Rubbish cameras on iPad make it an expensive upgrade

Discussion in 'iPad' started by kevingaffney, Mar 24, 2011.

  1. kevingaffney macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    #1
    Looking at the macmost review by Gary of the iPads cameras has convinced me to wait for the next incarnation of the device to upgrade. One of the few additions the new iPad has is the two cameras. It turns out they are rubbish for anything except facetime. Interestingly, most reviews I've read from people who have upgraded, have been so so with few if any saying it is dramatic upgrade as Apple would like to lead us believe. I'm usually an early adopter of new stuff, iPhones as soon as they are launched and the iPad a month before it released here, but not this time.
    Probably great for any first time buyers of course
     
  2. saving107 macrumors 603

    saving107

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca
    #2
    good to know, now I will finally be able to sleep peacefully.
     
  3. fop91 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    #3
    Thanks for the info. I went and dug my camcorder and digital camera out of the garbage can before the garbage truck came today. :D
     
  4. livspop macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2011
    #4
    Are you f@?king kidding me? The iPad2 has been out for how long? I hate people who bash people who post semi-useless, irrelevant or old info, but this is so beyond ridiculous that I just had to say something.

    Excuse me while I go kick my dog since I can't reach through my perfectly acceptable 32GB iPad2 and smack you upside the head....:rolleyes:
     
  5. s1m macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    #5
    So you dont have any actual experience of the iPad2 cameras - just repeating what some web blog reported?

    I actually have no intention of using my iPad2 cameras for anything other than facetime...

    No mention in the blog of the performance improvements then?
     
  6. Blorzoga macrumors 68030

    Blorzoga

    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    #6
    It really does puzzle me why Apple put such low quality cameras on this thing. I can't believe it would have cost much to put a HALF decent camera even on the front facing side. Even the face time and photo booth picture look horrendous.
     
  7. imutter macrumors 6502

    imutter

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Location:
    Somewhere between Baltimore and DC
    #7
    Oh yeah the camera is worthless LOL
    I did not get it for that. No need really I use the iphone or a photo or video camera . That thing is awekward to hold up and shoot pics with or video LOL
    I like so the slim lightweight portability of the device.
     
  8. Jesse3121 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    #8
    I have to admit, I am a bit disappointed in the back camera. That being said I absolutely love my white 64GB model. Do not regret it at all. If however the design would not have been updated I probably would not have upgraded for this model, I love the new design. It's so thin, I love it!
    Also I can hardly ever see a point where I will use this huge tablet as a camera other than to play around with. I have my iPhone 4 and DSLR for real pics.
     
  9. huck500 macrumors 6502

    huck500

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Location:
    Southern California
    #9
    Just curious, and no one seems to post details about this...

    Why do you want high-quality cameras on an iPad? What would you use them for? I have three cameras; one on my phone for all-the-time use, one Canon P&S to take when I MIGHT want a higher quality pic, and a Nikon DSLR for when I go out to actually take photos. The iPad would be redundant, because I always have my phone when I have my iPad.

    If your phone doesn't take pictures, maybe, but are you really going to stand there with a tablet in front of your face? I'm guessing Apple figured no one would complain about the cameras because Facetime is the only practical use for them.

    Personally, I'm waiting to upgrade because I want a higher-resolution screen for reading books. Reading on an iPad screen with the resolution of the iPhone would be awesome.
     
  10. Zeos macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #10
    I would use it in the field for work ( take a photo, then annotate with notes and observations). The pic quality is probably good enough for that. If it's really important, I would take out the point and shoot. If it's super-important, out comes the dSLR. I can't see the iPad or iPhone replacing a good camera (yet). Still, a better quality camera on such an expensive mobile device would be nice... In my case, upgrading for the camera is probably worth it.
     
  11. Mac.World macrumors 68000

    Mac.World

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Location:
    In front of uranus
    #11
    According to Apple, it was simply an issue with space... as in there wasn't any to put a higher res camera in the back.
    But I'm not sure most people buy a tablet to take pictures either.
     
  12. KittyKatta macrumors 6502a

    KittyKatta

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Location:
    SoCal
    #12
    WRONG! They aren't even good for Facetime. ;) They're only VGA and the sensor is so poor that it's horribly grainy in "non-optimal" (real world) conditions. Of course you could use it outside with better lighting... but then you cant see the screen because of the glare and you can't use it on the road because it doesn't work over 3G. :eek:

    I really love my iPad and think its a worthy upgrade. But it definitely isn't a homerun so waiting for next gen isn't a bad idea.
     
  13. kevingaffney thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    #13
    Interesting the main improvements being pushed here are the slimness of the thing. Hardly looks like an incredible upgrade to me and would certainly need something different than the shape of the thing to make my upgrade.
    And btw, the macmost review demonstrates the difference in video and stills between iPhone4 camera and iPad. Perhaps some might be afraid to look at negative reviews. I'm as big an Apple fan as anyone but I'm not blind
     
  14. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #14
    Wanting a decent quality image for facetime isn't a good enough reason? This morning, I tried turning on Facetime thinking I'd maybe try it out with a friend who has iPhone 4, and found that the "image" it was getting of my face was just a dark screen. I had to squint to see that the front camera was actually working and there was a slight blur on the screen that was my face. Seems the room I was in was too dark for the camera to work properly! Ok, so I just had a single reading lamp on, but that's often the case when I'm in the house. I don't want to go around turning on more lights each time I want to use Facetime. :(

    That said, I do love the thinness of iPad 2, IMO, it makes it a lot easier to hold than iPad 1.
     
  15. KittyKatta macrumors 6502a

    KittyKatta

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Location:
    SoCal
    #15
    Isn't that like asking "Why would you need more horsepower" or or "Why would you want a BIGGER TV"? The answer is "Because if its possible then there's no reason to choose something inadequate"

    Thats true, but do you have an iPhone? If not then did you know that not one of your 3 cameras can import video into iMovie because they aren't a native format? That means you have to go to your computer to convert it to something compatible and then upload it to the iPad.

    Apple emphasizes the iPad as a media creation tool but it doesnt have a good camera. The iPhone will be a compatible format but not everyone has one so as awkward as people say iPad camera shooting is, having a quality camera on board is the best way to get media for iMovie.

    And other real world uses for a real camera is document scanning with AutoFocus (which is lacking), Barcode Scanning and In-App check deposits. So the lack of good camera does get in the way of using (and developing for a next generation productivity device.
     
  16. TomCondon macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    #16
    so you say its bad for everything but facetime


    so you say its bad for everything but what it was made for.
     
  17. kevingaffney thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    #17
    All good points.
    It's so obvious, next February at launch of iPad3, one of the "big deals" Apple will be crowing about will be dramatically improved cameras over current ipad. Totally daft considering they could have addressed the issue now.

    Why am I not reading about any of the upgraders saying their new iPads are spectacularly faster, I suspect it's because they're not
     
  18. jddar macrumors regular

    jddar

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    #18
    Don't have my iPad 2 yet. However, I took some still and video images with the iPad 2 at the Apple Store and they seemed more than passable enough. I'm not at all concerned about the image quality. The cameras will work very well for what they are intended and likely to be used.
     
  19. kevingaffney thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    #19
    My point exactly. A unit costing 800 dollars with cameras that are passable enough and as someone else says, don't work in low light. Hardly a cracking review is it?
     
  20. KittyKatta macrumors 6502a

    KittyKatta

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Location:
    SoCal
    #20
    Thats a good point. You'll read a lot about people claiming "It's not about specs, its about what you need", but the hidden gem for Apple in this is that they can skimp on a feature one generation and then give a normal upgrade next gen with a tagline of "Now 18x better camera" or "4x resolution" and people will gobble it up because everyone is in denial of numbers now. This strategy will keep Apple in the headlines forever (Well, that and the fact that they do make fantastic products)

    Not much is optimized for dual core yet so that's not really fair. I think we'll see speed differences between iPad 1 and 2 increase as developers start optimizing for the A5.
     
  21. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #21
    Well... While I do find the camera disappointing, I would have been happy to pay $800 for iPad 2 even if it had no camera. And I don't know if I'll upgrade next year or not, but I do know the quality of the camera will have very little to do with my decision. I mean, you are talking as if the whole point of the iPad is the camera. But to me, it's just one feature out of many, and not such an important feature at that.
     
  22. melman101 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #22
    Personally, I've snapped a few photos. It's good for what I use it for. I haven't tried recording anything, but I'll be getting an iPhone 5, so I can't wait to see those cameras.
     
  23. melman101 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #23
    Also I agree. When iPad 1 came out, everyone kept saying why didn't the iPad have cameras? But yet it sold 15 million. Oh, and then there were people like me trying to justify it. Apple would never put a camera on the iPad. It would be awkward to video conference with it. And next year, just like everyone says, will be autofocus, just like they did between the 3G and 3GS. I can't believe they didn't put autofocus in this thing.
     
  24. Blorzoga macrumors 68030

    Blorzoga

    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    #24
    I never planned to use the ipad to take photos, but it seems like they could have put a little better camera in so that at least FaceTime wasn't so grainy. Maybe because the screen is so big, a higher resolution would have made the video feed more choppy. I have actually noticed that FaceTime actually freezes much more than on my ip4.
     
  25. PhoneI macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    #25
    Assuming you are in a well light location, I find the cameras very suitable for FaceTime and video.
     

Share This Page