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.
Why are people so against iPad Photography?
- Thread starter urkel
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The camera in the iPad 2 is flat-out embarrassing. The only reason I can think of as to why apple gave us that camera is to make us want the next one.
I wouldn't mind using it if they gave us 8 MP.
I wouldn't mind using it if they gave us 8 MP.
The camera isn't nearly as bad as people think - it's semi-crippled by apple's camera app. It actually reduces the photo resolution by 30%, and limits the shutter speed so indoor photos look dark and grainy.
Give it a little breathing room and full resolution, and it's a *lot* better. Still not "good" but at least not quite so embarrassing. Take a look at this post for a comparison of the default camera app and "what it's capable of": https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=14356521#post14356521
Prejudice, ignorance, preference (there is better control and ergonomics on many of the other options out there), tendency to blame lack of artistic skill on tools, etc. Does it really matter? Do what you like. There's no point in trying to change the minds of those who have already made it up and aren't going to reconsider.
Nonsense. Serious photographers tend to use DSLR's and such but there are pro photographers that use camera phones as well. Broad, sweeping, generalizations like this always fail at some point.
A lot of people only understand the world in dichotomies. As always, consider the source.
Last edited:
For me it was quality and accessibility. The only time I would use my iPad as a camera would be if it is already out and in my hands.
As for the case of the iPad having a better camera than iPhone...I doubt it, just because of the physical constraints of being a few millimeters thin.
I do think the iPad 3 will bring the focus to photography, given its supposed high-res screen. I am betting on Aperture for iPad being released simultaneously, similar to the release of GarageBand and iMove for iPad last year.
And I am calling Aperture as a separate app, because I think Apple feels the current Photos app is similar in features to iPhoto. Which I think will be renamed on the Mac to Photos in Mountain Lion.
As for the case of the iPad having a better camera than iPhone...I doubt it, just because of the physical constraints of being a few millimeters thin.
I do think the iPad 3 will bring the focus to photography, given its supposed high-res screen. I am betting on Aperture for iPad being released simultaneously, similar to the release of GarageBand and iMove for iPad last year.
And I am calling Aperture as a separate app, because I think Apple feels the current Photos app is similar in features to iPhoto. Which I think will be renamed on the Mac to Photos in Mountain Lion.
Ergonomics is a big issue with me. It's very difficult hold iPad in a stable fashion and press the shutter when the light level drops. All the large cameras had nice thick areas for easier grip, iPad doesn't. Also people don't (usually) carry iPad dangling off your neck on a string unlike DSLRs because that'll be too unwieldy and potentially dangerous because of the large exposed glass surface.
The main appeal of iPad as a photographic taking tool, I suspect, will be as a viewfinder and a controller to a DSLR sitting on a tripod. iPad as a wireless remote with a streaming view would be an amazing tool for many.
The new iPad Commercial
I finally got a chance to see the new iPad commercial and it got me wondering "Has anyones opinion on iPad photography changed now that we have an amazing screen, great software and a solid camera?"
Sure, big screen photography still looks silly but maybe with the new screen then the instant gratification of viewing your work on a big screen is worth the awkward stares.
I finally got a chance to see the new iPad commercial and it got me wondering "Has anyones opinion on iPad photography changed now that we have an amazing screen, great software and a solid camera?"
Sure, big screen photography still looks silly but maybe with the new screen then the instant gratification of viewing your work on a big screen is worth the awkward stares.
Last edited:
I'll be using it alot more often now.
In the past I would put down my iPad to pick up my iPhone, but now I can just use the iPad. Can't wait.
It is said that the best camera - is the one you holding in your hands... no matter if its an ipad, iphone, canon something og God forbid an android... if you havent got a camera to tage that special shot... bummer... That the ipad camera get's better with the new model - just makes your instant pictures better....
But.. going on a trip or going somewhere TO take a picure... the ipad will never be my first choice...
But.. going on a trip or going somewhere TO take a picure... the ipad will never be my first choice...
Hank Haney, Tiger Woods' old swing coach, uses an iPad to record his students and then play it back for them on the large screen. He either uses the stock Camera app or a special golf app.
The camera has many pro uses besides professional photography. I mean, even Apple showcased iPhoto with photos taken with a Nikon or some DSLR like that. The big screen is the iPad's biggest draw, not the camera's MPs, but now it has a better camera than the iPhone 4 (is that right?) which takes awesome pictures and videos. I think we're going to see a lot more people holding up their giant iPads to take pictures/videos.
The camera has many pro uses besides professional photography. I mean, even Apple showcased iPhoto with photos taken with a Nikon or some DSLR like that. The big screen is the iPad's biggest draw, not the camera's MPs, but now it has a better camera than the iPhone 4 (is that right?) which takes awesome pictures and videos. I think we're going to see a lot more people holding up their giant iPads to take pictures/videos.
At the OP, you can't tether into an ipad currently. I think there are a couple capture programs for it, but they load up cached thumbnails. The write speeds supported by the Ipad are too low currently. The other problem with this argument is that you're speculating without taking a viable stance on it. If you were photographing things for a living, the priorities are a bit different. It's not so much an attachment to one form factor or another. They pick something that works and that will hold up to heavy use with consistent results. Even if that eventually became an ipad like device, it's less likely that it would resemble what you think of as ipad photography today.
Cameras and tablets are becoming quite good for snapshots though due to the amount of research geared toward such devices.
Linhof actually manufactured more than just cameras. They had some interesting designs too, but they've always been extremely expensive.
Cameras and tablets are becoming quite good for snapshots though due to the amount of research geared toward such devices.
Who's to say? Maybe history?
How many large format cameras did you see people carrying around during the pre-digital era?
Linhof actually manufactured more than just cameras. They had some interesting designs too, but they've always been extremely expensive.
I agree. That's why I always have a good high end camera with me. Whether it's my Lumix with it's wide to long zoom that's barely larger than an iPhone, or my full on Nikon interchangeable lens DSLR, carrying a camera is something I've done for years.
The camera on my iPad never gets used. Ever.
Why wouldn't you put the glass under the cow and squeeze the milk into it?
Think it through next time because thats not nearly as clever as you think.
You're right, because obviously you can just pull out the camera lens and take a picture.Why wouldn't you put the glass under the cow and squeeze the milk into it?
Think it through next time because thats not nearly as clever as you think.
/bradllez
theres some light field cameras out already (what the wonder cam essentially is, but a bit more advanced) which seem REALLY awesome. The company that makes them actually met with steve jobs to discuss putting them in iPhones at some point in the future, which would be AWESOME.
For those that don't know what light field is, its essentially a camera that allows you to take the picture, and then change the focus to whatever you want in post processing. You could actually take 1 picture, and then export it as 2 images, with the focus different in each.
However, as a film student, I am very excited for the image stabilization they demoed. If it works as well as in the video, thats a very exciting feature that I hope transfers over to the iPhone 5
seriously. If you have to take normal, good quality photos, you can use your ipad just fine
If you want GREAT photos, use a camera!!
Avatar was not filmed by and iPad, you know
If you want GREAT photos, use a camera!!
Avatar was not filmed by and iPad, you know
Coincidentally, I have a similar combination of gear too (my Lumix is a GF2, which isn't exactly pocket sized, neither is my Nikon DSLR, though I do have a small pocketable Canon as well). I often carry the Canon in a side pants pocket when I'm travelling.
I haven't, however, mastered the discipline of always carrying a real camera with me everywhere I go. So for pictures of opportunity, I still pull out my iPhone.
I think the reason it won't catch on is that the quality is in between that of a P&S and a real camera (I'm talking iPad 3 here, the iPad 2 cam wasn't even up to P&S standards).
For people that really care about photography and would be willing to carry a large device, the quality still sucks too much to replace a real camera. For the people not bothered by the quality, they are perfectly happy with P&S quality so they'd rather have something small.
For people that really care about photography and would be willing to carry a large device, the quality still sucks too much to replace a real camera. For the people not bothered by the quality, they are perfectly happy with P&S quality so they'd rather have something small.
Still with iPad 3...if you have your iPhone in your pocket and iPad in your backpack the iPhone will be the first thing I would grab.
The iPad just if I already had it out and in my hands. Then I would use it and not mind.
That said, I am wondering about the iPad camera specs, mainly how wide it is. The iPhone 4S is 24mm equivalent so it is fairly wide angle.
EDIT: Just looked at the example photos on Apple.com, it appears the iPad 3 has a 35mm equivalent focal length. So iPad photos will be a bit more zoomed in than iPhone, if that is what you are going for. Better for portraits at least.
The iPad just if I already had it out and in my hands. Then I would use it and not mind.
That said, I am wondering about the iPad camera specs, mainly how wide it is. The iPhone 4S is 24mm equivalent so it is fairly wide angle.
EDIT: Just looked at the example photos on Apple.com, it appears the iPad 3 has a 35mm equivalent focal length. So iPad photos will be a bit more zoomed in than iPhone, if that is what you are going for. Better for portraits at least.
The iPad is a tablet, not a camera. It's not that people are against iPad photography, it's just that it's not it's intended purpose. If Apple was interested in making a camera, they would have made a camera. Wait.... they did and it bombed bad -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_QuickTake . There's nothing preventing Apple from entering into that market again with new advances in technology. Like I said, the iPad is a tablet, not a camera. If Apple wanted you to have a camera, they would have made one. iPhone is good enough for basic point and shoot photography now anyways. iPad will be good enough for basic point and shoot photography but not serious photography.
