This is just ******** and everybody who‘s been doing movies knows it. The coordination of the crew, recording of the audio alone is so much workload and cost, that the use of an iPhone doesn‘t safe up much in the first place. It’s a very nice challenge, and a nice message that you don’t need a good camera body to do a good movie, but that’s about it.
Aside from that, it's still blind marketing. The time you‘re going to spend on color grading that ****** footage, setting up correct camera parameters on set, fighting with a frustrating user interface meant for hobbyist use, lack of ND filters, no convenient change of battery and so on... will actually make the difference. So it‘s not only about image quality (which camera body’s obviously exceed at), it's primarily about ergonomics, convenience, reliability... the time you’ll spend being productive vs the time you’ll waste.
Also, I don’t know how they achieved the depth of field, but it‘s most likely an external lens, which is anyways the primary source of good quality nowadays.
And dont forget about the gimbal which is a crucial part of the rig.
So bottom line: No, by getting an iPhone you get nowhere close to getting a movie of such a high production value. Maybe you made like a 0.0001% progress towards getting there over a traditional phone camera. Dont get me wrong, I like Apple products, but stating that depth control helped in this case, showing some portrait photography footage is just ridiculous. The movie itself... great stuff
