| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/19/2011 12:33:08 PM · #1 |
Remember the Stanford research about changing focus after taking a picture? Well the camera is now available to buy.
Its interesting to read about the technical stuff - science-inside
And buy it here - https://www.lytro.com/camera
If you have never heard about this before - Play with the picture gallery (click on the portion of image to bring it in focus) to see what this is about |
|
|
|
10/19/2011 12:51:29 PM · #2 |
This is such a cool idea, and at the same time it almost takes the fun out of photography.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2011 01:32:28 PM · #3 |
Wow. This a going to big big with Point and shoot camera's. I've known several people that didn't realize that the delay when taking a picture was the autofocus and that they could hold the shutter down half way to focus eliminating that delay.
Price seems pretty good too. Not anymore really than a good P&S would cost you. |
|
|
|
10/19/2011 01:39:55 PM · #4 |
| Interesting form factor... a LITTLE bit back to box brownies :-) |
|
|
|
10/19/2011 04:03:56 PM · #5 |
Currently you need a Mac to import your pictures. LOL!
eta: I'm not sure I'd spend $400 on a camera with an internal battery. What do you do when the battery goes bad?
Message edited by author 2011-10-19 20:05:11. |
|
|
|
10/19/2011 07:10:26 PM · #6 |
I'm super interested in getting one. I don't worry so much about the internal battery. It should last for years. I'm a little confused as to the real resolution. 12 million light rays means nothing to me. It appears that the image may need to be in their cloud service to be posted for others. Lots of questions in their forum. If I can select my focal point, and then export to a reasonable size for printing, then I am very interested.
If I can only post them on their servers for viewing, then I am much less interested.
I was very close to an impulse buy, when I noticed delivery would be in the March/April time frame. |
|
|
|
10/19/2011 07:18:51 PM · #7 |
Yeah, I was just about to put up an updated link for it- I had put up one way back when it was first announced with only light interest.
Ergonomically it looks pretty horrible to use, in my opinion.
Here's the article I read today-
//www.engadget.com/2011/10/19/lytro-introduces-worlds-first-lightfield-camera/ |
|
|
|
10/19/2011 07:33:54 PM · #8 |
The only thing I'm wondering is can you take deep doF pictures with it? It looks like it's a constant F/2 that can't be changed which would explain the limited DoF. But if focus information is there for the entire picture, it seems like it should be able to put the whole shot into focus. Kinda like focus stacking but with one image.
Message edited by author 2011-10-19 23:50:09. |
|
|
|
10/19/2011 08:29:44 PM · #9 |
| Well that is not large format! |
|
|
|
10/19/2011 08:48:55 PM · #10 |
Still looks like a gimmick. The example pictures are mostly pictures with two really well defined areas of sharpness, and the rest of the frame is only so-so sharp.
The design does remind me of the uber simple camera from "The Man Who Fell to Earth".
|
|
|
|
10/19/2011 09:16:16 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by alohadave:
Still looks like a gimmick. The example pictures are mostly pictures with two really well defined areas of sharpness, and the rest of the frame is only so-so sharp.
The design does remind me of the uber simple camera from "The Man Who Fell to Earth". |
If you look at the pictures where something is going close to far, when you play around, it's possible to focus at any point along the object. |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 12:34:14 AM · #12 |
personally i think its going to be a gimmick or play thing, its not going to replace DSLRs is it, and isn't part of being a photographer getting the shot you wanted in camera so you focus how you want it.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2011 02:44:04 AM · #13 |
It might not be much more than a gimmick at the moment, but who knows how it will develop in future incarnations? It's not likely that this is the end of its possibilities. It may be the beginning of a revolution - or not. Time will tell.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2011 02:51:41 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
Currently you need a Mac to import your pictures. LOL!
eta: I'm not sure I'd spend $400 on a camera with an internal battery. What do you do when the battery goes bad? |
Same as you do with iPhones, flush them down the toilet. |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 05:06:51 AM · #15 |
| why can't they build this technology right into a dslr? |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 05:10:39 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by alohadave:
Still looks like a gimmick. The example pictures are mostly pictures with two really well defined areas of sharpness, and the rest of the frame is only so-so sharp.
The design does remind me of the uber simple camera from "The Man Who Fell to Earth". |
If you look at the pictures where something is going close to far, when you play around, it's possible to focus at any point along the object. |
Yeah I looked at many of the examples, and my point stands. Many of the pictures have something in the near foreground and in the background. The midfield areas are semi-sharp, and clicking on them doesn't do much.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2011 05:18:02 AM · #17 |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 05:21:42 AM · #18 |
One thing appears to be a fact. This camera will be completely worthless for missed focus challenges. ;-)
Shame they aren't shipping until March/April time frame. I had my credit card out last night. Today I have more of a wait and see attitude. |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 05:22:29 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by alohadave:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by alohadave:
Still looks like a gimmick. The example pictures are mostly pictures with two really well defined areas of sharpness, and the rest of the frame is only so-so sharp.
The design does remind me of the uber simple camera from "The Man Who Fell to Earth". |
If you look at the pictures where something is going close to far, when you play around, it's possible to focus at any point along the object. |
Yeah I looked at many of the examples, and my point stands. Many of the pictures have something in the near foreground and in the background. The midfield areas are semi-sharp, and clicking on them doesn't do much. |
Not from what I saw, but whatever. |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 05:27:45 AM · #20 |
| It's a gimmick camera that will make for some "artsy" effects on collage type YouTube videos and will be a hit with the kids for a month. It does not pack the specs to be anything worth putting your D-SLR down for. I wouldn't waste your money, that's what real cameras are for :) |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 05:33:23 AM · #21 |
I was hamstering all over their site last night. Some pictures did only seem to have limited focus. They noted that themselves, in regards to some of the space shuttle pictures. Other pictures, the butterfly and the mossy tree come to mind, seemed to have a much better range.
The butterfly picture, the spider web, and the mossy tree, blew me away. It's been a long time since I've actually said, "Wow, look at this!", while cruzing the internet.
Will it be the next big thing? I suspect it may turn out more like the Foveon sensor; with a dedicated core but not universal acceptance. Still I can see where it could survive in a niche market like the Foveon.
Disclaimer: I own a Foveon based camera, so I am inclined to purchase off the wall equipment. Your experience may vary. |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 05:37:58 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by ShutterRev:
It's a gimmick camera that will make for some "artsy" effects on collage type YouTube videos and will be a hit with the kids for a month. It does not pack the specs to be anything worth putting your D-SLR down for. I wouldn't waste your money, that's what real cameras are for :) |
I don't think so. There's more to it than that. I'm still reading through the inventor's PhD dissertation from Stanford where he developed the idea, but if it passed muster there, it's safe to say the tech behind it is solid. |
|
|
|
10/20/2011 06:48:31 AM · #23 |
+1
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by ShutterRev:
It's a gimmick camera that will make for some "artsy" effects on collage type YouTube videos and will be a hit with the kids for a month. It does not pack the specs to be anything worth putting your D-SLR down for. I wouldn't waste your money, that's what real cameras are for :) |
I don't think so. There's more to it than that. I'm still reading through the inventor's PhD dissertation from Stanford where he developed the idea, but if it passed muster there, it's safe to say the tech behind it is solid. |
|
|
|
|
10/20/2011 08:13:09 AM · #24 |
I've just seen this and on first look it's very exciting technology and could well revolutionise photography just as digital technology has up to this point.
It's very new technology and no doubt protected by all sorts of patents so I'd be interested to know if they've sought the backing of any of the major camera/lens manufacturers in producing this product. On the other hand, they may feel they can create and dominate a market sector of their own which could be tough.
Anyway, if I've infered and understood the basics correctly, the key is in ensuring the light ray vectors are interpreted accurately which requires good optics to get the light to the sensor. Good optics will also mean the colour and other information is collected accurately. I imagine the software could compensate for inaccuracies to a degree and help with sharpness etc.
I can't help but think in a few years this will have advanced much further. I guess from the vendor's point of view that they need to be able to fund further development and so a usable product has been developed. If it takes off then they'll no doubt do very well and the technology will advance at a pace.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2011 02:13:04 PM · #25 |
I just read a review over at the NY TImes -- they mention that the "images include reader software so your friends can see them" -- I'm wondering how these files will interface with editing software ... I also noticed that all of the files are "natively 3-D" -- should be interesting ...
With "infinite" focus and "no shutter lag" this should be a good P&S alternative, and if the zoom is long and fast enough perhaps a good alternative for action/sports photography.
Message edited by author 2011-10-20 18:15:32. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/06/2025 05:20:28 AM EDT.
