Yes, of course; I've read it already. Pardon my going on about it a little … but it's been brought up every single time the Light L16 has been mentioned for the past month or so.
Like most of the so-called "reviews" I read, it is mostly concentrating on the irritations and difficulties of the reviewer, the mis-match between their expectations and the operation/performance of the camera. As if the camera were a fully developed replacement for a Nikon F4, or something like that… It makes no sense to me to have expectations that this camera is even a finished product at this point in time. This reviewer has no patience for working with in-development equipment. The Light L16 is a first product by a new company, utilizing innovative new technology. Neither the camera's firmware nor the processing app are even "release 1.0" yet—they're both beta quality products at this time. Someone who doesn't understand what that means and whines, moans, and gives up because it doesn't meet their expectations … just dumb. This stupidity is probably brought on by modern notion that what is said in advertising and promotional tripe should be accepted as absolute gospel and you should set your expectations on that. "Of course it's true, I read it on the internet." Blech and fooey—what utter nonsense. Reviews like this are anything but definitive, why should I be bothered by them, or bothered to read them at all? I do read them, trying to find any tiny nugget of information about the item being studied that I missed, but most of the time they're just hot air and whining. I don't have time to sit down and learn the L16 thoroughly right now; I'm on my way out to travel for the next two weeks as of this evening, and I'm not taking it with me. But even in the short few moments playing with it I did yesterday, I found that the camera's capabilities and performance were quite good. It is, however, a beast of a different nature compared to other cameras I own and use, so that will take some to grok and get my head around. It's kind of like considering a Polaroid SX-70 vs a Leica M4 … both brilliant, but utterly different in approach, feel, use, and results. I don't know whether the L16 is brilliant yet, but the quick selfie test shows some excellent imaging qualities and I didn't find it all that difficult to figure out what is easy to do with the camera so far. That says a lot in itself. I'm sure I'll find plenty of things that are hard to do compared to doing them with my Leica SL … I expect that. But enough of that, for now at least. New tools invite different ways of seeing the world with a camera. And that's what photography is all about, to me: learning to see the world with fresh eyes and being able to express that vision so it can be shared with others. The L16 is new, is different, and bespeaks a different approach to seeing with a camera. Whether it constitutes a useful and different perspective on the world or not is as yet a question that is a challenge to answer. I look forward to the challenge. :-) G — The trouble with being punctual is that nobody's there to appreciate it. > On Dec 20, 2017, at 5:08 AM, Mark Roberts <postmas...@robertstech.com> wrote: > > Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > >> The Light L16 camera (http://light.co) that I ordered in 2015 is finally in >> production. I received my unit yesterday. > > Petapixel posted a review a while back: > https://petapixel.com/2017/12/08/review-light-l16-brilliant-braindead/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
