We're not guessing. Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megapixels#Megapixel
Now do the math.
The only real question is that, is this camera capable of doing 1280 x 720 pictures, or is it capped at 960 x 720?
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.
iPod touch Touch 4G - 0.7 megapixel camera??
- Thread starter pizz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
We're not guessing. Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megapixels#Megapixel
Now do the math.
The only real question is that, is this camera capable of doing 1280 x 720 pictures, or is it capped at 960 x 720?
as much as i HATE Microsoft.. im sure they won't **** up by putting a .7mp in the zune hd2....in the year of 2010 lmao
it will probably have 3-5mp still, hd-720 cam (like the one in ipod 4g), and oled display for a cheaper price
it will lack apps or have horrible but i barely use apps/games on my ipod...if it does have all this all i need is it for support macs lol
So, to you, having a device w/ lesser functionality makes it equal or better as long as the camera is better?
i understands why it's important to others
but for me personally? hell YES!
i'll be perfectly happy and pay twice as much for a ipod touch with just the mp3 player,browser, a 5mp camera and 720 video capture (i know it has hd vid cap btw) by itself
minus the retina, facetime, gyro,multitouch, gamecenter, games/shows, maps,i books, social networks, ect...all that nice but i can care less about it
I don't even see why microsoft would put a camera on their zune in the first place. The zune is absolutely amazing for music and watching movies. I don't really see a need for them to change and add a camera. Everything it can do is to try and get you to buy from the zune marketplace or subscribe and a camera isn't going to get anyone to buy anything.
Twice as much for < 50% functionality? You're not making sense
Get a real camera for the extra $$ you'd pay for an iPod to have those features Cool beans - so if I ducted taped a good camera to a touch you would pay me $600 - I'm in!
You bring up a good point though - the touch's capabilities and requirements will vary based on the user - I think too many people are imposing their wishes as the de facto standard that must be accepted by all - which is just utter crap
Don't get me wrong, based on the info available now, I am a little disappointed - but the main thing I wanted the camera is for quick scanning so I'm ok w/ it.
a frame of vidio from it would be 1280*720 not the 960*720 that the pictures are . its posible is capures a frame and crops it but with tap to focus zoom ect is more tikely it dose actually take a picture but the sensor only has 1280*720 pixels on it giving it a maximum 3:2 picture size of 960*720
67
apple didn't give it a MP rating the thread starter did and its actual MP "listing" is 0.691 200 megapixels
besides vga cameras are very often refered to by both consumers and manufactures as 0.3 megapixels and megapixels is the simple industry standerd way to measure camera resolution but yea i see your point
Here's Apple's picture on their website, probably a little beefed up in terms of quality, but still. To everyone that's worried, you shouldn't be. Expect the pictures to have no grain.
Ever heard of this nifty cool app called "PhotoShop?"
I've news for you...that image is 'simulated.'
This is a general purpose picture. Of course it is going to look a little worse than the picture, but you can tell that there isn't going to be any grain if that is what Apple is advertising. Apple is usually good to delivering things like this.
For example: http://www.apple.com/ipodtouch/features/hd-video-recording.html
That's almost exactly what the iPod HD Recording is going to look like. Except that video was taking at near-perfect conditions (lighting, weather, etc.).
I totally agree - just wondering where the 'photoshopped simulation' came into the picture
To clarify, for me, when using the term photoshopped, it is to create a fake/enchantment of the actual reality of the photo. Which would be misrepresentation.
Fair enough. Although they aren't obligated to tell you whether or not the screen images are real or enhanced, they have set a precedent for pointing out when they aren't.
When Apple posts an unretouched photograph, they call it out with a specific disclaimer:
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/camera.html (disclaimer midway down page...says they are unretouched)
Clearly if the feature is something to crow about, as it is and was with the iP4, then you'd expect to see something similar for the iPod Touch 4, right?
Unless they don't really want to draw attention to the fact...which I'm betting is clearly the case here. It's a "gimme" feature and one I think will end up being just a frame grab from the video stream, EXACTLY how it works on the last-gen iPod Nano.
Are megapixels what determine picture quality? No.
Is it possible for a .7 MP camera to take better pictures than a 5 MP camera? I'm sure it's possible. But if you have two cameras that take the same quality photos, one producing a .7 MP picture, the other producing a 5 MP picture, I'll take the latter. A .7 MP is definitely a step backward. My cheapo Verizon LG phone produces a 2 MP picture.
The question that people are raising: is the .7 MP camera in the new iPod touch as good a camera as the one in the current iPhone? I am willing to bet that the answer is no. Go to the iPhone page at apple.com and read their publicity blurb on the iPhone still camera, then do the same for the iPod touch. Apple sure seems more enthusiastic about the iPhone still camera. But we won't know for sure until people get the iPod touch in their hands and do comparisons.
Is the iPod touch still worth buying, despite the still camera? Well, I think so. I've been carrying around my old iPod video (64 MB) for years, because I don't replace stuff very often. This year I finally took the plunge to iOS and my wife and I are both getting an iPod touch. I would be willing to put up with a thicker iPod touch and get a better camera.
Would I have been happier if the iPod touch had the iPhone camera? Yes. People will say that megapixels don't matter, but when you read articles discussing megapixel counts in a still camera, the articles say "6 MP is good enough for almost anybody." They don't say ".7 MP is good enough for almost anybody." Why do I care about MP? Because I don't always frame my photos very carefully and have to crop stuff out.
For better quality photos, I see people saying that I should have a "real" digital camera. Well, yes, I have one. The thing is, I don't have it in my pocket all the time, because it doesn't fit in my pocket. When I'm out with the kids, there are many timere when I don't bring my camera with me. In that case, I'll use the one in my pocket if I want to take a photo. As a photographer told me once, "the best camera is ... the one you have with you." : no camera means no picture at all. If the iPod touch had a better quality camera, I for one would be very happy. In my case, I'm glad that there is a decent back video camera, but I don't see myself using Facetime all that much (you need a wireless network for that, right?), and I would gladly trade in the Facetime forward video camera for a better-quality still camera.
Is it possible for a .7 MP camera to take better pictures than a 5 MP camera? I'm sure it's possible. But if you have two cameras that take the same quality photos, one producing a .7 MP picture, the other producing a 5 MP picture, I'll take the latter. A .7 MP is definitely a step backward. My cheapo Verizon LG phone produces a 2 MP picture.
The question that people are raising: is the .7 MP camera in the new iPod touch as good a camera as the one in the current iPhone? I am willing to bet that the answer is no. Go to the iPhone page at apple.com and read their publicity blurb on the iPhone still camera, then do the same for the iPod touch. Apple sure seems more enthusiastic about the iPhone still camera. But we won't know for sure until people get the iPod touch in their hands and do comparisons.
Is the iPod touch still worth buying, despite the still camera? Well, I think so. I've been carrying around my old iPod video (64 MB) for years, because I don't replace stuff very often. This year I finally took the plunge to iOS and my wife and I are both getting an iPod touch. I would be willing to put up with a thicker iPod touch and get a better camera.
Would I have been happier if the iPod touch had the iPhone camera? Yes. People will say that megapixels don't matter, but when you read articles discussing megapixel counts in a still camera, the articles say "6 MP is good enough for almost anybody." They don't say ".7 MP is good enough for almost anybody." Why do I care about MP? Because I don't always frame my photos very carefully and have to crop stuff out.
For better quality photos, I see people saying that I should have a "real" digital camera. Well, yes, I have one. The thing is, I don't have it in my pocket all the time, because it doesn't fit in my pocket. When I'm out with the kids, there are many timere when I don't bring my camera with me. In that case, I'll use the one in my pocket if I want to take a photo. As a photographer told me once, "the best camera is ... the one you have with you." : no camera means no picture at all. If the iPod touch had a better quality camera, I for one would be very happy. In my case, I'm glad that there is a decent back video camera, but I don't see myself using Facetime all that much (you need a wireless network for that, right?), and I would gladly trade in the Facetime forward video camera for a better-quality still camera.
Sadly we are left to guess and guess until someone actually gets their hands on a new iPT and shares the results. By now there are plenty of educated guesses and informed opinions on this thread and many others like it across the web. Some day soon we will know the answer and everyone can decide if the photo quality works for them. Sadly, Apple set itself up for some cranky customers needlessly. This device is about 2 mm thinner than the iPhone? Many are saying a better camera couldn't fit in the case since the case is too thin. So Apple gives us all a super low resolution camera so they can claim the case is 2 mm thinner? Really? How absurd.
Some will say hey, the camera will be fine, and it may be. But given a choice between a .7mp camera and the iPhone's 5 mp camera with touch focus lens, which would you choose?
Apple has no one to blame but themselves.
Some will say hey, the camera will be fine, and it may be. But given a choice between a .7mp camera and the iPhone's 5 mp camera with touch focus lens, which would you choose?
Apple has no one to blame but themselves.
So the video on Apple site isn't compressed? It says "unedited" so it probably is compressed for web...
Oh DARN, and here I was thinking this would replace my DSLR
CURSE YOU APPLE, YOU HAVE FOILED ME YET AGAIN
Does the iPhone 4 camera replace DSLR? I don't think so...
And it probably looks better than the dumbphones 5 years ago, because of the better censor and stuff. More pixels doesn't mean more quality, I have a point-and-shoot that looks grainy when zoomed in the picture that was taken at highest resolution for the camera.
The solution to these complaints is simple - if you don't like it, don't buy it.
For my part, I think Apple has done a nice job with these upgrades. It's an iPhone without a phone, 3G, GPS and inferior still picture taking.
You get superior Retina display, front camera with Facetime, HD rear videocam, faster A4 CPU, 2X ram (probably), gyro, Wireless-N, and microphone, all for the same price as last year's model. It's a fantastic upgrade.
For my part, I think Apple has done a nice job with these upgrades. It's an iPhone without a phone, 3G, GPS and inferior still picture taking.
You get superior Retina display, front camera with Facetime, HD rear videocam, faster A4 CPU, 2X ram (probably), gyro, Wireless-N, and microphone, all for the same price as last year's model. It's a fantastic upgrade.
Simple, Apple has a product for you too. It's called the iPhone 4. Supposedly you can buy without a contract for 2X the iPod touch:
http://www.iphonefaq.org/archives/971037