Sony Xperia Z5&#39;s 4K display shows most content at 1080p

Who cares about 4k on a smartphone then.

To me it's the worst out of the 3 new sony phones.

Just waste of processing power and battery life.

Sep 22, 2015permalink

Timmbits

if they quote 2 days, and you get half that, that would be pretty good!

Oct 8, 2015permalink

scrup

But you can fit more icons with a 4k display :)

Not good for fat fingers tho.

Sep 21, 2015permalink

melgross

It's a little ridulous to have a 4K display on a phone. This is just another marketing gimmick. There is simply no way that anyone can see that resolution. Anyone stating otherwise, is very gullible.

Sep 21, 2015permalink

Agreed,

It's only ounter productive. Since the battery will die sooner then with a lower res screen and the processor will have a harder task.

1080p for 5 ish inch phones and 720p for 4.5 ish phones is a nice standard.

Just focus on processing, camera and battery life.

Sep 22, 2015permalink

lbjack

Infantile bashing of new tech: Wul, I don't need no that-there 4K blah blah...just marketing blah blah...

If optical zoom in smartphones is constrained by form factor, then the only alternative is cropping out aka digital zoom, a ripoff unless you get a finer field in the first place, which 4K gives. 4K enables far better crop zooming.

Of course 4K is meaningless on a 5" screen, but who said the phone is the end display? Whine about no 4K content? Well, get off your butts and make some! This phone facilitates it.

Why do you pubescents talk about the phone as the display? The phone is the viewfinder, not the display. It's a camera making content to be curated, then viewed later on a proper 4K display. Bashing as useless 4K based on a thin, 5" camcorder is infantile.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

martinj68

well said, too many people seen to think that the phone screen is the end display, oh unless its uploaded to "compressed" facebook.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

badi

ibjack, the things you say don't make much sense.
First, recording video at 4K is not related to the screen being 4K. actually all the cameras that capture 4K (GH4, sony A7 seriers, etc) don't have such display.

Second, while the phone cameras evolved a lot, and in good light you can actually produce very good photos with current flagships phones, the quality of the recorded images (both photos and videos) in normal conditions, will provide you great images to view or print on 4-5-6" media, but viewed at larger scales (either printed images, or films displayed on large screens (+20") ... they still got a lot way to go. So don't really tell me that you're going to make a footage with any phone that will look decent on a 40" tv or larger, processed or not (this days, maybe in a few years we'll get there)...

Sep 21, 2015permalink

lbjack

You missed my point. The things you say betray a need for remedial reading.

Sep 22, 2015permalink

Jasen70

Well said

Sep 24, 2015permalink

luigibozi

I think all the reviewers will tell us how 12Mp iPhone 6s images/video will be far ahead 23Mp Sony's 4K. Let me tell you I won't believe those.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

Joe Ogiba

Sony makes the sensors in most smartphones and the A7 full frame cameras come in 12, 24 and 42 mp (A7s II, A7 II & A7r II ) to give you a choice of high resolution or high iso . I think Apple putting 12mp and 4K UHD video in it's new 6s smartphones is a good idea. Now if you want 4K video in a camera under $7K you will only get it from Sony, Samsung or Panasonic since Canon does not even have 4K UHD in it's $5,500 C100 Mark II Cinema camera.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

zodiacfml

Can't wait for a couple of reviews on this one. Sadly, it is actually the interface and texts that might show a noticeable difference versus images and videos.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

GabrielZ

What an elegant simple solution, good on Sony. I have a feeling now Apple/Samsung et al might incorporate a similar solution on their future smartphone models.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Marcelobtp

Acctualy not a bad ideia at all, 4k wil be very tempting for VR headsets, and this will be a boom in many areas, including photography. For me 1080p displays today are more than enough for 5" smartphones, andbattery life is more important than a ultra high ppi display, but many already have power banks so...

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Photato

Sony is just doing what they have learnt with camera sensors.
Give them pixels and they will come.
But i wonder if they care about the brand reputation long term by using these cheap snake oil salesman tactics.
It looks disenginuos to say the least.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Paul Boddie

Battery stamina?

Sep 19, 2015permalink

SammyToronto

A 4K screen on a 5" phone is of no practical purpose whatsoever and is only used as a marketing lure to those simple-minded customers who think bigger is always better. Unless you have a built-in microscope in your eyes, you won't be able to discern the increase in sharpness compared to a Quad HD screen (which is already too much) or even an FHD screen.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Mal69

Thank God that i actually do have a built in microscope in my eyes, i just knew that operation would come in handy someday.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

peter drake

Isn't 4K and quad HD the same thing?

Sep 20, 2015permalink

SammyToronto

Quad HD is also referred to as 2K or 1440p, which is what you'll find on the LG G3/G4, Samsung S6, etc. It's a step down from 4K.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

edu T

Just trying to clarify, SammyT:
· Base-level HD: an 16:9 array of 1280 columns x 720 lines, or about 1 megapixel
· Full HD: 1080 x 1920, or ≈ 2 Mp, aka 1080 (image height), aka "2K" (width)
· Quad HD: 2560 x 1440, or 2x base HD linearly or 4x the area, hence the "quad".
· 4K: 3840 x 2160 (from the width)
Finally, the 'p' in "# of lines p" usually stands for progressive scan, as opposed to "i"nterlaced...

Sep 20, 2015permalink

SammyToronto

@edu You're correct, of course, except that 2K refers to Quad HD (i.e. 2560 x 1440), not FHD. I know it's not technically accurate, but that has become the convention afaik.

So Quad HD = 2K = 1440p = 4 x HD and 4K = UHD = 2160p = 4 x FHD!

As for the 'p' as opposed to 'i', I don't think interlaced Quad HD (or 4K) screens exist (correct me if I'm wrong), so 'p' has become the de facto designation above FHD.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

edu T

@SammyT It's me that stands corrected, on second thought I see you're right. Anyway, I couldn't agree more with your original point about 4K res on a 5.5" panel...

Sep 20, 2015permalink

peter drake

Thanks for the clarification :)

Sep 25, 2015permalink

Roxo2

Xperia Z5 Perimuim has 5.5" screen not 5.7".
The increased number of pixels clearly improves the overall screen quality no matter what screen size it is.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Benefits over using 1080p at that size are debateable.
Pushing 4 times more pixels arround will drain battery life and slow the phone down.

Benefits over 1440p at that size are non existant
Same problems mentioned above are still there though less significant.

In short less is more in this case.

Sep 22, 2015permalink

h2k

As a traveler and promenader, i use 5 inch mobiles a lot for navigating (with Google Maps if possible).

When i heard about this 4K Sony screen, i wondered immediately:
- How would Google Maps (and sat images) look on this? Will i have more detail on my hands, or less, or do i get essentially the same image quality and depth of information?

Now with this new information, i wonder:
- Is Google Maps (and Here and OSM) displayed at 4K or less? And how will it look downscaled to 2 or 3K?

Sep 19, 2015*permalink

electrophoto

Consider that pixels on most current (non 4k) smartphones up to 5+" are already "invisible" as an individual part to the human eye....
So unless you get a good magnifying glass or a microscope - the difference on G-Maps will be nothing.

Also GMaps data is vectorized - it's not a bitmap data... it's rendered "on the go".
The Satellite imagery though is fixed and FHD or 4K will not make a difference....

it would if your smartphone came with a 27" screen... but I doubt you'd carry that around daily ;)

there's absolutely no real virtue to 4k on a small display..... it simply is too high to make much of a difference.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

h2k

Electrophoto, thanks for your reply. Still i would like to see how it works on the device proper in real life - in part it depends on how things are rendered/sampled. Even though i agree with your reasoning in theory.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Francis Carver

Personally, I am waiting for the 3-inch screen smartphone with the promised 8K video playback capability and the 21-day battery life. The rest is for losers.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Debankur Mukherjee

hahahahah........well said.........

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Joe Ogiba

From the DPR clown.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

Debankur Mukherjee

Nothing is going to happen until new battery technology is put into use...............tablets and mobiles need more power in future to advance the technology..............

Sep 19, 2015permalink

2eyesee

The problem is not the battery technology - it's manufacturers' obsession with wafer-thin phones.

A thicker body would not only accommodate a larger battery, but also allow a larger sensor for the camera - something I'd also like to see.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Debankur Mukherjee

Nokia days......

Sep 19, 2015permalink

webrunner5

Yeah, in my pocket is still my trusty Nokia 808 every day. My Samsung Note 4 not so often. Mostly for the 4K Video it does pretty darn well.

It takes pictures, great ones, and makes and receives calls. Pretty much all I want in a cell phone.

Too old and crippled up to text LoL.

Sep 19, 2015*permalink

RichyjV

"which contradicts the popular belief that higher resolution displays consume more battery power"

No, it agrees with that *belief*(fact) entirely, and mitigates by only using it a high resolution in certain circumstances. So it is using more power(obviously) but isn't doing it that often.

4k where it matters, on video and images only? You can't see it anywhere so what is the point? I have a 4k large TV and I have to put my face to a silly close distance on it to make out individual pixels.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

gskolenda

I guess I would have to say, why are you looking for Pixels anyway? If you want to see pixels, further back get special glasses, or, give your 4K TV to someone who can appreciate it!

Sep 19, 2015*permalink

RichyjV

you buy a TV, you stick a big photo on to see how much more detail there is than normal HD TV you used before. Pretty obvious behaviour. Pretty obvious trolling too.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

gskolenda

That sounds like you, not me, I was just laughing at your ignorance of 4K use, LOL!

Sep 19, 2015permalink

And what do you use 4K TVs for you not so ignorant person ?
What do you watch on 4K Tv's ? Those 14 shows available today ? Over and over again ?
And please do learn how to debate properly, reading your comments is an orgie in sillyness.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

4K on that size is useless.
Great product for morons that think more is always better.
Way to many of those are born every day though :(

Sep 19, 2015permalink

gskolenda

Speaking of Morons, What if you wanted to Zoom in on a map or photo? If I'm a Moron then your a Snorom!

Sep 19, 2015permalink

reality_check

"What if you wanted to Zoom in on a map or photo? " Why? Why would you need that kind of resolution? For a map? Why?

Sep 19, 2015*permalink

@gskolenda
I zoom on maps and photos on my 1080 screen on daily basis and have done for 3 years now. No issues here. Maybe you should look up and see an eye doctor if you are experiencing any.
And what the hell is a "snorom", are you spelling "morons" backwards?
Admit it now, you are a 12 year old kid. You better be since your "points" and "arguments" are on that level. So if you are by any case a grownup and are stooping down to this level my only suggestion is get some professional help.

Sep 19, 2015*permalink

If you zoom in on a 1080p screen the image will still remain 1080p.

Your distance to the screen is still the same and guess what you will still not notice anything.

The only benefit can think of is virtual reality. However the PS4 has trouble getting 1080p in some games let alone 4k. So even if they would support it with a nice adapter a 1080p screen would give us the same experience.

Sep 22, 2015permalink

ewelch

What a stupid idea. Like 4K needs to be on such a small screen.

We're playing bullet point bingo here. "We have more bullet points than the competition!"

Sep 18, 2015permalink

iAPX

And what is the readability of text in the "4K" display that is actually Ultra HD, when over-sampling a Full HD image, for example while browsing websites?

I doubt it's working well compared to iPhone 6 Plus.

For example, by oversampling a FullHD image, you could not beneficiate properly from sub-pixel aliasing, so it might be even worse than a native Full HD display of the same dimension.

Sep 18, 2015*permalink

abortabort

Well being that it's a perfect 2x2 pixel dimensions I doubt it would be much different.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

TomFid

Snore. No one over 40 can see 4k on a 6" screen anyway.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

I am 26.

Have good eyes When doing work in the harbour on holidays. I did a test for crane operators and passed for my eyes.

I can't see the difference between 1080p and 1440p. Let alone 4k

Sep 22, 2015*permalink

Dilong

I'm definitely intrigued by this idea, as the power drain of 1440p and 4k screens is pretty high. But how does it determine it needs to go into 4k mode? Is there a way to force it to switch modes?

Either way, I'm glad they're trying something different and I hope it works well.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

Josh SZ

Now the next goal is 6K!!!

Sep 18, 2015permalink

RedFox88

4k is bring passed on. 8k is what people will get. Canon aims to broadcast 2020 Olympics in 8k

Sep 18, 2015permalink

Paul McCarroll

4k isn't really being passed on, and you're limiting it to broadcast resolutions. Phone and computer screens will move up incrementally - HP, Dell and Apple already have monitors at 5k resolution.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

AngularJS

No it doesn't make any sense.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

Sports Dad

Sony still makes smartphones?
Do they sell more than Kyocera? :)

Sep 18, 2015permalink

ET2

On IPS display, most of power is used by blacklit light which would be the same for 5.7" screen regardless if it's 4K or 1K. GPU will worked harder, but that won't be enough to make big difference to battery life.

It might be different for Oled screen.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

DVT80111

so you think all the extra IO processing for 4K does not consume extra energy?

Sep 19, 2015permalink

ET2

It does, but screen brightness/light uses the most battery. That's number 1 reason for battery drain. That would be same for 4K vs 1080, at least for IPS display

Sep 19, 2015*permalink

Osa25

That a "Number 1" exists does not mean that reducing the "Number 2" - or any other factor for that matter - would not reduce power consumption.

We should be able to hold multiple thoughts as valid at the same time.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

quick, somebody calculate the viewing distance to distinguish pixels from 806 PPI with 20/20 vision vs the 202 PPI it has rendering 1080P 4x over.

Sep 18, 2015*permalink

I took a shot at it...

Human resolution is said to be 1 arcminute which is .01666 degrees or .000291 radians.

distance (in) = 1/(PPI*sin(.000291)
806 ppi = overkill viewed further than 4.25"
202 ppi = overkill viewed further than 17"

So I don't think a 4K phone is crazy... but hard to argue for any MORE than 4K.

Sep 18, 2015*permalink

RW Perk

I disagree 4K resolution dose matter on a 5.7 inch display when viewing photos.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

AngularJS

They've done it to sell more 90mm FE macro lenses.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

RW Perk, I think I stated that pretty clearly. 4K matters on a 5.7" screen if you're 4.25" FROM that screen. Plus, if the alternative is 1080P, there's a need for more resolution if you're <17" from the phone (which seems pretty far for normal use).

Sep 18, 2015permalink

EthanP99

Exactly why you would need that resolution for Vr headsets

Sep 18, 2015permalink

Karroly

@mosc,
Do you actually watch movies for hours 4.25" away from your smartphone screen ?
Good way to damage your vision earlier than expected...

Sep 19, 2015permalink

Karroly, I view video on my phone closer than 17" which means 1080P on a 5.7" phone is not ideal. 4K is a nice standard res that doesn't need to interpolate the plethora of 1080p content with appropriate pixel density for a nearly 5.7" phone viewed at basically any distance, even within 17"

Sep 19, 2015*permalink

Paul McCarroll

Full HD would be 403ppi surely, as it only doubles the resolution in each direction. I'm using a FullHD / 445 ppi screen, and a circle on it looks like a perfect circle. I guess I get as close as 10", so I'm not going to notice any improvement above 445 PPI, unless we're going down the phone-as-a-VR-headset route.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

mpgxsvcd

"So Sony has done the smart thing and only uses the 4K resolution when it actually matters"

On a 5.7-inch screen 4K resolution never matters.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

Paul Boddie

It won't matter until Apple releases a phone that has 4K, and then it will suddenly make or break telephony, computing and imaging all at once according to the massed hordes.

But, of course, it still won't actually matter. :-)

Sep 19, 2015permalink

imsabbel

Well, it does for stuff like VR apps (where you literally use a magnification glass to look at the display).

Too bad it shows those only in 1080p.

Sep 20, 2015permalink

Matthias Hutter

except for VR

Sep 22, 2015permalink

Edgar_in_Indy

Ok, so we've officially got 4K screens on phones now. When are we going to start getting high-resolution displays on cameras? Stop playing games by telling us how many "dots" our screen has, and start listing the actual resolution.

A 1080p screen would go a long ways towards being able to judge focus when recording video.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

sibuzaru

Battery life is still the issue on cameras, they need to start making more dense battery, or at least bring fast charging.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

martinj68

thats a good point. most phone enthusiasts take crappy grainy vertical video shots that are never viewed on anything other than the phone itself or on facebook, so whats the point in 4k , as from what i have noticed, most smart phones are owned by a group of people who don't care much for photo and video quality anyway. The people who do care for quality and plan to "use" there shots, would also use a proper camera, so why are proper cameras/camcorders not given at least 1080 screens?

Sep 18, 2015permalink

BoFiS

There is nothing wrong with this, in fact, for a mobile device, this is the preferred way of doing it. Meaning, if you have 4K content, or are using it for VR, great, it'll display 4K, but the rest of the time, scaling icons and images up to 4K will just make them look worse and use up more battery than running at 1080p

Sep 18, 2015permalink

sibuzaru

Every +300ppi device should do this, it would help a lot with battery life.

Sep 18, 2015permalink

@BoFiS
How would you use a cell phone for VR ???

Sep 19, 2015*permalink

Timj351

What I imagine next will be devices made that contain a larger magnified lens that theses 4K cameras will sit in behind the lens for a larger viewing experience.

Sep 19, 2015permalink

sibuzaru

Google Cardboard, Samsung Gear VR.
The Xperias are compatible with Dual Shock controllers too.

Sep 21, 2015permalink