NEWS: Sony Xperia 1 announced at Mobile World Congress

Andy Bassett

Sony’s Xperia 1 smartphone, recently announced at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, has a raft of technologies aimed at making content viewed on the phone more cinematic.
Read the news.

SunnyIntervals

I'll need to see it before deciding, but I love the specs of this phone.

Leo31291

I was with it until the battery.

big boss

Lack of wireless charging is kind of a deal breaker for me, now that I'm used to it.

kBm

The screen looks great, its huge! It reminds me of the original Samsung Note, when all other phones at the time had 4 inch screens and everyone mocked...

The 3330mAh battery though...Sony usally does a decent job at power management, however, that battery surely wont last a day on a device designed to consume media on?

darksideofthe

If Sony spent less time on their "cinema" phone screens and more on their OLEDs, they may actually be able to make a class leading TV.  All this effort and spec for a tiny screen - what is the point?!  My old Samsung S7 still looks great when watching HD on it's 5" screen - most phones do.

BarKohba

What do you mean "more time on their OLEDs" ? You do know that Sony was the first company to introduce OLED tech in a tv (over 10-12 years ago) and is -consistently- among the top scorers (alternating with LG and sometimes Panasonic) when it comes to high end OLED tvs (usually beating all out on color accuracy especially) ?

As far as smartphones - Sony introduced OLED tech on the XZ3 at the end of last year, and the majority of tech reviews acclaimed it as being the most stunning screen of the moment.

darksideofthe

@BarKohba - The most stunning 6" screen. Wow! Seriously? Watching a movie on a cheap 6" £200 phone looks good too.  At that size, most do.

You kinda missed my point.  As good as their TVs are, they aren't class leading and are repeatedly being bettered by the competition. Hence my original comment.  The fact that they introduced the first OLED has little merit here.  It just frustrates me that all this R&D is going into a tiny screen, when it could be better used on their TVs.

Bl4ckGryph0n

It all depends on what you class as good. Take the Samsung s7 edge I used to have. I can see why some like the screen. However to me it was awful and looked unnatural .when you go to the budget end things can get a lot worse. And some actually can get better.

Have a good quality screen that presents a realistic and natural picture is very useful in my opinion.

BarKohba

I'll disregard your comment about watching a movie on a 6 inch screen - it's not only about watching a movie, but actually seeing realistic colors, especially in photos.

However, regarding TVs, you keep saying they are "bettered by the competition", yet I'm struggling to find a reputable TV reviewing publications that does not repeatedly rate their TVs year-over year (be it LCD or OLED) on the very top of the charts, many times as -THE- best. I'm looking at What HiFi, CNET, Rtings, and most importantly HDTVTest, who do, by far, has the most in-depth testing on the market.

You are free to check all of these sources, analyze their testing, and then it would be advisable to back up your claim of "bettered by the competition", because according to facts and empirical data, the reality is precisely the other way around.

It's ok to not like a brand, or very much like a competitive brand. Say you are a Samsung fan and you think their TVs are the best (for you). That's cool. But you keep saying they are bettered by the competition, and all the facts prove you wrong, and actually the complete opposite.

I'm looking at tests about contrast, dymanic range, luminosity, and especially Delata E deviation (color accuracy) - these are the most basic and instantly recognizable elements in picture quality. These are facts, not "opinions" - using testing gear all tests conducted show better number - I hardly can find a way to challenge that unless you do your own test, film it, an prove all others that they've been testing these figures wrong.