or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Camera lens supplier selected for Apple's second-generation iPad - rumor
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Camera lens supplier selected for Apple's second-generation iPad - rumor

post #1 of 43
Thread Starter 
Rumors that a Taiwanese company has been selected to exclusively supply camera lens modules for Apple's forthcoming second-generation iPad have been unsurprisingly met with a "no comment."

Market rumors in Taiwan have suggested that Largan Precision was selected as the sole supplier of lens modules for the forthcoming iPad upgrade, according to DigiTimes. In a filing with the Taiwan Stock Exchange, Largan refused to comment.

The report made no mention of how many megapixels the cameras might be, or even how many cameras might be included on the new iPad. Largan reportedly supplies 5-megapixel lenses for the iPhone 4.

Rumors of a camera-equipped iPad have swirled for months, and some evidence has even suggested that Apple originally planned at one point to include a camera in the first-generation model. However, Tuesday's rumor is the first time that Largan Precision has been named as a potential camera lens component supplier.

As reported by AppleInsider in September, Apple plans to aggressively push its FaceTime video chat open standard by releasing a new iPad model equipped with a camera. FaceTime was introduced in June, when the iPhone 4 launched with a forward-facing camera.

Some reports have claimed that, like the iPhone 4, Apple's second-generation iPad will include two cameras -- one forward-facing, and one rear-facing. While a device like the iPad, with a 9.7-inch screen, may not be practical for shooting photos with a rear-facing camera, its inclusion could be utilized for augmented reality applications and games.
post #2 of 43
A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.
post #3 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The report made no mention of how many megapixels the cameras might be, or even how many cameras might be included on the new iPad. Largan reportedly supplies 5-megapixel lenses for the iPhone 4.

Anything more than that is overkill. The lens is going to have dust and smudges on it, just like my iPhone. It doesn't need to be hi-res.
post #4 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.

I won't buy the thing until it has a front-facing camera and the ability to make Facetime calls. I suppose that makes me part of the "braindead crowd."
post #5 of 43
Once the iPad gets front facing camera I'll think about getting one. Would like to see retina display, the carbon fibre cover and an improved battery would be nice too. I don't think storage capacity matters on it.

15"MBP 2.66GHz Intel Core i7, 24" iMac 3.02 dual, 4GB Ram, Logic Studio, Apple TV (3rd Gen), 16GB iPod Touch (4thGen), Airport Express.

Reply

15"MBP 2.66GHz Intel Core i7, 24" iMac 3.02 dual, 4GB Ram, Logic Studio, Apple TV (3rd Gen), 16GB iPod Touch (4thGen), Airport Express.

Reply
post #6 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.

Curious and funny. You're funny zindako.
post #7 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by msuberly View Post

I won't buy the thing until it has a front-facing camera and the ability to make Facetime calls. I suppose that makes me part of the "braindead crowd."

Me too
post #8 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by sc54321 View Post

Once the iPad gets front facing camera I'll think about getting one. Would like to see retina display, the carbon fibre cover and an improved battery would be nice too. I don't think storage capacity matters on it.

I understand the iPad has lots of empty space inside, but more battery means more weight.
post #9 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.

Aren't you adorable Camera is a key feature. We are talking about video calls, augmented reality apps, real video diary apps and more. CPU, RAM and storage upgrades are not features, we know for sure that CPU and RAM will be upgraded in the next iPad. We are talking features here.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #10 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Largan reportedly supplies 5-megapixel lenses for the iPhone 4.

.



The author of this sentence seems to have at least two basic misunderstanding about how a camera works.

Clue: Lenses are not rated in megapixels.
post #11 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mex4eric View Post

I understand the iPad has lots of empty space inside, but more battery means more weight.

And weight is really the main issue (if you can even call it an issue) with the Ipad, IMO. Apple devices tend to be on the heavy side due to their large batteries. I'm not so convinced that their battery tech is really much better than the competition, just their engineering has improved greatly to accommodate-- exhibited in the iphone 4, Ipad and now the new MB Airs.
post #12 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.

Count slowly to ten, reread the article, think again, then you might realize, that cameras are not ubiquitously meant to take pictures There are a lot of applications which need camera feed to function. Augmented reality is just one of many features.
Really I am looking forward to see the iPad with front and rear camera. It will definitely be my next iPad!!
post #13 of 43
I don't care so much about cameras. Personally, I'd forgo all cameras on the iPad and iPod Touch if we were given GPS chips!
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #14 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabiko View Post

Clue: Lenses are not rated in megapixels.

My thought exactly.
post #15 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabiko View Post

The author of this sentence seems to have at least two basic misunderstanding about how a camera works.

Clue: Lenses are not rated in megapixels.

<sarcasm>

You're crazy!! Why just the other day, I was buying windows and the salesman showed me some 12.1 megapixel glass! Surely a glass camera lens would be rated the same!

</sarcasm>
post #16 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by msuberly View Post

I won't buy the thing until it has a front-facing camera and the ability to make Facetime calls. I suppose that makes me part of the "braindead crowd."



I'm pretty sure that none of your friends want to see an "up the nose" video of you.
post #17 of 43
It makes absolutely zero sense to have a rear-facing camera on an iPad. Are you really going to hold that thing up to take pictures with it???
post #18 of 43
I'd like to see Apple using two away-facing cameras on the iPhone and Touch so that we can start collecting stereo images. One camera near the top of the enclosure and one near the bottom, for use in landscape mode. I am sure that other uses for a dual camera system would be found too. Sub-pixel interpolation might be possible leading to reasonably higher resolution images for a given pixel rating. A Facetime camera on the iPad would be great.
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #19 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

It makes absolutely zero sense to have a rear-facing camera on an iPad. Are you really going to hold that thing up to take pictures with it???

When I use my digital camera I don't walk around holding it up constantly. I raise it, aim and shoot a photo and then lower the camera. Why can't I do the same with an iPad?

Tim
post #20 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

It makes absolutely zero sense to have a rear-facing camera on an iPad. Are you really going to hold that thing up to take pictures with it???

Several people have already pointed to augmented reality.

How about code scanning? I can see many business uses (inventory control and such) where having a camera would be essential.

Sure, for taking pictures of your friends at a party or on the beach, the iPad makes little sense. However, give app developers a little credit! Cameras open up many possibilities...
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
Progress is a comfortable disease
--e.e.c.
Reply
post #21 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

It makes absolutely zero sense to have a rear-facing camera on an iPad. Are you really going to hold that thing up to take pictures with it???

Bageljoey was polite in his reply, so i will try to be, too.
PLEASE READ posts before you reply to them.
post #22 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.

People don't take pictures all day even with a DSLR digital camera. I think you use the iPad only at home or work. For people that carry iPad around as the only mobile device, the camera will be very handy when needed.
post #23 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.

But I'm sure Oprah wants one to comunicate with Gail while she reclines on her couch in between reading her new iPad O magazine. That's all that matters.
Just because you'll be left with yet another obsolete 1st gen Apple products doesn't. Hint: eBay.
post #24 of 43
Quote:
...even how many cameras might be included on the new iPad.

To appease hardware geeks who want USB ports, SD card slots, PCMCIA, VESA, PCI-X, AGP and every other port on the iPad:

It will have 17 cameras. Now shut up.
post #25 of 43
A camera on the front for Facetime is a given. A camera on the back probably wouldn't get much use. That would make for some awkward, embarrassing photography.

I can see it now, people holding this ten inch pad (out at arms length of course) trying to take pictures with it. Cheese!
post #26 of 43
Same here. The thing would be ideal for FaceTime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by msuberly View Post

I won't buy the thing until it has a front-facing camera and the ability to make Facetime calls. I suppose that makes me part of the "braindead crowd."
post #27 of 43
Actually, I think it would be pretty cool. The viewfinder would be larger then on any other camera.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

A camera on the front for Facetime is a given. A camera on the back probably wouldn't get much use. That would make for some awkward, embarrassing photography.

I can see it now, people holding this ten inch pad (out at arms length of course) trying to take pictures with it. Cheese!
post #28 of 43
As they say, the best camera is the one you have on you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

People don't take pictures all day even with a DSLR digital camera. I think you use the iPad only at home or work. For people that carry iPad around as the only mobile device, the camera will be very handy when needed.
post #29 of 43
Instead of two mediocre cameras, how about one high quality camera mounted on a swivel like some of the old Sony ultralight laptops? I can't imagine anyone needing to use both cameras at once and one instead of two would mean either lower cost or higher quality.

Or better yet, how about a twisting swivel, sort of like a camera module mounted on a headphone jack. That would allow the camera module to be larger than what the Sonys had. Then it would be possible to put folded optics in the module to allow optical zoom. Hey, I can dream.
post #30 of 43
I'm pretty sure iPad "2" will match the iPod touch sensor specs rather than the iPhone sensors. The front camera will be there for FaceTime and the rear one for AR, scanning etc - it doesn't need to have an LED or 5Mpx sensor for those purposes.
post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by desarc View Post

Bageljoey was polite in his reply, so i will try to be, too.
PLEASE READ posts before you reply to them.

I wasn't replying to anyone - I was making a statement.
post #32 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjs View Post

When I use my digital camera I don't walk around holding it up constantly. I raise it, aim and shoot a photo and then lower the camera. Why can't I do the same with an iPad?

Tim

The iPad weighs over a pound - most cameras significantly less than that.
post #33 of 43
Think of all the new videos of people getting mugged for their iPads- genius!
If it gets a camera it will be for a magical reason- Steve won't do it otherwise.
post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.

Actually the iPad may turn out to be the most desired FaceTime device because of the size of the image.

Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Anything more than that is overkill. The lens is going to have dust and smudges on it, just like my iPhone. It doesn't need to be hi-res.

You might try wiping it off before turning on the camera.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

It makes absolutely zero sense to have a rear-facing camera on an iPad. Are you really going to hold that thing up to take pictures with it???

You can hold it steadier than a smaller device, and prop it up more easily.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post

I'd like to see Apple using two away-facing cameras on the iPhone and Touch so that we can start collecting stereo images. One camera near the top of the enclosure and one near the bottom, for use in landscape mode. I am sure that other uses for a dual camera system would be found too. Sub-pixel interpolation might be possible leading to reasonably higher resolution images for a given pixel rating. A Facetime camera on the iPad would be great.

Nice idea, but you would want the two cameras to be about 2 1/2 inches ~ 65 mm apart for decent stereo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post

A camera on the front for Facetime is a given. A camera on the back probably wouldn't get much use. That would make for some awkward, embarrassing photography.
I can see it now, people holding this ten inch pad (out at arms length of course) trying to take pictures with it. Cheese!

More imagination, please. It will make a fantastic view camera, as others have noted.

After living with the iPad for eight months now, enjoying every minute of using this life-changing instrument, the only thing I wish it had is the ability to do live video. So I'll be trading up if this camera thing happens. And I hope they put two of them in.
post #35 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

It makes absolutely zero sense to have a rear-facing camera on an iPad. Are you really going to hold that thing up to take pictures with it???

Of course people want to take pictures with it. Perhaps not as a regular camera, but

There you are in a cafe. Old friend comes by from out of town. "Hey grab a quick shot!"

Or maybe: "this is the street I am on. Which way do I go now?"

Personally, I do not see why an iPad is that much worse than using an iPhone to take a quick video.

So yeah - I am for 2 cams. They ain't even that expensive.
post #36 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by msuberly View Post

I won't buy the thing until it has a front-facing camera and the ability to make Facetime calls. I suppose that makes me part of the "braindead crowd."

You are not alone. Funny thing here I was ready to buy an iPad and then my mind did a 180 on FaceTime. Now I simply won't even consider buying until FaceTime is supported. Ideally it will come with a 3G modem that supports many service providers with the hope that one will support FaceTime over 3/4G. I will go with whatever vendor is willing to support FaceTime on their cell network.

On the otherhand i'm not sure why people get worked up about the mega pixels and stuffy. For a front facing FaceTime camera it really isn't important. All we need is reasonably good quality and hopefully decent low level light performance.
post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

I don't care so much about cameras. Personally, I'd forgo all cameras on the iPad and iPod Touch if we were given GPS chips!

I see the GPS chip as a big deal my self. Very important for many business apps these days. Though it is a little big it can also pass as a in visible navigation platform.

As a side note the issue may be technical. Specifically they may need the 3G modifications for the antenna. GPS need a good antenna and the current iPad has few options.
post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Largan reportedly supplies 5-megapixel lenses for the iPhone 4.

Um, lenses don't get rated by megapixels, sensors do. So is this story about the lens, or the sensor?
Note: this is exactly why the whole megapixel war is such a joke. You have a 10 megapixel sensor, but a craptastic lense, you get craptastic photos. You have a 3 megapixel sensor and a great lens, you get great photos, that just can't be enlarged. Sensor quality both being equal of course. Apple understands this, so I wonder when the iPhone will get a leica lens?

Gordon
post #39 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

A camera is the last thing I need on my iPad, this feature was pushed for by the braindead crowd.

Actually the rear facing camera has lots of uses.
1. Use it to take a picture of a document rather than using a scanner.
2. On project tours take pictures and enter description at the same time
3. realtors input data and pictures of a house using the same device
etc etc.

I'm not pretty enough, nor am I a narcisist, so I don't need a front facing camera.
post #40 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by hittrj01 View Post

<sarcasm>

You're crazy!! Why just the other day, I was buying windows and the salesman showed me some 12.1 megapixel glass! Surely a glass camera lens would be rated the same!

</sarcasm>

Where? Where can I get some? The last glazier I visited only had something he called "slow glass" where it took light three to five hours to transit depending on the thickness of the pane. Oh wait, I can think of a dozen uses college frat boys might have with this.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Camera lens supplier selected for Apple's second-generation iPad - rumor
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Camera lens supplier selected for Apple's second-generation iPad - rumor