Samsung Galaxy S8+ review: Infinity and beyond
- D
- AnonD-77443
- v6J
- 19 Apr 2017
vrvly, 19 Apr 2017Its a big shame there is no 2:1 ratio for photos or 21:9 fo... moreWouldn't surprise if Samsung adds a 18:9 photo ratio later.
Which xperia cameras are sharper?
Looking at all the GSMarena studio photos no Sony phone comes close to the S8+ in good or low light. (see link for xz and xzs)
http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=5&idPhone1=8523&idPhone2=8313&idPhone3=8599
- D
- AnonD-77443
- v6J
- 19 Apr 2017
GSMa Said "This does mean a native aspect ratio of 4:3 for the sensor. Of course, you could shoot in 16:9 instead, but this isn't really recommended."
And why not? The image dimensions on the S8+ at 12MP (4:3) are 4032x3024 at 9MP (16:9) it is 4032x2268. i.e. the S8+ simply cuts off a depth of 378 pixels along the top and bottom to get a 16:9 image ratio.
THE 9MP IMAGE QUALITY IS IDENTICAL TO THE 12MP IMAGE.
I always shot 16:9 on the GN7 and will do the same on the S8+.
- ?
- Anonymous
- psd
- 19 Apr 2017
21:9 is a useless format for a phone. It makes it much too elongated and very uncomfortable for any meaningful work. The rounded display cornes, soft keys, fingerprit scanner at the back and the AMOLED still very susceptible to picture burn-in makes it a no-deal
- ?
- Anonymous
- U@E
- 19 Apr 2017
Read the whole review. I think I will skip this.
- D
- AnonD-234961
- ndn
- 19 Apr 2017
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017The battery is actually quite less. Keep in mind that durin... moreActually you are wrong. Besides the actual display LED matrix, the display hardware is comprised of a subsystem called "display driver" which takes up a lot of power and must be on even if a single pixel is lit and the rest are black. That's why you see the AOD draining the battery. Screen being only 3/4 lit does not produce a significant difference in display-centric tests.
- vrvly
- prT
- 19 Apr 2017
Its a big shame there is no 2:1 ratio for photos or 21:9 for videos. Its such a waste of screen. it was he most unpleasant thing I felt when using it. I would also envy sharpness of xperia photos as well as 4K that feels like its resolution is lower somehow. I think g6 camera ui and processing will be better, we will see.
- ?
- Anonymous
- nC3
- 19 Apr 2017
I was eyeing the benchmarks in this review and I noticed something. LG V20 has better performance than LG G6? Though only in a few benchmarks.
- 3
- 303tk4
- Mf5
- 19 Apr 2017
I lost OnePlus 3 for some reason and it seems it's time to try Samsung again...! (I was totally over with iGarbage) I respect Sony more for its stability though.
S8+ looks damn slick
- D
- AnonD-77443
- v6J
- 19 Apr 2017
I pre-ordered the S8+ before the reviews came out because i wanted a better camera than my GN4 and it has exceeded my expectations.
Congratulations on market leading low light camera performance Samsung. :-)
Phone performance, screen quality, battery life etc are all up there too...
No doubt haters will find something small.... I'm guessing the screen/camera ratio, OS or glass backs?
- ?
- Anonymous
- LEP
- 19 Apr 2017
its downgrade in every aspect but design, screen size compared to the s7 edge exynos..
- ?
- Anonymous
- v6J
- 19 Apr 2017
Anonymous, 18 Apr 20174:3 is not a square, it is wider horizontally. And it perfe... moreStill living in the 90's are we. 4:3 screens are terrible.
Personally i don't know anyone who shoots 4:3.
- taghack
- 3PL
- 18 Apr 2017
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017Yet, GSMArean didn't test it (the battery life is tested in... moreJut another quick clarification. The battery endurance rating comprises of four components: 3G talk time, Wi-Fi browsing, standby and video playback. If there is any point at all to be made here, regarding 16:9 use cases, it would only apply to our standard test video. Indeed, it is 16:9, which we believe is the only way to make results directly comparable. We still measured a 45 minute or so improvement in video playback endurance over the S7 edge.
As per the other "on-screen" test we run, which is browsing, it was done using the full real estate of the screen, in the default Samsung browser at the native QHD+ resolution.
- S
- Savor
- 4Jn
- 18 Apr 2017
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017For phones, 16:9 is good, because phones are small. Phones ... moreBy narrowing the width, it also made typing in portrait mode more cramped and made the video experience less pleasurable.
My wider Note 3 is better to type on than the more one-handed friendly S7e thanks to it providing a wider keyboard and flat screen. Note 3 doesn't need to do palm rejection and offers me the right ratio.
Face it, the S7 edge was the best phone that Samsung ever made. I actually despise it more than others but their S7e is like what the Z3 was to Sony and M8 was to HTC. They peaked right there.
Unfortunately, Samsung will just milk this bezel-less, G2 copycat design until 2019 once their X is ready. As time goes on, people will laugh at this bezel-less, curved trend and oddball 18.5:9 like they did with HTC M8's extra eyeball and find something more useful.
S8 is a joke just like the jack-less iPhone 7 was last year. With enough whining, they will go back to something more normal and standard. What next for Apple? An Apple car with no steering wheel and wheels. Need to buy them separately?
- taghack
- 3PL
- 18 Apr 2017
Tann Hauser, 18 Apr 2017Am I not spot on with my deleted comment in any way?
Batt... moreAll GSMArena battery tests are conducted following a very specific procedure, which you can read about in detail here - http://www.gsmarena.com/gsmarena_lab_tests-review-751p6.php The S8+ makes no exception. Furthermore, tests were, in fact, conducted in the native QHD+ resolution. To be fair, this wasn't clearly stated in the text, which has since been corrected.
As for the point regarding the video: Yes, our standard sample is a 16:9 one, which does leave some inactive pixels on the screen. However, running it is the only way we can assure comparability and validity of results. This is, in fact, how we managed to measure a 45 minute or so improvement in video playback endurance on the S8+ compared to the S7 edge. We believe it to be a fair apples to apples comparison.
- ?
- Anonymous
- nC3
- 18 Apr 2017
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017Actually movies were always shot wider than 4:3, they just ... moreFor phones, 16:9 is good, because phones are small. Phones need more length because it needs space to fit in the hand. For example when holding vertically the phone, too much width would make holding/use the phone in one hand too hard, so you can extend the screen only vertically. When holding horizontally, you need space for the game controls when you play games. (While your thumbs cover the extra width of 16:9, you'll see about the central 4:3 from the game.)
And since it's a small device, it will fit in the human field of view anyway.
Old phones with keyboard had 4:3, but since the screen replaced the keyboard, it could go only vertically.
- S
- Savor
- 4Jn
- 18 Apr 2017
This future is now getting messy with dongles, different charging standards, and variety of aspect ratios and resolutions everywhere.
The S8+ battery life seems respectable enough but doesn't seem to have the same standby time as its predecessor. The S8 should test worse than it. If I had to choose between the S8 duo, it would be the S8+ because I adapted to 5.5" pretty quickly and typing on the narrower S8 would feel to cramped in portrait mode. Typing is the most thing I do on my phones. S7 edge is terrible at it thanks to the more palm rejection.
Why bother? Smart money is on the heavily discounted S7 edge though or S7 flat. I would trade that 10% improvement of the S8 for a 40-50% discount. Always get the one year old flagship at 50% off. Then you will start missing that physical home button which is another way to wake the screen and no onscreen buttons to kill display space.
With 18.5:9, this Infinity Display is so misleading fooling people you think it will use up the entire screen when watching videos but you won't. Move along. Nothing revolutionary to see here. Just took Samsung four years to copy the LG G2. I also want Samsung to make another beautiful non-black phone. Tired of another smudge magnet black phone already.
- ?
- Anonymous
- JbI
- 18 Apr 2017
Aspros, 18 Apr 2017What matters the most is WiFi browsing and that defintly fu... moreYet, GSMArean didn't test it (the battery life is tested in 16:9 environments) which is exactly my point. Had they tested it in a typical use case you'd get battery life in mid 70s ... quite far less than last year.
Point is that when one company makes the screen bigger they should also put a bigger battery else battery life suffers. That's exactly what happened with S8+ . Last year with the full screen lit it was 90 hours, this year with 3/4ths lit is 88h ... that's quite a step back, no two ways about it.
- ?
- Anonymous
- mrx
- 18 Apr 2017
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017It is happening only in Korea so farNot so: I've seen a pink-tinted S8+ on display in a shop in the UK, and can confirm that I couldn't eliminate it using the colour sliders or display mode, though I could make it less visible.
Just because a report says that customers in Korea are complaining doesn't mean they are the only ones affected, just that they got the devices earlier.
- ?
- Anonymous
- nC3
- 18 Apr 2017
Anonymous, 18 Apr 2017I don't get why peripheral vision is not useful though. I f... more4:3 is not a square, it is wider horizontally. And it perfectly fulfills the periphery.
http://www.brayebrookobservatory.org/BrayObsWebSite/HOMEPAGE/PageMill_Resources/AFOV/pfov.jpg
The 16:9 is too wide from the same standpoint, which makes it's edges useless.
The film standard is widescreen mostly because it was inefficient to place seats to fit the 4:3 movie screen, but with widescreen, they can place more seats horizontally.
The 16:9 monitors are nonsense anyway. For example all websites are vertically scrolling. It's much easier to read short line texts aligned vertically than long lines horizontally. That's why the text on A4 documents are vertical, not horizontal.
- ?
- Anonymous
- mrx
- 18 Apr 2017
Anonymous, 18 Apr 20174:3 is much better than 16:9 in every way, because the usab... moreActually movies were always shot wider than 4:3, they just cropped them for TV.
And would you really want to hold a 4:3 phone?