MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Apple has doubtless been watching the success of the Mino Flip and thinking... we could do video AND provide basic processing capabilities in an iPod touch.

It is slightly ironic, since it has been said countless times that one reason the Mino products are successful is that they are very "Apple-like" (and Mac-friendly).

"It would also work well in low light,"

Not a chance.

I still have my old Apple Quicktake digital camera with rechargabel double A batteries...does anyone want to buy it?

Kodak and Apple worked together before, Kodak comes with de Zi6, combine this with the iPod touch and there you are ..

May 21, 09 - 12:51 pm Comment from: iamdj

drooling.

May 21, 09 - 12:53 pm Comment from: iamdj

Seth's mom works well in low light.

May 21, 09 - 01:08 pm Comment from: Ottawa Mark

Aaah, yes...The QuickTake; yet another product from the dark days of the mid-90s when Apple had no idea what it should do and kept tilting at windmills...if they go down this road again let's hope they make the right commitment!

I'd buy it.

@Quad

""It would also work well in low light,"
"Not a chance."

Why not? Gathering light is all about the lens. It's very possible with the right lens.

May 21, 09 - 01:24 pm Comment from: rahrens

"It's very possible with the right lens."

And therein lies the rub. ANY camera with the wrong lens is a piece of junk.

Hope that when Apple imbeds these cameras into their products, they have purchased the right lenses...

I've been thoroughly please and impressed with the quality of my FLIP in low light situations. It is definitely more grainy but still good enough for the basic home video market.

Re: selling your old QuickTake Camera

As I found out last year when I sold mine on eBay, each of its memory chips are worth 10 times what the camera as much as the camera.

May 21, 09 - 01:43 pm Comment from: HMCIV

Kodak continues to exist with Apple's blessing. Eh Palm?

May 21, 09 - 01:44 pm Comment from: wannabe

AP, gathering light is NOT all about the lens. The physical size of the sensor remains a crucial factor just as it was in the film days.

This is due to the limitations of lens technology. Even with very small formats, it's technically very difficult to get much beyond f/2.8 in a zoom lens, and perhaps f/1.4 without zoom.

This essentially limits the total brightness that can be projected onto a given square millimeter for any given amount of light, and as a result the only way to get good images in low light is to increase the sensor size.

So this camera would likely perform about as well as current P&S;models in low light -- crappy.

May 21, 09 - 01:55 pm Comment from: Scot Murphy

Apple is also said to be buying up matter-scramblers from the future. Don't worry about who said it, just believe me that it's being said, and that you'll soon have your iTele.

May 21, 09 - 02:12 pm Comment from: Larry

If this is true, I'll have to sell my current iPod touch 2G (which I sold my first gen to get) and upgrade to the 3rd gen iPod touch.

It could be something like this

http://www.mix-to.com/Gallerie_3.html#18

May 21, 09 - 02:19 pm Comment from: LateRegistrant

Bottom line: The future of digital cameras is hard to picture.

May 21, 09 - 02:22 pm Comment from: KingMel

"Five Megapixel cameras are good enough to challenge entry-level point-and-clicks for still photography and at the same time record HD video."

What about noise and focal plane array size/sensitivity? Optical zoom? Image stabilization? Auto focus? Shutter and aperture controls? Large aperture for low light situations and/or sports modes (shutter priority)?

Megapixels alone do not make a good still camera or video camera. But this might appeal to the same people that are buying the miniature, low cost digital camcorders. They have the same limitations, but do not have the potential upside of the Apple operating system and app store.

i bought a circa 2006 camera Fujifilm f30 & f31fd for my wife and i. Why? Because this camera does a WAY better job of low light shots. I loved my Canon, but it couldnt pull off what my F30/F31 does with ease.

If Apple can tap this area (image quality) instead of the dumb Mpixel race (dead pixels that take up space/RAM). They could sneak up on a lot of manufacturers.

May 21, 09 - 02:35 pm Comment from: DacianFalx

@George
That's actually tempting...

The next big thing in digital photography, say I, will be the advancement of robust computational techniques for processing pixels immediately in the camera itself, immediately taking the blur out of a moving subject that would otherwise persist as a big streak in the frame, for example. Fascinating stuff.

@NewsReader..

How's that? QTake 150's only came w/ 2MB of memory..

Yawn!!!
If Apple intro an iPodTouchPhotoVideo thingy, where will the priority lie? In its iPodness? In its Cameraness?
It has to have a photography bias else what's the point. To do it badly would be a credibility disaster. To back it up with so-so software ... ditto. And yet I can't see these photo market ambitions aspiring to the high end because that is already very well served by the likes of Nikon and Canon et al. Apple's strength is that they could attack the prosumer level if they wanted to but only by partnering with a quality name. True high end photography is a minority interest. High profit but very very low volume. I cannot see Apple going too far beyond point and shoot - say to the pro-am level at best with Aperture SE and iMovie Light built in.

May 21, 09 - 03:15 pm Comment from: thethirdshoe

A Leica lens on it would be very nice.

May 21, 09 - 03:59 pm Comment from: Mr. Reeee

Say it ain't so.

Wannabe and KingMel are correct.

The size of the sensor counts more than the megapixel count.
And without a good lens, none of it matters.

The megapixel race has done NOTHING to increase the QUALITY of digital photos. Increasing in-camera "photo processing" does little to improve images, unless you trust the photographic skill and artistic taste of those writing the software filters.

Sorry, but an iPod touch as a camera just doesn't cut it. Yes having the ability to take snapshots might be nice, but it will NEVER be as good a dedicated, REAL camera. Nor will any phone with a camera stuck in it.

The photos generated by a camera in an iPod would be the visual equivalent of the compressed music that most people have on their iPods.

Noise, distortion, etcetera...
For some, it's adequate, the way some people tolerate using Winddows. For me? No thanks.

No they won't. It is simply added special feature for next iPod touch if rumor is true. Camera market is very different from cell phone or computer. Apple can't compete.

May 21, 09 - 11:00 pm Comment from: macslut

It's possible Apple is looking at releasing something that isn't a touch, but rather a much fuller sized camera. Imagine something with a real lens, HD video, image stabilization, plenty of storage, etc..., but it happens to have the screen from the touch, and can run all of the touch software.

It's always been a mystery as to why Apple is willing to give away the market for the Flip, and other pocket cameras.

May 22, 09 - 12:56 am Comment from: Macable

Yes an iPod Touch with a camera and more.

"Monday, May 4, 2009
Future iPod Touch?
If Apple adds, a good still and video camera, true turn by turn (voice) GPS, a reasonably priced optional data plan, and a 64GB memory to the iPod Touch, I think Apple hits a homerun.

An Ipod Touch with these features could outsell the iphone. Apple wins, whichever, is the better seller.
Posted by Appledoozy at 8:43 PM "
http://Appledoozy.com

Jun 02, 09 - 03:07 pm Comment from: MacMarc

Truth is that the digital photography market needs someone to come in and shake things up. I don't care who it is, but I hope they do it soon. (Sound like the phone market about 3 years ago?)

I wish it would, but Apple is unlikely to be the one at this point. They're just putting less crappy cameras in the iPod and iPhone, but they're still crappy (read "adequate").

Make your life time more simple get the credit loans and everything you require.