You are right to correct me on the need to clarify the quoted statement.
“The XT doesn’t address a single photographic need”...
that hasn’t already been addressed by existing tech cam solutions that have been on the market for years.
would have been a more complete, and more accurate, statement.
I accept that the intended inference behind the point I was making (based on the detailed post I made earlier) wasn’t conveyed as well as it could have been.
I have no idea what a Blendtec is, nor a Vitamix, so the analogy is completely lost on me.
But let me bring you back to the core issues that I made in my earlier post.
What landscape photographer is going to give up shift range and tilt capability of their chosen tech cam solution for the integration benefits the XT brings?
What architectural photographer is going to give up their rise/fall range capability for the integration (and 2-stop advantage leaf shutter speed) that the XT brings?
That there is a wait list for the camera is irrelevant to those questions. Supply is simple to constrain.
Kind regards,
Gerald.
Gerald:
Appreciate the clarification. A few follow-ons, and then I have images to go make and food to cook! This is all said with a friendly smile and arm-punching over an imaginary beer:
1. I think your clarification matters a great deal, because addressing the need, and the method of addressing the need, are two very different topics. The fact that a wheelbarrow has addressed the needs of farmers and gardeners for centuries does not mean that a new type of garden cart, that addresses the needs of certain gardeners with aging backs better than the wheelbarrow, does not itself address certain needs better. which brings me to the point of......
2.
Blendtec/Vitamix: doesn't matter if you know them; your unfamiliarity is not an answer to the point I made. No need to be intentionally obtuse here. C'mon! Substitute your own known analogy [Microsoft/Apple, Toyota/Nissan, GM/Ford, Siemens/Nokia, Carnival/Princess, etc.]; the market is full of competitive offerings for the same problems, all trying to address the largest number of needs/wants for the largest group of consumers. My point was rather universal: Just because you don't feel the need of the XT's improvements, doesn't mean they do not exist for others. The XT's market is not merely current owners; it is also new owners, and you repeatedly slide past that distinction. Just because you think all photographic needs that could exist have been met by the current market, doesn't mean that another entrant cannot [re-]package their solution so as to meet those needs in a more desirable [for some people] way. Gerald, there is no universal set of needs for any group of consumers larger than 1. Your arbitrary groupings of landscape and architectural photogs are mere approximations of
common needs, not
universal needs.
3.
Wait list for the camera: I agree, supply is easy to constrain, but no reasonably intelligent for-profit entity will do that for long when there are profits to be harvested. I would submit that constrained supply, in a rational market, is more likely a reflection of demand and capacity, rather than conspiracy. Yes, it can be the latter, but its likelihood is lower and proof burden is higher. Phase was shipping on Day One of the announcement; that's hardly indicative of intentional constraint. Do you have proof of intentional constraint? Or even a whiff? My guess is no, so the reality is that the market,
including people on this forum, are indicating you might be mistaken.
4.
Your questions [which are addressed only to entrenched owners of current tech equipment, and thus ignore any new buyers]:
- What landscape photographer is going to give up shift range and tilt capability of their chosen tech cam solution for the integration benefits the XT brings? This one. My shift range is primarily ±10º, sometimes 15, though I love to have as much as I can reasonably use of course, and my tilt usage is primarily as a focus shift comparative data point, not usually for final print. Since I have T/S lenses that I can use now with the XT, I don't actually have to give them up in order to begin the transition! That's another false choice you posit.
- What architectural photographer is going to give up their rise/fall range capability for the integration (and 2-stop advantage leaf shutter speed) that the XT brings? I dunno, maybe the one who wants those two stops? I am not a pro architectural photog, but I am an ardent, learning hobbyist, and as you might have guessed, I would answer "maybe" to this one. It depends on what I find out, given that my primary passions are bridges and old churches. I might not give up the Cambo 600, which I use when I don't have to travel, but I might be willing to forego the 1600 when I travel for those other benefits you do note.
Indeed, I would suggest that your acknowledgement of the benefits that
are offered—coupled with the fact that there are always new buyers in the market—proves the case: that the XT does indeed offer a solution in it own way that is different from other solutions. Any new buyer of a field/tech cam who chooses the XT will indeed prove that point. Doesn't matter if they are right or wrong, smart or not, they prove the point.
Greg