I logged on to Lytro's website and checked out their image sample gallery. It is pretty cool to be able to focus on any part of the image. I didn't care for the shape/ergonomics of the camera though (a small rectangle box similar to a square flashlight).
It's a social media camera. With no obvious way to set aperture, shutter speed and ISO (the PR text and the hands-on reviews seem bereft of this), I'm doubtful as to the efficacy of this camera for anything but general use/static-subject photography. It remains to be seen how good it is in specific ambient-light situations, what's the focal length range of that 8x, and what exactly is 11 Megarays anyway? It's like the bad old days when CD drives first came out and people started talking about 1x, 2x, 4x - for Silicon Valley, Lytro is remarkably vague about comparing their product to existing standards. A lot of buzzspeak but hard to judge against existing cameras/benchmarks.
The author brings up very valid points, particularly who is this new "Light Field" technology geared to and who would benefit most from this technology.
I can understand Lytro's choice of marketing their new light field camera to point and shooters; that is where the money is. Most large camera manufacturers, like Nikon and Canon, make the majority of their profit from the sale of their point and shoots and entry level DSLR's. After investing so much in research and development, I'm sure Lytro wants to cash in as quickly as possible. Will their marketing choice pay off in the end? Will point and shooters quickly grow tired of this new technology and revert back to "do it all" cell phone cameras? Who knows. I just hope that Lytro has the foresight to sell this technology to a bigger manufacturer if their sales figures don't go as planned. I would hate to see this technology go to waste such as Leica's digital back for 35mm SLR cameras did back during the birth of digital photography.
As the author indicates, wedding photographers, sports photographers, photojournalists, etc. (working photographer in general) would appreciate the advantages of a high IQ light field image more so than point and shooters would. Even the surveillance video market would benefit from this technology (think how great it would be if banks and retail merchants could refocus the original image on the suspect). This is why Lytro should seriously consider selling their technology to established companies who can afford better R&D.
On another note, I was not aware that Raytrix could "transform any existing digital camera into a light field camera". I wonder what it would cost to transform one of my D200's into a light field camera?
>On another note, I was not aware that Raytrix could >"transform any existing digital camera into a light field >camera". I wonder what it would cost to transform one of >my D200's into a light field camera?
> >>On another note, I was not aware that Raytrix could >>"transform any existing digital camera into a light >field >>camera". I wonder what it would cost to transform one >of >>my D200's into a light field camera? > >http://www.raytrix.de/index.php/RX_en.html > >Price on request. > >...Mike