| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/21/2012 11:52:19 AM · #1 |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 11:56:13 AM · #2 |
| I'd like to try one with street photography. But not sure I will pay for one... neat though. |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 12:23:15 PM · #3 |
| I've been contemplating whether I wan't one or not.. Could be great for street but the file size of the image will fill up my drives way too fast. |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 12:32:07 PM · #4 |
It looks very promising but then I came across this review Lytro Camera: 5 things to know before you buy
According to the reviewer "You need to offload your photos to a computer--which is Mac-only at launch--and process your photos with the included software. Want to share your living photos on Facebook or anywhere else? You need to upload them to Lytro's Web site first and then do your sharing from there. "
and editing?
"The desktop software is only for transferring and processing photos, adding captions, rotating pictures, sharing directly to Facebook, and sharing or storing on Lytro.com. You cannot adjust color or exposure, or use your favorite lo-fi filters, or even turn a shot to black and white. "
If that is the case, I'll wait til Lytro V F8 comes out to offer greater depth of post processing possibilities:-)
Message edited by author 2012-02-21 12:33:09. |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 01:10:07 PM · #5 |
| Interesting, Chrystine. Seems pretty pricey for such restricted use of your own images... |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 01:50:12 PM · #6 |
| Wow! 23meg images from a 1.2 megapixel camera. That's about 15x the size of a RAW file. I still want to play with one, but that is crazy. |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 01:52:46 PM · #7 |
It is definitely interesting! Don't know that I would invest the money in it though, my kids would think it was a toy (for them). haha
|
|
|
|
02/21/2012 01:57:51 PM · #8 |
| Yeah, I think i'm gonna pass for the time being. |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 02:08:42 PM · #9 |
It's a cool idea, and really not surprising that you need secondary software to do anything. It's a proprietary capture that is totally incomprehensible to most processing to access the features. It's like trying to feed a 3D image into a non-3D editing software. The posting thing is sorta dubious... I wonder how you can export it and then edit the image with other engines.
In any case, bleeding edge suffers some difficulty. Heck, many new bodies from Canon and Nikon aren't initially supported for RAW conversion by Adobe. What worries me more about these cameras is the ergonomics. They are definitely not designed to shoot in the sense that we normally do, making the picture making much different. This would be difficult for me, more than the exporting. |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 08:38:10 PM · #10 |
| After futsing with lenses and all sorts of other big gear, I'd feel silly shooting with that super simple, tiny toylike configuration. Looks like one of those tiny viewfinders on keychains :-) |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 08:51:58 PM · #11 |
I plan on getting one and trying it out. It's a difference concept to traditional jpg-type capture that I find rather interesting and am willing to explore.
Message edited by author 2012-02-21 20:52:16. |
|
|
|
02/21/2012 09:26:33 PM · #12 |
I've had one on order since October. So far no word on a shipping date.
|
|
|
|
02/22/2012 08:40:21 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
I've had one on order since October. So far no word on a shipping date. |
Let us know how it works when/if you receive it. Would love to see some pics from an actual member here. :)
|
|
|
|
02/23/2012 03:05:09 PM · #14 |
Lytro link
ETA: Oops, Johanna already had the link.
Message edited by author 2012-02-23 15:07:07. |
|
|
|
03/03/2012 05:26:16 PM · #15 |
|
|
|
03/03/2012 09:38:17 PM · #16 |
There were a few threads about this a few months ago, I remember. The commercial brand was not defined yet, I think, but I remember the boxy look of the thing :)
I think that's were photography is going, technology wise.
In a few years it will be the norm.
How many cool images will be lost to the loss of that specificity set of constraints I am not sure.
But I guess 50 years ago more than one grumpy photog, with a large format and hand cut film to put into it, would have argued the same against technological advance which dumbs down skills. |
|
|
|
03/03/2012 09:52:59 PM · #17 |
Since I do not have it in my hot little hands, I cannot yet say how it performs. However, what attracted me was not the lack of a need to focus, nor the idea of it making photography simpler/easier. I see it rather as a new way of seeing, and presenting, to explore. The idea of being able to look around and explore an image is the part that fascinates me. If they market it as photography simplified, I am not sure it will make it. There are plenty of cheaper point and shoot solutions available.
I'm not sure how well I'll like it, but I am looking forward to playing with it.
|
|
|
|
03/04/2012 06:02:50 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
Since I do not have it in my hot little hands, I cannot yet say how it performs. However, what attracted me was not the lack of a need to focus, nor the idea of it making photography simpler/easier. |
But you are a photographer as for vocation and interests I think, the large majority of camera buyers are not ;)
I am interested too and think any tool can give new ways to explore.
Or new possibilities even for very dedicated specialists. Just the potential for macro shots is quite impressive.
But I feel that the main general trend is towards simplifying things, it has always been, anyway.
The main difference is perhaps that this specific technology will lend itself well to a certain mobile phone style of photography, which some say is the new breed and where real innovation in photography will come from.
Not sure, I'll be overly deep and just say that the main thing is to have fun, hope the package reaches your little hot hands very soon ;) |
|
|
|
03/04/2012 08:49:26 AM · #19 |
Indeed the trend of most development is to improve performance, and simplify use.
Examples are cars, photography, computers, phones, and the list goes on and on. I would imagine that wet plate photographers decried the simplification of the ready made dry plate, which allowed less technically adept people into the game. Wet darkroom analog photographers are still decrying "fauxtoshop", allowing mere mortals to tart up their spawn of Satan digital images. Visit APUG.ORG for examples.
I am a doubtful that the Lytro will be a "game changer". Whereas back in 91, when I saw my first digital camera, I knew the handwriting was on the wall.
|
|
|
|
03/04/2012 12:52:53 PM · #20 |
| If Lytro will make a difference, I think it will be in terms of how it is used, not the technology itself. |
|
|
|
04/23/2014 08:49:57 AM · #21 |
|
|
|
04/23/2014 10:32:45 AM · #22 |
That looks pretty interesting. If it does macro as good as that article claims it might be worth a look.
I wonder what prints look like and how big can you print with this camera. The article says that they don't list a MP rating. |
|
|
|
04/23/2014 10:44:02 AM · #23 |
im intrigued.
as someone who makes use of extremely shallow DOF, i'll be watching this. 250mm at f/2? of course whats the sensor size? crop factor? im curious as to how well it works because it could in theory eliminate autofocus. |
|
|
|
04/23/2014 05:54:26 PM · #24 |
| There is a little bit more info here |
|
|
|
04/23/2014 07:31:17 PM · #25 |
Lyteo rates their sensors in Mega Rays as in light rays. For comparison, my original Lytro is rated at 11 Mega Rays. The output image is 1028x1028 pixels. The new camera is rated at 40 mega rays.
My current camera is a constant f 2.0. Zoom range is 43-344 mm (35mm equivelant). You can export shallow depth of field slices of your original image, as jpegs.
Sensor size for the new camera does not look to be specified, at this point. The camera is capable of some really interesting things. However the original, at least, is not a camera for making large prints. In their videos for the new one, they mention that it is the interactive qualities that are its reason for being.
Lytros, at least the original, strength lies in being able to bring a range of distances into focus, and adjust the point of view (slightly but noticeably), after the fact. A long distance image, as in a landscape, is easily bettered by many current cameras. It is the combination of close and distance, where the viewer can exlplore, is where it shines.
|
|
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: 09/06/2025 08:35:00 AM EDT.
