# Canon hurry up! Nikon's face-detection & Sony's Exmor sensors are killing us!



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

Greetings to all! First of all, I am a Canon user and I really want Canon to do well.

Have been reading up on D800 and 5D3's user manuals...
Gosh, Nikon's new face-detect technology inside the viewfinder is awesome!
Not only does the face detection works with
high-speed phase focusing but it also works with exposure calculation based on the face alone! 
In addition, it works with i-TTL too!! This is a paradigm changer for wedding photographers!

Implication is that when capturing any backlit portraits, there is no need for exposure compensation
if u turn on "face priority" in D800 or D4! This also helps bounced flash portrait photography immensely.
There is no need to "guess" the flash expo compensation and chimp anymore!! U get excellent focus
and decent exposure in the 1st shot!

Canon, do u realize this Nikon feature is going to kill us all Canon portrait photographers!
Please, Canon, I want this in the next Canon DSLR!

As if this is not threatening enough from Nikon, Sony's new Exmor backlit sensor used in D800 is
another game changer. It is not just another "better" tweaked CMOS sensor from a different manufacturer. It is
not a "tweak" of CMOS technology, it is another revolutionary technology by itself. It is like Nikon is using a gun to fight with Canon's sword. The ISO advantage of Exmor's backlit technology cannot be under-estimated.

Canon, please, hurry up! Perhaps licensing Sony's sensor technology is a fast stop-gap solution!


----------



## Astro (Mar 31, 2012)

> Canon, do u realize this Nikon feature is going to kill us all Canon portrait photographers
> .....
> Canon, please, hurry up! Perhaps licensing Sony's sensor technology is a fast stop-gap solution!



if you want canon to hear you.. well i would write to canon and not on a internet forum. :




> The ISO advantage of Exmor's backlit technology cannot be under-estimated.



well EXMOR is not EXMOR R.

the sensor in the D800 is not backlit.

EXMOR:

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/technology/technology/theme/cmos_01.html


EXMOR R:

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/technology/technology/theme/exmor_r_01.html


----------



## Daniel Flather (Mar 31, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> U get excellent focus
> and decent exposure in the 1st shot!


 
Epic.

*edited for formatting sarcasm.


----------



## Bosman (Mar 31, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> Greetings to all! First of all, I am a Canon user and I really want Canon to do well.
> 
> Have been reading up on D800 and 5D3's user manuals...
> Gosh, Nikon's new face-detect technology inside the viewfinder is awesome!
> ...


So dramatic. Unlike you i don't feel like i am being killed. I always use single point focus and i know to under expose or over expose based on light, its not that hard. Tech is good of course, thats why i love my 5dm3.


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

> well EXMOR is not EXMOR R.
> 
> the sensor in the D800 is not backlit.
> 
> ...



I can't believe D800's sensor is not backlit, seeing its high ISO score on DXOmark...
When 36MEG is scaled down to 8x12, or 8MEG, its noise performance is vy close to D3S.

Well, Canon has to double hurry up, if Sony can achieve this kind of ISO without backlit technology.
Astro, do u have a reference quoting D800 is not using a backlit sensor? Tks!


----------



## Astro (Mar 31, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> Well, Canon has to double hurry up, if Sony can achieve this kind of ISO without backlit technology.
> Astro, do u have a reference quoting D800 is not using a backlit sensor? Tks!



it´s EXMOR technology not EXMOR R.
im to bored to search the link.. nikon is not very open about what sony sensor tech they are using. but trust me it´s not backlit.

anyway backlit technology will not yield much better performance on a FF sensor.
the wiring in a FF sensors does not occupie as much space (percentage of the sensor area) as in a P&S camera.
that´s why sony is only using the Exmor R technology in small sensor cameras (beside that a backlit sensor is expensive, especially if it would be FF).

i think sony will have improved the quantum efficiency and that is why the D800 has a good iso performance.


----------



## wockawocka (Mar 31, 2012)

However did I manage the last 50 weddings shooting in manual mode?


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

> So dramatic. Unlike you i don't feel like i am being killed. I always use single point focus and i know to under expose or over expose based on light, its not that hard. Tech is good of course, thats why i love my 5dm3.



No, it is not that hard and I do that all the time. 1st shot (/w bounced flash) with an estimated expo comp based on experience, look at the histogram and chimp it, adjust the expo comp if necessary, and than reshoot... Well, sometimes the chance is missed and u cannot shoot again during a wedding...  Well, I am sure one would say we could Lightroom the exposure back but I prefer to get the correct exposure to minimize the amount of post-work. There is an additional benefit too. I can just use the jpgs directly out of the camera/DPP, which has better color than Lightroom or ACR after raw processing, IMHO.


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

Astro said:


> PhotoCat said:
> 
> 
> > Well, Canon has to double hurry up, if Sony can achieve this kind of ISO without backlit technology.
> ...



Thanks Astro, this is good info that I was not aware of.


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

wockawocka said:


> However did I manage the last 50 weddings shooting in manual mode?



I shoot weddings/events in manual mode /w centre focus too. (to be honest, indoor shooting is kind of auto too when I
use bounced flash indoor, since the flash output is in auto e-ttl mode, with some exceptions I was on full manual
at 1/1 flash power)

During outdoor shootings, face-detection is probably not that important as I can use the spot meter.
However, when using e-ttl bounced flash indoor, exposure calculation based only on the face would definitely
be a killer feature for me.


----------



## itsnotmeyouknow (Mar 31, 2012)

Then use spot focus and learn your trade better. If you have to rely on technology to get the shot I'd never hire you


----------



## Z (Mar 31, 2012)

Yep, face detection would be a cool option to have in the 5D III. Unfortunately you'll have to wait for the 1D X if this feature is a 'must have' for you.

Until then... keep calm and carry on.


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> Then use spot focus and learn your trade better. If you have to rely on technology to get the shot I'd never hire you



With all due respect, pls re-read the thread more carefully.


----------



## itsnotmeyouknow (Mar 31, 2012)

With equally due respect if you have to rely on face detection in order to shoot portraits accurately then you need to brush up your skills. 

I would say that *Having* face recognition willbe more threat to portrait photographers than anything else. Easy to set up a cheap business or for the likes of Costco etc to pay someone peanuts to just press a button.


----------



## Z (Mar 31, 2012)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> I would say that Having face recognition willbe more threat to portrait photographers than anything else. Easy to set up a cheap business or for the likes of Costco etc to pay someone peanuts to just press a button.


Scary thought, isn't it? I can only imagine professional photographers saying the same thing during the advent of digital photography - and it's true, photography (particularly events) is _*much*_ easier today than it was 15 years ago. Unfortunately you just have to 'get with the times', to put it bluntly - and hope that an improvement in technology such as face detection just serves to drive demand for better results.


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> With equally due respect if you have to rely on face detection in order to shoot portraits accurately then you need to brush up your skills.
> 
> I would say that *Having* face recognition willbe more threat to portrait photographers than anything else. Easy to set up a cheap business or for the likes of Costco etc to pay someone peanuts to just press a button.



No, I don't have to rely on face-det today but to arrive at the correct exposure when using e-ttl bounced flash indoor, some kind of iterative procedure is needed. U test shoot and then adjust and then re-shoot.

Perhaps there is something I am missing. Please enlighten me with a proper technique how I can get a
decent exposure of a bride using e-ttl bounced flash indoor, without needing to do a test shot.


----------



## Tcapp (Mar 31, 2012)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> With equally due respect if you have to rely on face detection in order to shoot portraits accurately then you need to brush up your skills.
> 
> I would say that *Having* face recognition willbe more threat to portrait photographers than anything else. Easy to set up a cheap business or for the likes of Costco etc to pay someone peanuts to just press a button.



I'm inclined to agree... but I don't think that we should fear any technology. (Unless they teach robots art, then we are screwed.)


----------



## itsnotmeyouknow (Mar 31, 2012)

Technology won't replace art (at least I hope not). I don't fear technology. But. If you make something easy to do then anyone can do it. Most church weddings in uk don't allow flash and in my view flash is too intrusive in what should be intimate moments. If you MUST have flash then reshoot before reception. 

The biggest investment you can give is experience. Make something easy to achieve for a $5k down payment and you are left with a Walmart product. Yes it's functional but do you want your wedding photography to be functional?

I think the OP has overstated his/her case. Lack of face recognition isn't killing photographers. Needing LESS skill will be the thing that kills photography especially in regard to wedding photography. Quick Facebook profile buy camer few lenses and you're off. Lots of underpriced gigs by people doing it in their spare time and not paying their taxes while everyone doing it properly struggles. 

Hang on, that's happening already on present technology. 

Be very careful what you wish for. It may very well come true and not be everything you dreamed of


----------



## Tcapp (Mar 31, 2012)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> Technology won't replace art (at least I hope not). I don't fear technology. But. If you make something easy to do then anyone can do it. Most church weddings in uk don't allow flash and in my view flash is too intrusive in what should be intimate moments. If you MUST have flash then reshoot before reception.
> 
> The biggest investment you can give is experience. Make something easy to achieve for a $5k down payment and you are left with a Walmart product. Yes it's functional but do you want your wedding photography to be functional?
> 
> ...



valid point. We pros will lose some business to the weekend warriors, but always remember, no matter what happens:

_The cream always rises to the top._


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

In all honesty, I really don't want anyone to invent any digital camera, face detection nor auto-focus, so that our value as a professional photographer is easily seen. Unfortunately that is not the case. Nikon has done it now and we Canon shooters need the playing field leveled. Imagine u r shooting the processional at f2.0-2.8 with bounced flash and hoping that AI-Servo is giving u a few sharp images, while at the same time uncle Bob is just behind u with his D800 with face priority on... Sure, my lighting will be better than his but if Nikon's face detect technology really delivers, he might nail the focus better than I can with AI-Servo.  sigh... Here, it is clearly a technology competition. we can't turn the clock back... if we can't beat them, we might as well join them... sigh... Eventually as tech advances, it might not be about the camera anymore, it could all be about art, lighting, posing, composition... and post work perhaps...


----------



## elflord (Mar 31, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> itsnotmeyouknow said:
> 
> 
> > With equally due respect if you have to rely on face detection in order to shoot portraits accurately then you need to brush up your skills.
> ...



Can't you use spot metering, FEL, and meter-and-recompose ? That's not iterative.


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 31, 2012)

elflord said:


> PhotoCat said:
> 
> 
> > itsnotmeyouknow said:
> ...



Thanks for the suggestion. I have tried that b4 but spot metering doesn't seem to work with e-ttl.
I think e-ttl only has 2 metering modes: evaluative & centre weighted, at least on my 5d2. 
However, if this technique has worked for u, please elaborate on it and I love to learn more. Thanks!


----------



## jrista (Mar 31, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> > well EXMOR is not EXMOR R.
> >
> > the sensor in the D800 is not backlit.
> >
> ...



You have to take DXO data with a grain of salt, and since the advent of D800 print DR results, you have to be EXTREMELY skeptical about it. You also have to realize that "Print DR" is an image that has had post processing. We don't know exactly what DXO is doing to those images, but the idea that you can magically gain additional DR above and beyond what the senor itself is capable of (which is what their Screen DR rating is representative of) is extremely fishy.

Riddle me this: If the D800 SENSOR itself is capable of 13.23 stops of DR, and the scene you are trying to expose has 14.4 stops of DR...will you be able to capture the full scene DR in a single shot? The obvious answer is no. The sensor is only capable of 13.23 stops of DR, and trying to expose all 14.4 stops in one shot is going to either blow highlights or block shadows. There is also the simple math problem. A 14-bit sensor is a 14-stop sensor...you would have to go to at least a 15-bit sensor to achieve more than 14.0 stops of native DR with the sensor itself. 

The D800 is NOT as amazing as it sounds, and referring to it as "unbelievable" would be about as accurate an exclamation you can get...it literally is unbelievable. The Canon 1D IV has 11.46 stops of DR. The difference between the D800 and the 1D IV is 1.77 stops, or roughly 1 2/3rds of a stop, of dynamic range. Not 2 stops, not 3 stops. The physical hardware differences are *far more moderated* than DXO, of whom _Nikon is a *paying* customer_ and Canon is not, would like you to think.

Print DR == BIIIG Grain of Salt (or a big TUB of salt, whichever tickles your fancy...just make sure you really salt it *good*.)


----------



## jrista (Mar 31, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> Perhaps there is something I am missing. Please enlighten me with a proper technique how I can get a
> decent exposure of a bride using e-ttl bounced flash indoor, without needing to do a test shot.



That would be called PRACTICE. You know the old saying: Practice makes Perfect! An intuitive knowledge of exposure and lighting is something that results from continuous, real-world, boundary-pushing use and experimentation. 

Technology can make things easier, but face detection it is most assuredly NOT necessary to properly expose a bounce-flashed portrait. People were doing phenomenal flash-lit portraiture with film and mechanical cameras for decades before digital cameras were even conceived, and it was a good decade more before face recognition found its way into digital cameras at all. Don't get so rialed up over what is arguably a MINOR feature of a camera where a significant percentage of users will probably operate in full manual mode, and the rest will operate in a priority mode (which is still largely manual.)


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (Mar 31, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> Not only does the face detection works with
> high-speed phase focusing but it also works with exposure calculation based on the face alone!
> In addition, it works with i-TTL too!! This is a paradigm changer for wedding photographers!



No... it really isn't... I'm getting a 1dx which has the same features and I can guarantee you that I won't be using it. 

I can't trust the camera to decide what to do - I need to be in charge of the shoot. I've not got anything against auto features, but the camera choosing what to focus on?


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Mar 31, 2012)

Gosh...how on earth anyone managed to make a good photograph before Nikon bestowed upon us the holy D800? Might as well write off nearly 200 years of photography.


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 31, 2012)

jrista said:


> PhotoCat said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps there is something I am missing. Please enlighten me with a proper technique how I can get a
> ...



+1 e-TTL makes life so easy for flash photos

I suggest reading a book by Syl Arena for a simple but comprehensive text on Canon flash


----------



## ippikiokami (Mar 31, 2012)

Have you ever used this fd mode in the d800 yet? I wonder why since it's such a killer function no review i've read really has mentioned it?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 1, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> > well EXMOR is not EXMOR R.
> >
> > the sensor in the D800 is not backlit.
> >
> ...



D800 is not backlit. I believe they only just figured out how to get exmor backlit relatively recently. Supposedly it would currently cost quite a bit to produce it in FF size, but maybe for the D900 or D1000.


----------



## PhotoCat (Apr 1, 2012)

ippikiokami said:


> Have you ever used this fd mode in the d800 yet? I wonder why since it's such a killer function no review i've read really has mentioned it?



I really hate to advertise for Nikon but here it is:

http://scottkelby.com/2012/cliff-mautner-on-the-nikon-d800/

CTRL-f for "face"

Read the article and the comments as well & use your own judgment since the word "Review" is not on the article!


----------



## D.Sim (Apr 1, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> > well EXMOR is not EXMOR R.
> >
> > the sensor in the D800 is not backlit.
> >
> ...



Uh, do you have a refernece quoting that it IS? 

since when do you get proof that something is not? Just because you can't believe that its not backlit...

Also: DxO mark? lol. 

I do have a question though: What type of portraits are you shooting, that you need a face detection focus aid to shoot?


----------



## RyanDavis200 (Apr 2, 2012)

Wow PhotCat... Calm down.. deep breaths. You need face detection to take professional quality photos? You don't want to take a test shot? You expect the camera with it's 56,000 ISO and face detection to replace photographic skills? It really saddens me to see the way photography is going this way. Everyone is a photographer now a days. All because of the technology. 

As many others have said, work on your trade a bit more. I'd be interested in seeing your portfolio... do you have a link?


----------



## wickidwombat (Apr 2, 2012)

and I thought it was just sweep panoramas that were owning us...


----------



## ippikiokami (Apr 2, 2012)

PhotoCat said:


> ippikiokami said:
> 
> 
> > Have you ever used this fd mode in the d800 yet? I wonder why since it's such a killer function no review i've read really has mentioned it?
> ...




Good job pointing out a review that's done by someone who was paid to shoot the campaign. Not biased at all

Seriously though.. If you haven't even tried the feature out. It's kinda amazing to deem it the killer app. If it's a focusing algorithm and it turns out to be useful you really think Canon won't make something similar?


----------



## leGreve (Apr 2, 2012)

Actually today, april 2nd, Sony will put both the MK III and the C300 in a coffin, nail is shut and sink the coffin into concrete...

So hold off your MK III purchases if you're buying it for video. Once the FS700 is announced it will slightly lower the price of the FS100, it will kill the 5D MK II and it will look at the C300 and spit it in the face.

Key features:

- 4K
- Success in ramping slow to almost 1000fps
- maybe maybe 4:2:2 through the 3G-SDI output
- Build-in ND filters (3...)
- a silly low price point at 8.000 dollars...
- Form factor like FS100

This will be a stellar cam that nothing in that price range can compete with.


----------



## leGreve (Apr 2, 2012)

And here we are 

Take care MK III and C300


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Apr 2, 2012)

It is going to be a great cam but 9K doesn't seems to get you 4K. That will probably be a paid upgrade.


----------



## itsnotmeyouknow (Apr 2, 2012)

leGreve said:


> Actually today, april 2nd, Sony will put both the MK III and the C300 in a coffin, nail is shut and sink the coffin into concrete...
> 
> So hold off your MK III purchases if you're buying it for video. Once the FS700 is announced it will slightly lower the price of the FS100, it will kill the 5D MK II and it will look at the C300 and spit it in the face.
> 
> ...



And this has what exactly to do with the OP?


----------



## leGreve (Apr 2, 2012)

itsnotmeyouknow said:


> leGreve said:
> 
> 
> > Actually today, april 2nd, Sony will put both the MK III and the C300 in a coffin, nail is shut and sink the coffin into concrete...
> ...



It has the Exmor sensor.... just face the facts and leave your fanboism behind. Note that I have a Canon kit that now will reside at its rightful place... a still cam.


----------



## itsnotmeyouknow (Apr 2, 2012)

what fanboism? Your talking about a video camera, OOP was talking about face recognition on a camera for stills. The OP was NOT talking about videos. *READ THE POST!* The clue is the talk of Flash. What videos do you use flash with?


----------



## mike_zawadzki (Apr 2, 2012)

Oh no I'm dying!!! Aughhhh!!

I switched to Canon from Nikon recently and trust me gimmicks like this (e.g. "3D Tracking") never work as well as originally intended and honestly aren't that important. LOL 

If you are really this wet over the D800 why don't you switch? I'm tired of hearing the "BUT IM SO INVESTED IN CANON GLASS" bs. I just swapped out my Nikon 24-70, 14-24, 70-200, 50 1.4, 135 2, and 105 micro VR at virtually no loss. If anything the glass is the easiest part to swap because it maintains value the most. Seriously instead of crying here, just switch. Both systems are great and you would become such a better photographer with face detect AF. 

Seriously I feel bad for the bride that gets you, if you can't make a reasonable guess at an indoor bounce flash exposure.


----------



## psolberg (Apr 2, 2012)

Ah yes. Buy more important, the letter on the 5Dmk3 is primitive as hell. Even the most basic Nikon dslr metters color. Only the 1DX does this. A real crippling by canon on the 5D3.


----------



## KeithR (Apr 2, 2012)

psolberg said:


> Ah yes. Buy more important, the meter on the 5Dmk3 is primitive as hell. Even the most basic Nikon dslr meters color. Only the 1DX does this. A real crippling by canon on the 5D3.



That's a lot of crap right there.


----------



## cps_user (Apr 2, 2012)

if can't expose properly without a function like this, then you shouldn't call yourself a professional (wedding) photographer. 

If you claim you are a professional and you do need this, just get the 1dx.


----------



## psolberg (Apr 2, 2012)

jrista said:


> PhotoCat said:
> 
> 
> > > well EXMOR is not EXMOR R.
> ...



wrong. it is all about how you quantize the measurement and what scale you use. They don't have to use a linear scale either.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=4747.120

you can stretch the 14 bits easily to cover more tonal ranges and since the lower bits are usually just pointless random noise, there is still headroom which is why the D800 is so stellar DR wise. I agree that eventually we'll go to 15 or 16 bits once cameras start pushing far beyond 14stops. But the DR of the D800 at base ISO of 14.4 stops as reported by DXO is absolutely amazing regardless, even if it was just 14.0 stops. To correct your point, the difference between the D800 and the 1D4 is over two stops. not trivial at all.

let's stop the famboysm and recognize that nikon has created an amazing sensor and hope canon can match it. instead of whining we should be excited to have canon follow eventually. I'm sure if it had been canon that did this, we'd be all singing praises to DXO and how they are so accurate.


----------



## psolberg (Apr 2, 2012)

KeithR said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes. Buy more important, the meter on the 5Dmk3 is primitive as hell. Even the most basic Nikon dslr meters color. Only the 1DX does this. A real crippling by canon on the 5D3.
> ...



crap? how so? As far as I know, the canon 63 zone sensor is the same old technology canon has been using for decades. meaning it is the color blind sensor you have had for ages. Unlike the 1DX *RGB meter sensor* which the 5DmkIII lacks. Every nikon body uses an RGB sensor and finally canon has moved to one, but only in their top of the line body so far. 

watch it happen, the next few canon bodies will have RGB sensors for metering except for the 5DmkIII.


----------



## mitchell3417 (Apr 2, 2012)

Straight off the canon website.

"The EOS 5D Mark III features Canon's multi-layer 63-zone iFCL (intelligent Focus Color Luminance) Metering System that integrates the cameras AF system into its readings. By taking into account the color and luminosity surrounding the chosen AF point(s), this new system delivers an entirely new level of accuracy, especially in situations where the light changes quickly. The metering sensor enables evaluative, center weighted, partial and spot metering, plus offers 5-step exposure compensation for perfectly exposed images, every time."

Same system used in the 7D. The point is, they both use COLOR.


----------



## D.Sim (Apr 2, 2012)

Sigh... Can we please bring back the Karma system....

things were so much more.... civilized... and also, fewer trolls...


----------



## kirillica (Apr 2, 2012)

mitchell3417 said:


> Straight off the canon website.
> 
> "The EOS 5D Mark III features Canon's multi-layer 63-zone iFCL (intelligent Focus Color Luminance) Metering System that integrates the cameras AF system into its readings. By taking into account the color and luminosity surrounding the chosen AF point(s), this new system delivers an entirely new level of accuracy, especially in situations where the light changes quickly. The metering sensor enables evaluative, center weighted, partial and spot metering, plus offers 5-step exposure compensation for perfectly exposed images, every time."
> 
> Same system used in the 7D. The point is, they both use COLOR.



Not really. Color Luminance != RGB color.

But, anyway. I always thought that I saw thousands of excellent pictures made by photographers. Some of them - with - unbelievable - manual focus. Do you really think face detection will make you work step easier? I doubt so. 

By the way, mobile phones have face detection. Buy new Nokia 40Mp+ phone, if pixels and algorithms are the things making ordinary photo excellent


----------



## Neeneko (Apr 2, 2012)

mitchell3417 said:


> Same system used in the 7D. The point is, they both use COLOR.



Meh. Colour is no big deal.. ever try to buy a B&W camera?


----------



## agierke (Apr 2, 2012)

i would want to know what the effective shutter lag is going to be when using face detection AF. i imagine it will take longer to AF if it needs to figure out what are the faces within the scene. any significant lag and this feature becomes a useless gimmick. remember eye controlled focusing? what happened to that?

i'm in the camp that doesnt trust auto features and rarely uses them. i am the photographer...i want control over making the photograph. the camera cannot make better decisions than me.

features are nice but in the end with a little effort and practice to hone your skills i have found i take better pictures when i'm doing things manually than when i am relying on automated features. give me a functioning fast AF system and i'm good after that.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 2, 2012)

mitchell3417 said:


> Same system used in the 7D. The point is, they both use COLOR.



Yes, they do. But not RGB. "_The metering sensor has 63 measurement zones and is a Dual-layer design with each layer sensitive to different wavelengths of light... one layer sensitive to red/green light and one layer sensitive to blue/green light._"

So, Canon's iFCL metering system sees color in the same way as a dog or an old-world monkey sees color - a dichromatic system, not a trichromatic system like the 1D X and us humans use (of course, birds, reptiles and fish are tetrachromatic - four color channels, so it's not like we humans and the 1D X are so special  ).


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 2, 2012)

Spring is here - our old cameras can still take a good picture without all the technological gizmos - face-detection doesn't really grab me as important and the IQ is more than good enough. My choice of camera is not going to be impacted by the technology

Here is this mornings picture of a kid, taken with an obsolete APS-H camera without iFCL or face detection. The second is even worse - with a camera with a Digic 3 processor!

Second picture:

Camera Model: Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III
Lens: EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Image Date: 2012-04-01 12:06:33 (no TZ)
Focal Length: 105.0mm
Aperture: f/8.0
Exposure Time: 0.020 s (1/50)
ISO equiv: 50
Exposure Bias: +0.33 EV


----------



## ippikiokami (Apr 2, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Spring is here - our old cameras can still take a good picture without all the technological gizmos - face-detection doesn't really grab me as important and the IQ is more than good enough. My choice of camera is not going to be impacted by the technology
> 
> Here is this mornings picture of a kid, taken with an obsolete APS-H camera without iFCL or face detection. The second is even worse - with a camera with a Digic 3 processor!
> 
> ...



What if I told you I'll make a camera with Goat detection ?  would that change your thinking?


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 2, 2012)

ippikiokami said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Spring is here - our old cameras can still take a good picture without all the technological gizmos - face-detection doesn't really grab me as important and the IQ is more than good enough. My choice of camera is not going to be impacted by the technology
> ...



LOL ;D ;D ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 2, 2012)

ippikiokami said:


> What if I told you I'll make a camera with Goat detection ?  would that change your thinking?



Only if the camera emitted a bleat instead of a beep for goat focus confirmation...


----------



## briansquibb (Apr 2, 2012)

Goats D800 and 5DIII go head to head about depth of field whilst MF645 looks on in amusement


----------



## Kernuak (Apr 2, 2012)

scrappydog said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > So, Canon's iFCL metering system sees color in the same way as a dog or an old-world monkey sees color - a dichromatic system, not a trichromatic system like the 1D X and us humans use...
> ...


Not in the old world .


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 2, 2012)

scrappydog said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > So, Canon's iFCL metering system sees color in the same way as a dog or an old-world monkey sees color - a dichromatic system, not a trichromatic system like the 1D X and us humans use...
> ...



Probably, but really it's more to do with the higher resolution of the tricolor (RGB) metering sensor of the 1D X, which has sufficient resolution to feed additional data to the AF system for tracking. The 2-color iFCL system does feed general color information to the AF system, which is useful in cases where the wavelength of the main illumination is not white (e.g. mercury or sodium lamps). Obvioulsly, it plays a role in metering accuracy, too.


----------



## jrista (Apr 2, 2012)

scrappydog said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > So, Canon's iFCL metering system sees color in the same way as a dog or an old-world monkey sees color - a dichromatic system, not a trichromatic system like the 1D X and us humans use...
> ...



I wouldn't say it has too many real-world implications, probably even less than a biological system.

In human vision, we have two separate "poles" of color sensitivity: blue/yellow and green/magenta. Because of the nature of how our trichromatic sight works, we cannot actually sense both blue and yellow or both green and magenta at the same spatial point at the same moment. If you try, the eye & brain will compensate by oscillating between sensing one color then sensing the other (http://io9.com/5710434/train-yourself-to-see-impossible-colors)...however you will not actually see green (which according to color theory is what you should get when blending blue and yellow). This is generally not a problem, as we have two separate poles of color sensitivity (increasing "color sensitivity resolution"), and our eyes "refresh" some 500 times a second. Dichromatic vision has only a single pole, and therefor has lower color sensitivity resolution. If you had dichromatic vision, you could either sense red or blue, but not both at the same time.

Now, the iFCL sensor is not a biological system, its an electronic system. Silicon is semitransparent to various wavelengths of light. So long as the upper layer is blue sensitive, there is nothing to prevent an electronic sensor from simultaneously sensing blue-green and red-green at the same time. Such a sensor probably still doesn't have as high a color sensitivity resolution as a trichromatic system would since your sensing _blue-green_ and _red-green_ rather than _blue, red, and green_, but its probably better than a biological dichromatic system.


----------

