or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Numerous 3rd party case photos suggest iPod cameras coming
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Numerous 3rd party case photos suggest iPod cameras coming

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
A plethora of recently revealed Chinese third-party iPod cases seem to corroborate rumors that cameras will be included in new models of the iPod touch and iPod nano, expected to be released later this year.

Discovered by Cult of Mac, dozens of pictures of new iPod touch and iPod nano cases show camera holes on the external covers. The iPod nano camera hole is placed on the bottom left corner of the back of the device, while the iPod touch lens looks to be at the center of the device, unlike the iPhone.

If legitimate, these pictures seem to support previous, recurring rumors that some of the iPod line would be receiving camera upgrades this year.

Manufacturers are reportedly already sending out samples of the cases to resellers. Cult of Mac obtained pictures from e-mails and PowerPoint presentations sent from several different Chinese companies to U.S. accessory makers.



Also reaffirming prior rumors, the case for the new iPod nano reportedly features a wider screen. The case suggests the new screen would carry a 1.5:1 aspect ratio, compared to the 1.33:1 featured on the current model. The case also accommodates a smaller click wheel.

While the iPod nano has never featured a camera before, the media player has shipped with a built-in photo viewer.



The iPod touch also already has a built-in photo viewer, while the camera software would likely be ported over from the iPhone OS.
post #2 of 28
Those cases sure are stylish. They really show off the dramatic new look of the nano and touch.
post #3 of 28
I know people are going to discuss the camera placement on the nano again as it would apparently be right where everyone would put their fingers. However, I've been looking at it and I don't think it woud actually be in the way if you are right handed. When holding the nano in portrait mode, your fingers would cover, but not touch the lens as your fingertips will hit the back left side of the device and the camera is on the back right. When taking a picture, most likely in landscape, your fingers would be below the lens. Now if you are left handed, that lens is definitely in an awkward place, however I can't think of anywhere else it could go if it can't fit behind the screen.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #4 of 28
I like how the cases do a great job of covering up how obviously shopped these images are.
post #5 of 28
Seems like a sure thing, especially for the iPod touch, which could also handle video recording (and thus would include a mic). We've heard rumors about orders for 5MP, which wouldn't be out of the question considering the base iPod touch has always had twice the storage of the iPhone and the 2nd generation iPod touch had a faster processor than the iPhone 3G.

Cameras would certainly put the hurt on the Zune HD and other rivals by changing the equation so now they have to compete on photo and video capture, sharing/uploading, etc.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #6 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

I know people are going to discuss the camera placement on the nano again as it would apparently be right where everyone would put their fingers. However, I've been looking at it and I don't think it woud actually be in the way if you are right handed. When holding the nano in portrait mode, your fingers would cover, but not touch the lens as your fingertips will hit the back left side of the device and the camera is on the back right. When taking a picture, most likely in landscape, your fingers would be below the lens. Now if you are left handed, that lens is definitely in an awkward place, however I can't think of anywhere else it could go if it can't fit behind the screen.

I was thinking the same thing, that it couldn't be put behind the screen. Or behind the clickwheel, probably. That doesn't leave many other options. I'm also wondering if the nano will get a little thicker? Or maybe the camera lens sticks out a little bit? It will be a challenge to create a good optical path for good quality photos in such a narrow space. Same goes for the touch. It's thinner than the iPhone, so it will be interesting to compare the photos from each device.
post #7 of 28
Apple should make a phone version of the iPod nano with a simulated rotary dial. (Of course, texting would be a bit of a bother.....)
post #8 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Apple should make a phone version of the iPod nano with a simulated rotary dial. (Of course, texting would be a bit of a bother.....)

yes simple phone nano ipod
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #9 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

I know people are going to discuss the camera placement on the nano ... I've been looking at it and I don't think it woud actually be in the way if you are right handed. ....

I thought the same thing.

This is one of those cases where left-handers get screwed a bit. The only solution would be holding it upside down if you are left handed. Maybe Apple has built in a software preference so that left handers can use it upside down and the picture automatically rotates?
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

I thought the same thing.

This is one of those cases where left-handers get screwed a bit. The only solution would be holding it upside down if you are left handed. Maybe Apple has built in a software preference so that left handers can use it upside down and the picture automatically rotates?

I assume you would be able to hold it in landscape mode with the clickwheel on the left if that is what you mean. The iphone can flip both ways, and I assume the current nano can as well. The only problem is that the lens would be below your hand, so your fingers could block the lens if you weren't careful.

I think it would be usable for left handers, but it definitely favors right handers. I don't see many other options without making the device thicker though, and we know Apple likes thin, even if it means limiting or removing features.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #11 of 28
Is it just me or does it look like there is something on the top-right front of the iPod touch? Is it another camera or just a repositioned light sensor?
post #12 of 28
Wouldn't the Camera app be on the iPod touch's home screen on that photoshopped image?
How could they miss something like that?
post #13 of 28
If it is true they are adding the camera, good for them. I could care less. The iPhone camera is crap for quality. I'd still take my point and shoot on trips, regardless of the fact that i have the camera on my iPhone. If Apple would put a 8-10 megapixel camera on them, and include a decent lens, it would be a start.

It's never going to be the all in one device if even one of the components is crap. Sure the 3Gs has better focusing and video capabilities, but if the image is blurry because it has no image stabilization and other features that regular point and shoots have, it's not worth my time.

The only thing i use the camera on my phone is for crap that i don't care about showing people. or stuff i post on facebook, but it'll never replace my Nikon PaS.
post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

If it is true they are adding the camera, good for them. I could care less. The iPhone camera is crap for quality. I'd still take my point and shoot on trips, regardless of the fact that i have the camera on my iPhone. If Apple would put a 8-10 megapixel camera on them, and include a decent lens, it would be a start.

It's never going to be the all in one device if even one of the components is crap. Sure the 3Gs has better focusing and video capabilities, but if the image is blurry because it has no image stabilization and other features that regular point and shoots have, it's not worth my time.

The only thing i use the camera on my phone is for crap that i don't care about showing people. or stuff i post on facebook, but it'll never replace my Nikon PaS.

post #15 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

If it is true they are adding the camera, good for them. I could care less. The iPhone camera is crap for quality. I'd still take my point and shoot on trips, regardless of the fact that i have the camera on my iPhone. If Apple would put a 8-10 megapixel camera on them, and include a decent lens, it would be a start.

It's never going to be the all in one device if even one of the components is crap. Sure the 3Gs has better focusing and video capabilities, but if the image is blurry because it has no image stabilization and other features that regular point and shoots have, it's not worth my time.

The only thing i use the camera on my phone is for crap that i don't care about showing people. or stuff i post on facebook, but it'll never replace my Nikon PaS.

More megapixels does not equal better quality, just like faster MHz doesn't necessarily mean a faster computer. In fact, on something as thin as the touch, it would most likely equate to worse quality...tiny photosites, resulting in lots of noise and low ISO capabilities. Heck, 10 megapixels on a compact point-and-shoot is almost pushing the useful limit as it is.

Give me a 3-4 megapixel sensor with nice fat photosites to capture more light for better color and ISO performance any day. Unless you are printing large prints (as in bigger than 8x10) that's all the pixels you need.
post #16 of 28
with the touch case i see two holes, does that mean a flash?
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
I APPLE THEREFORE I AM
Reply
post #17 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOFEER View Post

with the touch case i see two holes, does that mean a flash?

WiFi antenna.
What goes online stays online. What is online will become public.
Reply
What goes online stays online. What is online will become public.
Reply
post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

More megapixels does not equal better quality, just like faster MHz doesn't necessarily mean a faster computer. In fact, on something as thin as the touch, it would most likely equate to worse quality...tiny photosites, resulting in lots of noise and low ISO capabilities. Heck, 10 megapixels on a compact point-and-shoot is almost pushing the useful limit as it is.

Give me a 3-4 megapixel sensor with nice fat photosites to capture more light for better color and ISO performance any day. Unless you are printing large prints (as in bigger than 8x10) that's all the pixels you need.

That's why in I clearly state in my post that more Megapixels would be "a start". if it's 4 or 12 it's still better than 2 or 3. If you do a little research, physical 35mm film quality is the digital equivalent of 12 Megapixels, sure there are other features that give digital images better quality but i think our readers are smart enough to get the point.

Then further down i state image stabilization would be nice too. I also go on to state that it needs "other features that a regular point and shoot have"; need I bore people with the details.
post #19 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by aresee View Post

WiFi antenna.

GPS antenna
post #20 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

That's why in I clearly state in my post that more Megapixels would be "a start". if it's 4 or 12 it's still better than 2 or 3. If you do a little research, physical 35mm film quality is the digital equivalent of 12 Megapixels, sure there are other features that give digital images better quality but i think our readers are smart enough to get the point.

Then further down i state image stabilization would be nice too. I also go on to state that it needs "other features that a regular point and shoot have"; need I bore people with the details.

I didn't say your other points weren't valid, just that the 10 megapixel request didn't make any sense.

While I won't debate the 35mm = 12 megapixels, you are talking about a sensor that's less than 1/35 the size of a 35mm film frame. Canon's 50D is roughly 2/3s the size of 35mm film, and it packs 16 megapixles, or about 29,000 pixels per square mm. Many people consider this to be pushing the practical limit due to aperture diffraction, sensor noise, and lower ISO range (due to each pixel getting less light). To get higher pixel resolution while maintaining quality, you need to move up to a larger format sensor.

A compact camera like Canon's Elph series has a sensor 1/35 of full frame. A 10 megapixel sensor of that size would have a pixel density of 400,000 pixels/mm^2. But people accept that because they aren't expecting DSLR quality out of a point and shoot. But the sensor in an iPhone or touch would likely be smaller still, and yet people expect a camera phone to take photos as good as an average point and shoot.

All I was pointing out was that people requesting such high resolutions are fodder for the camera manufacturer's marketing team, similar to the "megahertz myth". It only gives you bragging rights, not better photos.

As far as the image stabilization, that only helps if YOU are moving. It doesn't do crap (to use your word) if your subject is moving. For that you need a faster shutter. You get that by having a higher ISO range. And there are two ways you can achieve that: 1) crank up the gain on the signal coming off the sensor, which will make for a very noisy photo, or 2) use larger pixels to capture more light. I'd prefer #2. Larger pixels=more light=higher ISO=faster shutter=better than having image stabilization.

Sorry if I've bored you.

Edit: Ok, there's 3 ways, you can use a larger aperture. But that's a very limited option on a camera phone.
post #21 of 28
Left-handed, or right handed, if that camera is in the lower corner of the Nano as it appears, one handed operation is likely to result in a lot of finger-in-the-frame shots either way.
post #22 of 28
Don't believe any of them. ITI all rumors.
post #23 of 28
Got my first iPhone this summer (3GS) and like it a lot, the video works great. My only video complaint is that there is no stabilization, taking video while walking or riding in a car is jumpy. Could use my Pentax with stabilization, but don't always have it on me. Adding cam/video to the touch and Nano would definitely be a big selling point for people who only want to carry one device and being able to take photos & video on the go, because people don't always have their real digital cam around. They also should add a flash, the iPhone takes good photos & video in well lit or day-time outdoors, but in low-light, a flash is needed.

For the casual user as most are, imagine having an iPod with photo & video capture, games, apps, music, video/movie watching, real internet, youtube, stocks, weather, connected / interactive calendar, gps / maps, email, wifi, and more... I don't know of any company having a device that would come close!

Huzzah.
post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

If it is true they are adding the camera, good for them. I could care less. The iPhone camera is crap for quality. I'd still take my point and shoot on trips, regardless of the fact that i have the camera on my iPhone. If Apple would put a 8-10 megapixel camera on them, and include a decent lens, it would be a start. ... but it'll never replace my Nikon PaS.

Why you sound so angry??!! My goodness, calm down.

I have the 3GS and it could definitely use stabilization (and flash would be nice), but I think it takes pretty good photos - in daytime or well-lit areas. But even in dim areas the photos are passable. Nothing you'd want to print high-res for a magazine, but all the photos are good enough for web viewing or printing to put in a photo album/book. I have a 10mp Pentax dig cam that works great, but this summer before my vacation I lost the battery and didn't have time to buy another. So, used my iPhone cam for photos and video and outside of the lack of stabilization, the video looks great and the photos are nice and clear. The autofocus works great when used correctly. So, outside of the 2 points I mentioned I really don't understand your groaning.

Don't think Apple is trying to compete with high-end or even mid-high end dig cameras, the iPhone 3GS cam is for the point-and-shoot crowd which it is good enough for. An 8 or 10mp cam would be overkill at this stage, no other device out there has 10mp in this market. They could go 5mp, but that's about it, at least for another 3-4 years.

If your photos look like said, "crap," I would chalk it up to user-error, 'cuz my photos are clear, in focus, balanced, and look just fine! And if you're on a 3G with the 2mp cam, yeah, your photos may not be great, then upgrade to a 3GS. That's why smart people like me waited an extra year.
post #25 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post

Got my first iPhone this summer (3GS) and like it a lot, the video works great. My only video complaint is that there is no stabilization, taking video while walking or riding in a car is jumpy. Could use my Pentax with stabilization, but don't always have it on me. Adding cam/video to the touch and Nano would definitely be a big selling point for people who only want to carry one device and being able to take photos & video on the go, because people don't always have their real digital cam around. They also should add a flash, the iPhone takes good photos & video in well lit or day-time outdoors, but in low-light, a flash is needed.

Huzzah.

Stabilization? Does any camera phone have that?
Flash would be cool but I prefer a zoom over that.
Does anyboy like any of the digital zoom Apps? Curious.
It would be interesting to me if Apple adds a even better camera on the Touch and really go after the camera market.
post #26 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

I know people are going to discuss the camera placement on the nano again as it would apparently be right where everyone would put their fingers. However, I've been looking at it and I don't think it woud actually be in the way if you are right handed. When holding the nano in portrait mode, your fingers would cover, but not touch the lens as your fingertips will hit the back left side of the device and the camera is on the back right. When taking a picture, most likely in landscape, your fingers would be below the lens. Now if you are left handed, that lens is definitely in an awkward place, however I can't think of anywhere else it could go if it can't fit behind the screen.

what if you hold the nano upside down when you want to shot portrait mode?
the screen would flip like it does when help in landscape mode,
this would allow you to hold the bottom part of the nano and thumb the click wheel on top on the ipod, and the camera would also be on the top ,
only restriction might be thumb would cover some of the screen,
post #27 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Stabilization? Does any camera phone have that?
Flash would be cool but I prefer a zoom over that.
It would be interesting to me if Apple adds a even better camera on the Touch and really go after the camera market.

I still think a flash would be great, but I agree a zoom lens would also be great. I am on vacation and lost the battery for my Pentax and can't find a store that sells 'em, now forced to use my iPhone for all photos & video and a few times I did want to zoom in. Would be wise of Apple to put at least 5mp in the touch and allow taking HD video to truly compete with the Cisco Flip. Do that and the Flip sales would plunge.
post #28 of 28
Megapixels count for nothing when the camera is a tiny sensor behind a plastic lens.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Numerous 3rd party case photos suggest iPod cameras coming