Lytro Light Field Camera Makes Time Magazine’s Top 5 Cool Innovations List
Perhaps you have heard of Lytro. I first got wind of the company a few months ago and thought it sounded amazing. But then the “That’s a press release. Where’s the follow through?” mechanism in my brain that stops me from buying useless products kicked in. Was it too good to be true?
The camera the company is creating is said be able to allow a viewer to focus on any spot in the image AFTER the image has been shot. This means different viewers can pick what they like and focus there, even changing the apparent aperture to control depth of field. All after an image has been shot. After checking out the Time article and the company’s website (which includes sample images) I believe the camera will be a hit from the moment it is stocked on store shelves.
While this camera is not for the serious photographer just yet (the image quality, while good, is not up to my standards), but its ability to (mostly) cure most amateurs’ problems with focus, coupled with its small size, will help it sell. What might go against the camera is the need for another computer program to download, edit and view images. This is understandable because nothing behaves like this camera and the images it produces.
The camera works on the principle that light hits an object and then scatters in all directions. When we, as humans or cameras, focus on one object, we are essentially focus on the two dimensional plane where that light is reflecting from. Light on planes before or after (forward or backward, if you will) isn’t focused on the same plane as our camera’s sensor and becomes slightly out of focus. That out of focus area is known as the circle of confusion.
The Lytro works by not focusing the light. Instead, it captures all the light rays reflected by objects at different depths of field. With a f/2 aperture, the sensor can capture 11 million individual light rays, then the software inside the camera process the information from the sensor to create the image, which then can be viewed on a computer. The images have their limits, but take a look at the examples on Lytro’s site, such as this image. After the image loads, click on various areas to bring it into focus. It really is quite cool.
It’s fun and innovative. While it has its limits (e.g., the camera does not accept memory cards and not everything can be brought into focus if objects are very, very close and very far away) I think it’s a step in a very interesting direction.
Stats:
- Planned for release in early 2012
- Suggested price of $399(8GB) and $499(16GB) – Pre-orders available now
- No shutter lag as it doesn’t use a shutter
- f/2 aperture constant throughout 8x zoom
- Current software runs on Mac and is being developed for Windows
- Weight: 7.55oz / 214g
- Size: 1.61″x1.61″x4.41″ / 41mmx41mmx112mm
Check out Lytro’s website for more information. I’m very eager to get my hands on a demo until and will report here if/when it happens.




7 Responses to “Lytro Light Field Camera Makes Time Magazine’s Top 5 Cool Innovations List” - Add Yours
November 25th, 2011 at 9:21 am
Whoa, that’s amazing!
It’s definitely different then anything I’ve seen before in looks and what it can do.
I wondered what camera makers would come up with next, it’ll be interesting to see how it takes off?
But Hey if your bored of the focus in your image being in the foreground, then you can change it to the background and then back again if the mood takes you!!!
November 25th, 2011 at 2:35 pm
The biggest problem I have seen with the system is the very narrow depth of field that is attainable in the images. While you can focus on a number of spots, you are very limited in how much depth you get. Secondary is the lack of manual control of the image (shutter speed, apatrue setting, exposure etc.)
November 25th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
It’s at the high end of the point-and-shoot price range but is unlikely to have comparable MP/IQ. (And you can’t swap cards.) They’re pushing it’s social media functions, where it’s competing with far better integrated smartphones. It’s got a weird form factor and an even weirder UI. And the demographic it’s aimed at is the demographic that’s least interested in fiddling with editing.
Other than it’s on trick, it really hasn’t got much going for it. Worse yet, other than the vague “people who mess up focusing” (and with modern cameras that’s a neat trick)… it really doesn’t fit any niche.
I wouldn’t be surprised if after an early surge, it ended up vanishing without a ripple. I’m not certain that having one ‘kewl’ trick is sufficient to overcome it’s built in problems.
November 25th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
John, I am sure you will be able to select them depth of field in the software that you will use to render them image into a regular image
I think the dof in the images you’ve seen on their gallery have such a narrow dof to emphasize what you will be able to do with the camera.
I, for one, is looking forward to mine, which I have preordered
December 1st, 2011 at 6:18 pm
I wonder how this technology will impact future cameras/DSLR?
It certainly would be handy for macro photography. Imagine extracting multiple images at different focus point from 1 shot, and stacking them to get a good depth of field.
December 2nd, 2011 at 9:00 am
Very interesting concept! How big is the sensor I wonder
December 30th, 2011 at 7:45 pm
Interesting concept, but overall, pretty useless and mostly just a gimmick.
It won’t impact future cameras or DSLRs. It uses its own format, so it’ll be difficult to post-process. And why would you even need a stupid feature like something to focus, afterwards? Most PNSs come with an autofocus system, and with new technology, it’s much faster and accurate. The quality of the images, even with the ability to refocus, is awful. An out-of-focus shot taken on a DSLR is still of much higher quality and sharpness than one that you refocus with the Lytro, and post-processing (and even the speed that DSLRs can take pictures at.. you’ll be able to get multiple shots of the same thing so there’s a good chance of you getting a good shot anyway!) of a RAW image would be fine.
The color quality and image size on the Lytro are awful. It’s just not a practical camera. Plus, it totally destroys the artistic quality in the pictures. bleh, this camera sucks Dx
Leave a Reply