It is photons. But it’s not a photon.
ETA: I’m trying to think of a better way to explain this. The article you linked to is something quite different which would not work for a photographic process. What happens here is that coded light is bounced of phenomenon that travel at or near the speed of light, not light itself. They’re not photographing bosons, they’re photographing bosons’ effects on fermions. In fact, even light-light scattering is a fermionic interaction, as the photons must first be transformed via pair production into fermions and then back into bosons via annihilation, thereby playing both roles in the interactive process.
But that is not what this camera does. Admittedly, I can see how the article might give that impression. I’m normally the first to criticize sloppy science reporting, but in this case most lay readers aren’t going to be familiar with the implications of the Pauli exclusion principle (though kudos to you for being better informed), so I’m not too bothered by it.
Anyway, hope the helps. Cheers.
