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.
Apple Working on Standalone Point-and-Shoot Digital Camera?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think the electrical part would be too problematic and even optics should be OK. After all AFAIK even Leica have been outsourcing their core electronics&image processing and generally doing fine. Apple will be able to find qualified partners as long as they are ready to spend money.
Is there any current large sensor camera with electronic shutter? (and I don't mean the CMOS rolling shutter) Of course, they could just have a built-in lens with a quiet mechanical shutter like Sony R1 or Fuji X100 but then you're stuck with a limited lens, however good it could be.
I think there's still room in the mirrorless market as the number of would-be enthusiasts who want to take nice pictures with "pretty blurred background" are still growing. Also there are so many things that could be done in cameras with a well made ecosystem that'll really help the users.
So if there is any truth to this, we should be seeing an iPhoto for Windows. If that happens then I'll believe this rumour, until then it's just fantasy
Going by that thinking, you'll have to go excuse me while I go power up my windows box to use garage band....
Oh wait. How did you get to that conclusion?
The problem with your logic is that pianos have been very much the same for years. In some ways they have become more complicated but basically they are the same as they've been for hundreds of years.
Cameras were until the advent of digital interfaces with the Canon EF mount, very simple. If anything, I believe Apple would focus on the basics. We use complete bastards now that nothing to do with skill sets and everything to do with bargain for the paper features.
Think: fifty years ago, even the copies of Leica and Swiss cameras made by Nikon and Canon, we're simple and made for photography, involving development and other skills.
Even those copies were direct and appealed to human interaction. Today, those copies are in live with buried menus or arbitrary dials and buttons with digital controls that have zero tactile and visual feedback. Cameras can do more. They should take responsibility to interact with their operators naturally.
Hardly. Remember this is rumor, speculation and a ton of assumption.
For all we know, what's going on with the iPhone and iPad is exactly what Steve was talking about. He might have been talking to this Lytro company to get info on how to keep the devices thin and still take photos that are awesome, at least for a point and click system. NOT to make a standalone camera. Which could be why better cameras and camera software has been a highlighted spec bump each time around.
----------
What next iWash and iDry kitchen appliances ?
iFlush
No, because Apple leaves things to those that do it best.
Now an API so that you can control those devices from your iPhone, why not. I would love to be able to see the timer on the dryer while I'm in studio (which is in the guest house) so I can go pull things out before they cool off and wrinkle. And since the one thing I haven't been able to do is teach the cats to actually flush after they poop in the toilet being able to remote trigger it so that I don't come home to major 'litter' smell wouldn't be a bad thing.
----------
Agreed on that one. For CONSUMERS it is very rare although if the tech could be used to reduce bad shots due to shaking camera or Junior moving around that's not a bad thing.
There are already cameras that allow you to wifi your photos right to a computer. So why not one that would allow you, if you wanted to wifi or blue-tooth to an iPad for controlling it. It's not something that perhaps everyone would use but the Pros would love it.
----------
No one sees them and you can always turn off photo stream. Nor do you have to delete them from the stream, you could just let it fill up and kill them automatically
Crap program that created horridly bloated code, good riddance.
Only if you define update as a complete redesign. Otherwise it's had several updates since release.
I myself haven't noticed a change in performance
Change is not the same as degradation. You don't like the changes, many you's haven't liked the changes, but it's not universal.
What major tech has there been, that was even 90% ready for primetime, that has been released that is of the type Apple would put it in the Mac Pro. Not even thunderbolt was totally ready when they released it.
the only thing they removed was Rosetta support. Otherwise you can still use the same Finder as before, you can still use your precious Terminal. You can reverse or turn off most of the features and switched defaults without even going into Terminal.
iDisk was buggy as hell which is why most folks switched to other services well before Apple dropped it.
maybe not to a Mr Picky Picky like you but to the consumers, they are coming to Apple in droves. And since they are the core audience because they make Apple the big money that drives up the stock value, who do you think Apple listens to more. You or the consumers. Give you a hint, it's not you.
How, Lytro didn't release this info. iLounge dropped the mention after seeing the name in the Job's bio and put it in their very questionable 'article'
Don't see what they can contribute to DSLR space. There are so many people in the space doing serious work - Nikon & Cannon have the pro market cornered pretty much. I can't see apple investing in making lenses.
As an owner of a Nikon D3 and a Leica x1, I find that I use my iPhone 4s much more than either simply because I have it on me more often. Plus for video it is superior than the Nikon D3. The DSLR trumps the iPhone obviously for challenging circumstances such as low light and if you want to play with depth of field.
The iPhone is a really simple to use camera. Look at the interface - tap to focus and tap to exposure really do cut out a lot of technical knowledge. Plus, the HDR option is fantastic in its simplicity. FAR simpler than taking 3 x different exposure pics with a tripod on a DSLR and combining them in photoshop!
I think I remember Steve Jobs saying that his opinion was that the convergence of separate devices into single devices will triumph. The iPhone really is the convergence of a lot of items into one: laptop for email/browsing, Sat Nav, Point and Shoot camera, Portable camcorder and iPod to name but a few of the devices you can leave at home when you've your iPhone in your pocket.
I don't think Apple need to enter this space.
As an owner of a Nikon D3 and a Leica x1, I find that I use my iPhone 4s much more than either simply because I have it on me more often. Plus for video it is superior than the Nikon D3. The DSLR trumps the iPhone obviously for challenging circumstances such as low light and if you want to play with depth of field.
The iPhone is a really simple to use camera. Look at the interface - tap to focus and tap to exposure really do cut out a lot of technical knowledge. Plus, the HDR option is fantastic in its simplicity. FAR simpler than taking 3 x different exposure pics with a tripod on a DSLR and combining them in photoshop!
I think I remember Steve Jobs saying that his opinion was that the convergence of separate devices into single devices will triumph. The iPhone really is the convergence of a lot of items into one: laptop for email/browsing, Sat Nav, Point and Shoot camera, Portable camcorder and iPod to name but a few of the devices you can leave at home when you've your iPhone in your pocket.
I don't think Apple need to enter this space.
Except, if Apple really wanted in on this market they'd buy Nikon, not a ******* gadget company like Lytro. This whole thing is a Lytro publicity stunt. End of story.
I had a professor in college (7 years ago for reference) who was part of a discussion panel about the paperless society. Everyone else is going on about security and legal paperwork etc. But when Dr B was asked if the world would ever go completely paperless he said that it won't happen until someone creates a computer that is small enough to hold with one hand and has a screen clear enough and controls simple enough that he can use it to read while he's in the bathroom.
He happened to retire the same year as the first iPad release so a bunch of us that had him as our advisor pooled together and bought him one as a gift. All we wrote on the card was "your future has arrived".
Given that he was basically a dirty old man I guess I shouldn't be shocked that his thank you card had a note something to the effect of "where's the porn".
----------
You don't know that, because Steve never said what his wish was beyond changing photography. So how about you stop dissing him over something that isn't what he said and is what some folks are claiming he meant by the vague phrase he did use
I'd take that as evidence that they are in fact interested in this market. Apple puts way more care and way more effort into their phone camera than other makers. Sure the 4S is a premium phone, but Apple started to include lots of software enhancements that show they really care about this.
Now imagine what they could do with bigger and better optics. Huge screen, serious optics, a bigger sensor, and the killer feature of Apple's camera would be... apps?
The other evidence comes from my Canon point and shoot - it's considered one of the best cheap point and shoot cameras, cost $300 when I bought it, takes pretty good pictures and the software is so goddamn awful that I never use it. And it's not internet-connected. But mainly the software - even figuring out how to turn off the flash is hard. While camera hardware improves all the time, software seems stuck in the dark ages.
Apple could make a killer camera using standard components with iOS as their competitive advantage, and with some usability improvements that would be trivial for Apple's interface designers. They wouldn't even have to do something special with the hardware, their software and industrial design alone would make them really competitive. Competitive enough? Not sure. But there's definitely a case to be made, and it's mostly how bad camera usability is.
I disagree. Photography as an art form hasn't been degraded at all by the rise of digital photography or accessibility.
That millions can take and share photos doesn't make those photos ART. They were basically crap (in an artistic sense) before and still are. By being exposed to so much crap all the time, folks can actually now see how much better real art photos are because they have a ready point of comparison.
If anything has been degraded it's those works of art that were created by careful use of digital manipulation. Now that all that crap is being coated with Instagram filters and such, people are associating all manipulations as the same kind of crap in a knee jerk reaction.
But the art of taking a photo hasn't really been negatively affected
Nokia is doing an excellent job providing recurrently the best point-and-shoot cameras a phone can have. N95, N8 and now the N808 are good examples.
If Apple enter the market of compact cameras, it would push the market of enthusiast phone cameras and could help Nokia business.
I think Apple could make a lot of money with an iOS, Social-networking 3d p&s camera.
If Apple enter the market of compact cameras, it would push the market of enthusiast phone cameras and could help Nokia business.
I think Apple could make a lot of money with an iOS, Social-networking 3d p&s camera.
True that. I know a lot of folks that know the technicals inside and out and still take crappy photos. Because they don't have a good artist eye for framing etc.
I see it a lot at work. Camera operators, DPs that know how to create a million different tricks. But don't know how to judge when you use them. So you get high speed and/or shaky cam stuff that really should have been slowed down and super crisp to make sure every detail is seen and understood. Its like they want to show off how smart they are rather than really create a good shot.
Because they are hardly likely to release a standalone device like a camera without the software support for 90% of the consumers out there.
Much as the same as we have iTunes for windows with the advent of the iPod and other iDevices.
Garageband is not tied to an external Apple hardware, its just software on a mac, hence there is no need for a Windows version.
See not that complicated to understand if you think about it
So if there is any truth to this, we should be seeing an iPhoto for Windows. If that happens then I'll believe this rumour, until then it's just fantasy
Apple making a stand alone camera doesn't equate to having iPhoto for Windows. Just having it read as a camera and import photos on Windows machines.
After all, the iPhone and iPad are cameras and they didn't make iPhoto for
Windows for those.
Heck you don't actually need iPhoto for the mac for those. You can use image capture or any one of a number of 3rd party Mac apps that include reading a digital camera to import
So because you didn't like it - it was crap ?
Maybe it just that what you produce is just crap....
It's had some updates but needs a proper revisional overhaul. Gosh that must be really hard to understand.
Oh that's why, you've gone and buried your head in the sand!
When you lose an application (soundtrack pro) or feature set (multi-camera work flow in the initial FCPX) in a new revision - it's more than just change, it is a degradation.
iDisk wasn't as buggy as you are saying and 'most folks' are forced to switch to other services because Apple is dropping it.
I'd rather trust iDisk to send a file to a printer, than something like Dropbox.
MobileMe Gallery was also VASTLY superior to photostream.
.
And if you read my first post I'm all for consumer driven focus, as long as its not at the detriment of other areas, and arguably that is the professional market.
Comparable to cheaper point and shoot cameras. It's far away from Panasonic LX, Fujifilm F or Canon S series. Only Nokia provides higher end p&s phone cameras today.
True points, however If Apple are going to go down the line of having a standalone camera, they will want to take advantage of the iTunes style revenue stream in regards to the Card and Albums and Prints that can be ordered through the software.
For that reason (extra $$$) they would release software support for Windows.