Camera design

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
If Apple were to make a digital camera they would probably have unparalleled design. I cant imagine how they would approach such hardware without breaking much ground though. Digital cameras these days are as compact as can be and the introduction of the new Minolta Dimage X proves that design is often a top priority when it comes to consumer devices.



<a href="http://electronics.cnet.com/electronics/0-6613935-1304-8653940.html?tag=belt"; target="_blank">http://electronics.cnet.com/electronics/0-6613935-1304-8653940.html?tag=belt</a>;



If apple were to introduce an Apple branded camera, what do you think it would look like? What new features would set it apart from the average camera... aside from the HD storage that everyone is talking about.



[ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: Metacom ]</p>

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 9
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    I'd buy an Apple-branded SLR in a second if it had firewire download capabilities, resolution approaching *good* negative film (even today's biggest megapixel numbers don't come close to negative film, let alone slide film), and compatibility with Nikon F-series lenses. Ya ya I know...keep dreamin'!







    [ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</p>
  • Reply 2 of 9
    cdhostagecdhostage Posts: 1,038member
    3 things an Apple camera needs:



    1) Firewire connectivity

    2) High resolution (4 megapixels or better maximum resolution, but standard click is less)

    3) Large storage unit - iPod HD for instance, but in 10 or 20 gig size

    4) Excellent battery - rechargable. iPod's battery, for instance

    5) Handheld of course - not a mini camera and NO STINKING TINY BUTTONS! Not as big as the Mavica of course, that was too big, maybe half that size.
  • Reply 3 of 9
    ricrocketricrocket Posts: 142member
    cdhostage - I appreciate your desire for a high quality product, but I've a feeling those "needs" would push an Apple branded camera into the realm of "not-gonna-happen".



    [quote] 1) Firewire connectivity <hr></blockquote>

    Yes, fair one - anything less would be uncivilized.



    [quote] 2) High resolution (4 megapixels or better maximum resolution, but standard click is less) <hr></blockquote>

    This is now out of the realm of most consumers both in terms of need (decent 4x6 - 8x10 prints) and cost.



    [quote] 3) Large storage unit - iPod HD for instance, but in 10 or 20 gig size <hr></blockquote>

    Damn! that's a lot of pictures... 1-2gigs is a helluva lotta pictures by itself, 10 or 20 is too much, too expensive (unless you need to take 3-4000 pics before synching, which I think is not often the case, even on long vacations)



    [quote] 4) Excellent battery - rechargable. iPod's battery, for instance <hr></blockquote>

    Definately - my Canon S100's short battery life is by far its biggest let down (other than that, a great point-and-click).



    [quote] 5) Handheld of course <hr></blockquote>

    Of course, unless you're thinking SLR, but that's really not gonna happen...not enough people are in the market for a digital SLR, if this happens it's going to be a point-and-click'er.



    If what your needs actually were met, it'd be an incredible camera... but there's no way I could afford it (or many outside the pro-photo market that could either).



    rr.
  • Reply 4 of 9
    max8319max8319 Posts: 347member
    as for design, i can see them using a compact design, as opposed to an ultra compact design like those elf cameras from cannon (?). this camera would be marketed towards consumers, not necessarily pros who need the latest and greatest. so it doesn't need to have the ability to change lenses or anything. 4 megapixel, ~105mm zoom equivelent, ease of use
  • Reply 5 of 9
    [quote]Originally posted by Moogs ?:

    <strong>I'd buy an Apple-branded SLR in a second ...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Apple won't be building an SLR if they are developing a digital camera at all. You're going to get an LCD screen to preview the image, you will probably get a rangefinder as well, but I doubt you'll get an SLR. That's more of a professional feature, and it requires a lot more physical space in the camera for the mirrors, which would make the camera larger than a consumer would want it.



    I still haven't seen an inexpensive digital SLR... I'm about to buy a Nikon D30 so I can use the lenses from my n90s, and the best prices I'm seeing on it are something like $1600 and higher, and that was a few months ago.
  • Reply 6 of 9
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    I won't buy an Apple branded camera unless it has 4+ megapixel resolution, a fair amount of manual control, FireWire. I would actually rather not have an iPod-like HDD built-in. There is, however an equivalent drive in a PCMCIA card. It would be great if Apple had a camera with a PCMCIA slot...and adapters for whatever kind of media you choose. I have a camera that can take both SmartMedia and CompactFlash, but I also have devices that use MemoryStick and SD/MMC, so compatibility with all of them would be nice.



    Most likely, though, I'm going to drop the bucks for the Sigma SD9 if no other manufacturer announces cameras that use the Foveon X3 by the time the SD9 becomes available. I just dread the idea of starting a collection of Sigma lenses.
  • Reply 7 of 9
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Holy cow...the Canon D60 is going to be ~$2200 if the Canadian price is anything to go by... :eek:



    Maybe I'll stick to a bayer pattern imager camera after all...
  • Reply 8 of 9
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    [quote]Originally posted by Moogs ™:

    <strong>I'd buy an Apple-branded SLR in a second if it had firewire download capabilities, resolution approaching *good* negative film (even today's biggest megapixel numbers don't come close to negative film, let alone slide film)...

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Not really. 5-6 MP comes close to decent negative film. Take a 'color' image with both and you'll see that they ain't that far off. When you enlarge the film negative you start to get graininess (that patina of film that we've all gotten used to) when you enlarge the digital image you get pixelation which tends to look less natural. But one doesn't really have much more detail than the other.



    It could be the optics involved, but even expensive 35mm scanners seem to be reaching a point of diminishing return at around 3200-4000dpi for most film. Suggests to me that once we get up around 12 MP there will no longer be any question about digital sensors (even as a replacement for slides). 2 More years.
  • Reply 9 of 9
    ccr65ccr65 Posts: 59member
    1. 4 mega pixel multilayered CCD

    2. Firewire

    3. MPEG movie mode

    4. some kind of unique linking features with the iapps, other hub devices and pro creative apps (FCP, DVD studio).

    5. audio only (MP3, MPEG 4 or something else) recording mode



    Basically it could be used as the all purpose audio/video/still picture input device for the hub. More than just a camera.
Sign In or Register to comment.