“Pro cameras. Pro display. Pro performance”.
Are they saying it’s a phone for professional photographers?
Are they saying it’s a phone for professional photographers?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Other iPhone 11 Pro
- Thread starter Jimmy James
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think the fact that there was an awkward, jarring explanation that the Pro moniker doesn’t mean it’s just for professionals in the actual launch event shows that it’s a bit of a confused brand message.
It's for self-proclaimed professionals. Who also don't mind having 64GB of storage.
It’s ridiculous to says the cameras for professionals, it’s a smartphone for Christ’s sake.
It's a phone for professional phone call makers.
In other words, it's an embarrassment.
In other words, it's an embarrassment.
I live in Maryland but will be visiting my fiance in SW Utah and having the phone (Pro Max) shipped there. She and I will be eager to take some scenery shots out there.
[doublepost=1568309929][/doublepost]
In what way? Please back up your assertion.
You'll never sell me on a smartphone camera being for professional photographers. Now I'm definitely as amateur as they come but I think every pro photographer on the planet would choose my Panasonic GH5 and various lenses over any camera on a smartphone for both pictures and 4k 60 fps video.
For that reason the camera on the phone doesn't influence my purchase decision at all. For me it's a FB photo taker. When I need something better I break out the GH5.
I went with the 11. Don't care about the 3rd camera on the Pro.
For that reason the camera on the phone doesn't influence my purchase decision at all. For me it's a FB photo taker. When I need something better I break out the GH5.
I went with the 11. Don't care about the 3rd camera on the Pro.
Im sorry, but this is just ignorant. I met some professional videographers who had URSAs, REDs, ARRIs at disposal, but decided to use a GH5/Pocket 4K, or sometimes even an iPhone for the job. There are different use cases, and each one screams for a different tool. If you're shooting a documentation, chances are very high that your iPhone will be actually your primary tool. The iPhone shines in situations where you don't have time to setup complex lighting and getting a particular shot is a matter of minutes/seconds. It might even hold up for interviews. Or for the behind the scenes track. Or it might even be a great secondary camera. Or... there is so many use cases for professionals, I'll stop at this point.
Of course there is those people who do feature films with it, but I guess thats more of a personal challenge thing. The iPhone most likely still sucks in key parameters like dynamic range, so with all the setup time required for a particular scene, there really is no point to using that device.
they're following their bumble speak to match the rest of their consumer gear:
MacBook Pro (yeah right)
iMac Pro (yeah right)
iPad Pro (yeah right)
iPhone Pro (yeah right)
MacBook Pro (yeah right)
iMac Pro (yeah right)
iPad Pro (yeah right)
iPhone Pro (yeah right)
No it’s not ignorant, I’m well aware that there are use cases, but that’s let’s get real here. How many wedding photographers have you seen using a smartphone?
Exactly.
Just because a pro may use it periodically as it’s smaller and more convenient, doesn’t make it a pro bit of kit. Not by a long chalk
Well said.
I'm definitely not knocking the phone camera at all... it's amazing for what it is no doubt. I just don't base my phone purchases on it because I have a GH5.
As you said the iPhone still has its uses and I am looking forward to the camera upgrade going from the 8 Plus to the 11. I'm not going to buy the Pro though because the 3rd camera is meaningless to me.
[doublepost=1568311211][/doublepost]
I used my GH5 at my niece's wedding in May.
Yeah, but thats a different use case in my opinion. People care about their wedding, for the majority its a once in a lifetime thing. The moment they see that person they just paid horrendous amounts of money film their special moment with exactly the same tool they have in their pockets... yeah...
But with documentations its exactly the opposite. If you film people, the most discrete tool will give you the most natural footage. Except if you're Werner Herzog of course, pointing a studio camera at someone until he gets so bored that he goes on with his personal life.
Sorry but if I paid a wedding photographer upwards of £1500 to take photos and they turned up with a smartphone, I’d ask for my money backWell said.
I'm definitely not knocking the phone camera at all... it's amazing for what it is no doubt. I just don't base my phone purchases on it because I have a GH5.
As you said the iPhone still has its uses and I am looking forward to the camera upgrade going from the 8 Plus to the 11. I'm not going to buy the Pro though because the 3rd camera is meaningless to me.
[doublepost=1568311211][/doublepost]
I used my GH5 at my niece's wedding in May.
[doublepost=1568311692][/doublepost]It’s not a PRO camera though. A pro camera would have to be designed for all use cases in mind, the iPhone can’t even do more than 2x zoom lol.
It’s good for a phone and the video quality is amazing, but PRO it ain’t
You’ve actually nailed it on the head. It’s all about perception rather than actuality.
They're obviously taking liberties with terminology. Someday the imaging quality of a smartphone when combined with computational adjustments will match the performance of a high end camera. There will still be something that separates the two though. The high end camera will still have something that you can't get in a smartphone. It has the superior form factor for capturing images.
A smartphone makes it easy for you to always have something that will take a pretty good and sometimes excellent photo, but it's not ideal if you're taking a lot of shots and have to react quickly. A real camera is hefty and burdensome to carry around, but when speed or efficiency matters there's nothing that comes close to a real camera for helping you get the image on the first try regardless of any quality differential in the final the image.
Form factor matters. Even some "antique" film cameras have areas that beat out the best digital cameras of today. I got to check out a friend's antique Hasselblad box camera with a top down viewfinder recently. I was amazed at how bright, clear, and large the viewfinder was even in bright daylight.
A smartphone makes it easy for you to always have something that will take a pretty good and sometimes excellent photo, but it's not ideal if you're taking a lot of shots and have to react quickly. A real camera is hefty and burdensome to carry around, but when speed or efficiency matters there's nothing that comes close to a real camera for helping you get the image on the first try regardless of any quality differential in the final the image.
Form factor matters. Even some "antique" film cameras have areas that beat out the best digital cameras of today. I got to check out a friend's antique Hasselblad box camera with a top down viewfinder recently. I was amazed at how bright, clear, and large the viewfinder was even in bright daylight.
Last edited:
For goodness sake.... in no form whatsoever is the iPhone 11 a ‘Pro’. It is merely a marketing hype, nothing more nothing less.
We all know by now that when Tim Cook and his entourage strut on to the stage they are doing it to heighten the audience.
They will use clever words and phrases as they walk around with their chest held high and claim “this is the best you have on the planet”...... But it is not, not by a long way.
The iPhone 11 Pro is merely an upgrade to a previous iPhone that also harkened from another previous... In other words:- it will never be ‘The Pro’.
I have been shooting for over 55 years and have learned the hard way.
What I will say is I have MANY, repeat MANY cameras and lens and a great amount of them are not pro despite costing thousands of UK pounds each.
As such there is no way I would cry aloud “I must have an iPhone 11 Pro as it is a pro machine. It is simply a tool for a job.
As a smartphone it does it well but for camera and video work.... in no way is it Pro!
We all know by now that when Tim Cook and his entourage strut on to the stage they are doing it to heighten the audience.
They will use clever words and phrases as they walk around with their chest held high and claim “this is the best you have on the planet”...... But it is not, not by a long way.
The iPhone 11 Pro is merely an upgrade to a previous iPhone that also harkened from another previous... In other words:- it will never be ‘The Pro’.
I have been shooting for over 55 years and have learned the hard way.
What I will say is I have MANY, repeat MANY cameras and lens and a great amount of them are not pro despite costing thousands of UK pounds each.
As such there is no way I would cry aloud “I must have an iPhone 11 Pro as it is a pro machine. It is simply a tool for a job.
As a smartphone it does it well but for camera and video work.... in no way is it Pro!
I’m not entirely sure what Apple stance is, but they’re really pushing the ‘Pro moniker’. As you can see, almost throughout their entire product line up, they’re using Pro for the MacBook/iPad and all now the iPhone. I don’t think the consumer is ‘sold’ on the word Pro (And they probably don’t care either what it means), but Apple wants the consumer to know what the most expensive iPhone is, obviously if it has the word ‘Pro attached, it’s one of the highest tiered/premium products they offer.
Well, I learned from different videographers. Some of them spend all day long talking about each peculiar detail of a lens, which camera sensor readout makes manufacturer A superior to manufacturer B and how big of a difference 70mm to 35mm film is.
... and then there’s videographers who just go out and shoot movies.
Both have their own strengths. The first kind you will usually find on feature films, since they tend to squeeze out every last bit of perfection.
The second one is more of the run and gun documentary / short film / YouTube shooter. And for the second kind it neither matters what a device is called, nor what specifications it has. As long as its significantly better as their previous tool, its a big win. And that’s all that the new iPhone is. An even better camera, that you will ALWAYS have with you, that never will gain attention in a crowd.
No need to search in your backpack, no need to carry it in your hands, no need to put on the appropriate lens, no fiddling around with ND filters, no need to turn it on ... just pull it out of your pocket and start shooting. And out of my experience, that’s what makes 75% of my good stuff happen. It doesnt matter whether the other 25% are done in superior quality, if the other 75% just don’t exist. Also, you can use that saved up time for the 25% to improve the framing and setup, which will contribute much more to the quality than sensor + lens.
That was exactly my point. And that’s exactly why documentary filmmakers hate “professional cameras” for their work. That, besides carrying around a huge setup. And for many other work, the smartphone has gained acceptance. I’ve seen people doing behind the scene tracks with their phone, just because people are more natural that way. Putting an iPhone next to an interviewed person has become normal, sometimes even with the built in mic. This will change even more over time.
That being said, if Apple really wanted this thing to be Pro, they would’ve advertised a better microphone on it. But that’s obviously not gonna sell, since most people still think cinematography is all about the camera...
Last edited: