Apple adds camera to… the Nano?

iPod Nano 5GI guess we all knew not to expect news about the tablet project at Apple’s press conference today. But the iPod Touch with newly added camera seemed like a sure bet. I own a Touch, and a camera would simply make it a lot better. Tonight’s big surprise was that Cupertino instead chose to add it to the Nano.

Let’s take a look at the new iPod line-up. There’s the Shuffle, which is dedicated to audio. You even control it through sound. Then there’s the new Nano, which although it has a slightly bigger screen is still not something I’d watch movies on. The Touch on the other hand is ideally suited for that. The Classic has the most storage, but lacks the Touch’s extensive multimedia features. The only iPod that would allow the camera to be used with Twitter, upload video through wifi and watch it on a decent screen did not get the camera.

Don’t touch the iPhone

We can only guess why Apple chose this, but the logical conclusion seems to be that they didn’t want the Touch to invade iPhone territory. It’s already a relatively cheap way to get access to Apple’s App Store (as was mentioned in the presentation), and my guess is Apple didn’t want it to get any better. Sure, it got a speed bump, but it’s still pretty much the same device.

Low resolution

Another thing the disappointed me was the camera’s lower-even-than-sd resolution. 640*480 pixels was pretty sexy five years ago, but if they really want to take on the Creative Vado and Flip Mimo with this, they better bump that to 720p asap. If the Nano can handle that. I’m sure the Touch could…

1 Comment

  1. I got my iPad a few weeks back, and have also been playing with it. I did a full review of iPad 2 and posted it on last week.

    I will give you my penny’s worth about the iPad camera below:

    I you look closely cameras on most tablet PCs are always lousy. This is due to their ergonomics, not their less-than-expected imaging sensors. Imagine adding wings to a boat — although it might fly, it’ll be so awkward you wonder why anyone bothered.

    Even so, it’s a mystery why Apple didn’t include the iPhone 4’s 5-megapixel digital camera in the iPad. Apple didn’t even list the pixel resolution spec for the iPad 2 still photos (you should know, however, the rear camera is .69 MP – 960 x 720 pixels – which is only slightly better than the VGA-quality front camera), and for good reason – still photos taken with the iPad 2’s rear camera are poor, bordering on “why bother”. Shots taken inside are grainy, with little detail or color, and going outside doesn’t improve things much either.

    But video is different.. If you hold the iPad 2 still (very difficult) you can take good 1280 x 720 HD video at 30 frames a second. Although the video is decent, the device makes for very shaky footage.

    I don’t believe Apple created the iPad 2 to function as a camera: the purpose of the rear camera is to allow callers to see what is around them. Nevertheless, it is very disappointing that the iPad2 takes lousy still pictures, since we do use it for this purpose.

    I hope my bit helps if you have been wodering about iPad camera

    Comment by Martin — May 12, 2011 @ 6:24 am