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
Taracta - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
Maybe instead of trying to compare a mini Tablet to a cellphone, a comparison to another tablet would be in order even if that tablet is larger?Screen issues? Compared to what? That screen is better than anything else other than the iPhone4!
I would suggest that going against the iPad, the iTouch would compare much more favorable. If you want a iPhone4 without a contract, BUY ONE WITHOUT A CONTRACT!
SimKill - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
Better in resolution/dpi, but quality?Taracta - Friday, September 10, 2010 - link
One in which you can see the individual pixels and one in which you cannot see the individual pixels, which one would you say is the better quality? Aside from that I had to ignore the video testing done because from the outset it obvious that they didn't even attempt to adjust the black level (Brightness)! Give me contrast levels, color saturation , etc. when you don't have the backlight at maximum so that you cannot get even close to black. Do you expect me to assume that iTouch 300DPI panel cannot do black? Or at least a better black than what was measured? Keep in mind that it is still better than that of the iPhone 3GS by their measurments.SadTouchLover - Monday, September 13, 2010 - link
Way to get off on a technicality, bub. Everyone in the world knows that the ipod touch is meant to mirror the features of an iphone. Buy an iphone without a contract? And pay 400 more dollars for a better camera and screen? You're not making any sense, man! Are you drunk? This ipod touch is a clear case of price gouging. They're hoping that clueless consumers outside of the geek elite will eat this thing up, which will probably definitely be the case. They left the buzzword features and snubbed the "below the surface" quality. BOOOOOOO APPLE BOOOOOOOOanemic - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
What's with all the Apple articles lately? I've heard enough about these disposable toys the last few months to last a lifetime. STOP IT ANAND! JUST STOP IT!B3an - Friday, September 10, 2010 - link
Yep Anand, less with the shiny toys and more with the grown up stuff please.I know that you review far more hardware these days than you ever have, but theres too much time wasted on junk like this, which just seems to be for more page hits. It's a bit dumbed down as well, get more technical, you could also atleast take this stuff apart and mess with it/see what components are used.
manicfreak - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
I don't know what to say about Rightmark Audio Analyzer if it gives some of the ratings as "Excellent" for the iPod. *roll eyes*gunblade - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
It is a frequency/spectrum analyzer.Human ear is inherently deceiving and human brain is biased, so equipment is developed to help doing measurement, where human bias and prejudice is not part of the equation.
kmmatney - Friday, September 10, 2010 - link
Since it shows the iPod is a good music player, it has to be a bad test suite, right? *rolls eyes*.Verve - Thursday, September 9, 2010 - link
I like the new iPod Touch since I'm upgrading from 1G (yes, it still lives with diminished battery life). I think the new iPod Touch is much improved in comparison. Besides, I'm not looking for it to be an iPhone substitute -- it just has to be my entertainment gadget that's easy to carry and last a reasonably long time.