im kinda in the same boat....i think the quality is pretty good when using it for facetime and skype and we use the skype feature EVERYDAY.
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.
Camera = Elephant In The Room
- Thread starter sanford
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
im kinda in the same boat....i think the quality is pretty good when using it for facetime and skype and we use the skype feature EVERYDAY.
I think video for facetime is very acceptable, especially if you have a lot of light. I did a video call from my porch today in NY (the weather is incredible today), to my cousin in Arizona. Both of us had a lot of light and the video was extremely clear
I saw someone posted the perfect subject for the iPad Camera.
Seriously though. The low-quality camera defenders aren't thinking long term. They rely on a single argument about how "nobody wants to take a picture with an iPad" and completely ignore that the lack of quality and autofocus affects development on the iPad platform. If the hardware doesn't exist then developers cant write for it. It's 2011 so it isn't that weird to expect that quality hardware from a quality company have a camera that isn't so outdated. And by omitting it then all those great iPhone apps for check deposits, document scanning or those new barcodes simply cant be done until NEXT gen.
Plus, there's no denying that the experience of using a 10" viewfinder is unique and actually quite fun. So why would anyone NOT want a better camera rather than one that requires sitting in the glare-filled yard just to get optimal lighting and reduce on grain.
Seriously though. The low-quality camera defenders aren't thinking long term. They rely on a single argument about how "nobody wants to take a picture with an iPad" and completely ignore that the lack of quality and autofocus affects development on the iPad platform. If the hardware doesn't exist then developers cant write for it. It's 2011 so it isn't that weird to expect that quality hardware from a quality company have a camera that isn't so outdated. And by omitting it then all those great iPhone apps for check deposits, document scanning or those new barcodes simply cant be done until NEXT gen.
Plus, there's no denying that the experience of using a 10" viewfinder is unique and actually quite fun. So why would anyone NOT want a better camera rather than one that requires sitting in the glare-filled yard just to get optimal lighting and reduce on grain.
As I said in another thread, knowing something about cameras and image formats, I think it's not inconceivable that at least part of the issue with the camera is software based in origin. Looking at the smeary pictures that come out of the back facing camera it appears to me that they're suffering from over aggressive JPEG compression.
Maybe 3 verys is too much. Still, that's just ONE of the things the Moto Xoom has going for it hardware wise. It also has no backlight bleeding at full brightness. Boom.
It might have bleeding, but who can tell on that screen. Boom!!!
It might have bleeding, but who can tell on that screen. Boom!!!
Yes, I hate that the XOOM screen has no light bleeding and is a higher resolution. You got me.
Just to add personal experience, I can understand both sides as I used my Ipad 2 this weekend in the exact manner many of you refer to. I took my ipad 2 with us on our recent hiking / bouldering trip into Joshua tree, and I'll try to upload some pics / videos later from dawn until dusk so that you can see the quality under variable conditions. The low quality of stills is annoying, and even in optimal lighting they are just ok, but in good, outdoor lighting, the video is actually pretty solid (i've skipped a generation of phones with 8mp / 5mp shooters though, so admittedly I'm more satisfied than some would be), and the front facing camera looks pretty good in good lighting.
Again though, I do understand some people's concerns. At the same time, I don't think it will prevent any augmented reality apps from being developed (they can simply use the video function rather than still camera function to accomplish all the same things), and while still's can be bad, assuming you have decent light they are definitely suitable for capturing a quick funny moment, or, if worse comes to worse, you can always just shoot a quick video. Really though, complaining will do nothing, I mean either buy an ipad or don't, if the camera's are your deciding factor than no, you probably shouldn't get an ipad because you won't be satisfied, let someone who's priorities aren't camera stills get it if you know you won't be satisfied.
Again though, I do understand some people's concerns. At the same time, I don't think it will prevent any augmented reality apps from being developed (they can simply use the video function rather than still camera function to accomplish all the same things), and while still's can be bad, assuming you have decent light they are definitely suitable for capturing a quick funny moment, or, if worse comes to worse, you can always just shoot a quick video. Really though, complaining will do nothing, I mean either buy an ipad or don't, if the camera's are your deciding factor than no, you probably shouldn't get an ipad because you won't be satisfied, let someone who's priorities aren't camera stills get it if you know you won't be satisfied.
If you're looking for a high-quality still camera integrated with your tablet, please don't buy an iPad 2! I really only want the camera for video chat, which most reports say it does just fine for. I have a 7MP 10x optical zoom camera for shooting real pictures with, and a 1.3MP camera on my crappy phone for when I want to take a quick picture on the go for some reason. I don't need one on my iPad as well - so please save the iPads and their crappy cameras for me!!!
It's not about taking still photos with the iPad it's about having a functional camera.
Like "scanning" a document or receipt. Reading bar codes for inventory.
For me, scanning would be a massive one.
Like "scanning" a document or receipt. Reading bar codes for inventory.
For me, scanning would be a massive one.
As impressive as cameras on phones/tablets/whatever have gotten over the years they still don't hold a candle to a decent dedicated camera.
My year old D5000 blows anything any phones can produce. Hell, my S90 kills anything an iPhone or N9 can produce and it's like less than a pound.
I'm not saying getting a better camera would be bad, I'm just saying that a 10 inch tablet shouldn't be the goto device for preserving a moment....
My year old D5000 blows anything any phones can produce. Hell, my S90 kills anything an iPhone or N9 can produce and it's like less than a pound.
I'm not saying getting a better camera would be bad, I'm just saying that a 10 inch tablet shouldn't be the goto device for preserving a moment....
I saw someone posted the perfect subject for the iPad Camera.
Seriously though. The low-quality camera defenders aren't thinking long term. They rely on a single argument about how "nobody wants to take a picture with an iPad" and completely ignore that the lack of quality and autofocus affects development on the iPad platform. If the hardware doesn't exist then developers cant write for it. It's 2011 so it isn't that weird to expect that quality hardware from a quality company have a camera that isn't so outdated. And by omitting it then all those great iPhone apps for check deposits, document scanning or those new barcodes simply cant be done until NEXT gen.
Plus, there's no denying that the experience of using a 10" viewfinder is unique and actually quite fun. So why would anyone NOT want a better camera rather than one that requires sitting in the glare-filled yard just to get optimal lighting and reduce on grain.
Hilarious picture followed by signs of consumer intelligence. Doubleplusgood.
It boils down to what you said, future applications and uses, and changing expectations. As in, gee, who in the world would ever want to take a picture with a CELL PHONE? *cough*
The iPhone also has a better camera than any of the current Macs. Why doesn't everyone complain about that?
The iPhone also has a better camera than any of the current Macs. Why doesn't everyone complain about that?
Because Macs are so 2010.
The iPhone also has a better camera than any of the current Macs. Why doesn't everyone complain about that?
have you looked on the Macs forum thread?
Here's my opinion on the cameras after using my iPad 2 for a week. Honestly, I have completely forgotten that my iPad even has cameras. I've used Facetime a couple of times (which works great BTW), but have had no desire to take still photos with it. The only time I would use it is if a tornado formed in front of me and I couldn't find my phone or digital camera, or my wife's phone or digital camera to take a picture with. For still photos, the iPad 2 is a last resort device. Apple put these low MP cameras in the iPad 2 because it was their polite way of saying, "the iPad 2 should not be used as a camera for still photos". The form factor of the iPad just doesn't allow for an enjoyable user experience when taking pictures.
With all that the iPad 2 can do, wanting to take pictures with it ranks just below using it to reflect sunlight on the wall and watching my cat chase it.
With all that the iPad 2 can do, wanting to take pictures with it ranks just below using it to reflect sunlight on the wall and watching my cat chase it.
Perhaps, but I grew to really dislike the screen on my Xoom. The iPad screen is FAR better.
like justify-a-bad-camera effect.
or justify-a-cheap-camera effect.
or justify-that-i-have-been-conned effect
