Is .7MP really that bad? or are people complaining just to do so?

Discussion in 'iPod touch' started by applealex, Sep 11, 2010.

  1. applealex macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2009
    Location:
    California
    #1
    From what I've been told, the .7MP photos are fine and even look good on Facebook. it's only when you try to blow them up or print them that you run into issues.

    I would think Apple put a camera on the iPod touch for your basic in the moment photos, like a quick picture of a friend or say you walk down the street and see a car accident you can whip out your iPod and take a shot.

    Obviously if you're going on a vacation or to a wedding you'd use a separate camera with higher megapixels no?
     
  2. M-5 macrumors 65816

    M-5

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    #2
    Apple put the cameras on the iPod touch for FaceTime.
     
  3. applealex thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2009
    Location:
    California
    #3
    Mainly yes but there had to have been a secondary reason why

    like why the DS had cameras
     
  4. alust2013 macrumors 601

    alust2013

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Location:
    On the fence
    #4
    Exactly, but people complain to complain. Sure they could have put a nicer camera in there, but who doesn't have a phone as well, and most of them come with nicer cameras and easier ways to share photos. They save on cost with that, and differentiate it from the iPhone more as well. But you're exactly right, if people want better pics, they know better than to use a camera that is simply a secondary function of another device.
     
  5. vanzantapple macrumors 6502

    vanzantapple

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    Location:
    USA
    #5
    They are complaining because the quality of the still pics are OK at best with good lighting(ok for facebook pics etc). The back camera does HD video pretty well. And from what I've seen both cameras work well together with Facetime.

    There are pictures and videos taken with the iPT4 on this site, youtube, flickr, and probably many more. Check them out.

    What is...IS. Apple isn't gonna suck all those new iPods back in and put a better camera in it. Even if they should. LOL. So check out the pics, videos, reviews, fights(forum battles) :D . Then decide. That's what I'm going to do.

    :apple:
     
  6. sam10685 macrumors 68000

    sam10685

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #6
    People are babies sometimes. Just because 5 or more MP's is available, .7 is a horrible thing I think...:rolleyes:
     
  7. mark28 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    #7
    0.7 is way too low by today's standard for a camera. You can't make Full HD pictures with 0.7 MP.

    I don't think I'll upgrade my 3rd generation iPod Touch to the 4th generation.

    I'll wait for IPS display and a better camera next year or maybe get an iPhone 5 if I plan on getting a new phone :p
     
  8. tubemonkey macrumors 6502

    tubemonkey

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #8
    It'll do for emailing and social websites; but will find better use scanning barcodes, identifying landmarks, translating text, etc.
     
  9. fswmacguy macrumors 6502

    fswmacguy

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    #9
    It's a .7MP camera that shoots at a resolution of 960 x 720.

    We should remember that megapixels is only the shorthand way of writing the maximum resolution of an image that the camera is capable of taking.

    960 * 720 = 691,200 pixels / 1,000,000 = .6912 = ~.7MP

    Megapixels is not "how good the pictures are", it's just the resolution.
     
  10. Ace134blue macrumors 6502a

    Ace134blue

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    #10
    And having a camera in a mp3 player isnt standard either, so pointless excuse
     
  11. D4ng3rchris macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    #11
    No, it's not that bad. People are just a bunch of whiners.


    Completely agree.
     
  12. Abscissa macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Location:
    VA
    #12
    At what megapixel do stills become HD?

    ----

    People are complaining WAY to much. An iPod Touch is the BEST mp3 player on the market...at least in my opinion and others I'm sure. It does so much more than other mp3 players. Portable game platform - not to mention, Need for Speed or something is on the PSP and like $30, on the App Store it's like $5. But I guess people could say that the game isn't complete because it costs a 6th of that of a full version. Anyways, it has the support of over 250,000 apps?! That's crazy IMO. HD video? Great! A $200 FlipHD is 8GB and does nothing other than record videos. For $30 more you get music, apps, EVERYTHING. I could go on...
     
  13. fswmacguy macrumors 6502

    fswmacguy

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    #13
    Arguably, .7MP could be considered HD. It's the point where the vertical pixels are at 720px. Though, HD is usually just referred to with video, where 720p (progressive scan) and 720i (interlaced) are different.


    I think so too.
     
  14. Abscissa macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Location:
    VA
    #14
    I understand, I was asking him sarcastically because he said the photos aren't close to HD even though photos aren't "HD". It just makes me laugh when people complain, don't know what they are talking about. They are the people that go buy a 21MP point and shoot or some crap. lol
     
  15. sam10685 macrumors 68000

    sam10685

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #15
    It's an MP3 player. It shouldn't have any camera's at all. Be thankful and don't moan about little stuff like this.
     
  16. Owen.C macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2010
    #16
    The resolution is bad, so the quality is pretty poor.

    But worse is that even in sunlight the pictures are covered in noise and the lens is awful, so in sunlight you have flare.

    No the end of the world, but it could of been much better and actually much more useful.
     
  17. mrpuffy macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    #17
    I think they should have made it better [​IMG] its pretty pointless putting it on if its terrible
     
  18. jmor macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    #18
    I feel like they could have made it better, it is a little disappointing, and they need to get over the obsession with thinness to get something better in there.
     
  19. HLdan macrumors 603

    HLdan

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    #19
    That's a horrible idea. "Give it to me perfect, or don't give it to me at all"??? That's a poor attitude. Last year people were complaining there's no camera on the iPod Touch. An "OK" is better than no camera. Besides I would much rather use it as an HD video camera and for still pics use a dedicated camera. An AIO device just doesn't cut it for everything.
     
  20. ntrigue macrumors 68040

    ntrigue

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
  21. fertilized-egg macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    #21
    Megapixel myth, image quality & stuff

    OK, so lots of opinions and uninformed discussions here. Please allow me to try explain this stuff: (no, I'm no expert. Just read a lot off stuff online ;) )

    - Why is mega pixel important? Well, digital imaging is sampling. Put it simply, it's the process of converting the analog stuff into digital data. The more mega pixel there are, more detail we can have.(higher rate of sampling) However detail/resolving power is only ONE of many factors that determine image quality. We'll get to it later.

    - How many mega pixels? It depends on various factors, but first, the most limiting factor is the resolution of the output device - i.e. the display. Once you have enough mega pixels to fill the display, then more mega pixel is really only wasted unless you plan to manipulate images or zoom in to see further detail. On a related note, yes, 12 mega pixels and 5 mega pixels don't make a lick of difference unless you zoom in or print large, assuming everything else is the same(a big assumption). More on this later.

    - Then the iPod Touch's camera is as good as it gets for the iPod screen right? Well, not quite. Theoretically it has enough pixels to fill up the "Retina" display but the actual resolving power/detail isn't really good enough to fully use the screen. To be more precise, most modern digital cameras use something called "Bayer interpolation" to make up the images from the sensors. It's a nice efficient process for colors but has a side effect of "losing" some detail. In other words, 10 mega pixel pictures don't really have full theoretical details you'd expect from 10 million pixels. So to get the "true" 0.7 mega pixel worth of sharp detail, you have to take a larger mega pixel picture and downsize it. But more importantly...

    - Other factors that determine the image quality: dynamic range, noise, color accuracy, etc. Dynamic range is the range between the extreme brightness and the extreme darkness the camera can capture. This is what allows you to get a nice picture with a blue sky instead of a white hole. Remember Apple's HDR demonstration? That's an attempt to increase the dynamic range through software processing. Noise is the "dirty" speckles you see in the pictures.

    - How do you improve dynamic range and noise? Two ways: larger sensor and better technology. Most times you only see mega pixel numbers and don't see the size of the sensor, but the size of the sensor in the camera is probably the single most important determiner of image quality outside optics and image processing. There's simply no way to get around the law of physics. Larger sensor = more photons collected = better image quality. However technology used in the sensor to catch photons more efficiently with less electric noise is obviously very important too, and many latest smallers sensors do better than old larger sensors because of newer technology. If you wondered why your 12 mega pixel cameras take better pictures than your old 2 mega pixel camera, the newer sensor technology + improved image processing is the answer, not the pixel count. (unless you print large that is)

    - No autofocus. Without autofocus, the iPod Touch camera relies on a deeep depth of field to get everything in focus(so to speak). This is OK for video but doesn't really give you that sharp image for photos, especially close shots.

    So the problem with the iPod Touch camera is simple: it lacks autofocus, the sensor is too small(bad noise and DR), and the native resolution (720p) isn't really large enough to take full advantage of the screen resolution. The iPhone takes better pictures because it has all those things with a larger sensor.(1/3.2" for the iPhone vs I believe 1/4.5" for the iPod) A larger sensor obviously would mean a thicker body but I personally would welcome it. However it will mean the iPod with a larger sensor will cost more too. Would you be willing to pay for it? ;)
     
  22. Aero26 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    #22
    I carry around a Flip Video camera. It may record HD but still's are only about .6-.7 megapixels, similar to the 4G Touch. Only pro in the whole case is it's great mobility and 1 hour capacity. I wouldn't upload those stills to anywhere for anyone in a photography group to see. Facebook, it's fine as a profile picture. [you know, like 30x30] And probably those moments you just HAD to see...quality irrelevant.
     
  23. uberamd macrumors 68030

    uberamd

    Joined:
    May 26, 2009
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #23
    This. Most MP3 players don't have 90% of the features that the iPod Touch has. Quit complaining, I feel like I'm reading thread after thread started by a crybaby spoiled kid.
     
  24. fswmacguy macrumors 6502

    fswmacguy

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    #24
    Precisely.

    And the iPod touch is extremely thin. It's likely Apple simply couldn't find a cost effective thinner camera.
     
  25. Owen.C macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2010
    #25
    The iPod touch is also quite a bit more expensive than other MP3 players.


    The reseloution isn't the awful part, it's the noise, poor dynamic range, and crappy lens.

    Yes it's better than nothing, but with a high end product such as this, where everything is high spec and refined. It just doesn't fit and kinda drags it down. Similar thing to the speaker as well.
     

Share This Page