$2,000 camera with 16 LENSES?!? Photography with the Light L16
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 08. 2024
- This is my long awaited review of the Light L16. Announced 2 years ago it is finally out. The Light L16 combines 16 lenses in a mobile style body. Light say this is aimed to replace a traditional DSLR and a bag of lenses.
The Light L16 uses computational imaging to get to the final image. When you make a photograph, it uses multiple lenses to compose the photo. Up to 10 images are combined and then stitched together in post production. On the widest angle setting this produces an 81 Megapixel image.
So how does it work and what do the images look like?
If you are a channel sponsor - check the Community tab to get links to the image gallery and download raw image files. To become a channel sponsor, the button is below this video.
Music from Epidemic Sound: goo.gl/v5wWKr
Subscribe for more videos!
www.youtube.com...
Watch More Videos:
$63,000 CAMERA :: WHAT DO THE IMAGES LOOK LIKE?
• $63,000 CAMERA :: What...
MY FAVORITE FUJI LENSES
• My FAVORITE FUJI lenses
FUJIFILM X-T2 :: DESIGN WHICH BLOWS EVERY CAMERA AWAY
• Fujifilm X-T2 :: desig...
Thanks for watching - if you like this video, remember to share it with your friends!
Ted Forbes
The Art of Photography
2830 S. Hulen, Studio 133
Fort Worth, TX 76109
USA
My name is Ted Forbes and I make videos about photography. I’ve been making photographs most of my life and I have a tremendously deep passion for photography that I want to share with you on CZcams.
The Art of Photography is my channel and I produce photography videos to provide a 360 degree look into the world of making images. We all want to get better so lets do this together!
I make videos covering famous photographers, photography techniques, composition, the history of photography, philosophy and much more.
I also have a strong community of photographers who watch the show and we frequently do social media challenges for photographers to submit their own work. I feature the best and most interesting on the show when we do these so come check it out and get involved!
At 1000$ you can get the APS-C mirrorless camera Sony A6000 + 35mm f1.8 OSS lens. And you have at 500g (L16 has 450g) a much better camera and you still have 1000$ to travel to other countries, get great pictures and have fun. L16 is nothing more than an idea made to be bought by a bigger company.
or if you want to go really simple a sony rx mk V. which is this camera but with true optical zoom
May be true. Light is actually working with SONY now. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up being bought by SONY
I'd *love* to see a side by side comparison where you *A/B* the images of this camera against a DSLR or Mirror-less package in it's price range
I'd put my Galaxy s7 up against it and win.
Review is bang on. It's new tech that needs development and it needs buy-in from early adopters to fund the development. The early adopters need to be aware that the first iteration of the camera they're buying is going to be primitive. The project was well funded so clearly there were enough early adopters who had enough confidence that Light could make this work in the long run. I've had the same experience with my L16 so far but I'm hopeful that image quality and work flow will improve - indeed they both have improved already several times since the camera shipped. Is it pricey? Yes. Is it for everyone? No. Will it open up new innovations in photography? Time will tell, but you don't get there without risk and without us early adopters who are anxious to see where the concept can go.
I can't see myself (an enthusiast) buying this camera. I can't see my mom (a point and shooter) buying this camera. I don't see where this gives a student a solid foundation for learning. A professional wouldn't choose this camera. So who is left?
Speaking for the dipshits with money to burn, I wouldn't buy this camera either! LOL!!!
LOL for sure - nice one!!
Not really, but thanks for jumping on the bandwagon, David. **Rolls eyes**
And, yes, it is definitely an early adopters game right now. But things are improving steadily with monthly/weekly firmware updates.
Who is it aimed at? Well, in some respects people like me, who like playing with future tech, today. But, to be frank, some professional photographers have added it to their kit (as a more casual "everyday" shooting option), some casual shooters picked it up as a prosumer+ camera.
We all know it's not meant to replace DSLRs right out of the gate (popular press headlines aside; don't believe the mis-quoted hype they use to sell papers, Light themselves said that this technology was the 'future' and might displace some DSLRs in 5-10 years, but in the interim it was a pocketable alternative somewhere between cell cameras and DSLRs). It's designed to be a [large]pocketable "everyday" shooter, and a proof-of-concept prototype to shake down an entirely new technology. We know it'll be rough for a while. It's a startup, after all... And a brand new "way of doing things," so there will be some mis-steps along the way. But, they're actively taking community feedback and resolving issues along the way, as well as prioritizing feature rollout & tweaks based on community feedback. But, yes, it's for folks willing to go along for the ride and willing to watch it develop alongside them. It's perhaps not for "pro" shooters, per se. It's not going to replace pro gear for pro shoots. But, so far, it's doing what it set out to do. Rough edges aside...
And, I agree, the current MSRP is a bit on the high side. But pre-order folks got in on it closer to $899, which was far more reasonable, IMO. I'm sure price will come down eventually, as production goes up, as competitors come to market, as newer generations come out. Wouldn't be surprised if they intermittently put it "on sale," too. As such things go.
Not too worried about it.
people who review cameras
Novelty collectors.
Wow! I'm not a professional photographer, but this has to be the most articulate, thoughtful, thorough, and FAIR review of ANY product I've ever watched! Light needs to hire this guy as a technical advisor.
Excellent review. Very much appreciate the pros and cons approach here. What a great idea gone wrong. I get these guys are new to the camera business but first impressions these days are important and so its critical to get it right the first time round. Most people including professionals want ergonomics, ease of use, and reduced post production efforts.
To your question -- No, they will not be able to resolve these challenges to the degree expected by anyone other than casual shooters, and they are already well served by cell phones. Unless they have a real software hero on staff, which appears unlikely based on your observations about the software, their challenges are not as much with the device as with the software that stacks and stitches images. Even with sophisticated and dedicated image stackers, you still need all the images to be at the same f stop and focal length. Imagine the finess necessary to align and adjust all those images of differing apertures and focal lengths and shot from slightly different perspectives into a single, sharp rendering free from chromatic and mozaic distortions. I'm skeptical.
I had ordered an L16 and returned it and got my money back.
My son who is a professional photographer tested the camera for me and told me all the bits and pieces that you highlight in your review.
Facit: If someone wants something fancy looking and something to impress his/her non-professional photographer friends...OK.
Thank you for your honest and qualified review!
Thank you light.co for taking it back and refunding me!
It's nice to see somebody bringing something to market that's genuinely new and innovative. Given that it is so different, I strongly suspect that at some point soon, somebody will find something it can do that nothing else can. I've no idea what (I don't have one, and I'm not a good enough photographer). Whether enough people want to do that thing enough to support the production of more cameras like this is something we just don't know at the moment. It'll be interesting to see where this idea goes.
I’m like you Ted, I like it when someone goes out of bounds and tackles a problem with a fresh look. Almost all great inventions originate from that way of thinking. That said there are many entrepreneurs who have great ideas but do not have the basic skills and notions to make their invention work (and most of them know it from the start). Going out of bounds with a great idea is DIFFICULT. In our world, there are more dreamers than inventors. And that does not end there, you not only need to have a great idea but need a team of personnel that will handle all that it takes to create the product (and it’s side products - lens, software, etc.), finance the product, and market it. The best of inventor could probably not do all of these things alone. So it’s all about team work.
Lucky for you, and for us, LIGHT does not seem to take their work LIGHTLY (sorry, I had to say that) - They seem dead serious (but I hope they don’t die). Again, I feel like Groucho Marx today…
My guess here, is that most of the budget for making this new camera went into making the camera. Seems simple enough but it’s not. They need to get a product out rapidly but they probably tossed aside the budget needed to improve the software. Now that they got the camera out, they know that the software is part of the weakness and my guess is that they will tackle this before changing anything on the camera, even if some ergonomic modifications are needed - like the ones you stated.
Now for my thoughts:
I don’t think LIGHT needs to wonder into the world of video, as of now. They must concentrate on their basic concept and must not do any trade off that might put them in peril. They must not be scared of tackling a problem from scratch if needed - which means they must avoid “patching” things. If they don’t someone will take their own concept, work at it from a different angle, and manage a better working model with a different patent.
I, like you, also think that the depth of field variations look artificial. Maybe that’s because we are use to work within the limitations of ONE specific lens and accept the trade-off it gives as bonuses, like Bokeh. Hopefully Light can better their software and leave some room for the user to get those limitations back. Maybe the user could choose - in post-processing - which of the multiple images he wants to build up the results. If ten lens were initially needed, then maybe the user feels that a specific group of five does a better rendering. Maybe some preview mode can just do that and let the user experience feel as if he is in control.
A user’s experience is all about feeling like he’s in control. So the ergonomic problem of holding the camera at hand when taking a picture must be tackle. Maybe they can come up with a simple solution for those who already own this version - like an add-on accessory that can be fixed to the tripod screw that will let your left hand rest so that your fingers don't cover any of the camera’s multiple lenses.
All that said, I wish them the best - because in the end, if all works well, we are the ones that will benefit from this.
Great objective review Ted!
Lytro all over again - cool concept, but too expensive and image quality isn't good enough.
The best for L16 is that Apple, Samsung, Xiaomi or any other big player buy the company
Nice concept tho.
not likely to happen, most of the big ten a probably way ahead of them in computational photography already.
Sure, Alvin. Show me their computational cameras, then. Ohh, right, they don't have any in the market. Your argument is invalid.
??????????????
really
Google Pixel 2 camera though
I was waiting for this review, so much! Gonna enjoy it, right now.
I'm not really big on having unlimited options for each shot. My first extra lens that I bought was a 50mm and I learned to shoot with it. Then I learned that I loved to shoot with it. Because of this I used it for any paid gigs because I knew that even if it had limitations I could set up the composition the way I knew it would work and get a great photo. And that is how you create your style. Personally if you give me a device that can do anything then I would end up with a portfolio of randomness, at which I am already having a hard time learning how to simplify.
So, in your worldview, because you only shoot with one lens, and have one "style," everyone else should be constrained to your limited style of shooting, or should be denied "options" in shooting?
I disagree. Not everyone is that much of a "one trick pony," as it were.
So it goes...
Also, I wouldn't say that it offers "unlimited options." If you compose a shitty shot, it'll still be a shitty composition. Can't exactly fix shitty composition in post, so-to-speak.
I would certainly say that it gives someone a larger degree of freedom and artistic control. As well as an ability to fix certain things in post that you might not otherwise have been able to. For instance, if you missed focus on your target slightly. Typically that couldn't really be fixed in post. In this brave new world, if the AF accidentally targeted the object next to them, rather than your portrait subject, you could change the focal point in post so it's on your intended target, and not an errant AF target.
And, frankly, some people simply ENJOY artistic freedom. If I like a shot better with a different focal point, or wish to "change the story I'm telling" by refocusing, or changing the depth of field, why should I be prohibited from doing so? What, because someone else prefers to "shoot once and be done with it"? If that works for you, fine. But it doesn't mean you get to tell me or others how *we* should shoot. It's not "your way or the highway." I honestly don't think there's anyone one *"correct"* way to compose, or take, or post-process a shot.
But, that's just my opinion, of course.
Your response merits a better one. Your portfolio isn't restricted by the lens but by your creativity. 35/120mm film was the main and only film used by photographers for decades and still today, they use different lenses to get a distance shot. You chose randomness on what you click a shutter on or not. I used the same 24-105mm lens for 5yrs and my portfolio reflects the variety I wanted to shoot. not that the lens gave me 81mm of randomness to choose. Your camera is merely a took to accomplish a look or exposure you desire. The rest is up to you.
Now they just need to incorporate this into a cell phone...😂😂👍🏻👍🏻
I don't believe that it can replace DSLRs. Because a thousand small lenses cannot replace one big lens. But I do like the idea behind the camera. "Computational" photography will be a class-leading concept if implemented properly. While cameras like this cannot replace DSLRs, they can complement them in many ways for sure.
I was waiting for this review to come up. Thank you, Ted! It was a very apt one!
I think the L16 is a concept of what smartphones will look like in 3-5 years.
I love their idea and think they'll be able to overcome the difficulties.
Wish I could them .
With over a dozen lenses I was thinking "I wonder what this does... all the lenses are in different places so maybe it takes semi-3D photos?" Not even that... I don't mind carrying my DSLR around lol it feels comfortable and natural... I like the process of it all.
I suspect that 3D will eventually be on the drawing board, or stereoscopic imaging. Probably mid-to-long-term (after getting standard imaging squared away satisfactorily). But it certainly seems like it would be a synergistic setup, given the perspective shift of the multiple sensor modules/lenses.
Big Camera companies would probably go and ask them for the Light L16 blueprint and the few years later, boom! The New L16!
One of the most important features of a camera is how well it handles. Without good ergonomics a camera will let you down a lot of times taking the fun out of photography. This looks as comfy to shoot with as an iPad (especially considering the lenses are positioned all the way to the edge). So no, this is not going to replace a DSLR and a bag of lenses.
Also it is physically impossible to replace a big zoomlens with a few small lenses and get the same result. The idea is great and the implementation looks very well done but you simply can't beat the laws of nature. So I guess I'll stick with my own camera for now but it still is interesting to see how they will improve things with firmware updates. ut I'm sure you'll keep us posted.
My initial impression is that the L16 is trying to compete with a smartphone camera but is marketed to be a dslr replacement. The cellphone we already carry and their camera is good enough.
When I want to go beyond my cellphone photos, better image quality on par with a $2k camera is expected. The ability to edit RAW, in Adobe or other software is needed.
I absolutely want one. Will I pay 2 grand? Nah...Maybe 500?
Even provided that they fix the processing issues and are able to resolve the fine detail correctly, they are charging a premium for a bulky "compact" camera that does not produce the image quality/low light performance to match the price. 2k buys you a hell of a mirrorless setup for the consumer crowd. For the pro crowd they might be targetting, that sort of money buys you either a nice new crop dslr setup, or a second hand full frame workhorse that can keep up with that kind of use. I can get a D3x with 24-70 for around the same price (maybe up to 2.5k total) that will run circles around this thing on all fronts. Additionally I'm not sure any clients would take you seriously if you show up with this thing, i wouldn't.
Very very cool concept. Apparently not what we all expected.
Congrats on 400K!
Thanks!
It looks really neat but I feel like the whole experience of photography has been removed from me. Half the fun for me is taking a film camera and seeing it in my head to dial it in or taking a DSLR/Mirrorless and having everything I can control. That and the ergonomics of it are sterile. As a brick I just don't feel like I'm part of the process. To me this camera is trying to be "your camera takes nice pictures" camera. It is literally trying to be the whole process and you just point it at something.
So, what's the problem with having a camera that "takes nice pictures"? I'm failing to see the down side of having a camera that you point and shoot and something potentially awesome comes out the other side.
You like to "dial it in" on your DSLR beforehand to theoretically match what's in your head (what happens if you "miss" and lose the shot forever?). Others like to "dial it in" on their computer to theoretically match what's in their head (what if you could "salvage" that important shot you missed forever, in post, due to the amount of information captured by the L16 or some similar technology?).
Why can't both markets co-exist?
Well if you practice in manual long enough your percentage of matching what you see in your head goes up. Let's say I'm making a macro photo of the wedding rings at a reception I am gigging at. I have the look I want in my head and that requires controlling the focal point and controlling the depth of field to achieve the bokeh I want. I also have the light the way I want it for that moment. If I take a point and shoot camera and let the computer do it how close will the computer get to the look I know I want? Let's take a landscape shot next. I planned for everything but I was 10 minutes late on the hike up and it's a little brighter in the sky now. Fortunately I packed a neutral density filter to compensate for the change in the light based on how I want to expose it. I've already taken 1000s of photos with DSLRs so I can take all the components and manually put them together to express the landscape in front of me. I can see my exposure in the histogram and I can post-process it accordingly. Even if I have just my smartphone on me I will manually set the ISO and exposure compensation if I have a nice sunrise or sunset in front of me. I got out of the business of relying on the computer to do it over time because I wanted to achieve various looks that the computer didn't know was possible. I say all this while in no way trying to diminish the power of point-and-shoot. That may be just all anyone wants. I personally wanted more. I wanted to understand the camera, I wanted to take pre-visualization as described by Ansel Adams to the technology that is the camera. I wanted a front seat to the craft of photography per se. In auto a camera is only as good as the algorithms that produce a balanced exposure. If you think about it when a camera gets better in auto over time that is the result of humans understanding photography and applying it algorithmically to the camera. A human still sort of took the photo. Auto only mean the algorithms are doing it manually for you ;) I got to where I want to be certain I got exactly what I wanted out the other side without the computer's help. Again, that took 100s of hours and 1000s of photos but I don't need auto anymore. That's just my opinion though :)
Couldn't have said it any better Ted! Really nice and honest review!!! I will stick with my DSLR...I see the Future going towards Mirrorless Cameras and for the most part to Smartphone Cameras. I wouldn't even consider taking an image with that camera because of several reasons...the main reason being restrictions as in using different lenses and focal lengths or the idea of not taking images of complex objects since it doesn't render them well and also Filters such as the polarising filter or even ND Filters...does the shutter really only go down to 1/15th of a second?? And they are trying to replace Pro Cameras with this? That's a joke...
I think in 5-10 years, this concept is going to be amazing, and may even take over. That said, there will be growing pains, not only for this company, but for others dabbling in the same concept. The journey will be rough, but the destination will be mind blowing.
It's 5 years later
I think it won't be a device that we all go for, but it might lead to develop some kind of technology resolving or just touching some issue. It's good for the market and future devices.
Still confused as to how this system works, so a fixed aperture, multiple lenses with different focal distances, I dont understand how it can stitch 2 or more images together with different focal distances?
As always, fantastic, in depth review. Thank you for all your work, much appreciated.
This camera has dramatically changed since its release. Firmware updates have made this easily rival DSLRs no question. Low light improved. Key is to export a DNG from their Lumen software and post process
I actually hate taking pictures, but I found this video really entertaining.
Fixing focus in post, perhaps more perfect/ active HDR, selecting DOF in post and maybe even auto stacking and many other possibilities with this idea are tantalizing... It's too bad it didn't have SOME feature or image so exciting that they could start building real support. I think the idea is great. I hope they can keep going till it's everything it can be!
As a UX design professional; I don't understand who their customer could possibly be... this is the most important and first question you should ask yourself and establish before committing years of work and bucket loads of money into. In my eyes this is a novelty camera that costs $2k.
Couldn't agree more. My review will be coming soon. Finishing the video edit as well as sample images. They miss the mark on so many levels. No battery or storage access. Clunky android interface. And, the post-processing software is just painful. Oh, and never once did I see a histogram. As always Ted, nice job.
the idea is good with having multiple lenses.
I'd prefer to lug around a bag of individual lenses because how else will I cure my GAS? Great review Ted, unfortunately I dont see myself relying on the cameras processing to get the exact photo I need. If they do fix the initial bugs there certainly could be an audience interested in this all-in-one setup. A lot of social media users arnt blowing up their images or pixel peeping like we are, so something versatile like this may be the answer
I loved your unbiased review , honestly I see so many people doing so many reviews ( not on this particular product) just in general, but the experience I had watching your video is awesome looking forward to many from you.. I'm a tech junkie and need reviews like this before I pull the trigger on crap I don't really need but at least with your review I won't regret the purchases
I really really want to say thank you for your review, its one of the best that I have found so far. I have waited a long time and didn't put in a deposit, i have watch from the sidelines the launch release and people's review and post of the first L16 images, its been a few months and it looks like LightCo really has improved on the compositing algo so I just went ahead and purchased it on sale this last weekend during their president's day sale. Please keep posting on the L16 your updated thoughts, I will be watchin for them :) I believe in the company too and I hope it does succeed too!!
I think we are at a new paradigm shift. I have a pixel 2 now and the photos are pretty amazing given that it is a phone. They seem to do multi-exposures and lots of computation to make up for the lens--and maybe the sensor. We might be in the era of signal processing---like our eyes do. The L16 is an interesting stop in this path.
I really want to see the second iteration of this.
It seems an interesting concept. If you do studio-photos you don't need it! I like the idea that you don't carry around one big lens so people are feeling watched with a usual DSLR. Generally it looks more interesting for doing videos!
I think the future will be software processing images from tiny camera sensors to HQ images. There was already an article how software could process a blury/pixelated image into something usable. Even the google pixel 2 processes depth information with only one camera and produces mind blowing images in the right conditions.
I remember when they started working on this idea and thought the same thing, a great idea with an awesome resolution. They have to nail the fine details if they want to compete with DSLR and the processing software needs to up there as well. Great review on the overall design pro’s and cons along with the technical but very important details. Keeping my fingers crossed. Thanks👍🏼
Generally, I like the idea. Their concept is similar to what large arrays of radio telescopes do to create an image of space. You hit on the main technical problem; how can you stitch multiple complex images together and keep the depth of field information? If they can solve that problem, they will have a chance. If not, they will go the way of Lytro, which surprisingly has a similar problem. (BTW, I believe that they can solve the low-light issues you mentioned.)
Note that if they work out these issues, this camera would be for serious photographers, not those who take snapshots and post on Facebook. The workflow is similar to what professional photographers already do. Adding support for things like replaceable memory cards and batteries are relatively simple to implement if that is what blocks users from adopting.
Very fair review. I personally love the concept and think it still holds some relevance. Hopefully they stick with it and turn this into a really shooting machine.
Hey ted congrats on 400k subs. I kinda like the idea but they have too much to improve. They might be a good option in 5 years just like mirrorless now. But i still think dslrs are not out the door yet and wont be for the next 5 years. Congrats again and thank you #notificationsquad.
I absolutely think this is relevant. I hope they keep pushing. Cameras have had a lot of Innovations, but I think this could be the smartphone of the camera world. Smartphones put telephones on their ass, and changed our very definition of communication. Cameras have always been either big and fixed, or small with a body and a lens (at least the good cameras). This would be small, and no separate lens, it could truly cut out interchangeable lenses entirely if this gets better. Tests I would like to see, portrait in a dark room, landscape with an overcast sky, and maybe a snowy day and a dog running.
I think this works well as a proof of concept, and if they licence the technology out to bigger companies (including ones that produce smartphones), the technology itself can have a decent future. We already see the dual camera designs in the high-end smartphones, and triple camera was rumoured to pop up this year, so i think others are also seeing some advantage of such en imaging system.
Thanks for your objective review. I like seeing when companies try something new and different - even if it doesn't always work. That said, I probably won't be buying one of these myself. I think we'll be seeing more of this technology in cell phones moving forward with multiple lenses.
Very interesting review, and I totally agree with your conclusion : two years ago, it was a brilliant idea, but then, considering how far cellphones already are, there is probably no niche market for such a pricey camera with such image results.
When you said it shoots everything "wide open", I pretty much made my mind up. All camera lenses have an optimum aperture for best results. Typically stopped down 2 or more stops. Every lens suffers from aberration when wide open and diffraction when fully stopped down. In order to establish this optimum aperture, many pictures need to be taken in various conditions. The L 16 has 16 varying focal length lenses, all of which are fairly small diameter, and not place concentric with one another. Optically each image is therefore a hodge podge of images. This hodge podge is further contaminated by using every lens at it's widest aperture, in order to "get more light into the camera." This massive digital "mess", is then interwoven and processed by software.
The people at Light are probably a lot smarter than I am, and a lot of engineering has gone into this product. However, the idea and the results do not add up. It seems that rather than re-invent photography, they have un-invented many of the well established fundamentals of photography.
As you said, the concept is awesome, but I didn't expect it to be waw especially for the first iteration, if they didn't surrender and continued to develop I think it's gonna be special in like 5 years giving the fact that they don't have big R&D unit.
I see focus stacking. Each of lens, take a different focal point. I wish them success .
I wish i could afford to buy one to test it with an outdoor portrait session. To test the idea that it could replace my dslr and make a video of it!
Thanks for the review, especially the detail on how the computational problem that may occur on too complex wood branches. I would love to see more of the issues with computational image such as how it handles fast moving objects, slow shutter handheld, through tunnels and stuff, and if you can discover any advantages you can actually use the computational flaws to your creative advantages.
Lately I get a lot of their ads popping up on CZcams. As of today it still can't record video either.
Computational photography is going to be a next big step for digital imaging. I'd like to see how far they get.
I think this camera could be useful for war photographers ... If they fix a bunch of issues... It's a great idea, but I think the only market for this kind of camera it's the «shoot first ask questions later» market. Because even a beginner knows what he wants on the picture, he just don't know how to get it. They have to put some presets modes like portrait, landscape, macro, etc.
I'm not particularly fond of the design but at least the concept is fascinating. Wonder if there will be a second version of this. Anyways, this was a very informative breakdown.
Nillohit Barman They gonna release a phone with the same technology this summer. Less lenses, but the concept remains.
Wonder if it'll be the new [rumored] Penta-Lens Nokia or something else?
Great review. Part of reason for Fujifilm's success in the last few years is that people want to pick up and use their cameras, because of how they look and feel in their hands. I love holding and shooting with my x-pro1, would I love walking around with, essentially a massive phone? No.
Sounds really good and you can put up with the cumbersome issue but at this price you need excellent quality photos. I've been waiting for this for over year and really doesn't seem much better.
Though it can never replace the big DSLRs and Mirror SLRS because: physics.
What they can do, the ones with more space can do better (bigger multi-lens, etc.)
But it's nice this exist, multi-cams on cellphones are all over.
I can't wait to a waterproof case for it to come out it would be awsome 😃
They should have focused this to macro photography. Being able to do macro without the annoying process of photoshop would have been a good selling point.
Feels as if, like the Lytro, they're trying to answer a question nobody asked.
Except the founder did ask it, and is working to answer it.
"Why is my DSLR sitting on my shelf gathering dust?"
Ohh right, 'cause it's too heavy and doesn't fit in my pocket, so I never take it anywhere.
Currently the main answer to that is "cellphone camera" (most of which are garbage, other than a few flagship iPhones, Samsungs, etc.), 'cause you always have that on you. But, if the images are garbage, what's the point? Why not make something equally portable that doesn't take garbage images, and gives you the increased flexibility of computational imaging?
The idea is to eventually pack it into a cellphone form factor and raise the minimum bar on mobile imaging. They just put it in a standalone camera first to get the imaging working, without having to deal with all the other cellular telephony crap whilst developing the imaging side of things. I've little doubt they'll get it further miniaturized and into cells and tablets in the mid-term. I suspect the penta-lens Nokia that's rumored to be coming out soon will be using Light tech. But we'll have to wait and see...
Portrait mode on every flagship smartphone uses the same principles. Nobody asked for it, now everyone expects it.
They use something like this in astronomy. Using multiple telescopes to create one image. The concept is valid. The problems come in that the sensors have to be the highest quality and you are going to need a lot of software chops to make it go. Probably I'd say in several years the concept will work, but maybe the quality will equal only a mid range dslr, not a high end. The S/N ratio will still be higher than something with larger pixel size.
Thanks for your honest review. I had been thinking of the Light 16 as a travel camera, sort of a high megapixel smart phone. Your video has convinced me to upgrade from my Sony A7 to the A7 II or III with it's 42 megapixels instead. As far as the future potential for me, if I am going to spend that kind of money I think I prefer an interchangeable lens camera which lets you use a variety of native or vintage lenses. I am attracted by the size but it sounds like it is considerable heavier than the iPhone 8 plus which I use in a pinch or when I don't feel like carrying heavy gear. Also sounds like the post processing in photoshop or light room is a pain in the ass. I look forward to your future reviews.
I agree with you that this particular model might not have the great success they hope for, but it can be the beginning of a disrupting movement in the camera world. There's a reason why camera manufacturer use different sensor sizes in their consumer level DSLRs.
Really interesting! I find it interesting how the placement of the lenses looks kind of random but has probably a purpose. Really impressive hardware!
They said they could have tried to make it more symmetrical, but they decided to just make the lenses fit as compactly as they could, through a few iterations, and just embraced the "weird look," which was kind of distinctive... ;) Definitely hard to mistake it for ANY other camera. ;)
loved the design and the idea, I have the faith too
Excellent review. I couldn't imagine this camera working very well. Even if it's possible to get software to do something, why take the risk when you can get a lens that does it for real. You can't burst with the effects, but you can with a Lensbaby or a shallow depth of field. No need to restrict because the information is already there.
Considering all the technical issues, and the black box approach... especially for a camera that is supposed to be a professional replacement, I definitely wouldn’t consider one.
Just out of curiosity could make a video about what camera and lens types you would want in a smartphone to have to be professional grade I think that would be pretty cool.
Latest firmware is amazing. Wow.
Interesting idea, but they got the form factor all wrong, a cell phone is the absolute worst camera to try to hold and use. I expect that this will join the Pentax Auto 110 in the museum of camera ideas that just didn't work.
Proof of concept as you say. If you want to check out something really cool, Madventure V 360 camera. 360 photo and video may be the next big thing in photography.
If it ain't Granny friendly then it ain't friendly at all.
It sounds like a great concept. I think your feedback and the feedback of others would be really important for Light to zero-in on identifying the problem areas. If they can take ownership of the flaws and really narrow down who this is for, it would be great to see if this could attract some investment. It seems like it would need to withstand spills, knocks, and and a certain amount of water pressure to appeal to the transient photographers of the world.
With 16 lenses, how would you handle adding a polarizing filter for landscape (or other) photography? I'll admit that I don't quite understand the finer details of a polarizer works, but if you had one large filter that covered the entire camera, wouldn't the affect be different depending on the placement of each lens? The only other option I see from there, is having 16 individual polarizers that you'd have to adjust one at a time. I fear this design is more kitsch than practical.
PS- is it weather sealed at all?
Thanks!
I just discovered this channel and found your video so thorough and informative. Great work! 👍
Thanks for the thoughtful review Ted!
Thanks for this thorough overview. I was pretty sure this camera would be DOA and this confirms it. They created a solution to a problem that did not exist. Use a smartphone or a mirrorless. This camera is WAY larger than a smartphone.
This feels a lot like Lytro did: it's an attempt to prove the concept of the technology to get bought by a big camera company. Except they're not really proving the technology is ready, and none of the big camera companies seem interested or care (nor should they). So you're basically buying an engineering prototype they're selling to make some money while they try to actually get it working well enough to sell out to Sony.
Chuq Von Rospach exactly right . It’s a proof of concept to get purchased by a big player .
They've said they have zero interest in "selling out" or getting bought out or plowed under by some monolithic company without their vision for what this camera can/should be or do... Give them some time. Yeah, it's all a big experiment, and a shakedown voyage. But, hopefully, what comes out the other end will be an interesting and useful piece of robust tech. And I suspect Gen2 will fix many of the things people don't like about the current generation. But that'll be a few years out, I'd wager. Still a metric ton to do on, and build into, this one...
And, being software-based, with frequent updates, it seems to me that this, in some sense, will never truly be "done," as there may always be some new or improved functionality to add, some new interface tweak, etc. There may not be a discrete "end point," barring a few years / generations down the road ending support/updates for the "original" model.
Finally all traditional camera makers will go the dino way.
It looks like they spent quite a bit of time trying to make it look sleek while foregoing simple things like making a grip for it that people can actually utilize, or even the inability to rest the camera when the cable is connected.
I think you hit the nail on the head with your wrap-up by saying that phone technology has come a very long way in the past 2 years. I feel like the L16 is going to struggle to keep up.
I wouldn't spend my hard earned money on one.
Look like an attractive paperweight... Maybe you could review THAT functionality!
Not everyone´s choice but I love mine. No, it will not replace my Canon DSLR for some of my serious work. However, I can now take the L16 with me on holiday and get very acceptable results.
General thoughts -- some of the issues you describe can, in principle, fall down to software and firmware shortcomings. Software on the side of the demosaicing not able to merge images in a way that preserves quality really well. Firmware because there can be issues synchronizing and aligning so many lenses simultaneously. You can have issues with images from different sensors not properly spatially correlated with one another, and the software really has to work to fix those errors in alignment. In order to really avoid that, you need some seriously high precision manufacturing not just in the electronics and optics, but also in the mechanicals of the device and its framing and cradles for every one of those 16 housings. Either that, or you have to individually calibrate every device across the entire focal width and depth range for at least a few dozen values of each. Neither option is cheap, though the latter is probably easier... Downside of it is that you will still get variance in quality across individual instances of the device.
We can already do high precision manufacturing of the lenses in this day and age (all smartphone lenses are molded plastic for this reason), and it's usually what separates the really good smartphone cameras from the garbage ones. While it is theoretically possible to get pretty good light absorption across the spectrum by using many lenses (assuming you use as many for a given shot as you can), one thing you cannot possibly get from small sensors is really good dynamic range. You hit the quantum limits of the well when they are really small. And I spoke to one of the founders at one point and he gave examples of the really tiny 1/3.2" sensors where the CMOS elements can actually reach saturation just from 25 photons actually getting absorbed (not all photons that strike an element actually get absorbed, btw). That means that the theoretical limit is only ~5 stops of dynamic range.
So the only way you can possibly have wider dynamic range is to have an even bigger number of lenses and sensors actually capture the same picture simultaneously at multiple different exposures and computationally compute true brightness (this is how proper HDR is actually supposed to be done). While you could take multiple exposures (akin to the high-res modes in some cameras with IBIS), having multiple lens sets is better because it avoid the issues with motion in the scene.
I think this device as is, serves little more purpose than a proof of concept... but the problem is that for a startup, there's little hope without a moneymaker to go from a proof of concept to a mature product. Companies like Magic Leap can pull it off because they got such an obscene amount of funding without ever having a product. Light isn't in that same seat, AFAIK, and the L16 is not capable of getting out there and making money. You can get enthusiasts excited about the future possibilities, but not about the present. The workflow is simply out of the question for the general consumer. That can be attacked a bit by just having significantly more computing power in the device, giving you the headroom to run some of the functionality on the fly like you can do with smartphones.
Thanks for the nice review!
For me personally I think it wouldn't replace a DSLR. I mean that's what people love about photography. They love having different lenses, analog cameras,... It's just like you said: If you're not that much into photography your smartphone which you always have with you will do the job just fine.
great review! pure pleasure watching it ✨
Are the images any better than what you'd get from an iPhone7,8,X, or a Pixel2?
Guess it depends how you define "better." ;) :P
Michael Gmirkin Not really. There are many objective parameters that define a what a better camera is: sharpness, noise, dynamic range, color accuracy, etc.
But how deep are the pixels?
Only medium depth I’m afraid ;-)
The Art of Photography but up to ten times as many?
Somewhere between Jack Handey and Buddhism...
As deep as a puddle...
Is that an Ableton Push I see in the distance?
If this camera had decent quality, I would totally want to have it. I've been following the progress since the Kickstarter project and am still intrigued, but only if they keep their promise of DSLR-like quality. For me the use case is hikes. I like hiking, and I have a bad back. Which is a horrible mixture if you like photography as well. I don't take my DSLR with me on my hikes, because it's just too heavy. Yet, my Pixel 2 photos could look better at times, and I especially miss the manual controls (especially manual focus for depth of field). If the L16 would have incredible image quality (as it promises), that would totally become my hiking camera. After watching a few reviews, I assume I'll have to wait for at least the 2nd generation.
Thanks for the review! This helped a lot to not press the "buy" button now and wasting quite a lot of money! :)
Oh wow, you're local to me. Noticed the picture of Klyde Warren Park!
I want to see what the video performance is like when they finally do it. What this really needs to compete with is the mirror less camera. I am a point and shoot person. I do not really need a whole lot of lenses but, I want something better than my smartphone.
Three years later,it seems like the direction smartphones are going.