A better camera isn't only useful for photographs. Augmented Reality apps will benefit from higher-resolution scanning, not to mention banking software will have an easier time scanning checks for deposit with higher res images.
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.
iPad 2 to have only 1-megapixel camera??? Are you F kidding me???
- Thread starter sniffies
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
my thoughts exactly, Just means we are all going to have a dumb looking hole in the backs of our cases.
Maybe not for serious photography but as an all in one solution to simply tell a story through pictures and video and upload it, yeah.
If you're doing that then is the number of pixels critically important anyway? A 1 megapixel image is still pretty large on a computer screen. Higher resolutions would give more scope for editing/cropping but 1 megapixel images could be used.
What I'd say is more important is the accuracy with which the sensor captures light. I'd take a lower res sensor if the higher res sensor produced pictures with inaccurate colours. This isn't to say that I think the iPod Touch camera is a good one; I haven't used one so I don't know.
1 MP is more than HD (0.9 MP is 720p), so "1 MP" doesn't tell me anything. I'll wait for some photos from it.
Your will ≠ our will.
Can we simplify this debate.
If Apple fit a 1MB camera unit into iPad2 it will be correct as that's all that's needed, it's the obvious choice, anything else would be stupid.
If Apple fit a 5MB camera unit into iPad2 it will be correct as Apple are a premium brand, and it's the obvious choice, anything else would be stupid.
See, it's easy
If Apple fit a 1MB camera unit into iPad2 it will be correct as that's all that's needed, it's the obvious choice, anything else would be stupid.
If Apple fit a 5MB camera unit into iPad2 it will be correct as Apple are a premium brand, and it's the obvious choice, anything else would be stupid.
See, it's easy
Does it mean that iPad 5 will still have a 1-megapixel camera just because they can't think of a scenario?
I'm sorry, but that's just plain stupid.
Then you don't buy the Steve Jobs minimalist design philosophy. Sorry, but if you value Apple elegance of design, you are going to have to accept the corollary, "if we can't think of a reason to have it, it doesn't go in."
Can we simplify this debate.
If Apple fit a 1MB camera unit into iPad2 it will be correct as that's all that's needed, it's the obvious choice, anything else would be stupid.
If Apple fit a 5MB camera unit into iPad2 it will be correct as Apple are a premium brand, and it's the obvious choice, anything else would be stupid.
See, it's easy
Let's compromise and meet half-way. I'd like a 3MP camera, you know, like on the iPhone 3Gs. I just got an iPod touch with 1MP and the pics are grainy compared to my iPhone 3Gs.
I'd be thrilled with 5MP, but 3MP will be pretty good.
(Although, 1MP will be better than 0.0MP like on iPad 1, I suppose.)
This is probably the best comment on this thread. Everyone who's complaining that 1MP is rubbish should take a look at the current iPad and be happy that at least the iPad 2 will most likely even have a camera.
Facetime is the only real reason why the iPad will even have a camera, its the whole reason a camera was added to the iPod Touch.
I have a Nikon D3...got it the month it came out...paid a pretty penny for one of the fastest state if the art focusing systems. One of the first AF camera I have ever owned (and I have owned/own a bunch), that would will track a bird in flight. But while the D3 is the master of the night and top notch for shooting BIFs, flying football players, or brides walking down isles in dimly lit churches, it doesn't fit in my pocket, nor do I carry it into Lowes, Outback, etc. Granted, the iPad doesn't fit in my pocket either, but it sure is good for going just about anywhere.
My point was that I can take a good picture with even a bad camera. Availability is the key. If it is with me, I am going to get good shots. I keep a small dslr in the car for those random moments on the road. But if I know I a
Going to be shooting, I take a netter camera, matching the form factor with the situation. And frequently, I shoot with multiple cameras around my neck.
The point is, a good camera on th iPad that I always have with me is worth a lot compared to having to put any p&s camera of any size in my pants pocket, or in without eu iPad bag, etc.
I don't see why people are so against the iPad getting a good camera. I think it lacks vision on a persons part to deny the usefulness of a good, iP4 level camera on the iPad. It doesn't really need to be higher res as it does a decent close focusing imager. But why not give it the same sensor as th iPhone?
Last edited:
I'm not against the iPad getting a camera. I do think it fills a niche market, and believe most of the real world use and benefit would come from the video side of things.
Personally I would much rather carry a decent point and shoot in my pocket for everyday stuff. Even with a camera the likes of the iPhone4, you're still getting a mediocre camera much weaker than any point and shoot that could take its place.
To each his own though. But I still believe users like you fall into that niche. I certainly wouldn't complain about getting a nice camera in the iPad. I'd much rather just have the simple connectivity of a usb cable to quickly plug in my camera to the iPad. I know about the camera cable, but a standard usb would be preferable.
I am not so sure about that statement. My favorite P&S is a Canon SX130 (or earlier 110, 120). Fantastic camera. But it is NOT a put it in your pocket and lets just take it with you every day camera. You got to at least THINK you might be taking pictures. Or, even smaller, but not as capable, the Canon S95. SWEET camera...but that is NOT a $50 camera mentioned above...more like $300+. ANd you still gotta be planning on taking pictures. I am not just going to carry a S95 in my pocket every day.
And, as far as the quality of the iP4. The iP4 OS is the ONLY phone on the market, that I know of, that has BUILT in HDR. Granted, it is in part to make up for a weaker exposure system. But the gate has been opened. ALL digital cameras lack the dynamic range of our eyes. So, for Apple to push an innovative standard such as in camera HDR...is...well, pretty freaking awesome. On the other hand, normal cameras already do this, but they don't give you an option unless you shoot raw. That is what the JPEG DiGi processing engines do...processes the picture and spits out the best DR it can. At least the iPhone give you that option...WITH HDR or NOT.
But the beauty of the iP4 is not the quality, but the connectivity...and the dang APPS. WOW!!!
If I weigh my options, for just a little recreational shooting, the iP4 is a really sweet option.
Check out this guys gallery: http://toddhargisphotography.com/Art/iPhone-4-gallery/15503819_CuAUK#1165820149_x4cUJ
He is one of the best photographers that I personally know...and has some of the best Nikon cameras and glass that Nikon makes, like the 85/1.4 G or the 14-24, as well as a D3 and D700. But take a look at his statement at the top of that gallery for the iP4. Pretty much sums up why have a good camera on a portable all-in-one device. I don't really care for the Holga style of photos, but he has take some REALLY good photos that aren't in that gallery that he has sent me just playing around with the camera.
I am not saying an iPad with a camera be as clever as an iP4, but Apple SHOULD NOT DUMB down iPad2 for future generation appeal!
Me in a Niche? Well, I believe we remember what we photograph...and like the Canon Commercial says...life's a trip...how are you going to remember the journey. Fact of the matter is, if you do something, and you DON'T take a picture, you aren't going to remember it for any length of time. Defining our life by our pictures...is...well, pretty important to me...and I think should be for everybody.
Last edited:
I most certainly agree. But there is a massive thread of hypocrisy running through the members of this, and other Apple forums. The Apple users argue that high quality cameras are so crucial you would think their life depended on it. "The best camera is the one you have with you" they say. And on and on.
I carry a Lumix that is small, light & puts smartphone cameras to shame. It takes little space in a backpack or messenger bag I'm already carrying for my 11" MBA anyway.
So while I fully respect we all have different preferences and usage patterns, why the zealots must be so extreme makes no sense.
If you aren't going to carry a tiny 6.5 ounce S95 with you, what are the odds you would have a 1.5lb iPad with you?
BTW the S95 is actually more capable. It shoots raw, has faster lens, and a larger (better) sensor. The SX130 is just a basic superzoom, other than zoom range the the S95 is better.
I couldn't care less about a camera on the iPad. I'll never use it. FaceTime on my iPhone 4 is a hassle. Would never use it on the iPad.
With that said, Apple SHOULD have shipped the original iPad with dual cameras and 512MB of RAM.
If the rumor about a 1MP camera is true, it doesn't surprise me at all. Just like the iPod touch, this is another example of Apple putting profits before customers and pushing the sales of the more profitable device (iPhone) ahead of whats best for the customer. Same with the original iPad launch. No reason it couldn't have had 512MB of RAM and dual cameras. Yet Apple saved that feature for the iPhone 4. Why? To continue pushing sales of the iPhone 3GS, push sales of the iPhone 4 when it launched, and attempt to get us first generation buyers to upgrade.
It's going to take a very significant upgrade for me to even considering buying a new iPad.
With that said, Apple SHOULD have shipped the original iPad with dual cameras and 512MB of RAM.
If the rumor about a 1MP camera is true, it doesn't surprise me at all. Just like the iPod touch, this is another example of Apple putting profits before customers and pushing the sales of the more profitable device (iPhone) ahead of whats best for the customer. Same with the original iPad launch. No reason it couldn't have had 512MB of RAM and dual cameras. Yet Apple saved that feature for the iPhone 4. Why? To continue pushing sales of the iPhone 3GS, push sales of the iPhone 4 when it launched, and attempt to get us first generation buyers to upgrade.
It's going to take a very significant upgrade for me to even considering buying a new iPad.
iPad 2 - 3MP Camera
I was reading all of the news articles about the iPad 2 having a 1MP camera too, but that didnt seem right, so I got the iOS 4.3 beta firmware for the iPad and did some digging. I found in a plist file, in a framework, a description of photos taken on the iPad being 3MP. I posted more information about this on my blog: http://www.chrisgalz.com/blog/
I was reading all of the news articles about the iPad 2 having a 1MP camera too, but that didnt seem right, so I got the iOS 4.3 beta firmware for the iPad and did some digging. I found in a plist file, in a framework, a description of photos taken on the iPad being 3MP. I posted more information about this on my blog: http://www.chrisgalz.com/blog/
iPad 2 camera needs to be just as good (or better b/c it is a bigger screen) then the iPhone 4 camera.
I will buy it either way. I decided in november I wanted one, but it is not urgent and I decided I would wait. I just want it to come out at this point...
I will buy it either way. I decided in november I wanted one, but it is not urgent and I decided I would wait. I just want it to come out at this point...
The iPad having a bigger screen doesn't affect anything.
A 1 megapixel picture (in 4:3) is 1152x864, which is a slightly higher resolution than the iPad screen itself. That's why some are suspecting a 1mp camera might only be used for video.
A 3mp image (as some are speculating will be the camera resolution) is 2000x1504, a much higher resolution than the iPad screen.
I've seen some amazing photos taken with the iPhone but most of those are crap. There's really nothing interesting about them and they just have the same boring filters applied to them.
Last edited:
As countless others have pointed out you need to reconcile resolution requirements with reasonable file sizes. Banking software requires scanning and transmission of check images to their servers. That needs to be done quickly and "quickly" means small file sizes. Do you really need a 3-5MP camera to capture a check-sized image from 6-8 inches away? Similarly, augmented reality uses video resolution which is also under 1MP.
Regardless, everybody's getting their panties in a bunch over rank speculation.
Indeed, and this is why the iPhone's 4 camera has too many megapixels.
It should only have 1 or at most 3.
To be honest I wouldn't mind if the iPhone had 3MP as long as the sensor was the same. More MP are only needed if I want to blow up my pics, which I don't.