Wow.. I'm shocked that this group does not realize the significance of this thing's underlying technology.
Yes.. its first incarnation here is cheesey, fbook, sub-pro-grade toy-product.
Yes it's being marketed like a candybar
Yes it's a long, hard to carry, uni-tasker that will probably fail..
But the underlying Light Field technology is totally game changing, disruptive technology.. and you KNOW that Nikon, Canon and others are pouring over the patents behind this as we type!
Ive looked at the tech, its great, maybe its game changing, but this camera is rubbish and your accusations that we are not giving this tech a good run is untrue, we are making fun of the makers and marketers not the tech. In fact majority of the posts say that the Tech is good, and that it would change cameras, but needs work, so whats the problem that you seem to try to point out in your post? Seems like you think we closed minded but as a teacher, I KNOW you arent reading.
Imagine a zero-delay, focus later set of lenses WITH built in 3D on a DLSLR?! With a =decent F#, the power of that offering would separate DSLRs into pre-all-focus and "modern" cameras.
Forget about the Lytro camera, but Light Field technology is truly a disruptive technology.
Who ever said Light Feild was rubbish, I dont see a post that says that. And Zero delay focus exists in DSLRs now, I think 0.034 seconds is more than enough. for most pros. Built in 3D? Dont we have already, especailly with Video cameras? Focus later? I like to use photoshop and I normally shoot more than once to make sure I have a properly focused image.
I dont see your point or your faux offence in your post.
1) Olympus OM1 [Zuiko Auto-S 50mm f/1.8]
2) Pentax MZ-60 [Sigma 28-90 & 100-300]
3) Canon 7D [EF-S 15-85 & 70-200mm f/4 IS & 50mm f1.4]
4) Leica M [50mm Summicron Pre-aspherical - Silver]http://www.poetproductions.net