LYTRO – LIGHT FIELD CAMERA

Not all that convinced that there are practical advantages for a photographer as opposed to a happy snapper.
For example I just had a look at the web site and played with three pics.
The monarch butterfly,the waiting for prey and the practicing a swing.
In each case, to me, there is only one obvious "aesthetically correct" way to take the picture, so the advantage to re-focus on a different plane would be if I had the wrong part in focus in the first place.
Low res at 1.2mp, so no good for cropping (not possible at the moment anyway) and or printed 8'x10" or larger.
Not sure about this but it appears to have just one aperture, F2. That is very bright for an 8x zoom lens (if it is indeed F2 at 8x…) however you get that relatively shallow depth of field so , at the moment, not ideal for landscapes or just group shots.
(I had another look. Yes it is a constant F2)
Note that it is, for now , Mac but not Windows compatible.
Of course if you are happy with the "now is in focus, now it isn't bit" than go for it.
Franco
To add
An example of a good alternative on what to have in focus is the surfer picture.
However in the sea lion one you can clearly see the low res and limits of the camera. Click on the background in that one.
(BTW, I had been following the development of this project )

I presume the "focus" is all an artifice created by the in-built computer/processor and that you could actually have the entire photo in focus or out of focus.

I'm interested in this camera as toy camera like LOMO :-)
To capture beauty of nature, I'm usually using SIGMA DP2, FUJI X100.

Yeah Franco, maybe not a "Photographer's" camera but I think its a neat idea. First off, it *looks cool* (the camera itself). Put that on a coffee table in Dwell and watch it sell. Second, most people taking snapshots don't have access to a shallow depth of field. Its a dramatic effect and this camera (software) seems to do a pretty decent job of detecting the field that is clicked on.

It's a bit expensive for what it is IMO but I think its cool.

It's fascinating as a proof-of-concept product that could not have existed without the tremendous computing power available to common consumer goods. In some ways it's the biggest paradigm shift in camera concepts since digital. Chances are good it will end up in the dustheap of interesting concepts the public ignored but I recall saying exactly that about the DVR and look what that's done for television consumptions. The only "live" television I watch today is sports, everything else is through the DVR I dismissed as silly a decade ago.

In a similar vein, since Adobe teased us with their beta motion blur technology I've stopped deleting my motion-blurred photos in hopes some will be retrievable when they release PS CS6.

Cheers,

Rick

Mario, when Barnack started the design of the 35mm RF, it was seen as a toy, a negative size of less tha 4"x5"? it's no use.

Check the Raytrix, and wait, probably this is going to be revolution in high quality imaging, maybe the biggest since Dr. Glatzel. The lytro is a toy camera, no doubt, but the concept it's not.

Remember the UR ?
Yes, I had one in my hands…
Usually I am the one trying to find the positive side, and there is a good one here, but I thought of just pointing out that as it is it may not be what some expect.
However I do get the "Lomo" bit ..
Franco