lets compare this phone camera
against the most expensive phone, and against budget phone
it is crazy how budget phone can crush them LOL
What is "premium" here, exept price!?
This is typical, well made middleranger and nothing more than that, so please GSMARENA, don't be as Chinese sites, wich pronounce every phone as "flagship", "premium" or "best buy"Â… with that you are loosing your dignity
The camera suck.my lg g3 better in low light and daylight.battery little dissapointeddize to big.good chip set price should be at least 400$
Angry Mobile Nerd, 20 Feb 2016lol whatever. I just think it's hilarious this phone scored over 100 hours on GSMarena's batt... moreAh I see, so you are just a Samsung fanboy who can't even take the slightest bit of constructive criticism about your fav brand.
I was expecting atleast half an effort from you to come up with a counter argument. Instead all you have is 'lol whatever'
There is a problem, a clear one as explained with the example of the Galaxy A8's battery life but you are not able to counter that apart from "lol whatever". You have no real understanding of hardware or how to evaluate efficiency.
In the mean time I strongly recommend anger management for you, Angry nerd =))
MHanz, 20 Feb 2016Lol maybe you need to take that advice and keep yours shut instead? Amoleds always give hig... morelol whatever. I just think it's hilarious this phone scored over 100 hours on GSMarena's battery tests and someone still has the audacity to complain (you). I'll bet software update after software update you won't see those web browsing times improve because that's not the problem. Actually, there is no problem really.
just believe that glass back is really not comfort in hand, its really hard to feel and touch not easy to use at all
Angry Mobile Nerd, 20 Feb 2016Then shut it and buy a Mate 8. Oh wait, but the Mate 8 on gets only 12+ hours of video playba... moreLol maybe you need to take that advice and keep yours shut instead?
Amoleds always give higher run times on video tasks as seen with the good numbers on a Note 4.
Samsung's own midrangers like the A8 can give already 12hrs of browsing run times with a 1080p 5.7" amoled panel and just 3050mah battery to boot.
The A9 has a better improved amoled panel and delivers good run times for video playback along with the 4000mah battery but falls flat on it's face in web browsing run times. Just ~1.5hrs more for another 950mah is not hardware related. SD652 is far more efficient than the SD615 of the A8.
This is browser bug or poor optimization or sple other ROM specific issues for the A9.
Educate yourself before go off onto a silly lecture.
PS: no one who actually cares about proper support will go for anything huawei, little to non existent updates to their products is a big reason to stay away from their products. No thanks
MHanz, 20 Feb 2016Dissapointed. For 4000mah battery and 1080p amoled I expected much more on browsing numbers... moreThat's actually what's happening to devices fitted with AMOLED displays, their web browsing time is always lower than the video playback time. IPS panel on the other hand does the opposite with longer web browsing time than the video playback time. In the end IPS for web browsing, AMOLED for entertainment mostly.
MHanz, 20 Feb 2016Dissapointed. For 4000mah battery and 1080p amoled I expected much more on browsing numbers... moreThen shut it and buy a Mate 8. Oh wait, but the Mate 8 on gets only 12+ hours of video playback while the A9 gets a staggering 18+ hours. Do you get why yet? It has nothing to do with software optimization but most likely CPU architecture and power draw for different tasks so don't expect any noticeable improvements with software updates.
For 4000mah battery and 1080p amoled I expected much more on browsing numbers for battery life. Not impressed.
If it's priced well I might still buy it for someone else. I was planning to get this for myself but 13 odd hours of browsing is not impressive enough other phones are doing 11 odd hours with just 3000mah battery, also from Samsung. I am hoping there was a bug in the browser or some optimization botched
TechEnthusiast, 19 Feb 2016First of all multiple tech sites have reviewed the A9 and confirm that it has a 13 mp camera i... moreWhy do you bring the aspect ratio into play? I was talking about sensor size, and there is a difference and of course both phones feature an F1.9 aperture, but it's not the same size. The galaxy s6s aperture is larger and better, saying it's THE SAME, is just wrong. So yes, both have 1.9, but 1.9 is not equal to 1.9 if the sensor does not have the same size. And that has nothing to do with the aspect ratio...
I love those days when samsung were putting led notification on their upper midranger like samsung mega 6.3(2013) and samsung alpha(2014) all they care now is how to make a profit. they are becoming crapple now.
could a 3rd party camera app enable 2160p video since the hardware is technically capable of it?
I don't get it? Why launch 2 different Dual SIM models? Why not launch the same Dual SIM model everywhere, which has a dedicated SIM+MicroSD tray and a separate 2nd SIM tray? That makes a lot of sense.
MarcoK., 19 Feb 2016There is a technical fault in the article:
"It starts off with a downgrade - the sensor has 1... moreFirst of all multiple tech sites have reviewed the A9 and confirm that it has a 13 mp camera in 4:3 format on default..even though there is also a 16:9 mode.
Are you actually arguing with Samsung and GSMarena about the specs of the phone because it is OFFICIAL THAT ALL THE PHONES IN THE A(2016) SERIES HAVE AN F1.9 Aperture!!
Leo. 001, 19 Feb 2016I really hated samsung in the other day cuz their ugly round shape devices.. But now i would s... moreHardware matters the most, software always comes next. In any case build quality is a part of hardware too. Jeez!
There is a technical fault in the article:
"It starts off with a downgrade - the sensor has 13MP resolution (and it's 4:3 instead of 16:9). Other than that, the camera boasts the same bright f/1.9 aperture and optical image stabilization."
The aperture is always in relation to the sensor size. The galaxy s6 has a 1/2.6 inch sensor, the a9 has a 1/3 inch sensor.
That said, the SAME aperture in this case would be a f/1.65 and not a f/1.9. In fact, the a9 aperture is SMALLER, so the sensor gets less light and it's just not the same.
I really hated samsung in the other day cuz their ugly round shape devices.. But now i would say samsung is so close to what im searching for.. None of these hardware matters.. The only things matters are build quality and design.. I think finally samsung had understood it.. Good work samsung..