August, 2011) and decided to wait until Sony brings the NEX-7 replacement out. Or maybe they were even smarter and scratched the entire Lunar project...

This entry was posted in Hasselblad and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Marc

    Maybe by then the nex-7n will be out

    • Exactly, they should at least wait and make the Lunar based on the NEX-7n.

      • SleeperSmith

        Yeah that’d make this piece of sh*t worth buying.


  • Nobody Special

    Me thinks this is what happens when ‘venture-capitalists’ hook into a company or product they know nothing, or little about. It’s all about return on the investment cash. Hasselblad was/is too good for these kind of idiots.

  • Yoursadgrandma

    I think this camera is going to struggle to see the light of day. Too many things working against it. If only they made actual Hasse lenses for the mount, then maybe there would be a viable niche. As it stands now an over-lacquered shell is not enough.

    On the other had I heard recently that the D Lux was Leicas best selling camera so we can never underestimate the power of branding (and supposed specialized image handling).

    • Nobody Special

      I agree completely. Sometimes re-branding can bring in new customers, or even lower-end product as C and N have done as well as Sony. Leica and now, Hasselblad (trying) have taken an approach that seem incapable of producing themselves. Digitally, even small sensor point and shoots can produce really good results, especially when compared to the old smaller, ‘Instamatic’ type film cameras, whose results are even surpassed now by cell phones. If Hasselblad continues on without dilluting the brand, so be it.

      • Sperdynamite

        Um no, even disposable cameras have not been “surpassed” (whatever that means) by cell phones.

        • Mike

          Do you see the irony of your comment? You disagree, but don’t know what he’s talking about. Surpassed means to be greater than, to move ahead. “I don’t know what you said, but you’re wrong” ha ha

          It’s not even the Hassleblad is using an NEX 7. It’s that are charging a multi, multi thousand dollar premium. Put a Bentley badge on a VW…. it’s still a VW.

          • putting a Bentley badge on a VW is a crime, a crime against VW’s, as is this folly turning a very good (if not totally brilliant) camera in to a gasterbation tool for the clinically over cashed and under IQ’ed brigade.

          • Bentley->VW
            Toyota->Public transport

          • asdf

            Public transport->RMIT lecturers

          • VW (or Toyota or even Hyundai) + $400,000 in the bank to spend on travel etc > Bentley

            Sony Nex7+ $4000 in bank to spend on travel > Lunar

          • No longer Pablo Ricasso

            I’ve seen some photos coming from a four dollar Kroger brand throw away cardboard 800 speed film camera that make me scratch my head and think that I’ve wasted a lot of money on pricey gear. I’ll tell you when I see a camera phone that “surpasses” that.

          • crap

            Or put a brain into you, you are still you.

          • Mike

            I’m hurt, I think.

        • JakeB

          Skipped few English classes in school, maybe?

      • What the hell

        try rewriting that in English, it might even make sense.

        • Kikica J

          Try reading again, it might make sense.

      • Nobody Special

        Oh boy. For those ‘scribblers’ who don’t know what an ‘Instamatic’ was, it was a cheap, very common camera type of the mid’ 1960’s into the 1970’s. You would load the ‘camera’ with drop-in film cartridges, the film negative was about a half-inch square, the results were generally of very poor resolution. Next: today’s cell-phone ‘cameras’ vastly out-perform or surpass – meaning better than.

        • No longer Pablo Ricasso

          110 Agree. 126 maybe… Disposable 35mm not.

          • Nobody Special

            Like I said: Instamatic from the 60’s/70’s, I didn’t say anything else. Yes, I agree with you about the current 35 disposables.

  • They should delay this embarrassment permanently.

    • Benmarkley

      This is the best comment about LUNAR yet 😛

    • kuishinbou

      Yes, they should just cancel it, as it is definitely going to be a failure and it has already been a huge embarrassment. Instead, they should develop a large sensor mirrorless system with AF, no AA filter, and fast primes for less than $3500 for the body. That would be fantastic, but unfortunately they appear to be clueless.

      To be honest, I was excited when I heard they were going to enter the mirrorless market, as I thought they would introduce a large sensor system, which is needed. But, instead, they announced this ridiculous idea…A great way to waste money!!!

  • fjfjjj

    Oh no, what will I do without my Italian-airbrushed NEX?

  • King of Swaziland


  • malchick743

    Scrap the entire project, that would be the best move…

    Honestly who will want a rebadged NEX-7n or something like that

    • madmax

      The same people that want a rebadged Panasonic camera with Leica brand on it.

      • Daniel Watson

        Leica may be panasonic, but there is no Leica camera that is identical internally to a particular panasonic..at least that I can think of.

  • ysengrain

    Delayed … for ever ? Yessss !!

  • I like it. I think it would make an excellent book-end

  • Opps!

    That’s funny, what a waste of time.

  • beavis

    Probably some problems with grips…?

  • StevieG

    The key difference, I think between the Leica/Panasonic and Hassy/Sony links is the glass. If we give people some credit in that they realise that Leica makes great lenses and Panasonic is great at electronics/sensors etc, the resulting combination is the “best of both worlds”. Folks would then be happy to pay a little more for the Leica experience compact camera (even though the panasonic has the same lens!). The problem with the Hassy/Sony link is that they’ve gone about it the wrong way round. If it was the cosmetically altered body with Hassy glass on the front then it might work, but good as they may be, the sony lenses just don’t have the same “cache” as the swedish firms glass. As it is I agree the Lunar is highly likely to fail. I have no interest in it at all.

    • Ken Elliott

      SteveG is spot on with his analysis. If Hasselblad took the Sony 7n electronics package, added real (German) Zeiss lenses, housed it in an outstanding package with well engineered controls, it might have a chance. I think they see Leica having success and want to go that route.

      • Leica has success with their own M models, I doubt they sell many of the rebranded Panasonic cameras.

    • M43

      There is no Hassy glass, it is made by third parties such as Zeiss or Fuji. And Panasonic sux at cameras, they specialise in toys.

      • Nobody Special

        I would add that, even Leica, as well as Zeiss and other brands have much of their ‘glass’ (blanks) and some of the optics made by major glass houses like Schott. Either way, the glass and lenses are made to the spec’ of the company in question, or are usually/mostly, depending on the lense(s)finally assembled in house.

        • crap

          Really? Anyway, you learned one thing today: there is no Hassy glass. OK?

          • Nobody Special

            Duh, yes, that is true – there is no ‘hassy glass’ – just Zeiss labeled, Zeiss spec’d glass some made somewhere else and some still made in Germany.

      • madmax

        You are right: GH2 and GH3 cameras are only toys for videographers, but better than Nikon and Canon toys.

        • Pablo Ricasso

          Right, if you say so Sherlock.

        • M43

          I only shoot stills and N and C vomit on M43. Splash! Full of puke! No, it’s not a matter of taste / point of view / whatever.

    • Sahaja

      Hasselblad never made lenses – so where would you get this “Hassey glass”?

  • Wengo Lee

    For God’s sake, Scrap the project before it is too late.

  • They should have based this off an Epson R-D1, and upgrade the sensor, monitor & controls. That would be one of the best cameras if they would just update it….

    • ProtoWhalePig

      Why? What, specifically, is so good about the RD-1, other than that it fulfills your digital rangefinder fantasy?

      Not much, I guess, since you recommend they upgrade…everything of importance in it.

  • StefanNils

    It´s funny all those net-comments from people who thinks that they know all about the camera-brands. Simple fact is that a lens isn´t better because it has a classic brand on the ring around the front glass. I´ve been using the most Hasselblad models as well as the most Leica and Nikon cameras and I´m still most impressed by Olympus lenses as well as some Sigma-lenses. Yes the super achromat 250 is a brilliant lens but I get better quality with Pentax 300 mm 4,0 6X7 than a Zeiss 250 4,0 as well as a Sigma 35 1,4 on a Nikon D800 E than i get with a Distagon 50 mm 4,0 on a 205 with a CFV-39.

    Refering to classic brands as better is only to admit that you´re not capable to sort out a lens by yourself. It´s the same thing as refering to BMW as more sporty than everything else. That´s just to admit that you can´t sort out a cars chassi but you´re easily fooled by the manufacturers adverts.

    Lets hope for a Hasselblad Lunar with nice prime lenses like Olympus 12, 45 and 75 for MFT!

    • I have not heard of any indications that Hasselblad will produce their own lenses for the Lunar camera. If that’s the case, the Lunar camera makes more sense.

      • No longer Pablo Ricasso

        What would make more sense is if they concentrated on trying to get someone to develop a sensor that can fill the whole frame that they can expose. But for all we know they might just have Zeiss gearing up to produce a whole bunch of lenses.

      • Sahaja

        Isn’t Zeiss supposed to be bringing out some lenses in NEX and Fuji mounts soon?

        Perhaps they are waiting for those then at least they can sell it with Zeiss lenses.

  • JW

    This is still the most abysmally stupid cameras I have ever seen.

  • Tuxfriend

    The Hasselblad Lunar – a nice paper weight that makes the Pentax K-01 look good. Maybe it would be better to call it the Hasselhoff Lunatic …? 😉

  • Flo

    Perhaps Hasselblad doesn’t expect their customers to even know, that they’re just buying a regular Sony camera wrapped into a bunch of junk. And god knows, they might be right in some cases.

    The fact that they’re working with an existing camera from an other manufacturer is one thing – but the way they do it, thats the crime.
    As a distinguished camera manufacturer they must have been able to create a “new camera body” and not use an existing and wrap around some fancy stuff… I mean, you can see the NEX body underneath – and to me thats one of the main failures!
    I love my old 500C/M and it hurst to see them do such crap.

    As mentioned before Hasselblad is not a lens manufacturer, but a camera manufacturer and this is their expertise.
    Imagine a new (less luxury-fancy) Hasselblad Body partially based on the successor of the NEX-7, combined with some specific designed Zeiss lenses. Maybe with a new Sensor size: for example something like a square APS-C format or whatever… and they’re on the right way.

    At least we have something to argue about… 😉

  • Dixie

    Same kind of idiots are going to purchase Lunatic who are paying ridiculous premium for Leica products!

  • Hasselblad had a full page color ad for this camera in the Wall St Journal magazine today.

  • Back to top