The Apple iPad Air 2 Review
by Joshua Ho on November 7, 2014 9:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Tablets
- Apple
- Mobile
- iOS
- ipad Air 2
Camera
For better or worse, the camera on a tablet has become increasingly important. While there was a time when the cameras on tablets were solely used for video calls and similar functions where quality was of relatively low importance, there’s been a clear shift in the other direction. While I don’t think anyone is going to use their tablet as a primary camera, there is a level of convenience that comes with it. I’ve definitely found it to be rather intensely uncomfortable to use a tablet as a camera at all as it’s the furthest thing from inconspicuous. This brings us to the iPad Air 2, which brings the first notable camera change to the iPad line since the iPad 3, as seen below.
| Rear Facing Camera Comparison | |||||||
| Sensor | Resolution | Aperture | Focal Length | ||||
| Apple iPad Air 2 | 8 MP | 3264 x 2448 | f/2.4 | 3.3mm | |||
| Apple iPad Air | 5MP | 2592 x 1936 | f/2.4 | 3.3mm | |||
| Apple iPad 4 | 5MP | 2592 x 1936 | f/2.4 | 4.3mm | |||
| Apple iPad 3 | 5MP | 2592 x 1936 | f/2.4 | 4.3mm | |||
| Apple iPad 2 | 0.7MP | 960 x 720 | f/2.4 | 2.0mm | |||
| Apple iPad mini | 5MP | 2592 x 1936 | f/2.4 | 3.3mm | |||
While the iPad Air 2’s camera does have an eight megapixel output image, it’s important to distinguish this from the iPhone line as the sensor is noticeably smaller than what we see on something like the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus. Instead of 1.5 micron pixels, this gives us 1.1 micron pixels. In addition, the camera lacks PDAF, so focus times will definitely take a fall as a result. On the flip side, this also means no camera hump on the back.
While focus times are one thing, the difference in pixel sensitivity is likely to be the biggest difference. In casual testing, the ISO of the rear-facing camera goes between 25 and 800 ISO, and the front-facing 1.3MP camera will vary between 50 and 2000 ISO. As the tablet lacks optical stabilization, Apple has capped exposure time to a maximum of 1/15 seconds similar to what we see with the iPhone 6.
As one might guess, this difference in sensitivity doesn’t actually make for a significant difference in daytime. While 1.1 micron pixels are relatively small, daytime resolution isn’t all that far off from the iPhone 6. The extremely low sensor gain means that the impact of lower pixel sensitivity isn’t all that significant. It’s clear that the A8’s ISP does a good job of preserving detail while removing noise as we don’t see loss of detail in low contrast areas and noise in general is hard to see outside of the sky.
HDR is also quite good as one might expect, with no perceivable halos or ghosting effects from moving objects.
Unfortunately, in low light we see the weakness of the smaller pixel sizes as a significant amount of noise creeps in. This is especially obvious in preview as noise reduction doesn’t seem to be running at that point. Given the amount of noise in the preview, it’s still quite impressive how Apple manages to make the best of a system that isn’t really designed for low light photography. While a great deal of low-contrast detail is gone, there is a great deal of detail preserved and such images definitely good enough to put online if necessary. I don’t see any major color noise in the image, and luminance noise strikes a good balance between excessive blurring and obvious speckle.
In video, we see a similar pattern. On the whole, the iPad Air 2 benefits from the shared ISP from the iPhone 6’s A8 SoC as the EIS solution is surprisingly effective at suppressing high-frequency shaking. In daytime, detail in video is surprisingly good and quite close to what we see with the iPhone 6 line of devices. The one noticeable weakness is that due to the lack of PDAF, it’s necessary to stop and tap to focus on specific objects to maintain detail. There is auto-exposure, but video performance overall is a bit weaker than what one would get from the best smartphone cameras available. We see the same 17 Mbps bitrate encoded with H.264 high profile here as on the iPhone 6.
The iPad Air 2 also has a slow motion mode, which does 120 FPS at around 31 Mbps encoded with H.264 high profile and plays back at 30 FPS. The resolution is 720p, which is in line with other iOS devices for slow motion.
Once again, in low light we see the weakness in the smaller sensor. There’s a great deal of noise visible throughout the video, although there is an acceptable amount of detail and frame rate remains relatively high.
Overall, it’s hard to really find fault with the camera. While the smaller sensor size and lack of phase-detect focus does make for worse images, the camera can actually take good photos in daytime and usable photos in low light. Video follows a similar pattern as well. As said before, this camera is unlikely to be of any value as a primary camera due to the tablet formfactor. However, for applications that need a camera this should be quite serviceable.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
226 Comments
View All Comments
wewewe - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
Just received mine. Previous was an Ipad 4th gens. One word ! Wow !! This is really magical. Its thin piece of glass with a processing power of a computer. I doubt there is a better tablet experience than this.Hyper72 - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
I replaced an iPad 2 (512MB RAM) with Air 2, imagine my wow experience...Yes I also enjoy the thinness more than I thought I would. Only using it ~ two hours a day means it has more than plenty juice in any case.
Klug4Pres - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
" While tablet applications that haven’t been properly scaled on the iPhone line are likely to look horrible due to the scaling factor used. While the same can and does happen with Android apps, it isn’t nearly as obvious because most of the scaling done is far more seamless and simply leaves a great deal of white space in the application that can’t necessarily be used."Please tidy that up by using actual sentences, because it is difficult to understand what you are saying here.
"As a result of all this work, it seems pretty obvious that the iPad Air 2 continues to deliver some of the best tablet software on the market. For the most part, every application available seems to effectively deliver a tablet-specific experience that helps to set the iPad lineup apart from other tablets. Unfortunately, it seems that due to a lack of competition there isn’t much in the way of attempts to dramatically improve the software experience, and as a result it’s a bit difficult for me to justify carrying a tablet around all the time as its size is relatively massive compared to even a 6 inch phablet"
You are saying the iPad Air 2 has some of the best tablet software, but tablets in general are not worth carrying around because they are too big relative to phablets. You attribute this to a lack of competition for the iPad, which means Apple has failed to make dramatic improvements to tablet software, improvements that would be necessary to make it worthwhile to carry tablets. OK. What about just having one for use at home? I think you are trying to say too many unrelated things in this paragraph.
"Overall, the iPad Air 2 is likely to be one of the only tablets worth buying on the market today."
I think this is rather too sweeping a statement for a review focused on one tablet, not very helpful when you omit to mention the other tablets worth buying, and anyway the statement isn't well supported in the article itself.
name99 - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
"The glass is flat, which makes it seem noticeably different from the iPhone 6 line in that regard as it meets the chamfered edge of the back cover rather than making a seamless curve."iPad manufacturing has always lagged iPhone, I imagine because the volumes are lower.
I wouldn't read any "statement of direction" into this.
For example my iPad Retina came out at the same time as the iPhone 4/4S. The 4/4S was incredibly slick for its time, while the iPad Retina used a sort of lacquer or something to form the bezel around the screen, and there was noticeable unevenness in this lacquer. (Uneven meaning not visible, but you could feel it if you ran your fingers over the bezel.)
Of course the iPhone 5 ramped up slickness of manufacturing to a new level with the really tight tolerances, the feel of a single block of material; the 6 retained that while now converting straight edges to curves. I'd say the iPad Air 2, in terms of manufacturing slickness lives halfway between the 4/4S and the 5/5S. It doesn't QUITE reach that feeling of a single uninterrupted block of material, probably because it's striving for curves --- they might have been able to make it if they'd gone for a look exactly like the 5/5S.
The larger pattern, I think, is that the manufacturing/fit-and-finish is improving for iPads every year; they just suffer in comparison with the absolute perfection of the phone manufacturing.
sporkfan - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
In agreement with you here. I'm really not a fan of how the TouchID is integrated into the iPad Air 2. I'm not sure if it's just lower tolerances than the iPhone 5s, or perhaps my unit is weird. But if my fingernails are long enough that they contact the ring at all (not that long, I swear!), they catch on the sharp outer edge. It feels icky. On the iPhone 5s this is totally not an issue.feeblegoat - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
Hey, Josh, the data doesn't really match your conclusions about efficiency too much. I can see that performance degraded slightly more on the shield tablet, but only at the very end, before the last ten minutes. Up until then, performance stays at a steady 57fps (http://www.anandtech.com/show/8329/revisiting-shie... However, considering that this is an onscreen test, I'll assume the 5-7 fps advantage compensates for the lighter workload given by the lower resolution screen. So, assuming the workload is even, then we must consider the battery size difference. Ignoring the screen power usage for now, the Shield Tablet has a 19.75 Wh battery, the Air 2 a 27.62 Wh battery. Ratio the battery numbers with the battery life difference, and we end up looking at a 23% efficiency win for the Air 2, maybe up to 25-28% because of the larger screen. That's a little less than I would actually expect (but pretty close to expectations) considering the A8X is 20nm and the K1 28nm. So if anything, praise the efficiency of 20nm; because considering the gap in architecture, the efficiency is maybe worse than the K1's GPU.Sidenote: (Of course, that's a somewhat invalid argument, because the A8X has 20nm, K1 doesn't, and we can't just say that the K1 is more efficient - it's not. But still, the difference is due to 20nm. Kudos to Imagination, though, for making a GPU that has similar hypothetical efficiency to the juggernaut Nvidia. Can't wait for Maxwell SoC's though. One SMX on a phone?)
techconc - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
"Ignoring the screen power usage for now"Huh? Once you do that, the rest of your question is meaningless. The screen is the largest power consuming component by a large margin. What's more, you're comparing a device with a 5" screen to a device with a 10" screen and attempting to guess at the efficiency of the chip components based the the respective battery sizes for these devices. That's an exercise in futility as you're not able to draw any meaningful conclusions based on the data you have.
lucam - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
He doesn't get..so be it..dwade123 - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
Lol Android devices are nowhere close to the iphone 6 let alone Air 2 in raw power and app library.Morawka - Friday, November 7, 2014 - link
Thanks for the review! finally ! haha