Lytro light field camera coming

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10 October 2012   #61
Originally Posted by hypercube: Here's a couple of reviews..

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/lytro

http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/08/lytro-camera-review/


Really just seems more a proof of concept than anything right now..the focusing trick doesn't make up for the lack of performance and lack of output quality yet by a long shot, IMO.


Wow, the night shots look terrible...I mean, really terrible...
__________________
LEIF3D.com
 
Old 10 October 2012   #62
Originally Posted by CKPinson: How is the low light performance of this thing- it is 400 bucks- I don't see a flash on it- am i missing something?


Theoretically speaking, the low light performance should be amazing using this technology, but this particularly incarnation doesn't appear to demonstrate this. The reason why it could be amazing is that you could use a much larger aperture than you ordinarily would, since the narrow focal plane wouldn't be an issue.

Personally I do find this really fascinating stuff but it's obviously years away from being particularly useful. I do a lot of metal concert photography and have had to throw away photos so many times since the musicians move around so quickly in metal, meaning that even with my AI servo-tethered AF focus point jumping around my 5D's 61 point array, I occasionally end up with a throwaway killer shot because the focus ended up slightly wrong. Suffice to say, when you're shooting for a website or publication like I do, missing those killer shots can be pretty devastating. Because of this, technology enabling the correction of focus after the fact is particularly intriguing.

But yeah, we are years away from a truly useful incarnation of this tech.
__________________
leighvanderbyl.com
 
Old 10 October 2012   #63
Originally Posted by CKPinson: Isn't the point that you can refocus it all you want later?


Im not entirely sure to who you wrote. Assuming it was for me. This is exactly the question I was asking for. I was only pointing to what I see on those images. I don't see free selection of focal plane freely. All I see is 2-4 different images being show to me when I select something on distance or nearby. This is what bothers me.

Forgive my ignorance on this, as I said. But Assuming I understand correctly the point of the tech that ultimately you would get this "freedom of focus afterwards" but where is this freedom? I don't see it in the examples. All I see is 2-4 steps in preselected focal planes. As if you go out there and take 4 pictures and then make fancy application the depending on the area clicked on image changes to the appropriate picture for this focus point.

Maybe I am not able to explain my point...
 
Old 10 October 2012   #64
Thanks for the comments girls and guys. I guess I will wait for the next generation.
__________________
http://www.vlad74.co.uk/
 
Old 10 October 2012   #65
Originally Posted by Cromfel: All I see is 2-4 steps in preselected focal planes. As if you go out there and take 4 pictures and then make fancy application the depending on the area clicked on image changes to the appropriate picture for this focus point..


Did you read my cousin's dissertation paper? it's freely available in the about section on the site, it explains the tech behind all of this. Don't go assuming things like this when there is actually information freely available, it's actually very cool tech and it boggles the mind when you think about how deep this tech can go.

But I agree, the format and practical uses of the commercial product as a whole right now aren't groundbreaking.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #66
Coincidentally, I saw this on Gizmodo today. Looks like they've added manual controls. I haven't read the rest of this thread but when I read and saw Lytro a year ago, the tech was amazing while the images lacked. That's not a bad thing when you have something with such new technology. Give it some time and I'm sure this will blossom into a really cool camera.

http://gizmodo.com/5950176/lytros-i...manual-controls

-Rich
__________________
Richard Rosenman
Director & Supervisor
www.cgplugins.com
www.cgsphere.com
www.hatchstudios.com
www.richardrosenman.com
 
Old 10 October 2012   #67
Originally Posted by airstyle: Did you read my cousin's dissertation paper? it's freely available in the about section on the site, it explains the tech behind all of this. Don't go assuming things like this when there is actually information freely available, it's actually very cool tech and it boggles the mind when you think about how deep this tech can go.

But I agree, the format and practical uses of the commercial product as a whole right now aren't groundbreaking.


I have read the article and I do understand its very nice stuff. It still doesnt remove the fact that end results are what they are. Having some logical explanation why the end results are not freely focusable would be OK.

No need to get offensive. I think you can make the same conclusion just by checking the pictures. Im _not_ questioning the science behind at all. Im just boggled by the end results.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #68
Originally Posted by Cromfel: Having some logical explanation why the end results are not freely focusable would be OK.


Heh I'm not getting gnarly or anything, but they are? If you could do what the camera does in your web browser for free then why would you buy the camera? Of course you need a simplified version for to sell the product to the masses.

I'm pretty sure the bulk of the calculation for re-focusing is done in the software you get when you buy the camera.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #69
The technology is impressive- hardware and software. I like the image format capability to refocus but I find I am doing quiet a bit of low light shooting lately and need at least a 2.8 aperture to get the ISO low enough for a cleaner shot- don't always like using flash or light is not always an option.
__________________
CK Pinson
 
Old 10 October 2012   #70
Originally Posted by CKPinson: The technology is impressive- hardware and software. I like the image format capability to refocus but I find I am doing quiet a bit of low light shooting lately and need at least a 2.8 aperture to get the ISO low enough for a cleaner shot- don't always like using flash or light is not always an option.


I shoot with fast lenses myself (my main workhorse is a Canon 24-70mm F2.8 L) due to the majority of my shooting being in problematic lighting situations, but be aware that ISO handling is better in some bodies than others. You can also use software like Nik's DFine for noise reduction - DFine is the best noise reduction software I've ever used, actually.
__________________
leighvanderbyl.com
 
Old 10 October 2012   #71
Nik's DFine: will def check it out- actually have the rental Canon 100mm F2.8 L coming to test it out on my crop body (60d) but am looking for another L lens for all around use. Either 24-70mm f/2.8L or Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM (since i do some video). Curious to see how the 100mm Macro fairs in the portrait world.
__________________
CK Pinson
 
Old 10 October 2012   #72
Originally Posted by CKPinson: Nik's DFine: will def check it out- actually have the rental Canon 100mm F2.8 L coming to test it out on my crop body (60d) but am looking for another L lens for all around use. Either 24-70mm f/2.8L or Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM (since i do some video). Curious to see how the 100mm Macro fairs in the portrait world.


Definitely check out DFine, it's amazing. Actually, all of Nik's plugins are fantastic. You should consider checking out the 135mm f2 L lens, it's possibly the sharpest lens Canon have ever made, although it's obviously not really an "all purpose" lens. But since it's a similar focal length to the 100mm, it's worth investigating. I have the 50mm f1.4 which is really nice and quite versatile, but you can't beat the 24-70mm for versatility and quality in a zoom.

Regarding bodies, I have a 5D Mark III and its ISO handling is absolutely superb. You can get relatively noise-free images up to ISO 6400, which was unachieveable on my 7D, which I had before upgrading. But of course, this comes at a price, as the 5D is not exactly a budget body.
__________________
leighvanderbyl.com
 
Old 10 October 2012   #73
Originally Posted by CKPinson: Nik's DFine: will def check it out- actually have the rental Canon 100mm F2.8 L coming to test it out on my crop body (60d) but am looking for another L lens for all around use. Either 24-70mm f/2.8L or Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM (since i do some video). Curious to see how the 100mm Macro fairs in the portrait world.


If you're thinking of getting the 50mm 1.4, I'd probably get the 1.8 instead(nifty-fifty). It's only like $80 and there's really not much difference at all between the two that is worth spending an additional $200+ for. The other option at the other end is the 50mm 1.2L for $1k, but it's L glass.

I have the 135 f2.0L, which is an amazing portraiture lens, but not a very good everyday lens for stuff other than portraits. I'd imagine that's the case with the 100mm f2.8L too, especially on your crop 60d.

I've heard the 24-70 f2.8L is a great lens too, but haven't tried it.

I've had the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 for years and have been really impressed with it. It's a great everyday lens and much cheaper than the L lens alternative. Maybe test that out too.
 
Old 10 October 2012   #74
Originally Posted by th3ta: If you're thinking of getting the 50mm 1.4, I'd probably get the 1.8 instead(nifty-fifty). It's only like $80 and there's really not much difference at all between the two that is worth spending an additional $200+ for.


I would disagree with this. There's a big difference between the nifty and the f1.4. The build quality of the f1.4 is superior, plus, more importantly, the AF is considerably faster. Auto focusing the nifty is very slow which can be a problem in many situations (like the photography I do), plus you need to stop down to around f2.8 to get the sharpest images out of it. It's a great lens for beginners but I think eventually most photographers upgrade to the f1.4.

The best f1.8 lens I've used is the 85mm USM one. It's relatively cheap and offers superb quality for its price, plus it focuses very quickly with its USM motor. Much, much better than the nifty fifty.
__________________
leighvanderbyl.com
 
Old 10 October 2012   #75
Originally Posted by leigh: I would disagree with this. There's a big difference between the nifty and the f1.4. The build quality of the f1.4 is superior, plus, more importantly, the AF is considerably faster. Auto focusing the nifty is very slow which can be a problem in many situations (like the photography I do), plus you need to stop down to around f2.8 to get the sharpest images out of it. It's a great lens for beginners but I think eventually most photographers upgrade to the f1.4.

The best f1.8 lens I've used is the 85mm USM one. It's relatively cheap and offers superb quality for its price, plus it focuses very quickly with its USM motor. Much, much better than the nifty fifty.


Guess it depends on the kind of photography you're doing.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.