Hey musicvid10 - I have looked at a couple rigs that allow handheld but mostly I like to shoot on sticks. The adapter kit allows for tripod mount and also has an interesting set up for handles/stabilizer.

"Why do you want to do it?" he asked while typing on an iPad.

Why? Is it because this is all you have to shoot on? Is it because you want to shoot on an iPad as an experiment?

The iPad camera is probably fairly decent in good light, but it seems strange not to consider more practical alternatives..... if there are any at your disposal.

If I was looking to put together a minimalist kit for shooting a documentary, I would not choose an iPad. The GoPro camera is better and if you pair it with a cheap gimbal, you can cover a lot of shooting situations. I bought one of these for little money and it works extremely well: http://www.feiyu-tech.com/products/30/

Pick up a copy of FiLMiC Pro. It will give you a lot of control over focus, exposure, frame rate, data rate, etc. If you use the built-in Apple camera software your frame rate may vary and you don't want that. FiLMiC Pro also comes with an Apple Watch app so you can start and stop recording from your Apple Watch (if you have one). This could come in handy if you are shooting and interviewing because you could sit down to interview and control the camera from your wrist. I use the GoPro Apple Watch app all of the time. With the GoPro app you actually get a viewfinder on your watch so you can use it to frame a shot. Pretty cool.

Schneider Optics makes a nice set of lenses and a rig for the iPhone but I don't see an iPad rig. :( There is a nice anamorphic adapter you can add to this kit as well. There are several lens systems for the iPad but I just wanted to show you what Schneider is doing as a quality comparison. I would get one that is an entire case rather than just a clip on one. This way you don't have to worry about it getting knocked off and the case should have a camera mount for a tripod.

As others have pointed out... small chip cameras like lots of light. That would be the main disadvantage. Of course, if you are planning to edit with Vegas Pro and not on a Mac with Final Cut Pro X then the other disadvantage is that the iPad shoots QuickTime and Vegas Pro doesn't like lots of QuickTime files in a project so if you shoot it on an iPad, I'd recommend cutting on FCP X and save yourself a lot of headaches.

~jr

I'll echo what Johnnyroy said, and strongly encourage you to not only edit on FCPX, and use Filmic pro, but also shoot 4K on an iPhone 6s Plus. The camera on my iPad Air 2 doesn't compare to the new 4K, image stabilized video on the 6s plus. And don't even think of doing this in Vegas, the QuickTime files will prove a disaster, not to mention the fact that Vegas at this point seems to be abandoned by Sony.
And I edited two features and many projects on Vegas. I can just see when it's time to step away.

Even if there was no further support for Vegas Pro (and my guess is there will be), Vegas Pro 13 works like a dream: stable, fast and unbeatable for audio. I plan on using it for years to come. I have used Vegas since Video Factory. I make my living primarily from Vegas (and Sound Forge and iZotope and Xara and PSP X8) and have done almost exclusively for more than 15 years.
Having said that, I also prefer the ergonomics of a video camera for video and a DSLR for stills so I wouldn't go near an iPad for filming a serious program.
But each to their own :)
David

Thanks for all the feedback! The main reason I WAS thinking of shooting with it was for portability. I had also considered using an iPhone 6s and using it as an "affordable" way to step up to 4k. But I do worry about shooting a feature-length documentary. I worry mostly about battery life and file size... and of course workflow.

The iPhone 6S has issues with battery life and it is probably going to bite you. There are many good solutions with portability.

Sony DSC-RX10ii or if you want to go even smaller RX100iv.

Somehow, the idea of shooting serious video with an Ipad or Iphone just seems like a really bad idea. There are simply too many limitations to warrant consideration IMHO. For going minimalist, the idea of using a GoPro would seem to be better, although you would need to deal with the issue of poor audio and image distortion resulting from the use of a fisheye lens. It does play in Vegas quite well though. Additionally, the GoPro, like the Ipad or Iphone, requires lots of light for a decent image. If you intend on shooting in low light, a camera with a large sensor, like the ones suggested by Old Smoke, would seem essential, although your cost will increase. If good low light performance isn't essential, you might consider use of a consumer grade Sony handycam, even 2 or 3 to gather decent b-roll footage. If I'm not mistaken, the newer models record XAVC S at 50 Mbps and the footage can easily be edited in Vegas. Lots of options out there to be considered, but again, not an Ipad or Iphone. Just another opinion.

wwaag

Sorry - hope this isn't the iDebate you were hoping to avoid, but IMO simply being realistic. Surely an iPad or iPhone lens (or any similar device) is a toy compared to a real camera - even compared to the likes of GoPros or clones ?

And the lens likely a limiting factor for everything except the number of pixels in the file ? The dinky little CCD can't be that great either, you'd think, apart from big numbers.

The main reason to flash iGadgets around would seem to me to be seem to be hip with the iCrowd and whatever kudos that must bring, which I guess does count for something despite the skepticism engendered from the more serious types ....

geoff

>>>Advantages vs disadvantages?<<<

Advantages??? Absolutely none

Disadvantages? I don't think this forum will accommodate a list that long.

Advantages??? Absolutely none

There is one. You'd be mistaken for a tourist and no one would know you're shooting a documentary.

wwaag

You can shoot with a GH4 and be mistaken for a tourist too. Just put on some touristy shirt and shorts.

Of course there are advantages. The makers of Tangerine shot on an iPhone 5s, went to Sundance, and got a good distribution deal.

http://nofilmschool.com/2015/07/tangerine-sundance-iphone-5s-sean-baker-radium-cheung-interview

And it's currently sitting with 96% on Rotten Tomatoes. No easy feat.

I'd heard of Rotten Tomatoes. But needed to check it out. Wow, if that is for the Red toms that is very high acclaimation indeed.

Of course there are advantages.

I'd like to hear of these advantages since I have both an Ipad and Iphone, but have never considered them for planned filming. For spontaneous events that just "happen", sure, they're great. We see footage shot in such situations everyday on the news.

The makers of Tangerine shot on an iPhone 5s, went to Sundance, and got a good distribution deal.

You're conflating two very different things--the camera and the man behind the camera. Of the two, clearly the person doing the filming is by far the most important. However, the discussion here is, or at least should be, just about the tool he is using.

wwaag

There are advantages. As mentioned earlier, an iPhone is less conspicuous when needed and it has a rather wide angle. I have used my iPhone 5 and now 6 on several occasions but I cant see myself using it as the ONLY camera. I have set mine to 60fps and seems to hold 60fps constant, on 30fps you can end up with variable frame rate.

"You're conflating two very different things--the camera and the man behind the camera. Of the two, clearly the person doing the filming is by far the most important. However, the discussion here is, or at least should be, just about the tool he is using.

The aspect of the exercise which is "shot on an iPhone" (or iPad, or whatever) could be considered a gimmick that has now been done. So that technological hurdle is now a "been there, done that".

So I guess the factors remaining are the technical and production quality, and the content. If those limitations are acceptable, go for it. But expect a degree of scepticism from the participants and bystanders. And see how the result stands up in comparison to conventionally-shot pieces.

geoff

I have the opinion that an iPad is the absolute minimum you can have and shoot something, but why do it? Any camera up from an iPad has better features and makes the task easier. The audio alone would be appalling.

Its a bit like wearing your underwear on the outside of you clothes.

>>>>Of course there are advantages. The makers of Tangerine shot on an iPhone 5s, went to Sundance, and got a good distribution deal.<<<<

Those are gimmick/marketing advantages.

You do a crappy movie, but put out the: "made only with iPhone" hype + Apple throws in some cash for you to do it ( they do this all the time ) and off you go. You may have a shot at you crap being viewed far more simply because it is a gimmick and people love those.

But if we are talking about technical issues, there is absolutely no advantage.