The latest black clip protrudes beyond the FW3As body while the silver one does not.
The ugly hole - meh. Can live with it. The ugly paint job - rather disappointing. But this… this is a dealbreaker for me
Where are Luminotop’s comments on this topic?
If they have changed the boundary conditions, they need to give some explanation.
How do they understand exactly what they have to do and are they committed to not depart from the assignment?
Sorry if I missed some answers…
A lot of energy and time are invested in this product.
I made a simple bill:
(8526 post here) x (5 minutes per post) = about 90 working days just for posts.
The time spend for reading can’t be calculated…
This simple calculation should oblige the contractor to strictly observe the desire of the forum.
Or give a reasoned opinion of the changes…
That is exactly what I was referring to. Nice picture!
I honestly don't know if I'd buy the light with the clip that bad. Or I might just get one, instead of two. Fixing that will just be a pain in my tail-switch.
OK, thanks for clearing that up guys. :+1:
I understand now…… “It is not fit”. It appears in that picture anyway.
……. ’Hopefully’…. it is not as bad as it ’appears’ in that particular picture. :innocent:
Please don’t tell me what to be, it’s hard enough to be who I am as it is… With all the comercials, politicians, religious people telling me what and who to be.
That’s my point exactly. The price has to be competitive with the D4 when compared against the same emitter options, especially since this has one less and the X-PL HIs are a significant portion of the cost of a D4 with them.