Look sharp
When you download an image to a computer, the Lytro software spends about 30 seconds per pic crunching the light field. As the pictures are read into the Mac they are processed. Any marked favourite pictures are processed first, and they all appear in black and white before they are processed.
Importing Lytro pictures to the Mac from the camera
Click for a larger image
At the moment there is only a Mac version available and the testing was done with a moderately fast MacBook Pro. No installation CD is needed, the camera contains the set-up software in ROM and when you first plug it into your Mac it instals and then downloads updates.
Lytro has an ambitious roadmap for those updates and because the light field which is transferred from the camera is the equivalent of a RAW file. Hence, any future improvements in the image processing will be reflected in all the pictures you have taken in the past. This includes a promise of 3D pictures.
Click to enter our Lytro samples gallery
All the pictures here, even the indoor ones were take with a lot of daylight. Experiments with artificial light and in low light led to very poor pictures. So, technical wonders and low light issues aside, is it worth the money? Talking of which, unless you're in the US buying one can be a bit of challenge – Lytro has a web page highlighting the options.
The camera, software and posting images to the web is very exciting, in a “this is the future of photography” way. The technology is fantastically clever and as sensors get ever bigger it makes more and more sense, but it isn’t a software lens mobile phone option the way Dblur is, or was as it’s not been heard of for three years. Indeed, the Lytro optics need a lot of glass and that’s not too pocket friendly. Nor is it really an option for photographers who can’t focus, because each of the pictures at an individual level of focus is a bit “meh”.
Compact but not exactly pocket friendly
Besides the photographs which show off the technology well are those images that have a good distance between objects which aren’t those you tend to take. You don’t really need lots of focal points for groups of friends smiling at the camera, Christmas trees and sandcastles. Yet using a Lytro does make you think differently about composing your shots but I’m not sure if the way we usually compose shots is because of the limitations of conventional photography – and the human eye – or because that’s the best way to present the information.
Have you never taken a picture of someone pointing sushi at you because you couldn’t do it or just because you didn’t want to? You have to put a lot more thought into composition. It’s not just the camera which captures the whole scene, you have to build that model in your head too.
Game changing shooter for the digital domain
Verdict
Over the last couple of weeks I’ve been pondering what the usefulness of the Lytro Light Field Camera. Much like when I had my first Sinclair Z80 computer people said: yes, but what’s it for? I’ve decided the job of the Lytro is to make you think differently about photography. By taking away the need to focus it may very well make you a better photographer from a creative standpoint and, at the very least, a more contented one if you struggle with the finer points of photography. ®
Simon Rockman sells, and blogs about easy to use mobile phones at Fuss Free Phones
Thanks to Jez San for the loan of his Lytro camera.
More Camera Reviews… |
||||
 Fujifilm
Finepix X10 |
 Nikon
Coolpix P7100 |
 Eight...
rugged cameras |
 Pentax
Q |
 Canon
PowerShot S100 |
Lytro light field camera
COMMENTS
Re: Crime scene photography
Except that one of the reasons they take lots of shots is so they've got good-quality pictures of everything. Not gonna work if you're only getting webcam-quality, regardless of whether you can shift the focus.
Only Mac?
No Windows (I was hardly expecting linux) support? Makes me think this really is a shiny toy of little real use...
Nice idea, but I think I can wait a few months to see if it's really any use.
Re: Only Mac?
@Dapprman... I think they have identified their target market perfectly. Willing to pay over the odds for a pretty looking gadget of little real use.
Re: Only Mac?
Since when it was launched. You could only initially get iTunes on Mac until they brought the Windows version out some time later.
Unlikely ever to be more than a novelty.
I'll quite possibly have to eat my poorly-focussed hat on this, but I would be amazed if this ever became anything more than a novelty. It cannot squeeze down to a practical depth to fit into a phone which is the big market for novel photo apps - and that's a physics limit more than an engineering limit. Even with the absurd rate of increase of pixel density in sensors, you still lose pixels geometrically with this system - crudely speaking, N planes of focus means you only get an Nth of the raw pixels of the sensor in the final image(s) - so you hit the noise limit for tiny pixels N times faster than with a 'normal' camera. And there are far less "clever" but far more practical methods of after-the-fact focussing. The small sensors and lenses on compacts and cameraphones effectively give infinite depth of field already and it isn't rocket science to measure and add a depth parameter to the raw image.
Most annoyingly of all, the focus on most Lytro images is terrible. The focal plane is never truly sharp regardless of where you try to refocus the image.
Light field image capture is a super clever solution to a problem that simply doesn't exist.
That said, five or so years ago when this was first proposed I brashly declared that it would never be anything more than vapourware so I don't have much of a track record here.
