> fucking dashcam for your sweater lol. Cute kid BTW. When I was in high school I was really into manual photography. Then I lost that hobby for a long time and a year or so ago I bought a Nikon D3000 with the intention of getting back into it. Only have the one 18-55 lens. Man, it is a lot of work to relearn and understand all that stuff. I am still not any good. It is shit like this: 
That's damn good, yo. The moon is a stone bitch to photograph. Anyone will tell you so. Really, the trick is to just put the sucker in aperture-priority and rip. I know people who insist on shooting full manual but they're stupid. The point is to get the picture and if the exposure is even halfway there you'll nail it once you dump it into the computer. Depth-of-field isn't something you can get after the fact, Lytro be damned, and shooting wide open will work 90% of the time. Only other trick is to get a couple decent primes. They're really cheap, particularly if you stick to the holy trinity of 28mm/50mm/70mm. A 50 f/1.8 will make any portrait look magical.
Sure you can, you just need to a stereo pair to recover the depth. Taking a stereo pair so you can add depth of field with your computer is a little bit Rube Goldberg, but you can do it.Depth-of-field isn't something you can get after the fact, Lytro be damned, and shooting wide open will work 90% of the time.
Right - so either you sport a stereo rig or you only take pictures of things that don't move. Would you prefer it if I said "depth-of-field isn't something you can practically get after the fact?" 'cuz I've worked with stereo rigs and I'm here to say - beam splitters are unpleasant.