Apple Working on Standalone Point-and-Shoot Digital Camera?

[maflynn]

I don't see this happening, I'm sure what I post is nothing new given the size of this thread.

The camera market is saturated at this point. Technology has really caused the cameras to shrink but perform almost as well as SLRs.

There are so many P&S cameras that can shoot in RAW, have great lenses and produce excellent results.

Apple has no experience with lenses, sensors, including type, size. Will the camera use a mechanical shutter or electronic. If they go electronic, that may impact how many megapixels, since the sensor needs extra circuity to handle the shutter action.

The market is mature, and established camera makers are finding that mid range cameras like Micro 4/3s are eating into the DSLR market. The highly competitive and saturated market is not going to be kind to a new entrant.

 

[foodog]

I hate the copy in that mockup. "Todays cameras confuse users with way too many options based on legacy concepts."

Is this really what its come to? Don't learn anything? Don't understand how anything works? Start insinuating that a skills based task is actually bad? This is the one mentality Apple has brought to the table that I loathe.

As an avid photographer with a wife who refuses to take pictures because she doesn't understand my camera. I have tried to buy her the simplest product I can find because the best camera is the one you have at hand. If it becomes as easy as a toaster to use so much the better for the average picture snapper. My wife is a very smart person, I don't understand most of what she does.... and I don't have the desire to. Much like she couldn't give a flip about aperture, shutter speed, frame rates, etc... What she wants it to take pictures of our family at different light levels without having to worry about exposure, if the highlights will be blown out, if the picture will be blurred.

Everyone wants to take pictures but the vast majority isn't trying to become the next Ansel Adams.

Will I stop using my 5D? No. Would my wife take more pictures and be less frustratred making my life easier? Yes

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Bizarr0 rumor. There is no logic around it from any perspective. The snapshot crowd does not buy P&S cameras anymore b/c they have iPhones w/ Intstagram, iPhoto, PS, etc apps to make their pics look artistic.

The consumers who are interested in actual photography take the time to learn how to use a DSLR. They are not rocket science. And in fact, it's a lot easier to learn on a DSLR than old film SLR b/c you can immediately see the result of your aperture/iso/shutter/lens combo.

 

[macandiPhone]

There's not even the slightest chance they would do this.

Edit: After thinking about it further, iLounge could be right that Apple is developing a camera but not for a point and shoot. It could be something like Kinect and would be a companion device to the Apple TV.

I actually agree with this.

Apple has already re-invented photography with iPhones having similar resolutions as a standalone digital camera. It has taken away a huge market from photographers to iPhoneographers.

 

[filmantopia]

The only way this makes sense to me is if they are coming from a wearable "Google Glass"-esque approach. Light field tech coupled with a super high quality sensor and processor, incredible groundbreaking design, advanced software, augmented reality, multiple features (maps, apps), and iCloud integration...

Basically Google Glass, but packaged together really well.

It would be everything, just marketed as a camera (the way the iPhone is marketed as a phone).

Release around 2016

Just my best guess at a camera that people would actually buy.

 

[j2004p]

I hate the copy in that mockup. "Todays cameras confuse users with way too many options based on legacy concepts."

Is this really what its come to? Don't learn anything? Don't understand how anything works? Start insinuating that a skills based task is actually bad? This is the one mentality Apple has brought to the table that I loathe.

You sir are my hero!

 

[AustinIllini]

It can't get any worse than the Instagram user base. Or can it?!

Instagram is the worst. However, I will contend Ping Photos would be awful.

 

[Konrad]

...or perhaps, and better yet, Apple should launch its own communications satellites into space?

 

[AndyUnderscoreR]

The camera industry is just as ripe for the picking as the phone industry used to be. It's a usability nightmare at the moment, full of jargon and makes unreasonable demands of the user (what do you mean you don't know the temperature of that light in kelvin?), and crucially, lots of the current issues go away if you throw more behind the scenes technology at them:

Shutter speed goes away if you capture 500 frames at 500 fps - the user can decide how many of those to blend afterwards.

User reaction speed goes away if you let the use choose which of those frames to start from, and camera reaction speed goes away if you pre-record a 250 frame buffer at all times.

Camera shake is easy to solve too if you are capturing 500 frames, because you can track motion and compensate.

Expensive optical zooming goes away if you have enough megapixels and throw away most of the data (as seen in the Nokia 808 Pureview phone).

Exposure and ISO both go away if you capture at a higher bit depth (and of course that gives you HDR abilities).

There's no need to understand apertures or do complex auto focusing if you either capture z-depth, always bracket a wide range of focal lengths or let the user tap on the bits of the image that they want in/out of focus and let the machine work out what that means in terms of aperture.

... and then there's the elephant in the room - stills cameras and video cameras are inevitably converging. It's the perfect time to start a new camera company that doesn't make video cameras that have a still feature buried in the menus or stills cameras that can just about do crummy VGA video, but cameras that are equally at home with stills or moving images.

As for usability, that's Apple's strong point. 1 button on the top, a big 'retina' viewfinder on the front and a touchpad on the back are all you need. No menus, no jargon.

Of course, not all this technology is there yet, which is why I expect that when the Apple TV stops being Apple's 'hobby' and goes mainstream, cameras will become Apple's new hobby.

(oh and as for the 'Apple can't make lenses' argument, that's really weak. Apple has a cash pile that could buy every lensmaker on the planet ten times over, or they could just buy in lenses from someone else, exactly like all the other guys do)

 

[Fanboy4ever]

Mine Too!

You sir are my hero!

Yup, it is what it is today. i AGREE! Learn nothing new if you need not do so ... that's the ticket! However, don't think it is ONLY Apple's doings. User-friendly gadgets is something we all want and will get them - cheaply, if possible and not just Apple products.

 

[Abazigal]

I hate the copy in that mockup. "Todays cameras confuse users with way too many options based on legacy concepts."

Is this really what its come to? Don't learn anything? Don't understand how anything works? Start insinuating that a skills based task is actually bad? This is the one mentality Apple has brought to the table that I loathe.

Past a certain point, it simply may not be worth the time-benefit ratio to learn a certain skill yourself. Everyone wants to be able to take decent photos, and not everyone is willing or able to invest the time and effort to become an expert photographer, especially when their rice bowl does not depend on it.

All Apple would be doing is making photography more accessible to the masses (if they ever come out with an icamera or whatever they call it). I don't think it is inherently a bad thing.

I believe that any good photographer worth his or her salt would still be able to take much better pictures compared to a newbie, just that the learning curve would be much less steep.

 

[linuxcooldude]

I have tried to buy her the simplest product I can find because the best camera is the one you have at hand.

This is why I always believed smart phone cameras are the future. People always have a cell phone with them and not always a camera. The average person only uses point and shoot cameras at planned events. Cell phone cameras are more convenient.

 

[organerito]

I hate the copy in that mockup. "Todays cameras confuse users with way too many options based on legacy concepts."

Is this really what its come to? Don't learn anything? Don't understand how anything works? Start insinuating that a skills based task is actually bad? This is the one mentality Apple has brought to the table that I loathe.

When Marcel Dupré (great organist) went to the USA for the first time to give 100 recitals, someone said something like this, "in a era where everyone worships mediocrity, it is very comforting to know that there still giants on earth". It was said almost a century ago.

 

[wovel]

Lytro pictures turn grainy in anything but bright light. Unless Apple plans to evolve the technology (maybe they do, who knows), I doubt they would put their name on a device based on it.

I don't believe there is a point and shoot camera market anymore. I do believe iLounge is re-framing an old story (about the Jobs/Lytro meeting) in an effort to get more hits. There are rumors and then there are crazy things people just make up for attention. This story is the latter.


Has iLounge ever been right about anything? The camera industry has already been changed. iPhones are like the top 3 cameras on Flikr now. Apple may upgrade the camera in the iPod touch, but that is as close to a point and shoot as they will ever get again.

 

[gloss]

Big seller, was it? Maybe that's why people forget that Apple were among the first companies to stick their logo onto hardware built by established camera manufacturers.

Fair points, all.

 

[guzhogi]

How big would that mockup be? Looks like it would either be really long, making it not very portable, or the screen will be really, really small.

 

[Hastings101]

The worst rumor of the week award goes to...

 

[shigzeo]

What are you talking about?

Every dSLR I've ever used lets you easily control aperture, ISO, and shutter speed with two buttons and a physical scroll wheel...?

Playing with menus is typically a very small part of using a dSLR.

Again, please look at why I am suing what I am saying. DSLR's are complicated because non-software companies are writing software.

My Vanon P takes as good or better pictures as my D200 (by all accounts a modern digital camera). The latter's controls, even when called via external dials, control software. No button is labelled. Nothing can be adjusted by itself. It is all done by looking into other screens.

Photography today is inherently disrupted by bad software and do-everything mentalities.

A camera only needs to be a box for a lens with some mechanism for changing shutter speed and aperture (preferably on the lens).

Today has such disconnect with those basic controls and include horrible eye level viewfinders unless you you very expensive cameras.

 

[Abazigal]

I don't see this happening, I'm sure what I post is nothing new given the size of this thread.

The camera market is saturated at this point. Technology has really caused the cameras to shrink but perform almost as well as SLRs.

There are so many P&S cameras that can shoot in RAW, have great lenses and produce excellent results.

Apple has no experience with lenses, sensors, including type, size. Will the camera use a mechanical shutter or electronic. If they go electronic, that may impact how many megapixels, since the sensor needs extra circuity to handle the shutter action.

The market is mature, and established camera makers are finding that mid range cameras like Micro 4/3s are eating into the DSLR market. The highly competitive and saturated market is not going to be kind to a new entrant.

Or like the ipad, Apple could just create their own market.

 

[CausticPuppy]

I can't see how they would be able to market anything that didn't have niche appeal. Apple already makes a great camera that people already have with them-- the iPhone 4S is pretty good as a point-n-shoot.

Now it's possible they could do something revolutionary with the software and integrate it into the ecosystem in ways we currently don't have. Will it be a pro-level camera? Probably not. Will it enable the average joe to create very high quality photos without knowing the details of photography? Possibly, the same way that Garage Band allows the average user to make pretty decent multitrack recordings.

Maybe it'll be a camera that is truly unifies camcorders and still cameras in a single package. Current consumer-level devices still seem to excel at one at the expense of the other.

 

[ctdonath]

HAHAHA - Imagine the price of a[n ] 200mm@2.8 lens =$20,000???

And there's the problem. Exactly, precisely expressed.

Outside of a relatively small percentage of geeks, nobody knows what "200mm@2.8" means. F-stops? ISO? He11, I've been a techno-geek all my life, I've got probably over a dozen digital cameras from the original Kodak DC-40 to the Nikon DX-40, I grew up with a film photo lab in the basement, and even I don't know what those terms mean. It's not that I'm stupid (though you may argue that), it's that those terms are so obtuse to the basic process of taking pictures that even when I do look 'em up and go "oh, right, got it" the meanings don't stick. If I can't grok 'em, then the common customer doesn't have a chance.

All most people want is point-and-click. Even hardcore photogs would surely prefer to just capture the image with minimal tweaking and then post-process that data into what is desired - to wit, the specs should so far exceed the needs that specs should be irrelevant.

Is there something which avoids all that temperamental time-consuming fiddling with lenses, knobs, settings, modes, etc. and just takes the picture? Something simple, compact, and produces results on par with a 200mm@2.8? yup. Heck, for most of human history there was no way of capturing images, but in a short time we've gone from "camera obscura" to 1080p HD video in 1cm^3, so I expect we'll see much better in not long.

Imagine, for a moment, a sheet of light-gathering pixels, sub-100nm resolution. No lens. Whole back of the iPhone is an imaging sensor, 1mm thick. Captures the totality of light hitting that surface, letting you select after-the-fact not just focus point & depth, but which way it's "pointing", 3-dimensional beyond-stereoscopic, and anything you could do with a lens.
Doable.
Makes a 200mm@2.8 look ... limiting.

 

[CausticPuppy]

Hmmm.... OK, I'm starting to see the angle Apple might take on this.


Imagine a high-quality "superzoom" camera (doubtful it would have interchangeable lenses) with the following features:

* High powered multicore processor on board (comparable to what's used in iPads/iPhones/AppleTV at the time it's released)

* Runs iOS

* SDK for 3rd party applications

* Touchscreen on the back (basically an iPod screen), and a shutter button

* accessory shoe that has a data interface (USB?)

* Easy linking of multiple cameras on local networks or over the internet... this could have some cool applications. Also, full remote control of all features using another iOS device.


You could have your cake and eat it too. There might be a photo app giving you full control of aperture, ISO, shutter speed, etc. There could be another photo app that abstracts all of that away behind an intelligent interface.

 

[d0vr]

I hate the copy in that mockup. "Todays cameras confuse users with way too many options based on legacy concepts."

Is this really what its come to? Don't learn anything? Don't understand how anything works? Start insinuating that a skills based task is actually bad? This is the one mentality Apple has brought to the table that I loathe.

My thoughts exactly. Suddenly all professional photographers will be out of the job because the iSnap takes 'good enough' photos. I have a feeling it would be the start of $99 wedding photos which is not a good thing. (if you are a pro photographer, find a new profession sooner rather than later!!)

 

[Konrad]

Unfortunately, the inherent problem with the digital age is not so much the acquisition, but the playback. iTunes and the iPod despite the ease of distribution have, in similar way to digital photography, reduced the content to low quality, to playback via cheap headphones in horrible environment, or to viewing pictures using monitors, rather than high quality prints in made ready albums. A bit like viewing catalogues in url form in contrast to flipping pages of a printed catalogue. The change in ergonomics have taken place in (digital) photography probably for worse where the introduction of a successful iCamera would potentially only deepen the problem of a certain irrelevance in photography. I still i.e. elect to take for a trip my Leica with a few rolls of film which turn immediately after a journey into a physical album with which you can spend time anywhere, anytime at you convenience without having to fire up a computer. I often ask my friends, who has seen your pictures? And as often I hear the same answer relating to the difficulty of locating the data within the hard drive, or the fact that the computer room is not available, or that the iPad is not charged...

 

[ctdonath]

X goes away if you Y

Exactly. Glad someone around here gets the idea.

Apple has learned that if your specifications are good enough, nobody cares about specifications any more because it just works. That's the idea behind "retina display": it's so good users just don't care about "how many pixels? what's the resolution?" any more. It just is. It just does.

All kinds of fiddly things go away with sufficiently advanced specs. Users don't want to fiddle with specs, they just want to do something.
Resolution? enough pixels and they won't care.
Shutter speed? take lots of superfast frames and add 'em up.
Response time? pre- and post-buffer enough frames and choose the exact frame(s) later.
Zoom? sufficient resolution plus interpolation.
Focus? light field: refocus later.
We can do even better than those, given sufficient technology and a crowbar to get us outside the ISO & F-stop box.

Pity you were downvoted. Amazing how many people don't get that as advanced as technology is now, it's got a long way to go.

----------

Is this really what its come to? Don't learn anything? Don't understand how anything works?

No. It has come to: technology has moved past those paradigms, so stop imposing them where they don't belong, and use technology advanced enough that fussing over those specs is downright irrelevant.