Comparison: 4K 60fps video shot on iPhone 8 Plus vs. Panasonic's Lumix GH5 mirrorless came...

Posted:
in iPhone edited October 2017
With iPhone 8 and 8 Plus, Apple introduced the ability to capture 4K video at 60 frames per second, a major accomplishment for such a small device, but how does the compact lens and camera module fare against a proper prosumer rig? AppleInsider takes a closer look by pitting iPhone 8 Plus against Panasonic's GH5 mirrorless camera.





For reviews, news, tips, features and more, subscribe to AppleInsider on YouTube.


Solipatchythepirate
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    OK. Now let’s see some low light video. 
  • Reply 2 of 34
    what kind of parent gives his kid a fauxhawk...
    mike1
  • Reply 3 of 34
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,491member
    1) Thanks for the video, Mike. While the iPhone is clearly inferior to the Panasonic in the comparison for the price of the device (not including the utility of being a smartphoen) and size of the camera components it's incredible what the iPhone can do. They've come a long way in a decade.

    2) Is filming in H.264 and H.265 for [email protected] options for the iPhone 8? If so, did that change the quality in perceivable manner? I've read reports that H.265 will result in slightly lower quality, but those claims seemed spurious.

    3) Is the iPhone still the only smartphone with [email protected]? I've seen the Note 8 and Pixel 2 being listed as [email protected], but it seems like those are still actually [email protected]

    4) If Apple is still getting camera components from Sony (and other vendors), how is this Apple getting so far ahead in this field? Is this mostly SW efficiency by building a better ISP into their A-series chip, are they designing their own camera components, and/or are they getting exclusive deals for camera component from 3rd-party vendors?

    hentaiboy said:
    OK. Now let’s see some low light video. 
    Half the video literally covered low light video comparisons. 

    what kind of parent gives his kid a fauxhawk…
    Why kind of parent would tell a child he couldn't brush his hair that way?
    redgeminipaGG1patchythepirateargonaut
  • Reply 4 of 34
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,672member
    Two tiny paragraphs of text and a video.    If I wanted to watch a movie I'd go to the theater or turn on TV.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 5 of 34
    AI videos usually annoy me -
    but this one was happily the exception.  Really a lot of info that would've taken an age to explain in text - presented clearly ina short and to the point video. 

    I love the the utility of having the iPhone camera on me all the time. And under good conditions I can get some some great shots - but with a 1 yo toddler 'good conditions' are pretty rare now. I noticing most dads/mums getting a separate camera like the Panasonic for use at parties, family events etc. 

    i was kinda hoping the 2017 iPhone range would solve this - but I'm going with 'nah'.
    Soliargonaut
  • Reply 6 of 34
    This is what "common sense" shooters will tell you. It's nice to have this video to illustrate the point.

    The iPhone camera is really good. It's particularly impressive when you consider that the camera includes a pocket computer and communications device at no extra cost.

    However, when I hear people say they're going to shoot their next session, doc, or short on an iPhone and leave their prosumer gear at home, I shake my head wondering why they would do that? It seems obvious that a dedicated device designed for a specific task is going to provide options and benefits that an all-in-one consumer product won't. I don't understand why anyone would deliberately choose "good enough with some acceptable deficiencies" when it's so easy to achieve "even better without the flaws."

    There''s nothing wrong with saying the iPhone camera is really good, an excellent choice for many applications, but not capable of (or intended for) some of the things a pro or even prosumer camera can do. Why does it have to be a "replacement" for pro gear to be considered viable in some people's minds?
  • Reply 7 of 34

    wizard69 said:
    Two tiny paragraphs of text and a video.    If I wanted to watch a movie I'd go to the theater or turn on TV.
    This is a case where I think a video is not only justified but actually essential. Comparing videos requires seeing the videos.

    That said, I would have appreciated a transcription of the script in text form, or at least a summary of the conclusions. I could then decide if I have the time (or bandwidth) to view the video and see if I feel the same way.
    Soliargonaut
  • Reply 8 of 34
    "It'll be hard to tell in a blind comparison" hehe..
    patchythepirate
  • Reply 9 of 34
    d_2d_2 Posts: 55member
    Great video comparison, AI — the iPhone does well when considering the handiness as well as cost of the Pana — the iPhone video quality will continue to improve while the Pana and similar gear with that kind of quality will naturally get much cheaper.
  • Reply 10 of 34
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,903member
    Great review Mike thank you.  By coincidence I have spent the last week doing 4K UHD / [email protected] tests on a lower budget but similar pair, the iPhone 7 Plus and Panasonic Lumix  FZ2500 and had very similar results, both very good with decent light the Lumix wining clearly though.  I'm taking them both to Antarctica soon rather than my Canon body and L lenses simply due to the weight of the latter gear is ludicrous for travel these days at my age.  The FZ2500 sadly isn't weather proofed, the iPhone 7 Plus is somewhat.  The thing that can really gives the iPhone the edge in both our tests is neither the GH5 nor FZ2500 Lumix fit in a your jeans pocket!  

    I will add though, the 24-400/ 35 mm equivalent Leica lens on the FZ2500 is killer. For camera enthusiasts who may wonder why I selected the Lumix over the excellent Sony RX10 III, it was the built in ND filters.  Had the RX had them I'd have gone with the Sony.
    edited October 2017 patchythepirateargonaut
  • Reply 11 of 34
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 2,113member
    MacPro said:
    Great review Mike thank you.  By coincidence I have spent the last week doing 4K UHD / [email protected] tests on a lower budget but similar pair, the iPhone 7 Plus and Panasonic Lumix  FZ2500 and had very similar results, both very good with decent light the Lumix wining clearly though.  I'm taking them both to Antarctica soon rather than my Canon body and L lenses simply due to the weight of the latter gear is ludicrous for travel these days at my age.  The FZ2500 sadly isn't weather proofed, the iPhone 7 Plus is somewhat.  The thing that can really gives the iPhone the edge in both our tests is neither the GH5 nor FZ2500 Lumix fit in a your jeans pocket!  

    I will add though, the 24-400/ 35 mm equivalent Leica lens on the FZ2500 is killer. For camera enthusiasts who may wonder why I selected the Lumix over the excellent Sony RX10 III, it was the built in ND filters.  Had the RX had them I'd have gone with the Sony.
    I tested my iPhone 7 Plus with a Sony FDRAX53. Some of my results were similar, but the Sony AX53 was far superior in most situations shooting in 4K. With that said, I'm still amazed at how far phone cameras have come, especially with the iPhone. A lot of times when I'm traveling, there are days I don't feel like hauling my Nikon around so I will just use the iPhone. Out of curiosity, are you doing one of those cruises to Antarctica? Antarctica is pretty high on my bucket list. 
     
  • Reply 12 of 34
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Although 4K 60fps is not quite there, that also means that 30fps 1080P for smart phone are now close enough to mirrorless cameras and 1inch compacts for most people's use, even inside, for most people not to care either way...
    That's extra bad news for camera makers who are increasinly pushed into niches.
  • Reply 13 of 34
    Soli said:
    what kind of parent gives his kid a fauxhawk…
    Why kind of parent would tell a child he couldn't brush his hair that way?
    While my post was in jest, I know you have a difficult time with humor so I’ll take your bait for a serious discussion on the matter. Kids that age don’t think to get fauxhawks on their own, it’s a parent who thinks it’s cute to make his kid look like a quasi badass hipster. 
    edited October 2017 MacProargonaut
  • Reply 14 of 34
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,584member
    This is what "common sense" shooters will tell you. It's nice to have this video to illustrate the point.

    The iPhone camera is really good. It's particularly impressive when you consider that the camera includes a pocket computer and communications device at no extra cost.

    However, when I hear people say they're going to shoot their next session, doc, or short on an iPhone and leave their prosumer gear at home, I shake my head wondering why they would do that? It seems obvious that a dedicated device designed for a specific task is going to provide options and benefits that an all-in-one consumer product won't. I don't understand why anyone would deliberately choose "good enough with some acceptable deficiencies" when it's so easy to achieve "even better without the flaws."

    There''s nothing wrong with saying the iPhone camera is really good, an excellent choice for many applications, but not capable of (or intended for) some of the things a pro or even prosumer camera can do. Why does it have to be a "replacement" for pro gear to be considered viable in some people's minds?
    I just sold off all of my Canon 70D and Lumix GH kit and will be shooting primarily with my new iPhone X. My only backup now will be my Canon PowerShot G9 all-in-one. And I am a professionally trained commercial photographer. The reasons are very simple: Ease of use, high quality imaging, and significantly less eguipment to carry around and setup. Although I used to do a lot of studio work, I now shoot stills and video mostly for social media and the web and I see no reason to have more kit than this. Your comment - “why anyone would deliberately choose "good enough with some acceptable deficiencies" when it's so easy to achieve "even better without the flaws“  - this is the same thing that was said about shooting video with the Lumix and Canon DSLR cameras when they started shooting better video. Yet they still ended up being used to shoot professional theatrical movies, all or in part, based on the same benifits I stated above. As to quality, this is no different than choosing to shoot video with a Canon DSLR versus a Red camera which is used in shooting many theatrical films today. There is a quality difference, yes, but you need to put the footage side by side to realy discern any significant difference. As a general rule in photography, the subject, composition and lighting are far more important than the equipment.

    One last thought. With the amazing and easy to use editing tools provided by Apple, many of the variances identified with the iPhone vs the Lumix GH can actually be easily improved in post.
    edited October 2017 argonaut
  • Reply 15 of 34
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    Soli said:
    Half the video literally covered low light video comparisons. 
    They probably meant actual low light. I didn't see anything in that video similar to low-light tests people often do with SLRs. But, I think we all know what the results would have been... so that's probably why they didn't do it.

    StrangeDays said:
    While my post was in jest, I know you have a difficult time with humor so I’ll take your bait for a serious discussion on the matter. Kids that age don’t think to get fauxhawks on their own, it’s a parent who thinks it’s cute to make his kid look like a quasi badass hipster. 
    Or, they see it on YouTube / TV.... AND, then the parents think it's 'cute' and do it. I'm always thinking more like, poor kid.

    freerange said:
    As a general rule in photography, the subject, composition and lighting are far more important than the equipment.
    I think the main problem is for when you can't control that stuff. For example, I miss some real zoom most with the iPhone. Also, low-light is still a huge problem. But, also, for social media and stuff, high-quality isn't exactly even necessary.
  • Reply 16 of 34
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,491member
    Soli said:
    what kind of parent gives his kid a fauxhawk…
    Why kind of parent would tell a child he couldn't brush his hair that way?
    While my post was in jest, I know you have a difficult time with humor so I’ll take your bait for a serious discussion on the matter. Kids that age don’t think to get fauxhawks on their own, it’s a parent who thinks it’s cute to make his kid look like a quasi badass hipster. 
    1) If you’re going to make a joke you should at least try to be funny. Ending a question with an ellipsis doesn’t cut it.

    2) Kids are sponges and will pick up countless things from older siblings, cousins, television, peers, and countless other sources, so your non-jocular affirmation that “it’s a parent who thinks it’s cute to make his kid look like a quasi badass hipster” because children have no mental capacity for desires or trends not pushed on them by their parents is rubbish.
    edited October 2017
  • Reply 17 of 34
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,491member
    foggyhill said:
    Although 4K 60fps is not quite there, that also means that 30fps 1080P for smart phone are now close enough to mirrorless cameras and 1inch compacts for most people's use, even inside, for most people not to care either way...
    That's extra bad news for camera makers who are increasinly pushed into niches.
    Even with smartphone cameras hindering sales of traditional cameras we still a lot of innovation in this area, and even some expensive, niche choices even within its product category.

    To me, this one is just bizarre. If someone came to me with idea I’d have a hard time greenlighting it’s design and production.

    • https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/10/10/16452852/yashica-y35-digifilm-fake-analog-camera-kickstarter


  • Reply 18 of 34
    Soli said:
    what kind of parent gives his kid a fauxhawk…
    Why kind of parent would tell a child he couldn't brush his hair that way?
    While my post was in jest, I know you have a difficult time with humor so I’ll take your bait for a serious discussion on the matter. Kids that age don’t think to get fauxhawks on their own, it’s a parent who thinks it’s cute to make his kid look like a quasi badass hipster. 


    Whether or not your comment was meant "in jest" has almost nothing to do with it; even "in jest" your comment was needlessly negative. It has nothing to do with anyone potentially having a 'difficult time with humor'.

    What a bizarre thing to be judgmental about.

    Soli
  • Reply 19 of 34
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    Soli said:
    2) Kids are sponges and will pick up countless things from older siblings, cousins, television, peers, and countless other sources, so your non-jocular affirmation that “it’s a parent who thinks it’s cute to make his kid look like a quasi badass hipster” because children have no mental capacity for desires or trends not pushed on them by their parents is rubbish.
    It's actually more like a test of parenting skills is you're capable of talking them out of the idea. :)
  • Reply 20 of 34
    cgWerks said:
    Soli said:
    2) Kids are sponges and will pick up countless things from older siblings, cousins, television, peers, and countless other sources, so your non-jocular affirmation that “it’s a parent who thinks it’s cute to make his kid look like a quasi badass hipster” because children have no mental capacity for desires or trends not pushed on them by their parents is rubbish.
    It's actually more like a test of parenting skills is you're capable of talking them out of the idea. :)
    Why talk them out of the idea? Seems harmless enough, if that’s what they want. As a parent I care about a lot of things and make a lot of decisions based on what I decide is best for my child. But how he wants to wear his hair? I’m not so concerned; personal expression and creativity are to be encouraged, no?
    Soli
Sign In or Register to comment.