I had the opportunity to handle and shoot a bit with the new Light L16 camera at an event in New York last week while I was in town for PhotoPlus. The event seemed to be put on for Light L16 pre-order customers and some industry and press members. While there, I was able to walk around with a Light L16 to try it out.
My first impression was that it was a little bigger than I expected. It’s probably not fair but I imagined something close to a large cell phone; however, the L16 is definitely bulkier in length and girth. That said, I still was able to carry it in my back pocket – although that’s probably not something I would recommend if you are shelling out $2,000 for one of these on pre-order.
I’ve watched Light from afar over the past couple of years. I haven’t followed along with every bit of the news and announcements that have happened since it was originally shown as a pre-order campaign. At the time, I thought the camera was going to be the next big thing and would shake the camera industry once again. After using it for an hour or so, I’m less sure of that.
To be clear, I’m thoroughly impressed with the technology inside the Light L16 camera. I just don’t know if the market needs (or even wants) this camera.
The camera is easy enough to operate. You don’t feel the wild computational image capture happening as you frame your shots and press the shutter button. Mostly, it feels like you are shooting with a large phone. Image review is similar as well – tap, swipe and zooming all work seamlessly with the touchscreen.
There are some mild editing abilities on the camera; however, nothing allows you to take advantage of the incredible computational imaging power available in the L16’s photos. To get the most out of the camera, you have to connect it to a computer (there’s no memory card slot) and download the images from the built-in L16 storage.
Once you’ve got the images on the computer, you can then use Light’s Lumen desktop application to make a number of rather amazing adjustments. Light’s specs identify the adjustments as:
- Process photos
- Adjust depth of field
- Edit depth
- Adjust focal plane (coming soon)
I had limitied opportunity to observe and use this software. However, it appeared to operate mostly the way we are accustomed to editing photos in other applications. It had basic image adjustment controls but what sets it apart is the ability to customize the depth of field.
This is possible thanks to the 16 camera and lens modules on the Light L16. Every image shot with the L16 uses at least 10 of its cameras to shoot a single 52MP photo. Using the data from those images, the Lumen software allows you to manipulate the photos to give the look of shooting with a 35mm lens at f/1.4 or f/16. Soon, you’ll be able to adjust the focal plane as well – similar to what we’ve seen from the Lytro cameras that never really took off.
The problem with the Light L16 is that is astounding technology but you need a computer to get the most out of it.
When I first tried out the L16, I reviewed the first image I shot in-camera and dug around the menus so I could manipulate the depth of field. This is, after all, the key attaction of this camera. After asking a Light staff member for some guidance, I was met with disappointment that I couldn’t really do anything with these photos.
And there’s the rub.
The people that are reading the this blog are likely willing to dive into L16 and take on the learning curve of a new software application. However, Light doesn’t want to jump into the DSLR marketplace and fight amongst Canon, Nikon and Sony in a bloodbath premium market. Light wants to take on Apple and Samsung for the attention of the masses. The L16 simply can’t be that camera because the user friction is too great.
While the 52MP image quality may be stunning (or not), the comparative quality of iPhone and flagship Android cameras are “good enough” for most of the market. Moreover, the computational imaging capability in devices like the iPhone 8+, the Huawei Mate 9 and like are, again, good enough for the consumer market.
I’m afraid if the Light L16 can’t deliver the ultimate imaging from inside the camera it is all but dead on arrival. If you can’t deliver your bokelicious images from the L16 to Instagram, then it leaves much to be desired as an option for the masses.
I left the Light event scratching my head a bit. Maybe Light gets there and gives us all the camera that the L16 hopes to be. Maybe it takes a generation or two. Or, maybe Light’s not really interested in making a piece of hardware that it sells to millions of consumers. Perhaps Light is more likely to take this tech as far as it can before the company is acquired by Apple, Samsung or some other tech giant. An acquisition may make the most sense as a company goal. If Apple, Samsung, Sony or whoever can shrink the tech down to a phone-sized package, they could get the next leg up on the competition.
Unfortunately, I think the dream that Light is dreaming is a little to big for the small company to achieve in today’s camera market. And I hope I’m wrong.
Jared says
I didn’t realize it didn’t have a card slot.
bob fately says
Hmmm – I actually paid into the funding campaign about 18 months ago but then pulled back (and got my deposit refunded) about 6 months back, concerned that the camera might be more gimmick than worthy. And that was before realizing it could, Lytro-like, allow for changing of DOF.
That said, though, I agree – if it requires a separate computer to do the nifty stuff it’s unlikely to get traction in the marketplace. That said, maybe they’ll come out with an app that allows for that post processing manipulation so the artsier-minded instagrammers would consider it worthy.
nsl4 says
thanks for the article but respectfully, I think the authors premise is flawed.
There is a point and shoot market (easier to use, cheaper and lower image quality). This has co-existed for decades with the DSLR market as they appeal to different segments.
I doubt even the most tech savvy / early adopters would ever shell out $2000 for a canera no matter how good it is right out of box if they’re not somewhat seriously into photography (or have a LOT of disposable income)…
Correct me if I’m wrong but Light never claimed to want to disrupt the entire photography market (that would be foolish), its aim is more concentrated on the the high(er) end DSLR market which is far more niche than the author alludes to (the everyday iPhone/ Android user).
Jared says
Although the higher end DSLR market would certainly benefit from removable memory.
Jon Smith says
As a photographer with decades of experience what I see as the problem is a general “dumbing down” of photography. Right there in the article it says people find cell phones “good enough”. In a world preoccupied with posting small photos of barely acceptable quality and selfies – all on social media – there is a distinct lack of appreciation for good photography and more importantly, good output.
Quality prints are becoming a museum and art gallery item. There’s no sense or desire for any form of permanence in the photos of today.
Harris Fogel says
I was at the same press event, and was curious to see what a final working model looked and felt like. The feel part was the same as last year, when they had early pre-production versions at the first Light party during PPE.
The use of it was quite interesting. My sense of it is that buying one is a huge leap of faith, not only financially, but photographically. It is a camera that is 100 percent reliant on proprietary technology to operate. While the camera can produce a JPEG, the user has very little ability to tweak that image, you can’t adjust Depth of Field, White Balance, etc. So, even a cheap several year old smart phone can do many of those things on manual settings. I shot a lot of photos with the camera during the event, testing every function I could find.
Shooting manually, you can adjust only two things, shutter speed and ISO, so that’s how you get the exposure you want. There wasn’t a focus lock, which made it tricky to use. It’s pretty large, but to be fair, the goal was a pocketable camera that could replace a DSLR with a Wide to Telephoto zoom. So, the size was pretty reasonable to me.
But… this really is a test bed for new technology. From a tech POV it’s astounding what they have created. This is an outrageous tech leap for photography. Across the street were cameras and lenses that represented very simple refinements, deja vu from a decade, or two ago. Better sensors, better lenses, and nothing really that interesting. Better cameras, features, yes, but those are gradual and expected refinements.
The L16 is like the Moon Shot compared to a Piper Cub or Lear Jet. So, if one is going to adopt it, it’s really an act of faith. That Light can stay in business, that the technology will adapt and improve, and that the original goal of the camera, to have one camera that can take the place of a high-end DSLR for many people, is realized.
One thing is clear however, Light is very committed to making the system more powerful, more photographic, and according to them the camera contains a lot of processing horsepower, so their goal is to migrate the editing capabilities of Lumen from the computer to the phone.
I use my phone for images that I need quickly, or want to post to Facebook, etc.. as good as it is, it’s not that good. Small sensors, are well, small sensors.
For everything else I use a Ricoh GR, shoot RAW (DNGs in the GR’s case) and then process later in Lightroom. So, from my POV, not having the ability to tweak a JPEG in the Light 16 isn’t that big a deal. I rely on a seriously calibrated NEC display, the ability to set precise white balance, highlight control, shadow detail, sharpening, etc.. all after the fact, so doing the same with the L16 in Lumen seems like a pretty natural workflow for most serious photographers. I mean, how many folks are going to buy a Full-Frame DSLR and shoot in JPEG mode? I do have colleagues that do, but the reality is that it’s a camera for serious shooters, and they treat their image captures seriously. And I think when you step back and look at the L16 in the same light, it’s not that radical a workflow.
But, if you are buying a two-thousand camera to post on Social Media, I agree, use your phone. That’s not the design goal for this product.
I do worry about any proprietary format. I have for example a Nimslo on my desk as a reminder of fun, cool tech, that died along with the camera. So, a digital format of this complexity, is far more than a camera, nor do I think it would be an easy job for someone to write an app for, assuming that one day they Open Source the format code.
If you don’t mind having a couple of grand invested on a bet, and if that bet rests on bleeding edge technology, you might be on the cusp of the next great thing, as Job’s would say. But, like Icarus, you might just fall to earth if they don’t work on the wing design and GUI in a hurry.