Sidebar Sidebar
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?

Goldarn said:
The problem with cameras is the most important part is something Apple doesn't produce, and never has produced — the lens.
Click to expand...

So, they do what Sony and Panasonic have done and pay money to a good lens maker (Panasonic cameras have Leica-branded lenses, and ISTR some Sony cameras have Zeiss-branded lenses). I do understand that "-branded" doesn't mean "lovingly hand-crafted by" but they can license the designs and, if Apple feel they need it, the brand.

Heck, have Kodak pawned the "Ektar" brand yet?

I can imagine a "travel zoom" camera (like the Panasonic TZ range) with a touchscreen covering the whole back, pinch to zoom etc. and iPhoto on board.

"Siri, get rid of that redeye. Siri, can you get that sunset? Siri, can you make the background blurred? Siri, stick that one on my Facebook wall!"
 
"many users are abandoning standalone point-and-shoot cameras for increasingly powerful cameras included on their smartphones"

I don't know anyone who abandoned a camera for a phone. A phone might satisfy someone who doesn't have a camera, but if a person cares about image quality, and wants control over the image he/she is making, no phone will suffice.
 
absolutely no chance. Point and shoots are dead, and Apple's way of reinventing photography was putting good cameras in phones. I realize they didn't do it alone, but either way, photography has been reinvented
 
Old News

They already did. It's called the iPhone.

http://www.flickr.com/cameras/

99_graph_main_8395249c35.png

Apple iPhone 4
Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Nikon D90
Canon EOS REBEL T2i
Apple iPhone 4S
 
Last edited:
fa8362 said:
"many users are abandoning standalone point-and-shoot cameras for increasingly powerful cameras included on their smartphones"

I don't know anyone who abandoned a camera for a phone. A phone might satisfy someone who doesn't have a camera, but if a person cares about image quality, and wants control over the image he/she is making, no phone will suffice.
Click to expand...

Point and shoot cameras are being over taken by cameras on phones (look at the stats for photo sharing and which cameras are the most popular). Yes, a camera on a phone will never match an SLR or a Mirrorless camera (with a good sensor). But most point and shoots usually have pretty iffy sensors and optics that a phone camera can get pretty close to.

That isn't the issue though. The point of taking photos for many people is capturing a moment. You can't see a moment, hop in your time machine, go fetch your point and shoot and come back and take the photo. You have use what you have on you which is the camera on the phone you have in your pocket. Basically, you have the wrong idea what the job is. It isn't to take high resolution images. It is to easily share moments. Point and shoots fail because they're not always there and it is very hard to share even if you do have your point and shoot on you. You might as well argue why iPads will never replace a computer because they can't be used in a render farm.

This does leave an open market for Apple to expand into (the higher end). But who knows if Apple wants to go there (they could make significant improvements but they may not care to do so).

fa8362 said:
And when the "real" camera manufacturers entered, Apple camera sales died.
Click to expand...

You realize that the QuickTake was made by Kodak, right? One of the "real" camera manufacturers. You're really showing your ignorance on this matter. Either that or you're trolling.
 
Last edited:
NAG said:
Point and shoots fail because they're not always there and it is very hard to share even if you do have your point and shoot on you.
Click to expand...

That's nonsense. This phone camera stuff is all about younger people who don't own a camera. Any idiot can use a point and shoot or a dslr. Just put it on program automatic (P) and press the button.
 
justjohn025 said:
I would buy an Apple DSLR
Click to expand...

I wouldn't.

A fortune invested in lenses is a far more compelling reason for brand loyalty than a few quid in apps.

A point & Shoot, as the article states could be a hit though if it used some of the apple ecosystem. Airplay & video+photo editing apps on the camera itself could be hugely popular with not only consumers but also street photographers.
 
TennisandMusic said:
Labeling important camera features as "legacy" is a hostile comment aimed at the current pro market.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the Altair people were just as mad when Apple decided that switches and LEDs were legacy.

TennisandMusic said:
Why can't it just be a camera aimed at non enthusiasts? Why does it have to also paint the more serious tools in a negative light?
Click to expand...

Why can't it be a great camera that is a serious tool that delivers professional results to the masses? If it can streamline and simplify a complex and complicated process and deliver the same end result, why would this be a bad thing?

TennisandMusic said:
I just find it incredibly ironic and disappointing that Apple has done a complete 180 on how they used to position themselves.
Click to expand...

I see this as *exactly the same way* that Apple has positioned themselves since the late 70s! They want to provide powerful, elegant, and easy-to-use tools to provide results that were previously limited to a smaller group of people.
 
fa8362 said:
That's nonsense. This phone camera stuff is all about younger people who don't own a camera. Any idiot can use a point and shoot or a dslr. Just put it on program automatic (P) and press the button.
Click to expand...

Cool, so does the P stand for pants, as in lets you fit an SLR or point and shoot in your pants?

If you don't mean that, you might want to check what you quoted because what I said had absolutely nothing to do with camera modes, troll.
 
G4DP said:
Already available with Wifi SD cards. Samsung have already for this with their new point and shoot models as well. Cannot see what Apple could bring to the table on this.
Click to expand...

WiFi cards and Samsung use iCloud? I didn't realize.
 
bdavis89 said:
Yes, and leave the computer industry to IBM, the music player industry to Sony, the phone industry to Nokia, and the tablet industry to Microsoft. amiright? :rolleyes:

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple is researching these type things, but probably to apply to existing products.
Click to expand...

If anything Apple is in the best situation now ever - it has the software, OS, the manufacturing process know how for hardware, and lots of cash, not to mention talent and r&d. NOW is the perfect time to venture into new markets and challenge to dominate them, wherever electronic gadgetry can make an impact.
 
"given that many users are abandoning standalone point-and-shoot cameras for increasingly powerful cameras included on their smartphones"

Uhhh, so why would Apple make a standalone camera again?
 
iPhone and iPod cameras are pretty nice, sure, but some people like to:

  • Mount the camera on a tripod (I'm sure there are adapters you can put your device in that can mount on a tripod, but that's yet another purchase).
  • Hold the camera up to their eye to frame up a picture, instead of holding their device out in front of them. I've seen a lot of blurry phone pictures taken by people that can't hold their iPhone still while taking a photo.

Some have mentioned direct upload to iCloud, which would be nice. Another option I'd like to see is the ability to dump (via BlueTooth?) images right into an iPhone/iPad/iPod/Mac as they're shot, and use software on the touch/Mac to edit/crop/etc... before uploading to social sites, as well as the ability to just send from the camera (if near Wi-Fi).

For a tripod mounted camera, it'd be nice to have full control from an iTouch/Mac. Things like zoom, focus, etc... Focus wouldn't be an issue if they use a Light Field camera, of course. I'd like to see the option to use RAW format, too. Another thing that could be controlled by a touch or computer would be timed images... Not just countdown so you can jump into the picture, too, but set a time of day to shoot. And time-lapse... Tell it to shoot an image/frame every x seconds/minutes and do it for x minutes/hours. Maybe motion sensing trigger... Set it up to see what critter is getting into the garbage cans behind the garage?

There's all kinds of things that could be built into a camera that nobody's doing right now. Not so much in imaging features, but in controlling it.
 
I think the possibility that's being missed here is that the light field technology that Lytro uses can be put in an iPhone form factor. The only reason Lytro is as large as it is? The optical zoom apparatus. Remove that, and the components will fit inside a phone.

Jobs must have read Ren Ng's research paper back in 2006, and had been watching the story unfold with great interest... I would have. One of Jobs' gifts was being able to see seemingly unrelated pieces of technology fit together to make something greater than the sum of the parts.

iPhone would have a very significant edge in redefining how we capture and share our lives by giving users in a social setting the ability to manipulate depth of focus after the fact.

Call it a novelty, if you will... But, aside from vastly reducing capture time (the most time consuming part of the cycle is autofocus), the whole scope of photography as a shared experience may be transformed by light field, because it turns every photograph into a process of discovery: Different people will focus on different things in the frame, quite literally.

Will it replace SLR's? No, not for the professional and semipro segments.... But it will most certainly transform mass usage of the medium for years to come. This is Bladerunner-style technology in the palm of your hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back