NSXType-R said:

There's actually a guy who shoots with older cameras- a 4x5 medium format camera.

Let's not forget...this is the same guy who captured the never to be repeated photo of Mary Decker in 1984...

So, maybe he knows something the rest of us do not know? :-)

But as to how far we have come...here is a shot, a copy of a 20" x 24" B & W print..of my model director in 1970. And this was considered a nice shot in those days. This was made to be a grainy special effects, but still one can see the "F" with an 85mm f/1.8 and I believe Tri-X film at maybe pushed ASA of 800.

Another on the same Flickr page shows a model shot....Hasselblad, Plus-X, ASA 80, D-76 1:1.

I didn't realize how long ago that D1x photo shoot was. In that case it makes sense.

I'm not knocking the IPhone shots, they're well done, it's just that it feels like he's jumping through a lot of hoops to get things to mesh well. Unless he made a custom mount for the binoculars to mount to, it'd be kind of awkward. Nothing wrong with that, but it just seems like it would slow him down in comparison to a photographer with conventional equipment. If you're trying to make deadlines and such, unconventional equipment might make a big difference in whether you get things done on time, etc.

The 4x5 photos I just didn't like so much. I know he's done a lot of Olympic shots. Perhaps he just wants to slow down and be creative.

NSXType-R said:
It's strange to be doing a shoot with a IPhone. Yes, I know it's a pretty decent
Back to the D1x photo- The same question for me- what's the advantage of shooting with a D1x for a professional shoot? the 1/16,000th shutter speed?

Impressive results indeed, but give the guy a D300 with a battery grip, he won't miss the D1x.

I think you missed the point of me showing the D1x. That shot was taken in the 2004 Olympics, not today. The point was the iPhone quality isn't much different than what was more than acceptable just a few years ago. And that is taken through a pair of binoculars.

One of Dan Chung's iphone photos.

I'm not sure why you think one must have the newest shiniest gear or knock people who know how to achieve what they envision. If it an iPhone, Holga, Leica M3, or a D4 to get a great shot, why the need calling it a turd just because what system it came from?

David Burnett is the one with the Speed Graphic. He actually is an amazing photographer who has shot at every Olympics since 1984 and shot extensively for Time & Life. He doesn't always shoot with the Speed Graphic either. He uses a Holga too;) He has been so successful that agencies allow him to choose what and how to shoot a major topics. How many press photographers would be allowed to show up with a Holga and a Speed Graphic to cover a presidential campaign or Hurricane Katrina?

It's strange to be doing a shoot with a IPhone. Yes, I know it's a pretty decent camera- but why bother other than to prove your point?

You could polish a turd, but then you could also buy a marble and save yourself the trouble.

Back to the D1x photo- The same question for me- what's the advantage of shooting with a D1x for a professional shoot? the 1/16,000th shutter speed?

Impressive results indeed, but give the guy a D300 with a battery grip, he won't miss the D1x.

There's actually a guy who shoots with older cameras- a 4x5 medium format camera.

http://gizmodo.com/5932550/the-single-most-awesome-photographer-at-the-olympics

I actually don't like his shots, there's a link to a NY Times article there about his photos. He uses tilt shift and it ends up different, but not in a good way.

Again, I don't see what the big deal is- there's no apparent advantage, other than the crazy depth of field he's messing with that's all the rage and can be done with $500 Lens Baby kits. But then again, he gets the bills paid on time...

In any case, I do like the IPhone photos more than the 4x5 large format photos.

oops that went out of whack - didn't expect that - but that Wikipedia image blown up does illustrative what 5mp cameras from the past can do!

This one did it for me - that is vision.

Not meant to take anything away from it, many of the images were not "just" with the iPhone though and had some help from some accessories.
-iPro Lens System from Schneider
-and some Canon binoculars. I'm willing to bet they were a pair of the IS (image stabilized) pair.

I'm a bit surprised that anyone is surprised that a 8mp iphone can take good photos. Really it doesn't look all the different than the 5.3mp photos a Nikon D1X.

To me it is the ability to capture amazing shots consistently - something that Mr. Dan Chung did with an iPhone! That is impressive! I'm silently wondering how many he took that were bad. ;)

@adamz...." it's the photographer who counts doesn't matter what equipment she/he is using" +1

Although, it looks and feels like free advertisement I'm gonna let this go this time, as the topic is very interesting. It shows one true face of photography - it's the photographer who counts doesn't matter what equipment she/he is using. Sure, some of the snaps are not 100% technically correct, but... who cares, if they are really good and say the story.

If you want an interesting time killer article. Well then this is your lucky day. It's about iPhone image capture of London 2012 by a pro photographer for the Guardian UK. BTW it's more then just iPhone images, there is some background info that's neat to know.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jul/27/london-olympics-2012-smartphone