[zavertnik]

To be fair, the iPhone is not a camera, its a smart phone with a camera. There is no question that a DSLR with an interchangeable lens will beat out iPhone.

> The source camera and lenses were good enough - and the look was amazing compared to camcorders - to achieve this.

I would bet that the camera and lenses used didn't do the heavy lifting there, the selection of the location, the time of day, and the direction from the DP did. An expensive lighting setup isn't a requirement for a good image but good lighting is. Whether its natural or artificial is up to the DP.

The minimum viable quality you need for a project depends on the needs of the shoot.

> Forgetting "shoots" and professional lighting, the iPhone isn't going to have the massive range of other equipment, and when you're spending literally thousands of pounds on studio time, lighting hire, operator costs, etc etc, are you really going to pick up and shoot on an iPhone when you've got a Black Magic or Sony or Canon at hand? Unless you're being paid by Apple?

Of course not! I don't think anyone thinks the iPhone 15 is replacing the main camera on a shoot with a proper budget. But could the iPhone 15 be an additional camera for specialty shots or experimentation? Absolutely. For instance, if I'm shooting an unscripted scene with two people talking alone and I can mount my phone for a passable wide shot that can roll the whole time, giving me flexibility to shoot both individuals without losing coverage, then that's a huge value add.

I think in cases like that and in cases where people want to experiment without buying into a camera system, the iPhone becomes elevated beyond being just a mobile camera.

> I get that it's viable but there really is a lot of road between viable and superlative.

Totally agree, however I don't think I argued that. From my perspective, a viable camera is a viable camera for a job. The iPhone 15 seems viable from my viewing and it lives in my pocket while every other viable camera does not. That to me is the impressive feat. iPhone not living up to a proper DSLR is expected.

[seec]

I think it's just not true. Supplementary equipment is REQUIRED to get something decent out of the iPhone. Without it the quality really is not great at all. If you don't have any budget then you don't have the equipment then the iPhone is just not that useful for anything more than amateur vlogging type of stuff.

Also, it's funny seeing arguments about 1k+ iPhones being able to "save money" for video production when a Canon 5D MKII can be picked up for about 500 with a decent lens; and it cost less than 50 a day to rent. Results would be infinitely superior to the iPhone. The iPhone can be a camera argument to justify its price is simple pure nonsense.