I wish the deep learning could be taught, since my sports everybody wear funny outfits they are not recognized as human...
Upvote
0
Canon officially announces the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
I wish the deep learning could be taught, since my sports everybody wear funny outfits they are not recognized as human...
I am pretty excited. This camera is a powerhouse and I am buying one. If it had 30mp I would be sleeping in a tent in front of Canon trying to be first in line to get it. As it is I am preordering from the comfort of my office via the internet.
Upvote
0
Right, what I'm suggesting, since autofocus seems to be one of your primary considerations, is that you wait for the pro-level R mount camera that many people are expecting to be announced (hopefully) sometime soon.
The 1-series is excellent for those that need an optical viewfinder for fast moving subjects where EVF lag might post a problem, for top build quality and weatherproofing, high FPS, etc. That said, it is my opinion (any many others) that dual-pixel autofocus on the sensor is far superior to the focus mechanism used when shooting through an optical viewfinder. That's in large part why so many are so highly anticipating a pro-level R.
Regarding your hummingbird, I'm not sure what high FPS has to do with your focus issues. You're correct in that those aren't particularly in focus, but high FPS is not your issue. What shutter speed are using? Yes, I know the hummingbird's wings flap really fast, I'm not suggesting that you used a slow shutterspeed because the wings are blurry, it just seems the whole images are fairly blurry so I'm thinking maybe an even faster shutter speed might have helped? And perhaps the aperture was too wide and you moved backward or forward at the time you pressed the shutter? Were you in Servo mode? If you weren't in servo and you moved even a fraction of an inch after autofocusing, the whole image would be blurry.
Either way, obviously people, including me, have been successfully focusing on and getting tack-sharp images of hummingbirds and other fast-moving birds before these "deep learning algorithms" came around. No algorithm is going to make up for incorrect camera settings to begin with (I'm not suggesting you used incorrect settings, just making a general statement). I have no idea why those hummingbirds are out of focus, but I can assure you it's not a limitation of the camera. Personally, I think you'd love a pro-level R mount.
Upvote
0
This was just a sequence that popped up as I searched quickly for something to illustrate. I am fully aware of the human problem (me) but less aware of how to solve it - the teach old dogs (me) new tricks issue.
Your points are all valid. Shooting hummingbirds in Costa Rica was one of the easiest tasks as far as getting the birds in focus and I'm not talking feeders, unless you consider flowers to be feeders, but having a frame that would keep them in focus as they dart around would be amazing with the high FPS. Here is another example of where fast AF could be helpful and where high FPS also is very helpful as far as pose is concerned. It doesn't help to often be shooting 400 X2 and with poor lighting, and that's the dilemma, there are always trade-offs.
Jack
Upvote
0
I think you train a neural net model with positive examples (e.g. human head) and negative examples (e.g. cat, dog, flower, cloud, etc.) of roughly equal set size, say 100k pictures in each set, and then when using the trained model in the camera, when seeing a scene it can decide whether it is a human head or not (binary decision) with high accuracy. Of course it is possible to train a model for more objects using the same principle.
Upvote
0
This was just a sequence that popped up as I searched quickly for something to illustrate. I am fully aware of the human problem (me) but less aware of how to solve it - the teach old dogs (me) new tricks issue.
Shooting hummingbirds in Costa Rica was one of the easiest tasks as far as getting the birds in focus and I'm not talking feeders, unless you consider flowers to be feeders, but having a frame that would keep them in focus as they dart around would be amazing with the high FPS. Here is another example of where fast AF could be helpful and where high FPS also is very helpful as far as pose is concerned. It doesn't help to often be shooting 400 X2 and with poor lighting, and that's the dilemma, there are always trade-offs.
Jack
View attachment 188157
Beautiful photo. Really spectacular!
Yep, understood. I was just tossing another alternative into the mix with mirrorless, since you were seeking some input. I was in the same boat regarding AF challenges as I was trying to figure out the best way to focus on the wildest creature of them all: Toddlerus Runnerus (Common Name: Running Toddler). I tried an RP and was pleasantly shocked at how effortlessly and intuitively it focuses. While looking through the EVF, I use my thumb on the touchscreen to move the AF box over whatever moving subject I'm trying to focus on, and that's it. It uses over 4000 AF points on the sensor to instantly track the subject wheverever it moves over almost the entire frame. Anyway, I'm not trying to convince you, just sharing my own experiences! If a pro R body comes out with high FPS and weather sealing, I will likely snap it up in a second.
Upvote
0
Is one option to keep what you have, and spend the difference between trading in your 1DX II and purchasing a 1DX III ($3-4k) instead on the forthcoming high MP R? - that way you have the best of both worlds? (albeit, spread over two cameras!)I was torn between going for higher resolution via 5D4 or 1 level camera via 1DX2. It went on for weeks and finally my wife nudged me over the edge - she sees 1D as "the best". Essentially it was a coin toss. To compensate for no bump in MPs (sold the 6D) I bought the 400 DO II, really over-spending and rationalized that 400 X2 based on reputable comments would be very satisfactory. Truth is, 800 did put me within reach for a lot of birding situations but as more samples of the results of high MP shots passed by me I came to realize that my cropping capabilities were now more limited if I wished to maintain the detail and sharpness I was accustomed to (I had previously used the 300 2.8 II, which uncropped was amazing).
As a retired person and just an amateur photographer what in the world is wrong with me not just being satisfied with what I've got?! Well, the problem is I tend towards being a perfectionist; nothing to do with showing off, I just love excellent results. Honestly, I can't afford this hobby but by cutting out other likes, I do, and I really enjoy it.
With over 3 years of fun with the 1DX2, I've absolutely loved the 14 FPS and the 4K60 and could have been quite happy with a boost of 4 or slightly more MPs and in that case jumped on the expensive 1DX3 bandwagon. Others say no, but I maintain that often I'm on the edge, where cropping that would be offset by those extra MPs, would be very much appreciated. Perhaps by analogy it could be compared to having a car that tops out at 55 when speed limits are 60.
On the other hand, talking about being on the edge, recently in Costa Rica, I was reminded what it was like to have roughly 12 hours of light and dark and mist and deep shadows in jungles and, well, there is no doubt that low noise higher ISO would have been really helpful especially when I was at F4 X2. In many of those cases my reach with 800 (560 probably would have worked too) was fine but the lighting just wasn't there.
So, which poison do I choose. What I'm reading about the 1DX3 resonates because I am very aware of improvements that could be game changing if the reports are trustworthy but would I ever be happy with just 20 MPs. Anyone else feel like me, or share the same thoughts?
Jack
Upvote
0
There are a lot of different neural network architectures and they all have their own ways of working. But you are definitely not constrained to a binary decision. Neural networks are just functions, you apply them to an input and get an output. The output can be of any dimension though, it doesn't have to be a two dimensional "Yes" or "No" output. With your example, you can have an output with 4 numbers, where the highest one can be interpreted as the recognised result. So if your first number is for cat, second for dog, third for flower and fourth for cloud, and your numbers are 0.2 0.98 0.1 and 0.0 you should interpret that as "Your input corresponds to a dog".
Upvote
0
I was torn between going for higher resolution via 5D4 or 1 level camera via 1DX2. It went on for weeks and finally my wife nudged me over the edge - she sees 1D as "the best". Essentially it was a coin toss. To compensate for no bump in MPs (sold the 6D) I bought the 400 DO II, really over-spending and rationalized that 400 X2 based on reputable comments would be very satisfactory. Truth is, 800 did put me within reach for a lot of birding situations but as more samples of the results of high MP shots passed by me I came to realize that my cropping capabilities were now more limited if I wished to maintain the detail and sharpness I was accustomed to (I had previously used the 300 2.8 II, which uncropped was amazing).
As a retired person and just an amateur photographer what in the world is wrong with me not just being satisfied with what I've got?! Well, the problem is I tend towards being a perfectionist; nothing to do with showing off, I just love excellent results. Honestly, I can't afford this hobby but by cutting out other likes, I do, and I really enjoy it.
With over 3 years of fun with the 1DX2, I've absolutely loved the 14 FPS and the 4K60 and could have been quite happy with a boost of 4 or slightly more MPs and in that case jumped on the expensive 1DX3 bandwagon. Others say no, but I maintain that often I'm on the edge, where cropping that would be offset by those extra MPs, would be very much appreciated. Perhaps by analogy it could be compared to having a car that tops out at 55 when speed limits are 60.
On the other hand, talking about being on the edge, recently in Costa Rica, I was reminded what it was like to have roughly 12 hours of light and dark and mist and deep shadows in jungles and, well, there is no doubt that low noise higher ISO would have been really helpful especially when I was at F4 X2. In many of those cases my reach with 800 (560 probably would have worked too) was fine but the lighting just wasn't there.
So, which poison do I choose. What I'm reading about the 1DX3 resonates because I am very aware of improvements that could be game changing if the reports are trustworthy but would I ever be happy with just 20 MPs. Anyone else feel like me, or share the same thoughts?
Jack
I'm with you every step of the way, there Jack. The main reason I bought the 1Dx2 was that the 7D2 AF can be a bit twitchy and because most of my good wildlife shots are taken in morning or late afternoon the 7D2 is often pushing it, especially for BIF. I have also found that the 7D2 starts to struggle with the 2x converter on the 400DOii, which means that for BIF 7D2+400+1.4x has about the same sort of reach as 1Dx2+400+2x.
Also, largely because of the cropping, I have learned that I don't need to have frame-filling images every time (which has actually benefitted my composition and editing). Having said all that, I do find the sheer quality of pixels on the 1Dx2 means even with the same lens on both cameras I can crop almost to the same FOV as the 7D2 with very little loss in picture quality.
BUT....give me a 5DIV with a bit extra battery oomph and 8-10 fps and I would be well happy.
Why oh, why do I like the challenge of BIF so much. Why can't I just be happy with a bird on a stick?
Upvote
0
If that is the case, if it is baked in, then as you say it is not 'learning' - it is simply using a more detailed algorithm which would mean that Canon is using modern buzzwords to sell it stull (like 'nano' was few years ago, and not is it 'i-whatever').
When the Olympus E-M1X came out, there was talk that it actually 'learnt' the photographer's preferred subjects. So with a basic algorithm, it knows what a head looks like but if the head was turned sideways it initially would miss it. But gradually over time it would see a head turned a bit, then turned more, then turned more and as the photographer shot more and more heads it would 'learn'. Similarly for cars etc. I don't know how true any of that is, but it strikes me as a method with more potential for tracking the subject across the frame or in front of complex backgrounds.
Upvote
0
Or make it possible to replace it with something else! So where's the place on the Canon website I can upload all my jumping spider pics to?
Upvote
0
OK - so no learning involved. Just an updated reference database.
Upvote
0
As always it’s not the buzzword tech that’s the important thing but the quality of implementation- how large and well labeled the data set, what model used and so forth.
As noted the output need not be Y:N but instead, for example, a series of probabilities, e.g.
(Is a focus target) (Is human) (Is bird) (Is dog) (Is cat)
0.98, 0.03, 0.11, 0.65, 0.89
which would relate to start focusing with an focus priority assuming Cat but it’s a bit dog like too...
As noted the output need not be Y:N but instead, for example, a series of probabilities, e.g.
(Is a focus target) (Is human) (Is bird) (Is dog) (Is cat)
0.98, 0.03, 0.11, 0.65, 0.89
which would relate to start focusing with an focus priority assuming Cat but it’s a bit dog like too...
Upvote
0
OK, since you called yourself a sucker, who am I to challenge that.
If I were not financially constrained I wouldn't blink before ordering it. Knowing Canon and knowing Canon's history, there is not a shadow of doubt in my mind that the shortcomings of the Mark II have been largely dealt with and the camera will be a significant improvement in the areas that Canon has felt pressured to improve (AF was one of them) and where they were able to improve (speed was obviously a limiting factor and that's been drastically improved via CFexpress, Digic X etc.).
I've always shook my head when people praised the joystick because it clearly was clumsy when speedy AF point movements were required; now the new AF-ON button appears to be a godsend. I also have no doubt that the AF capability of the latest Nikon and Sony top cameras has exceeded what we got with the Mark II, even considering that many users did not adjust the parameters as optimally as possible. I suspect that will no longer be the case, at least for the time being.
In the realm of video, those in the know are expressing overall satisfaction with the added capability and already the quality of the Mark II was generally praised except for file size. The dumb CF, CFast arrangement is gone and for those with deep pockets the new cards offer many advantages.
My concern, if I were to purchase, is in the realm of, I can only justify so much expenditure on a strictly luxury item when there are other needs and wants and I already have a very good camera. My "worry" is that there may be significant improvements relative to a 1 level offering in the R line and if that camera will be slightly smaller and significantly lighter then as an aging user I'll regret that my (probably) last camera is a beast.
I seldom express frustration with Canon's approach to making money but if I were to express one major gripe it would be that there needs to be two somewhat different 1 level cameras, one that maximizes speed and one that is still fast but optimizes resolution for those of us that invariably do more cropping. I don't get the logic of forcing those with resolution needs into a lower than 1 level feature set.
Jack
Upvote
0
How hard will it be to get your hands on one close to the 2/13 release date if you don't preorder? I haven't decided if I will even get one yet so I haven't preordered. I'm wondering if this will be like the 85 1.4 release -- waited about 2 months to actually receive it after ordering after the release date.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
