Phase One XT: The First Modern Field Camera (and X-Shutter and new firmware)

[dougpeterson]

I've had to add Gerald to my Ignore List for my own mental health.

I trust he means well and is a knowledgable guy, but it's honestly very hard to look past his presentation.

I dislike doing this as it means that, in a sense, I won't be in a position to defend myself against whatever accusations or interpretations he posts. I trust that if there is a point that he raises that others would like addressed, that someone else will raise it.

 

[gerald.d]

I've had to add Gerald to my Ignore List for my own mental health.

I trust he means well and is a knowledgable guy, but it's honestly very hard to look past his presentation.

I dislike doing this as it means that, in a sense, I won't be in a position to defend myself against whatever accusations or interpretations he posts. I trust that if there is a point that he raises that others would like addressed, that someone else will raise it.

My turn. Just this once. With the ad hominems

Such fatuous nonsense.

Ignore a member on this forum, and you get the option to view their individual posts at the click of a button, without them even being aware of the fact.

And the problem is, it’s not akin to blocking on social media, where your block means I don’t get to see what you post.

Of course you’re going to read everything I write in response to any of your posts.

Starting with this one.

When you (or anyone else for that matter) address the objective issues I raised about perhaps why the XT makes sense neither for the landscape photographer nor the architectural photographer, I don’t doubt that from your perspective as someone whose job it is to sell the camera they will be well intentioned.

But as someone who gains absolutely $0 from anyone buying into any camera ecosystem (and never has), I don’t have a skin in this game.

The XT is very cool.

But in my view it doesn’t address a single photographic need.

I’m more than happy to be proven wrong.

 

[stevenfr]

I am a fine art landscape photographer. I make my living selling prints. I show my large fine art prints in galleries around the world. I have been hiking with fifty pounds of camera gear for over thirty years. At times, I carried a Pentax 67 and a Horseman 617 and an assortment of lenses up over 4000 feet in elevation and hiked for over 20km in a day.

I currently have a Phase One XF IQ4 150 with six blue ring lenses.

Thirty days ago at age 55 I had a total hip replacement. Not fun, especially at this age. To me the new XT system when the lens lineup expands to include some longer lenses will allow me to cut the weight of my pack and allow me to continue my career and my passion. I have over a 1000 images, I feel can be sold as fine art prints. It’s the passion and excitement that landscape photography brings to my life that is important to me. The journey to the magical spot I find in nature.

The tilt component would be nice, but not the end of the world for my photography. For the shift capabilities, it won’t matter to me, because I will stitch. Its the weight saving, ease of use, rodenstock glass, and size saving, which has me interested in this camera.

I think if one looks at the demographics of the typical buyer, weight saving, ease of use for a field camera are high on the list for the typical buyer.

Just my thoughts.

 

[RLB]

I'm amazed by the endless continuance of a few grumbling about a product they have never actually touched and apparently by their own assessment is neither a good fit for their use
for a myriad of speculative reasons. If you are not excited by the XT that's fine, but its past time to move along. Let's get back to shooting and exchanging useful information.


Robert

 

[gerald.d]

Thirty days ago at age 55 I had a total hip replacement. Not fun, especially at this age.

My wife had a total hip replacement aged 35, so I can definitely relate, albeit second hand, to what you are going through right now, and I wish you all the best.

To me the new XT system when the lens lineup expands to include some longer lenses will allow me to cut the weight of my pack and allow me to continue my career and my passion.

Could not agree more. There are clear and significant advantages over the XF system that the XT delivers for your requirements.

I don’t think anyone would struggle with use case scenarios where the XT makes a LOT more sense over an XF.

But I’m intrigued as to why you have to date not considered other tech cam solutions that have existed for many years now.

What benefits does the XT deliver to you that other existing alternatives don’t?

Kind regards,


Gerald.

 

[stevenfr]

Thank you for your thoughts on my recovery. I am making progress. 35 would be a frightening age to have hip replacement. I hope your wife is doing well.

I have considered a tech camera in the past there are a few items that have prevented me to purchase one. A few of the items that I found stumbling blocks compared to the use of a XF system, Longer lenses, ease of use, creating a lcc, setup time. The new XT system has integrated the settings into the back. The concern over copal shutters and replacing them over time if there wear out.

I know a few XF photographers that have told me they plan to add the XT to their bag with the 23mm lens. Currently, the XF system has a wide angle at 28mm, which is a bit dated. The extreme wide angle is something they desire.

At the time of my decision to buy a XF vs a tech camera there was no good live view as there is today with the cmos chips.

My wife had a total hip replacement aged 35, so I can definitely relate, albeit second hand, to what you are going through right now, and I wish you all the best.



Could not agree more. There are clear and significant advantages over the XF system that the XT delivers for your requirements.

I don’t think anyone would struggle with use case scenarios where the XT makes a LOT more sense over an XF.

But I’m intrigued as to why you have to date not considered other tech cam solutions that have existed for many years now.

What benefits does the XT deliver to you that other existing alternatives don’t?

Kind regards,


Gerald.

 

[drunkenspyder]

The XT is very cool.

But in my view it doesn’t address a single photographic need.

I’m more than happy to be proven wrong.

Ignoring the ad hominem part of the rest of this post, I am curious about this aspect. You state that the XT is "cool" but "doesn't address a single photographic need"? While not inherently inconsistent, I think those two statements could bear some expansion. If one is new to MF and/or tech cams, it seems to me the XT could be exceptionally compelling, offering as it does a modern approach to address one's interest in the field camera version of MF.

If one is looking for greater simplicity and/or to cut weight [as SF describes], while desiring to remain in the field camera realm, it seems to me to afford just such an avenue, especially if one desires greater convenience and/or automation. Further, some aspects of the XT, such as the integrated rotating dovetail, seem like definite useable, if modest, improvements. I know I see that rotating & removable dovetail as potentially very helpful to my field work. Steven's use case may be more of a "need" than my improvement case, but both suggest you could be incorrect.

Perhaps all you meant is that it does not address a need you perceive or feel? I can completely understand that. A Blendtec user might see zero need for the latest Vitamix, even if the latter decisively solved a problem/annoyance/request of some obscure part of the smoothie community. But if that same Blendtec user were a first-time purchaser, they might feel differently. Similarly, if I was confronted with my original Cambo WRS 1600 purchase decision [after already having bought, used, and been unhappy with the Alpa STC], and the XT was an available choice, I can tell you now which one I would buy—and it would be because the XT offered integration and automation not offered by the Cambo, while doing so in a form I find more attractive than all other offerors. How is that "not address[ing] a single photographic need"?

Like any item that is both luxury and functional, want and need are in the eye and wallet of the purchaser. If, as I have been informed by more than one dealer, the XT waiting list is growing, it seems to me the market has in fact proven you incorrect.

 

[gerald.d]

Ignoring the ad hominem part of the rest of this post, I am curious about this aspect. You state that the XT is "cool" but "doesn't address a single photographic need"? While not inherently inconsistent, I think those two statements could bear some expansion. If one is new to MF and/or tech cams, it seems to me the XT could be exceptionally compelling, offering as it does a modern approach to address one's interest in the field camera version of MF.

If one is looking for greater simplicity and/or to cut weight [as SF describes], while desiring to remain in the field camera realm, it seems to me to afford just such an avenue, especially if one desires greater convenience and/or automation. Further, some aspects of the XT, such as the integrated rotating dovetail, seem like definite useable, if modest, improvements. I know I see that rotating & removable dovetail as potentially very helpful to my field work. Steven's use case may be more of a "need" than my improvement case, but both suggest you could be incorrect.

Perhaps all you meant is that it does not address a need you perceive or feel? I can completely understand that. A Blendtec user might see zero need for the latest Vitamix, even if the latter decisively solved a problem/annoyance/request of some obscure part of the smoothie community. But if that same Blendtec user were a first-time purchaser, they might feel differently. Similarly, if I was confronted with my original Cambo WRS 1600 purchase decision [after already having bought, used, and been unhappy with the Alpa STC], and the XT was an available choice, I can tell you now which one I would buy—and it would be because the XT offered integration and automation not offered by the Cambo, while doing so in a form I find more attractive than all other offerors. How is that "not address[ing] a single photographic need"?

Like any item that is both luxury and functional, want and need are in the eye and wallet of the purchaser. If, as I have been informed by more than one dealer, the XT waiting list is growing, it seems to me the market has in fact proven you incorrect.

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.d]

At this juncture in the discussion it probably makes sense to state this:

If the XT had 20mm movements in every direction, and had the capability to tilt, it would make for a very attractive and compelling solution.

 

[BFD]

Does anyone know the XT body weight and dimensions? I can't seem to locate it anywhere on any of the sites.

 

[stevenfr]

https://phaseonext.com/the-xt-is-smaller-and-lighter-than-you-think/

 

[gerald.d]

Does anyone know the XT body weight and dimensions? I can't seem to locate it anywhere on any of the sites.

700 grams. Not sure about physical size.

 

[TheDude]

the new XT system when the lens lineup expands to include some longer lenses will allow me to cut the weight of my pack and allow me to continue my career ... Its the weight saving, ease of use, rodenstock glass, and size saving, which has me interested in this camera

There are only two Rodenstock lenses with longer focal length: Digaron-SW 90mm and Digaron-SW 138mm (ignoring Digaron-S 100mm and Digaron-S 180mm due to limited coverage).

Lightweights these are not!

 

[BFD]

700 grams. Not sure about physical size.

So, 300 grams (roughly 2/3 of a pound) lighter than a WRS. Just based on the pictures, looks like it might be 1" shorter in both height and width than the WRS. The thickness looks to be about the same as the WRS, negligible if any different.

For argument's sake, if you have a 10lb. pound backpack with an XT, lenses and IQ4 back in there, a comparable Cambo setup would be about 10.66 pounds. Either way, you are hiking with a 10 pound backpack. Quite frankly, I've never regarded my WRS as big, heavy and obtrusive.

I think if you already have a tech setup, this XT doesn't really make sense to change over to. The blue button release and integrated electronics are really nice but I don't see a huge workflow advantage. Both my copal shutter and the IQ electronic shutter release are fairly easy for me to push. Even weight wise, you could switch to the WRC-400 (and still have 20mm shifts) at 500g.

No, I haven't used or even held an XT but it's looking like a really hard sell to me. My guess is the first year will be full of bugs and/or empty promises from P1 just like the IQ4. Only time will tell—maybe my tune will change when I see one in person in 2021.

 

[TheDude]

At this juncture in the discussion it probably makes sense to state this:

If the XT had 20mm movements in every direction, and had the capability to tilt, it would make for a very attractive and compelling solution.

And an easy & affordable way to use lenses one already owns.

 

[dougpeterson]

https://phaseonext.com/the-xt-is-smaller-and-lighter-than-you-think/

I will add dimensions to this link shortly.

 

[drunkenspyder]

And an easy & affordable way to use lenses one already owns.

Just to clarify, it does . . . if one already owns Cambo WRS-fitted lenses. That is not a small sub-universe. IOW, I can use all my tech lenses, all my Hasselblad lenses, some Canon, etc. Depending on where one is invested, it is actually quite easy to use lenses one already ones. Or quite difficult.

But that's true of other solutions as well. When I decided to move from Alpa to Cambo, I had to pay a pretty penny to refit two of my Rodie lenses. Nothing about this point is unique to the XT, and I would argue the XT is in some ways a step ahead of where it could have started.

 

[dougpeterson]

I will add dimensions to this link shortly.

Done.

 

[buildbot]

Got a price quote on that?

https://www.1stvision.com/cameras/models/Teledyne-Dalsa/Falcon4 Color 86M

I'll try to make this my last off topic post on the XT thread, but following up the cost for the medium format Falcon4 camera, one site got back to me and for the body/sensor alone it is 61,470 dollars. You'd need some other gear, including a capture card for the camera-link interface which run 1,500.

Also the dynamic range is fairly low, if I'm doing the conversion between dB and stops correctly.

So global shutter cmos medium format _does_ exist, but is very expensive and somewhat limited.

 

[drunkenspyder]

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]:

1. 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.
2. 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