MrTaikitso: When Lytro launched their first (innovative but impractical) camera, I said Canon or Adobe should buy them. Neither did, and being they had so much venture finding ($200m if I recall) I knew they would survive to eventually get their business model right, and they have, as their remarkable machine announced at NAB shows. Canon make very good (high end) movie cameras, but have Sony and Panasonic on their tail, but most importantly of all, Canon's greatest technology has always been their AF. So it would have made sense for them to invest in a technology that makes focusing obsolete in specific use cases - namely Lytros.
Instead, they launched the unversatile unimaginative M series so Panasonic and Oly ate them for lunch.
I have never owned a Canon camera (love their scanners and printers!), but know how good their gear can be from other users and results, but they cannot rest on their past reputation.
Buy Lytro Canon & launch a revolutionary multi-focus APSC mirrorless.
@MrTaikitso: if you look closely, what Lytro does is not disruptive.
More precisely:Both Lytro (M=6) and Canon (M=1.4) use a Multipixel sensor with M^2 sensels per microlens. They are closer than you think and just use a technology originally introduced by Fuji (phase sensels). Multipixel sensors patents cannot be defended (obvious technology) and soon, all sensors will be of Multipixel type (cf. Sony and Samsung).
Personally, I think M=2 (quad pixel) is the sweet spot.
This news is welcome.Esp. in BIF this camera seems to be made for, backlit subjects are very frequent and the ability to push shadows is an important asset for the D500.
Donald B: I think you need to compare it to the k3ii at iso 6400 raw .
Made my day.Logic errors in arguments this large are rare :)
falconeyes: Thanks for the additional info.As a matter of fact, it means the Lytro Cinema is an example of the "Multi-Pixel AF Sensor" with 21 MP and Multi=6x6.The Canon Dual-Pixel AF Sensor is another example with Multi=2x1.For some time now, I advocate a broader adoption of Multi-Pixel AF Sensors, specifically Quad-Pixel with Multi=2x2.OTOH, it is a significant step-back from the original idea of a real Light-Field or plenoptical camera which requires a much higher sub-ray resolution being captured. But this stepped-back specification yields a much more interesting camera overall, still increasing the available depth of field by a factor six.
Just adding to it...We do not know yet the 35mm-equivalent properties of this camera. But as it looks massive, even F-Stop numbers of 6*N could imply shallow-enough depth-of-field to make this camera operate more like a conventional camera which requires constant focus operation.
Thanks for the additional info.As a matter of fact, it means the Lytro Cinema is an example of the "Multi-Pixel AF Sensor" with 21 MP and Multi=6x6.The Canon Dual-Pixel AF Sensor is another example with Multi=2x1.For some time now, I advocate a broader adoption of Multi-Pixel AF Sensors, specifically Quad-Pixel with Multi=2x2.OTOH, it is a significant step-back from the original idea of a real Light-Field or plenoptical camera which requires a much higher sub-ray resolution being captured. But this stepped-back specification yields a much more interesting camera overall, still increasing the available depth of field by a factor six.
I think the D5 is all about the kind of images you get, not the image quality of each. Don't forget, at daylight an RX100 easily matches the image quality of an DSLR. But the DSLR may catch images the RX100 will fail at.
In my German Nikon forum, the following image from the Bundesliga Bayern Munich game was posted (Player: Vidal) -> http://www.nikon-fotografie.de/vbulletin/picture.php?albumid=30124&pictureid=498687Credit Michael Weber, IMAGEPOWERD5 JPEG ooc, AF-S VR FL 600/4 + TC-14E III + strong crop at ISO 8000 f/5,6 1/1250sMr. Weber: "Image taken from across the playing ground, the opposite side of the goal and previously, I struggled with mild blur in similiar situations."That's the kind of images which do actually sell!Anything else, this DPR article included, can only give a weak impression of how the camera performs, or doesn't. In my German Nikon forum, Michael writes: "I am more than content (with the D5), the more the longer I work with it".
Robert Kempen: Leica reports record revenues for the past financial year with 'double digit' profits - unlisted company, of course, so does not need to provide exact profit numbers, but the revenue number is a new record for Leica's photographic division
Bottom line: M, Q & SL are selling like hot cakes and so is the new S
B&H must be smiling...
@Robert Kempen> unlisted company, maybe, but in Germany business does still follow the rules ;)-> https://www.bundesanzeiger.de/ebanzwww/wexsservlet?session.sessionid=f96ae031a172c833e3a010224fdbaecb&page.navid=detailsearchlisttodetailsearchdetail&fts_search_list.selected=eccf989a8a489f92&fts_search_list.destHistoryId=61614
They make profit around 38 and 14 million € (2014 and 2015 resp.) but don't shift any of the profit into the next year.
Most expensive tripod ever: microgravitation :)
falconeyes: This is a tiny project for a company the scale of FB. Cool but tiny.
Nevertheless, I am glad to see that undercover projects are still making it to the surface in large corporations :)
Tiny it is.Miniscule team and prototype-level hardware solution.Roughly equivalent to what a decent engineering university's thesis work would achieve.
RPJG: Does anyone know why 14 horizontal cameras are required, given the quite wide 19mm-equivalent field of view - e.g., for better stitching results?
@Mark BanasAssuming the standard 100° FoV (diagonal) of current VR glasses, 2x8k translates to about full HD per eye.
ProfHankD: In the past few years it seems everybody has discovered that you can stick an array of cameras together for 360 capture. The Surround 360 does not seem to be a particularly clever nor cheap way to construct the multi-camera, and I wouldn't call overnight stitching fast. As far back as 1999, my research group showed two different multi-camera 360-degree rigs on autonomous platforms, with real-time stitching and video wall pan/zoom on a Linux cluster (fed captures via 802.11 wireless), in our research exhibit at IEEE/ACM SC99: http://aggregate.org/EXHIBITS/sc99_360.jpg
That said, we didn't do stereo, and the stereo video processing and encoding is far from trivial. I applaud Facebook freely releasing the design and software for others to use and help improve. I look forward to the actual open source release, which they say will happen "on GitHub this summer."
I agree. I am loking forward to learn which algorithm exactly they adopted to compute the stereo disparities. That seems to be at the heart of the news ;)
This is a tiny project for a company the scale of FB. Cool but tiny.
Mssimo: So video output is VGA resolution?
> they have to provide what they sayNo, they do not.They just try to stay connected to their money flow from venture capital. In the end, Lytro will fail. The only question for the people currently on board is how much longer they can run their party.
FYI, the current trend in 3D image and video aquisition is with a distributed set of ordinary high-res cameras and clever software. Aka structure from motion. Lytro doesn't seem to be part of that. 700+ MP may sound much. But above approaches easily deliver several Gigapixel (from their multiple cameras) and are still cheaper overall whith better depth resolution.
falconeyes: All of this sounds great on paper.
Only problem is that this is from the guys who are known to promise rather than deliver.
Here is a company which produces Lightfield cameras which actually do serve a purpose and where the company is making actual money rather than trying to impress investors-> http://www.raytrix.de/
Sometimes, I simply don't get it why performers don't get media attention.
BTW, the more Lytro is entering the industrial market, the more likely they break Raytrix patents ...
All of this sounds great on paper.
falconeyes: Before people get too excited ...This is a 220mm F4 lens at the long end.
A lens like the Nikon 70-200/4 is both cheaper and lighter than this camera. So it all comes down to actual image quality, how well the lens really resolves.
The diffraction limit for F4 is 1.34µm, the pixel pitch is 2.4µm. So, if this lens is diffraction-limited stopped down to F5.6, it may be a winner. Otherwise, it won't deliver anything a DSLR cannot at the same price and weight (at the long end).
Looking for4ward to an actual lens test. This is where the RX100m3/4 really shines.
Some don't seem to get the point I was trying to make. But don't worry ;)
Before people get too excited ...This is a 220mm F4 lens at the long end.
Boss of Sony: Amazing camera. Sony continues to push the boundaries of possible. Unfortunately, 600mm is not long enough. Luckily, Nikon B700 shoots 4k video at 1440mm.
A lens is long enough if all pixels become equal brightness due to diffraction ...
falconeyes: This certainly isn't a big issue for an event's camera like the D5.
However, the curious part of me still would like to inquire if this is due to:- No on-chip column-parallel ADCs (i.e., no Sony chip)?- Too fast (read imprecise) ADC to support 12fps readout?- Other reason?
Extremely high iso cameras (D5, A7s) don't yet seem to be iso-invariant. Still, I'd like to know why.
So, actually nobody has a clue as of why this is ;)
This certainly isn't a big issue for an event's camera like the D5.