Razer Phone

Aurelius said:
There is a case to be made for lightness, but at the same time, this isn't like a laptop... unless it's an absolute brick, it's not going to be a pain to hold or carry in your pocket. Even the Essential Phone isn't all that burdensome, and it's made of titanium and ceramic.
Click to expand...

The weight is 0.43 pounds. If that weight is too much for someone (not you Aurelius, that other guy) than damn son grow a pair.

I agree that a heavy laptop sucks.
 
It's weighs the same as a Galaxy Note 8, don't understand how that is too heavy.
 
NamelessPFG said:
Speaking of pro modes, though: why is it just fully manual in the cases I've tried (mostly Samsung flagships)? I'd think there would also be semi-automated shutter priority and ISO priority modes (no aperture priority since that's fixed) like most SLRs dating back to the mid-'70s (shutter/aperture priority since film ASA is obviously fixed per roll). I figure most photographers packing a modern DSLR actually use one of the priority modes rather than full manual, or even full auto/program.
Click to expand...
My Htc 10's pro mode allows me to individually set auto or a specific value for each available setting (like ISO, shutter speed, etc.). So I can specify the lowest ISO and then increase the shutter time to 30 seconds if I wanted to catch some star trails.

For most shots though, I just use the Google Camera (from the Pixel phones, modified to work on my phone) because it just works so well.
 
mls1995 said:
Too heavy... considering the weight? What? If it's too heavy then I'd suggest some bicep curls.

I actually like a little heft, some of these phones are so darn light they feel like cheap plastic toys.
Click to expand...
I meant too sharp edges for that weight. It's not going to be comfortable to held in hand.
 
Tup3x said:
I meant too sharp edges for that weight. It's not going to be comfortable to held in hand.
Click to expand...

"Too sharp edges for that weight". You still don't make sense, what's weight got to do with the sharpness of the edges. Whatever I suppose it doesn't matter either way. There are legit reasons to not like this phone but I wouldn't agree with you.
 
Tup3x said:
I meant too sharp edges for that weight. It's not going to be comfortable to held in hand.
Click to expand...

The edges are too sharp? That's why it's the Razer phone.

You might be right about the edges, but I would not know until I held one. I'm not really interested in why because it's just too big for my preference.
 
Brian_B said:
A bit off topic but...

I can’t, for the life of me, understand why phones get ranked more on the basis of their camera than anything else?

I understand a lot of people take pics with their phones. But if you want to take professional grade photos, shouldn’t you get a no shit camera?

I would much rather a phone focus on things like improved network reliability and speed, durability, battery life, and the software - than on throwing more camera sensors and lenses in there.

But maybe that’s just me.
Click to expand...
They have to make it seem like it is worth a upgrade over last gen flagship phone. In reality there really is nothing wrong with a say 6P, S5 or iPhone five still. For most people there really not much difference they will see going from one of those to the latest flagship. I got a 6P with a broken screen and don't feel compelled to buy anything new lol. It still works after 2 years with good battery life and the broken screen hasn't even hampered my use of the phone. Having the latest and greatest is just a status thing especially for the iSheep. Apple can make a phone with less features then the last and people flock to it like they been doing.
 
mls1995 said:
"Too sharp edges for that weight". You still don't make sense, what's weight got to do with the sharpness of the edges. Whatever I suppose it doesn't matter either way. There are legit reasons to not like this phone but I wouldn't agree with you.
Click to expand...
I don't think you even want to understand. I had Lumia 920 and it was not a light phone. It was uncomfortable to hold because the corners sunk in my hand. On top of that I dropped it a few times so that the corners hit my chest. Also when something like that hits a wooden floor, for example, it makes much more damage to that surface than rounder phone. On top of that the sharp edges made the Lumia feel even bigger than it was and much harder to use (especially with one hand - though this is just way too large for that anyway).

Okay, this has slightly rounded corners but probably not enough. Kinda weird choice for a gaming focused device that you are supposed to grab with both hands... How many game controllers there are with sharp edges? Neither PS4 nor Xbox controller has those.

So yeah, I have pretty good reasons to dislike heavy phones with sharp corners.
 
Tup3x said:
So yeah, I have pretty good reasons to dislike heavy phones with sharp corners.
Click to expand...

Maybe perhaps you shouldn't be man-handling the hardware so tightly? I've owned plenty of devices over the decades and honestly to me personally the form factor has never been a consideration towards either a purchase or usage of small handheld or designed for handheld operation. Can't speak for the dropping issues, maybe such tight grips on the device(s) is a problem for you or someone else, never been an issue for me, I don't know but I put a bit of effort into insuring that my devices are well taken care of but that's just me I suppose.

Even with the "boxy but good" nature of the Nextbit Robin device when it was available I don't think I ever heard any reviews or owners complaining of "sharp edges" on the device. It's one of the trademarks of why the Robin stood out from the masses of "every smartphone looks like ever other smartphone." Personally I loved the fact that the Robin basically said "We don't fucking care, this is what it is, don't like it? Don't buy it."
 
Tiberian said:
Maybe perhaps you shouldn't be man-handling the hardware so tightly? I've owned plenty of devices over the decades and honestly to me personally the form factor has never been a consideration towards either a purchase or usage of small handheld or designed for handheld operation. Can't speak for the dropping issues, maybe such tight grips on the device(s) is a problem for you or someone else, never been an issue for me, I don't know but I put a bit of effort into insuring that my devices are well taken care of but that's just me I suppose.

Even with the "boxy but good" nature of the Nextbit Robin device when it was available I don't think I ever heard any reviews or owners complaining of "sharp edges" on the device. It's one of the trademarks of why the Robin stood out from the masses of "every smartphone looks like ever other smartphone." Personally I loved the fact that the Robin basically said "We don't fucking care, this is what it is, don't like it? Don't buy it."
Click to expand...
I don't manhandle my devices. I can count the drops with one hand. The point was that if it drops... And that it's far from being ergonomic and it almost certainly doesn't feel good or better than the alternatives.

Judging by GSMArena's review there really is hardly any reason to but this unless you are phone gaming junkie (though the poor battery life makes it less than perfect for that too).
 
And again, review units are not production hardware nor using the final production builds of the Android OS for those devices so, things will work out as time passes. As for buying phones based on reviews, never done it, never will - the only review that matters is the one I do based on my own usage of owning a device. If it doesn't work out or I have issues then it gets returned but, buying things based on what anyone else says or does, it really boggles my mind that people do such things. :stop::wtf:
 
Thing is, not everybody has a good return policy depending on where you live. It is still uncertain if Microsoft Canada will be carrying the phone, so Canadians will need to order from razer directly and I don’t know how that process is as I have never done it.

Sometimes getting information second hand is probably a better way to gauge the level of performance of a specific product.

For me, I’m test driving an iPhone X cause I have an apple store in town. My pixel 2 XL Panda is coming next week cause Canadians get their XL’s a month later than Americans. Then I can test drive both, and see which I like better since my Note 5 is feeling like crap even after a full wipe.
 
Eh, another pre-production pre-final-release build review, but apparently this one says they got good battery life, go figure.
 
So far only one review says good battery life from what I’ve seen. Definitely will need a wait and see. Would be real disappointing if that is the case (terrible battery life).
 
I imagine 120hz is the culprit, seeing as your screen is effectively what drains 90% of your battery. Refresh plays a big role, you are asking it to be twice the screen.
 
Trimlock said:
I imagine 120hz is the culprit, seeing as your screen is effectively what drains 90% of your battery. Refresh plays a big role, you are asking it to be twice the screen.
Click to expand...

In theory, this shouldn't be a culprit, as VRR should limit power draw outside of games etc. This may be what they're dialing in with final firmware.


[remember that both G-Sync and then FreeSync are built on the laptop-based power-saving technology designed to limit display refreshes]
 
IdiotInCharge said:
In theory, this shouldn't be a culprit, as VRR should limit power draw outside of games etc. This may be what they're dialing in with final firmware.


[remember that both G-Sync and then FreeSync are built on the laptop-based power-saving technology designed to limit display refreshes]
Click to expand...
I don’t know much how VRR is supposed to work. But adaptive synch works based off of performance, does VRR artificially limit refresh rates?
 
Trimlock said:
I don’t know much how VRR is supposed to work. But adaptive synch works based off of performance, does VRR artificially limit refresh rates?
Click to expand...

The technology that all VRR implementations are based upon works by not updating the display when nothing has changed.

For games, it's like a reverse 'wait for V-Sync', where instead of the GPU waiting for the next monitor refresh interval to update the framebuffer, thus sending only whole frames, the monitor waits for the GPU to send the next frame.

Together, if they get it implemented well system-wide, the battery impact of 120Hz should be minimal, at least outside of games where you're paying for it!
 
IdiotInCharge said:
The technology that all VRR implementations are based upon works by not updating the display when nothing has changed.

For games, it's like a reverse 'wait for V-Sync', where instead of the GPU waiting for the next monitor refresh interval to update the framebuffer, thus sending only whole frames, the monitor waits for the GPU to send the next frame.

Together, if they get it implemented well system-wide, the battery impact of 120Hz should be minimal, at least outside of games where you're paying for it!
Click to expand...
Do we know if the GPU on the SoC supports this? Or will this be a purely software driven feature?
 
Trimlock said:
Do we know if the GPU on the SoC supports this? Or will this be a purely software driven feature?
Click to expand...

Snapdragon SoCs have been doing this for years now, at least in my experience, can't speak for other SoCs from other manufacturers (MediaTek, Apple's A-series hardware, RockTek, etc).
 
Tiberian said:
Snapdragon SoCs have been doing this for years now, at least in my experience, can't speak for other SoCs from other manufacturers (MediaTek, Apple's A-series hardware, RockTek, etc).
Click to expand...

Apple's A10 Fusion and above definitely do, since the iPad Pro's display has VRR.
 
Comprehensive Btekt review by Basil Kronfli


Speaker Grills
Advises taking care to not let any dirt get in the micro drilled grill holes because they attract dirt and it is difficult to get the dirt out once it gets in.

Dual Camera
The Optical 2X zoom gives a worse picture than if you simply crop in on a picture taken with the primary camera at the widest angle.

Camera App
Comparison photos show the camera can be improved by modding the phone with the Google Camera HDR+ apk.
 
Last edited:
Hold on a moment! The second camera with a dedicated optical 2X zoom gives worse results than just cropping the main sensor to digital 2X zoom? What was the point of that?

I'm still left thinking that dual cameras are generally pretty gimmicky. Just take the Nokia PureView route and offer one really good camera sensor!

And yes, I think that 120 Hz + VRR need to be standard across the flagship market soon. I'm surprised Samsung didn't do it sooner, given the obvious benefits the extra refresh rate would have for Gear VR, and Google would also benefit similarly for Daydream. Too bad that LCD means Daydream is a no-go for the Razer Phone, high refresh rate be damned; the response times are too high. (Strobing techniques should mitigate this, as that's exactly what low persistence mode does for Gear VR, but 60 Hz strobed flickers the hell out of my eyes.)

I had one more thought regarding the gaming aspect of an Android smartphone: it seems like the games that take themselves a bit more seriously have gamepad support and pitch themselves as having a more "console-like" experience. This includes FPSs, which makes no sense to me. Normally, I'd propose proper keyboard and mouse support, but FPS source ports can't use proper mouse input without root privileges because Google hasn't provided a proper API for it, to say nothing of how mouse acceleration is forced across the OS.

When is that going to change? I could see someone trying to dock the Razer Phone into something DeX-esque and getting a more PC-like experience out of it.
 
NamelessPFG said:
Hold on a moment! The second camera with a dedicated optical 2X zoom gives worse results than just cropping the main sensor to digital 2X zoom? What was the point of that?
Click to expand...

It's probably supposed to be better, so it's possible that we're looking at a defect- but who knows. It's not something you'd reasonably expect, so we should wait for more reviews to be sure. The lack of OIS could certainly be a factor here too. If there's any one omission on this phone that catches my attention it's the lack of optical stabilization. It just helps so very much, and it helps even more as focal length increases and field of view tightens.

NamelessPFG said:
I'm still left thinking that dual cameras are generally pretty gimmicky. Just take the Nokia PureView route and offer one really good camera sensor!
Click to expand...

Eh, this isn't wrong, but it is also opposite of design trends- headphone jacks are getting tossed because they take up too much space, and if you remember how large the PureView module was...

I do wonder if they'll figure out how to make solid, compact optical zooms for these phone cameras. Even a 2x (as mentioned) would be helpful; that takes you from 28mm equiv. that main phone cameras use to the ~56mm equiv. that they're claiming for 'portrait' use. And since it looks like Sony licensed Canon's DPAF tech, you're getting a depth map with every shot, which means that you can do great processing for portraits like what Apple is already doing (well, 'well enough' processing for consumer use).
 
IdiotInCharge said:
It's probably supposed to be better, so it's possible that we're looking at a defect- but who knows. It's not something you'd reasonably expect, so we should wait for more reviews to be sure. The lack of OIS could certainly be a factor here too. If there's any one omission on this phone that catches my attention it's the lack of optical stabilization. It just helps so very much, and it helps even more as focal length increases and field of view tightens.

Eh, this isn't wrong, but it is also opposite of design trends- headphone jacks are getting tossed because they take up too much space, and if you remember how large the PureView module was...

I do wonder if they'll figure out how to make solid, compact optical zooms for these phone cameras. Even a 2x (as mentioned) would be helpful; that takes you from 28mm equiv. that main phone cameras use to the ~56mm equiv. that they're claiming for 'portrait' use. And since it looks like Sony licensed Canon's DPAF tech, you're getting a depth map with every shot, which means that you can do great processing for portraits like what Apple is already doing (well, 'well enough' processing for consumer use).
Click to expand...
I keep taking image stabilization for granted because my Note 4 from late 2014 had it. It was considered a major improvement on what was already considered a very good camera sensor for the time, same as the S5, and it certainly helped minimize blur from hand-held shots.

It was *still* considered a good sensor until Samsung touted the newer 12 MP dual-pixel sensor they've been using since the S7, up to and including the current Note 8. I wonder if that falls under the Canon DPAF license, given that the main selling point of a fully dual-pixel phase autofocus sensor was ridiculously fast AF throughout the sensor's entire field of view, alongside the apparent reduction in resolution used to actually enlarge each individual pixel's size and allow better low-light performance with less noise.

Seeing OIS omitted on much newer flagships baffles me, especially on zoom camera/lens modules where you'd notice the lack of stabilization more.

And yes, I remember just how much of a hump the PureView models had. It makes most camera humps (which are pretty ugly as is) look like gentle hills next to Mt. Everest. It's half the reason I call them point-and-shoot cameras that make phone calls, and it has a lot to do with the delicate balancing act that is cramming a good camera (and, more importantly, the lenses in front of said camera sensor) into a smartphone without massively increasing overall bulk and thickness.

By the way, when you speak of focal length equivalents, that's in full-frame terms where 50mm is roughly natural human FOV, right? Smaller sensors get more of a telephoto effect with the same focal length, which makes things really confusing. I'm still learning as I read up on photography-related stuff here and there.
 
NamelessPFG said:
By the way, when you speak of focal length equivalents, that's in full-frame terms where 50mm is roughly natural human FOV, right?
Click to expand...

50mm in 135-format/35mm full-frame is considered the long end of 'normal', which is roughly defined as being the same focal length as the diagonal width of the sensor/film. On 35mm, this is actually 42.5mm- but 40mm to 43mm lenses are actually pretty rare, and many of the more accessible versions (say Canon's 40/2.8 STM) are comparatively slow for prime lenses. For a significant period of time, 50mm lenses were the easiest lenses to make with wide apertures, which is why you see $100-$200 50/1.8 lenses and $400-$600 50/1.4 lenses, depending on system and age. Further, the nice thing about these 50mm lenses, even ones that are forty or fifty years old or ones that use designs that are almost that old (see Canon's 50/1.8 lenses, Canon's 50/1.4, and Nikon's 50/1.4G) is that once stopped down to ~f/5.6, they can still resolve 50MP.

So, essentially, 50mm was and is the cheapest way to make a fast lens that is close to 'natural human FOV'.

NamelessPFG said:
Smaller sensors get more of a telephoto effect with the same focal length, which makes things really confusing. I'm still learning as I read up on photography-related stuff here and there.
Click to expand...

I get what you're stabbing at here, and on the basic level it's true- 'crop' sensors, as they're called, when used on lenses that support a larger sensor, essentially crop the field of view. Nikon's DX (and other APS-C aside from Canon) is a 1.5x crop, which means that a 50mm lens used on DX has the same FOV as a 75mm lens would on full-frame. The thing to watch out here is this: 50mm is still 50mm, and if the lens is f/1.8, it's still f/1.8 on APS-C (and micro four thirds and...). Focal length is an optical property (and a property of physics and described in basic trigonometry) and does not depend on sensor size, and the same goes for aperture and f-stop.

Now, because the 35mm-system is so well understood, at least among consumers, it's used as a baseline to compare fields of view of differing sensor/film sizes. Most phone cameras use a 28mm 'equivalent' lens; the actual focal length of the lens used is extremely short, maybe 5mm (I'm lazy), and thus the actual aperture size, where on a 50mm f/2 lens (regardless of sensor size!) would literally be 25mm, is also extremely small on the phone cameras.

Further, if you were to put a 50mm lens on your phone camera (or a point and shoot, many of which have zooms that go to 50mm and beyond), you'd have a supertelephoto lens instead of a normal lens; conversely, if you were to put a 50mm lens on a medium format camera with sensor/film that dwarfs 35mm, you now have a wide-angle lens. There's actually a system where you can do this: Pentax interchangeable lens cameras (ILC's) from 6x7 (that is, 60mm x 70mm film!) down to 1/2.3" point-and-shoot, and adapters in between. You could, theoretically (and I believe actually) adapt a medium-format lens to the smallest size, and see how FOV changes, if you wanted. You'd also see that exposure would remain the same, which is one of the more difficult things to wrap your mind around (or was for me).

------

One thing you'll notice is that you can spend a little, or a whole freakin' lot, on a ~50mm lens. The cheapest 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 lenses use simpler designs and have plenty of aberrations and lower contrast when shot at the widest apertures; some of the more expensive versions, like Canon's 50/1.2L and Nikon's 58/1.4G, have the same limitations.

However, lenses like Sigma's 50/1.4 | Art and Sony's FE 50/1.4 are complex designs that are very well corrected at wider apertures, and are also huge and heavy relative to most 50mm lenses on their respective systems as a result. You'll find lenses that follow both philosophies, even brand new, 'modern' lenses, and you'll find people that chase after the lower-contrast look of older lenses too.
 
Very informative post overall, good read. I want to continue discussing this part, though:

IdiotInCharge said:
One thing you'll notice is that you can spend a little, or a whole freakin' lot, on a ~50mm lens. The cheapest 50/1.8 and 50/1.4 lenses use simpler designs and have plenty of aberrations and lower contrast when shot at the widest apertures; some of the more expensive versions, like Canon's 50/1.2L and Nikon's 58/1.4G, have the same limitations.

However, lenses like Sigma's 50/1.4 | Art and Sony's FE 50/1.4 are complex designs that are very well corrected at wider apertures, and are also huge and heavy relative to most 50mm lenses on their respective systems as a result. You'll find lenses that follow both philosophies, even brand new, 'modern' lenses, and you'll find people that chase after the lower-contrast look of older lenses too.
Click to expand...
This made me think back to the aforementioned Asahi Super-Takumar 50mm f/1.4 (the earlier f/1.2 statement was an error) M42 lens that came with my Spotmatic. It and its close relatives, regardless of 7-element, 8-element, single-coated or Super-Multi-Coated, are pretty sought-after vintage 50mm primes due to the generally low prices (again, the body and lens cost me $30-something at a thrift store) and high build quality.

People like adapting them to modern cameras, even if it means having to manually focus for a change; there's no shortage of YouTube videos featuring these lenses.

While they're probably not the highest-quality 50mm primes money can buy today (not for lack of trying; Asahi Optical Co. actually lost money producing the original 8-element version just to show that they could beat the likes of Zeiss in optical quality, so the story goes), some people seem to like the "character" that some of the optical flaws impose (particularly shot wide-open at f/1.4), perhaps because it makes everything look vintage in a way that modern lenses wouldn't.

I haven't seen Sigma's lens lineup, admittedly; I mostly know them for their use of Foveon image sensors as opposed to literally everyone else using the Bayer matrix. It's something that made me want a Sigma DSLR for years, at least until I started hearing about how slow their cameras were relative to the competition, misleading megapixel advertising (divide it by 3 to get the equivalent spatial resolution to a Bayer sensor, making everything before the SD1 hilariously low-res), subpar low-light performance (particularly red wavelengths) as a side effect of how the Foveon sensor works, the apparent lack of Foveon RAW/X3F support in any photo editing software not named Sigma Photo Pro, and yet another lens mount in the form of Sigma SA, though word is that it's electronically Canon EF to the point that some people actually modded their Sigma bodies with EF mounts to great success.

Oh, and I almost forgot: all are APS-C, not full-frame. This is mainly a concern for the aforementioned reasons about mounting vintage lenses on a modern DSLR and getting different perceived FOV as a result.

...I almost forgot that this was the Razer Smartphone thread. Apologies to everyone else for derailing everything. Word is that you can buy 'em in the US now; anyone wanna plunk down the $700 + tax for a review?
 
I am posting from the device now.

Here are my thoughts after a few hours:

The speakers are amazing. I could see the phone replacing a Bluetooth speaker in most situations which is another thing smartphones could potentially replace like cameras, maps, etc.

Any system noise is very loud and annoying due to speaker power.

Build quality is very good and I really like the trend-dodging look of the device. The materials do make my hands sweat. It has a very Darth Vaderish look. I would say it's my favorite looking phone.

The camera seems fine to me but I am not in the camp who feels I am a pro photographer since the rise of smartphones. It would be good enough for anything I do.

Battery life is the best of any phone I've used. Maybe there were fixes but I can't get it to go down. I could almost see getting two full days if I was careful.

The elephant in the room for me is the screen, which is very poor. The 120 or even 90hz make it the smoothest Android phone I've used...even more so than Pixel 2 XL. But, it is extremely reflective and not nearly as bright as my $140 Galaxy Alpha. I am running at max brightness in a dimly lit office. If you love super glossy monitors, which I know a lot of people do, then you might be OK. For me the combination of super reflective and dim means I can't use it outside while working.

It does not have blue tint like the Pixel 2 XL but I would take the shift over super reflective plus dim.

I can't see keeping the device as I am already getting eye strain. Other people's mileage may vary.
 
Last edited:
Supersnake said:


Marques Brownlee
Published on Nov 21, 2017
Click to expand...


I don't know to what degree he is "sponsored" by review item providers, because I don't see how you could go without mentioning the dim and reflective display

I'll say again that max brightness on the Razer is.comparable to 50-60% on the $140 Galaxy Alpha
 
QuiteSufficient said:
I don't know to what degree he is "sponsored" by review item providers, because I don't see how you could go without mentioning the dim and reflective display

I'll say again that max brightness on the Razer is.comparable to 50-60% on the $140 Galaxy Alpha
Click to expand...
he did talk about the dim, brightness, and reflectiveness. But I do suspect that he's being sponsored as well.

He says the battery life is great. I have seen more reviews that says its battery life is great than not. So maybe that's true.

He also mentioned that the camera being terrible is the primary reason that the phone is not his daily driver. That's really a shame too. Cause the camera is just that terrible. At least the OP5 camera isn't terrible.
 
QuiteSufficient said:
Any system noise is very loud and annoying due to speaker power.
Click to expand...

Am wondering if your system noise could be the 'high pitch sound when playing audio with Atmos on' that has been reported on XDA Forum. If so there is supposed to be an update that addresses that, look in your settings and see if you have Build .813 , .853 , or later.
 
Last edited:
CHANG3D said:
he did talk about the dim, brightness, and reflectiveness. But I do suspect that he's being sponsored as well.

He says the battery life is great. I have seen more reviews that says its battery life is great than not. So maybe that's true.

He also mentioned that the camera being terrible is the primary reason that the phone is not his daily driver. That's really a shame too. Cause the camera is just that terrible. At least the OP5 camera isn't terrible.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying Marques isn't sponsored... But the fact that he knocked the camera so hard shows that he wasn't trying to sugarcoat in the review.
 
mls1995 said:
Review up

https://m.androidcentral.com/razer-phone-review
Click to expand...
Only had to read the headline to know it was a pass.

The quick take
The Razer Phone is supposed to be a device for enthusiasts, but for it to make sense at the $699 price point, you need to be the kind of enthusiast who doesn't care about water resistance, a good camera, or display daylight visibility.

Look at the damn pictures the Pixel 2 takes in shitty light... https://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/11/21/xspc_razor_neo_gtx_1080_ti_waterblock_review
 
RashMullah said:
I'm not saying Marques isn't sponsored...
Click to expand...

He's always stated (at least in my experience in the past) that he pays for the hardware he reviews himself - yes he does get some items that aren't available for sale yet, pre-production hype material to get the word out since he is quite popular on YouTube - but if he discovers something that under-performs or just flat out sucks ass he's got no problems telling people as such.

It's obvious Razer skimped on the camera aspects, they could have put better camera hardware in the device but that would just increase the retail cost and I for one am pretty sure they really wanted to keep that $700 price point in place even if it meant making a few sacrifices to do it.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
[it's something I've always wanted to try, by the way, but I currently work nights on the east side of Dallas, and I'm moving to San Antonio in March- and if that changes, I may hit you up]
Click to expand...
Let's get a beer. Hell, maybe we need to organize an [H] night...
 
The camera really doesn't seem that bad to me, or maybe my bar is just very low.

The screen is worse than say a Galaxy S6 or even a Galaxy S4, both of which I have on hand for comparison. The camera is not worse than either of those.

I do hope this phone sets a precedent for 120hz, and the design and battery life are awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top