Apple's 30 year film was shot on iPhones and iPhones only.

I can believe that smart phones will impact on small point and shoot cameras, because the quality and features would be similar and who wants two devices when one is sufficient?

Never-the-less, I was recently surprised when a smart phone user in her late 20s asked me if she could borrow a "small" camera to take to a wedding, since she had left hers at home. Maybe she was too intimidated to ask to borrow my expensive and complex D7000 SLR or maybe such a monster would not be "cool", I don't know. I was happy to loan her my old Panasonic FZ20, which she accepted even though it is not particularly small.

Like Mark Twain, maybe rumours of the death of small cameras has been greatly exaggerated, but Samuel Clemens eventually did die even if Mark Twain should live forever.

If image quality is "good enough" then convenience will win out. The same goes for audio media players, MP3 is "good enough" for most people.

Ugh ??? !! good enuf is the younger generation hype. MP3 files music - horrible - give me a good music source off CD for example!
I also outgrew consumer video cameras a few days after I bought one. Thank god you get better video from something that cost about what my first used car cost in 1967.
Wooaaaa.

Unfortunately the "old" guys that know better then "good enough" are fading out :-(

I agree that smartphones are getting better & better image quality, but there's more to a camera than the ability to snap a quality portrait or landscape. What about action shots?

When an iPhone can grab a shot with quality remotely similar to this, I'll be truly impressed.

Juvenile Bald Eagle Flyby in the wild; Canon 1DX; 500mm F/4L IS USM 1.4TC. (note the chin feathers).



...Jerry

PS: Hmmmm... after a refresh, I can't see the embedded image. Can anyone see it?
PPS: Strange, I can see it in Firefox, but not IE11. Hyperlink to image is here
PPPS: Original image (that didn't display) was a .jpg. I've replaced that with a .png which seems to work. bug somewhere: this forum?? IE11 browser?? elsewhere??

Yes, and it's a mighty image
Duncan

The point and shoot and home video markets will be absorbed by smartphones and tablets, just like GPS and MP3 player markets, but the pro and semi-pro camera market will survive. I haven't used an actual video camera in several years, but I only miss the dedicated video camera occasionally. I like my GH3 better for everything except for unscripted event type stuff, but I make do on those rare occasions that I do that sort of thing.

> "MP3 files music - horrible - give me a good music source off CD for example!"

CD's? That digital garbage?... Give me a good ole' analog vinyl record with a nice big album cover to look at while I'm lying on by bed listening! :-D

~jr

Apple's 30 year film was shot on iPhones and iPhones only.

For those of you who haven't seen it, this is the video that OldSmoke is talking about.
Apple Shot a Wonderful Video Only On iPhones & So Can You! (With Lots of Money & a Full Crew)
However, the second paragraph in the article tells the truth.
Bold parts were added by me.

What the team accomplished is pretty amazing, but I think something that gets lost on people at times is what goes on behind the scenes to make these sorts of things happen. They may have shot on iPhones, but a good amount money was spent on support gear and personnel to make it happen. Again, that’s not to take anything away from what they were able to do (because it’s pretty wild when you look at it), but the average person probably won’t be going out and producing something like this just with their phone — there is a bit more to it than that.

Mike

... and who wants two devices when one is sufficient?

Not everyone has a smartphone. My phone makes phone calls and text. It does have a camera, but it is only a 2 meg image and fixed focus. I'd rather have a 'real' camera anyday.

PS .. my phone only needs charging ONCE A WEEK!!

"Give me a good ole' analog vinyl record with a nice big album cover to look at while I'm lying on by bed listening!"

And make sure that the amplifier uses warm and cuddly valves (vacuum tubes). None of this cold transistor nonsense!

I think the most important difference between iPhony cameras and real ones is that real cameras have real lenses, not these awful button things that make do.

> "MP3 files music - horrible - give me a good music source off CD for example!"

Problem with today's sound is many young people have no sound reference : they do not know how a real violin sounds like for example.
We use overcompression, loudness is 4 times higher compared to 1983...




Most of us listen music with loudspeakers - this is not real music, composers and sound engineers do choices to be able to get analog vinyl or cd's records.
What is the problem ? ears of our children become lazy (and ours) (mp3 makes sound easy to listen) year after year. This will be a major problem in the future.
A pianissimo ? they will be unable to listen and think there is no sound at all because it is below ambiant noise...
Fastened presbyacousie is also a major problem, this is ignored by so many people.
Headphone hearing is also so bad and we are not supposed to listen music with headphones more than 1 hour per day. Because you become unable to say where a real sound is located in the real life.
Our ears must be educated every day, otherwise, they loose so much perfomances with musics we listen over internet or even while shopping ...
Forget audio streaming unless you use uncompressed sounds... or accept loosing audio capabilities.
Teach you children to listen to music on your best Home HiFi system, and as much as possible, go to concerts, with HI FI eye protections for most of them as simple plugs does not make sound response linear.

This is a really bad idea

This is true and a result of young people having lost so much with their ears.

Once our ears have lost capablilities, it's very difficult to re educate them.
If damaged, an ear can never be repaired : you then need electronic audio systems...

I cannot say what the survival of camera manufacturers will be and think no one can.

Didier.

"None of this cold transistor nonsense!"

Hey! When's the last time you touched one of those power output transistors under full load? They can scorch pretty much just as well as the valves do.

Touché!

The major thing I see holding back smartphone cameras is the need for physical depth. A camera lens and sensor need to be a certain distance apart, especially if optical zooming is involved.

I suppose, though that the designer could first pass the light through a 90 degree prism and the lens assembly could lie on its side. There was a camera that did this maybe 10 years ago. I recall it did not have very good reviews.

"especially if optical zooming is involved"

Do any smartphones use optical zoom?

I doubt it, there does not seem to be sufficient room for any sophisticated optics in the average phone.

It still amazes me almost to the point of disbelief that the optical and sensor system can live in such a tiny space. Of course, this also means that the lens must be an extremely short focal length, and the sensor itself must be horrifically tiny. My phone claims 8MP in a sensor that can't possibly be more than 1/8" across, which means about 30K pixels per inch.

A 24MP full frame 35mm sensor has about 4.3K pixels per inch. That means that the camera sensor has pixels only about 1/50th the area, which also means a lot more noise and a lot less sensitivity. Unless, of course, the camera manufacturers are lying about the native resolution of my phone's camera. That couldn't possibly be, could it?

>>>Apple's 30 year film was shot on iPhones and iPhones only<<<

And you believe that just because they said so.

Come on, let's be serious. Nothing coming out of Apple is even close to truth of any kind.

Edit: On the other hand I looked at about 30 seconds of their video in HD and it looks like $hit, so maybe they did use iPhones after all.

When will they learn. You don't brag about making a movie for just $100 00 when the end product looks like you spent $100 on it, likewise you don't brag that you've shot something on a thing that costs $500 when you could have made it look 3 times better with a point and shoot Canon, Olympus or Lumix that costs less than that.

Why does a $hitty land line from 1925 still sound better than any iPhone? Maybe they should put some effort into resolving that mystery.

At the end of the Apple video it does say, "additional apps and equipment used for some scenes." No telling what that could encompass.