Samsung Galaxy K zoom review Comments
- Jon (Swe)
- mhB
Anonymous, 04 Jul 2014nice review, but it's too expensive.
the price is similar to Galaxy Note 3 Neo here.It is a bit expensive.
It costs slightly more than the S4 LTE+ where I live.
And about the same as the Note 3.
But in comparisson to those, it's not really more expensive;
The K Zoom has the better camera sensor + optical zoom +60fps, over the S4 version. The S4 on the other hand has some performance (it's the upgraded version with the snapdragon 800, also it comes with 16GB of storage).
The Note 3 neo has higher capacity battery (but about the same time for browsing), and the stylus, whereas yet again, camera and video is better on the K zoom. When it comes to the display the pixel density is better with the K zoom, but the Note 3 Neo has higher number of sub pixels. Also the K zoom is brighter and performce better in sunlight. But which is the best at the end of the day, I could not say without comparing them closely under different situations.
Really prices of high end smartphones got a bit out of hand in 2007. It started with the N95, and contiued with iPhone and so on...
Before that, you got a top of the line consumer phone (in some cases smartphone) for about the same money as the K Zoom. (for a while, including all sensors made the price difference make sense, but even for half the price of the K Zoom today, you get GPS, LTE, BT4.0, and so on, so mostly it's an industrial culture thing, where companys are trying to get better profit margins on higher end devices).
- Anonymous
- mhB
AnonD-237024, 04 Jul 2014Nutshell:
It's a Galaxy S3 with a massive camera module on the back.But better processor.
Better batterylife.
Better display (sunlight performance, at least).
Newer android.
Better connectivity.
More RAM.
Different looks
And some other stuff.
In other words not much at all like the SIII except for screen resolution.
- Anonymous
- mhB
pegasso, 04 Jul 2014strange...
this review has no picture of Galaxy K zoom with its back cover removed.
and i ... moreIt is removable.
If you go to phone specs and klick pictures, there is a picture.
And I think they even removed it in the preview video.
Ahy they forgot to mention it in this review and why they didn't post a picture here, I dont know.
I guess they just forgot, they are humans after all.
- Anonymous
- mhB
If I'm not mistaken, there is a two key press to launch the kamera. It's like shutter-key plus volume or something like that.
Nothing about air-view.
Nothing about turning the sensitivity of the screen up to use with gloves.
And nothing about one-hand operation.
I guess it does not have those features. Or Touchwiz (and other launchers, even vanilla) has too many features to cover all.
- AnonD-52738
- tZ4
Fail series. Wonder why Samsung still continue this series.
- AnonD-110477
- 8jp
qx10 after the latest software update beats this galaxy k
- Anonymous
- pqp
Is it serious? This phone has horrible photo quality. S4 take better photos. Even the Nokia N82 has better camera... I can't believe it. (Did you degrade/ruin the photos to discredit the phone or what?)
- AnonD-237024
- nG$
Nutshell:
It's a Galaxy S3 with a massive camera module on the back.
- AnonD-130880
- pin
conclusion: stillborn
- AnonD-70078
- mx}
So ugly. Lumia is far better
- pegasso
- 6%C
strange...
this review has no picture of Galaxy K zoom with its back cover removed.
and i thought the battery is removable.
as far as i know, GSMArena usually took a picture of the device with its back cover removed to show the battery, the card slots and many more.
- Anonymous
- tA$
nice review, but it's too expensive.
the price is similar to Galaxy Note 3 Neo here.
- mir
- sxt
Nice phone, but if you can live without the zoom and xenon flash, then you are better off with the S5 which can take overall sharper photos and better videos.
Tip us
2.0m 150k
RSS
EV
Merch
Log in I forgot my password Sign up