Razer Phone

Trimlock said:
Wow he’s very enthused with it.
Click to expand...
He also reviews a lot of crap that I'm guessing he got paid for (not to mention he's super positive on those lot of crap). While I do watch his videos, I consider them just marketing hype. In this scenario, it feels like either he got paid (cause he got the device early) or he's just trying to get on Razer's good graces and have them give him more stuff.
 
I'm in the sticks so no MS store. Also I did register with Razer but would prefer to get it off Amazon. So no product link on their site is expected ATM I guess. Booooo
 
That power button fingerprint scanner, the superior front facing speakers, the 120Hz activesync display, and the cost/value of the phone makes it a perfect phone if the camera is at least matching the quality of a OnePlus 5.
 
That review says no option for 60fps shooting. Is that only for 4k? 1080p30 isn't gonna cut it.
 
Does anyone know if Atmos for mobile works if you output video from the phone elsewhere, e.g. USB-C to HDMI or casting?
 
Is there any casting that make Dolby Atmos happen on standard speakers? No...

As for headphones, I believe so.
 
illram said:
Does anyone know if Atmos for mobile works if you output video from the phone elsewhere, e.g. USB-C to HDMI or casting?
Click to expand...
I thing as long as it’s being bitstreamed it won’t matter, are you trying to send it to an Atmosphere or DTS:X enabled processor?
 
CHANG3D said:
He also reviews a lot of crap that I'm guessing he got paid for (not to mention he's super positive on those lot of crap). While I do watch his videos, I consider them just marketing hype. In this scenario, it feels like either he got paid (cause he got the device early) or he's just trying to get on Razer's good graces and have them give him more stuff.
Click to expand...
He comes off as a paid for review type guy.

He only mildly mentioned the camera could be bad. I doubt we’ll hear him say anything negative.
 
I wonder what all the "professional" photographers demanding such enacting detail from their photos did with their lives before the smartphone.
 
-120 Hz screen with variable refresh
-front-facing stereo speakers
-4000mAh battery
-ability to keep the SoC running at higher clocks for sustained performance longer than most other flagships
-unlockable bootloader
-Nova Launcher Prime as stock launcher
-Sony-style fingerprint scanner/power button on the side
-microSD slot + 64 GB UFS 2.1 storage

Holy balls. Razer came out swinging with that Nextbit acquisition, and it's so close to the ideal flagship already without getting too ridiculous with the price-

-no headphone jack and only single USB-C, thus the nice headphone DAC is confined to a dongle
-no OIS on the camera (can't say I'm a fan of blurry hand-held shots because I wasn't perfectly still with it)
-no waterproofing, yet the battery's still not easily removable
-calls itself a gaming phone, but doesn't have physical gamepad controls
-no CDMA support for those still stuck on Verizon and Sprint (small wonder why I talked my family into switching to T-Mobile)

Goddamnit, you were so close, and yet so far! I wasn't expecting anyone to challenge Samsung's little penabled niche, but those are omissions I didn't expect, either. Damn shame, because like the LG V-series, it's just that close to ideal for me, but not quite there.
 
NamelessPFG said:
-no headphone jack and only single USB-C, thus the nice headphone DAC is confined to a dongle
-no OIS on the camera (can't say I'm a fan of blurry hand-held shots because I wasn't perfectly still with it)
-no waterproofing, yet the battery's still not easily removable
-calls itself a gaming phone, but doesn't have physical gamepad controls
-no CDMA support for those still stuck on Verizon and Sprint (small wonder why I talked my family into switching to T-Mobile)
Click to expand...

The headphone jack thing is passe at this point, they had to do what they had to do and retooling the Robin chassis while sacrificing the speakers probably made them think "You know, since we're all about getting awesome audio quality because of the larger speakers and discrete amps we're just going to have to sacrifice the headphone jack." I don't have a big issue with that, I really don't, and I'm a diehard wired headphone user forever but again they have to make sacrifices for this device at that price.

Missing OIS is a big issue for me, however, and many other people obviously because it seems like a fucking no-brainer nowadays - word was it had the same camera assembly and sensor as the Samsung Galaxy S7 series devices but apparently that might not be accurate since those DO have OIS but again, they had to make some sacrifices to have the device available at that price.

Water resistance is somewhat important but if someone is playing games or watching movies on that device in a body of water and they can't keep it from getting wet then they shouldn't be using such devices in bodies of water. ;)

As for the gamepad aspect. maybe that'll be an accessory later on, who knows. I don't see it as a major need but it could easily be done with an add-on that potentially could have a battery in it too which wouldn't be such a bad idea (now I just need to make a Kickstarter for it). :D

CDMA, I get why some folks want support for it but it's losing traction each year in the cellular marketplace. I expect that within the next decade both Sprint and Verizon will simply have to shift their networks to GSM capable hardware whether they like it or not, that's just my personal take on how things have been going so we'll see what happens on that front.

For a first effort, I can't imagine anyone truly being able to look at what's being offered overall and immediately just call it "teh suck" because it's obviously not. The question now is how it works out once they go into mass production and people get the devices and whether or not it truly proves itself to be a fantastic device at that price.
 
I really want to see how this phone performs. I have the Pixel 2 XL on pre-order here in Canada but I can get the Razer for ~$500 less. It does pretty much everything I need, and I don't take videos often with my phone so that doesn't really matter to me at all.
 
Tiberian said:
The headphone jack thing is passe at this point, they had to do what they had to do and retooling the Robin chassis while sacrificing the speakers probably made them think "You know, since we're all about getting awesome audio quality because of the larger speakers and discrete amps we're just going to have to sacrifice the headphone jack." I don't have a big issue with that, I really don't, and I'm a diehard wired headphone user forever but again they have to make sacrifices for this device at that price.

Missing OIS is a big issue for me, however, and many other people obviously because it seems like a fucking no-brainer nowadays - word was it had the same camera assembly and sensor as the Samsung Galaxy S7 series devices but apparently that might not be accurate since those DO have OIS but again, they had to make some sacrifices to have the device available at that price.

Water resistance is somewhat important but if someone is playing games or watching movies on that device in a body of water and they can't keep it from getting wet then they shouldn't be using such devices in bodies of water. ;)

As for the gamepad aspect. maybe that'll be an accessory later on, who knows. I don't see it as a major need but it could easily be done with an add-on that potentially could have a battery in it too which wouldn't be such a bad idea (now I just need to make a Kickstarter for it). :D

CDMA, I get why some folks want support for it but it's losing traction each year in the cellular marketplace. I expect that within the next decade both Sprint and Verizon will simply have to shift their networks to GSM capable hardware whether they like it or not, that's just my personal take on how things have been going so we'll see what happens on that front.

For a first effort, I can't imagine anyone truly being able to look at what's being offered overall and immediately just call it "teh suck" because it's obviously not. The question now is how it works out once they go into mass production and people get the devices and whether or not it truly proves itself to be a fantastic device at that price.
Click to expand...
As for the headphone jack thing, I could put up with a bit of dongle life if there was a second USB-C port. Having two of those ports also allows for more versatility in a variety of ways, like plugging another USB drive or peripheral in one of those ports with an OTG cable while still being able to charge it.

Water resistance is actually something I rank below removable batteries in importance, but the problem I see right now is that not even LG bothers with removable batteries. You might be thinking "But dude, 4000mAh!", but I'm thinking "Not after three years!" That cell's going to wear down with time until it's a brick.

I can deal with a gamepad being an accessory; maybe it'll be a clamping dock sort of affair like the MOGA ACE POWER or the Gamevice. The important thing is that it should be easy to install and remove on a whim, as leaving those physical controls attached would compromise the device's overall design as a phone.

CDMA is eroding because Sprint and Verizon already have to use GSM-style SIM/UICC card slots for LTE, but they haven't fully transitioned to VoLTE yet. Until it finally dies off, a good portion of the US is gonna be stuck with limited phone options... and I'm glad to no longer be in that trap. Long live T-Mobile.

I should point out that I actually do find $700 fairly reasonable given how ridiculous smartphone pricing is getting this year; take it from someone who has to shell out about $781 in total for an unlocked Note 8 (after $200 discount from S5 trade-in and $51-something in sales tax).

However, I'm going to point out lacking features like those as my way of saying how they could improve their next model. It's how I am with everything, really.
 
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.
 
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...
Really I just want a camera that is clear and takes quick photos.

A negative is still a negative though.
 
Brian_B said:
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..
Click to expand...
Tragically, besides network reliability, the market has spoken and the consumer appears to not care.

Network reliability: This is a given that the phones have a reasonable level of reliability. It's also extremely hard to test this objectively because one phone that is top ranked in one regard can be the worst in another test (varies by location, provider, frequency, etc.)
Speed: Phones are more than fast enough nowadays for the average user.
Durability: Clearly nobody cares since glass-backed phones are selling in droves.
Battery life: Likewise because we have sealed batteries and a regression in battery life (from the high point of the LG G2 generation).
Software: The best selling Android phone runs Touchwiz, enough said.
 
In the last couple of the years, the top smartphone cameras such as those from Apple, Samsung, and HTC/Google could take shots as good as DSLR's except when zoomed or low-light situations. This year Huawei has been able to deliver on a smartphone with great cameras as well; Huawei has been able to do it; let that sink in! OnePlus 5 has a camera nearly as good as the cameras of last year.

For videos on YouTube, you would hardly be able to see a difference. Heck, many DSLR are worse in videos (with adequate lighting) than smartphones. This has been true for years, because they (the camera manufacturers) wanted you to buy camcorders instead. Only recently did they start focusing on videography due to smartphones being able to take better videos, and small action camcorders like GoPro and YI have been taking over what is left of the home video market. Heck, the price of an iPhone 7 with its 4K60 capabilities is fairly cheap compared to many camcorders of that caliber. This year's GoPro Hero 6 added 4K60 capabilities, and it's $499.

As for going "Pro," with a device like Beastgrip and its DOF attachment, people could use fast speed SLR lenses (f0.95-f2.8 aperture). Beastgrip and other adapter cases are often used for filming by the professionals, mostly for videography in films, news, and commercials. Zach Snyder is currently making a short film using an iPhone and Beastgrip. Are you going to tell Zach and the rest of them that they aren't pro enough?

DSLR will still have its advantages ahead in low-light as the sensors in smartphones will likely be smaller than those in DSLR due to size constraints. But for most other situations, the camera on a smartphone is already good enough. It's also one less thing to haul around.
 
ChronoReverse said:
Tragically, besides network reliability, the market has spoken and the consumer appears to not care.

Network reliability: This is a given that the phones have a reasonable level of reliability. It's also extremely hard to test this objectively because one phone that is top ranked in one regard can be the worst in another test (varies by location, provider, frequency, etc.)
Speed: Phones are more than fast enough nowadays for the average user.
Durability: Clearly nobody cares since glass-backed phones are selling in droves.
Battery life: Likewise because we have sealed batteries and a regression in battery life (from the high point of the LG G2 generation).
Software: The best selling Android phone runs Touchwiz, enough said.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if I'd say tragically. Battery life does appear to be getting better in some spaces, and speed (including network quality) is often good enough or better. Software performance is still a concern on the Android side.

I do think we periodically need reminders that what hardcore enthusiasts want and what the general public wants are often two separate things, and we shouldn't conflate our own tastes with those of others. If you believed tech forums, no phone could sell well unless it had microSD, a 6,000mAh removable battery, completely stock Android and firmware so open the company actually gives you instructions for rooting your phone. But that's not what most people want. They just want enough storage, enough battery life, reasonably quick software... and they not only don't care how open it is, they have no reason to care.
 
CHANG3D said:
In the last couple of the years, the top smartphone cameras such as those from Apple, Samsung, and HTC/Google could take shots as good as DSLR's except when zoomed or low-light situations. This year Huawei has been able to deliver on a smartphone with great cameras as well; Huawei has been able to do it; let that sink in! OnePlus 5 has a camera nearly as good as the cameras of last year.

For videos on YouTube, you would hardly be able to see a difference. Heck, many DSLR are worse in videos (with adequate lighting) than smartphones. This has been true for years, because they (the camera manufacturers) wanted you to buy camcorders instead. Only recently did they start focusing on videography due to smartphones being able to take better videos, and small action camcorders like GoPro and YI have been taking over what is left of the home video market. Heck, the price of an iPhone 7 with its 4K60 capabilities is fairly cheap compared to many camcorders of that caliber. This year's GoPro Hero 6 added 4K60 capabilities, and it's $499.

As for going "Pro," with a device like Beastgrip and its DOF attachment, people could use fast speed SLR lenses (f0.95-f2.8 aperture). Beastgrip and other adapter cases are often used for filming by the professionals, mostly for videography in films, news, and commercials. Zach Snyder is currently making a short film using an iPhone and Beastgrip. Are you going to tell Zach and the rest of them that they aren't pro enough?

DSLR will still have its advantages ahead in low-light as the sensors in smartphones will likely be smaller than those in DSLR due to size constraints. But for most other situations, the camera on a smartphone is already good enough. It's also one less thing to haul around.
Click to expand...

Just... no.

Smartphones easily reach 'good enough', and even professional photographers try to carry the best smartphone camera that they can as they know all too well that the best camera you have is the one you have with you. And when Facebook, Instagram, and Youtube are the common standards for sharing socially, phone cameras certainly get the job done, since content > quality here.

However, phone camera sensors are a tiny fraction of those used in any interchangeable lens camera, let alone popular DSLRs. Further, lens flexibility for composition, bitrates for high-quality video, depth of field control through lenses with extremely wide apertures (say up to 100mm apertures on a 200/2), actual low-light performance, action tracking ability, exposure and post-processing latitude available through far higher dynamic range, and so on, are currently untouchable by the smartphone camera systems.
 
As a complete photography noob, I'd bet that most people don't give a crap about all the advanced photo wizardry. What people want is a camera that they can point in the right direction, tap to focus and then takes the best shot possible. This is why Google's camera has done so well and the port is used on so many devices. My Pixel XL takes miles better photos for me that my S7 Edge did, but that doesn't mean the S7E couldn't with it's lens and optics. It just means that I'm too much of a noob photographer to take the most benefit of the camera hardware. Google's algorithms therefore improve my photos quite a lot - at least to my eyes.

Since this is like a differentiating factor for most people, that's why it appears people judge harshly on the camera. Most of the people I know get through a day with an average smartphone (S7E/ S8 etc) and the software is smooth enough if not quite as smooth as the Pixels/ iPhones. Not to mention that if they have an expensive phone it will likely be in a case. Hence cameras will at times be the deciding factor. It comes down to incremental gains/ losses in the other areas.
 
Too large, too heavy and too sharp edges considering the size and weight.
 
The camera on a phone is a huge differentiating factor, because beyond that, all modern phones do the smartphone thing reasonably well.

And again, this is just as true for professional photographers as it is for your average Joe, and everyone between!
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Just... no.

Smartphones easily reach 'good enough', and even professional photographers try to carry the best smartphone camera that they can as they know all too well that the best camera you have is the one you have with you. And when Facebook, Instagram, and Youtube are the common standards for sharing socially, phone cameras certainly get the job done, since content > quality here.

However, phone camera sensors are a tiny fraction of those used in any interchangeable lens camera, let alone popular DSLRs. Further, lens flexibility for composition, bitrates for high-quality video, depth of field control through lenses with extremely wide apertures (say up to 100mm apertures on a 200/2), actual low-light performance, action tracking ability, exposure and post-processing latitude available through far higher dynamic range, and so on, are currently untouchable by the smartphone camera systems.
Click to expand...
I have zero idea what you're disagreeing with me about. So in turn, I'm going to disagree with you for not being able to put things in laymen's terms like I have.
 
CHANG3D said:
I have zero idea what you're disagreeing with me about. So in turn, I'm going to disagree with you for not being able to put things in laymen's terms like I have.
Click to expand...

I'm disagreeing on 'as good as DSLRs'. Phone cameras are very good, but there is a large gap that cannot be closed simply through processing (software).
 
IdiotInCharge said:
I'm disagreeing on 'as good as DSLRs'. Phone cameras are very good, but there is a large gap that cannot be closed simply through processing (software).
Click to expand...
Did you not see what I wrote next? Did I even end the sentence there? Heck, do you even know what the word "could" means? Did you also read the final paragraph?
 
Reading reviews the battery life is absolutely shite. That's a D-D-D-D-D-D-Deal Breaker for me :(
 
And all those people offering up their reviews are using non-final production models using non-final operating system code too so take all of them with rather large grains of salt I suppose. I wouldn't worry too much about reviews till at least January to see how the device works out for at least a month or two after release.
 
There's gotta be a serious software optimization issue if the battery life is a letdown with a 4,000mAh battery. I think I'll wait it out for impressions formed on release software.

As for the camera discussion, just about any flagship nowadays takes good enough pictures in the default auto mode, even without sideloading Google Camera. It helps that the camera2 API has been a thing for years, so you're not entirely at the mercy of the OEM's camera software like 2014 and earlier flagships (which I felt a bit miffed with, because Samsung and LG could've easily updated stuff like the S5, Note 4 and G3 to camera2 with their Lollipop updates and provide a Pro mode with manual controls if they wanted to).

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.
 
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...

Depends on the shot, but for most shooting I'll be in M, but with ISO set to auto, which is similar to the other priority modes in actual operation. For a camera system with aperture control, this puts shutter speed and aperture on the dials directly- and many cameras have exposure compensation on top of that, which allows you to adjust relative to the meter, which is controlling ISO.

On a phone, just being able to control shutter is really enough. Aperture is fixed, so your only other adjustment is ISO and phone camera meters can generally nail that pretty good since they can do subject-aware full-frame metering. At most, the option to lock ISO to base or some acceptable value might be nice for say landscape shots, especially if you're able to lock the phone down with a tripod or other malleable grip.
 
NamelessPFG said:
There's gotta be a serious software optimization issue if the battery life is a letdown with a 4,000mAh battery. I think I'll wait it out for impressions formed on release software.

As for the camera discussion, just about any flagship nowadays takes good enough pictures in the default auto mode, even without sideloading Google Camera. It helps that the camera2 API has been a thing for years, so you're not entirely at the mercy of the OEM's camera software like 2014 and earlier flagships (which I felt a bit miffed with, because Samsung and LG could've easily updated stuff like the S5, Note 4 and G3 to camera2 with their Lollipop updates and provide a Pro mode with manual controls if they wanted to).

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...
At least with Huawei phones you can use automatic everything in pro mode or just auto iso or auto shutter. It's very flexible.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
Depends on the shot, but for most shooting I'll be in M, but with ISO set to auto, which is similar to the other priority modes in actual operation. For a camera system with aperture control, this puts shutter speed and aperture on the dials directly- and many cameras have exposure compensation on top of that, which allows you to adjust relative to the meter, which is controlling ISO.

On a phone, just being able to control shutter is really enough. Aperture is fixed, so your only other adjustment is ISO and phone camera meters can generally nail that pretty good since they can do subject-aware full-frame metering. At most, the option to lock ISO to base or some acceptable value might be nice for say landscape shots, especially if you're able to lock the phone down with a tripod or other malleable grip.
Click to expand...
Shooting in M... well, I suppose it depends on the camera.

I have a Pentax Spotmatic, which is as manual and mechanical as it gets; the only luxury is the built-in light meter. Of course, this means that the 50mm prime it came with (a Super-Takumar 7-element f/1.4, to be exact) is easy to work the focus and aperture on. Small wonder why photographers tend to learn the trade on the later K1000.

I also have a Canon EOS 650, and shooting M on that is tedious by comparison because I have to hold this M button on the side of the lens mount to adjust aperture instead of shutter speed with the main control dial. I can't just do it on the lens since it's the original EF lens mount camera and all - meaning aperture is controlled by the body. (Also, the 35-70mm kit lens it came with is garbage, optically speaking. Chromatic aberration, vignetting, generally something that makes me wish I could afford a good EF lens to put in its place.)

Neither get much practical use not just due to their bulk, but also the hassle that is trying to get 135 film developed and scanned in this day and age when everyone and their grandparents just use their phone cameras.

Then there's the constant vaporware that is digital backs - something I look into because full-frame DSLRs are stupid expensive unless I want to take a chance at using something old like a first-gen EOS 5D. Even the used listings for slightly newer models like the 5D Mark II can be much more expensive, and don't get me started on what Sony wants to charge for a full-frame mirrorless... and then there's the lenses. Cripes, some of those things make my Note 8 look cheap!

Yet every time I go back to a phone camera, even the aforementioned Note 8 with its 2x OIS second zoom camera that doesn't have to suffer the losses of digital zoom, I think to myself "This still isn't enough for many of the shots I want. I want real telephoto capabilities that don't look like garbage, but that would take at least 4x zoom, maybe 8x."

That's exactly why I don't get too obsessed over phone cameras now that camera2 API and manual modes are pretty much defaults for any modern Android flagship. There just isn't enough thickness in these things to allow for large sensors and high-quality lenses, and going the Nokia 808/Lumia 1020 PureView route means you end up with more of a point-and-shoot digital camera that just so happens to make phone calls.

By the way, do you have any recommendations for phone tripods, especially something that could be used for an overhead view on a table? I figure that using old flagships as digital camcorders would be a start when it comes to making tech videos.
 
Last edited:
NamelessPFG said:
Shooting in M... well, I suppose it depends on the camera.
Click to expand...

It absolutely does- and like your Pentax, any 'auto' modes will depend on the effectiveness of the metering system. I've had to drop out of M simply because I couldn't get the camera to dial in the exposure I wanted, for example, due to a complex subject and limitations of the metering system.


NamelessPFG said:
By the way, do you have any recommendations for phone tripods, especially something that could be used for an overhead view on a table? I figure that using old flagships as digital camcorders would be a start when it comes to making tech videos.
Click to expand...

Well, you can use just about any tripod, or something like a GorillaPod from Joby; what you'd do is get a tripod head that can hold the phone, and that would screw into whatever solution you come up with.
 
Tup3x said:
Too large, too heavy and too sharp edges considering the size and weight.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Pass.

Razer
Phabelt
No headphone jack
Shit battery life
 
  • Like
Reactions: hmz
like this
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...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top