[shuttertalk]

I've come to the conclusion that the built in mic on my DSLR is pretty poor. I'm thinking even recording audio externally with the iphone and then maybe splicing it back it will probably produce better results.

That said, does anyone have any suggestions on external DSLR mics? Preferably something in the more affordable range?

[slejhamer]

The Rode directional video mic seems to be the best bang for the buck, based on the reviews. It's not stereo , if that's important to you, but the stereo condenser mics in this price range don't get very high marks.

There is a pro version which has some advantages - like not blocking access to your viewfinder (not a problem with LCD live-view, I suppose.)

And don't forget the dead cat if you're shooting outside.

I'd buy a cheap field recorder before using the iphone!

[shuttertalk]

Thanks for the suggestion Mitch... most people seem to recommend either Rode which is the more expensive or Sennheiser...

I hear the stereo ones produce a hiss because of the automatic gain control..

The iPhone was just an extreme example - I've actually got a Zoom H2 portable recorder which I use for music recording - would probably resort to that first before the iPhone.

[Wedding Shooter]

Go with the Rode.

[shuttertalk]

Thanks for the suggestions guys... 2/2 for the Rode, eh?

[Zig]

The Rode: you won't have quality issues with the Rode, and am guessing that noise floor will be pleasingly low with it; however, for DSLR recording,it'd be pretty pointless getting a high-end mic if married with lo-end, generic, bog-standard capture like a phone, for goodness' sake. Or a camera, to be honest, as the audio converters will be an afterthought.
If you're doing anything half-decent then a standalone 24-bit audio capture device is a must: the more you pay for your mic, generally the wider frequency response and lower noise floor(level of hissy stuff, for instance). Bear in mind that often the additional hiss will be either the crappiness of the recording device, of the mic...OR, some kind of automatic limiting/compression algorithm set to "brickwall". They often include such things both as preventers of dangerous pre-gain and to do a rough "auto mix" by ramping up the levels of everything(including artefacts). Like photo software(and equally daft), it's then possible to "de-hiss" in post-processing...but far better to not have it to begin with, as the effect will be the equivalent of(and is!) noise reduction. Noise reduction is essentially blurring and fudging of detail of an image...the similar thing happens with audio. Horses for courses; decide what your output is, and let that be the guide: pointless getting a standalone audio capture device and decent mic for field notes, but necessary for, say, recording a band with some chance of success.

[NT73]

Like most say it depends on what you want as an end product.
When I was recording video with a sony camera (DV Tapes) the mic on that was pretty abysmal, when compared with a cheap tape recorder and cheap sony mikes. That was in the 80/90s, so technology has come along in leaps and bounds (I guess).
I imagine the camera mike will get you a basic sound if the source is close to the camera. Measured in similar distances to an onboard flash.
Much further than 4 -6 metres it loses all clarity and defeats the object. IMO
A bit like me now, I can hear the noise but it don't make any sense.