Most will disagree but I am glad they use low res cams in the iPad 2. The purpose is for video chatting. It would look ridiculous if the iPad had great cameras and people were out shooting video are taking stills using the iPad. I think this is what Apple was trying to prevent.
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 I am glad apple used low res cameras in the 2.
- Thread starter richard371
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Richard has a point. Go buy a point and shoot digicam or a dslr if you want to take high res photos. But if you wanna take great photos you can, it's just a matter of skill and i would definitely not use my ipad to take photos. Its just silly.
No.
No.
What he is saying is that if he had a choice between having the ipad2's current crappy cameras vs the iphone4's better cameras, he would be ok and happy with the ipad2's crappy cameras.
I can't agree more with the second comment. Apple was trying to save us from looking awkward? really? You do realize they'll probably upgrade the cameras in the next version right? (can you imagine what vga res would look like stretched to a retina display?)
We now can't do decent scanning (barcodes, documents) nor close up pictures (no autofocus).
There's no reason to be glad for inferior specs. If Apple had two models for $499, one with a 0.7 MP cam and the other with a 5MP, you'd seriously choose the crappier one to avoid being tempted to look awkward while taking a picture?
While it may be silly (and i agree to an extent that people may not do it regularly), there are thousands of apps that deal with photography. Being able to pull out my iPad 2 to capture a moment in photo would be a huge benefit.
I was looking forward to using 360 Panorama and I'm not 100% sure what the requirements are. With such a low MP camera I'm not even sure it will work.
I would much prefer the better camera (for video and photo).
The OP is worded awkwardly and as written, I agree it sounds pretty foolish.
However, as far as the idea of not being really upset at the cameras I fall into that category.
Would it be nice to have better cameras? Sure. I wouldn't complain.
But I'm glad to get the upgraded speed, cameras, and thinner design for the same price point.
If the iPad 3 really has better cameras, a better speaker, an upgraded chip, and a retina display there's no way it stays at the same pricepoint. Something's gotta give. Cameras as the least important of that mix for me, in terms of needing an upgrade. Like the OP implied, there's no way in hell I'll be walking down a fall street snapping pics of the falling leaves with my ipad.
However, as far as the idea of not being really upset at the cameras I fall into that category.
Would it be nice to have better cameras? Sure. I wouldn't complain.
But I'm glad to get the upgraded speed, cameras, and thinner design for the same price point.
If the iPad 3 really has better cameras, a better speaker, an upgraded chip, and a retina display there's no way it stays at the same pricepoint. Something's gotta give. Cameras as the least important of that mix for me, in terms of needing an upgrade. Like the OP implied, there's no way in hell I'll be walking down a fall street snapping pics of the falling leaves with my ipad.
Also, I agree, I didn't want to pay more for the ipad for better cameras. THe HD video is enough. iPad is not a point and shoot.
How good are the ones in the Macbooks?
I'll pay more for better screen, capacity etc. not cameras. cameras are everywhere, everyone probably has at least 2 or 3 devices that shoot pictures.
How good are the ones in the Macbooks?
I'll pay more for better screen, capacity etc. not cameras. cameras are everywhere, everyone probably has at least 2 or 3 devices that shoot pictures.
Thats absolutely exactly what happened and happens with the iPhone and electronics every single iteration.
No, he does not. He absolutely does not.
+1
Op can love his low res chats all he wants, but I would have loved to have better cameras on the iPad for higher res facetime chats.
The OP didn't say he was "satisfied" he said he was GLAD they used crappy cameras. Of course you wouldn't use the ipad as a main camera, but what if you forgot your camera (or your smartphone if you use that) at home and wanted to grab a pic of something? What about all the people that are trying not to carry around 10 devices (phone, ipad, camera). What about all the people who can't afford to buy a $500 ipad and another $300 compact cam to go with it?
I agree with you, it's nice to have cameras at all, but it would be nicER if they were better. but you can say that about any feature on the ipad, the cams just stick out the worst.
Your comment was sensible, the OP's was just ridiculous
Maybe the need to wait until the release of iPhone 5 (with better camera) to upgrade the iPad cameras to the iPhone 4 quality. I know if I could get the same quality camera on my iPad I would most likely actually just buy the iPad plan for data etc.... As wacky as it sounds....I may not be using a smart phone at that point.
My thoughts exactly.
Apple is trying to prevent consumers from looking like dumbasses? Then why include a camera at all?
"Thank you, Apple, for not putting retina display in my iPad. It really makes my user experience tons better. And the fact that the cameras are so LQ prevents me from looking dumb!"
Just, no.
iPhone is subsidized and used to get people into contracts. MUCH more money is made off of the voice/data and other fees by the cell phone companies that they can do this. They don't make money on the widget itself so much as the services they provide for the widget.
However, just like the MBPRO or any other non contract apple device, it is not subsidized. The widget itself IS the way the company makes money (as well as a separate market on apps). I think there's little debate that the price of the iPad will be going up over time. Right now Apple appears to be underwriting the price a little to protect their dominant market position. But as competing product proliferate, it will become more expensive to keep everything at the cutting edge, more expansive to protect market position, more expensive to mitigate intellectual property challenges, and etc.
Doesn't mean it will rise exponentially or anything. But I do think the future on this is pretty clear, unless apple views the App market as their true profit center or they remain willing to subsidize their market position.
most companies aim to get 20-30% profit margins on the cost of their devices (not including overall R&D, Marketing etc, talkin parts here). On Apples CHEAPEST iPad they've already met that and on their higher end models they're pulling in 50-60% margins. Apple can afford spending a bit more on the cam if they want to. Not saying they didn't have a good reason not to even if it's just to save money. but it wouldn't really have a significant impact on their overall business.
The iPad 2 is too thin for the iPhone 4's rear camera. Apple chose the thin form factor over megapixels and the iPad has the HD video optimized iPod Touch camera, instead.
For what it's worth, FaceTime on the iPad is a way better experience for me than on the iPhone, and my girlfriend says that the video from the front camera on the iPad is superior to my iPhone when we FT'd to her MBP.
With all due respect, you have no idea what sort of profit apple makes on their devices. Most of that information is not public. But one very common mistake people make is to assume the cost is what it takes to make it.
You must factor in R&D, market protections, advertising, intellectual property, legal, warranty, raw materiel storage and depreciation, shipping/transportation/logistics, employee costs/benefits, and a 10 page spreadsheet of other costs and liabilities when determining the real profit of a product. And that's if a company does not integrate product lines within their companies.
Where are you getting your info from? Who says the iphone 4 camera is too thick to fit in the ipad? the ipad is barely thinner than the iphone.