should pentax dslrs have face detection added

open to all

future dslr that is ie k300d k30d

I think it could be worthwhile, as long as,

1 its quick
2 its would have to cope with multiple faces/evaluate DoF
3 you could turn it off easily

My views are skewed by problems with perfectly focused hordings at football games...and blurred players. I know its a shocking admission, and maybe its not so mnay shots really that get ruined like this, but they are always the ones you would have most hoped would have been sharp!!

Well thats the blue touch paper lit......

Cheers all
Geoff

As much as it would infuriate the purists, I think it's a great idea, would definately have come in handy for the wedding shoot we did.

Rataegeoff 3 points would definately be needed for it to work well though!

Face detection on a DSLR?

I think, no, but what do I know?

if I want face detection I'll buy a point and shoot with it. DSLR's are about shooting the creative (hard) way.

No.

Every penny spent on stupid gimmicks for stupid people is one less penny for useful features, or better quality construction.

G
(Infuriated purist)

but still the point of having face detection on a dslr is that you still get top photos and only have to carry one camera and also if i could be switched of you wouldnt have to use it but if its there and you think i realy wanna get this pic of my family all together dead perfect why not use it would you carry a dslr and a point and shoot?

stupid people thats not nice.
why have live view or shake reduction or dust cleaning.
Because its there to help you no one said you have to use it did they.

If we turn this question about and think "why would Pentax put face detection on a dSLR?" To make more sales, of course. If they do, I guess it would be at an entry level K-m type camera rather than at the "semi-pro" K20D level, cf. the plethora of shooting modes with the K-m (night portrait etc) compared to M, P, Av etc on the K20D. For the next semi-pro level camera my guess is that they will try and improve things like the live-view feature or (if they have been listening to some of us) the FPS as well as, almost inevitably, the pixel count.

Not being a camera designer, I am assuming that the face recognition stuff is all software based (like my webcam, very unnerving) and as they have cracked it for some of the compacts, it shouldn't be too difficult to carry over to dSLRs, and certainly less development time/money than a full frame or medium format camera.

Just my halfpenny.

Best wishes, Kris.

I wouldn't pay more for a camera just to get that feature, but one of my sony camcorders has it, and it does work. So for general/family snaps It'd improve your keeper ratio on "average" shots. But for professional work, since when does "average" sell?

I'll second one of Wombles comments, Pentax would do better to make the Liveview feature much more accessible than having to trawl through the menu to set it up.

Face recognition gets a thumbs down from me, but I dont do a lot of people stuff anyway

Total waste of time, space and money

Having never experienced Face Recognition, I would therefore not miss it, surely it is for webcams and not semi pro DSLR's?

But can we all please keep the discussions pleasant, and not start calling each other names.
After all we live in a democratic society, and we are all entitled to our opinions.

Face detection software works fine on compact cameras where the image from the CCD is continuously displayed and analysed.

With a DSLR it wouldn't be possible via the normal optical pentaprism/pentamirror finder, so presumably would need to be a part of Live View.

For anyone who understands a bit about photography I don't see much advantage (well, not any advantage really) as it seems a "point and shoot" feature.

As for Live View in general, why would I want to use a relatively poor electronic screen when the proper view is available through the superb Pentax optical systems?

I like it. The debate that is, it's great nitty gritty stuff. Just what we should all waste our time on

Seriously, though, most of the iconic photographs taken (and I'm thinking black and white from the early days up to say the 80's) didn't use digital, didn't therefore have electronic aids of any kind, yet we all aspire to creating something similar. Roll the clock forward. We now have a camera that has Artificial Intelligence (isn't that what face recognition feels like?) and everyone is taking perfect photos.

Utopia!

I think not. We need to have a flaw in the system so that us creative types can use our guile to overcome it and show everyone how hard we have worked to produce a seemingly, impossibly brilliant, nay perfect, photograph!!

Perhaps something I may not achieve in my lifetime, but I'm damned if I'm going to show one that the camera took on my behalf (whilst I was somewhere else )