Yes, although the cables appear very robust, much more so than the previous sync cables.
No remote cable solution (for now), but with the expected release of capture One Mobile (this Spring?), remote trigger can be accomplished without a remote cable.
Those for whom shift info in metadata is critical will miss that feature. However, that must be weighed against expanded shift capability.
You also lose the blue shutter button on the XT.
It's nice to have more options. XT is great because of complete integration and size/weight. Democratic X Shutter now provides 90+% of those features, but with more cameras of choice.
Steve Hendrix/CI
I totally agree with you on the last point - we live in great times for digital + tech cameras, and the more options, the better
- About the X Shutter's cable, for me the point is not the cable's robustness, is operational cumbersomeness; you'll need to attach / remove cables every time you change lenses, you set your camera up, you put your camera back in the bag, etc. This will make you lose time, as well as making the whole thing more difficult to operate when working in precarious balance, on unsteady ground, on a cliff edge, in the water, with bad weather, and so on.
- About Capture One Mobile vs cable release, I personally am really looking forward to C1 Mobile, and I personally would use that over a cable release; however, for many that's not the case, and generally speaking having the ability to use a cable vs an app would be useful for those situations where recharging your phones is difficult and you want to save phone battery, or when you simply run out of phone battery; on the camera side, even though I didn't test it, I am pretty sure that the IQ4's batteries will last much less if you use Wi-Fi, and probably dramatically so if you use it all the time;
- As you said, the shift conundrum (metadata vs more shift) will depend on each photographer's specific requirements; personally, for my work and for my lens lineup (23, 32, 50 and 90mm, all Rodenstock HR), had I choose to go for a 20mm-shifting camera I would only really use the extra shift on the 90mm, which is a lens I use less than others, so for me the XT's smaller size / lighter weight / better integration won against having the extra shift. Of course, for people using larger format lenses, lenses with larger images circles, longer lenses, and so on, and for people doing different genres of photography than what I do, that might be more critical;
- About the shutter, I believe that it is actually pretty useful to have it, makes it quicker to work in the field versus using the screen all the time.
As you perfectly put it, it's great to have many options, in fact the more the better. Camera choice is extremely personal, depending not only on what kind of photography one does, but on how much one values certain features over others, and so on. Choosing our gear is always a matter of compromises; there rarely is a perfect solution, one where you wouldn't change anything, add anything or remove anything from a camera. I try to be as analytical and purpose-oriented in my choices, and while I know perfectly well what I miss not having the extra shift, or not having the built-in tilt of the Arca-Swiss Rm3di, or the zoom lenses of smaller formats, or the longer lenses of smaller formats, and so on, for me and my work the XT's advantages win over other solutions' advantages - today, that is, since things change and there always are new options and new solutions to consider
More generally, will I miss some shots by going with the XT versus other systems, smaller formats, and so on? Very likely so. On the other hand, going with the XT will make me get shots that i.e. my previous Hasselblads wouldn't let me get; most importantly, going with the XT will provide me with image quality that any of my previous cameras would only dream of (or any other system on the market today, for that matter). So, in the balance I am happy with the pros and cons of my system - other photographers' mileage might vary, of course
Best regards,
Vieri
