Phase One Announces Leadership Transition - New CEO and Chairman

[SrMphoto]

Leica collaborate afcourse with Panasonic, all electronic parts and chips are Panasonic, Leica made in germany is the body, design and the lenses.
without the panasonic part leica could only produce analoge film cameras.
Leica made all these lenses for panasonic Video Cameras all the years in the past.

None of those are Chinese companies. The collaboration with Panasonic is a long and fruitful one. They also have more cooperation with Sigma, which is also not a Chinese company.

 

[mristuccia]

It is not my intention to derail this thread from its main topic, but this discussion made me reflect on two things.

The first, is the law of diminishing return, which oddly enough creates a fictitious asymptote to a digital technology that could potentially not have any. The limiting factor being the cost/benefit ratio, not technology.

The second, and this one comes to mind quite frequently, is the transition from analog to digital. This pivotal moment represents both the greatest revolution and the most profound mystery to me. Why did we make this switch? Was analog technology truly at its limit when we made such transition, or did we simply choose a cowardly shortcut? Were we at another asymptote, maybe in this case a technological one? Yes, costs and signal to noise ratio. But how did we come to the realization that in order to better represent an organic reality, we needed a numerical eye? It almost seems like an oxymoron.

Anyway, after all these years working mostly digital, I find myself drawn back to the analog world: mechanical watches, vinyl records, film photography, and so on... It feels like I've lived in a fake world, an illusion of reality. It's like I'm finally seeing the matrix.

I don't know, but two things emerge from these reflections: 1) I am no longer a professional photographer, if I ever was one. 2) I am getting old.

 

[Rod S.]

It is not my intention to derail this thread from its main topic, but this discussion made me reflect on two things.

The first, is the law of diminishing return, which oddly enough creates a fictitious asymptote to a digital technology that could potentially not have any. The limiting factor being the cost/benefit ratio, not technology.

The second, and this one comes to mind quite frequently, is the transition from analog to digital. This pivotal moment represents both the greatest revolution and the most profound mystery to me. Why did we make this switch? Was analog technology truly at its limit when we made such transition, or did we simply choose a cowardly shortcut? Were we at another asymptote, maybe in this case a technological one? Yes, costs and signal to noise ratio. But how did we come to the realization that in order to better represent an organic reality, we needed a numerical eye? It almost seems like an oxymoron.

Anyway, after all these years working mostly digital, I find myself drawn back to the analog world: mechanical watches, vinyl records, film photography, and so on... It feels like I've lived in a fake world, an illusion of reality. It's like I'm finally seeing the matrix.

I don't know, but two things emerge from these reflections: 1) I am no longer a professional photographer, if I ever was one. 2) I am getting old.

@mristuccia , this is an interesting topic and one deserving of its own thread. It may well generate many comments. Please start a new thread for it.

 

[Reginald Fluggelding]

Phase doing a partnership with a Korean or Japanese company (with Chinese manufacturing capability) as a few people have mentioned could be a great thing. I don't think they want to compete in the $7K bracket though. The problem is there is a massive gap between those circa $7K systems and what Phase offers, and there is the knowledge gap too: lack of knowledge from users that Phase One even exists or why they should consider making such a large investment for diminishing returns (the user/consumer/pro).

If they could offer a $14K (just sub $20K) system and do some decent marketing they could take some of that niche in-between $7k system and what they offer now. Get a bigger market share, lower margin, but higher number of units sold. At least have a money making entry level model, and then a halo product like the IQ4.
There will always be those buyers that just want the 'better than everybody else's gear', just for bragging rights — all the gear and no idea crowd. But if it's down to a $7K price point, vs $50K, those with the means thin out a bit. A lot of pros would be willing to stretch to double the GFX/Hassleblad investment, but triple/quadruple is too much. They can still be the premium brand — just better to be the premium brand that is still in relevant and still trading.

At the moment the XC cameras give me the vibe of those terrible Hasselblad lunar or whatever they were cameras that Hasselblad did when they were floundering around 15–20 years ago: just a money grab/accountant/money man endeavour. The Phase One website is a joke, I just had a quick look and you can't even see a camera/back without digging through some menus. I'm actually their customer base and I find it repellant.

 

[TechTalk]

It is not my intention to derail this thread from its main topic, but this discussion made me reflect on two things.

The first, is the law of diminishing return, which oddly enough creates a fictitious asymptote to a digital technology that could potentially not have any. The limiting factor being the cost/benefit ratio, not technology.

The second, and this one comes to mind quite frequently, is the transition from analog to digital. This pivotal moment represents both the greatest revolution and the most profound mystery to me. Why did we make this switch? Was analog technology truly at its limit when we made such transition, or did we simply choose a cowardly shortcut? Were we at another asymptote, maybe in this case a technological one? Yes, costs and signal to noise ratio. But how did we come to the realization that in order to better represent an organic reality, we needed a numerical eye? It almost seems like an oxymoron.

Anyway, after all these years working mostly digital, I find myself drawn back to the analog world: mechanical watches, vinyl records, film photography, and so on... It feels like I've lived in a fake world, an illusion of reality. It's like I'm finally seeing the matrix.

I don't know, but two things emerge from these reflections: 1) I am no longer a professional photographer, if I ever was one. 2) I am getting old.

I don't think of "digital" imaging as separate from analog imaging. I think of the digital portion of the process as just an intermediate means for the storage and editing of analogue images, captured on an analogue electronic sensor, which are always viewed as analogue images from a monitor or print. That said, I do understand how you feel about it and share some of that sentiment.

As a practical matter, earning my living thru photography, I jumped into the digital world earlier than many with a Leaf DCB II back which captured 4 megapixel color images by combining multiple shots taken thru a rotating wheel of red, green, and blue filters. I realized that digital would quickly overtake film and that for high volume shooting (print and online product catalogs, supermarket weekly newspaper advertising, etc.) was already a more practical and cost-effective solution than film by the mid 1990s when I became interested.

Because I was an early adopter; part of my career for a time, during the film to digital transition era, was as a consultant helping others make the transition. It usually began with reassuring people that the skills they had learned to create and capture images on film were still relevant and that digital was just an additional intermediate process to learn as I mentioned above.

 

[Alkibiades]

None of those are Chinese companies. The collaboration with Panasonic is a long and fruitful one. They also have more cooperation with Sigma, which is also not a Chinese company.

You seem to have a big problem with China, but this was not my point.
here the Leica-Xiaomi collaboration: https://leica-camera.com/de-DE/news...RopJTQx3f9BOhWCDAwj7oASf-Kz4UJ0EN5sN5rM-zshbq
I explained why china or korea seems to have a potential to offer a good cooperation between european company like phase one and "hungry" new companies that seem to be open for new development.
But Sigma would be also an interesting company indeed...great lenses for less money and their chip development would need a bigger guy to push it.
Anyway also all known japanese companies like Sony, canon, nikon produce their most lenses in China- only high end are made in Japan.

 

[Alkibiades]

It is not my intention to derail this thread from its main topic, but this discussion made me reflect on two things.

The first, is the law of diminishing return, which oddly enough creates a fictitious asymptote to a digital technology that could potentially not have any. The limiting factor being the cost/benefit ratio, not technology.

The second, and this one comes to mind quite frequently, is the transition from analog to digital. This pivotal moment represents both the greatest revolution and the most profound mystery to me. Why did we make this switch? Was analog technology truly at its limit when we made such transition, or did we simply choose a cowardly shortcut? Were we at another asymptote, maybe in this case a technological one? Yes, costs and signal to noise ratio. But how did we come to the realization that in order to better represent an organic reality, we needed a numerical eye? It almost seems like an oxymoron.

Anyway, after all these years working mostly digital, I find myself drawn back to the analog world: mechanical watches, vinyl records, film photography, and so on... It feels like I've lived in a fake world, an illusion of reality. It's like I'm finally seeing the matrix.

I don't know, but two things emerge from these reflections: 1) I am no longer a professional photographer, if I ever was one. 2) I am getting old.

But this is absolutly usual development: we always look for something new, so we go first for the newest high end technology and when we have it we miss simple things, so it is not a big surprise that a lot of professionals -especially when they become independent and can do what they what - go back to analog film. And real analoge prints, real baryt papers ...

 

[Alkibiades]

Making a move from their market position to the position of the $7,000 cameras would have been a disaster for Phase One IMO. First, they give up their advantage in expertise for high resolution/high image quality, large sensor capture. Second, they are at a competitive disadvantage to the technology that Fujifilm and Hasselblad/DJI already bring to that table setting, with years of experience and skilled personnel at the wheel, with nothing in house to lean on in order to catch up. Third, going from a company creating $40,000 - $60,000 systems to one creating $7,000 systems necessitates a drastic change to the company, the personnel, the infrastructure, a substantial overhaul. That was never in the cards for them, and rightly so.

Instead, they continued to lean into what they specialize in (large sensor, high resolution, high pixel level quality), and sought new markets that were eager for those capabilities, while still keeping a toe dipped into the consumer side of things for crossover developments to those who still are interested (and why not?). They're not depending on those consumer sales for the survival of the company. They'll never dominate the high end consumer space like before, but they can certainly continue to present products for that side of the industry as long as there is some viability there. At this point, those are at best a small, but useful contributing element to their overall business. The heavy lifting though, happens in the industrial sectors, where they can truly leverage their strengths and expertise.

Anyone who thinks Phase One blew it or missed something by not jumping into the same boat as Fujifilm/Hasselblad is missing the real story - IMO.


Steve Hendrix/CI

ok let see the real story:
for me the real story is now this example: Phase one LS 2,8-80 mm modyfied by Schneider , silver ring, standart lens for the XF system.
It is a really good lens, it is one of the best Planar lens design lenses, better then any Hasselbald V Planar version, better then any Schneider 2,8-80 mm Xenotar, ok at 2,8, really sharp at 4, has very nice bokeh thanks to the Schneider MC couting. And it has schneider leaf shutter with the fantastic shutter speed of 1/1600 sek.
And now the crazy thing: this lens will be offered in mint condition for 180 euro! not one but 20 times and more. There is nothing wrong with this lens- similar planar-xenotars of other systems are offered for more than 1000 euro and are much older, technicly and opticly worst.
So the reason for this price decay is not the lens itsself but the situation of the Phase one system now.
It means simply : nobody want it.
So when Phase one system reach this point so there is no other way then drastic changes- if they want survive as a camera maker.
They have been companies that miss the point for drastic changes and they dont exist any more. A part of phase one business was belonging to Rollei successor company- Phase one buy it after their bankruptcy. they should learn from the rollei story. They also thought that they can survive with the high prices, mostly becouse of the name and reputation of the past.
hasselblad is a second example: they become a cartoon of their own by producing a luxury version of Sony cameras with the lunar series.
Also their H backs cost in the past similar as Phase one about 30 k. Now they are at 8 k and they products are better then before.
Hasselblad had also large sensors and high resolution and claim to be the number one....
i dont understand why phase one can not produce different backs as they done it in the past, the small 100 MP sensor is cheap now and a back like the Phase one 150 version but with 100 MP would be for sure a bestseller, offered for 10 k or less. and for sure a better business then a totally overpriced full frame.
The whole technical cameras maker and rodenstock as the last lensmaker need such popular back to sale some products also- i cant imagine that rodenstock will produce lenses when maybe 10 new backs will be sold.
And when Rodenstock will stop the lens production then it will be too late for new backs....

 

[Steve Hendrix]

ok let see the real story:
for me the real story is now this example: Phase one LS 2,8-80 mm modyfied by Schneider , silver ring, standart lens for the XF system.
It is a really good lens, it is one of the best Planar lens design lenses, better then any Hasselbald V Planar version, better then any Schneider 2,8-80 mm Xenotar, ok at 2,8, really sharp at 4, has very nice bokeh thanks to the Schneider MC couting. And it has schneider leaf shutter with the fantastic shutter speed of 1/1600 sek.
And now the crazy thing: this lens will be offered in mint condition for 180 euro! not one but 20 times and more. There is nothing wrong with this lens- similar planar-xenotars of other systems are offered for more than 1000 euro and are much older, technicly and opticly worst.
So the reason for this price decay is not the lens itsself but the situation of the Phase one system now.
It means simply : nobody want it.
So when Phase one system reach this point so there is no other way then drastic changes- if they want survive as a camera maker.
They have been companies that miss the point for drastic changes and they dont exist any more. A part of phase one business was belonging to Rollei successor company- Phase one buy it after their bankruptcy. they should learn from the rollei story. They also thought that they can survive with the high prices, mostly becouse of the name and reputation of the past.
hasselblad is a second example: they become a cartoon of their own by producing a luxury version of Sony cameras with the lunar series.
Also their H backs cost in the past similar as Phase one about 30 k. Now they are at 8 k and they products are better then before.
Hasselblad had also large sensors and high resolution and claim to be the number one....
i dont understand why phase one can not produce different backs as they done it in the past, the small 100 MP sensor is cheap now and a back like the Phase one 150 version but with 100 MP would be for sure a bestseller, offered for 10 k or less. and for sure a better business then a totally overpriced full frame.
The whole technical cameras maker and rodenstock as the last lensmaker need such popular back to sale some products also- i cant imagine that rodenstock will produce lenses when maybe 10 new backs will be sold.
And when Rodenstock will stop the lens production then it will be too late for new backs....

Because Phase One is not interested in creating wholesale changes to their entire company, distracting from the industrial sectors that they now focus on and develop for, in order to have a shot, and not necessarily a good shot, at making a go in the very competitive under $8k - $10k digital capture segment. The IQ5 is not a savior for the company, it is a partial injection of sales that is relatively easy for them to do as the primary R&D around that sensor will be absorbed already by the industrial division. And it will be there for those who want it. They will not make an $8,000 smaller sensor digital back product, and I think it is the right choice for them not to. All in my humble opinion.

Somehow, there seem to be many who think that changing your entire company direction to a product line 1/5th the price, which would need to sell at volumes many times more, is a simple, doable thing, and surely an opportunity for success. It is not simple, and success would not be assured. There's tremendous risk. One may argue that a $50,000 IQ5 is not assured of success, and you would be correct, but they risk/lose nothing by delivering it, while the risk is very high going in the other direction. The industrial markets are their present and future, and as long as they keep making products for the consumer side, for those who desire them (they are still there in small numbers) and those who can afford them (they are still there in smaller numbers), be glad availability continues.


Steve Hendrix/CI


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Because Phase One is not interested in creating wholesale changes to their entire company, distracting from the industrial sectors that they now focus on and develop for, in order to have a shot, and not necessarily a good shot, at making a go in the very competitive under $8k - $10k digital capture segment. The IQ5 is not a savior for the company, it is a partial injection of sales that is relatively easy for them to do as the primary R&D around that sensor will be absorbed already by the industrial division. And it will be there for those who want it. They will not make an $8,000 smaller sensor digital back product, and I think it is the right choice for them not to. All in my humble opinion.

Somehow, there seem to be many who think that changing your entire company direction to a product line 1/5th the price, which would need to sell at volumes many times more, is a simple, doable thing, and surely an opportunity for success. It is not simple, and success would not be assured. There's tremendous risk. One may argue that a $50,000 IQ5 is not assured of success, and you would be correct, but they risk/lose nothing by delivering it, while the risk is very high going in the other direction. The industrial markets are their present and future, and as long as they keep making products for the consumer side, for those who desire them (they are still there in small numbers) and those who can afford them (they are still there in smaller numbers), be glad availability continues.


Steve Hendrix/CI


Steve Hendrix/CI

I respectfully, fundamentally disagree with this view.

DJI-Hasselblad represents a living, breathing example of what's actually possible when you break free from "it can't be done" thinking—precisely the mindset that has Phase One trapped in strategic paralysis which was driven by the short-term profit orientation of the PE investors and some false bets (i.e. bet on XT and old PRO price points instead of mirrorless successor, etc. or bet on SaaS for C1 when attacking LR customers).

Consider the hard numbers: DJI just reported $272M in revenue from their Hasselblad business, generating roughly $40M profit with $25M in R&D investment. This topline has doubled twice from their ~$70M base in 2022. Remember, Hasselblad started this journey in the late 2010s with $50K H6D-100c systems, and now they're systematically demolishing Phase One in the photography space.

The math reveals their strategic brilliance: assuming a conservative 1:3 lens-to-body ratio with wholesale pricing around $6,800 for bodies/backs and $4,250 for lenses, they're moving approximately 40K lenses and 14-15K bodies annually while maintaining healthy margins. With their R&D homework largely complete on the X2D MK II platform, they're positioned to hit $70M+ profit on an even higher revenue base—likely exceeding $300M by 2025.

But here's what makes DJI truly formidable: they're not just winning in photography. Their expanding B2B footprint in industrial drones and mapping solutions means they're competing with Phase One on multiple fronts simultaneously, marrying in the same company a modern prosumer go-to-market with perfect social media execution and cutting-edge industrial solutions. Go look at their new Gaussian Splatting 3D mapping drones. Incredible stuff.

This proves there's absolutely a viable middle ground where Phase One could offer both crop sensor solutions alongside their flagship 250 MPX systems, maintaining B2B leadership while building a compelling mirrorless successor to the XF. It demands investment and courage, but DJI's successful pivot counters any argument that it's impossible.

The critical insight is "prosumer"—call it luxury amateur if you prefer—because the traditional PRO market is fundamentally dead. The economics have shifted: fewer photographers can justify business depreciation on Phase One gear, and brick-and-mortar "advisory heavy" pro stores are becoming less relevant as sales channels as there are ample long-form youtube reviews that answer all questions on new equipment before ordering from the convenience of your desktop at home. That's different from "demoing" a 50k P1 kit in 2009 to see for yourself how great the IQ is.

Yes, they saw that too (a bit), which is why their "Premium Imaging" BU is called "Bespoke Photography", but the price point is too high to make it long-term growing rather than declining against alternatives like Hassy. We've seen the ads of some 50y old former doctors and entrepreneurs who sold their businesses and dabble in P1 gear to shoot a Safari to show to their friends. But the problem is that the quality delta vis a vis Fuji and Hassy is not high enough anymore to make this strategy fly to the tune of the price/performance ratio they dialled in. Also Chinese marketplaces are full of used P1 gear with IQ4 hitting the 15k USD mark down there despite a list price of what 45k?

Phase sells what - 150 XT third-party purchased and assembled (Rodie + Cambo) lenses per year while Hassy is pumping out 40k self-produced lenses- I know who's winning here.

The other critical insight is that mirrorless with AF is the key rather than tech cam focus. I bet the ratio of digital backs vs. X2D is higher than 1:5 (not for CI, but say B&H) with most prosumers just wanting a nice travel camera to shoot family, friends and landscapes with and NOT a tripod based system. And the XC - without AF and EVF not really useful. Its more a bragging right thing on Chinese social media rather than a serious camera system with good sales. The Petapixel review essentially was not really favorable ...

Hasselblad grasped this reality and adapted their go-to-market accordingly: B&H, direct web sales, volume-oriented distribution, move on from traditional PRO distribution (while still keeping the PRO store channel open). In Zurich, where I live last week the 30y long-standing CI equivalent closed doors forever - they just liquidated last stock last week. I doubt the golden age of pro photo stores is coming back - the future is prosumer, youtube reviews and online orders circumventing brick and mortar.

Re Hassy: Who would have predicted that the company synonymous with massive mirror-based H-series cameras would exceed a quarter-billion in crop medium format sales just a few years after almost going bankrupt after having been saved by a DJI? That's not just growth—that's complete strategic reinvention with a modern, low cost supply chain.

Phase One's fundamental problem isn't technical capability; it's organizational DNA. They remain an industrial company first, with photography as a secondary consideration. This creates a customer experience that's emotionally sterile—you wire $13K and receive an industrial lens in basic packaging, no communication, no relationship building. Compare this to Leica's prosumer-focused approach: free sensor replacements, complimentary repairs, genuine customer care that builds brand loyalty. I had a P1 sales rep in Southern Germany at one point - he would send me smalls things like lens wraps etc. for free. He got fired. In some Leica stores you get a coffee and look at a gallery on top.

The tilt lens debacle perfectly illustrates Phase One's tone-deaf customer relations: demanding $7-8K for tilt upgrades from customers who already paid $11K+ for lenses, despite the list price delta being only $1-2K between tilt and non-tilt versions. This kind of treatment kills prosumer adoption before it starts.

DJI proves you can successfully operate in both industrial and consumer markets simultaneously, but it requires fundamentally different cultural approaches within the same organization. Phase One needs to decide now whether to follow Hasselblad's playbook, but I fear their private equity timeline may not accommodate the patience required for this transformation. Their investors need an exit strategy, but they're constrained by declining photography revenues, stagnating Capture One growth, and tariff-impacted B2B performance.

The window for strategic pivot on the photo side is closing rapidly, but the DJI-Hasselblad model provides a clear roadmap for what's possible when industrial excellence meets consumer market sophistication. The alternative of just selling industrial goods to prosumers will result in further declining sales at these ultra high price points as Hassy penetrates more and more the space. The failure of this strategy can be seen also in secondary market prices. XT lenses are difficult to sell, and even new condition stuff trades at 50% or below retail.

It remains to be seen if the new leadership can do this. The choice to select a machine vision specialist as CEO indicates that the investors still want to firstly execute on a B2B strategy; this said, DJI's turnaround here is remarkable and a show of the new world-class companies China has produced and it should be studied very closely by the board of P1 what Hassy-DJI did here. Really remarkable to hit a quarter of billion of camera sales from near-bankruptcy. The reality in today's world is that China has reached parity or superiority in some tech areas, e.g. EV batteries, robotics and with DJI they have their own world-class camera company now. Built on know-how from their acquisition, but amalgamated and catalyzed by an incredible 9-9-6 work ethic (9AM to 9PM six days a week, look it up) DJI can out-R&D P1 now on lower dollar-cost basis and as a result we now have a 10-stop IBIS MF camera shipped and fully tariffed in the US market for USD 7'400 which already shows that you need to really roll-up your sleeve to compete or face potentially even lower sales down the road as people already now are selling P1 kits to move to X2Ds.

Now is a unique moment in time for P1 to recalibrate the prosumer strategy, or at least to find a sort of middle ground compared to the past between the ultra high price point and Hassy's successful strategy as I do believe that P1 can still command a modest premium for their backs compared to Hassy. Winning against this competition will require a tremendous effort culturally, and operationally but I do think it is possible as P1 still has a powerful brand in the photography world.

Let's see.

 

[mristuccia]

@mristuccia , this is an interesting topic and one deserving of its own thread. It may well generate many comments. Please start a new thread for it.

Yep, I apologize for the rant. Please ignore this post of mine, at least here in this thread.
I will eventually create a new thread on this topic. Which, by the way, is something different from the well-worn argument of digital vs analog, which is better and which is worse. It is more about a fundamental mind-shift in how we interact with the world around us.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

I respectfully, fundamentally disagree with this view.

DJI-Hasselblad represents a living, breathing example of what's actually possible when you break free from "it can't be done" thinking—precisely the mindset that has Phase One trapped in strategic paralysis which was driven by the short-term profit orientation of the PE investors and some false bets (i.e. bet on XT and old PRO price points instead of mirrorless successor, etc. or bet on SaaS for C1 when attacking LR customers).

Consider the hard numbers: DJI just reported $272M in revenue from their Hasselblad business, generating roughly $40M profit with $25M in R&D investment. This topline has doubled twice from their ~$70M base in 2022. Remember, Hasselblad started this journey in the late 2010s with $50K H6D-100c systems, and now they're systematically demolishing Phase One in the photography space.

The math reveals their strategic brilliance: assuming a conservative 1:3 lens-to-body ratio with wholesale pricing around $6,800 for bodies/backs and $4,250 for lenses, they're moving approximately 40K lenses and 14-15K bodies annually while maintaining healthy margins. With their R&D homework largely complete on the X2D MK II platform, they're positioned to hit $70M+ profit on an even higher revenue base—likely exceeding $300M by 2025.

But here's what makes DJI truly formidable: they're not just winning in photography. Their expanding B2B footprint in industrial drones and mapping solutions means they're competing with Phase One on multiple fronts simultaneously, marrying in the same company a modern prosumer go-to-market with perfect social media execution and cutting-edge industrial solutions. Go look at their new Gaussian Splatting 3D mapping drones. Incredible stuff.

This proves there's absolutely a viable middle ground where Phase One could offer both crop sensor solutions alongside their flagship 250 MPX systems, maintaining B2B leadership while building a compelling mirrorless successor to the XF. It demands investment and courage, but DJI's successful pivot counters any argument that it's impossible.

The critical insight is "prosumer"—call it luxury amateur if you prefer—because the traditional PRO market is fundamentally dead. The economics have shifted: fewer photographers can justify business depreciation on Phase One gear, and brick-and-mortar "advisory heavy" pro stores are becoming less relevant as sales channels as there are ample long-form youtube reviews that answer all questions on new equipment before ordering from the convenience of your desktop at home. That's different from "demoing" a 50k P1 kit in 2009 to see for yourself how great the IQ is.

Yes, they saw that too (a bit), which is why their "Premium Imaging" BU is called "Bespoke Photography", but the price point is too high to make it long-term growing rather than declining against alternatives like Hassy. We've seen the ads of some 50y old former doctors and entrepreneurs who sold their businesses and dabble in P1 gear to shoot a Safari to show to their friends. But the problem is that the quality delta vis a vis Fuji and Hassy is not high enough anymore to make this strategy fly to the tune of the price/performance ratio they dialled in. Also Chinese marketplaces are full of used P1 gear with IQ4 hitting the 15k USD mark down there despite a list price of what 45k?

Phase sells what - 150 XT third-party purchased and assembled (Rodie + Cambo) lenses per year while Hassy is pumping out 40k self-produced lenses- I know who's winning here.

The other critical insight is that mirrorless with AF is the key rather than tech cam focus. I bet the ratio of digital backs vs. X2D is higher than 1:5 (not for CI, but say B&H) with most prosumers just wanting a nice travel camera to shoot family, friends and landscapes with and NOT a tripod based system. And the XC - without AF and EVF not really useful. Its more a bragging right thing on Chinese social media rather than a serious camera system with good sales. The Petapixel review essentially was not really favorable ...

Hasselblad grasped this reality and adapted their go-to-market accordingly: B&H, direct web sales, volume-oriented distribution, move on from traditional PRO distribution (while still keeping the PRO store channel open). In Zurich, where I live last week the 30y long-standing CI equivalent closed doors forever - they just liquidated last stock last week. I doubt the golden age of pro photo stores is coming back - the future is prosumer, youtube reviews and online orders circumventing brick and mortar.

Re Hassy: Who would have predicted that the company synonymous with massive mirror-based H-series cameras would exceed a quarter-billion in crop medium format sales just a few years after almost going bankrupt after having been saved by a DJI? That's not just growth—that's complete strategic reinvention with a modern, low cost supply chain.

Phase One's fundamental problem isn't technical capability; it's organizational DNA. They remain an industrial company first, with photography as a secondary consideration. This creates a customer experience that's emotionally sterile—you wire $13K and receive an industrial lens in basic packaging, no communication, no relationship building. Compare this to Leica's prosumer-focused approach: free sensor replacements, complimentary repairs, genuine customer care that builds brand loyalty. I had a P1 sales rep in Southern Germany at one point - he would send me smalls things like lens wraps etc. for free. He got fired. In some Leica stores you get a coffee and look at a gallery on top.

The tilt lens debacle perfectly illustrates Phase One's tone-deaf customer relations: demanding $7-8K for tilt upgrades from customers who already paid $11K+ for lenses, despite the list price delta being only $1-2K between tilt and non-tilt versions. This kind of treatment kills prosumer adoption before it starts.

DJI proves you can successfully operate in both industrial and consumer markets simultaneously, but it requires fundamentally different cultural approaches within the same organization. Phase One needs to decide now whether to follow Hasselblad's playbook, but I fear their private equity timeline may not accommodate the patience required for this transformation. Their investors need an exit strategy, but they're constrained by declining photography revenues, stagnating Capture One growth, and tariff-impacted B2B performance.

The window for strategic pivot on the photo side is closing rapidly, but the DJI-Hasselblad model provides a clear roadmap for what's possible when industrial excellence meets consumer market sophistication. The alternative of just selling industrial goods to prosumers will result in further declining sales at these ultra high price points as Hassy penetrates more and more the space. The failure of this strategy can be seen also in secondary market prices. XT lenses are difficult to sell, and even new condition stuff trades at 50% or below retail.

It remains to be seen if the new leadership can do this. The choice to select a machine vision specialist as CEO indicates that the investors still want to firstly execute on a B2B strategy; this said, DJI's turnaround here is remarkable and a show of the new world-class companies China has produced and it should be studied very closely by the board of P1 what Hassy-DJI did here. Really remarkable to hit a quarter of billion of camera sales from near-bankruptcy. The reality in today's world is that China has reached parity or superiority in some tech areas, e.g. EV batteries, robotics and with DJI they have their own world-class camera company now. Built on know-how from their acquisition, but amalgamated and catalyzed by an incredible 9-9-6 work ethic (9AM to 9PM six days a week, look it up) DJI can out-R&D P1 now on lower dollar-cost basis and as a result we now have a 10-stop IBIS MF camera shipped and fully tariffed in the US market for USD 7'400 which already shows that you need to really roll-up your sleeve to compete or face potentially even lower sales down the road as people already now are selling P1 kits to move to X2Ds.

Now is a unique moment in time for P1 to recalibrate the prosumer strategy, or at least to find a sort of middle ground compared to the past between the ultra high price point and Hassy's successful strategy as I do believe that P1 can still command a modest premium for their backs compared to Hassy. Winning against this competition will require a tremendous effort culturally, and operationally but I do think it is possible as P1 still has a powerful brand in the photography world.

Let's see.

I think there are dramatic differences between the opportunity that Hasselblad was able to take advantage of and the one or lack of one that Phase One faces. It's not impossible that Phase One could pivot to the market Hasselblad and Fujifilm are in, I just don't think it is as viable for them as it was for Hasselblad, in particular.


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[stngoldberg]

My view:
I own an Phase One Iq4 and all of the wonderful lenses.
while I struggle with the weight of the Phase One, the latest model of the Fujifilm camera I recently purchased with three lenses is lighter; but the images fall way short of the Phase One.
I’m not a professional photographer, but I am an engineer and in my retirement I enjoy photographing most days.
I don’t need more megapixels; I’m delighted with what I have and the support I get from Chris Snipes and the Capture Intergration team.
Stanley

 

[Manoli]

I’m delighted with what I have and the support I get from Chris Snipes and the Capture Intergration team.

AFAIK, CI support extends just as much to Hasselblad as it does to PhaseOne.

 

[cunim]

As someone who owned a company that built and integrated expensive systems for industrial/research imaging markets, I have to second @Steve Hendrix perspective. A company should play to its strengths, and the path to radical change is fraught. Rewarding if you do it just right, but finding the people (and cash flow) to accomplish that transition is so hard.

That said, there remain risks in doing what you know. I remember post-production houses struggling with investments in Avid workstations (big deal products back then), only to be relentlessly underbid by minor players using generic hardware and software. There are so many examples of companies who thought they had both intellectual and hardware protection for their high end products - only to have that protection stripped away by rapid evolution of generic platforms. Does P1 have the depth in its chosen markets to maintain a gulf between it and the sharks? It seems they are betting that what they know about the applications will carry them through. I wish them well.

In the meantime, they are not going to pay much attention to photographic products. Still hoping for an IQ5, but not optimistic about it including any major innovations.

 

[Alkibiades]

I would maybe open a new perspective on this topic.
In the middle format world the main player is not hasselblad, Fuji or Phase one but Sony.
This is the guy with the big bolls.
And they can cancel the whole IQ5 story in one second.
Sony make good money with fullframe and the 33x44 chips, they can sale a lot of them.
The question is now how many big sensors sony can sale to phase one?
I am sure they want to sale a size that make some profit for them.
And now the only user of that chips is Phase one.
So maybe Sony will find it some day unprofitable to care about few hunderts of big chips when they can sale few hundert tousands of the smaller.
I dont know how ambitious Sony is, but would it not be a great prestige for them to be the only company that produce the big sensor camera system?
Something like" XXL E - mount like" camera system with 250 MP and big sensor? For such big company such system would make sense even only as a positive advertising, it dont need to be profitable directly- it would increase the profit anyway in other areas: the people love to buy the "image".
Maybe here is a key for phase one for success: to try to make a deal with Sony in this regard.
Anyway when the Leadership of a company change you could expect a big change but it seems here that nothing should change , only the smiling face, it will smiling even more.
In some way it seems for me to be similar with the end of Soviet union when Breschnew ( or Brezhnev) followed tho guys that were even older than him and the Soviel union could not even organize the state funerals so fast for 3 guys that died one after other...
I hope you can forgive me my gently sarcasm.

 

[dougpeterson]

Sony Semiconductor that makes sensors is technically in the same mega-corp as Sony (Camera), but from a practical perspective it would be best to think about them as not-especially-close cousins.

P1 is not at all the only company that uses Sony's 54x40 full-sized medium format sensors. They are just the only ones using those sensors for a product targeted at the photo market.

The chance of Sony (Camera) producing a 54x40 sensor sized body is basically zero, and is not meaningfully impacted by the fact their corporate cousins make those sensors.

 

[Maxx9photo]

I'm waiting for IQ5, 250mp, 5tb integrated HD, IBIS, slimmer body (1/2 size of IQ4), bigger screen, longer battery life, etc.

 

[John Black]

There are more subtle things that Phase One could do. The IQ4 / XF were christened the "infinity platform"; it's been pretty finite for the past 3 years. There are number of firmware updates that could have done (and could still do). Lord knows I've submitted many suggestions.

Capture Pilot came to end with IOS 15 or thereabouts (that's when the connectivity problems began). The fix seems simple - their Capture Mobile platform should support IQ3-100 for LV tethering / remote viewing. They could offer an upgrade service to the IQ3 CMOS backs to work with the XT camera and XT lenses (X-Shutter).

These things wouldn't revive PO in terms of new customers, but it would help current customers "keep the faith". Hopefully their new CEO / leadership sees these types of things as an opportunity. But if the "bespoke" photography division is just a side-hustle for Phase One... I don't think the XC cameras and a $20k 150mm XT lens are going to change PO's trajectory.

 

[jduncan]

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/phase-one_phase-one-announces-leadership-transition

Phase One announces leadership transition

After more than two decades at the helm, Henrik Håkonsson has decided to step down as CEO of Phase One and will continue to contribute as a member of the Board of Directors. Henrik has been instrumental in shaping both Phase One and Capture One – today two standalone companies – into global leaders, and his deep knowledge and passion will continue to benefit the company in this new role.

Reflecting on the transition, Henrik says: “It has been a privilege to lead Phase One on this journey. I am immensely proud of what we have achieved together, and I am confident that Arne, with his experience and vision, will continue to build new success. I look forward to supporting the company in my new role on the Board.”

From 1 September, Phase One welcomes Arne Dehn as the new CEO. Arne brings strong international experience from leading technology businesses through growth and transformation, most recently as CEO of STEMMER IMAGING . His customer focus, strategic insight and global outlook position him well to lead Phase One into its next chapter of global growth.

“Phase One is renowned for its innovation and excellence in imaging. I am excited to join this talented team and to continue driving value for our customers worldwide, while building on the strong market position established under Henrik’s leadership,” says Arne Dehn.

We are also welcoming Casper Jensen as the new Chairman of the Board. With deep leadership experience from Thrane & Thrane, Cobham and, currently, as CEO of Danelec, Casper has a proven track record in building and transforming technology companies and will provide strong leadership as Chairman of the Phase One Board.

Our majority owner, Axcel, highlights the importance of this transition:

“Arne is an excellent match for Phase One with the right capabilities to further strengthen the company's position in the premium imaging market and drive future growth. We are equally pleased to welcome Casper as Chairman and look forward to benefitting from his strong tech track record. And not least, we all owe a big thank you to Henrik for his enormous contribution to Phase One and Capture One over the past two decades – I am thrilled we will continue our close collaboration on the board,” says Co-Managing Partner Christian Bamberger Bro.

Hi,
The good part is that he appear to be be an expert on niche oriented companies.
He may be able to make Phase One profitable in a sustainable way.
I hope that does not mean dropping the MF cameras and keep only the industrial products.

Phase One has been to many crisis and have always find a way to rebuild themselves for a new an era.

I have to accept that I am not sure I will keep the bespoke cameras, so I will not trow shade at him if he close production
to save the company, but I hope he find the way to keep it and make it profitable.

Best regards.