Apple's iPod Touch (2010) Review, Not a Poor Man's iPhone 4
by Anand Lal Shimpi on September 9, 2010 12:38 AM EST- Posted in
- Gadgets
- Apple
- iPod Touch
The Camera
The iPod Touch ships with not one, but two integrated cameras for the first time in its life. There’s a VGA camera up front and a 960 x 720 (0.7MP) camera on the back. The rear camera is a significant reduction from the 5MP sensor that ships with the iPhone 4.
Apple advertises the rear facing camera as being able to record 720p video, however that’s not exactly true. Photos are shot at 960 x 720 but video is shot at 1280 x 720. Apple appears to be using a 960 x 720 sensor to cut costs, but upscaling video to 1280 x 720. Apple’s scaler seems pretty good, the bigger problem is the sensitivity of the image sensor.
Comparing videos shot on the new iPod Touch vs. the iPhone 4 the Touch just looks more dim (see the stills below taken from videos shot at the exact same time).
iPhone 4
iPod Touch
The camera sensor on the new Touch just isn’t as sensitive as what’s on the iPhone 4, which makes sense as the 4 shipped with a very expensive sensor.
Video quality is actually quite good provided there’s sufficient light. The new iPod Touch is definitely an acceptable video camera for use in well lit situations.
As a still camera, the iPod Touch is ok for web use, once again provided that you’re shooting in well lit situations. It just doesn’t compare to what Apple used in the iPhone 4.
Compared to lesser smartphone cameras the sensor isn’t bad if you can get over the resolution. Images captured by the iPod Touch rivaled those of the Epic 4G I just reviewed, but only at lower resolutions. I put together a comparison gallery to help illustrate what I'm talking about:
The new iPod lacks an LED flash. Combine that with the less sensitive imaging sensor and low light photography is basically out of the question. Even shots taken indoors with room lighting can appear grainy.
White balance continues to be an issue for Apple’s cameras. The slam ball pictured below should be yellow like the shot from the Epic 4G, not green as captured by the iPhone 4 and iPod Touch.
iPhone 4
iPod Touch (2010)
Samsung Epic 4G
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
86 Comments
View All Comments
SadTouchLover - Monday, September 13, 2010 - link
Don't do your little winkie face at us, jacko. This is obviously a case of Apple trying to float a subpar product in hopes of the masses being too clueless to care. They absolutely could have put in a camera that wasn't WORTHLESS and a screen that was the same as the iphone and STILL made profit. Just not as gigantic of profit. BOOOOO APPLE.sabot00 - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
You should compare the iPod Touch 4G to the 3G too, you haven't compared the 2 at all.I want to know is the "weak" speaker is better/worse than the 3G and is the black level on the screen better/worse.
grant2 - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
Ok Anand, honestly, what multi-function device were you playing MP3s on back in the year 2000?grahamnp - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
Nice to see a review that points out the flaws instead of why they don't matter.AnnonymousCoward - Friday, September 10, 2010 - link
I leave a dedicated MP3 player in my car. It makes a lot of sense, since it's always plugged in, it has a dedicated 24hr battery, it holds a ton, and it's easier than messing with your phone.The SanDisk Fuze kicks butt. $50-70 gets you a 2-8GB model with an empty microSD slot. So you can have a 10GB player for $63! 24GB for $104! Even expand it up to 40GB. ...versus the iPod Nano 8GB for $149, or 16GB for $179! And you can transfer music like any USB drive.
austonia - Friday, September 10, 2010 - link
if it had GPS i would be interested in getting a Touch to replace my Evo for tracking the miles i walk while listening to audiobooks. Evo is a bit bulky and heavy but gets the job done. maybe next year. seems like it won't be long before they run out of features to add.also not a fan of the shiny metallic case. easy to scratch and then it looks worn out. better if they used extruded aluminum like the nanos, or anything else really.
jed22281 - Friday, September 10, 2010 - link
Compared to the engadget review.....Will always come back to you guys for objective/measured reviews.
You simply are one of the best in the business.
SadTouchLover - Monday, September 13, 2010 - link
Agreed.Pliablemoose - Sunday, September 12, 2010 - link
I know you got lots of attention for bashing the iPhone 4's reception, but you're off the mark here, you're asking Apple to produce an iPhone 4 for less than 1/2 of the price.Will it get you page views? Yes.
Is it a fair comparison? No.
If iPhone 4 performance equality is what one wants, buy an off contract iPhone 4 and don't activate it.
Problem solved.
SadTouchLover - Monday, September 13, 2010 - link
Uh do you REALLY believe that adding a camera that isn't a dismal 0.7 megapixels and using screen materials that aren't from the bargain bin would make up the $350+ difference between an ipod touch and an unsubsidized iphone? No. This was a calculated move by Apple to get the kiddies to purchase this product and make as much money as possible. They left enough features so Steve Jobs could have his buzzwords at the keynote address and shaved material quality to maximize profits. An Iphone 4 costs less than 200 bucks to make. Apple just doesn't give a hoot about consumers who aren't going to pay them upfront AND month to month.