Lytro plenoptic light-field camera pre-orders begin today at $399

http://thisismynext.com/2011/10/19/lytro-plenoptic-light-field-camera-pre-orders-today-shipping-2012/

by pavlov • 15 years ago

44 29 15 years ago

chwahoo2• 15 years ago

I've been pretty excited about the idea of light-field photography/Lytro, but this thing looks pretty awkward to carry/use :(. I look forward to seeing reviews when they start to trickle out. Hopefully Lytro can figure out how to make it more compact in the next iteration.

sp332• 15 years ago

This is about the same size as a normal point-and-shoot, isn't it?

chwahoo2• 15 years ago

Perhaps in length, but it looks much thicker. It seems like it would be awkward to carry in a pocket.

huhtenberg• 15 years ago

Cool tech, but the design is... I don't know... dorky? At the very least it attracts attention, which is something that in great many cases not needed when making photos.

AndrewMoffat• 15 years ago

cool but doesn't look very ergonomic. grasping rectangular blocks isn't very comfortable

jberryman• 15 years ago

Just watching that thing being used gave me carpal tunnel. For Christ's sake its an LCD screen and can go anywhere. Why not put it on the side/top of the camera?

This makes me so grumpy.

colanderman• 15 years ago

Optics.

(There's more to a camera than just a sensor and an LCD screen...)

bradleyland• 15 years ago

I rather like the design. It reminds me of using a scope, rather than a camera. Holding it up, looking at the end, and seeing what's on the other side has a very retro-telescope kind of appeal to me. Plus, I'm not sure people will recognize it as a camera, so it might be good for grabbing candids. Kudos to them for trying something new.

adyus• 15 years ago

I think they went all in with this. Not only are they revolutionizing the concept of what a digital photo is and how it can be captured, they decided to introduce a new form factor for cameras.

Is it the most comfortable, ergonomic grip out there? Certainly not, but it is definitely memorable.

My hunch is that the lens assembly and light field technology requires a long barrel, and this is the best they could do. Perhaps if the next version were a tube?

bri3d• 15 years ago

They could easily have added a grip system, and based on the linked hands-on, which states that shake-induced blur is an issue, they should have.

I think the design is novel to prevent mental comparison with a "real" camera, which presumably performs much better in terms of image quality (especially in low light).

Avoiding "real camera" thinking also highlights the device's unique aspects and lets them sell this first version as a less-serious novelty at a relatively low price.

I really hope this isn't their end-game play and that they'll introduce something more "prosumer" in an intelligent, useful form factor next (and something that doesn't require integration with a bogus social network).

piinbinary• 15 years ago

I am hoping to see some cool hacks be created using this. I imagine that with a few pictures from different angles, you might be able to make a nice 3D model with pictures taken with the camera. I'm sure that folks will come up with other cool things.

jamesbritt• 15 years ago

Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cclpQ1pI0xQ&feature=playe...

Very cool video of Adobe tool for playing focus and deriving 3D info from an image.

rorrr2• 15 years ago

Notice how resolution isn't mentioned anywhere. It means it's low.

int32• 15 years ago

It's unconventional, not low:

"Light Field Resolution: 11 Megarays: the number of light rays captured by the light field sensor."

rorrr2• 15 years ago

It doesn't matter how it's represented internally. The end goal is a digital photo that you will print or post on facebook/flickr.

What I don't get it who their market is. If you aren't taking serious photos, nobody really cares if it's perfectly focused. And I doubt pro photographers will want it because of the low resolution.

zokier• 15 years ago

Looking at the samples, low would be a good guess. Or the optics are really blurry.

int32• 15 years ago

Their picture gallery is worth checking out:

http://www.lytro.com/living-pictures

(Click on any part of the image to set focus there)

kgen• 15 years ago

The one with the reflection off the car bumper is CSI-amazing. Can't wait till we have this in normal DSLRs.

beambot• 15 years ago

This is (yet another) good example of a computational camera: where you can exploit megapixels, physics, and computation to build more capable cameras. There was a really good plenary talk by Prof. Nayar (Columbia) about other techniques a few years back:

http://www.hizook.com/blog/2009/06/26/computational-cameras-...

My personal favorite is the "flexible depth of field," where you can actuate the imaging element during image acquisition and then use DSP techniques to create an image that is in focus across all depths simultaneously.

Also... if you'd like to get involved in these type of projects, a team from Stanford is working on the "FrankenCamera" -- a open-hardware and open-source effort:

http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/fcam/

dgrant• 15 years ago

Why not just use a normal camera and focus it right the first time?

ent• 15 years ago

because there might be more than one type of right

vogonj• 15 years ago

to some extent, though, this devalues lytro pictures as "photograph-as-artistic-statement" in favor of the much more contemporary "photograph-as-infallible-chronicler-of-the-coffee-you-got-this-morning."

(that said, I really want one of these.)

leoh• 15 years ago

I like this technology, but it's really a rare occasion that I've taken an out-of-focus photo. In fact, I can hardly think of one out of nearly a thousand pictures I've taken the last year, except for a few where I've used manual focus.

Are there any other photographers that really would find this useful? The only thing that I could gain from it is the fact that it looks like it has a relatively shallow DOF, which is a nice effect. But in some ways, it makes the camera feel gimmicky to me -- the DOF on all their photos is extremely shallow (aperture size???)

anoother• 15 years ago

It's a constant f/2 lens, but that's fairly irrelevant as, given the way the camera works, you could use focus stacking to get the whole frame in focus if you wanted.

Of course, that depends on either software features or a lot of manual labour, which is why my main question about the device is how open/hackable the image format is.

I'd love to see the applications that come out of this - eg. ultra high-res 3d scanning from only a handful of photos - so I hope they've created it with a view to encouraging indipendent development.

It seems the examples are there just to showcase after-the-fact focusing, and that's clearly most easily done with a shallow DoF.

wlievens• 15 years ago

To people complaining about the form factor: most cameras look like this. It's only consumer cameras (low and high end) that have the typical form you can hold in your hands comfortably. Industrial cameras for machine vision often have this "rectangular tube" form.

That said I don't know what their target market is...

Lytro plenoptic light-field camera pre-orders begin today at $399

Related Stories