Hasselblad had a near death experience because it fumbled the transition to digital photography. This a good article about an industry where major players fail

Hasselblad had a near death experience because it fumbled the transition to digital photography. This a good article about an industry where major players failed to make the transition because "core competence = core incompetence." Hasselblad developed a digital system early on but dropped it because they felt it was so inferior that it would damage the brand. As a consequence they missed out on the learning experience. They should have read and deeply understood Clayton Christensen's "Inventors Dilemma." My SO is an artist who uses digital photography to make studies for her paintings. She started out with a 6 megapixel Nikon D70, but the resolution was inadequate for her needs. Last year she moved up to a 12 megapixel D300 for around $1500 with a new lense. At the time I looked at the new new Hasselblad, 52 megapixels at $35,000. Needless to say out of out budget. The thing is a Hasseblad is not worth it for nearly anyone. With the Nikon software and Photoshop, the can take 6 overlapping images and stitch them together and get a 50-70 megapixel image. May be Hasselblad will last a few more years, but by then your under $5000 Nikon or Canon will have surpassed it. Also the HP z3200 printer produces superb prints. So much for phot finishing labs and print shops.