I would say the Light adjustment block is pretty good. I also like the white balance adjustment block which is exactly like Aperture with warm, temp/tint and skin. I also like the level adjustment which is like Aperture and has 8 control handles and individual RGB channels. Those are my favorite Photos adjustment blocks. And with the destructive editing extensions, i can do anything i can imagine.

I don't expect Apple to to do much with Photos. I would be totally shocked if they add import/export library or brush-able adjustment. I do wish Apple would provide a way to import Photos editing sidecards into Aperture so I can work on the raw stuff on an iPad and then import the raw files and its editing sidecars into Aperture on a desktop.

I'm still using Aperture and i'm not worried at all. if it stops working some time in the future, i'll move it to Photos and start with a different dam.

“Revert to Original” does not mean non-destructive at all.

A full non-destructive process has 4 characteristics:

1)The original image file is read only.

2)Edits are stored in a sidecar that's either an embedded sql database or file that is outside of the source image file.

3)All edits are rendered from the original source image and not another raster like a tiff, jpg or any other bitmap source or copy.

4)Edits such as adjustments and filters are never baked in and users should be able to go back to change the setting of any of the filters or adjustments at any time after they have been applied them.

This what users here expect with dam/raw editors.

Another definition that's tossed around is a looser definition that applies to layer based raster editor such as Photoshop CC, Affinity Photo and Acorn 5 which are far superior to dam/raw editing for photo editing and can also do raster illustration, raster based graphics and limited vector illustration. This loose definition have characteristic #4 from above. That is the edits are not baked in and users may change the setting of any previous edits any time after the edits was applied. But are not fully non-destructive because the source PSD image file is getting change with these edits. The edits ARE NOT stored in a sidecar that is outside of the PSD and the source PSD is not read-only. Example of this loosely defined non-destructive editing:

1)Photoshop CC layer adjustment (also know by the same name in Affinity Photo and Acorn 5. Pixelmator does not have this!!).

2)Photoshop CC special object filters (Affinity Photo calls this live filters. Acorn 5 calls this layer style live filter. Pixelmator does not have this!!).

3)A through the layer stamp, heal and context aware fill is also considered non-destructive. Any editing process that resemble this also considered non-destructive.

Affinity Photo, Photoshop CC and Acorn 5 have significant number of non-destructive editing features. Pixelmator is a non-destructive. Pixelmator filters will bake in changes into the raster layer that's getting filter. If non-destructive editing is important to you, Pixelmator is not for you.

One way to know it's not non-destructive is you are require to revert to original to redo a adjustment, or filter. That's destructive editing!!! That is a major problem with Photos Extensions as well as Pixelmator where you need to save a copy layer as backup of the original to revert to or required to use undo to redo a filter.

Here's a strong, one sided opinion. Apple has treated musicians very well with quality apps like Logic Pro X, Music Memo, GarageBand and Logic Remote but has treated photographers in an opposite matter. Photos is sorely lacking for advanced users but at the same time, it's difficult to use for novice despite it's lack of functionality. Photos user has to do a lot of clicking to do anything. whether to view a map, face or do a simple edit. It's complicated to do the simplest thing and yet it is lacking in functionality at the same time which is really weird. Weird!!! Navigation in Photos is not good. It's not easy to find any thing.