Am I the only person who would love Apple to put out a top specced ipad such as iPad Pro but with just a basic camera or no camera at all, that would be a great option.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPad Top spec iPad without the cameras
- Thread starter streza lenys
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why wouldn't you want a camera? It's a little bonus to the system, you don't have to use it.
The answer is probably "Why should I pay for it if I don't use it?" Which is exactly why Apple won't do it, it would go against their interests to add lower-priced models.
Last edited:
Hmm. No camera *would* chop the price by 100$ or so. I'm content with paying for the camera (4k video is wonderous and takes less space than I thought it would) but can see how some people could live without the camera for a discount.
Also, whats an SKU?
It's "stock-keeping unit", which is not the best choice of words (or abbreviation) here, I'll edit my comment.
I’d love this. Between my wife and me, we currently have three iPads, two of which are iPadPro’s, and we’ve had several more over the years. We use a DSLR occasionally for our best planned-and-staged pictures, and our iPhones for the rest. Neither of us has ever taken even one picture/video with our iPads; for us it is a really cumbersome camera platform. Our newest iPadPro 4th gen appears to have five thingies in the camera rectangle on the back two of which appear to be cameras, a light at least useful for the flashlight/torch application, one sensor for something or other, and another area for something else or other (LIDAR? Interface to HAL?). With the exception of the infrequently-used flashlight, I would have preferred to get a Pro without any of the other add-ons.
And yeah, it isn’t going to happen.
The way I see it iPads do not need to have the best rear camera. We just need enough to be able to scan documents and to use the Lidar for AR.
Most people I would say use the front camera for some video calls so good quality front camera and microphone is the way to go there.
I don't think that Apple would create an iPad Pro like but with inferior camera. They have way too many models as it is to choose from, no need to make it even more fragmented and complicated.
Most people I would say use the front camera for some video calls so good quality front camera and microphone is the way to go there.
I don't think that Apple would create an iPad Pro like but with inferior camera. They have way too many models as it is to choose from, no need to make it even more fragmented and complicated.
I like my current 9th gen and Mini 5 iPads. One reason is the cameras that don't require a bump.
I don't want a camera that requires a camera bump which in turn requires a folio case to compensate for the bump. That is one reason why Apple discontinued producing smartcovers for iPads.
If there was a slightly cheaper option with no camera I think people would be tempted because it's strange to have a camera like that on the back of a 13" iPad, but it's never ever going to happen.
Is the Lidar more than a gimmick? I have never used it as more.
I do not use it as well because that's not my job but I have seen that some people do use it. I might be wrong. I do not want to discount their needs. I think that people working in interior design or architecture can find benefit of the Lidar.
I love taking photos with an iPad, it's both a show off to people that think iPhones are the only devices good for photo taking, and it's actually pretty comfortable to hold as a camera. It's an amazing slab of high quality camera goodness.
Thanks for sharing your feedback! What kind of photos do you take? Also which iPad are you using for taking photos?
iPad Pro, the mini is a little more comfortable for photos but the camera is pretty bad, so it isn't worth it. I mainly take medium-light photos such as stuff in my house and in some buildings, occasionally of outside too. There's a little graininess to be seen in the dark areas, but for what it's worth, it's a very good camera (s).
For me, no need for rear facing but front facing camera can stay... Yes taking picture with an iPad would be great for having a big screen but it is better for watching videos and editing pictures and videos instead...
As days go by, I do find the benefit of taking a picture using an iPhone instead of a dedicated camera [DSLR, MILC, etc] although quality wise, and longevity, I still prefer picture taken by a DSLR camera... But the more I take pictures with my iPhone 6s, the more I understand those who use their smartphone as their primary/only camera...
As days go by, I do find the benefit of taking a picture using an iPhone instead of a dedicated camera [DSLR, MILC, etc] although quality wise, and longevity, I still prefer picture taken by a DSLR camera... But the more I take pictures with my iPhone 6s, the more I understand those who use their smartphone as their primary/only camera...
Got it! I do use sometimes the iPad Pro camera but it is more to scan documents or to take photo of something I need to show someone or to take photos during lectures/trainings to add in Notability for my notes for example. If I a really after good photos (in terms of quality, composition, idea) I use my iPhone.
I never use my iPad Mini for taking photos; it's a clumsy camera body! Still, a couple of times I did shoot some pictures, I admit the quality was very good.
I don’t care how good the camera is on my ipad. The only reason I want it to have a camera is that I like to use it to scan documents.
right yeah, those people who think iPhones are the only devices good for photo taking really need putting in their place. They've been getting away with this for far too long now.
it wouldn’t even be as big of cost savings as you think with having the R&D of another entire product with a different manufacturing line and that would make up like 0.1% of sales.
