Don’t you worry. Another product is coming right up 
@Crease Duo Cam Pan is good since they also have Duo Cam Doorbell. Afterwards, they can do Duo Cam Pan V2, Duo Cam Doorbell V2, and Cam Pan V4. It’s when people start using abbreviation then it starts getting confusing for me.
I don’t disagree on either point. Some of the abbreviations people choose to use here don’t follow even Wyze’s product names, which just adds to the potential for confusion, especially when we’re left guessing at the meaning without sufficient context. That’s one reason why I tend to write out full product names and often will be explicit about referring to something like…
…when drawing a distinction about what I’m referring to. Hopefully doing that also minimizes confusion for newer Forum users, as well.
As for this one, I’ve been wondering if I could find a use for it. After watching the unboxing video, I could see this as something I might put at a corner of the house, but I don’t currently have convenient power there and would want to see the new outdoor power adapter first.
Missed opportunity. Too bad the pan tilt moving camera is not a 2k OG3 telephoto. That is why thousands of us have taped an OG3 telephoto on a wyze or other pan tilt camera. You want a closer up view of the moving object, Putting 2 wide angle lenses on a pan tilt /stationary defeats the purpose of having pan tilt 2 cam set. 2 v3s do a better 24/7 270 degree coverage job.
I like this camera, but I think they need a pro version that has the fixed camera with a wide-angle view like the floodlight Pro, maybe even 4K. Then have the second camera be a full PTZ camera true pan tilt and optical zoom that tracks AI, detections and zooms in on people or pets or license plates, etc. Or if they don’t want it to zoom because optical zoom lenses are too expensive, then at least use a telephoto lens that is always zoomed in like the OG telephoto lens. Maybe at 5x zoom instead of 3x zoom?
Then include rtsp, onvif, and home assistant compatibility. Make it an affordable price… You have yourself a winner.
Fixed cam sees everything in high quality. Zoom camera sees details up close and doesn’t track light/shadows and wind, and it works great with almost everything.
I like all those things, too, but you have to consider the market Wyze is targeting. Maybe their data indicates that your demographic is insufficient to sustain it.
While, at the same time, make it seem that they are keeping up with the Reolinks that @bryonhu is pitching.
I sure like the resolution of my Reolink 4k cameras without heavy compression like Wyze does 
Compression is as big of a deal as resolution if you want to read license plates at a distance….
Except if you know someone with that top secret software in the movies that can take pixelation to clarity
Yeah, while that’s awesome for some of us more advanced people, but can you imagine the complaints the Wyze demographic would have if Wyze did the same thing? Some people’s networks struggle with just a couple of 1080p cameras.
It helps that Reolink is local by default. Reolink users really only struggle when they try to stream or view events away from home, and most of their users are choosing them because they are already more familiar with advanced things like rtsp and networking etc. Wyze caters more to the simple plug and play at the most affordable possible price demographic.
I still think that in the long run they will be forced toward more local functionality as the default.
Does that justify all the bugs and countless updates to both app and firmware?
I like the constant updates. They are frequently adding new features and value. That’s one thing I like about them.
I have cameras with so many other companies and basically all of them have bugs. The thing that drives me crazy with some of them is that refuse to ever update anything. The philosophy is that if they fixed the bug it has, they’d just create new bugs and then they’ll have to fix the new one and create a new one. So doing any updates will create a perpetual cycle of maintenance that costs them money without new income and look like they have more bugs, so it’s better to leave the existing bugs than to fix them because the people who don’t like the bugs will just get a different camera and the people who don’t mind or notice, don’t care enough anyway and it seems like there aren’t as many bugs because it was limited to something they don’t use it care about, but if they fix something then a new bug may show up to people who previously didn’t notice any.
The problem is that they also never get new features or upgrades, etc either. You have to always buy a new camera to ever get anything new. Wyze often adds new features and upgrades to older cameras too which is pretty cool. While some of my cameras from other companies have had high severity critical impact bugs for years that the company won’t address and scared me away from the company basically permanently to be afraid to trust them at all (in this case I’m thinking of Eufy, though I could say similar cases about several others I have too or examples from the forums of several others too).
To be fair, Wyze has taken this same “no updates” stance on several of their non-camera products. They discussed it in an AMA… Basically, for most products they want to do the competitor strategy of getting it to a mostly “stable” firmware and leaving it alone (never add new features, ignore wishlist feature requests for existing models, and never fix bugs unless they’re critical bugs).
I don’t think they should do the same thing for their cameras though.
I can see a good case for both ways of doing things, but I like that are continually doing updates and not stagnant like other companies. I just think they need to listen to beta users’ feedback more actively before launching new updates to the public. Too often they completely ignore the testers and push something out anyway. I think that’s the biggest issue.
I hear you loud and clear, but you said it yourself “Too often they completely ignore the testers and push something out anyway. I think that’s the biggest issue.” That and failing to test what new upgrades have broken like 
It is known as regression testing, and from what I’ve seen, Wyze never does it.
I remember you mentioning it a few times 
A lot of companies pay lip service to software testing, and Wyze is among them. The belief is that it costs. Yes, it incurs an initial expense; however, they fail to recognize the benefits and cost savings (and the positive publicity) that result. Think about how much it costs Wyze to redo all of its firmware and releases every time it has to do one.
Ordered the Wyze Duo Cam Pan on the 13th Finally got a notification today that it was shipped 
Direct from Wyze? That’s not good unless stock was exhausted and they had to wait for restock.
Well the camera took 9 days to get here and it Doesn’t seem like works as it should.
When you have the camera set on track motion and it picks up motion only the pan camera light turns on, if you turn off tracking both lights will come on when motion is detected, maybe is supposed to be that way I don’t know. Another odd thing it will track motion when motion Detection is turned off.
Is “Track Motion” enabled?
Yes tracking motion is on motion detection is off, It doesn’t make sense to track motion when motion detection is turned off
They changed that with cam pan V3; DZ and motion tracking can’t be both enabled. Must be the same for the new duo pan.
I wonder what practical advantage this new camera has over using two separate cameras, a fixed camera and a panning camera, stacked together instead? Seems to me that the new camera is comparatively less flexible and has only one microphone and one memory card versus 2 separate microphones and memory cards.