Sony Xperia 1 II review

29 May 2020


Sort by:

  • ?
  • Anonymous
  • I8m
  • 04 Jun 2020

Shanti Dope, 04 Jun 2020"How does setting a lower maximum brightness level than nor... moreFor the love of God can you even read???????
I quoted you and went into detail about all of that to specifically explain all of this.
You either have severe reading and comprehension issues, are purposefully not paying attention, or English is not your first language and you need much more practice before continuing to bother people.

"I don't get what you're trying to say here, but your own statement has pretty much answered your question already."

Because this is what you said and I already quoted this to point out and explain...
--YOU SAID advantages of oled:
"is the more lively color reproduction and better brightness"
--Then said:
"setting it on the lowest brightness simply defeats that purpose"
--Then you said:
"So Sony limited the brightness to around 600 nits to prevent this issue from happening"

Basically you said Sony limited the maximum brightness to solve the issue of leaving screen brightness too low.
Whether or not that is what you meant to say that is what your typing said.

Which is specifically why I said
"That makes zero sense at all."
And why I also said
"If you meant that solved the burn in issues then you completely messed up your wording and connections."
Because what you typed out and what you meant to say are two different things.
Also me pointing out how that doesn't make sense did not "answer my own question". That statement makes no sense at all.

Next.... you said:
--"Only in certain scenarios, such as night time viewing,"
Who are you to decide what brightness levels people can or should have? Or when or what level they can keep it dim?
And just because some people keep it dimmer doesn't mean you know exactly how dim or how often they keep it. As to claim they are wasting it.
You shouldn't assume. Nor should you judge.
And just because some people keep it dim doesn't mean most do and that you need to be so worked up over it.
--"so outside viewing experience will not be a problem on them," "Sony wouldn't be stubborn on allowing to shine brighter if they know there won't be any risk." "They pioneered this technology after all".
This is just excuses and again samsung did more pioneering in mobile oled than Sony.

Next... in response to me saying if you meant the burn in then you messed up your wording...
--YOU SAID:
"It IS a solution in a sense that it PREVENTS the thing from happening"
"If there's anything wrong about it, then it's got to be your understanding of what I've said, as I have clearly explained my own reasoning based on facts that I've read."
NO. You were the one with the understanding issue. And it's not only my words but you didn't understand your own words. Because again... clearly me saying
"IF YOU MEANT IT SOLVED BURN IN" means I CLEARLY understood that it was possibly you were trying to say that solved burn in....duh!?
As I've now pointed out already the issue was that while you meant the lower maximum brightness was supposed to solve burn in what you actually typed implied the lower maximum brightness solved people turning their screens down to low.
You have to watch how you type/say things. Especially with English. Every little variable can completely change the meaning of what you say.

Next....
My comment "One way makes no sense and the other is a poor excuse."
Was again because you miss worded what you were trying to say. So I explained the the differences from what you actually said and what you probably meant to say. And how both were wrong.
-What you said didn't make sense.
-What you meant to say was still an excuse.
1. On one hand it didn't make sense that a lower max brightness prevented people from putting the brightness all the way down. Which is what you typed. Like it or not it is what you said.
2. On the other hand, knowing you probably meant burn in, that is a poor excuse. Again it's probably more to do with being vein. Which is silly because most people won't have it cranked all the way up all the time. And that's why there is auto vs manual. So it was pointless.
--So you saying "Adults like you should've understood. I already explained how things are working" "it's on your part now to conceptualize everything that I've said."
is just you being rude and completely missing that I've already properly explained everything. And you missing your own errors.

Next....
--"You just gave a benefit of such move."
No... limiting it just because some people would foolishly keep it all the way up at all times and complain their battery life is not as good as others is not an advantage. It's a punishment to the majority with excuses for Sony to make themselves look better. Again. It's more to save face rather than needed. Battery endurance will be more than adequate for the majority.
Especially since they finally put a reasonable sized flagship battery in a phone...

Next...
--"Just because they don't produce such products with such technology, doesn't mean they know nothing about it."
NO DIP SHERLOCK....I never once said or implied they didn't know anything about it.
--"Definitely not if they've pioneered it, like I've said. If such was the case, then their first phone with OLED wouldn't be that good"
Again the point was that samsung was just as much a pioneer of them if not more so in mobile oled. Which is simple facts whether you like it or not.
Not to say Sony was not a pioneer in oled.
And actually if their first mobile oled had been like 5 to 7 years ago it probably wouldn't have been on the same level of Samsung's. It's not just their skill in displays that made their first "main" and flagship oled so good, but also just the time of release. They waited until oleds were extremely matured and ALL mobile displays had amazing specs before they finally made one. So that played a key factor in it too. Not just their skill in it.
That's simple logic whether you accept it or not.
--"consumers preferred it over the ones from Samsung in a blind and unbiased test."
That was a small and limited test. And lab results from places like here on gsmarena still proved the galaxy had a technical edge.
So keep dreaming

    Alex, 04 Jun 2020I DO NOT believe that you're checking the camera, screen, s... moreMind if I ask why? I don't really care about the fact you don't believe me, but rather I'm interested in the reason why you, who barely know me, should have strong doubts about what I said regarding to stuffs I do.
    And I'll be completely honest here - I'm a gadget enthusiast so I find joys when testing out devices myself in the store. I don't have any reasons NOT to try them out when they are available.

      • A
      • Alex
      • Ld5
      • 04 Jun 2020

      Nick Tagataka, 04 Jun 2020If a company states a specific number to quantify the perfo... moreI DO NOT believe that you're checking the camera, screen, speaker(s), etc. with your own eyes and ears, if you rely on Dxowhatever, their samples, and you're waiting for someone to test something so you could form an opinion. You are free to claim so, but i do not believe it.

        • ?
        • Anonymous
        • I8m
        • 04 Jun 2020

        Smithravi, 04 Jun 2020Test from whom?? From youtube community?? Just buy one for ... moreBwahahahaha. All companies false advertise and Sony is by far no exception.
        And they said an objective test for cross talk.
        Where on earth does that imply a random YouTube test?
        And if the claim was Samsung reduced crosstalk to 20db then you world say you need objective proof.

        So stop being a hypocrite, stop putting words in people's mouths, and stop twisting things because you prefer Sony.

          • ?
          • Anonymous
          • I8m
          • 04 Jun 2020

          Smithravi, 04 Jun 2020Again dreaming. Why are you bringing iPhone when I compared... moreCan you even read???????????
          Why did I bring up iphone? Cause I brought up iphone, pixel, lg, and even used the words "ANY OTHER RELEVANT FLAGSHIP" from 3 years ago. Meaning ALL brands of phone. ALL.
          Because your point was bogus.
          And I said YOUR CLAIM was bogus. I never said YOU are bogus.... more face palms...

          The claim that someone is more likely to be using a 7 year old Sony device than a 3 year old S8 or anything else is in fact you dreaming.
          And you have no way, shape, or form of proving such a ridiculous claim.
          But I'd be delighted to see some proof.
          In fact it's more likely that the majority of users would be using a few year older iPhone, galaxy, Google, LG, or any other device than a 3 year old Sony. Only because Sony devices are not as easily or readily available to most. So not because of the device being bad, but still the opposite of your claim is true. And it's funny because I didn't realize that until you made your fantasy claim lol. Nice job trying to drag others down only to point out more sony flaws in the process haha.

          And why are you bringing up issues of other brands hur dur.....
          Oh yeah to deflect out of hurt. Samsung lag? Exaggerated bs. You get the same exaggerated claims from ios users. Except it's all androids lag and are virus ridden according to them.
          The truth is all phones had some lag then. Even Sony, HTC, or iphone. And the difference of any of them including Samsung was minimal.
          So therefore your deflect is nothing but a side track to evade the point that Sony had some serious hardware issues for years back then. Something that was worse than the average issues every device has.

          And no that 23mp camera was never better. Especially all the time they lacked ois and a comparable aperture.
          I had/ have devices like z1,z3, z ultra, and others. Since we are talking 7 ish years ago specifically. And the samsung ones among others were by far way better. Under the right circumstances you could get a nice photo. But it was not always easy and the processing was just not up to par.

            Alex, 04 Jun 2020See, that's the main problem today. You're waiting for some... moreIf a company states a specific number to quantify the performance of their product in a certain area then they should get the same or at least similar enough number when a third party tests that area. Otherwise the company is lying about that number therefore meets the condition of false/misleading marketing. Plain and simple.

            When I want to check the camera performance on a phone, I look up on DxOMark's review, but I ALSO thoroughly inspect the full resolution images that they and other websites have uploaded and if possible compare them with the photos from other phones side by side, and test them out in stores. The same goes for phone speakers - I inspect GSMArena's frequency charts and audio samples, but I listen to them in the physical stores as well.

            Stereo crosstalk or display brightness numbers are different from those. They are something that can't be verified without dedicated measuring equipments and I can only wait for someone else who have them to carry out the test objectively. Online reviews proved that Apple did not lie about the display brightness on iPhone 11 Pro. I just expect the same from Sony and this phone's stereo crosstalk number as well.

            So your argument is not entirely wrong, but it's completely missing my point.

              • ?
              • Anonymous
              • Lj%
              • 04 Jun 2020

              Sterrr , 04 Jun 2020If only it had 18.8 screen instead off 21.9.If they called Cinema Wide, it means it has to be 21:9, not a ratio not found on TV and content.

                • S
                • Sterrr
                • mHH
                • 04 Jun 2020

                If only it had 18.8 screen instead off 21.9.

                  • ?
                  • Anonymous
                  • BiP
                  • 04 Jun 2020

                  It's £799 on O2UK - got my pre-order in and hopefully will get the headphones too.

                  PS: there are far too many fanboys of inferior brands polluting the comments here. Why can't you just stand back from the fact that you've spent money on another device and admit that technology-wise this as an overall package is better than anything else on the market?

                    • A
                    • Alex
                    • Ld5
                    • 04 Jun 2020

                    Nick Tagataka, 04 Jun 2020I already wrote most of the stuffs I wanted to say in the r... moreSee, that's the main problem today. You're waiting for someone to test it and tell you what to think. Ever thought about testing the camera yourself, instead of taking for granted what Dxowhatever told you? Ever thought about checking the screen yourself, and not just looking at the numbers on the net? Ever thought about checking the speakers yourself, instead of taking for granted what somebody told you?
                    Who do you believe more, your own eyes and ears, or Dxo and some random dudes on YouTube?

                      Smithravi, 04 Jun 2020Test from whom?? From youtube community?? Just buy one for ... moreAudio quality is very hard to quantify it and often quality assessments heavily rely on testers' personal preference and listening experience, so even if I had "some audio guy" as one of my friends it would be impossible to tell what he says is truthful or not.

                      I'm not naive enough to swallow everything manufacturers say. I wasn't fully convinced in my mind when Apple claimed that iPhone 11 Pro had 800 nits, but my mind got cleared up as GSMArena measured that it can indeed go beyond 800 nits. So as I already said, I'll wait for someone else (Maybe Notebookcheck or Anandtech if they will actually do it, or people some audiophile community forums that measures values using proper equipment) to carry out an objective test to prove Sony's claim as well.

                        Anonymous, 04 Jun 2020That makes zero sense at all. Oled advantage: "is the mor... more"How does setting a lower maximum brightness level than normal for flagship device of a certain price bracket from 2020 solve the issue of people putting the brightness down to low????"

                        I don't get what you're trying to say here, but your own statement has pretty much answered your question already.
                        By setting a lower maximum brightness, the screen can be prevented from the occurrence of burn in. Also the main reason why Samsung used to put a limit from their screen maximum brightness by warning the users on the risk of going over the comfortable threshold brightness.


                        "Because keeping the brightness low often is defeating the purpose of the screen apparently... which doesn't mean they never turn it up."

                        Only in certain scenarios, such as night time viewing, where a bright screen could've been devastating enough to destroy a human eye. But not at all times people are using their phones in those cases, so a "bright enough" one will be ideal for most cases. Besides, the screen contrast ratio of OLEDs is very high in nature already, so outside viewing experience will not be a problem on them, which questions the need for going higher.
                        Sony wouldn't be stubborn on allowing the screen to shine brighter if they know there won't be any risk. They pioneered this technology after all, so they obviously know the limitations and weakest points of OLED.


                        "If you meant that supposedly solved the exaggerated burn in issues then you completely messed up your wording and connections."

                        It IS a solution in a sense that it PREVENTS the thing from happening. In a similar way that Samsung made their AOD to continuously move the content in different places to avoid overusing a portion of the screen. If there's anything wrong about it, then it's got to be your understanding of what I've said, as I have clearly explained my own reasoning based on facts that I've read.

                        "One way makes no sense and the other is a poor excuse."

                        There's a big difference between lowest brightness and lower maximum brightness. Adults like you should've understood it right away. I already explained how things are working, it's on your part now to conceptualize everything that I've said.


                        "If anything they probably did it for battery life. Or to save face for battery life. Because people might have cranked it up and spoke poorly of endurance."

                        You just gave a benefit of such move. The main intention of the solution was still regarding the burn in concern, this was just one of the advantageous effects of such strategy.

                        And sorry, but especially in the mobile industry, Samsung has been extremely prominent in oled development. Sony has barely been using them that long in their devices. Just like people give way to much credit to apple over their Samsung oled panels."

                        Just because they don't produce such products with such technology, doesn't mean they know nothing about it. Definitely not if they've pioneered it, like I've said. If such was the case, then their first phone with OLED wouldn't be that good that even the general consumers preferred it over the ones from Samsung in a blind and unbiased test.
                        Apple has limited knowledge about screen technologies. The engineers may know some, but definitely not as much as those who are working in the screen industry for a while. Heck, they're not even investing into R&D for display advancements either (the last one was the Retina display, and it was during the time of Steve Jobs when Apple was actually investing into R&D instead of creating an existing stuff, customize a bit to make it a little better, then price it as if the world has never had it before).

                          Nick Tagataka, 04 Jun 2020I already wrote most of the stuffs I wanted to say in the r... moreTest from whom?? From youtube community?? Just buy one for yourself and test it by some audio guy. Till date Sony never false advertised their specs.

                            Smithravi, 03 Jun 2020Audio quality depends on both hardware and software. Sony h... moreI already wrote most of the stuffs I wanted to say in the reply to Tann Hauser's comment (Wait for a bit until it gets approved).

                            "Sony claims crosstalk has been reduced to 20dB"
                            I'll believe it when someone else proves it through objective tests.

                              Anonymous, 04 Jun 2020Bwahahahaha!!! People are more likely or in greater numbers... moreAgain dreaming. Why are you bringing iPhone when I compared with S8?? There are many reasons why people use Iphone and they do provide software for 5 years. But my point of comparison is in android. Also instead of calling me bogus, why cant you prove me that I'm wrong.

                              Also back then not just Sony had problems, even Samsung has name of laggy devices. Though even back then they used higher RAMs compared to Sony just like today.

                              Also Sony 23/19MP cameras might not be great in Auto mode but they still performed better than other competitive smartphones. They capture more details and great colours especially in good lighting conditions. Only people who complained are the ones who don't know how to take pictures.

                                Tann Hauser, 03 Jun 2020Actually it is. See YT reviewers comment and actual video r... moreNot if the actual drivers powering the speakers aren't any better. I listened to the audio samples from GSMArena's review using my earphones and noticed that Xperia's speaker is skewed towards high frequency (especially when Dolby Atmos is on), and while trebles are well represented there's barely any audible bass in its sound. In comparison S20 Ultra sounds slightly more muddled in highs but I can feel more depth from both male/female vocals, whereas Mi 10 Pro is.. yeah, no wonder people call it the best speakers on a phone.
                                I agree that the front facing speakers are more suitable than side facing ones for playing videos or games, but just because they are facing front that doesn't automatically guarantee that the quality is there.

                                "DSEE Ultimate or 3D Reality Audio"
                                The former is pretty much an AI bit-depth & frequency upscaler. Although it definitely sounds fascinating, it's yet to be tested how much difference it would actually make in real life listening experience.
                                The latter would have required them to subscribe to one of Tidal, Deezer or Nugs in order to test it and the feature cannot be used for any of regular music/video streaming services (e.g. Soundcloud, Spotify, Netflix) nor Youtube, so they probably couldn't be bothered to properly go through it.

                                  Nick.B, 04 Jun 2020I want 1000 commentsMe too!!!

                                    Exyvia, 04 Jun 2020@Shanti OLED Advantages are not Brightness and colour accu... moreIf we're to compare a high end IPS LCD to a common OLED, that would've been the case, but generally speaking, OLEDs are easier to achieve higher brightness due to its nature of light being emitted directly from the source instead of passing through several layers of components.
                                    The only problem is that it is all organic materials, and organic products tend to degrade quickly over time, so the maximum brightness that manufacturers are effectively using are lower than the highest potential of what the screen technology could actually achieve (a 10,000 nits OLED will be brighter than the 10,000 nits IPS LCD if such panels were to exist).

                                    As for color reproduction, it might be true that IPS screens can be calibrated just as good as an OLED screen, but we all do know that OLEDs have easier time nailing the right colors in the spectrum than IPS screens, and part of the reason to this is also the brightness advantage. The brighter appearance of OLEDs also help them achieve higher intensity of colors, though again, IPS screens have the advantage of shining bright up to any levels without any major compromises, so there's that.

                                    The rest are true, I just forgot to pinpoint them out as well.

                                      Smithravi, 04 Jun 2020Don't live in dreams man. I myself have been using my Z5 fo... moreYou know i am one of these people "not the illiterate" the others you mentioned, i have used xperia z1 for 3+ years then, and as a result i bought the xperia x and been using it for 3+ years so far, i bought a new battery last year anticipating that the original battery is going to die eventually and i might have a hard time to find a new one later so i bought it before its time, in the meantime, the new battery is laying on the shelf :)

                                        Anonymous, 04 Jun 2020Panel is a panel and two manufacturers can do different thi... moreYes, I know all those things and some. What I want to see however, is a valid evidence to the claim that this phone's OLED panel is a Samsung-made one. I just want to be sure to everything, because I can't seem to find any reliable source of information regarding this thing.

                                        Many have compared the LG Wallpaper TV and the Sony Bravia A1, and the verdict is that LG won just by the fact that it was easier to install. Image quality wise, Sony was still better, especially with the color reproduction, and if not for the ease and grease benefit of the LG, Sony could've won there. But at least LG is a sure second placer to me for the best TVs on the market right now.

                                          15 of 50