Emanuel Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 2 hours ago, cantsin said: This is getting silly, sorry. We have sample images, taken in perfect light, probably from a tripod and at high shutter speeds (since there's not the slightest trace of camera shake or motion blur), properly focused (since the detail resolution issues aren't the kind of issues caused by a defocused lens, but the same kind of issues that we know from frame grabs of highly compressed video) and properly exposed. Now you're saying that we can't make ANY statement about the camera's image quality based on these images. Then we can just as well close this whole forum. One thing is to comment this or that. Another one is to claim a definitive judgement as a final word on something you had no even a single chance to put your hands on it, to begin with. Add this one to taking presumptions, not really idoneous that you had the most skillful shooter to use the device and you'll have the answer to such assumption of your own. They are not an established camera maker as those fancy samples you're used to see coming from, in this whole forum as you say. I wouldn't much dare to bet on this course either or then, why to expect for the usual suspects as far as an upcoming entry concerns? Why to come and wait for an Andrew's review, as for instance, so? On the leftover, I invite you to read my last two lines of my previous post. Both examples left follow the point; I guess 35mm film in the hands of the crème of la crème can actually be seen here, there and everywhere as counter balance but to match the virtues and shortcomings of a consumer device such as this one discussed along this thread. Summing up the whole stuff of our controversy: you act as you're expecting a PRO outcome from and in anything other than a mere gadget, new technologies pitch aside. I see it as a new artistic tool choice, taken the customary boundaries of their own as due for sure. Frankly, I don't give a damn for professional standards when art can give me more than that. Within the professional pattern ballpark as much as possible, of course. As matter of fact, we're attending a full revolution on the democratization of media acquisition. It doesn't matter how limits you can gather to try to diminish it. Pardon me :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantsin Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 49 minutes ago, Emanuel said: Summing up the whole stuff of our controversy: you act as you're expecting a PRO outcome from and in anything other than a mere gadget, new technologies pitch aside. I see it as a new artistic tool choice, taken the customary boundaries of their own as due for sure; No, I am not expecting anything from this camera - and I am in no religious camp -, but am merely and modestly putting some question marks behind the "camera breakthrough" headline of this thread and behind the "DSLR quality in the palm of your hand" headline of the Light L16 website which - on top of that - quotes the Financial Times with the statement "The L16, if it is as good as promised, will be as important for photography as the first 35mm film camera, the Leica 1, was in 1925". It's not me who makes pro quality claims. And the producer of the camera doesn't claim, like you, that it is a toy. (I wouldn't even call it a toy, but very clearly said that it looks, based on the images we have, like an early demo of a technology that will still need to go a longer way to mature.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted July 29, 2017 Share Posted July 29, 2017 1 minute ago, cantsin said: No, I am not expecting anything from this camera - and I am in no religious camp -, but am merely and modestly putting some question marks behind the "camera breakthrough" headline of this thread and behind the "DSLR quality in the palm of your hand" headline of the Light L16 website which - on top of that - quotes the Financial Times with the statement "The L16, if it is as good as promised, will be as important for photography as the first 35mm film camera, the Leica 1, was in 1925". It's not me who makes pro quality claims. And the producer of the camera doesn't claim, like you, that it is a toy. (I wouldn't even call it a toy, but very clearly said that it looks, based on the images we have, like an early demo of a technology that will still need to go a longer way to mature.) LOL Toys r us, man, all of us. Since birth to the last station. Anyways, I agree with you on that one. Fair enough. I just don't tend to see the glass half empty. I love to find it at the opposite direction, really :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaylee Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 i think these are actual samples, biggg difference!! check it out (warning - large files) https://light.co/assets/images/hi-res/CubaCowboy.jpg https://light.co/assets/images/hi-res/HorseshoeBend.jpg https://light.co/assets/images/hi-res/PointReyesShipwreck.jpg ? EDIT: wait a min!!! i take that back lol. the 81mp shot of the man in the hat looks p good, the 65.89mp one looks less good, and the boat shot still looks like poo more info here https://petapixel.com/2017/08/04/heres-first-81-megapixel-photo-light-l16-16-camera-camera/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trek of Joy Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 Still not impressed. I'd like to see some comparisons with other cameras because those smudged details and watercolor looking foliage look worse than Fuji files. I find the Red Hydrogen more interesting at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 The 100% crops dont look good, no. But theres so much more to photography than things looking good at a pixel level. The camera offers so much in a small body. If youre someone who avidly likes to capture images then i feel like the only reason not to get it if you can afford one is the lack of video features. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantsin Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 3 hours ago, kaylee said: i think these are actual samples, biggg difference!! check it out (warning - large files) https://light.co/assets/images/hi-res/CubaCowboy.jpg https://light.co/assets/images/hi-res/HorseshoeBend.jpg https://light.co/assets/images/hi-res/PointReyesShipwreck.jpg ? These are exactly the pictures/files we've been discussing in this thread before. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaylee Posted August 8, 2017 Share Posted August 8, 2017 15 hours ago, cantsin said: These are exactly the pictures/files we've been discussing in this thread before. Just saying. ok whoops! thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.