ipad

thebaz

Unfortunately not thinking of getting one , just wondering from any of the techy ones here , what do you think the ipad would be like for photo editing and general photography stuff - anyone using one here ??

dinneenp

See Forum discussion here basd on artcile below

There once was a time when photographers didn't know if their pictures were any good until they came out of the dark room. They had to wait hours before seeing the results of their work, and by then, the chance of getting another shot was long gone. Today, advances in digital photography allow photographers to see their work before they decide to call the shoot a wrap. They can make changes or simply take a few more photos to be certain all of their bases are covered.

But there is still one lingering concern. Most digital camera screens aren't nearly big enough to give photographers an accurate idea of how their pictures will ultimately look when they get home and see them on the big screen. This is where the iPad becomes a game changer. It is the perfect tool for the field, allowing photographers to see their work as their viewers see it. The screen is a nice 1024 by 768 pixels, plenty of space for seeing what develops after a photo is taken. Although the iPad currently offers no USB connection options, wireless SD card readers are currently available, and it won't be long before digital cameras themselves start to offer more wireless options.

iPad application developers will get on board by creating iPad versions of popular photo editing software. Adobe is a highly likely candidate, but there will be others. New iPad apps which have the ability to color correct, sharpen, and enhance their photos on-site, will ensure that photographers will leave every shoot with a completely finished product. Instead of telling the client they'll send the photos on Monday, they can send the photos right away and take care of payment, all on one device!

The iPad will also help photographers present their portfolios to prospective clients. Printed portfolios are about to go the way of the dinosaur. Why carry a bundle of printouts when you can carry a 1.5 pound device that will hold every photo you've ever taken while giving you a fun distraction to keep you occupied until your next interview? With the iPad, photographers can show more than just photos. They can point to websites and publications with their work, all by touching the screen. No subject will be left uncovered.

With so much talk about how the iPad will change the lives of photographers, we shouldn't forget to mention how it will change photography itself. As more people tune into portable content on their iPads, the need for great photography will only go up. The medium is undergoing a change. New camera models offer combined still and video options, turning tomorrow's photographers into videographers.

People want more from written content these days. It used to be enough to write a blurb of text and put it up on the web. In today's world, text is nothing more than a wrapper for great photos, videos, and interactive animations. People don't just want content shoved in their faces. They want to interact with it. The iPad is one of the first devices that finally makes the fulfillment of this shared desire possible.

The iPad is a handy new tool for photographers. The device makes it incredibly easy to view photos and change them within a moment's notice. But the same tool that makes photographers' lives easier might also make them harder. As more people adopt the iPad into their daily lives, they will come to expect more from their media. More and more will be expected from iPad application developers. Photographers and other content producers might just have to work extra hard to meet them in the middle. Still, no matter what happens, the quality of the content we consume on a daily basis is about to get much better, thanks to iPad application development. We're excited to see where it leads!

Nforce

A netbook would be a better, more portable and cheaper option. Neither would be really suitable for photo editing....maybe very basic stuff, but you won't be running Photoshop CSx on either.

stick-dan

Nforce wrote: »

A netbook would be a better, more portable and cheaper option. Neither would be really suitable for photo editing....maybe very basic stuff, but you won't be running Photoshop CSx on either.

i can concurrently run lightroom and cs4 on my netbook.no joke

swingking

Nforce wrote: »

A netbook would be a better, more portable and cheaper option. Neither would be really suitable for photo editing....maybe very basic stuff, but you won't be running Photoshop CSx on either.

I managed to get Photoshop cs4 running on my Samsung NC10.

melekalikimaka

stick-dan wrote: »

i can concurrently run lightroom and cs4 on my netbook.no joke

jasus i struggle with that on a duel core, 4gb ram, 512mb dedicated gfx tbh

stick-dan

really? :S no joke i've the samsung N110 and it works a charm. odd time it slows but come on I expect no more.It is only a netbook (with some mods) Plus the added durability of the no less than 9 hour battery is great when on a day trip to the zoo.. How could you go wrong for 400 euro when i bought it but its only 325 now...

swingking

stick-dan wrote: »

really? :S no joke i've the samsung N110 and it works a charm. odd time it slows but come on I expect no more.It is only a netbook (with some mods) Plus the added durability of the no less than 9 hour battery is great when on a day trip to the zoo.. How could you go wrong for 400 euro when i bought it but its only 325 now...

the resolution of netbooks doesn't support camera raw though

Thirdfox

swingking wrote: »

the resolution of netbooks doesn't support camera raw though

It does on the EEEpc - with their 1024x768 "extended screen" option - you just have to scroll around the edges.

I run CS4 fine on my 2 year old netbook - 1.6ghz, 1gb ram

PaulieC

the blurb about ipads is the biggest load of pie in the sky I have ever read. It's full of 'it doesn't have....but might have' bs. photo editing using a finger ? I'll eat my hat if that ever takes off in a meaningful way

Nisio

what kinda hat do you wear?

Nforce

I'm surprised that CS4/5 seems to be working so well on netbooks! :eek: My comment was a generalisation and a sweeping statement though, but performance will depend on the netbook's components obviously. Can you carry out intensive PP, or more basic editing?
I'd still get one before shelling out for an iPad,however.

joeKel73

Apply really irritate me sometimes.

When they came out with the first video MP3 player and marketted the fact over the world I was sitting there with my Cowon video mp3 player that I had gotten two years previously!

They're now presenting the iPad as a revolutionary idea - it's just a tablet PC with a makeover. Their stuff does look great I do admit, but they oversell it and market it into the leading position. I know a lot of apple users who are just drones to anything made by apple, and will stick their apple logo on anything that isn't (guitar, surf board...)... ask them why they're so good and you'll get some blurb straight out of the ads.



Now these are the purely facebook/youtube using users I'm talking about. I believe it is good for high end graphics applications, I haven't tried that myself so can't comment.

Apple just irritate me! And I'm shamed to own an iPod touch! I'd sell it but hope to make some apps soon so could be handy.
</rant>

Thirdfox

Nforce wrote: »

I'm surprised that CS4/5 seems to be working so well on netbooks! :eek: My comment was a generalisation and a sweeping statement though, but performance will depend on the netbook's components obviously. Can you carry out intensive PP, or more basic editing?
I'd still get one before shelling out for an iPad,however.

Creating a panorama stitch from 10 12mp images can take 10 minutes (or what seems like 10 minutes :P )

But cloning, airbrushing, curves, levels etc don't use much processor speed.

Depends on what you call intensive pp... liquify can take a moment or two to see the effects.

But you can't really beat the convenience of a 7 hour battery life, wifi enabled laptop that slots into the free space of my camera bag and comes onto the plane with me

charybdis

cambo_gueno wrote: »

the blurb about ipads is the biggest load of pie in the sky I have ever read. It's full of 'it doesn't have....but might have' bs. photo editing using a finger ? I'll eat my hat if that ever takes off in a meaningful way

Why would photo editing using a finger be any worse than photo editing using a mouse, or photo editing using a trackpad, or photo editing using a Wacom tablet?

foto joe wrote: »

Apply really irritate me sometimes.

When they came out with the first video MP3 player and marketted the fact over the world I was sitting there with my Cowon video mp3 player that I had gotten two years previously!

They're now presenting the iPad as a revolutionary idea - it's just a tablet PC with a makeover. Their stuff does look great I do admit, but they oversell it and market it into the leading position. I know a lot of apple users who are just drones to anything made by apple, and will stick their apple logo on anything that isn't (guitar, surf board...)... ask them why they're so good and you'll get some blurb straight out of the ads.



Now these are the purely facebook/youtube using users I'm talking about. I believe it is good for high end graphics applications, I haven't tried that myself so can't comment.

Apple just irritate me! And I'm shamed to own an iPod touch! I'd sell it but hope to make some apps soon so could be handy.
</rant>

I don't think Apple ever suggested their first video-playing iPod was "the first video MP3 player", and I think the iPad is pretty revolutionary in that it works quite well, has a large potential userbase that is familiar with its interaction style, and has enough of an ecosystem built around it that it won't just die on the vine.

Promac

"Why would photo editing using a finger be any worse than photo editing using a mouse, or photo editing using a trackpad, or photo editing using a Wacom tablet?"

Trackpad is different as it's just a different way of controlling the mouse (with left and right mouse buttons) but using a finger is far too inaccurate and doesn't have enough combinations. Not to mention that you'd need a highly customised interface - or in other words, a highly customised version of an interface that is designed for a multi-button mouse.

You pose a typical pro-apple argument though (and for the record I have multiple ipods and an iPhone so I'm not a 'Hater') - ignore the massive failings and rebutt the small irregularites.

the iPad will never be a common sight among photographers "In the field" - who would be bothered? Why pay 500 or more euro for an extended preview screen - I hardly use the one built into the camera.

thebaz

i'll personally wait a year or so , till my current laptop packs up - and hopefully the ipad will have eneogh memory and processing power to do a little photoshop by then - I'm sure you will be able to get an external mouse - i hate been conned by marketing , but have to say the iphone is great , and in general apple make great products

melekalikimaka

the ipad is a bit of a joke. no hope in hell it could load a series of raw files and carry out editing... not for a long time

Ghost Train

No reason why an app supporting raw editing can't be developed, its just software that manipulates a file. You have apps that edit jpeg. Sketchbook app is pretty cool http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMT0eu37nQQ

The ipad camera connection kit does support importing and viewing certain raw files, but its not really doing any converting http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/120482-ipad-supports-raw-files-merged-7.html#post1316517

I think the ipad would probably be handy enough as a device for doing basic edits and uploading them to flickr when you don't have access to PC. For doing serious work in most cases you're still going to want lots of processing power and a large screen, never going to be the same sort of experience on a netbook or ipad.

upaho

I'm sure I read somewhere that CS (probably 3 at the time) wouldn't run on the SSD version of the Macbook Air. Since CS is essential to me I didn't pursue the Air version any longer but stuck with my now clapped out Titanium G4 Powerbook. I can't find that reference at this time.

Checking the Adobe spec now for CS 5 they say it needs an Intel chip to run under MacOS and there's no such beast in the iPad.

I have run CS4 on the macbook and while I found it stunningly fast (coming from the G4) the screen is too small for any serious work.

As regards finger control of Photoshop CS X I've done most of the work on my Powerbook with the touch pad and never had a problem with pixel level control. Maybe it's just my Apple lovin' fingers though.

Can't wait for my iPad, I'll even go into debt for one CS or no!

sineadw

If I ever get a tablet (which I doubt - even my smartphone has a full hardware qwerty keyboard) I'll be waiting for one that has such crazy features as usb. Or multitasking. Or I could just buy one of the much cheaper ones that are already on the market :rolleyes:

stcstc

the ipad is NOT a laptop, its not a prost production tool for images either

its a fancy media player with some very cool other apps

its not ment to replace your computer, its ment to complement it

The very cool applications for m are being able to show images and images of frames prints etc

and using the office app, being able to take notes and sketch what a client wants for a frame etc

magicbastarder

the wintel designers failed with the tablets because they were trying to be all things to all people. that rotating screen was clunky. at least apple have binned that concept, and made a machine which isn't trying to be several things at once, and concentrated on making a piece of kit that excels in one area.

i won't be buying one, mind.

TinyExplosions

I think that's is still early days for the iPad yet, and that like with the iPhone, it'll be the apps that make/break it into a suitable arena for photographers or anyone else.

I think an iPad version of Aperture would be great for anyone working with images, and also think that touch control could work very well for photo editing, after all a mouse is a pointing device, and so is your finger -yes, it might be bigger, but you could always zoom in to get the accuracy you want. Imagine it like heading back to the dark room and dodging/burning by hand, it's a similar sort of thing.

Yes, it'll never take much market share away from the heavy users of PS, but there's more than enough scope for it to be a really useful device for use on the move, it's just down to app developers (and apple) to make it happen

charybdis

Promac wrote: »

"Why would photo editing using a finger be any worse than photo editing using a mouse, or photo editing using a trackpad, or photo editing using a Wacom tablet?"

Trackpad is different as it's just a different way of controlling the mouse (with left and right mouse buttons) but using a finger is far too inaccurate and doesn't have enough combinations. Not to mention that you'd need a highly customised interface - or in other words, a highly customised version of an interface that is designed for a multi-button mouse.

You pose a typical pro-apple argument though (and for the record I have multiple ipods and an iPhone so I'm not a 'Hater') - ignore the massive failings and rebutt the small irregularites.

the iPad will never be a common sight among photographers "In the field" - who would be bothered? Why pay 500 or more euro for an extended preview screen - I hardly use the one built into the camera.

How is a trackpad, controlled by a finger and left & right mouse buttons, any better than a multi-touch interface similarly controlled by a finger and a couple of touch-sensitive areas with similar functionality to the two mouse buttons?

To suggest that a multi-touch program requires a "highly customised interface" and is therefore doomed to failure is like suggesting in 1984 that the mouse is doomed to failure for the same reason. The mouse was never a particularly good interface paradigm in the first place, but it was sufficiently simple and appropriate for the needs and technology at the time to succeed. Things are different today, you have a population that's very familiar and open to the idea of casual computing, they understand Apple's flavour of touchscreen interface, and they've seen that it works and is easy to use. There is no primacy to the mouse interface other than that it has been the way things have been done up to this point, pretending it is somehow inherently better than other interfaces is a hollow argument that would be difficult to substantiate.

If anything, the iPad is likely to provide new avenues of control to most people; for example: most colour correction and colour grading for movies is done on a specialised control surface that primarily consists of three simeltaneously-moveable trackballs; by simulating this in a multi-touch interface you're eliminating a large part of the need for such specialised hardware and making this kind of interface available to many for a fraction of the cost of the control surfaces. The iPad mightn't replace more specialised tools in all cases, but it will in some.

I don't know if professional photographers will flock to using the iPad in the field, but I can certainly imagine casual photographers on trips will use it to view, edit, and select images either for upload to the photo sharing site du jour or for sync when they return home.

I don't think Apple are flawless and if they ever did something sufficiently irksome I would have little trouble moving to a *nix variant (at least for general computing), but dismissing someone's argument on the grounds that they are "pro-Apple" is pretty much the cheapest argument you could resort to. Arguably, criticising the iPad for having different UI requirements is ignoring the massive successes and criticising the small irregularities.

thebaz wrote: »

I'm sure you will be able to get an external mouse

I'm fairly certain this will never happen, at least not in a way sanctioned by Apple.

thebaz

charybdis wrote: »

I'm fairly certain this will never happen, at least not in a way sanctioned by Apple.

i thought Apple invented the mouse as a way of navigating a computer screen ??

Promac

charybdis wrote: »

blah

I never said the iPad was completely useless - it definitely has certain qualities.

I just think it's crap as a photographic tool which was the subject of discussion. There are other tools that have been readily available for years which are better - as people pointed out, a decent netbook would be much more useful and practical.

magicbastarder

thebaz wrote: »

i thought Apple invented the mouse as a way of navigating a computer screen ??

that was xerox, afaik.

melekalikimaka

magicbastarder wrote: »

that was xerox, afaik.

i think they invented the windowed os... maybe i'm wrong

charybdis

thebaz wrote: »

i thought Apple invented the mouse as a way of navigating a computer screen ??

They didn't invent it, they weren't even the first to market it, they were the first to popularise it by putting it into a consumer product that was designed to work with it from the ground up; much in the same way that Apple didn't invent capacitive touchscreen interfaces or weren't the first to market tablet computers, they are the first to make a capable computer that is entirely built around the multi-touch interface.

They're not going to throw away the work they've put into building the touch interface by lobbing in a mouse interface as an afterthought.

magicbastarder wrote: »

that was xerox, afaik.

Xerox PARC pretty much invented the last 30 years of computer interfaces athough I don't think they could be considered to have invented the mouse.

Promac wrote: »

I never said the iPad was completely useless - it definitely has certain qualities.

I just think it's crap as a photographic tool which was the subject of discussion. There are other tools that have been readily available for years which are better - as people pointed out, a decent netbook would be much more useful and practical.

The point you haven't addressed is why netbooks are more useful and practical. The iPad is a very new product and to dismiss it on the grounds that comparable software isn't available for it yet when the device isn't even available in this country is very short sighted. You haven't addressed what's theoretically wrong with the iPad compared to netbooks or similar other than that existing photo editing software is based around mouse-based interaction.

Ghost Train

I'm sure they'll keep slowly adding extras if they can sell them. No reason a mouse couldn't be added at some point

Ipad does have good quality ips lcd

Promac

charybdis wrote: »

The point you haven't addressed is why netbooks are more useful and practical. The iPad is a very new product and to dismiss it on the grounds that comparable software isn't available for it yet when the device isn't even available in this country is very short sighted. You haven't addressed what's theoretically wrong with the iPad compared to netbooks or similar other than that existing photo editing software is based around mouse-based interaction.

You can install photoshop on a netbook. Netbooks often come with built in card-readers. You can pull your memory stick out of your camera, stick it in the netbook, copy and process your images and upload to where-ever you want. Using flash uploading programs most likely. And if, after doing all that graphics work, your battery gets low, you can pop in the spare one. If your hard-drive gets too small you can put in a bigger one. If you start to need more memory, you can put in some more. See where I'm going with this?

I don't even know how you'd get the pictures from camera to the iPad in order to use the purely hypothetical software that would allow you to do the same kind of image processing as photoshop would.

charybdis

Promac wrote: »

You can install photoshop on a netbook. [...] Using flash uploading programs most likely. And if, after doing all that graphics work, your battery gets low, you can pop in the spare one. If your hard-drive gets too small you can put in a bigger one. If you start to need more memory, you can put in some more. See where I'm going with this?

Photoshop is far from necessary for basic photo editing and file handling. It's entirely possible that something similar to Photo Mechanic and Adobe Camera RAW will run on the iPad and do 90% of what photographers would realistically want to do with Photoshop and more.

I agree the iPad doesn't have much options with regard to user-modifiable hardware, but if the applications are designed specifically for the hardware at hand then there shouldn't be any need to upgrade the hardware beyond what the application was designed for. You can also buy external battery packs for the iPad. And, realistically, I can't imagine many netbook owners are personally upgrading their hardware and carrying spare batteries.

Also, suggesting Flash is essential for uploading photographs to the internet is a pretty cheap argument. I don't know of any site with a Flash uploader that doesn't also offer a HTML form, and I would imagine many photo-sharing sites would be very eager to offer iPad apps for the express purpose of uploading images to their site.

Promac wrote: »

Netbooks often come with built in card-readers. You can pull your memory stick out of your camera, stick it in the netbook, copy and process your images and upload to where-ever you want.

Promac wrote: »

I don't even know how you'd get the pictures from camera to the iPad in order to use the purely hypothetical software that would allow you to do the same kind of image processing as photoshop would.

The iPad Camera Connection Kit.

melekalikimaka

i really cant see the ipad ever breaking the camera market, the beauty of it is its simplicity, all those add ons it will require, mneh, and netbook and teathered iphone for uploading is far more logical, even if the thing gets some chopped down version of photoshop(tho the way adobe and apple are over flash...i wouldnt be holding my breath)

Promac

charybdis wrote: »

Photoshop is far from necessary for basic photo editing and file handling. It's entirely possible that something similar to Photo Mechanic and Adobe Camera RAW will run on the iPad and do 90% of what photographers would realistically want to do with Photoshop and more.

I agree the iPad doesn't have much options with regard to user-modifiable hardware, but if the applications are designed specifically for the hardware at hand then there shouldn't be any need to upgrade the hardware beyond what the application was designed for. You can also buy external battery packs for the iPad. And, realistically, I can't imagine many netbook owners are personally upgrading their hardware and carrying spare batteries.

Also, suggesting Flash is essential for uploading photographs to the internet is a pretty cheap argument. I don't know of any site with a Flash uploader that doesn't also offer a HTML form, and I would imagine many photo-sharing sites would be very eager to offer iPad apps for the express purpose of uploading images to their site.


The iPad Camera Connection Kit.

Photoshop is not necessary, no. But it's desirable. the iPad is nowhere near necessary but people think it's desirable.

I should've guessed you need special plugs for the memory card - you do for everything else apple related. No wait, not literally "everything" - that time it was hyperbole (just in case you didn't spot that).

I said "most likely" flash - not every time nor every website so I hardly suggested it was "essential". Again though, it's desirable - it's one of the most commonly used pieces of software in the world and the iPad won't ever run it.

Your argument is currently at the level of "the iPad is great because you can't convince me otherwise" and I'm not gonna try any more.

Your thoughts on not needing to upgrade hardware are pretty ludicrous though. But apple are well aware of it and they realise that the kind of idiot who buys an iPad in the first place will also buy the same product 2 years later because it's got some extra hard-drive space.

Apple fans have this high opinion of apple as if they're all about doing it for the people - they're doing it for the money - as much of it as you are stupid enough to part with.

charybdis

Promac wrote: »

Photoshop is not necessary, no. But it's desirable. the iPad is nowhere near necessary but people think it's desirable.

For what definition of "necessary"?

Promac wrote: »

I should've guessed you need special plugs for the memory card - you do for everything else apple related. No wait, not literally "everything" - that time it was hyperbole (just in case you didn't spot that).

I don't know of any netbook that has a built-in CF reader, so you essentially need "special plugs" for them too.

Promac wrote: »

I said "most likely" flash - not every time nor every website so I hardly suggested it was "essential". Again though, it's desirable - it's one of the most commonly used pieces of software in the world and the iPad won't ever run it.

I would argue that Flash is far from desirable, particularly for something as trivial as replacing a HTML form. HTML5 should be able to provide sufficient pretty colours to rival using an inefficient and messy plugin for a very basic purpose.

Promac wrote: »

Your argument is currently at the level of "the iPad is great because you can't convince me otherwise" and I'm not gonna try any more.

No, my argument is "you're making unfounded and unreasonable assertions about the iPad and attempting to straw-man me into the role of a mindless Apple apologist in a public forum and I'm going to correct you".

Promac wrote: »

Your thoughts on not needing to upgrade hardware are pretty ludicrous though. But apple are well aware of it and they realise that the kind of idiot who buys an iPad in the first place will also buy the same product 2 years later because it's got some extra hard-drive space.

My point about mitigating the need for hardware updates was based on the idea that people designing software for the iPad will have done so with the specific and standardised hardware in mind. The software will be made to run well on the available hardware; it's a way of not stratifying their hardware to the point where it needs the kind of tinkering that may be needed to get a netbook up to spec..

Promac wrote: »

Apple fans have this high opinion of apple as if they're all about doing it for the people - they're doing it for the money - as much of it as you are stupid enough to part with.

I don't think anyone denies Apple are a for-profit company, and yes, they charge money for their goods and services. The price of their goods is determined by demand and the laws of economics, like every other company; so how is Apple any worse in this regard than similar companies?

Promac

This has gone way past the topic at hand and I'm really bored with the iPad versus PC argument. No matter what I say about it you're gonna defend the iPad - good for you, you stick to your guns there chief. I'm outta here.

charybdis

Promac wrote: »

This has gone way past the topic at hand and I'm really bored with the iPad versus PC argument. No matter what I say about it you're gonna defend the iPad - good for you, you stick to your guns there chief. I'm outta here.

Again, you're misrepresenting my argument and pretending I'm not being reasonable.

I never suggested the iPad is better than a PC, I said that its interface metaphor wasn't any worse than a PC's and that your other assertions about the iPad deficiencies were unreasoned.

And, until your last post, the discussion was on-topic.

Promac

I think you're just trying to goad me into a pointless argument now so, sayonara.

coolmoose

*cough* fanboy *cough*

charybdis

coolmoose wrote: »

*cough* fanboy *cough*

Classy.

coolmoose

ah stop it was a joke...it's not that offensive a word!

Thecageyone

melekalikimaka wrote: »

jasus i struggle with that on a duel core, 4gb ram, 512mb dedicated gfx tbh

I've a dual core with 2GB RAM, runs cs4 smoothly. Often with Lightroom open same time.

I don't like the look of the iPad whatsoever. I think they're awkward looking.

VisionaryP

charybdis wrote: »

The iPad Camera Connection Kit.

Nothing for Compact Flash?

alexlyons

when they were announced I really wanted one, but then I realised they were nothing more than a big iPod touch so I decided to look for something better or completely different.

I resigned myself to not picking up anything when I go to San Francisco next week. But last night I was given an iPad for 24 hours and I'm typing this on it. yes, it is a big iPod touch and it does little more than what they do, but what I like about it is the way it does things. I hate laptops and maybe that's one of the reasons I like it. Previously, sitting on the couch if I wanted to look at Boards I either got my a 15" laptop, went upstairs to my desktop or took out my iPhone. The iPhone was the usual choice, but the screen is far to small to do anything quickly on it, boards' layout isn't very friendly to a small screen and I'm not a fan of m.boards. Once I got a hold of this thing it was as if my wishes had been granted. Yes it is lacking in some respects, but if you look at how it does what it does, it's not as bad as people say. Rather than doing new and better things than a smart phone, or trying to be a computer, it just does the same sort of stuff as a smartphone only 10 times better.

It's not for everyone, no piece of technology will be, otherwise one company would own the market. So quit the stupid arguments about not running Photoshop etc and either buy it or don't. I'm a photographer also and I can tell you now, when I get one of these, I may upload a few photos from my camera, but it won't be to post process them, I'll do that on the laptop, it'll be to show them off to people on an amazing screen, very easily.

VisionaryP

If someone figures out a way to tether it to a camera so I can use the Canon EOS utility or equivalent, I'd buy one.

alexlyons

the only thing I know of from a quick browse on the store is an app that tethers a camera from an iphone to the iPad by bluetooth. will also work for an ipod touch instead of an ipad if it has bluetooth. Not great, very slow, but it captures the images to the ipad. Not what your looking for but just a heads up to others

charybdis

VisionaryP wrote: »

Nothing for Compact Flash?

There are two parts: an SD card reader and a USB connector that can be used to connect card readers or other devices.

CraggyIslander

Having had the 'pleasure' of using one for 30mins to configure wi-fi and sync someone's email, the ipad is nothing more or less than an oversized iphone (without the phone bit).

In those 30 minutes, the battery dwindled from 65% down to 40%... so unless they provide replacable batteries so you can have a couple at the ready for that 2hr flight to whereever, i will not even be considering one.

Nah, who am I kidding, I will not even consider considering getting one, it's bling and a gadget with few uses: reading ebooks / comics and browsing the web while vegged out on the couch in front of the telly.

Promac

It's really just a platform for Apple to sell apps. They charge 30% of all sales for all apps.

sunny2004

for me it needs a USB port, so more than likely I will wait for version 2...