AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › First sample photos from new iPad show dramatic improvement over iPad 2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

First sample photos from new iPad show dramatic improvement over iPad 2 - Page 2

post #41 of 70
3/14/12 at 7:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub View Post

It's also a real shame Apple does not build in an SD Card slot for storage expansion....

Then use this..
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 70
3/14/12 at 7:36am
Who walks around using the iPad as a camera? The thing is too big and unwieldy to be used as a point & shoot.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #43 of 70
3/14/12 at 7:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub View Post

I know I can back up to iCloud but I would need to purchase extra storage on top of that too.

I have the sneaking suspicion that this is the exact intention.

It really makes little overall sense to not offer at least a 128GB version of the new iPad.
Not only are apps much larger (2.5-3x it was said), but also you'll be shooting much higher res pictures and movies. And download HD movies too.
A 64GB new iPad will seriously feel like a 32GB iPad 2.
Out of the box.

How much room is there to grow? None.
Juggling data onto SD cards as extension is not going to work well either.

The only real option is to upload all your movies and pictures and music to the cloud, especially iCloud, to keep data on the iPad lean.
One seemingly has little other choice.


So I think Apple wanted it that way.
They want you to feel crammed on your iPad, to force you onto (i)Cloud.

That is the only explanation I can think of why they did not offer a 128GB version.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 70
3/14/12 at 8:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobBIT View Post

I have the sneaking suspicion that this is the exact intention.

It really makes little overall sense to not offer at least a 128GB version of the new iPad.
Not only are apps much larger (2.5-3x it was said), but also you'll be shooting much higher res pictures and movies. And download HD movies too.
A 64GB new iPad will seriously feel like a 32GB iPad 2.
Out of the box.

How much room is there to grow? None.
Juggling data onto SD cards as extension is not going to work well either.

The only real option is to upload all your movies and pictures and music to the cloud, especially iCloud, to keep data on the iPad lean.
One seemingly has little other choice.


So I think Apple wanted it that way.
They want you to feel crammed on your iPad, to force you onto (i)Cloud.

That is the only explanation I can think of why they did not offer a 128GB version.

The ONLY exception? So you've actually seen a design that Apple refused to use? There could be a number of reasons. Perhaps they didn't have room on the motherboard and adding 128 GB would have created too many tradeoffs?

Face it. You don't know why Apple doesn't offer 128 GB so please stop acting like you do.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 70
3/14/12 at 8:23am
It is baffling that some people seem to be personally insulted that Apple offers a 16GB model.

For many users a 16GB model has more than enough storage. A massive percentage of the iPad userbase only browses the web, emails, watches you-tube, looks at an occasional map. Perhaps a few 3rd party apps are installed, maybe a cookbook, netflix, or a handful of games.

16GB is more than enough for this type of user. They aren't looking to store media files and don't plan on downloading 63 games.

Before anyone tries to rebut for some bizarre reason, realize that this is only one type of user. There are certainly other people that need a lot more storage. That's the enlightened perspective, to realize that different people have different needs. Apple chooses to offer a 16GB model because it thinks there are a significant number of people who prefer that model. They don't offer a 128GB model because they must feel that there aren't enough people to justify selling it.

Theoretically, they could also offer a 1TB model. But they have to draw the line at some point. Whether 64GB is the right cut-off point, that's debatable. But given the sales statistics, it seems that apple probably has the right mix of product offerings.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 70
3/14/12 at 8:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Who walks around using the iPad as a camera? The thing is too big and unwieldy to be used as a point & shoot.

Schools for documentary assignments. Augmented reality apps. QR code scanners. OCR programs. It may also just be the device you have with you.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 70
3/14/12 at 8:51am
I think people will quickly recalibrate their expectations for what is socially acceptable behavior. While some people might feel foolish holding up an iPad as a camera, that self-consciousness will likely diminish over time as it becomes common.

The iPad also offers an unprecedented way to shoot video. A viewfinder that offers 1080p and can be seen at arms reach... it truly is a new paradigm. It isn't just acceptable, it is actually superior. In the near future, nobody will want to shoot video with tiny view finders.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 70
3/14/12 at 9:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98 View Post

I don't get Apple with this camera upgrade.
Why upgrading least used back camera? Seriously, who is using it?
Why not to bring HD quality to the front camera for better experience in FaceTime, Skype, PhotoBooth, etc?

I can imagine front vs back camera use in iPad is at least 100 to 1.

I don't expect a lot of people are using those services either. I wish more people used them, because that would make customer support a lot easier for me, so I can see what products they are using, how they're using them, and then show what they need or how to use it, in real time, rather than play email tag.

Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub View Post

128Gb and 256Gb should be a given option on iPads even if we have to pay a bit more.. It's also a real shame Apple does not build in an SD Card slot for storage expansion....

I think you'd be paying at least $200 more, if not $400.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJJameson View Post

Then use this..

Please at least understand what the product an and can't do before passing it off as a solution. It's not that hard. That device allows files to be taken in, but I don't think any Apple-approved apps can use that reader as an expansion slot.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 70
3/14/12 at 10:00am
@jragosta:
Gee, sorry if my tone insulted your eyes...
I did qualify my post by saying that this is the only exception I can think of. You might be able to think of others, but sorry I cannot think of another more likely one. That's all I meant to say.


@dfiler:
In light of the reportedly vastly higher storage requirement (due to 4x higher pixel count) just to keep the 'status quo', by which I mean the same apps as currently, the same number of pictures taken, number of movies shot and number of HD movies downloaded for offline viewing, the question is not whether there are users who need >64GB storage on an iPad, but more to the point whether currently users even need 64GB.

Seeing as the 64GB new iPad will virtually feel like a 32-60GB iPad 2 (depending on your usage pattern) offering the new iPad only in 64GB seems like a virtual reduction in maximum storage space.

Perhaps this is OK. Perhaps Apple found that hardly anyone uses 64GB on their iPads.
That really is my question here.

My 64GB iPad 1 currently has just 4GB available. I doubt the new iPad will offer me enough storage capacity after upgrading my movies and apps to new iPad versions. I will probably have to remove things. Which is never nice with a new gadget, as it gives the impression of a 'downgrade'.

Understood, I might not be the typical Apple user, but I gladly would have liked to buy a 128GB version.


@JeffDM:
Would it be impossible to offer a 96GB version to keep costs lower?
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 70
3/14/12 at 10:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

How high of quality do you need for Skype or FaceTime?

OTOH, you could use the back camera for all sorts of photos of things where the quality DOES matter. I think you have your ratios backwards.

Mmm, I gotta agree with Jason. A high-quality front-facing camera seems much more useful than the back camera on an iPad. Maybe I'm just shallow but I like seeing crisp, high-res video when using skype or facetime.

I'm curious - how many iPad2 users regularly use their iPad to snap photos with the rear camera?
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 70
3/14/12 at 10:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobBIT View Post

Seeing as the 64GB new iPad will virtually feel like a 32-60GB iPad 2 (depending on your usage pattern) offering the new iPad only in 64GB seems like a virtual reduction in maximum storage space.

Perhaps this is OK. Perhaps Apple found that hardly anyone uses 64GB on their iPads.
That really is my question here.

My 64GB iPad 1 currently has just 4GB available. I doubt the new iPad will offer me enough storage capacity after upgrading my movies and apps to new iPad versions. I will probably have to remove things. Which is never nice with a new gadget, as it gives the impression of a 'downgrade'.

Understood, I might not be the typical Apple user, but I gladly would have liked to buy a 128GB version.


@JeffDM:
Would it be impossible to offer a 96GB version to keep costs lower?

I have no idea, it's plausible given that it's two chips, at least it was on previous models. Then one 32GB and one 64GB chip might be used.

Hopefully the storage wouldn't be so much worse for you. The file sizes for 1080p video in a higher profile allows better quality with negligible file size increases. Hopefully Apple tightens up the compression on photos. Photos saved to iOS devices seem to be loosely compressed for images supposedly optimized for their target device.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 70
3/14/12 at 10:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobBIT View Post

@jragosta:
Gee, sorry if my tone insulted your eyes...
I did qualify my post by saying that this is the only exception I can think of. You might be able to think of others, but sorry I cannot think of another more likely one. That's all I meant to say.


@dfiler:
In light of the reportedly vastly higher storage requirement (due to 4x higher pixel count) just to keep the 'status quo', by which I mean the same apps as currently, the same number of pictures taken, number of movies shot and number of HD movies downloaded for offline viewing, the question is not whether there are users who need >64GB storage on an iPad, but more to the point whether currently users even need 64GB.

Seeing as the 64GB new iPad will virtually feel like a 32-60GB iPad 2 (depending on your usage pattern) offering the new iPad only in 64GB seems like a virtual reduction in maximum storage space.

Perhaps this is OK. Perhaps Apple found that hardly anyone uses 64GB on their iPads.
That really is my question here.

My 64GB iPad 1 currently has just 4GB available. I doubt the new iPad will offer me enough storage capacity after upgrading my movies and apps to new iPad versions. I will probably have to remove things. Which is never nice with a new gadget, as it gives the impression of a 'downgrade'.

Understood, I might not be the typical Apple user, but I gladly would have liked to buy a 128GB version.


@JeffDM:
Would it be impossible to offer a 96GB version to keep costs lower?

The examples given for drastically increased app sizes seem to be apps that have stock image libraries for use in creating content. This is significant to some people but not to others. Sure some people will need more storage, but the point that I was making is that for a large percentage of people, 16G will still be enough. For instance, high-res buttons won't drastically change the size of apps like maps, netflix or mail.

As for a virtual reduction in max storage space, we must also consider the trend away from local media storage. As mobile network speed and coverage improve, the need for local storage has decreased. This is evidenced by the popularity of pandora, netflix, youtube, etc.

Again though, this is just an acknowledgement of a trend and isn't meant to deny the existence of people who will feel a storage capacity crunch with retina apps. In my opinion the Macworld storage crunch article touches on a valid topic but greatly exaggerates the significance to most people. It is my prediction that the vast majority of people will have no trouble with storage capacity. Most apps simply don't rely on a lot of locally stored graphics.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 70
3/14/12 at 10:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by 712clark View Post

Secondly, back camera would be used mainly for P2P use or self-portrait, therefore usually face-only detail required. If this was HD, then a new iPad-to-new iPad FaceTime or Skype video call would require substantially more bandwidth at it's highest resolution use.

I am sure ISPs and mobile operators wouldn't appreciate that and neither would you when you get the bill or get blocked for excessive bandwidth usage. Additionally, a further network upgrade would be required to cope with even more HD video calls, HD video streaming & internet usage.....and so the continual upgrade circle keeps turning.

Do not see how that was Apple's motivation. Especially when they are going to start serving HD movies online.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 70
3/14/12 at 10:39am
I've got to be completely honest, I've used the camera on the iPad a bunch of times.

My phone is pretty lame, and I'm always using the iPad, so if I need or want a picture or video of something, I'll just open the app and I'm ready to go. Simple.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 70
3/14/12 at 11:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Who walks around using the iPad as a camera? The thing is too big and unwieldy to be used as a point & shoot.

i don't know about "walking around" but i see people all the time using the cam for video at swim meets...

we sit in the stand for hours at a time during these meets and you bring your ipad to help pass the time. When it is time for your kid to swim, turn off your Angry Birds game and switch over to the video cam for saving a memory.

I have never done it, but with the new ipad, i will give it a try. (even though i typically carry a Sony HD video cam for this)
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 70
3/14/12 at 12:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Who walks around using the iPad as a camera? The thing is too big and unwieldy to be used as a point & shoot.

I can think of several:

1) insurance adjusters

2) inspectors

3) contractors

4) doctors and nurses

5) anyone who needs to carry a tablet, who occasionally needs a camera.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #57 of 70
3/14/12 at 12:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

The iPad also offers an unprecedented way to shoot video. A viewfinder that offers 1080p and can be seen at arms reach... it truly is a new paradigm. It isn't just acceptable, it is actually superior. In the near future, nobody will want to shoot video with tiny view finders.

Absolutely agree. The iPad is the highest-resolution field monitor ever made. There are those with camera gear costing 100 times that of an iPad wondering how they can hook it up. Those of us with more modest budgets can simply use it as a 1080p videocam with manual control over exposure, focus and frame rate (e.g.
using the Filmic app) and still have the best field monitor than money can buy.

See how some are already using iPad 2: http://www.makayama.com/moviemount.html

Tim.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 70
3/14/12 at 12:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

No need. Have you seen the photos from the iPad 2? They're horrible in room lighting--lots of chroma noise. Very similar to the camera in the original iPhone and iPod Touch. In other words, no side-by-side comparison needed, not for me anyway.

I don't remember asking if you needed a side by side comparison. I mean no offense, but I was asking because *I* wanted one. We all know the new iPad's camera will blow away what the iPad 2 could do. I'm curious to know how the new iPad camera compares to the iPhone 4 camera since they're both 5 megapixels (again, to be clear, NOT the 4S, which has a better camera). I don't expect to use my new iPad as a camera that often, but I think the comparison in capability is an interesting one since both the iPhone 4 and the new iPad are 5 megapixel cameras. Really, the iPhone 4 has quite a nice camera. I'm curious to know if Apple managed to improve on it for the new iPad.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 70
3/14/12 at 12:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Still waiting for an explanation of why you need so much better resolution for FaceTime or Skype. I'd also like to know why you need stereo mics for FaceTime or Skype.

Perhaps the person wanting that feature has two heads? Or one very uniquely formed head with two mouths?

...probably not, but...?
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 70
3/14/12 at 12:57pm
2D games and apps will be increasing because of the higher resolution artwork needed. Yet 3D games such as Infinity Blade, Real Racing 2, etc shouldn't increase much as running a game in a higher resolution doesn't require more space.

Also as a side note, the initial download sizes have increased to support the new iPad but when you install an app on the previous iPads surely the install sizes are the same? They won't require the higher resolution artwork. People are confusing download size and installation size, the download sizes have increased because they have to support BOTH resolutions.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 70
3/14/12 at 1:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

I think people will quickly recalibrate their expectations for what is socially acceptable behavior. While some people might feel foolish holding up an iPad as a camera, that self-consciousness will likely diminish over time as it becomes common.

The iPad also offers an unprecedented way to shoot video. A viewfinder that offers 1080p and can be seen at arms reach... it truly is a new paradigm. It isn't just acceptable, it is actually superior. In the near future, nobody will want to shoot video with tiny view finders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by timmillea View Post

Absolutely agree. The iPad is the highest-resolution field monitor ever made. There are those with camera gear costing 100 times that of an iPad wondering how they can hook it up. Those of us with more modest budgets can simply use it as a 1080p videocam with manual control over exposure, focus and frame rate (e.g.
using the Filmic app) and still have the best field monitor than money can buy.

See how some are already using iPad 2: http://www.makayama.com/moviemount.html

Tim.

Two absolutely intelligent answers, and add Dick Applebaum's above too.

Will you people with no imagination or too much self-consciousness please read these and stop with the back-camera wonderment?

You are going to feel very stupid in a month or two, if not in a week or two.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 70
3/14/12 at 1:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

As for a virtual reduction in max storage space, we must also consider the trend away from local media storage. As mobile network speed and coverage improve, the need for local storage has decreased. This is evidenced by the popularity of pandora, netflix, youtube, etc.

In the world of data caps, even on unlimited accounts, the move away from "local storage" is a dead end unless the carriers stop bending us over and raping us in the a$$.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 70
3/14/12 at 1:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stynkfysh View Post

I'm using the camera, at least will. Part of my job is to inspect things which includes capturing photographs while taking notes. The iPad is perfect for me. If you think about it, there are many professions that can take advantage of having a tablet with camera. Not to mention, when I am sitting around the house surfing the web on the iPad and my family does something interesting, I have the ability to capture it on the spot before the moment is gone. Not all features are for everyone. I could care less about graphics performance in Infinity Blade, for example - but lots of people DO care. I wish Apple wouldn't have gone cheap in leaving out a flash, however. Pictures in this post are waaaaaay better than my iPad 2, but not awesome like the 4S.

I have the same type of job- I inspect buildings for insurance companies. Having a rear camera of better quality is much more preferable for me because of this. I can't wait to see how much more efficient and fun iPad makes my job! What do you do exactly?
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 70
3/14/12 at 2:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicComposer View Post

. People are confusing download size and installation size, the download sizes have increased because they have to support BOTH resolutions.

I probably am confusing it also. You mean that the universal app file I have in iTunes on my computer contains all necessary files for normal res and retina res and iPad res, yet when it is installed on my iPhone, it will not put all the files, just the ones necessary for the low res screen of my 3GS iPhone and not the higher res files?? Seriously?

You sure about that?? It would make sense, yet all journalists and bloggers have not mentioned that. Any link to a website stating that fact??
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 70
3/14/12 at 2:32pm
I saved the pictures to my PC and used PIE (Picture Information Extractor) to reveal the camera info embedded in the image file. The 2nd and 3rd picture appear to be from an iPad camera.

Camera: iPad
Make: Apple
2592x1936
24bit
5MP
f2.4 lens
4.3mm (eq. 35mm) focal length
1/15 sec shutter speed
ISO 200 and 500
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 70
3/14/12 at 2:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

Also, if you look closely, you'll notice that the iPad holder is off-center and the guy/gal to the right of him/her (in the center) looks like he/she is possibly holding another camera. I'd say it's definitely possible they're faked.

I saw that. My take is they were shooting the same picture with two different cameras, and then comparing the two to see how much difference there is (white balance, saturation, tones, resolution, etc.).
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 70
3/14/12 at 3:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by timmillea View Post

Yep, they are fake. Here is the evidence:

1) The image size is incorrect. They are 2592 x 1936. Omnivision 5MP chips are actually 2592x1944 active pixels.
...
Tim.

I guess Apple is also publishing fake pictures, since <http://images.apple.com/ipad/gallery/images/downloads/IMG_1190.JPG> is the same pixel size.

Reply
Reply
post #68 of 70
3/14/12 at 3:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by VFC View Post

I saved the pictures to my PC and used PIE (Picture Information Extractor) to reveal the camera info. The 2nd and 3rd picture appear to be from an iPad camera.

Camera: iPad
Make: Apple
2592x1936
24bit
5MB
f2.4 lens
4.3mm (eq. 35mm) focal length
1/15 sec shutter speed
ISO 200 and 500

Maybe, but they couldn't be from the iPad camera in the picture. Look at where the iPad is pointed in the blown up image.
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 70
3/14/12 at 4:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The 5-megapixel rear camera has an infrared filter and ISP built into the device's A5X chip. It features auto-focus and auto-exposure and can record in 1080p video.[/URL]

This is the first camera article I've ever seen that used the acronym ISP. I had to look that one up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicComposer View Post

2D games and apps will be increasing because of the higher resolution artwork needed. Yet 3D games such as Infinity Blade, Real Racing 2, etc shouldn't increase much as running a game in a higher resolution doesn't require more space.

For 3D games, you might find larger texture file sizes. Devs might want to increase mesh detail some a bit. But I don't think that's going to mean such a dramatic difference.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 70
3/15/12 at 5:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post

I'd prefer being able to film with my iPhone and send the video to my iPad to make a movie, but it's not even possible to do this between two iOS devices yet. I'm counting on iOS6 for an airdrop feature.

Check the app store. There are a few apps that will transfer the camera roll between iOS devices over wifi.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • First sample photos from new iPad show dramatic improvement over iPad 2
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › First sample photos from new iPad show dramatic improvement over iPad 2