Previous news story    Next news story

Low-res iPad Mini and updated 'Retina' iPad released in Apple refresh

By dpreview staff on Oct 23, 2012 at 19:25 GMT

Apple has announced an new 'Mini' version of the iPad with a 7.9 inch, 163ppi display. The iPad Mini's display offers a quarter of the pixel count (1024 x 768 pixels compared to 2048 x 1536) of its 9.7in, A6 processor-equipped cousin (simply called 'iPad'), the fourth generation of which was also unveiled at an event in San Jose, California. The iPad Mini has created a lot of buzz, but photographers might be disappointed that its screen resolution is lower than the cheaper Google Nexus 7 tablet, which offers 1280 x 800 pixels and a pixel density of 217ppi.

It's a different story with the latest 13" (33 cm) MacBook Pro, though, which features a 227ppi screen, adding the 'Retina' designation that is carried by devices that - in Apple's words - offer resolution so fine that the human eye can't perceive individual pixels. 

The popular iMac range has been refreshed as well, and although the new models don't offer Retina resolution, Apple has worked to improve the displays by introducing an air-gapless screen with anti-reflective coating. This is claimed to result in 75% less reflection than its predecessor - a long-standing complaint of previous glossy-screened iMacs, especially from photographers. 

The iPad Mini will cost $329/£269 for a Wi-Fi-only 16Gb tablet, compared with $249/£199 for an equivalent Google Nexus 7 or $499/£399 for the fourth generation 'iPad with Retina display.' Cellular versions of the Mini will cost up to $649/£529 for the 64Gb version, compared to $829/£659 for the full-sized iPad. (All UK prices include VAT).

Comments

Total comments: 118
rondhamalam
By rondhamalam (Oct 27, 2012)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/25/goopad_mini_ipad_mini_clone_china/

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Let-down-by-the-iPad-Minis-higher-than-entry-level-price--GooPhone-has-you-covered_id35888

http://liliputing.com/2012/10/329-ipad-mini-too-expensive-goophone-has-a-99-android-version.html

http://www.ijailbreak.com/ipad/goopad-mini-ipad-mini-knockoff-november/

http://www.gizchina.com/2012/10/24/goophone-goopad-mini-ipad-mini-clone/

0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (Oct 26, 2012)

again more news about the same tablet in dpreview? This is quite interesting coming from the dpr guys.

1 upvote
alfredo_tomato
By alfredo_tomato (Oct 25, 2012)

The iPad mini is not aimed at the photographer. It is for the mobile gamer.

0 upvotes
Zuzullo
By Zuzullo (Oct 25, 2012)

128Gb missing!

Would have been the deal for photographers.... :)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
garyknrd
By garyknrd (Oct 24, 2012)

I bought the Nexus 7 and the GPS on mine does not work properly, but the photos display very nice quality. I bought the 16 gb for 249.
I love the iPad though.

0 upvotes
Jacques Cornell
By Jacques Cornell (Oct 24, 2012)

"Low-res iPad Mini...in Apple refresh"

Way to dis Apple, DPR.

0 upvotes
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Oct 25, 2012)

Oh, give me a break. Few other major digital photography sites publish as many apple-related articles as DPR does. I wouldn't call what they are doing here a 'dis.' On the contrary, seldom in my surfing do I come across so much apple devotion. I am personally sickened by it.

2 upvotes
sagebrushfire
By sagebrushfire (Oct 27, 2012)

I doubt that was the intention but it's not like Apple doesn't deserve it. Their products are awesome but their business practices ... well they have more in common with a prison shower scene than I'm comfortable with.

0 upvotes
Jun2
By Jun2 (Oct 30, 2012)

truly low resolution

0 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Oct 24, 2012)

I love the new kit. I process all my photos on my iPad. The work flow works great for me. I use Adobe Revel to shunt them to the cloud and then download later on my Mac or office PC. A very neat solution.

If you don't like Apple or their products, that's up to you. Don't waste your life writing negative comments - that is sad. What is someone's tablet choice to do with you.

If you are happy with Android or whatever - Fantastic. Enjoy it!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 37 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Oct 24, 2012)

What raw extraction software do you use on the iPad?

And where did you get an iPad 4?

0 upvotes
Wye Photography
By Wye Photography (Oct 24, 2012)

PiRAWnha as a suggestion.

0 upvotes
Najinsky
By Najinsky (Oct 24, 2012)

@HowaboutRAW

The built in support for raw in iOS is extremely well done, you can use your raw files directly in any photo app. It uses the embedded JPEG rather than the raw data, but at least this makes the files instantly usable (contrast with Android which does not include built in support for raw files and you need an App to extract the thumbnails, or process the raw, in a separate step and then have multiple unconnected files to deal with). The iOS solution is very elegant, given the processing limitations of tablet chips.

If you can't accept the embedded JPEG (bear in mind probably 98% of the world shoots JPEG before dissing it too much), you can buy raw Apps that will process the raw data for you, but slowly, not real time like on a powerful computer. You also end up with multiple unlinked files to manage.

Three main raw converter for iPad are:

piRAWnha
Photo Raw
Raw Converter 2

Each have pros and cons and I use all three for different tasks.

0 upvotes
Ken Aisin
By Ken Aisin (Oct 24, 2012)

I wouldn't call it low res. A higher res screen with something like 300 ppi simply means you have to zoom in and out a lot more for precision editing.

By the way, I thought apple would never make a tablet smaller than 10".

"There are clear limits of how close you can physically place elements on a touchscreen before users cannot reliably tap, flick or pinch them. It is meaningless unless your tablet also includes sandpaper, so that the user can sand down their fingers to around one-quarter of their present size," Steve Jobs said.

1 upvote
xtoph
By xtoph (Oct 24, 2012)

I agree that the title still (even after editing from the original highly misleading version) seems off the mark.

It's the same number of pixels as the ipad 2, in a smaller space. And the ipad 2 (for that matter the original ipad) look fantastic for photos, and more accurate than most laptop screens. I expect that actual colors and contrast on the new mini will be better than an ipad 2.

Likely a sweet spot in terms of speed, battery, size, and app compatibility. I doubt any real photographers will be "dissapointed".

As for apple changing course, well, they do do that from time to time...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Daniel from Bavaria
By Daniel from Bavaria (Oct 24, 2012)

Why did they brought out the mini?
Quite easy, because some customers demand them, what the success of the Samsung Galaxy Pad clearly shows.
I am a iPad2 user, but my wife would like to have a Mini, because it fits easily into her handbag - and she demands it for quite long now ;-)
I refused to buy the Samsung for her, because I don't want to learn a new device. I am a Apple guy, with not much time ;)

So I will buy the iPad Mini for her. Perfect fit.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Oct 25, 2012)

I guess it's more because of Galaxy Note then Galaxy Tablet - I'm not sure what are the worldwide sales figures for Galaxy Tablet, but where I live it sold extremely poorly - to a degree where they sell more iPads in one week then Galaxy tablets in a quarter of the year.

0 upvotes
nofumble
By nofumble (Oct 24, 2012)

I bough an iPad3 for my wife, and bought an iPad2 for my mom. The iPad 2 is $399.

The iPad mini is a reduced screen-size iPad2. Why is it priced at $329?

It does not have GPS. Is there any reason I would carry with me when I am going out?

As far as viewing photo-image using iPad3 - not worth it. It is too slow to load for my patience. Pictures taken from my DSLR are too big. The iPad3 don't handle it too well.

0 upvotes
EvokeEmotion
By EvokeEmotion (Oct 24, 2012)

The iPad mini is a reduced screen-size iPad2, and its price is lower than that for iPad2. So what's the problem?

0 upvotes
nofumble
By nofumble (Oct 24, 2012)

That maybe Apple's logic but today is different. They should priced to compete with the Nexus 7 16G which is only $249.

0 upvotes
PC Wheeler
By PC Wheeler (Oct 24, 2012)

"Priced to compete": Not an Apple concept. MacBooks et al are more expensive than Win laptops, at least most are.

Looks like nofumble needs an iPad 4 -- like the iPad 3 but faster. I'll stick with my iPad 3 :)

0 upvotes
Kartika Sari
By Kartika Sari (Oct 24, 2012)

they saved the GPS for iPAD mini 2

1 upvote
xtoph
By xtoph (Oct 24, 2012)

'does not have gps' -- where do you get that? You are wrong; apple's tech specs clearly state that the cellular models *do* have gps, just like the other ipad devices.

Weird how people start these random myths.

4 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Oct 25, 2012)

"Looks like nofumble needs an iPad 4 -- like the iPad 3 but faster. I'll stick with my iPad 3 :)" - faster and hopefully: Doesn't get warm after using it for more then 30 minuts.

These two reasons are good enough to pick it over iPad 3. Thing is that: I got iPad 1 and still don't feel like getting a new version. These devices perform so well and are reliable enough not to think about upgrades with each new release :)

1 upvote
jon404
By jon404 (Oct 24, 2012)

Photographers -- if you had a new iTouch with the truly hi-res 326ppi screen, would that be enough to serve as a picture presentation device? Or, do you think that the larger size of the new Retina iPad makes it a better purchase... at, I guess, about double the price?

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
HubertChen
By HubertChen (Oct 24, 2012)

I am a photographer shopping for a tablet PC. More important to me actually is a slightly smaller size, such as 7 ... 8 inch. It is because the 10 inch tablet does not fit into my photography bag, and that would defeat my purpose of buying the tablet. In the studio I use a PC, only on the go I want a tablet. 1280 on 7" seems sufficient. Good balance of cost and resolution. And more importantly than resolution would be legibility in sunlight. How good is high resolution when you want to review your latest shot and you can not see it good enough as the display is too dim when viewed outside ? Last but not least iPad is no use for me in the field, as I can not add / change micro SD cards.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
xtoph
By xtoph (Oct 24, 2012)

The itouch (or iphone) is better than nothing for ad-hoc portfilio sharing, but no, not 'enough' imo for that purpose. Many people you want to share your photos with--practically anyone over 40 for starters--will have difficulty appreciating pictures that small. (i am not just guessing, i actually have had occassion to use both iphone and ipad to share photos with dealers, galley owners, other photographers, and random people.)

The ipad makes a spectacular presentation device (even the non-retina ipad 2), so much so that i truly think every photographer should have one (in an ideal world). We will have to wait and see if the mini is large enough to serve almost as well, but i wouldnt be surprised if it was very good for the purpose.

3 upvotes
Pandaemas
By Pandaemas (Oct 24, 2012)

I awe apple devices for their display, but offering a low res device doesn't seem like a smart move...

0 upvotes
Tom_N
By Tom_N (Oct 24, 2012)

It's the same resolution as on the iPad 2. My guess is that keeping that resolution helped not only with cost, but with weight and battery life. (Remember, when they went from the iPad 2 to the iPad 3, the battery capacity went up significantly but the battery life did not, in part due to the Retina Display.)

0 upvotes
Jacques Cornell
By Jacques Cornell (Oct 24, 2012)

The reason Apple kept the same res as the iPad 2 is that this way developers do not have to make yet another version of all of their apps. One of the big problems on Android is that the wide range of hardware specs makes software developers lives miserable. The iPad Mini runs regular iPad apps exactly the same as the larger iPad 2.

1 upvote
vqro
By vqro (Oct 24, 2012)

Well... if they quadrupled the resolution they'd need 652ppi... No one can make a screen with that pixel density. Pictures on the original ipad and ipad 2 look great. They'll look great on the ipad mini too.

1 upvote
plantdoc
By plantdoc (Oct 24, 2012)

Yes, the Kindle Fire HD has ads but they hardly "bombard" you. Actually, very unobtrusive and sometimes interesting. Some web sites are far worse. While I am not knocking Apple (I have an Iphone), I find the Fire has just about all the apps I really need for a tablet. Who can shift through several hundred thousand apps? Note, I don't usually play games. Pick your product as there are plenty of good choices these days. Up next, Windows 8 tablets.

Greg

Comment edited 52 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Gary Dean Mercer Clark
By Gary Dean Mercer Clark (Oct 24, 2012)

I don't think this product was aimed at photographers.

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Oct 24, 2012)

Get the new 9.7" Retina iPad 4 (2048 x 1536) with new A6X chip that is 2x as fast as the iPad 3 if you want 4x the pixels.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Oct 24, 2012)

Different strokes for different folks. There's no doubt in my mind that the iPad Mini is aimed at parents with school age children and even the budgets of the school systems themselves. It just makes sense. After all, photographers already have plenty of other display choices.

1 upvote
plantdoc
By plantdoc (Oct 24, 2012)

Rather overpriced and somewhat disappointing. Other than the overwhelming app store, the new Kindle Fire HD is quite impressive for just $199, especially if you buy into the Amazon Prime for videos, storage, and 2 day shipping. Also, the Kindle doesn't require managing everything through Itunes or similar "locked down" software. Photos on the Fire look quite good, but the wide screen does leave black bars unless you re-crop. With Flash memory virtually dirt cheap, buying a high memory model must be a big profit bonus.

Greg

2 upvotes
intensity studios
By intensity studios (Oct 24, 2012)

Kindle Fire bombards you with ads and has a proprietary OS that doesn't have many apps. but it's cheap!

0 upvotes
pjcooney
By pjcooney (Oct 24, 2012)

iOS 6 isn't proprietary? If not, what is? Yes, lots of apps but...

1 upvote
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Oct 23, 2012)

You say that it's likely a disappointment for photographers, whereas Chase Jarvis says photographers will be extra happy. Whatever. Some people will love it, some people will hate it. What's new?

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Oct 23, 2012)

I don't love it or hate it.

3 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Oct 24, 2012)

@Mr Fartleberry - You might have a point if Apple had said something like "This is the most awesome tool for photographers the world has ever seen!". Of course they didn't. Am I "disappointed" my toaster oven doesn't make waffles? Do I "hate it" because it doesn't? No.

2 upvotes
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Oct 24, 2012)

@AbrasiveReducer,

You're the other people I failed to mention, the "some people will neither love nor hate it".

0 upvotes
Pavel Sokolov
By Pavel Sokolov (Oct 23, 2012)

It's for poor people who have no additional $170 for The new new iPad :)

2 upvotes
meanwhile
By meanwhile (Oct 24, 2012)

Or want want something smaller than an iPad, but bigger than a Touch.

1 upvote
meanwhile
By meanwhile (Oct 24, 2012)

For example, I hate reading in bed with the iPad, it's just too big and heavy for the job. The iPod touch is about right in terms of weight, but it's too small. Perhaps the new Touch with the 4" screen is big enough, but at almost the same price, the iPad mini might make more sense.

0 upvotes
Pavel Sokolov
By Pavel Sokolov (Oct 24, 2012)

hey, I have hp touchpad 10,1" and Blackberry Playbook 7" - the second one is not so good for browsing and reading - it's too small.

0 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Oct 23, 2012)

When did 1024 x 768 8" screen become "low-res." This article needs a new title. It may suck for photographers but for other reasons like its crap 5MP camera and low storage.

4 upvotes
laueddy
By laueddy (Oct 23, 2012)

1024x768 is pretty low resolution. It barely have enough resolution for windows 8 or mac os. Some website now don't display properly unless your have 1280 on the wide side.

2 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Oct 23, 2012)

Since phones that are > factor 2.7 smaller already have higher resolutions as do other 7" tablets.

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
kevin wilkins
By kevin wilkins (Oct 23, 2012)

its not designed for photography. It is aimed for web browsing, reading and occasional gameplay.
It is also a "cheap" Apple tablet. So the lower resolution is the trade-off. If it had the high resolution of the 3rd generation iPad then it would be more expensive and not be placed in the lineup as it is.

2 upvotes
Mr Fartleberry
By Mr Fartleberry (Oct 23, 2012)

You should be able to fit several 1024 rez pictures on your new 3.5 floppy discs. Have these forums really tanked now?

You have gotten in line for your 40 dollar adapters haven't you?

2 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Oct 24, 2012)

1024x768x3RGB = 2,359,296 pixels. In the camera world, its high rez. Most new monitors are 1920x1080. My guess is that your using about 1024x768 to edit your picture (since we need room for the UI)

Anyway, its not that bad and that is coming from a person that uses two 30" 2560x1600 monitors.

2 upvotes
Victor Engel
By Victor Engel (Oct 24, 2012)

Mssimo, you need to check your math. 1024x768 is less than one megapixel.

0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Oct 24, 2012)

It didn't become low res, it is low res. It's poor for a smartphone let lone a much bigger tablet. Would have been far more desirable with at least 1440 x 1080 if they want to stick to 4:3 aspect ratio.
Apple is no longer the only game in town so this is a rather mediocre offering. iMacs and Macbook pro offering is far more interesting.

I wonder if they'll be doing 7-8" surface tablets soon?

0 upvotes
Tom_N
By Tom_N (Oct 24, 2012)

"It barely have enough resolution for windows 8 or mac os" - even if that were true, how is it relevant? This is a tablet running a tablet operating system, not a tablet-shaped PC. It has the same 1024 x 768 resolution as the iPad and iPad 2, which sold like hotcakes (and that was with the pixels spread out over a larger area).

1 upvote
costinul_ala
By costinul_ala (Oct 26, 2012)

it is the lowest in the range (nexus, asus etc) and most are 7 not 7.9, so being the lowest res can get you the low res label

0 upvotes
racketman
By racketman (Oct 23, 2012)

some company should bring out a tablet targeted specifically at photographers with CF and full SD slots etc

2 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Oct 23, 2012)

It would need more storage. Maybe 1 TB. I been looking for a device to backup photos to.

2 upvotes
larsbc
By larsbc (Oct 23, 2012)

I agree. Just having a USB port which can operate in host mode would be a big step (ie: like some of the Android phones/tablets). The "camera kit" that Apples makes available for copying images off of an SD card is very, very limited. USB host mode would go a long ways toward making an iPad much more useful as a travel device for me. I already have an iPad 3 so I'm switching to Android for my next phone in order to get USB host capability.

1 upvote
Adrian Harris
By Adrian Harris (Oct 24, 2012)

...and I would like HDMI 'in'. As I want to be able to use a tablet as a large LCD screen when setting up shots.

I can not find a tablet - or netbook that has that feature. They all have HDMI 'out', why on earth would I need that!

0 upvotes
Tom_N
By Tom_N (Oct 24, 2012)

If what you are looking for is a portable photo backup device, there are devices made specifically for that purpose. They typically are based around notebook-size hard drives, have multiple types of card slots, and can serve as external drives to Macs and PCs (for importing photos once you get home). Most such devices have very small, low-resolution (sometimes even only black-and-white) screens that are more suitable for selecting menu controls than previewing photos, but if backup is what you need, they are specialized for that job.

0 upvotes
Stubb
By Stubb (Oct 23, 2012)

Not to mention the disappointment of the continued non-release of Aperture 4.

2 upvotes
intensity studios
By intensity studios (Oct 23, 2012)

what is wrong with aperture 3?

0 upvotes
Stubb
By Stubb (Oct 23, 2012)

* Missing lens & perspective correction
* "Noise reduction" should be relabeled "remove detail"
* Keyword hierarchy not preserved in export
* Primitive interface for working with GPS tracks
* Full-screen mode unavailable in Faces/Places
* No linking between Faces and keywords
* Web output sharpening

4 upvotes
neo_nights
By neo_nights (Oct 23, 2012)

I'm not a Pro but... If I was, I wouldn't look for ANY tablet for 'precision' work. Just sayin'...

14 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Oct 23, 2012)

I think only noobs would use a ipad for editing.

3 upvotes
Octane
By Octane (Oct 23, 2012)

Maybe it's just not aimed at photographers and their needs.

3 upvotes
WellyNZ
By WellyNZ (Oct 23, 2012)

You're crazy!

1 upvote
costinul_ala
By costinul_ala (Oct 26, 2012)

it is aimed at nexus and its potential buyers

1 upvote
garmon
By garmon (Oct 27, 2012)

Ding, Ding, Ding! we have a winner! I reading through this thread and you hit the nail on the head. Many people not only buy 7" tablets for cost but large portion love the size and when apple introduces a 7" itouch those consumers would move away from the android devices. I would like to know the numbers for android to ipad users in the 10" market. You can probably get a projection how apple would be with the # of 7" tablet users

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Amin Sabet
By Amin Sabet (Oct 23, 2012)

I prefer the shape of the 7" Android tabs, which are narrow enough to hold in one hand or slide into my dress pants pocket.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Oct 23, 2012)

Like sensor resolution: Screen resolution is not the most important thing when viewing photos. The colour quality of the screen on my 15" HP laptop, purchased in early 2011, easily beats that on the latest 15" “retina” Macbook, even though my HP’s resolution is a bit lower. (No this is not a basic HP laptop.)

So reading preclaims about how unsuitable this iPad is likely to be for viewing photos is kinda annoying. DPReview should know better; wait until there are samples at Apple Stores, etc.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
1 upvote
cinemascope
By cinemascope (Oct 23, 2012)

I guess Samsung got fed up with all the crap from all Apple and ditched them all together.

http://www.techpowerup.com/174238/Samsung-Stops-Making-LCD-Screens-for-Apple.html

Samsung is the unbeaten the king of displays these days, good luck to Apple trying to source another supplier at the same quality/price level...

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Oct 23, 2012)

The rumor is that Apple heavily invested in LG's OLED screen tech, and OLED screens are much much better than LCD/LED screens. Samsung also has OLED screen tech.

0 upvotes
graison
By graison (Oct 23, 2012)

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/22/3541314/samsung-apple-lcd-sales
Samsung denies reports of cutting Apple LCD sales

2 upvotes
Breitling
By Breitling (Oct 24, 2012)

> Samsung is the unbeaten the king ...

Samchung is what? ;)

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Oct 24, 2012)

Most reviewers and testers say the iPhone 5 display is the best display they've ever seen on a mobile phone. And you do realize Samsung doesn't make it, right? Not saying Samsung doesn't have great display tech, they do, but they're not the only one in the world who can do it. In fact, that iPhone 5 display is made by 3 different manufacturers, none of whom is Samsung. No reason why they couldn't also make great tablet displays when the time comes.

http://www.displaymate.com/Smartphone_ShootOut_2.htm
"the best Smartphone display we have seen to date"

1 upvote
meanwhile
By meanwhile (Oct 24, 2012)

Hehe. "Apple stops placing orders" becomes "Samsung refuses to make LCDs".

2 upvotes
costinul_ala
By costinul_ala (Oct 26, 2012)

xperia, lumia. Best display on a phone? why is it grey not black in the dark ? best display in an i-phone

0 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Oct 23, 2012)

It's clearly not aimed at photographers but at Appelholics....i see already the queues and people sleeping in fromt of the stores...

As an non-Appleholic I own an Ipad 3 (that one with that Retina display) Technically I love the ipad, it has great components, it's screen is wonderful and the battery life is 10+ hours. By means of features/possibilities/integrated connectivity it's dredge.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
7 upvotes
Octane
By Octane (Oct 23, 2012)

+1
This new mini iPad is clearly not aimed at professionals and photographers, but Apple's answer to a demand for smaller tablets like the Kindle.

I'm also with you on the frustration of how restrictive Apple is with their devices. Especially for professional photographers it's unnecessarily complex to get photos on or off the iPad (iPhone) at good quality and once there, there is zero way to manage them on the device or get them off to a flash drive or different computer.

0 upvotes
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (Oct 23, 2012)

DPR wants the traffic for ads obviously
It's the micro 4/3rds of the iPad world ;)
Or is it APS C?
It does have cameras so let's not get our thongs in a knot.
This is what should have come out in the beginning.
Planned obsolescence... Retina display coming next year probably with bottle opener and nail file. If you got that Nail File joke you are truly an apple geek.
I don't want one for lack of SD slot

0 upvotes
skytripper
By skytripper (Oct 23, 2012)

Yes, those "poor photographers" will have to "make do" with the iPad mini's 163 ppi screen. Whatever did they all do when all they had were Mac and PC screens, most of which still have resolutions of less than 100ppi?

4 upvotes
kelpdiver
By kelpdiver (Oct 23, 2012)

that was then. Now we can get 7" tablets with higher resolution, and the next google and amazon tablets look to take it even further.

1 upvote
Lee Cawley
By Lee Cawley (Oct 23, 2012)

It doesn't matter how high the resolution is, all that increasing the resolution does, is mean you have to magnify the image more, to resolve a single pixel for precision work. 1024x768 is perfectly adequate to do precision editing (or creating, as I do as a professional artist), I did it for long enough on a 17 inch PC monitor, so it is perfectly adequate on a 7inch display. But nobody in their right mind, would do precision editing on a tablet, unless it was something as "precise" as a Cintiq for example... especially a "professional" photographer.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Oct 23, 2012)

A bit of a silly argument. Just over a decade ago most were happy with 15" 800x600 computer monitors too. But this is 2012 and such a monitor would be laughing stock now, even if it could do the job. Expectations of many will fit the current developments and current competition. In that context, it certainly can be disappointing, if looking at the resolution as a whole or per inch.

0 upvotes
MGJA
By MGJA (Oct 23, 2012)

I thought this was connect content? I see the link leads there, and I'm a bit peeved to see it here, since I've specifically followed the instructions given on Opent Talk on how to filter that out of my news stream.

I respect people who are interested in this mobile stuff, but please mark it accordingly so that those of us who are not can skip it easily.

8 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Oct 23, 2012)

This is 'Other news' which can also be filtered. There's more on Connect, where it's more relevant, but the bit that relates to dpr readers is here.

4 upvotes
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Oct 23, 2012)

MGJA, you took the words right out of my mouth. I come here after a couple of dog-tired days, looking forward to seeing what Dpreview has to share with me from the photographic realms, and lo and behold ... MORE crapple, front and center. Argh!! Have mercy on me, dpreview! Don't you know that these treacly, overripe, genetically corrupted fruits can give me high blood pressure??

3 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Oct 23, 2012)

What sort of precision work could we expect to do on a 7" display?

0 upvotes
DenWil
By DenWil (Oct 23, 2012)

I'd be curious exactly what form of precision work photographers are doing on their 3d generation iPads that is excluded on an iPad 2 or a Mini.

Specifically which photographers, and would you identify the published work that could not have been achieved before an iPad with Retina existed. Thanks.

Tabloid style headlines are an insult.

12 upvotes
Michal59
By Michal59 (Oct 23, 2012)

I don't believe in what I read - is there many around who look for this kind of stuff to do "precision work"? C'mon dpreview :)

3 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Oct 23, 2012)

Their new iMac looks pretty good, though, finally with a non-reflective screen. Might be of more interest to photographers than the iPad Mini.

3 upvotes
dale thorn
By dale thorn (Oct 23, 2012)

To me it's perfect - I haven't been carrying my iPad around because it just adds too much bulk and weight. But the new mini I can carry, so that's a huge advantage over what I've been carrying - iphone and ipod touch. 1024x768 isn't ideal, but don't forget that a double-tap raises the view to 2048x1536, and those pixels are captured by the sync process by default. And of course, price comparisons to other brands are meaningless - what matters to me is it's $170 cheaper than the full-size iPad.

0 upvotes
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (Oct 23, 2012)

Well I'd like the iPad Mini but would never consider doing any real work with it, frankly I don't think its meant for photographers to do serious work.. but lets see.

1 upvote
stuntmonkey
By stuntmonkey (Oct 23, 2012)

iPad "4" was really about ramping up for international markets. I don't think photographers are going to be disappointed, the mini is about building the iBooks ecosystem, more than anything else.

1 upvote
RXVGS
By RXVGS (Oct 23, 2012)

Another Apple Product On DPR!

11 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (Oct 23, 2012)

Maybe there will be an article about the nexus 10 with 4mp screen too. That'll be the day.

5 upvotes
bradleyg5
By bradleyg5 (Oct 23, 2012)

I have an iPad and have never once felt the urge to edit a photo on it, it's a terrible platform to do any real work on. Media consumption device, not much else.

16 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Oct 23, 2012)

At risk of starting a flame war, I'd be interested in what you think of Snapseed on the iPad. It's by far the most useable photo manipulation app for any mobile device that I use. Really nice tech.

3 upvotes
davidrm
By davidrm (Oct 23, 2012)

Personally I find Filterstorm - despite the stupid name - to be far more useful. Snapseed is nice - and easier to use - but I find it a bit limited.

1 upvote
vFunct
By vFunct (Oct 23, 2012)

Snapseed seems nice (I have it but I think I only used it once, if at all), but the whole workflow isn't there on the iPad to make it usable as a editing/publishing platform. You can only edit the photos taken on the iPad, and there isn't enough space to download/archive all your camera photos, and you're limited in the places you can publish the photos. (mostly social networks)

Meanwhile, I can download terabytes onto my laptop, and have it backed up/archived from there, and posted on my own website or published in inDesign or something else.

To do all this on an iPad needs a ton of extra hack steps.

0 upvotes
jquagga
By jquagga (Oct 23, 2012)

Vfunct, some of that is inaccurate. Snapseed will happily edit photos where-ever they've been taken once you get them onto the iPad/iPhone's photo roll. Eye-Fi'ing jpeg's over works well or you can use the camera connection kit on the iPad. I think it's a fine app for what it does and works well for "on the go editing". Does it match LR4 with ColorEfex4? Of course not.

The tablet / phone do not replace the computer workflow; they augment it.

In terms of general comments: I think the biggest limitation the iPad 2 has (along with my iPhone 4S) is the colorspace of the display. I'm interested to see if the Mini has a color improved display (at the lower resolution) or if it's limited like the iPad 2. I'll make beautiful photos on my computer, push to the phone and they look "meh" on non-Iphone5/iPad(3|4)

1 upvote
io_bg
By io_bg (Oct 23, 2012)

Who cares...
I am actually happy Apple products aren't that popular here in my country!

4 upvotes
backontrack
By backontrack (Oct 23, 2012)

It's coming, io. Resistance is futile, prepare to be assimilated.

5 upvotes
io_bg
By io_bg (Oct 23, 2012)

lol

2 upvotes
roy5051
By roy5051 (Oct 23, 2012)

That's a bit quick for an update, isn't it? It's only been a few months since iPad3.

0 upvotes
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (Oct 23, 2012)

It's a new product...

3 upvotes
roy5051
By roy5051 (Oct 23, 2012)

What? 6 months after the last one? Do me a favour, iPad3 owners must be seething.

1 upvote
chrisfourie
By chrisfourie (Oct 23, 2012)

Apple never called it the iPad 3, see http://www.apple.com/ipad/compare

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Fred Briggs
By Fred Briggs (Oct 23, 2012)

I believe the "bit quick for an update" comment refers the refreshed version of the full size iPad which has been announced with 2x faster processor and which may upset purchasers of the previously latest and greatest which had an even shorter than usual tenure (only 7 months). Perhaps it will help Apple users to realise that they can get off the upgrade treadmill and maybe even look at alternatives?

Fred

2 upvotes
mattmtl
By mattmtl (Oct 23, 2012)

The upgrade treadmill is stupid whether it's Apple gear, Android gear, cars or cameras. So a new latest-and-greatest came out? Big deal! It just doesn't make sense to treat any gear as "only worth having until superseded by the next model"... a sick attitude in our consumer culture. To the point that some people will now consider their brand new iPad 3 "obsolete", which it of course is not.

I feel some sympathy for those who bought within the last couple of weeks, but not recently enough to get a refund/do an exchange. The rest should suck it up.

Call me old school, but I don't have a problem running my computers into the ground (takes around 5-7 years), or using a two-year-old camera, or planning on a new iPhone lasting three years minimum.

Should we Apple users consider alternatives? Absolutely! I liked Apple better as the underdog, and I prefer that the dominant Apple have credible competitors rather than a near-monopoly on music players, or tablets, or what have you.

2 upvotes
Richard Shih
By Richard Shih (Oct 23, 2012)

Thanks, Fred. My mistake.

0 upvotes
djrocks66
By djrocks66 (Oct 23, 2012)

There is no alternative. When someone comes out with a touch screen as smooth and good looking as Apple's then maybe. But then you would need and OS and hardware as good. I am a lover of all tech but the other tablets just don't compare. Of course this is my opinion. :)

0 upvotes
win39
By win39 (Oct 24, 2012)

It seems clear to me that they plan to revise all the iPads at the same time in the future. So it would not make sense to introduce a Mini version of an iPad that does not exist. And how unhappy would those owners of the third version be if some of the features of the bargain basement version were better than their 6 month old iPad?

0 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Oct 23, 2012)

163 ppi is indeed quite a bit less than 263, but on the other hand it is still 60% more than 'common' MacBook Pro laptops. And with a screen of just 8" there is not too much space for photo work and for viewing it should be OK.

Where I would expect to see more of a difference to iPad 3/4 is the price tag which is only some 20 - 25 % (in Germany , cellular models, and depending on the memory) less. So it seems that the screen is not the main price-driver.

So I say - 163 ppi may be OK, but not for the price quoted by Apple at the moment...

0 upvotes
Ronj2
By Ronj2 (Oct 24, 2012)

I can hardly see the difference between our old Ipad2 and our new Ipad3 so putting the older Ipads resolution into a smaller space should be even better.

Too bad there's no SD slot yet.

0 upvotes
MatthewRogers
By MatthewRogers (Oct 24, 2012)

moved

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 118