Apple's successor to the iPad may still be unconfirmed officially, but information buried in the latest iOS software-development kit indicates that it won't push the boat out in terms of camera resolution.
As 9to5 Mac explains, the SDK references a product codenamed 'K94' that's thought to be the iPad 2. The SDK mentions the K94's 'Back Facing 1MP Photo', in addition to a VGA-resolution camera on the front of the device.
The front-facing camera will probably mainly be used for making FaceTime video calls, and matches the front-facing cameras in the iPhone 4 and iPod touch. As with its smaller siblings, the next iPad will probably let you switch to making FaceTime calls with the back-facing camera too, so you can show off the scenery.
A 1-megapixel camera sounds disappointing, but, then again, who's really going to use their iPad to take photos? We sense few potential iPad 2 buyers are hoping for a 5- or 10-megapixel snapper in the new device.
We'd welcome a higher-resolution front-facing camera to make the iPad 2 more future-proof. But we're not feeling too woeful about the low-res back-facing camera. Let us know what you think in the comments section below.
Android App 
RSS Feeds 
iPhone App 
Newsletters 
Comments 10
Add your comment
Pokeh 24 January, 2011 15:00
Given that it's likely to cost £400+ (Probably £500 if you want 3G) I'd say that this is a bit of a fail.
pete2106 24 January, 2011 15:32
not really Pokeh, I know I'll be first in line to get my iPad 2. And I really dont care if it even has a back camera. It would have been nicer to have a better quality front camera (as the article states) but it will be nice to be able to make facetime calls on it.
Pokeh 24 January, 2011 16:05
Why "not really"?
It's not good enough and Apple know it - this way a few years down the line they get to sell us an iPad 3 (or whatever) with a higher resolution camera. Just like they did with the iPhone. I'd say given the high price the device will inevitably have warrants a decent back camera. Still, people will suck it up so whatever I guess. Just my two pence.
Anonymous 24 January, 2011 16:51
I think you need to judge the camera on its primary purpose (presumably facetime/skype?). I think that comparing specs between Apple devices against competitors generally doesn't work as on paper a lot of them are missing things you might have thought were fundamental (e.g. USB port) but the products still work great (imho).
I think the way to go is looking at things you can DO with a product rather than the specs of the technology.
billfred 24 January, 2011 17:27
I don't see the use at all with a rear camera on a tablet, then again I don't see a huge point in a tablet come to that anyway.
pete2106 24 January, 2011 17:34
The fact is, no one is going to use the rear camera at all (except maybe for some augmented reality apps) so it really doesn't matter what size the camera is. Given the price, I'd like to see a much faster processor or significantly more storage space.
Anonymous 25 January, 2011 09:46
Thing is though, is anyone actually STILL making 1mp sensors?! I would have thought we've now got to the point where its more expensive to put one of those in than a 3mp + sensor due to economies of scale.
No one is using them, less are made, so the per unit price goes up
Anonymous 25 January, 2011 16:12
Nice write-up!
agree with anonymous. there's little excuse for 1 mp... even less for the puny .7 mb they put on the IPT 4G!! 3 mp should be standard, the minimum, and cheap to include--especially as Apple is ordering millions of these things.
OTOH, who really needs much of a front-facing camera anyway? Although I like the writer's idea of a scenery use-- to show off to family friends elsewhere what you've done with the yard or the house while still maintaining a Skype connection via the front-facing camera.
Incidentally, to the managers of the site-- the Captchas are hard to read and I am a human. Plus, it is irritating to discover that they do NOT appear unless one allows Google Analytics tracking. You should switch systems--and in the meantime let users know Google is watching you!
Anonymous 25 January, 2011 17:29
iPad1 sold well without any cameras, as iPad2 will with low quality ones. It seems our once premier Apple products have become ones containing features just enough to get by with.
polygonal 27 January, 2011 08:06
As a grandparent I am looking forward to seeing some augmented reality childrens books come out which use the Ipad rear facing camera. The children could read the story in the book and view animated figures or any other video content which can pop up out of the books image in the ipad. The posabilities are endless!