Can you tell which is which?
This is from Robino Films
Here’s a “fair” test between the iPhone 4S and the Canon 5D MK II. I made a little rig that allowed me to shoot both cameras at the same time side by side. All scenes are perfectly synced together so you can pause and scrutinize the frames! See photo of the makeshift rig in the photo area.
Exposure, shutter speed, frame rate and picture style were matched as close as possible between the two cameras.
This test shows that the tiny F2.4 lens and sensor on the iPhone are pretty nice. It even got a little depth of field!
I did not overlay the exact ISO and Stops 5D settings per shot. It was too much to keep track for this simple test. To be fair I matched 5D exposure to the iPhone so no “Cinestyle” / 24p here.
Here are the settings:
iPhone 4S
– AE.AF locked. That’s all you have!
Canon 5D MKII
– Canon 50mm 1.4
– ISO 160 ~ 640 (varied per shot to match the iPhone)
– F 7~22 (varied per shot to match the iPhone)
– Shutter 1/60th
– Auto WB
– Standard Picture Style
– 1080p 30
6 Comments
kenny October 21, 2011
Oscar-nominated cinematographer Seamus McGarvey admitted that he filmed a couple of shots for The Avengers using an iPhone. And there are a couple of those shots in the trailer.
So, that pretty much makes any further conversation about this moot, doesn’t it?
kenny October 20, 2011
Less stationary…you mean like run & gun? Shooting in varying lighting conditions, changing focus quickly and overall quick adjustments? Yeah, that’s why I love my high end camera so much – all those manual controls are at my fingertips with dedicated rings or buttons, NOT buried in a menu somewhere.
BUT, I don’t take my camera with me everywhere cause it’s big. My iPhone will always be with me. And then I can get SOME footage. And some is better than none. So, advantages & disadvantages to both. But the phone makes the medium accessible to the masses and it’s passable for most situations.
Austin Beeman October 20, 2011
Only goes to show that if you are shooting for the web, the sexier gear is overkill. I believe, however, that if the video has been less stationary, (like shooting inside of a protest or riot,) the flaws of the iPhone would show up. Maybe?
kenny October 19, 2011
meant to say –
“If, after cutting together some pieces, you find you dig the medium (and have the storytelling and camera skills) you can UPGRADE.”
kenny October 19, 2011
Hey nix – Michael IS looking at the bigger picture. Always. The boy’s a futurist of sorts. And he sees here the same thing I do – You actually don’t NEED to drop a chunk of change these days to be a “serious videojournalist”. This test very specifically shows that you can get similar visual results with a device that fits in your pocket.
So, if you follow this blog regularly, you’ll see that Michael is all about putting the technology in the hands of folks who previously didn’t have access to it and allowing them to hone their craft. So, everyone needs a phone, right? So, get a NICE phone, bust it out with external mics, an Owle Bubo (google it) and a mini light and you have a cheap, yet decent quality, entry level VJ rig. If, after cutting together some pieces, you find you dig the medium (and have the storytelling and camera skills) you can. BUT, you could make videos (even movies) all day with just an iPhone. Don’t get me wrong, I have a Sony Z7U, so I’m not saying a high quality camera isn’t nice. I’m just saying (and it seems that Michael is as well) that it isn’t NECESSARY.
titus nixon October 18, 2011
Thank for saving me from buying that over price Canon 5D, not. it a lot more to it then this test if you are a serious videojornalist Canon is where you need to go with. Youn must look at the bigger Picture. That all I’m saying, but I appreciate the test. Good job