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
It feels like this last week or so has been a roller coaster of hype for the iPad 2
Higher res screen, then that was dismissed
Multi touch gestures, then that was dismissed as a test
Now we are on the slippery slope back to reality.
iPod 4th gen equivalent cameras, USB ( eu law says we need USB), slight CPU boost, possibly dual core, sd card reader. That'll be it this year in my opinion
Higher res screen, then that was dismissed
Multi touch gestures, then that was dismissed as a test
Now we are on the slippery slope back to reality.
iPod 4th gen equivalent cameras, USB ( eu law says we need USB), slight CPU boost, possibly dual core, sd card reader. That'll be it this year in my opinion
Jason Beck
macrumors 68000
The dual core and sd card reader will be cool though. I just wish they didn't cut corners with the camera after everyone wanting one so bad on it. It's like "Here, you can have a 99c Big Mac."
Some of you guys don't make sense by saying that one of the reasons iPad will have only 1-megapixel camera is that it's "big, not portable enough" to take pictures with. Well, then why does iPod touch (being as portable as iPhone) have only 1-megapixel camera??? Where's the logic behind it? 😕
bpaluzzi
macrumors 6502a
Fizzoid
macrumors 68020
It would seem at least 1 professional photorapher would 🙄
The logic behind your Touch only having a 1MP camera is so if you want better you buy the more expensive iPhone4 🙂
I do not understand the big deal. Who is really going to use an iPad for a camera. Yes, I know someone will use it to take a photo here and there, but lets get real. Its there for video chatting, document scanning, barcode scanning and other things like that. Apple is smart enough to know the vast majority of people are not going to hold up an iPad to take a photo.
Jason
I think some people here are missing the point of the iPad cameras. (including the OP)
a. If you want high quality photos, buy yourself a proper digital camera. Apple has no obligations to cater for the camera market. If they were, they'd make cameras.
b. You can't take photos properly with a 10" device.
c. Think how Apple are pushing facetime. It'll be more for that so people can show images from behind the iPad rather than turning it around.
d. Anyone expecting a 5MP+ camera in the iPad (like the double res screen) is in lah-lah land. Better to expect little and wait for the surprises Apple will bring to the iPad 2. You won't be as disappointed.
a. If you want high quality photos, buy yourself a proper digital camera. Apple has no obligations to cater for the camera market. If they were, they'd make cameras.
b. You can't take photos properly with a 10" device.
c. Think how Apple are pushing facetime. It'll be more for that so people can show images from behind the iPad rather than turning it around.
d. Anyone expecting a 5MP+ camera in the iPad (like the double res screen) is in lah-lah land. Better to expect little and wait for the surprises Apple will bring to the iPad 2. You won't be as disappointed.
Disappointed, but not surprised. They're doing this so that they can have a 5mp in the iPad 3 or 4. However, they could just be copying code over from the iPod Touch and somehow it managed to get in to the beta. Well I'll be xooming off now. 🙂
Winni
macrumors 68040
Some people might be tempted to mount the iPad on a tripod and shoot a VIDEO of their family's Christmas party, child's birthday or just an evening with friends. And that person might be more than tempted to edit the entire thing with an iMovie edition for the iPad and then upload it to some free web space (also known as "cloud service") to share it with everybody.
THIS is where a low quality 1MP camera quickly becomes a big deal, and this is what you will actually see people doing with an iPad with a built-in rear camera. Photos are sooo last century. It's all about VIDEO.
colmaclean
macrumors 68000
I'd venture this market is remarkably small, possibly in the region of 5 people worldwide.
Seriously, that argument is getting way too old.
According to your logic, wouldn't it suffice just to include a 0.1-megapixel camera? I mean, why waste loads of money on a 1-megapixel camera?
colmaclean
macrumors 68000
colmaclean
macrumors 68000
As colmaclean said, it's a communication/multimedia/business device. Serious photographers would get a decent SLR camera. Even so, amateur photographers could buy a compact for pennies and still get better photos. The 10" frame would make your hands shake like hell.
Video for facetime/general youtube makes sense. They're the people to target. Realistically, it'd make more sense for editing to be much snappier on the iPad and allow cameras to connect directly to it (make use of the internal space).
To pro's, a 1-mega pixel camera on an iPad 2 is a waste. To Apple, it makes financial sense to provide a communication camera. If anyone brings up "why does the iPhone 4 have 5MP then?". For one, it's a camera sized object. For two, they don't have costs of a 10" LCD IPS screen to fork out on.
anim8or
macrumors 65816
0.9 megapixels is enough pixel real estate to produce a 720p HD image.. those who think that a device like an iPad requires more then please explain how it would benefit you?
I am in the camp that you should buy a device that fits your needs and is built for that purpose... everyone is getting lazy these days wanting less devices and more all in ones.
I agree that integrating certain devices like ipod and cellphone is brilliant and then adding a camera to that setup even better, but i certainly do not see a device as big as the ipad replacing my digital camera... and i dont see very many people disagreeing with me on that point.
This is obviously apple's thinking behind using a lower resolution camera, despite what you think less people are going to want to use the ipad to take pictures so why should apple pend more money on a component that will not be necessary... and then pass on that cost to consumers?
Finally, we're just a millimeter away from getting to my point:
Would you not prefer to have an even clearer FaceTime with, say, 3-megapixel camera versus 0.1-megapixel "chessboard"?
colmaclean
macrumors 68000
I think you need to read a bit more about how pixels work.
3 megapixels gives you a "2048×1536" resolution. Too much for conferencing and would require more power to reprocess the image down to a reasonable size ready to encode for facetime. It's all down to the CCD quality more than the megapixel value as well.
I wish some people would use their common sense more. Apple aren't a specification beater to gain sales. It's how the tech is used and the way it's marketed/sold.
It's not the end of the world if it's 1-megapixel. I'm sure you'll end up still buying an iPad 2 and saying it's the best thing in the world 🙂.