I do not know, but here is a 4K Test Video from the latest (Samsung S8):

Samsung Galaxy 8 4K Test Video: Rainy Day on Vimeo

Aside from some strange motion things.... looks pretty good, and I think we all have run into oddities with 4K and motion due to shutter speeds and frame rates!

It's actually pretty safe to say the "war" is already over, point and shoot is now "grab my phone" for a very large segment of the population (myself included). Sony has for some time been innovating and adding features to its cell phone sensor lineup, to the point where the "small sensor" camera (still or video) really has a tough time finding a reason or purpose in a "gear bag" (or pocket or purse).

There ARE "real" cameras of course, with larger sensors, better user controls, and most importantly better IMAGE QUALITY.... When appropriate, I'd rather shoot with one, for all those reasons. Whether 98.6% of the population can even notice or gives a hoot about the better results.... well, that's an entirely different ball of cheese.

Arguably, the fact that phone manufacturers rather prominently promote the CAMERA (not a peep about how awesome the phone calls are!?) in EVERY advertisement, one has to believe that it's one of the most important features to most of the consumer market, and they DO expect better quality, even if it's a step or two (OK, a bit more... maybe) below what a "professional" demands....

Sensor suppliers know that a small sensor cell phone cam module is cheaper and easier to produce, and will sell in high 6 to 7+ figure quantities, so it shouldn't be surprising that the R&D is going there, and the performance "gap" is much smaller than it used to be!

Very thoughtful post.

Here is another video, with more motion, different light situations, and sound tests:

Samsung Galaxy S8 4K Test Video 2: Travel to the Big Apple on Vimeo

I now invoke Doug Jensen. :-)

Andrew

My iPhone7 was very helpful a few weeks ago when recording a presentation that was running long. I felt the memory card from one camera position was going to run out of space and the presenter had moved to a new position so my other un-manned camera wasn't on target any more.
With 3 minutes to go I grabbed the mini tripod and iPhone holder from the gear bag and set up a nice wide shot which I started recording with 1 minute to go so there would be plenty of sync audio available.
He actually finished with seconds to spare, but my iPhone recorded a perfectly acceptable wide shot while I switched to recording on the second card slot during the first 20 seconds of Q&A.
I was recording main audio on a different recorder, but as my good luck would have it the first question was from someone in the back of the room close to my phone and the audio was better from the phone than from my ambient mics. I was rolling again with my "real" camera by the time he started his answer.
Nothing was lost so I was very happy to have a great camera phone on me, but despite that success I won't be giving up any of my many and varied cameras, mics and audio recorders.

There's a slight problem with that here in 50Hz land. Every phone's camera function that I've seen has only delivered 30Hz video, meaning that matching that up to 25p or 50p produces variable results.

Cell phones will eventually replace small point and shoot camera's but only for users who use the camera for personal reasons on a daily basis, smartphones have become a minicomputer that fits in your pocket and it's the convenience to take pictures or shoot video whenever you feel like it that eventually will stop people from buying dedicated camera's.

For professional users that ofcourse is not the case, a cellphone will never replace a dedicated videocamera, it might come in handy like Jay pointed out that if you have no other option your phone could be a last resort to take over for a short time but I don't see myself shooting a entire wedding or company video with it, that would be a bit ridiculous.

The samsung s8 video looks nice and detailed but there is a constant shake going on which seems to warp the image, probably because of lack of decent stabilization?

I now invoke Doug Jensen. :-)
Andrew

I'm not sure why I'm being invoked because I have no opinion on this. People can shoot with what ever they want, and if a "professional" video shooter wants to use a cell phone as their tool of choice, that's great, because it just means there will be less competition for the rest of us who have clients that know the difference and will pay the difference. If saving a few thousand dollars on the cost of buying a professional camcorder is a big deal to someone, then then they are moving in different circles than I am. Pro camcorder cost nothing compared to what they can earn for a professional, what they can enable a professional to do, and how much time and effort they can save on every shoot. The cost of the camera is peanuts to a professional.

But if a pixel peeper wants to shoot on cell phone because they think that image quality is the only thing that matters, and that a cell phone is good enough, more power to them.

But other than that, I have no opinion. :-)

People can shoot with what ever they want, and if a "professional" video shooter wants to use a cell phone as their tool of choice, that's great, because it just means there will be less competition for the rest of us who have clients that know the difference and will pay the difference. If saving a few thousand dollars on the cost of buying a professional camcorder is a big deal to someone, then then they are moving in different circles than I am.
I think cell phone video is *GREAT*. But, I do have one foot squarely on both sides of the fence, if there is one.

On the one hand, proliferation of pocket cams has meant that a viewer has a vast see of crap to navigate to get to the quality viewing experience they want. Note that their desired experience may be different than mine!

On the other hand, as per American journalist A.J. Liebling, "Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one." I think it's good for our society that more - many more - people have access to distribution. This is the DV revolution all over again, but this time for the masses.

As a rule, if there's one thing that phone/tablet originated video doesn't have it's good sound. A camera-mounted mic remains a very poor choice for an interior interview, though it can be fine for much b-roll.

I've taught one workshop on Mobile Filmmaking for a local community non-profit, and have a couple more scheduled. The people interested seem to be making personal documentaries, or social activists looking to create more compelling video, or developing journalists, or in one case corporate in-house training.

So, mostly not the pro market. Except that downmarket news outlets of various sorts are expecting mobile-based news reports from their contributors.

So, mostly not the pro market. Except that downmarket news outlets of various sorts are expecting mobile-based news reports from their contributors.
I agree with Seth, they have their place.

A few (arguably) truisms:
Content is king. (It's the story)
Casting is 85% of the movie.
Audio is 2/3rds of good video

In the news recently was some video that made for world-wide distribution. I'm talking about the passenger who was unceremoniously dragged off a United Airlines flight.

The video was apparently shot with someone's phone, apparently using it's own mic, no lighting kit, and no stabilization, yet it was viewed by many more people than anything I've ever done, or will do, with my cams with better lenses, better controls, better mics, and better kit available.

The problem with pro gear is it takes time to put the kit together and set it up for the shoot. By that time, what ever one wanted to shoot is O.B.E. At the other end of the scale, if one has more time then there is the script, the actors, rehearsing, takes, and editing, oh, and also stuff like the budget and distribution.

If whatever it is doesn't get one's attention in the first 15 seconds it's time to change the channel. There has to be something of interest and the creative content and presentation has to be there.

At least the phone operator (I didn't say cameraman) of the news event was able to get some decent camera angles and captured enough audio to fill in with the action. Others were obviously taking video too but didn't happen to have the location, or perhaps ability, to get the best angle.

There's a slight problem with that here in 50Hz land. Every phone's camera function that I've seen has only delivered 30Hz video, meaning that matching that up to 25p or 50p produces variable results.

If you look at specialist apps like Filmic Pro (http://www.filmicpro.com/) it is possible to have control over many parameters including frame rate and bit rate:

Frame Rate
Preset options include: 24 FPS, 25FPS, 30FPS, 48FPS, 50FPS,
60FPS, 120FPS & 240FPS

(Snip)

Video Encoding:
FiLMiC Extreme
The app sets a target of 100mbps for 2k, 3k and 4k. At 1080p this target is is 50mbps.

FiLMiC Quality
At 1080p, FiLMiC Quality is 32mb per second for improved image quality, detail and color information.

Apple Standard
The same data rate as you get with the native camera. Adjusts for resolution as do all bitrates.

Anyone with half a brain for business and good shooting skills ought to be making a 6-figure income with a camera like the Sony FS7. There is tons of business out there ripe for picking. So show me anyone who is making even half of that income shooting with a cell phone as their main camera -- and then I will concede it is a professional tool. Hoping to catch a cop beating the hell of some guy while you capture it on video is not a business model.

Weelllllllllll

Here's the thing. It was mentioned on "another forum" that there are those clients for whom something like a smart phone will be "good enough".

There are clients who DON'T appreciate the difference between smart phone quality video and video from better cams, and since everyone wants to save money whenever possible, the number of those clients vs the ones who do appreciate quality could potentially grow and grow as the phones' cameras get nicer and nicer. There are plenty of smartphone rigs out there for attaching mics and other accessories as well. It's starting to seem like, unless you're on the higher end of things, the phones really are, for them, often "good enough."

NEWSREADER: "We interrupt this live footage from Josh Bass for an incoming phone call. Stand by."

In another potential scenario, I for one would like to see how they handle an escaped lion / hungry thing with fangs. Probably wished their phone had a zoom lens attached. :-)

Andrew

You silly. I didn't really mean for live applications. But there's probably a way to disable the phone and put it in "live streaming mode" or something. Or there will be. Any day.

Now that is funny stuff Andrew +1

I agree with Doug's posts.

I do not allow clients or technology to dictate how I choose to do business. If a "lowest price only" shopper calls me by accident it does not take me long to figure out they are looking for a Craigs List shooter. I politely let them know I probably charge more than they are interested in paying. It saves my time and theirs. If I loose a gig to a guy with a cell phone it is not a gig I would do in the first place.

Kind Regards,

Steve

How do you suss them out? I have tried various flavors of "what's your budget?" And rarely am able to get an answer.

The solution is simple: Post your rates on your website so no negotiation is ever necessary.
Doug Jensen - Freelance director of photography and cameraman (http://www.dougjensen.com/)

Those people who do not want the gear I own or do not want to pay the rates I charge can move on without ever wasting a second of my time. I don't even want to talk to bottom feeders. And if someone does decide to call me, I assume they know what they are getting into and we can get down to discussing their specific needs. I don't know why more people don't post their rates? I hate it when I go into a store, a used car lot, or anyplace else that doesn't post their prices. I want to be as upfront as I can and save everyone a lot of wasted time.

Of course, if someone is hiring me as a "production company" to produce a finished production rather than a day-hire freelancer who hands over raw footage at the end of the day, then obviously a custom quote is necessary. But then I need a detailed description with a consultation on WHAT the project entails. Then I will give them my non-negotiable bid. If they accept it, great. If not, I go work on something else. I don't negotiate because if I do, I'll end up working for less than my time is worth and I will also give the client the appearance that I was attempting to overcharge them in the first place. That is the wrong message to send. So if they balk at the first price I may offer them an alternative plan for the production that may fit their budget better, but that is not the same as giving them a better price. If I quote them a price for a BMW production and they have a Chevy budget, then I'll offer to give them the Chevy production at a Chevy price. But they are never going to get the BMW production for the Chevy price no matter how much they cry about it. This weeds out the crappy clients pretty fast and builds a great relationship with the good guys. Success in the video industry is all about repeat business.

I think I will try the price list thing for a while (though Lord know I don't have your client list/experience/gear list to brag about!)

Apart from technical differences the impact of phone/tablet video has had a profound effect on the viability of certain types of previously paid for gigs where the cameraman would arrange with the event organizers to provide video services, speculating that individuals featured in the recorded activity would buy a copy.
Used to be ten years ago I could count on 30 - 50% of the participants buying a dvd or blu-ray, Nowadays it's more like 2-5% Of course you already know this. Mom and pop's pnone/tablet video is nowhere near as good as mine but to them it's free and that makes it good enough to post a snippet somewhere.
A threat to Real camcorders/cameras? yep
A threat to Cameramen - oh yeah

I think that mainly applies to shows where children perform and where the parent is ok with their own cell phone video of their child taken from their seat; they don't care about the full performance, only the part that features their child.

For corporate videos or weddings that would never apply, companies want a professional result and for that reason they hire a professional and not shoot it themselves, same for weddings, no couple is going to collect hundreds of short clips taken by guests cell phones and then edit it themselves, there would also be a night and day difference between that result and something shot and edited by a professional videographer. I know there do exist companies that edit cell phone videos, just like they would edit your holiday films but this is mainly done by couples who have no budget for a videographer but who want something as a memory on film.

Don't kid yourself.
A tremendous amount of business has been lost by so called professionals with more and more lost every day and increasing faster and faster as the consumer gear gets better and better along with simple apps that allow for very professional looking results.
After all, a goodly portion of professionals are just regular folk who one day decided to buy a camera and see if the could get jobs with it because they liked photography and videography. Similar types of people are employed by those corporations and amoungst the guest lists of wedding parties.
Every business goes through this cycle: growth - peak - decline . What's at the end of decline (where we're at) nada

So you are saying weddingvideographers and corporate video shooters are loosing a tremendous amount of business by people who shoot with their iphones?

how could you not know this?

In weddingvideography at least I am not seeing any decline in requests I am getting, guess we have to wait untill the Iphone 9 comes out before I need to find another job :)

I have to say, my recent trip to Japan I had issues with some gear A7s, RX10 and had to rely on my wife's iPhone 6 for some family video, wow beats the RX10 in the video side of things for my eyes. I think phones are perfect for a blogger or even pro use, I've never thought of using the video capabilities of a phone (iPhone) however this has me thinking.... if you could lock in focus, iso, shutter, f stop the normal things then count me in, the quality I think in good light is fantastic.

I still use an old iPhone 4 and its just about dead so have never shot video on this.
Phones I think might be a real threat for some camera companies, sure phones don't have some of the higher end specs of some DSLR, Mirrorless cameras.... time will tell, for basic blogging videos that iPhone 6 is great.

... if you could lock in focus, iso, shutter, f stop the normal things then count me in, the quality I think in good light is fantastic.

I still use an old iPhone 4 and its just about dead so have never shot video on this...
Filmic Pro is a great $15 app for iOS or Android that allows you to lock the focus, WB, and exposure settings. Not sure it will run on an iPhone 4 though.

The Sony BVP300 killed film. DV killed Beta. DSLR video killed DV. Nothing new going on here, just the normal run of winners and losers as new and revolutionary technology breaks.

Storytelling stays the same. Your iPhone may outshoot my... VX1000, but, I still know how to shoot and edit a story, that never goes out of style. The more things change the more they stay the same.

I had a colleague back in the 20th century who was a pro photographer and animation stand operator who trained at Brooks Institute. Really very good, he moved on to found his own stock agency representing his own and others' work. Digital killed the animation stand work. He didn't find the same type of clients as he used to shoot for. Re-established himself as a developer/publisher of online photography courses.

So, he came out OK, even though his market changed. And yet, there are still many, many working pro photographers.

It's a dynamic set of industries and markets for digital media production.

To a certain degree it really doesn't matter which camera I reckon and as you mentioned seth, it's all about the story.

I have been working in corporate video for a very long time. No one is shooting a real paid gig with a phone. We are still using broadcast cameras, switchers, and engineers to shade and call shots in many situations. The lowest level of camera I have ever seen on a ballroom conference gig for a straight record was an A7S (not my gig). If I showed up on my gigs with even a DSLR or a phone to shoot with, my clients would immediately fire me. No one in the real corporate market is using a phone. It is not happening.

Even for my corporate interviews on closed sets DSLRs are unacceptable. Phones are a joke. It is not happening.

Kind Regards,

Steve

Phones are a joke. It is not happening

Amen...

I think particularly videographers working in the lower end who shoot low budget theaterperformances, communions and weddings have to fear phones being a replacement for their line of work much more then videographers delivering a professional specialized service.

I first thought Bruce was joking but apparently not, I honestly cannot imagine corporate shooters, like Steve, showing up on a filmset with a few tripods and phones attached to it, seriously? :)

It's not just the ridiculous thought of doing a professional shoot on a phone but just the lack of functionality having to preset everything from a touchscreen and lack of lens choices or other options that a dedicated videocamera will give you.

For weddings I have a different opinion when it comes to camera's used where bigger is not necessarily better and where photocamera's with a videofunction have primarily taken over from dedicated videocamera's. Small size, low light performance and shallower dof are one of the biggest reasons why many made the switch. I still find dslr's a big compromise when it comes to shooting video and when it comes to functionality they still are a pain to use. It's so refreshing to use a camera more geared towards video only, like my jvc ls300 to get rid of all compromises I have to make with my dslr's.

I could not imagine trusting my phone to shoot run and gun style adjusting iris, whitebalance, focus on the fly, getting my creative shallow dof shots and having it reliably shoot continuously over an hour or trusting that it will capture decent audio, again, seriously? :)

A phone is a multi-media device that is like a jack of all trades, it's there to make and receive calls, watch films, play games, surf the internet and capture those family and holiday moments to share on facebook and so many more things but it is not going to replace a videocamera fro professional use anytime soon.

I never shot any video with a smart phone, but if this is something that is gaining in popularity, then there might be a business case for "someone" to develop a sort of "Masterclass" training syllabus on "Making Videos with your Cell Phone". I'm envisioning a book and series of video tutorials.


Mark

Actually, a small but growing percentage of the stories showing up on the news from stations in my area are now being shot by reporters themselves (actual employees, even one news director) on smart phones. They are even blogging about doing it!

It's a natural outgrowth of putting video footage shot by the public on their phones on the air.

And the public is getting more and more used to watching cell phone video. The thought may come to them, "if it's good enough for the stations to use, why don't I use it myself?"

Plus, DYI is now big business. Stores like Home Depot don't just sell to contractors. A large portion of their business comes from Do It Yourselfers.

It's hard to compete with free. Fortunately, I've found a couple of niches with very specialized requirements where my services are a very small part of the client's overall costs.

I never shot any video with a smart phone, but if this is something that is gaining in popularity, then there might be a business case for "someone" to develop a sort of "Masterclass" training syllabus on "Making Videos with your Cell Phone". I'm envisioning a book and series of video tutorials.


Mark

There are already several YouTube channels with very large followings already largely devoted to this. Of course, they are very marketing oriented, with tips on how to market using your self produced (cell phone) videos. It's hokey, but one of them may even title a lesson "How to turn your cell phone into a SELL phone."

It's hokey, but one of them may even title a lesson "How to turn your cell phone into a SELL phone."

But isn't that directed towards vloggers or people selling footage to news organisations? known vloggers seem to be earning quite a lot of money and for them it's content that matters, not the gear that is being used so if they are vlogging while driving around with a car, then ofcourse a cell phone will do just fine, it's the same with capturing news, a phone is always in your pocket so if something happens while you pass by and if it's something significant then that is what will be shown on tv, even if it's full of noise, shaky and out of focus.

I think mainly in news and entertainment (like vlogging) smartphones can have a clear advantage but I don't see any reason to panic that it will affect what I do. Lot's of uncle bobs at weddings that shoot video with their smartphone but none of them will ever be able to deliver what I do, those that are fine with whatever their guests are shooting on their smartphone either don't care or don't have a budget, both are type of clients I never get to deal with anyway.

You have to separate CONTENT from the hardware, per the thread title....

Content can be captured by many devices - and the increasing quality from a small sensor phone device can be "good enuf", plus there's the "camera you have with you" aspect. Meaning that the content is captured, albeit likely in a less that stellar quality.

SO, for the typical consumer, they have ZERO reasons to buy a nice dedicated small consumer/prosumer still or video camera - that "threat" ended in the effective DEATH of that segment of the market (this was fairly obvious when I strolled down the aisle quite some time ago, at a Fry's that HAD been the "camera" aisle, and there were a few lonely "leftovers", and tumbleweeds... cameras were no longer worth giving shelf space).


PROFESSIONAL cameras and production are a somewhat different matter, but haven't we all noticed that there aren't a whole lot of "serious" cameras being introduced... guess what happened when all the R&D went to small sensor cell modules... and effectively exited the building for all but the highest $$$$ "professional" gear?

Take a good look at the structural and financial conditions of the "big boys" in imaging... Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Sony.... not exactly reporting huge sales growth (aside from a couple small segments). Sony and Panny have or are restructuring, Nikon cancelled an entire line of cameras before a single one was sold... Product announcements and introductions (save perhaps the GH5) are barely exciting enough to get out of bed for... <cue "I'm not dead yet" sound clip>


On the one hand, media capture has become democratized and commoditized (for better or worse), but the hardware for the "average consumer" is de facto a cell phone. There is still an "enthusiast" niche that seems to be selling, but it's not to "typical" consumers.

On the other, there is still a market for QUALITY, be it event production, corporate, or whatever. There likely will always be a market for higher end, just won't be as big, and yep, won't likely be shot on an iPhone 24 or whatever... at least not entirely....

And if anyone can say that the HARDWARE market (cameras) is going to stage a huge comeback, please contact me for this bridge, statue and beachfront land I've got, I'll make ya the deal of a lifetime!

Mark. The first lesson should be "HOLD THE PHONE THE RIGHT WAY. HORIZONTALLY."

Cell phone users are professionals, they know how to hold the phone when shooting a pepsi commercial.

Mark. The first lesson should be "HOLD THE PHONE THE RIGHT WAY. HORIZONTALLY."

And for multi-cam, they can get a pen with a video camera inside and put in their shirt pocket and wear some of those sunglasses that have a full HD video camera. Boom! OMB Multi-Cam.

When you mute the sound on a cell phone, so it doesn't ring when someone calls you, does that mean you can't plug in a microphone for sound recording while you are shooting video?

These are not the cameras you are looking for. (mystical wave of hand)

Andrew

When you mute the sound on a cell phone, so it doesn't ring when someone calls you, does that mean you can't plug in a microphone for sound recording while you are shooting video?
Airplane mode.

Well that's it then, all of those cameras and lenses that you've spent thousands of dollars on, are now useless junk.
You can stop your endless, time consuming quest to find video equipment to suit your needs. It's all sorted, just use your smart phone.

By the way, I will be in your area shortly with my truck to collect all that useless, outdated, obsolete and inferior video equipment...

I always wonder how much brides appreciate carefully created content that wedding editors like Noa spend hours working on or are they more interested in how they look and what they are doing ? In fact sometimes editors go to all that trouble to make the image soft romantic and dreamy when all they really need to do is shoot it on a $39.95 cell phone and it's already soft and fuzzy!

I know content is king but how fussy are viewers really ... we have a 1280x720 res Samsung TV and I cannot tell the difference between it and my mate's 1080 TV ...In fact I saw a 4K TV the other day and yes it's very sharp but somehow it doesn't look normal and I could imagine a acne inflicted bride freaking out because her 4K video shows all the defects under the makeup. I know my wife will happily watch TV programs in HD and SD and when asked about the IQ difference I get the response ...I was watching the show I didn't notice ... in fact one enterprising videographer here is offering classic wedding shoots on "genuine VHS cassettes for that vintage feel"

Even DVR dashcams ($49.95) produce amazingly crisp footage AND bear in mind they are shooting thru the windshield glass too!!!

I wonder if the professional videographer and all his gear will eventually become a dying breed and his "pro rig" will soon drop into his top pocket ? The only person that will have a huge collection of gear then will be Jack!!

Hi Chris,

Some interesting points that I agree with and have thought about a lot recently.

I have filmed a couple of weddings this year where the light levels have been very poor, view obstructed, and venue sound systems have broken down and I have been concerned about parts of the video not being up to my usual standard. One in particular I delivered and they watched it all the way through while I was there. The bits I felt uncomfortable with, they didn't notice at all and were only interested in the action. They were absolutely delighted and gave me a fantastic review. I also posted some photos from a very recent wedding on Facebook, on which I had spent quite a bit of extra time doing some antique and soft focus styling in photo shop, something that has been very popular with Brides. I had an email from the Bride saying that she liked the photos, but they much preferred just natural colour and everything in the background visible!

To me, that reinforces that although we try to offer something as professional and polished as possible, couples are often only interested in something simple.

Particularly with modern wedding video, I think that a lot of new people entering the business have perhaps been to university on film production degree courses and have learnt a lot of modern techniques. That coupled with big blockbuster style films and the availability of affordable camera and ancillary equipment and software, has meant that a lot of film and video makers have been able to apply cinematic style to their productions. That has given aspirations to new and existing video producers that tend to be frustrated by the lack of paid work on the film industry. The one easy access market that can give a financial return and allow the videographer to apply new skills is the wedding video industry.

That of course raises the question of are we actually giving clients what they want or what we want? Are we in fact making our own market more restricted by adding ever increasing technical quality that may look very nice, but is moving away from a more simplistic and affordable coverage. So many are used to watching phone and lower quality instant video these days, that is nothing about quality and everything about content. Maybe we are making ourselves into a luxury item that is becoming more detached from the instant fun requirements of modern couples. I'm not suggesting that we all change over to phones, but that maybe there is a call for a return to the simple one camera limited editing market of a couple of decades ago.

Roger

Hi Roger

I'm sure I have said it before but I really think that we DON'T give brides what they want as they normally have no idea what they want so we show them some samples and they say "that's great" and book you.

So in a nutshell we give them what we like and hope they will like it too. I think with weddings we have shot a huge variety over the years so we have the experience of 1000's of events under our belt and we have probably been influenced a little here and there as well as developing our own style but for the poor bride, in most cases, this is the first time for her so she is clueless, not just video and photos but basically everything as it's all new to her. A lot of the time brides accept what we feed them and if we all used mobile footage that's what they would like.

Could you get away with a mobile phone for photos?? probably you could because 90% of a good photo is composition, catching a moment etc etc not the fact that you have a DSLR with a honking great telephoto lens. (I still have no idea why these photogs have a huge Canon 400mm zoom yet they stand only feet away from the bride) In the same instance I reckon I could also get away with using a laptop and 2 x $150 web cams for a wedding ceremony instead of my usual cameras and very few people would even know. My retired mate Philip wants to film his daughter's wedding using 8 x GoPro's and I'm sure the footage would look good too.

It's not the camera ..it's the person behind the camera that counts and whether it's a Digi BetaCam or a 4K Phone , that's what will make the difference.

Hey Dave

It wasn't that long ago that videos were shot on video cameras, proper video cameras that sat on your shoulder and made you look like the dude from the local TV station. Still photos were taken on DSLR cameras with a nice bunch of lenses and you would never, ever consider shooting video on a still camera ..shucks even my old Nikon D90's were able to shoot basic video when I first got them BUT I never did so.

It was a matter of a few short years when shoulder mount cameras virtually vanished from the market (my last were my Sony EA-50's and they were already called hybrids) DSLR's virtually took over for video shoots even though you were limited to 12 minute clips.

Seriously there has to be a new phase happening fairly soon! I have no idea whether it will be "pro cell phones" or GoPro will introduce a palm size 8K camera that wipes Nikon, Canon and Panny out of the market but I think we will need to be looking a niche markets as the consumer starts to have the gear to shoot a whole lot of stuff that pros used to shoot!!

Interesting times???

Looks like there is a product for this at NAB. We're all doomed, doomed I say!

(click image to embiggen)

More info on the product is here: http://cinamaker.net/

Andrew

What is really sad Andrew is that most people will not watch it on a 60" 4K big screen TV either ...they will watch it on their phones so the image will look as good as any pro camera. Yikes, two phones and a tablet and you have a TV studio setup .. what is the world coming to?

Then again I can see a huge advantage in using this system when it comes to carrying giant cameras around to events ...that system could easily fit into just one carry bag so it's easy to go to venues without making 4 trips from the car.

I was wondering about audio on a system like this but looking at my previous statement about "they will watch it on their phones" I guess you don't need to produce audio that sounds good through a home theatre system.

So what do we do now? Stay behind and look for specialised niche markets that can only be done with traditional video cameras or do we call Jack Walsh to pick up our old gear and go the new tech route? I might as well put my desktop computers on the pile too and do everything on a phone!

Here's my prediction in the next xxxx many years. Phones or something like a small handheld device will dominate the video industry, resolution will be stupid like 20k and more, you focus on near then focus on far and then choose what you want in focus when in the edit or in your phone. The screen it's self will be a lens. I'll be dead before this happens however this is the future I reckon, Imagine just rocking up with one unit/device set it wide, have a beer come back, put it back in ya pocket, edit away... perfect. Now Image for live broadcast, setup heaps of units, one operator in a room somewhere with tracking device on the ball/player the list is endless. I just want to add for live sport, replays, an operator finds the action required to replay just by zooming in on the ball/player never missing one frame of the action.

You might be surprised Simon !

The way things are going we both could be able to shoot events directly from our aged care walkers and do a damn good job of it. The way technology is heading age won't be a set back either ...we just grab a few phones hop onto our hover boards and be able to do aerial shots as well ...drones will still be around but just to serve drinks at the venue to guests!