Lytro "light field" Camera. A few test photos.

coelacanth

coelacanth

Ride, dive, shoot.
Local time
2:31 PM
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
3,546
Just received the Lytro Camera this morning.

IMAGE_8F887587-698A-4F9D-9527-44D562356843.JPG


IMAGE_4FF033BD-5DB6-44B3-916C-39811C7D91C1.JPG


IMAGE_93E9E4E6-B2CD-48B1-8B71-EE0147B5697E.JPG



Been a bit busy at work and there aren't many fun stuff to shoot around the office, but here are some quick test shots (can change focus). I'm hoping to add more interesting shots later...

http://pictures.lytro.com/suguru/

(I hope they'll have BBC compatible embed code soon...)
 
Definetly interesting and your shots look good already.
I'm still undecided, if I ask my parents to get one this summer, when they spend their vacation on the West-Coast, due to the small jpg export size.
 
Here are some stills out of the camera. It's only 1024x1024 px, and the picture quality in general is pretty much like "meh" level phone cameras at best. iPhone 4S takes a lot better photos. You need good amount of light otherwise picture looks very noisy. These are the shortcomings I knew already though.

cactus.jpg

Cactus. The stem is about thumb size.
Camera is set to "creative mode" so it can focus as close as almost the lens touching the subject.
Morning indirect sunlight in the room.

cams.jpg

Cameras on coffee table.
Creative mode. Didn't really prefocus with finger.
Dark apartment room in the evening.

coopers.jpg

My Cooper S.
Parking lot at my work, before sunset.

ear.jpg

My kitty cat.
Lighting is about the same as the cactus shot.

fu.jpg

She's walking towards me in this shot. Shutter speed is fairly high. (1/60)
Dark apartment living room.
 
I couldn't get any of the images to interact, until I remembered I use a flashblocker: lytro puts a still up in place of the flash in that case.

Interesting. Seems like it would get a lot more interesting if it were a full-frame sensor, where you could have longer lenses and a lot more DoF to play with. Hard to see how the interactivity of it is a big deal at this stage.
 
hteasley said:
I couldn't get any of the images to interact, until I remembered I use a flashblocker: lytro puts a still up in place of the flash in that case.

Interesting. Seems like it would get a lot more interesting if it were a full-frame sensor, where you could have longer lenses and a lot more DoF to play with. Hard to see how the interactivity of it is a big deal at this stage.
Click to expand...

I don't have too many shots, but the Lytro has 8x optical zoom at constant F2.0.

I personally think the current implementation and the interactivity in little lightbox aren't really the true value of this technology. It merely a fun gimmick. That said, I see many more practical use of the technology in many area of photography, and probably the video/movie in near future when the technology matures. The current Lytro camera is really a real-life proof of concept, and hey not too many proof of concepts are actually interactive and purchasable. ;)

I've added a few more shots to the gallery. I'll try telephoto shots when the weather improves.

http://pictures.lytro.com/suguru
 
coelacanth said:
In a few years time, Lytro III or Lytro Pro Mk II would be an ultimate pet or kids camera because they don't keep still. You forget about focusing and just snap away to capture the moment.
http://pictures.lytro.com/suguru/
Click to expand...

Wait a minute ... doesn't the Lytro solve only the problem of errantly focusing behind or in front of the subject? That would help with kid photos to the extent that a kid ran from where you focused to somewhere in front or behind, and stopped, and then you snapped the photo (with focus still at the original point). But if the kid is moving at the moment you make the picture, nothing about the Lytro is going to solve motion blur, is it? I think I already see motion blur on some of your cat pics (not just the stills here; the ones on the Lytro site). To my mind, that's the main problem with photographing two-year-olds. They are motion blur.
--Dave
 
jsrockit said:
Want to love it, but the quality just isn't there yet. Super-gimmicky at this point only.
Click to expand...

Not a gimmick, but not competition for hi-res, high quality cameras either. It takes a different way of thinking - a different photographic vision - to visualize and execute pictures that benefit from viewer refocusing.

I've been shooting with a Lytro for about 10 days now, and find that I am changing what I look for in photo situations.
 
Argenticien said:
Wait a minute ... doesn't the Lytro solve only the problem of errantly focusing behind or in front of the subject? That would help with kid photos to the extent that a kid ran from where you focused to somewhere in front or behind, and stopped, and then you snapped the photo (with focus still at the original point). But if the kid is moving at the moment you make the picture, nothing about the Lytro is going to solve motion blur, is it? I think I already see motion blur on some of your cat pics (not just the stills here; the ones on the Lytro site). To my mind, that's the main problem with photographing two-year-olds. They are motion blur.
--Dave
Click to expand...

One problem that Lytro has solved for me was the same thing I used prefocus for - speed of focussing. Lytro's effective dof at f/2 is anything between about 4 inches to about 300 feet. So I can do street shooting freely and instantly.

Unfortunately only at online viewing resolution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom