Fujifilm confirms 'world's first' 3D stills and films compact

Fujifilm has finally officially unwrapped what it’s claimed is the world’s first compact camera capable of snapping both still pictures and films in 3D. Fujifilm_3D_W1_01 Fujifilm's FinePix Real 3D W1: dual lenses allow for 3D capture As previously reported, the secret to the 10Mp FinePix Real 3D W1’s ability to capture 3D …

[Neur0mancer]

Awesome

This is the future. I'll bet it will cost £23 Quadrillion pounds though. And not American quadrillions, good old fashioned British ones.

[Richard 81]

2 dimensions was good enough for my father.

3D TV, video etc. better not be the future. I can only see in two.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not the first one

Wasn't there a DoCoMo phone with stereo camera and one of these special screens around a few years ago? And a 17" laptop too, about the same era.

[Greg J Preece]

*Drool*

Nuff said.

[Bernie 2]

I want one

and I don't even have a 2d camera atm.

[IR]

Catching up with the hobbyists

There have been people taking 3D photos and movies for years, simply using a pair of cameras with a single trigger. They are a bit more flexible too, since you can move the cameras apart to get shots that appear further away. About time that someone brought out a cheaper single camera version, it's hardly rocket science.

Everyone remembers those big chunky red viewers with the disks that display 3D pictures, seems odd that it has taken so long.

[DI_Wyman]

Magic!

You can just imagine the work place conversations after a Lads weekend.."Will you just look at the jugs on that"

[The elephant in the room]

Great possibilities...

But also STOP. I would happily buy one at 1/3 that price, but £570 is a huge sum for what may end up being a novelty item.

10 megapixels seems pointless as you need a screen to view the pictures with and the screen Fuji are releasing to do this has a resolution of just 600X400 according to this article:

http://www.photographybay.com/2009/07/22/fuji-finepix-real-3d-w1/

Sure 10MP means you can use it for 2D pics too, but it is extremely unlikely that anyone would buy this as their main or only camera, so I wonder why they didnt go for cheaper low-resolution hardware matched to the spec of the viewing screen, which would have enabled a more mass-market price point.

I dont see that there is that much R&D expenditure to pay for with this - software & self-adhisive lenticular lenses for interlacing stereo image pairs into a single picture that can be printed on a normal inkjet are off-the-shelf items.

I hope they'll make a desktop 3D print kit to go with it (some kind of 6X9 photo printer with a lenticular lens laminator).

[A 20]

Price fail: £570?!? They're mad!

I thought this would be the product that finally cracked the 3D nut, as they also have both 3D digital picture frames and 3D prints sorted, but £570 is nothing short of insane.

Discussing this last night, my friends and I decided that £199 would be ideal, £299 might work, but I don't think they'll sell more than a handful at £570. I could strap two cameras together for much less, OK I wouldn't get the 3D screen, but if that saves me £200 I can live with that!

>"When shooting in bog-standard 2D mode, the camera’s dual lenses allow two slightly different shots to be taken with a single shutter button depression. For example, you could take a close-up view of your friend at a party and simultaneously snap a second image with a wider span that takes in the surroundings."

Can you really use different zoom levels on each half of the camera? That sounds very unlikely to me.

[Tom 64]

looks good

my wallet is twitching, but it is pricey... I'll wait for the reg review before I order one ;)

[Martin 6]

Viewing?

And you view the pictures in 3D how exactly?

[Snert Lee]

use limitation?

So the only place to view the 3D images is on the back of the camera?

[Stu]

Brilliant sales tactics...

..."Right I've got me 3D camera now. Paid a premium. Taken some snaps. Family is round, lets all gather round and view em all on our lounge TV."

"Ah right, can't...actually...do it."

"So HOW MUCH did u say for that 3D TV set!? Shyeah right. And what do you mean I have to be sat right square in front of the TV to see the effect? What about everybody else in the family? Oh. And its not even that convincing an effect? Right."

"Okay then, how about just a computer monitor that does 3D?"

"Forget it."

.

EPIC Uber-gimmick FAIL

[A 20]

Viewing

They also announced an 8" 3D digital picture frame, and they've also announced a minilab that produces 3D prints too.

[Len Goddard]

share and enjoy

And I send prints to my aged relatives how?

[GregC]

@Len Goddard

From the press release:

"Fujifilm will be launching a print service to the purchasers of the 3-D camera as a direct service from Fujifilm because of the newness and complexity of the print system"

[Francis Boyle]

Since the lenses

are all of 75mm apart you're not going to be getting any sort of noticeable stereo effect unless the subject is quite close - within reaching distance, in fact - which means it's only really useful for one thing (see icon).

[Paul 4]

@Brilliant sales tactics...

Family: "Oh. We cant see your photos? Thank F for that."

[The Indomitable Gall]

Bet it'll be heavily compressed

I hold out very little hope that this will allow the recording of video at a low enough compression ratio to allow decent post-processing. Why bother offering the latest whizz-bang technology then crippling it to the level of an upmarket webcam?

[Peyton 1]

Add me to the list

of those confused as to how this works on printed paper.

Still, two lenses is a nice idea for 2D work. Right now, as far as I know, HDR is hard to manage for things in motion, since the images are taken sequentially. Since this snaps two shots simultaneously, seems like it would overcome that, though you typically need >2 images for good HDR.

[Dave Bell]

Old gimmick

There were film cameras, with special printing tech

Yoo could get various attachments for film cameras, and viewers for slides. For landscapes, you could get a stereo effect just by taking two shots, and shifting your weight from one foot to the other between shots.

75mm is the same sort of spacing as your eyes.

To be honest, there are a lot of 10 megapixel cameras out there, and most of them skimp on the lenses. Optically, with the sensor size, getting the resolution is hard. Getting 10MP equivalence out of 35mm film needed top class equipment.

And for the sort of prints most people use, the resolution of the sensor is wasted anyway.

If you want photographic pose power, forget this. Get a Leica instead.

[Vladimir Plouzhnikov]

A question...

What is the actual output format of that camera - does it produce anaglyphic images or stereopairs for straight or x-eyed viewing?

[Bod]

Re: Since the lenses

"are all of 75mm apart you're not going to be getting any sort of noticeable stereo effect unless the subject is quite close"

75mm is about the average distance between the human eyes, and we manage to get a pretty good stereo effect ;)

[Bad Beaver]

@ Francis Boyle

Exactly how far apart are your pupils? *shudder*

Anyway, nice toy. I'll give them €200, say €250 max on a micro-sized sensor shooter like this.

[Anonymous Coward]

@Tom 64 - my wallet is twitching

That's not your wallet, mate. You've got your hand in the wrong pocket.

@Francie Boyle - only really useful for one thing (see icon)

Yeah, so what's your point again? There has to be at least ONE redeeming feature.

@Paul 4 - Thanks for making me spew all over.

@DI_Wyman - jugs on that

I assume you mean beer jugs, right?

[GregC]

@Vladimir

I've just been reading the discussion about this over at dpreview, and according to one poster there it's a single "multi picture format" file. Usual warnings about information posted on internet forums apply....

[Robin Baker]

NIMSLO

Just that really - they never sold many either!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm ...

Price is very relative. I remember buying the first gen Sony minidisk player/recorder available in this country and it was £500 in about 1991/92. I've Still got it and it still works great, but I seldom use it.

That was serious cash back then, but £500 today, although still too much to be comfortable about loosing, is worth considerably less.

I still have my trusty old Tag Heuer after 20 years (before they got naff) which I wear all the time in showers, swimming and in bed and that was about the same price. Now that *was* a worthwhile purchase. It seems a bargain now.

[Anonymous Coward]

Cyclops...

What if you only have one eye?

Btw they're releasing a 3D display for those wanting to look at their pics/footage somewhere other than the camera back. You can bet that's going to cost major bucks.

Fad.

[barfridge]

Not use to me

I've got a serious case of bung eye, so when one eye is looking north, the other is looking NNW. This means I have no stereo vision, bad depth perception and can't see 3D effects.

Apart from that, this camera manages the unlikely combo of looking cheap and being stupidly expensive. No thanks. For 700 quid you should be able to get 2 entry level SLR's and a bit of angle iron.

[Wize]

Viewmaster

Is there an easy way of creating a card to go in my Viewmaster?

[The elephant in the room]

Viewmaster

@Wize:

To make your own Viewmaster card eith relative ease you will need to track down one of these and some colour slide film:

http://www.vmresource.com/camera/camera.htm