Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

You're speaking as if this were a mature product, and letting the marketing 
hype guide you rather than common sense. Which is exactly the error that the 
reviewer makes in his article. And you're doing it in the absence of actually 
working with the camera. 

I ignore the marketing hype entirely. I didn't buy it because of what they 
said. I bought it because the concept of the camera is interesting and 
innovative, and I expect it to have problems on first release, at least until 
both the firmware and software for it reaches a v1.0 level of release quality. 
Working with it just the little bit that I did so far, I was surprised by how 
well it worked rather than appalled by how immature it was. But I don't have 
enough time using it to make a studied evaluation of it yet. 

I prefer to let the thing itself guide my expectations, not the marketing hype, 
and then to derive from that what I think it ought to do that it doesn't. And 
also to see what it does poorly, and does well. To each their own, I guess. 

G

> On Dec 20, 2017, at 10:32 PM, mike wilson  wrote:
> 
> I think you're making my point.  The camera is on the market with, as I
> understand it, no qualifiers other than some slight reservations over the
> processing software.  The user decided that the inadequacies of the software
> were greatly in excess of what he had been lead to expect.  He provided pretty
> good, to my eyes, evidence for his claims.

-- 
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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[mike wilson]

> On 20 December 2017 at 22:41 Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > On Dec 20, 2017, at 1:28 PM, mike wilson  wrote:
> > 
> > Not really fair, that.  As a development engineer, you have a completely
> > different viewpoint on products to a normal consumer.  I wonder if you would
> > be
> > so sanguine if your Bladerunner flying car was always having near misses?
> 
> If I was flying a Bladerunner car prior to its being a full, certified
> production machine with all relevant safeties and control systems finalized,
> I'd be a test pilot. I'd know *exactly* what I was getting into and what the
> risks were.
> 
> That's rather different from being given essentially an early- to
> not-quite-release-ready- production camera along with a pile of marketing hype
> to guide your expectations, wouldn't you agree? 

I think you're making my point.  The camera is on the market with, as I
understand it, no qualifiers other than some slight reservations over the
processing software.  The user decided that the inadequacies of the software
were greatly in excess of what he had been lead to expect.  He provided pretty
good, to my eyes, evidence for his claims.

-- 
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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Jostein]

So what's *principally* wrong with crowdsourcing testpilots for a flying 
car? :-)


I don't think it's right with cameras either.

Jostein

Den 20.12.2017 23:41, skrev Godfrey DiGiorgi:



On Dec 20, 2017, at 1:28 PM, mike wilson  wrote:

Not really fair, that.  As a development engineer, you have a completely
different viewpoint on products to a normal consumer.  I wonder if you would be
so sanguine if your Bladerunner flying car was always having near misses?


If I was flying a Bladerunner car prior to its being a full, certified 
production machine with all relevant safeties and control systems finalized, 
I'd be a test pilot. I'd know *exactly* what I was getting into and what the 
risks were.

That's rather different from being given essentially an early- to 
not-quite-release-ready- production camera along with a pile of marketing hype 
to guide your expectations, wouldn't you agree?

G
—
No matter where you go, there you are.



--
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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

> On Dec 20, 2017, at 1:28 PM, mike wilson  wrote:
> 
> Not really fair, that.  As a development engineer, you have a completely
> different viewpoint on products to a normal consumer.  I wonder if you would 
> be
> so sanguine if your Bladerunner flying car was always having near misses?

If I was flying a Bladerunner car prior to its being a full, certified 
production machine with all relevant safeties and control systems finalized, 
I'd be a test pilot. I'd know *exactly* what I was getting into and what the 
risks were.

That's rather different from being given essentially an early- to 
not-quite-release-ready- production camera along with a pile of marketing hype 
to guide your expectations, wouldn't you agree? 

G 
—
No matter where you go, there you are.

-- 
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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[mike wilson]

> On 20 December 2017 at 15:01 Godfrey DiGiorgi  wrote:

> 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.


Not really fair, that.  As a development engineer, you have a completely
different viewpoint on products to a normal consumer.  I wonder if you would be
so sanguine if your Bladerunner flying car was always having near misses?

-- 
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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

I've been waiting for that car a long time too. =8-)

G
—
The trouble with being punctual is that nobody's there to appreciate it.

> On Dec 20, 2017, at 12:44 AM, Anthony Farr  wrote:
> 
> This must be the camera that Leon Kowalski used to take the photo that
> Rick Deckard analysed with his Esper machine in Blade Runner,
> 
> Real life has finally caught up with sci-fi. Still waiting for my
> flying car, though.
> regards, Anthony
> 
> -- 
> 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.


-- 
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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

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  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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Mark Roberts]

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/
 
-- 
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com





-- 
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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Anthony Farr]

This must be the camera that Leon Kowalski used to take the photo that
Rick Deckard analysed with his Esper machine in Blade Runner,

Real life has finally caught up with sci-fi. Still waiting for my
flying car, though.
regards, Anthony

-- 
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.

Re: Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Bulent Celasun]

Thanks for sharing this.
I have never seen a camera like this.
It promises to make almost all (non-dedicated) cameras obsolete.
Despite its looks, it does not seem to be an all-in-one gadget which
cannot excel in any of its functions.
On top of these, its price (< USD 2000, apparently) is within
acceptable limits for most enthusiasts.

I hope you enlight us more : )

Bulent

-
http://patoloji.gen.tr
http://celasun.wordpress.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bc_the_path/
http://photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=2226822
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/bulentcelasun


2017-12-19 23:55 GMT+03:00 Godfrey DiGiorgi :
> The Light L16 camera (http://light.co) that I ordered in 2015 is finally in 
> production. I received my unit yesterday.
>
> I snapped a few exploratory frames playing with the controls. I then set it 
> on a shelf, a 35mm equivalent FoV selected, and let it make a photo of me. I 
> rendered the file with its app and with Lightroom to this first, full 
> resolution (50Mpixel) JPEG. It's a pleasing result given the three different 
> light sources in my office and my complete lack of experience in using this 
> camera.
>
> https://flic.kr/p/22Ca1VJ
> (ISO 511 @ f/8 @ 1/25 @ 35mm equiv)
>
> Here's the full resolution JPEG, if you're so inclined:
> https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4730/39134202292_e4d97307b7_o.jpg
>
> It's a very interesting camera and will take some time to master, never mind 
> for the firmware and its processing app (Lumen) to become mature.
>
> With respect to size, here are two comparison photos of it parked next to my 
> iPhone 6:
>   https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4683/24303915537_1fea5e2abe_b.jpg
>   https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4680/39134657842_92caec51b7_b.jpg
>
> Weight wise, it's 145g for the iPhone and 435g for the L16.
>
> The L16, in its slip case, fits in my jacket or vest pocket easily, or into 
> the smallest camera bag I have. I can carry it on the bicycle in the back 
> pocket of my cycling jersey (or in a small sling bag) and not even notice 
> it's there. It's quite portable: a lot of camera in a very small package. 
> When coupled with a small tripod for best stability, I think it will make an 
> excellent field camera for various types of subject matter.
>
> And no: I'm not selling my Leicas any time soon…  =:-D
>
> G
> —
> “The biggest hindrance to learning is fear of showing one's self a fool.”
>  - William Least Heat-Moon, Blue Highways
>
>
>
> --
> 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.

-- 
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.

Into the Light (perhaps OT for some, but amusing at least I hope) - GDG

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

The Light L16 camera (http://light.co) that I ordered in 2015 is finally in 
production. I received my unit yesterday.
 
I snapped a few exploratory frames playing with the controls. I then set it on 
a shelf, a 35mm equivalent FoV selected, and let it make a photo of me. I 
rendered the file with its app and with Lightroom to this first, full 
resolution (50Mpixel) JPEG. It's a pleasing result given the three different 
light sources in my office and my complete lack of experience in using this 
camera.
 
https://flic.kr/p/22Ca1VJ
(ISO 511 @ f/8 @ 1/25 @ 35mm equiv)

Here's the full resolution JPEG, if you're so inclined:
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4730/39134202292_e4d97307b7_o.jpg

It's a very interesting camera and will take some time to master, never mind 
for the firmware and its processing app (Lumen) to become mature.

With respect to size, here are two comparison photos of it parked next to my 
iPhone 6:
  https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4683/24303915537_1fea5e2abe_b.jpg
  https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4680/39134657842_92caec51b7_b.jpg

Weight wise, it's 145g for the iPhone and 435g for the L16. 

The L16, in its slip case, fits in my jacket or vest pocket easily, or into the 
smallest camera bag I have. I can carry it on the bicycle in the back pocket of 
my cycling jersey (or in a small sling bag) and not even notice it's there. 
It's quite portable: a lot of camera in a very small package. When coupled with 
a small tripod for best stability, I think it will make an excellent field 
camera for various types of subject matter. 

And no: I'm not selling my Leicas any time soon…  =:-D

G
—
“The biggest hindrance to learning is fear of showing one's self a fool.” 
 - William Least Heat-Moon, Blue Highways



-- 
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.