What do you think about Lytro Cameras?

[Panama Hat & Camera]

Do you know Lytro Cameras? What do you think about it?
Lytro camera is a light field camera produced by Lytro, Inc.
Light field cameras can dramatically change photography.

From Wikipedia:

"A light-field camera, also called a plenoptic camera, is a camera that uses a microlens array to capture 4D light field information about a scene. Such light field information can be used to improve the solution of computer graphics and computer vision-related problems.
One of features of a plenoptic camera include the refocusing: Users are able to refocus images after they are taken."

More information about Lytro Cameras:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lytro_camera
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plenoptic_camera
https://www.lytro.com/camera

Cheers,
Antonio.

[geoz]

Thanks for the links Antonio. At first I thought that it was way cool but after a looking at a few I keep asking why.

[Rhoads238]

I like the idea of having a camera that isn't recognizable for street photography. But the functionality and stats don't do it for me. I wouldn't get one for those reasons.

[Letrow]

I have seen this a while ago being introduced. The technique looks pretty interesting, but I don't feel any urge to be using it somehow. So, for me, for the moment it looks like a nice gimmick. If it's cheap enough I might even consider it. It doesn't seem like it's going to change my way of photographing anytime soon though.

[shreds]

With the usual enthusiasm the US has for restricting trade with the rest of the world, I will have no choice but to give it a miss

[GrahamS]

I think that the Lytro technology will, in the future, have a great influence on photography as we know it today, but it will take some time for this to happen.

[Colin Southern]

I suspect it'll die a quiet death. The technology may be innovative, but it all comes down to getting sales and marketing traction -- and they'd better have a HUGE budget for that because they'll be treading on a lot of toes.

Anyone remember beta -v- VHS? beta was better, but VHS won the war.

[Inkanyezi]

I'm of the same opinion as Colin on this one. Just as other techniques that didn't reach great numbers, the Lytro won't have much attraction for the masses. For example stereo photoghraphy should be an even more interesting approach, but it didn't fly, not even when direct viewing images appeared on the scene. Who remembers Nimslo?

After all, most compact cameras already have enough depth of field to cover all that the Lytro technique does in that respect, the difference that with Lytro you can actually focus on various things in an image with shallow depth of field, and it does not present great depth of field without special software treatment. I cannot see why this would be attractive to photographers, although some techno-nerds might appreciate it.

[Colin Southern]

the difference that with Lytro you can actually focus on various things in an image with shallow depth of field, and it does not present great depth of field without special software treatment. I cannot see why this would be attractive to photographers, although some techno-nerds might appreciate it.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

In essence, once the novelty aspect wears off it becomes a camera for only "lazy photographers" who "can't be bothered focusing at the time" (what the heck, we'll just sort out what to focus on in post-production!). Probably somewhat over-simplified, but I think that's the essence of it. Perhaps in years to come we'll have cameras that allow up to specify focus, aperture, shutterspeed, and FoV all in post-production!

[Inkanyezi]

Of course, the selective focusing capability of Lytro could, and should, be used creatively. When we might take a shot with huge depth of field and then in pp blur the parts of it we want blurred, to leave only some objects sharp, the Lytro process is more or less the opposite. From an essentially completely unsharp picture, any objects within could be rendered sharp, thus enabling selective focus on not only one, but several objects at different distance from the camera, not only in a single plane as when tilting.

Those are properties that I think might attract someone artistically minded, but I cannot see that it would attract a mass market, so that it might be accessible for that particular artist. I would rather start learning brushes and paint on real canvas before doing that.

[Rob Ekins]

I suspect it'll die a quiet death. The technology may be innovative, but it all comes down to getting sales and marketing traction.

I agree,

If they can put that technology into a phone they will be on to a winner. Right now that housing is ugly and less than inconspicuous.

On the subject of Beta,

The old man went Beta not VHS..... I have fond memories of unpacking the Beta behemoth on Christmas day with my younger brother as it was a family gift.

To his credit, we were still rolling Beta tapes on events and in studios 20+ years later.

Robbie.

[Ady]

Hi Antonio,

I think It's an interesting idea, but considering a 'Light field resolution of 11 Megarays' equates to flat file output of 1080x1080px it's still a very long way short of being usable for anything other than web output.

Cheers,
Ady

[Glenn NK]

What do I think of Lytro cameras?

I think someone else should buy one; I have 1,000's of better ways to spend my money.

Glenn