A number of award winning movies and tv shows have been shot with iPhones, including older ones.
Right. The fact that other filmmakers have gotten good results from the iPhone contradicts his conclusion that the iPhone is "not up to snuff" because he couldn't do it. Tangerine was shot on the iPhone 5s.
(NSFW Trailer)
[VIDEO]
There are a few night time and darker indoor shots that are very useable in this trailer. As far focus goes: is anything out of focus?
As an aside, IMHO DSLRs tend to make lousy pro video cameras compared to a dedicated pro video camera and 4K input is essential these days not just for longevity of the media but for current 1080p output
Agree. I think Nikon and Canon just take different approaches to consumer cameras than a smartphone maker does since they also make professional video cameras, some costing hundreds of thousands of dollars like the ones you see for broadcast of professional sports.
That said, the Canon C500 shoots 4K Raw or 4:4:4 at 120 fps at 12 bit, yet only costs a little over $2K. (body only)
Neutral settings on a DSLR? You are missing the point of using a DSLR completely! Look at the definition of the sky, this self-claimed professional photographer said iPhone 6s looks better. Either he's color blind or he's talking out of his behind. Clearly he's talking out of his behind!
exactly. My Prosumer camera shop wouldn't let me buy a camera until they showed me how to set it 'correctly' for about 8 different situations. Literally would not let my put the CC down until I committed to coming back for free training (later that day).
I'm loving my 6s camera (focus and f/s adjustment much faster), but my 5 year old 14mp Sony A is still a better camera... barely. Video... the 6s is head and shoulders better, even without image stabilization.
The D750 is still said to have a number of advantages in video, including better low-light performance, a lens mount, and the ability to capture shallow depth-of-field.
Those are all advantages in still photography too. Major, insurmountable advantages.
That's why pros (and quite a few prosumers) still use larger-format cameras instead of iPhones etc.
But another massive DSLR advantage for pros (and serious amateurs) is the responsiveness of a DSLR.
Instant shutter response. You can capture a precise moment. Nearly impossible on iPhone.
Right. The fact that other filmmakers have gotten good results from the iPhone contradicts his conclusion that the iPhone is "not up to snuff" because he couldn't do it.
Sure, but mostly the videographers just did it to prove a point. It was not because they could get superior results with an iPhone. Professional cameras have a lot of features that are difficult to duplicate with an iPhone. For one, the iPhone doesn't have time code so it is difficult to capture multiple angles in your scene if it has dialogue. Also external sound inputs are rather limited as is the choice of lenses. I'm not arguing that you can't get professional results from an iPhone but you do have to live with a few compromises.
I have both of these cameras, appreciate them both for entirely different reasons and for mostly different use cases.
Yes the headline is silly and the story misses the point, but the point of the video is valid - "joe everybody" gear has at least one set of conditions in which it is superior to pro gear. Yes there are far better 4k pro cameras out there (not from nikon), but also not the point.
Rather, in 2015 this type of mid-pack pro gear just needs to bring 4k video to the table as part of the price of admission. Point taken.
Taking video with my new iPhone 6s Plus is one of the things I enjoy most about my new iPhone. Thank you Apple. It is absolutely outstanding.
If you don't have a 4k device to watch your amazing iPhone video here's the next best thing.
Go to settings --> Photos & Camera --> Record Video Change this from the default of 1080p HD 30 fps to 1080 p HD 60 fps. Your video will then be shot at 60 fps which makes a great picture to watch on a non 4k device. Simply amazing.
I love love the slo mo feature. The other night I stood on my porch and during a lightning storm shot in slo mo. Wow, I couldn't believe the number of lighting bolts that occurred in less than 1/2 of a second. This was taken with my iPhone. I couldn't take this kind of video with my Nikon $1200 camera. The last lightning bolt started a fire.
Will Apple ever update their audio to something better than low bit mono? Not to mention it clips with loud noises. This is something Nokia really got right with their HAAC mics.
Sure, but mostly the videographers just did it to prove a point. It was not because they could get superior results with an iPhone. Professional cameras have a lot of features that are difficult to duplicate with an iPhone. For one, the iPhone doesn't have time code so it is difficult to capture multiple angles in your scene if it has dialogue. Also external sound inputs are rather limited as is the choice of lenses. I'm not arguing that you can't get professional results from an iPhone but you do have to live with a few compromises.
They did it to see what the iPhone could do, which is a valid question and one that deserves to be answered. Before you get too defensive about it, remember that not too long ago, people asked the same question about DSLR filmmaking: "what's the quality compared to bigger, more expensive digital cinema cameras?" That question was answered by some intrepid filmmakers on a Canon 5D a few years back. Now we take DSLR filmmaking for granted. It's no longer a "they did it to prove a point." The point was proven.
iPhone filmmaking is the next step in this trend. Please don't draw the line on "professional camera" snobbery at DSLR/smartphone boundary; it's an arbitrary line that will continue to shift as smartphone cameras continue to improve.
Sure, but mostly the videographers just did it to prove a point. It was not because they could get superior results with an iPhone. Professional cameras have a lot of features that are difficult to duplicate with an iPhone. For one, the iPhone doesn't have time code so it is difficult to capture multiple angles in your scene if it has dialogue. Also external sound inputs are rather limited as is the choice of lenses. I'm not arguing that you can't get professional results from an iPhone but you do have to live with a few compromises.
I think the limitations of an iPhone's capabilities is the attraction for some film makers. It sets a parameter within which they can be more creative. Limitless resources and options rarely aid creativity. I have never tried synching anything shot on an iPhone but couldn't tc be added after shooting? Or is it even needed with digital media?
I think the limitations of an iPhone's capabilities is the attraction for some film makers. It sets a parameter within which they can be more creative. Limitless resources and options rarely aid creativity. I have never tried synching anything shot on an iPhone but couldn't tc be added after shooting? Or is it even needed with digital media?
That very well could be. I've sometimes, and read about others doing the same, simply walked out with just a 50mm on my camera and left the big bag O' glass behind to see what I could accomplish with just that boundary. Did some fun stuff with just a 20mm out in Yosemite for similar reasons.
And as to the overall theme, the old rule applies. Your best pictures WILL be taken with the camera you have with you, not the one back in your closet. And pop some decent lens on a D800 ish camera and we're talking north of six pounds.
I have never tried synching anything shot on an iPhone but couldn't tc be added after shooting? Or is it even needed with digital media?
The only way to get it perfect is to send timecode from a remote source to both cameras. Genlock syncing is similar, but you wire the two cameras together. Often in professional video, you are recording the audio on a separate recorder. In this case you definitely need to send timecode to all devices. Timecode is important because each camera has a slightly different crystal oscillation and can become out of sync very quickly. Even as much a single frame of difference will visibly show problems with lip-sync. There is of course software that can usually fix sync problems in post.
Agree. I think Nikon and Canon just take different approaches to consumer cameras than a smartphone maker does since they also make professional video cameras, some costing hundreds of thousands of dollars like the ones you see for broadcast of professional sports.
That said, the Canon C500 shoots 4K Raw or 4:4:4 at 120 fps at 12 bit, yet only costs a little over $2K. (body only)
Wow! Can you tell me where you can get that body for $2k? I'd love to buy a dozen, please!
exactly. My Prosumer camera shop wouldn't let me buy a camera until they showed me how to set it 'correctly' for about 8 different situations. Literally would not let my put the CC down until I committed to coming back for free training (later that day).
I'm loving my 6s camera (focus and f/s adjustment much faster), but my 5 year old 14mp Sony A is still a better camera... barely. Video... the 6s is head and shoulders better, even without image stabilization.
All the people pooh-poohing the iPhone here are the same people who say Final Cut X is not professional.
EG: The "spend big money and hard to use == professional" crowd.
True, to get shallow depth of field you need a bigger sensor, and reading out 4k on a big sensor at 30 or 60 fps is not trivial....
but most delivery is at 1080p and so this comparison is valid.
The real truth is this-- the camera manufacturers have been letting their electronics and the CPUs in these expensive cameras lag, because their customers have not been too demanding.
Apple on the other hand, always pushes forward... and as a result has just embarrassed Nikon.
With a much worse lens that iPhone is putting out much better 1080p video. It's really impressive.
Why does everyone think using a pretty professional lens like a 24-70 f/2.8 in bright light at f/8 is the worst possible conditions for the Nikon? If anything, that would seem like the best situation for the DSLR as well.
He may be going for clicks, but iPhone and DSLR filmmakers still advise that you shoot with proper lighting. You don't need a pro gaffer, just basically throw enough light on your subject, and if applicable, the scene. It's a case of "know your equipment and know what it's capable of" before you shoot. Unless you intend to shoot your subject surreptitiously.
The idea that a camera should just "deal with it or not up to snuff" is not the art of filmmaking.
The fact that these new cameras allow idiots to take photis and do so farly well, is why the attitude of "its the cameras fault" exists. Many simply dont even know what adjusting the eposure is
The point is an iPhone and DLSR shouldn't even be comparable.
That was the point of the video. He pooh pooh Nikon for letting their DSLRs fall so far behind that the video they shoot is laughable compared to a cell phone(He also gave samesung and gopro props in the same vein as the iphone so don't praise him yet) and the new mirrorless cameras.
Comments
Right. The fact that other filmmakers have gotten good results from the iPhone contradicts his conclusion that the iPhone is "not up to snuff" because he couldn't do it. Tangerine was shot on the iPhone 5s.
(NSFW Trailer)
[VIDEO]
There are a few night time and darker indoor shots that are very useable in this trailer. As far focus goes: is anything out of focus?
As an aside, IMHO DSLRs tend to make lousy pro video cameras compared to a dedicated pro video camera and 4K input is essential these days not just for longevity of the media but for current 1080p output
Agree. I think Nikon and Canon just take different approaches to consumer cameras than a smartphone maker does since they also make professional video cameras, some costing hundreds of thousands of dollars like the ones you see for broadcast of professional sports.
That said, the Canon C500 shoots 4K Raw or 4:4:4 at 120 fps at 12 bit, yet only costs a little over $2K. (body only)
Neutral settings on a DSLR? You are missing the point of using a DSLR completely! Look at the definition of the sky, this self-claimed professional photographer said iPhone 6s looks better. Either he's color blind or he's talking out of his behind. Clearly he's talking out of his behind!
exactly. My Prosumer camera shop wouldn't let me buy a camera until they showed me how to set it 'correctly' for about 8 different situations. Literally would not let my put the CC down until I committed to coming back for free training (later that day).
I'm loving my 6s camera (focus and f/s adjustment much faster), but my 5 year old 14mp Sony A is still a better camera... barely. Video... the 6s is head and shoulders better, even without image stabilization.
obtw, I am color blind.
The D750 is still said to have a number of advantages in video, including better low-light performance, a lens mount, and the ability to capture shallow depth-of-field.
Those are all advantages in still photography too. Major, insurmountable advantages.
That's why pros (and quite a few prosumers) still use larger-format cameras instead of iPhones etc.
But another massive DSLR advantage for pros (and serious amateurs) is the responsiveness of a DSLR.
Instant shutter response. You can capture a precise moment. Nearly impossible on iPhone.
I'm talking about still photos here, of course.
Right. The fact that other filmmakers have gotten good results from the iPhone contradicts his conclusion that the iPhone is "not up to snuff" because he couldn't do it.
Sure, but mostly the videographers just did it to prove a point. It was not because they could get superior results with an iPhone. Professional cameras have a lot of features that are difficult to duplicate with an iPhone. For one, the iPhone doesn't have time code so it is difficult to capture multiple angles in your scene if it has dialogue. Also external sound inputs are rather limited as is the choice of lenses. I'm not arguing that you can't get professional results from an iPhone but you do have to live with a few compromises.
Yes the headline is silly and the story misses the point, but the point of the video is valid - "joe everybody" gear has at least one set of conditions in which it is superior to pro gear. Yes there are far better 4k pro cameras out there (not from nikon), but also not the point.
Rather, in 2015 this type of mid-pack pro gear just needs to bring 4k video to the table as part of the price of admission. Point taken.
Taking video with my new iPhone 6s Plus is one of the things I enjoy most about my new iPhone. Thank you Apple. It is absolutely outstanding.
If you don't have a 4k device to watch your amazing iPhone video here's the next best thing.
Go to settings --> Photos & Camera --> Record Video Change this from the default of 1080p HD 30 fps to 1080 p HD 60 fps. Your video will then be shot at 60 fps which makes a great picture to watch on a non 4k device. Simply amazing.
I love love the slo mo feature. The other night I stood on my porch and during a lightning storm shot in slo mo. Wow, I couldn't believe the number of lighting bolts that occurred in less than 1/2 of a second. This was taken with my iPhone. I couldn't take this kind of video with my Nikon $1200 camera. The last lightning bolt started a fire.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_sz94AuEdQ
My Chevy is faster than your Ferrari (if we limit your Ferrari to first gear). LOL
That's probably not true either ;-)
They did it to see what the iPhone could do, which is a valid question and one that deserves to be answered. Before you get too defensive about it, remember that not too long ago, people asked the same question about DSLR filmmaking: "what's the quality compared to bigger, more expensive digital cinema cameras?" That question was answered by some intrepid filmmakers on a Canon 5D a few years back. Now we take DSLR filmmaking for granted. It's no longer a "they did it to prove a point." The point was proven.
iPhone filmmaking is the next step in this trend. Please don't draw the line on "professional camera" snobbery at DSLR/smartphone boundary; it's an arbitrary line that will continue to shift as smartphone cameras continue to improve.
I think the limitations of an iPhone's capabilities is the attraction for some film makers. It sets a parameter within which they can be more creative. Limitless resources and options rarely aid creativity. I have never tried synching anything shot on an iPhone but couldn't tc be added after shooting? Or is it even needed with digital media?
That very well could be. I've sometimes, and read about others doing the same, simply walked out with just a 50mm on my camera and left the big bag O' glass behind to see what I could accomplish with just that boundary. Did some fun stuff with just a 20mm out in Yosemite for similar reasons.
And as to the overall theme, the old rule applies. Your best pictures WILL be taken with the camera you have with you, not the one back in your closet. And pop some decent lens on a D800 ish camera and we're talking north of six pounds.
I have never tried synching anything shot on an iPhone but couldn't tc be added after shooting? Or is it even needed with digital media?
The only way to get it perfect is to send timecode from a remote source to both cameras. Genlock syncing is similar, but you wire the two cameras together. Often in professional video, you are recording the audio on a separate recorder. In this case you definitely need to send timecode to all devices. Timecode is important because each camera has a slightly different crystal oscillation and can become out of sync very quickly. Even as much a single frame of difference will visibly show problems with lip-sync. There is of course software that can usually fix sync problems in post.
Wow! Can you tell me where you can get that body for $2k? I'd love to buy a dozen, please!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=855975&gclid=CMnjj5r2s8gCFUqRHwoduVEAOQ&Q=&m=Y&is=REG&A=details
Which shop was that? I'd really like to know.
All the people pooh-poohing the iPhone here are the same people who say Final Cut X is not professional.
EG: The "spend big money and hard to use == professional" crowd.
True, to get shallow depth of field you need a bigger sensor, and reading out 4k on a big sensor at 30 or 60 fps is not trivial....
but most delivery is at 1080p and so this comparison is valid.
The real truth is this-- the camera manufacturers have been letting their electronics and the CPUs in these expensive cameras lag, because their customers have not been too demanding.
Apple on the other hand, always pushes forward... and as a result has just embarrassed Nikon.
With a much worse lens that iPhone is putting out much better 1080p video. It's really impressive.
The point is an iPhone and DLSR shouldn't even be comparable.
That was the point of the video. He pooh pooh Nikon for letting their DSLRs fall so far behind that the video they shoot is laughable compared to a cell phone(He also gave samesung and gopro props in the same vein as the iphone so don't praise him yet) and the new mirrorless cameras.