That's just data though. I'm speaking about images. The data says the ursa mini 4.6k has more resolution, more dynamic range and as good a codec as the alexa, therefore it should be vastly superior which we know to be false.
Guys I understand what I'm gonna say is controversial, but I believe the iphone 7 could be much closer to the arri than this video shows, and that the test isn't fair to the iphone.
Hear me out:
The alexa is shot in LOGC with a rokinon xeen lens
The iphone is shot with stock settings with the base codec
A closer comparison would have been the iphone using log mode in filmic pro with a DOF adapter and a Rokinon Cine DS lens. NOW THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
I have a feeling that with enough time grading the iphone and very little time grading the alexa the results would be significantly closer. If you don't believe me google "filmic pro iphone 7 plus" and see if you share my theory.
I'm not delusional, I work with higher end equipment exclusively and recognize its value. I can find any reason for me at this point in my life to ever shoot with an iphone. I'm not saying they are the same at all.
I remember reading dvx user a few years ago when hvx200 was all the rage and seeing the feature films that were shot with them. It seemed to me that with a DOF adapter, proper lenses, and enough lighting and lighting control you could emulate the look of film somewhat. I feel like this is the same idea. Take tangerine for example.
I'm not gonna stop using better cameras, but I wish I had this in highschool, were for a small investment I could've but myself a dof adapter, lens, a handheld gimbal and a mic(and recorded on another iphone) and made kickass shorts with a lot of free labor from people who have no financial obligations and lots of free time (if you are in high shool, do this!, or buy a pocket if you can)
I think the reason we don't see more people doing this kind of thing nowaday is because cameras are so much cheaper now, and the the amount of effort it would take to compensate for the iphone's inherent limitations, versus say, a second hand blackmagic pocket is not worth the financial additional cost to nearly anyone, maybe even high school students.
Still kinda cool seeing how fast the gap is narrowing from the lowest end to the high end.
Bleeding edge companies often deliver late. More so if they are "budget" bleeding edge.
This isnt exclusive to BM, Sony delivered their raw for the fs7 late, and with many issues. Arri still doesnt have arriraw in their mini. RED, well red has been late as much as BM. Somehow because blackmagic is doing this at a price many more can afford, it makes people more angry.
If people are holding their budget hostage , they have only themselves to blame.
Red used to have problems with delivery and with specs. If you look back at the release of the original epic, you'll see.
Sorry if I offended you. I wasn't trying to censor anybody, I used the language to make a point about the value of blackmagics, and how their lack of flawlessness does not make them worthless. Some people can live with the compromises, some can't and it's OK either way.
My point was about consumer entitlement, and how in the end, you get what you pay for in one way or the other. Everyone chooses what compromises they deem acceptable. If Blackmagics aren't, you can shoot with some other system. Just don't expect any camera to be free of compromises ( for example, price, for higher end systems)