Check out this great 3 minute video showing off the power of the Dual Pixel AF systems, especially when combined with the Face Detection capabilities of the C100mkII. Canon's AF is so good, i've never seen anything like it in a professional camcorder. It really is like having a focus puller assistant living inside your camera. The video also highlights the cameras slow motion features, and What do you think?

Canon C100 MKII Slow Motion / Dual Pixel AF / Face Tracking Tests on Vimeo

Eric Petrie
provideoandtape.com
Finance the Canon C100 for $129 a month
Finance the Sony FS7 for $248 a month

This is why 4K doesn't attract me as much when it currently means giving this up. Dual Pixel AF has allowed me to get shots easily that would have taken many takes without a focus puller, and shots I wouldn't have been able to get period.

I don't think people realize how powerful the DAF tool can be, until they really give it a try.

its why we own two 70Ds, that face tracking auto focus, I'd love to have 2 or 3 of these.

This is why 4K doesn't attract me as much when it currently means giving this up. Dual Pixel AF has allowed me to get shots easily that would have taken many takes without a focus puller, and shots I wouldn't have been able to get period.

My guess is the C300 Mark II will have similar autofocus features while also being 4k capable, which is what I'm really waiting for.

Just imagine being able to use L glass while center focusing and being able to reframe as needed in post. Yes, with an STM lens you don't need to reframe due to the face detection, but STM glass isn't fast and doesn't produce the best image.

For example, when I'm filming a bride coming down the aisle I often want this at f2 or f2.8 with a longer lens like the 70-200 2.8L IS II or 135L. Face detection won't work with L glass so I'll be forced to either pull focus manually or always frame the bride right smack in the middle. This prevents my ability to use the rule of 3rds and also limits my creative power.

Just imagine being able to use L glass while center focusing and being able to reframe as needed in post.

I don't see the reason to load a bunch of time spent "fixing" bad composition on the backend in post. Not to mention that when you start zooming in on the 4K image, you start to enlarge the noise.

It's helpful, yes, but to rely on it is a bad choice in my opinion.

Gary, you seem to be on a crusade against 4K :) In an other thread saying how impossible it is to deal with in post and now that using 4K to reframe in post is no good either, just because the c100 doesn't have 4K doesn't mean it has no advantages. There are still many that wanted 4K on the c100 eventhough it does do great 1080p. I would prefer to have one 4K camera in my gearbag instead of one 1080p camera with great autofocus capability, in my case 4K doesn't cause any issues, neither in post or when using it to reframe and that last part is the main reason why I want 4K, it made a hugh difference for me when shooting ceremonies with unmanned camera's. Also about enlarging noise, actually 4K footage looks less noisy when downscaled because the noise becomes smaller as well but when you go back to it's native resolution, it won't become noisier, it will be equally noisy then when shooting at 1080p, the only difference will be it's 4 times the resolution.

The autofocus capabilities of the c100 performs great but only would not trust it in a non repeatable shot, like with any "auto" function on a camera it can be fooled at just the worst time and send you home with unusable footage. As long as you have control and be able to repeat your shots when needed it's something I wished my camera's would have as well. When you are using that auto face tracking mode, does the camera allow to override this by turning the focus ring if you wanted to correct?

Noa, I know with the 70D's autofocus, its touchscreen, so I keep my finger on the spot during non repeatable moments. The processional in particular, with so many faces on screen at once.

I don't see the reason to load a bunch of time spent "fixing" bad composition on the backend in post. Not to mention that when you start zooming in on the 4K image, you start to enlarge the noise.

It's helpful, yes, but to rely on it is a bad choice in my opinion.

Of course nobody wants to spend a bunch of time in re-composing in post, but when you are limited to only center autofocus, you really pigeon holed. Either risk missing focus or limit your composition choices. Having 4k doesn't force you to choose between these two options and gives you the best of both worlds.

Plus most filmmakers aren't going to rely on autofocus very often, so if the C100 had 4k I doubt recomposing isn't something I would have to do very often.

And I agree 4k isn't often a necessary tool, but I can see situations like this one where it can be beneficial. Personally I think 2.5k or 3k is the sweet spot.

Gary, you seem to be on a crusade against 4K :)

Nope, not at all. I have my GH4 and a Shogun and used it today. My point is that so many people want to tout it, and when it comes time to work with it, they quickly learn they didn't know what to expect and end up spending time downrezzing everything to 1080 and never touch the 4K. Rather like shooting in raw.

just because the c100 doesn't have 4K doesn't mean it has no advantages

I never said it didn't, but in the C100, you already get the 4K->1080 look because the sensor is 8MP which is read at 4K and then does Canon's particularly downscale to get to 1080. It looks like all that Red Epic footage I turn into 1080 ProRes HQ to send to editorial. With the C100, the only two benefits you lose are re-cropping in a 1080 timeline (which, obviously, means you are not mastering in 4K either), and a true 4K master, but you can always make a C100 4K master as I exemplified in another thread.

I would prefer to have one 4K camera in my gearbag instead of one 1080p camera with great autofocus capability,

Funny, because if I could only take one camera with me, it would be the C100 and a Ninja Star every time, instead of my GH4 with the Shogun.

Also about enlarging noise, actually 4K footage looks less noisy when downscaled because the noise becomes smaller as well but when you go back to it's native resolution, it won't become noisier, it will be equally noisy then when shooting at 1080p, the only difference will be it's 4 times the resolution.

You didn't read what I wrote. Zoom that 4K footage to 200% on a 1080 timeline and then tell me how the noise looks.

The autofocus capabilities of the c100 performs great but only would not trust it in a non repeatable shot, like with any "auto" function on a camera it can be fooled at just the worst time and send you home with unusable footage.

Do you own a C100 with DualPixel? That sounds like you only know the feature from hearing about it instead of using it and learning how to make it work for you and not against you. Of course, if you leave it on all the time, it's about 50/50 where it works and where it messes you up, but that's a moot point because you can toggle it on and off.

its why we own two 70Ds, that face tracking auto focus, I'd love to have 2 or 3 of these.

Robert, does the 70D allow face tracking with non-STM lenses?

Check out this great 3 minute video showing off the power of the Dual Pixel AF systems, especially when combined with the Face Detection capabilities of the C100mkII. Canon's AF is so good, i've never seen anything like it in a professional camcorder. It really is like having a focus puller assistant living inside your camera. The video also highlights the cameras slow motion features, and What do you think?

Canon C100 MKII Slow Motion / Dual Pixel AF / Face Tracking Tests on Vimeo (https://vimeo.com/116869816)

Eric Petrie
provideoandtape.com
Finance the Canon C100 for $129 a month
Finance the Sony FS7 for $248 a month

When the model was walking towards the camera it kept losing focus on her face, so it isn't that good. Likewise, shifting focus back and forth between two faces did not happen immediately and took some time.

Honestly, it did not appear all that different from any modern high end consumer video camera in that respect.

And I agree 4k isn't often a necessary tool, but I can see situations like this one where it can be beneficial.

1080p is just fine to shoot with these days if it's good 1080p and the c100 is capable of delivering that, 4k also makes good 1080p and it does have other advantages, even if some c100 owners refuse to acknowledge that, but that's fine, at the end all camera's are just tools and what is useless to one can be a godsend for the other, everyone has different priorities when it comes to shooting video.

at the end all camera's are just tools and what is useless to one can be a godsend for the other, everyone has different priorities when it comes to shooting video.

I think this is completely true and if all of us would really believe it then we'd be out shooting more and spending less time discussing which camera is "better" ;)

Robert, does the 70D allow face tracking with non-STM lenses?

yes, but its terrible. I have only used relatively cheap lenses but they are very noisy and not smooth at all. I've gotten some bad lens vibration, too.

Here are a few bad examples. The only STM is the shot of my son on the deck outside. Its mislabeled as a USM lens.

70D lens tests on Vimeo

4k also makes good 1080p and it does have other advantages, even if some c100 owners refuse to acknowledge that, but that's fine

Funny, because it was acknowledged. You seem to not understand that the 1080 from the C series models is 4K to 1080, so that advantage is moot. You only lose the ability to zoom in up to 200% and maintain resolution.

Regarding 4k...

yes, the ability to recompose through zooming is handy when you are too rushed, or had other restrictions to keep you from composing properly in the first place. But I don't think too many women (or men even) over 35 are going to want to see themselves in sharp focus when shot and broadcast at 4k. Even at 1080, this can require a little softening.

I saw some 4k demo footage recently with a younger model... and it was very revealing... Even with high end makeup.

Sports, action scenes, and landscapes - yes. Close ups - no.

Sports, action scenes, and landscapes - yes. Close ups - no.

If I understand right the c100 delivers equally detailed footage compared to a 4K camera when the footage is downscaled in post, does that mean we have to soften every shot on a c100 to make it look less realistic? What about photographers, they have to deal with way higher resolutions, does it mean they apply very heavy softening filters to portraits because it's too revealing?

I think we need to stop finding excuses why the c100 doesn't need 4K and maybe start questioning why Canon yet again intentionally cripples their camera to protect sales from higher end models, especially at the c100 pricepoint there is no reason not to incorporate a technology that's going to become a standard on every camera, even smartphones, very soon.

4K might not be something for you and that's fine but there are many other's out there that wished the c100 would do 4K and they would find 4K beneficial for their needs, it's 2015 after all.

...4K might not be something for you and that's fine but there are many other's out there that wished the c100 would do 4K and they would find 4K beneficial for their needs, it's 2015 after all.

The C100 does 4K. Just not in the way you want it. It wouldn't be a C100 if it did 4K differently. Get over it. Can you guys take the 4K war to another thread? This one is about the Face Detection.

The c100 downscales internally so it doesn't output 4K, it's 1080p what you get, nothing else. I do know it's about about the focus capabilities here but 4K became a part of the discussion along the way and was not started by me, but I have no problem not talking about it anymore as I have made my point.

The face Detection on my 70d with a 18 - 135 STM Lens works great. I keep looking for more STM Lenses. My Tokina 11 - 16 works well with Face detection also.

But I don't think too many women (or men even) over 35 are going to want to see themselves in sharp focus when shot and broadcast at 4k. Even at 1080, this can require a little softening.

I heard the same with HD when that transition was going on, and it ultimately had little effect on that.

4K might not be something for you and that's fine but there are many other's out there that wished the c100 would do 4K and they would find 4K beneficial for their needs, it's 2015 after all.

Then don't buy it, simple as that. But someone shouldn't shoehorn themselves into some other camera when the C100 would fit their needs perfectly just because it doesn't do 4K, and the benefits otherwise are over-touted. I am pointing out specific workflows where the difference isn't really that big.

What I find a bit amusing is the anti 4k crowd acting like it's not possible to shoot 1080p on a 4k camera.

It's like someone saying they don't want a camera to be capable of shooting high frame rates because they don't want big files, don't need slow motion, and it takes up too much time in post. Ummmm...ok then shoot in 24p.

4k is a tool just like any other tool. Sometimes you will need it and sometimes you will not. Would you refuse to buy a camera with built in NF filters because you never shoot in bright sunlight? Personally I like my cameras to have many different tools to suit a wide array of applications and we all know the C100 only falls short in a couple categories.

Personally, the c100 has been a great camera, and has paid for itself several times over without slomo or 4k... Just as my 5d2 paid for itself many times over without either. And one day when 4k is the required standard, I know that there will be lots of suitable, and affordable camera options... it's all good.

I doubt 4k will be a broadcast standard for a least another 5-7 years. Most of the filmmakers who currently use 4k do not deliver in in 4k. They are just using the extra resolution when needed, like any other camera feature. When delivering in 4k is the new standard, filmmakers will likely be looking for 5k or greater to maintain the same creative control. This is why my current preference is 2.5k or 3k.

And we all know there are already plenty of suitable and affordable options... they just don't say Canon on the front.

What I find a bit amusing is the anti 4k crowd acting like it's not possible to shoot 1080p on a 4k camera.

It is on an FS700 with the Odyssey 7Q. It is on the FS7 internally. Both of those options cost more than the C100 Mark II.

The DMC-GH4 does not shoot good 1080. It's very poor compared to its 4K mode downrezzed to 1080, which starts to resemble the C100 resolution.

What other camera are you thinking of?