02 May
Blog

PlayStation 4 Slim Review: The Default Choice

Sony PlayStation 4 Slim

PlayStation 4 Slim 1 TB console

"The updated PlayStation 4 is now slimmer than ever and strengthens Sony's legendary gaming platform."

  • Faster WiFi can make a big difference

  • Smaller chassis with a fun design

  • Same great PS4 game library

  • Cheaper than ever

  • No more optical connection

  • A more powerful PS4 console is also available

Three years after the launch of PlayStation 4, Sony redesigned its outdated console to breathe new life into it. As with previous PlayStations, the updated console has a sleeker new look, some new features, and even some minor internal upgrades.

Unlike previous generations, however, the new version of the console came at a turbulent time for the PlayStation brand. There are currently not just one, but three new PlayStation devices: this revised PlayStation 4, a 4K-compatible version of the PS4 called PlayStation 4 Pro, and a PlayStation VR headset that works with any PlayStation 4 device. Not to mention the PS5, with which the next generation of consoles will start.

The "Slim" could appear overwhelming alongside such ambitious brothers. It was designed to attract players who have not yet bought a modern console than to appeal to current PS4 owners. After all, nobody wants to buy the smaller start console.

If you have strong feelings for the PlayStation 4 – good or bad – this console will not change your mind. Aside from a thinner figure, there are only one or two notable changes from the original model. The key elements – computing power, the feel of the controller in hand, and the game library available on the PlayStation Store – have not changed. The new PlayStation 4 is "better" than the original, but the difference is not necessarily worth the extra investment, especially with a more powerful version on the market.

PlayStation gets a "fun" makeover

The most noticeable changes to the new PlayStation 4 are shown while playing and are not noticeable.

Functionally, the new console is significantly smaller than the original PlayStation 4, just over two-thirds the total size of the original PS4. It's also a little lighter: the slim weighs 4.6 pounds versus the 6.2 pounds of the original.

More importantly, the Slim has been given an aesthetic makeover. The characteristic shape of the PS4, a sharp, oblique parallelogram, was slightly softened with rounded corners. At the front, the drive and two USB ports are now somewhat hidden in a flat indentation. The console also has the PlayStation logo. Underneath the console rests on "feet", which are shaped like triangles, circles and exes on the buttons of the console.

The on / off buttons, initially two thin black buttons on the front, are now much smaller and are located on the "lip" of the console in front of the drive. A large indicator light attached to the top of the console has been removed. The light that informs you when the console is starting up or shutting down can now be seen in a small series of dots on the console power switch.

If you already have a PlayStation 4, there are few reasons to upgrade to a PlayStation 4 Slim.

The DualShock 4 controller has also been slightly revised. The touchpad is now translucent and allows a light bar from the console's colorful indicator lamp to pass through. Although you won't notice the change too often, unless you routinely hold the controller in front of your face, it provides easier access to the light at a glance. The back, the analog sticks and the buttons on the directional pad are now gray and no longer black.

While each change feels slightly light, the PS4 together feels less self-serious than the original model. They feel that, although it is an essential piece of technology, this product is meant for gaming, not for business. The long strip of light on the top of the console gave the console a first-class feel and a bit of flair. Overall, the new console looks good and maintains a lower profile. People looking for it will enjoy the attention to detail. others won't notice when it pops up on a shelf of routers, streaming devices, and other set-top boxes.

Wi-Fi friendly

The most significant improvement to the PlayStation 4 – the only reason why you should buy one over the original – is the improved Wi-Fi compatibility. The Slim now supports 802.11ac Wi-Fi, which should result in faster download speeds and more stability when playing online for those whose routers support it. In my apartment in New York, I was finally able to play online via WiFi instead of connecting via an Ethernet cable.

There is another system change that most people don't notice: with the slim redesign, the PlayStation 4 loses its optical output. If this message doesn't make you scream immediately, it doesn't matter to you at all. The optical output is used for high-end home theater systems and makes no difference to the majority of players.

Warranty information

The PlayStation 4 comes with a one-year manufacturer’s warranty from the day the console is purchased.

Our opinion

Thanks to a few minor improvements and internal upgrades, the PlayStation 4 retains its place as one of the leading dedicated gaming platforms, if not as such. If you want to play video games and don't plan to make the little things work up a sweat, you've come to the right place.

Is there a better alternative?

Not at the moment and probably only when the next generation is released.

The Nintendo Switch is an excellent console, but it's hard to call it an alternative. The switch can be used as a handheld or docked console. To achieve this, the visual quality is compromised. The Nintendo console also has a completely different game library. So your choice depends on what you want to play.

However, Microsoft's Xbox One X is clearly a step behind the PlayStation 4, although it is much more powerful. Some players may still prefer it (for example, if you're a serious Gears fan), but most stick to the Sony console better.

However, the PlayStation 5 is almost there, and you'd better wait for it since it will play many of the same games on your system right from the start.

How long it will take?

PlayStation 4 is nearing the end of its lifespan, as PlayStation 5 will be released in late 2020 as long as production is not affected. If you don't mind being a generation behind, the hardware itself should take years, maybe decades, with a huge library full of great games.

Should you buy it

Maybe if you don't already have a PS4. The PlayStation 4 Slim is the cheapest version of the most popular console of this generation and therefore a great way to experience all the fantastic games of this generation on a budget. However, if you can wait a bit and have the money for it, you might just want to wait for the PS5 this Christmas season.

This article was last updated on April 28, 2020 by Cody Perez, a Digital Trends employee.

Editor's recommendations




01 May
Blog

Garmin Vivimove Style Review: Smart, Timeless, Quirky

garmin vivimove style review intelligent timeless quirky vivoactive 28

"Garmin does fitness without flash in its subtle Vivomove style."

  • Timeless aesthetics

  • Robust Garmin Connect app

  • Hands move to see statistics

  • HR and Pulsox sensors

  • No buttons

  • Dull AMOLED displays

  • Picky gesture control

Fitness watches usually look clear: chunky, colorful, rubberized. You send a message to the world that you make fitness a priority – or at least that you buy things that make fitness a priority.

For some, sending this message is part of the appeal. I'm the first to admit that putting on a watch that could help me sail around the world makes my day a little more fearless, even if I haven't left my neighborhood for weeks. However, if you're not the type to wear a 26.2 bumper sticker, the Garmin Vivomove Style may be right for you. It promises the entire inner life and the data of a full-fledged fitness tracker and a smartwatch, without the appearance.

When I got my hands on Vivomove Style for the first time, I was shocked at how light it was. With the nylon strap, the watch weighs at least 35 grams. With a case size of 42 x 42 x 11.9 mm, I expected it would be heavier, especially given the technology inside, but the all-aluminum construction is a watch that is the opposite of clunky. While the device I tested had the nylon strap "Black Pepper", the Vivomove Style offers several different options in terms of housing color and strap selection. For those who want to improve the quality a little, there is also a Vivomove Luxe line with stainless steel housings and high-quality strap options.

Deceptive look

At first glance, the face of the Vivomove Style looks incredibly simple. With physical hands and nothing that alludes to intelligent functions, it looks like a simple wristwatch. But these looks are pretty deceptive. The Vivomove Style is a touchscreen. At the top and bottom of the dial are AMOLED displays for displaying customizable data fields. The AMOLED displays are indistinguishable from the dial, so you don't get the usual obvious transition from the screen to the non-screen area, which enables the covert nature of the Vivomove style.

When you move your wrist to bring the watch to your face, the screen lights up with two data fields to take a quick look at some preselected statistics. Gesture control works most of the time and has the option of being completely off, on during an activity, or always on. If it doesn't work, it quickly becomes frustrating. The Garmin Venu had the same problem, but rescue grace was the "always on" option for its AMOLED screen. The Vivomove style does not get this option. You can tap the face twice to wake it up, but it diminishes the undercover nature of the Vivomove style and instead makes it look like you think your watch is broken.

Tapping the top and bottom of the glass made it easier for me to navigate, but it took almost three days to get used to it. Even then, my faucets were sometimes not always registered on the screen, and my once immaculate incognito smartwatch was covered with fingerprints, which drove me crazy. The question really arises, why no buttons? A single button on the side would do a lot to relieve the frustration I was having with the touchscreen. But unfortunately the Vivomove style is buttonless and not better for it.

Once the ads are on, you can swipe to see everything Vivomove Style has to offer. Here the Vivomove Style and the entire Garmin suite shine with tracking capabilities. You will find the usual statistics such as steps, inclines, calorie consumption and heart rate as well as intelligent notifications for iPhone and Android. Anyone familiar with Garmin's metrics will be happy with the automatic goal that learns about your current activity and sets daily goals to drive you forward. Sleep monitoring, intensity minutes, body battery, stress tracking and VO2 max are included as well as monitoring the fluid intake. Because of these metrics, joining the Garmin ecosystem is worthwhile.

The Vivomove Style does a neat party trick to display the data: The hands of the physical clock move to indicate your status, between the different levels of the heart rate zones, the battery etc. This is not really necessary after two weeks of playing Get the Vivomove Style I still get a kick out of the interaction between the physical hands and the AMOLED screens. Of course, this means that the hands of the watch no longer show the time. If this bothers you, you can lock it manually to show the time during an activity versus your heart rate. However, you have to repeat this every time you start a new activity.

Disappointing screen

On Garmin's Venu, the AMOLED displays are something nice. They are a bit boring with the Vivomove style. I'm not sure if it is due to the gap between the touchscreen and the surface of the AMOLED, but it is nowhere near as clear as the Venu. The AMOLED displays also consume more battery than the standard MIP (memory in pixels) display used by other Garmin watches. I had about four days of battery life with daily exercise and I can only wonder how much more life I would have had if Garmin had used different displays.

The Vivomove Style includes a heart rate monitor, a barometric altimeter, an accelerometer and a pulse ox sensor. Instead of your own GPS device, the Vivomove Style relies on the GPS of your smartphone to get location information. This means that the Garmin Connect app needs to be running in the background to get route, distance, and speed information. This makes starting activities like walking, running, cycling, or swimming a bit more cumbersome, as you'll need to pull your phone out when the Connect app isn't running.

Once in an activity, the Vivomove style can track you well with runs like cadence, time, pace and distance timers. In the meantime, strength training activities have a replay counter and swimming has an underwater heart rate monitor. There are a number of other Vivomove-style activity profiles, but none is particularly robust in the metrics provided. The Vivomove style is ideal for training with heart rate zones. However, if you are looking for more detailed data such as swimming stroke analysis, automatic break or training plans, you have to look elsewhere.

Garmin grants a one-year standard warranty on the Vivomove Style, which includes defects, but does not include cosmetic defects such as scratches and dents or accidents.

Our opinion

The Vivomove Style is possibly the most subtle fitness watch you can buy today. But the concessions on styling, including the lack of physical buttons, also make it more difficult to use. The task is largely done through the comprehensive Garmin Connect app, but the user interface could be a little more polished.

Is there a better alternative?

The Fossil Hybrid Smartwatch HR comes closest to the ability of the Garmin and does not have functions such as touchscreen, customizable data fields and the know-how of the Garmin Connect app.

How long it will take?

Garmin products are built to last, and I have no doubt that the Vivomove style can last for at least a few years.

Should you buy it

If you hate the look of standard fitness trackers and smartwatches, yes. The Vivomove Style is a very respectable option, which is strange, but has a large selection of health sensors and a rescue grace in the Garmin Connect app.

Editor's recommendations




01 May
Blog

Nikon Coolpix P950 Review: Epic Zoom That’s Easy to Use

nikon p950

"The Nikon P950's 83x zoom lens captures great detail, but performance is slow at times."

  • 83x zoom lens

  • Bright wide angle with an aperture of 1: 2.8

  • Macro mode

  • Exposure compensation wheel

  • Easy to use auto modes

  • Slow buffer

  • Occasional autofocus is missing

  • Annoying battery life indicator

As the announcements of point-and-shoot cameras are becoming scarcer, the Nikon P950 is in a remaining category that smartphones cannot touch: the super zoom. With an 83X, 24-2,000 mm equivalent lens, the P950 can capture subjects that you simply cannot see with the naked eye.

As an update to the P900, the P950 offers 4K video and RAW photos, two new features that more advanced photographers will appreciate. Despite these updates, the P950 is still well suited to less experienced shooters in automated modes. A new exposure correction control on the lens barrel enables fundamental brightness adjustments that anyone can use, even without understanding how the exposure works.

Not everyone needs an 83x zoom, but for those who do, the P950 offers an affordable, if incomplete, solution.

Burly design

Nikon coolpix p950 rating 9400

Nikon coolpix p950 rating 9399

Not surprisingly, the housing of the Nikon P950 is dominated by this 83x zoom lens. The lens is so big that you can feel the weight of the camera shifting forward in your hands as you extend it. At 35.5 ounces, the P950 is the weight of a DSLR (but with a much smaller lens). I still managed to carry the camera on a 5 mile hike without feeling terribly uncomfortable. Unlike a DSLR, I didn't have to lug around multiple lenses to take both wide-angle and telephoto shots.

The body style mimics a DSLR, which means the P950 has a large, comfortable grip, extensive physical controls, and a hot shoe slot on the top. The control scheme is similar to that of the P900, with a mode dial and a dial at the top right and a well-known set of menu controls at the back.

Hillary Grigonis / Digital Trends

There's plenty of room for controls, but advanced photographers will have to dig a little more in the menu. ISO, a fairly common adjustment in one of the manual modes, is not one of the link options.

The lens barrel is so large that it contains its own controls. A zoom switch provides a second way to zoom in with your left hand while a button retracts the zoom so you can redesign the subject. A new feature of the P950 is an exposure compensation wheel on the lens barrel. This was one of my favorite controls, resting exactly where my left hand is carrying the weight of the camera, and offering easy access to lighten or darken the photos.

The P950 also has an electronic viewfinder with 2.36 million points. A viewfinder is almost a necessity with so much zoom, because the support of the camera with your face keeps it much more stable than if you hold it at arm's length to use the LCD screen. This screen measures 3.2 inches diagonally, but is somewhat unusual for 2020 and is not a touchscreen. The resolution of both the viewfinder and the screen is not crazy high, but sufficient and expected for the price.

The battery is designed for 290 shots, which was sufficient for hiking and bird watching. You will definitely need a spare part if you want to take the camera with you on long trips. The battery indicator also has only two notches – full and half. This is annoying because you don't know whether you still have 135 or only 5 shots left.

Easy to use but sluggish performance

Hillary Grigonis / Digital Trends

The ability to take a RAW photo is new to the P950. Although photographers with some experience have more options to control the shot, the camera's built-in automatic modes have given surprisingly good results.

I spent a lot of time in bird watching mode. Combined with the exposure compensation wheel on the side of the lens barrel, almost everyone can take good photos of wildlife in 90 percent of the cases. I occasionally had to switch to shutter priority mode and control the settings so that the long zoom didn't cause blurring, and it's a little annoying that the camera didn't automatically know this. However, the P950 could easily be an effective tool for the bird watcher who has almost no photo expertise.

Edited RAW photo Hillary Grigonis / Digital Trends

Despite the addition of RAW files, the P950 remains a camera designed primarily for casual photographers. The manual settings are limited. If you want to work faster than 1/2000 seconds or slower than 1 second, you must set the lens to a certain position and the ISO value to a certain setting and must not be in burst mode.

The camera was good for slow or quiet wildlife, but photographing animals in action was more of a crapshoot. Between slow autofocus and trying to keep the subject in the picture (not easy at 2,000mm), more of my action shots were disposable than goalkeepers.

The P950 can shoot at 7 fps, which is respectable for the class, but it can only process ten shots at that speed before the buffer fills up. Even worse, the camera controls are frozen while these images are being written to the card. For example, you can only adjust the zoom once the photos have been processed. It takes about eight seconds to process a full JPEG burst before recording can resume, while RAW takes about 12 seconds. Despite the long zoom, this isn't the best camera to photograph your child's tee game.

Using auto focus with contrast detection, the P950 focused on most slow or stationary subjects, but auto focus performance was somewhat inconsistent at full zoom. The camera accessed some subjects that I thought were too difficult, while occasionally it was difficult to take a clear picture of something that I thought would have been easier. It grabbed a bird through a jumble of branches, which is impressive, but it wouldn't focus on a sandhill crane in a meadow with the lens fully extended – perhaps because the colors were less contrasting.

nikon coolpix p950 review 0404 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn5.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/nikon-p950-review-0404-640x640.jpg "srcset = "https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7Hillary Grigonis / Digital Trends

nikon coolpix p950 review 0237 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn6.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/nikon-p950-review-0237-640x640.jpg "srcset = "https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7Hillary Grigonis / Digital Trends

As a budget-friendly superzoom, the slower performance of the P950 is not unexpected, but it can still be annoying.

Sharp, bright pictures

The Nikon P950 has a 16-megapixel 1 / 2.3-inch sensor, the basic size for point-and-shoot. However, this small sensor makes the 83x zoom possible. And zoom performance isn't the only thing the lens has to offer. It also offers a bright one Aperture 1: 2.8 at the widest angle – ideal for point-and-shoot shots with so much zoom.

The story changes as you enlarge it. At the telephoto end, the aperture drops to 1: 6.5. Given that you are likely to only use as much zoom outdoors in sunlight, this may not be too much of a problem. Macro mode also makes the lens more versatile by shooting the subject in the wide-angle position up to 0.4 inches from the front of the lens.

Images come out of the camera with a surprising level of detail: enough to see the texture in the animal's fur and water drops adhering to the whiskers.

This detail is supported by a solid sharpness in real tests. While the P950 can't keep up with image quality with a mirrorless camera or DSLR that uses much larger sensors, of course, these cameras don't offer anything near 83x zoom.

Subjectively, the image quality of the P950 will not be particularly pleasant. At full zoom, the blurred areas either look like a blotchy mess or a painterly impression, depending on how you look at it. Instead of smooth bokeh, the background looks more like oil paints.

For JPEGs, the color is largely accurate directly from the camera without being oversaturated or excessively subdued on the other side. Even the white balance didn't seem to be tending towards green like most Nikon cameras do. However, some of the pictures took on a magenta color indoors. One of the advantages of RAW shooting is that you can now correct the white balance afterwards, which would not have been possible on the P900.

Sample art filter

Image stabilization also plays a role in taking detailed photos with such a long lens. With 5.5 stabilization stops, I was able to use the 83x zoom handheld for most shots. Dim light, however, is still a problem. When I was shooting an hour before sunset, I had to use the full capabilities of the camera to get a sharp shot at full zoom, which resulted in an image that was just too dark. If you don't need to extend the zoom fully, its brighter aperture can give you better results at the wide end of the lens.

With the smaller sensor, the P950 has problems with high ISO values. The noise creeps in early and photos are best at or below ISO 800, while ISO 1,600 and 3,200 are fine. The maximum ISO 6,400 should be avoided. None of this is surprising for a point in a shoot, but remember, just because the P950 looks like a DSLR doesn't mean it works like one.

In video, 4K resolution is an improvement over the P900. Despite all of these extra pixels, the video is still not particularly detailed, although the colors match the quality of still images. If you want to record videos with 2,000 mm, be sure to bring a tripod. There's simply no way to keep the camera steady enough to get a smooth video recording with such a long zoom.

Our opinion

The Nikon P950's zoom is essentially telescopic, making the camera ideal for taking pictures of objects that are normally far away, such as birds, wildlife or the moon. Images are sharp, even though the background is mixed up at full zoom. RAW photos and 4K are nice enhancements to the P900, along with the new exposure compensation wheel on the side of the lens.

While the benefits of such a long zoom lens cannot be denied, the P950 offers slow performance and an auto focus that occasionally fails. And while adding RAW is a start, you still have to reach into the menu to change settings like ISO. Photos in low light conditions are not possible with full zoom, although the bright aperture offers a certain user-friendliness with large settings.

Is there a better alternative?

Since one of the few types of point-and-shoot cameras cannot compete with discounts for smartphones, the Superzoom category offers many competitors. Aside from spending $ 1,000 on the 125x Nikon P1000, the P950 gets you the closest thing to your subject. The Panasonic FZ3000 offers faster performance and a brighter lens, but only with 25x zoom. The Canon SX70 offers 20 megapixels, but the 65x zoom lens is not as bright at 1: 3.4 to 6.5. With its larger sensor, the Sony RX10 IV offers better image quality and faster performance with a 25x Zoom – but at twice the price, it doesn't really try to compete with those of the P950.

How long it will take?

Point-and-shoot cameras typically have a shorter lifespan before they're out of date – and the 16-megapixel sensor can overtake the P950 faster. However, the camera was only launched in early 2020 and should therefore be able to be used for a few years.

Should you buy it

Buy the P950 if you absolutely need an incredible zoom. If you want to photograph action, keep looking. The P950 is decent, but a niche camera for bird watchers and nature lovers, while its poor performance and limited usefulness in low light conditions prevent it from being a great all-round camera.

Editor's recommendations




01 May
Blog

Sparkmaker Review | Digital Trends

Sparkmaker rating

"Sparkmaker is definitely a fixer upper. In other words, you should steer clear unless you are ready to tinker with something."

  • Affordable

  • High print resolution

  • Compact and quiet

  • Favorable construction

  • Buggy software

  • Small build volume

  • Unreliable prints

When 3D printing was just beginning to become mainstream, the only printers available to consumers used a technique called filament deposition modeling (FDM). This is the type of 3D printing you've probably seen before: a printer passes a strand of plastic filament through a hot nozzle and carefully places the melted goose bumps layer by layer on a building board to create a 3D object.

This is by far the most popular and widely used style of 3D printer, but a technology known as stereolithography (SLA) has recently increased. SLA printers create objects by flashing light into a pool of photoreactive resin that hardens when UV light hits it. Because of the precision of this technique, SLA printers generally produce much better parts than FDM printers.

The only problem, however, is that this type of printer has been prohibitively expensive in recent years and therefore out of reach of the average consumer – but that is beginning to change.

A typical example? The $ 300 Sparkmaker Printer. The Sparkmaker was born from a Kickstarter project that started in early 2017. It is one of the first SLA / DLP printers to pass the $ 500 mark. So we got one to see how it stands out from the competition.

Excellent functions and specifications

The first thing you'll notice about the Sparkmaker is its small size and light weight. At just 6 pounds and 6 x 11 inches in size (it's a cylinder), it's definitely one of the smallest printers on the market. While it won't be hard to find a place for the little guy, it has a downside.

By lifting the orange UV protection hood, the tiny 4 x 2.2 x 5 inch construction envelope of the printer becomes visible. This is certainly not the smallest footprint we have ever seen, but you shouldn't expect large prints to be made on this device. On the other hand, Sparkmaker has a removable resin container that makes changing materials a breeze.

The Sparkmaker owes its low price to its relatively simple printing technology. Instead of using a laser like Formlabs' printers, Sparkmaker uses a UV-backed LCD screen to project an image into a resin container, which solidifies it – a process called DLP. Despite some minor disadvantages, this printing method offers the Sparkmaker a maximum resolution of ten micrometers. For those of you who want to score at home, this is ten times more detailed than an average FDM printer and about 1.5 times more detailed than the $ 3,500 Ultimaker 3 – arguably the best consumer-level FDM machine currently on the market.

Setup and configuration

In contrast to FDM printers, the Sparkmaker has only one moving component and does not require assembly. Therefore, the setup is extremely simple. After connecting, all you need to do is pour some resin into the tank and make sure the build plate is level. Once you've done this, you're ready to print.

You will definitely not find another SLA / DLP printer that matches Sparkmaker's $ 300 price tag.

Then there is the software. Like many printers today, Sparkmaker has its own cutting program that can be downloaded free of charge from the manufacturer's website. It's called Sparkstudio, and it's one of the most intuitive and accessible we've ever used compared to most other proprietary slicing programs.

Unfortunately, we encountered some bugs that affected the experience (more on that later), but overall this printer is a breeze.

Design and build quality

Sparkmaker is inexpensive for a reason. Most of the body is made of plastic and the parts feel a bit thin and cheap. The makers definitely made some cuts during manufacturing, and that shows it.

The biggest misstep in machine design is a tiny component called a "lead screw". It is a small threaded tube that moves the building board smoothly along the Z axis – or at least it should. Due to the faulty design of this component, the up and down movement of the build plate is susceptible to periodic jerks and jumps that cause problems during the printing process.

Sparkmaker ratingBill Roberson / Digital Trends

However, there is a fairly simple workaround for this problem. After some advice from the Sparkmaker Facebook group, we used another 3D printer to print a new lead screw. This simple exchange drastically improved the success rate and overall consistency of the printer. If you want to buy this printer, you should definitely plan to replace this screw.

Apart from the faulty lead screw, the rest of the printer works pretty well. The removable resin tank is easy to remove and replace, and the build plate itself is secured with a single button screw, simplifying the process of removing the finished print from the printer.

Another bonus is that the Sparkmaker is generally incredibly easy to disassemble and edit – which is good as it definitely requires some crafting.

User interface and software

Sparkmaker's integrated user interface is practically non-existent and consists of a single push button. Unlike other printers that use this design, however, that's all Sparkmaker has to offer. There is no associated screen that you can use to navigate, so the device lacks a number of helpful features. This includes: stopping printing, adjusting device settings without connecting to a computer, and selecting specific files on your SD card for printing. The latter is particularly annoying as you are then forced to either remove or rename old files. Sparkmaker only recognizes cut files with the name "Print.wow". It's not the worst problem you could ever have, but it's definitely one of those annoying quirks that make working with the machine a problem.

Due to software errors and hardware errors, this machine has an above-average failure rate.

Fortunately, the associated desktop software Sparkstudio partially compensates for these problems with an excellent user interface that is both feature-rich and easy to navigate. In other words, it's simple and accessible to beginners, but it also offers extensive customization options so that advanced and advanced users are not left out to dry.

To our great delight, Sparkstudio also offers a tool that is generally only available for high-end slicing software: customizable supports that you can place or remove manually. If this isn't your bag, the software will still include an automatic support placement that you can change posthumously. It is really neat and we want more slicing programs that offer this kind of functionality.

Despite all the good things, Sparkstudio suffers from a few debilitating mistakes that affect the experience. First, there is a scaling error that randomly adjusts the length, width, height, or size of the objects you cut into slices – without any advice or warnings. During our testing, this resulted in a 3DBenchy tug that was twice what it should have been, and a skull that was about a tenth of the height we originally set for it. This error, combined with an inconsistency in what caused our prints to fail, prompted us to use a completely different slicer program. In the end, we used SLAcer: a custom slicer that fixes Sparkstudio's mistakes above, but also doesn't offer many of its best features – including the custom support placement feature.

All in all, Sparkstudio has enormous potential, but is held back by a few obvious shortcomings. It is possible that WOW! These problems may be fixed in the future, but the software is frustratingly buggy in its current state. Until these problems are resolved, use a more reliable but less feature-rich slicing program.

Printing performance

Despite the problems with consistency and splitting errors, the Sparkmaker prints surprisingly well – (when it's done). With its maximum resolution on the Z axis of 10 micrometers, this small device can print amazing details and super fine geometry. Some of our test prints show a slight voxel formation (a consequence of the printer's DLP printing technology). However, the effect is only noticeable when you search for it.

Sparkmaker ratingBill Roberson / Digital Trends

Overall, the virtues of the Sparkmaker outweigh its shortcomings in terms of print quality. It's definitely not on the same level as the Formlabs Form 2, for example, but let's not forget that it's a $ 300 printer we're talking about here. It is a tenth of the price of a top-of-the-range machine, but offers only slightly lower quality. It is quite impressive.

However, print quality is only part of the equation. Consistency and reliability are the other part of it, and unfortunately that's where Sparkmaker comes up short. Due to the software errors and hardware errors mentioned above, this machine has an above-average failure rate.

Despite all its shortcomings and shortcomings, we liked this printer.

Even after we fixed the lead screw problem and switched to a less faulty cutting program, we still experienced a high number of botched prints. According to our count, you have a 50/50 chance that the print will not adhere properly to the build plate. You can fix this problem by printing on the underside of your object with an improvised "raft". However, this raft cannot be removed and there is still a good chance that it will not stick anyway.

All in all, we would say that the Sparkmaker produces impressively detailed prints in about 30 percent of the cases. The other 70 percent make something that resembles postmodern glitch art. However, we will continue to work on and update this article as we figure out how to get better and more consistent prints.

Our opinion

Despite all its shortcomings and shortcomings, we liked this printer. It's compact, quiet, and the only printer we've ever tested that didn't drive everyone in the office with its vapors or noise. It is also very affordable, relatively easy to update, and occasionally produces outstanding prints.

Still, Sparkmaker is definitely not a good printer for beginners. In its current state, it is too flawed, too flawed, and too unreliable to recommend it to anyone just breaking into the 3D printing scene. However, if you're enjoying a little challenge and aren't afraid to get your hands dirty, the Sparkmaker is a fixer upper that could be worth your time.

Is there a better alternative?

You will definitely not find another SLA / DLP printer that matches Sparkmaker's $ 300 price tag. However, there are some competitors that you can buy for around $ 500 – like the Wanhao Duplicator 7 with a slightly larger build volume and a built-in menu navigation screen.

If you haven't chosen an SLA / DLP printer, there are a handful of good FDM printers on the market that you can put your paws on for around $ 300. For price-conscious buyers, we recommend Monoprice's $ 160 mini-delta printer. It may not match the Sparkmaker's print resolution, but it has a larger footprint and is far more reliable.

For those who don't mind spending a little more, you can also buy a Monoprice Maker Select Plus for $ 400. It's a little more expensive, but for that extra $ 100, you get a much larger footprint and a full range of high-end features.

How long it will take?

With its cheap parts and plastic case, the sparkmaker's lifespan is probably definitely dependent on how you treat it. Without regular maintenance, we would be willing to bet that things will fail after a year or two. However, if you keep it up to date and keep it well oiled, it will likely continue to tick after the age of 5 – assuming WOW! continues to release firmware updates and bug fixes.

On the positive side, there are numerous instructions for corrections and upgrades in the Sparkmaker community. We found endless support from the Facebook community when we encountered problems from both other users and the developers themselves.

Should you buy it

If you are new to 3D printing and want something that is easy to use, don't buy this printer. We guarantee that you will pull your hair out. However, if you're ready to get messy and do some DIY upgrades, Sparkmaker may be just the thing for you. With a little tinkering, you can definitely make this machine shine.

Editor's recommendations




30 Apr
Blog

Zortrax M300 Review | Digital Trends

Zortrax M300 test

"The Zortrax M300 prints beautifully, but urgently needs a new build plate and some software updates."

  • Robust, attractive frame

  • Excellent printing performance

  • Large building envelope

  • Perforated building board makes it difficult to remove parts

  • Onboard and offboard software are limited

  • Bowden tube anchors can fail

  • Expensive

When it comes to 3D printing companies, Zortrax is not as well known as Makerbot or Ultimaker – but it has been making 3D printers for quite some time. In fact, the company's M200 printer (which was released back in 2012) is generally considered one of the best FDM printers you can buy.

For this reason, we were very excited when the company launched the new M300: a larger, worse version of its flagship machine. To find out how it stacks, we put the printer through its paces over the course of a month. That's how it went.

Excellent functions and specifications

The first thing you'll likely notice about the M300 is that it's huge. This isn't exactly a desktop printer, so you should definitely plan to allocate some space for it. With a weight of 110.2 pounds and an outer dimension of 18.6 inches x 19.2 inches x 26.1 inches, this thing is a big, beefy bastard of a printer. Fortunately, this also means that it has a fairly large build area – with a spacious 11.8 "x 11.8" x 11.8 "envelope.

Some other nice features you'll find on this device are: a heated bed (which increases grip and prevents pressure deformation), semi-automatic bed leveling, a small LCD screen for navigation and removable front / side panels.

The otherwise great foundation of the M300 is adversely affected by a variety of small design flaws.

The M300 also comes with something that we have never seen before and that scratched our heads in confusion. This "function" is a perforated building board – something that makes little sense for a machine that squirts out molten plastic to make items. We'll discuss why shortly.

Unfortunately, this seemed to be an ongoing issue for the printer. While it is clearly well made and has admirable features, the otherwise great foundation of the M300 is adversely affected by a variety of small design flaws and mysterious oversights.

Setup and config

Setting up the M300 is relatively simple and straightforward, but requires a bit of assembly and heavy lifting. Once you have released the printer from its packaging and attachments, you will need to attach the printer's build plate. Fortunately, this is not particularly difficult and only requires attaching a few wires to a clearly marked outlet.

Zortrax M300 Check "data-image-id =" 1340217Bill Roberson / Digital Trends

Bill Roberson / Digital Trends

You can then start the printer and start inserting the filament to the hot end. Zortrax's instructions on board will guide you through the device. The semi-automatic bed calibration of the printer is also fairly simple and guides you through the leveling process before you start printing.

Overall, the M300 is certainly not the easiest machine we've ever set up, but it's still pretty darn easy. As long as you are able to read and follow basic instructions, you shouldn't have any problems.

User interface / software

While the built-in controls on the M300 are easy to use and understand, there are some minor issues in the built-in software interface that make printing difficult. For example, when printing starts, you can no longer interact with the device. There is no pause / resume function and no possibility to adjust settings during operation or to cancel printing immediately. The only way to stop printing is to turn off the device – which is puzzling because these features are standard on most modern printers. Needless to say, the M300's unfinished software later led to some annoying usage problems.

Removing a finished print from the M300 is like pulling Excalibur out of the stone while trapped in a broom cupboard.

With the offboard software, the M300 works exclusively with the Z-Suite slicing program developed by Zortrax. The serial code from the back of our printer was required to download the program and was requested again during installation. While this is not the worst thing in the world, we found it to be over the top, superfluous and slightly annoying.

After putting the Z-Suite into operation, we were satisfied with the clear user interface, the easy-to-navigate design and the entertaining graphics – and were immediately disappointed with the simplified printing options. The program seems to be aimed at beginners and is therefore very easy to use, but unfortunately omits a number of "advanced" print adjustment options that are extremely important. For example, there is no clear way to switch off support structures, rafts or to optimize the filling settings. This is extremely frustrating and generally means that you will burn the filament faster.

Design / build quality

The design of the M300 takes up one page of the Z-Suite book, and by that we mean that it has a strong foundation and is clearly well made, but also has annoying disadvantages. Individually, these problems are not a big deal, but together they are enough to spoil an otherwise outstanding machine.

We start with the good things. The M300 has one of the most stable frames we have ever seen in a 3D printer. It is built like an air raid shelter and would probably print well in an 8.7 magnitude earthquake. It also has a clean, attractive look and comes with side panels that allow you to hide the mechanical guts from view.

Zortrax M300 Check "data-image-id =" 1340208Bill Roberson / Digital Trends

Bill Roberson / Digital Trends

But then there is the perforated building board. It is a double-edged sword because it keeps prints stable while printing, but it also makes them a great pain when printing is finished. To make matters worse, there is also no easy way to remove the print bed from the printer. So you have to pry the print out of the limited limits of the inner chamber of the printer, scrape it off and provide it with a spanner. In other words, removing a finished print from the M300 is like pulling Excalibur out of the stone while trapped in a broom cupboard.

Most of our prints were incredibly clean, detailed, and almost flawless.

And another thing: the perforations on the build platform effectively prevent you from printing without a raft (a few layers of support structure printed under the object to improve adhesion and prevent warpage). When you do this, the best scenario is that you have a series of plastic hubs at the end of your object. The worst scenario is that when you try to pull it off the build plate, your pressure won't easily release and crack (which has happened to us a few times).

Most frustrating, however, is that this perforated design is completely unnecessary. We believe that Zortrax contains the perforations to improve bed adhesion. The thing is, however, that the M300 already has a heated bed and automatically prints with rafts – both of which would probably have done the trick and reduced adhesion / warping problems. The perforations are redundant and cause more problems than they solve.

Unfortunately, the M300's problems don't end there. Another major design flaw was the printer's Bowden tube assembly. The Bowden tube, which is used to guide the filament to the print head, is attached to the rear of the printer using adhesive pads on the back of the plastic clips. The glue on these pads eventually failed during printing, causing the filament to detach from the spool and knot – which ultimately blocked the printer and ruined 13 hours of printing.

Trying to use the M300 for large-format, multi-hour prints is a risky business with no sensors to detect that filaments may run out or jam or even pause when this happens.

Printing performance

Despite the problems on the hardware side as well as on the software interface, both the included print (a strange bottle without a bottom) and our standard 3DBenchy test print have proven themselves remarkably well.

With a maximum print resolution of 90 microns and excellent dimensional accuracy, most of our prints were incredibly clean, detailed and almost error-free. We have one of the best benchy boats we have ever printed.

The M300 also copes with gaps and overhangs, as well as some of the best FDM printers we have ever seen, and praised virtually all of the prints it has completed. Unfortunately, due to hardware problems, we weren't able to give him many chances to prove ourselves, but we were very impressed with the print quality we saw in the pieces we finished.

Zortrax M300 Check "data-image-id =" 1340218Bill Roberson / Digital Trends

Bill Roberson / Digital Trends

When it comes to reliability, the M300 definitely needs some work. When a print is complete, that print will undoubtedly look good – but the machine doesn't always do the print jobs you give it. Until you have secured the Bowden tube and prevent it from loosening and getting your filament tangled, you should not entrust the M300 with large prints lasting several hours. Fortunately, however, this is the only real reliability issue. We have never experienced any faults or prints that have come off the bed.

Our opinion

The M300 is like a chubby house on a solid foundation. In its current form, it's not something you want to live in, but if the landlord had made a few minor touch-ups, it would be a great place to hang your hat.

In other words, the M300 has the potential to be an amazing machine, but its design flaws mentioned above hold it back. With an update of the software and firmware, this printer could possibly be among the best in its class. Medium print options, more control in the Z-Suite and a print bed without holes would take the M300 to the next level.

Is there a better alternative?

Given the M300's price of $ 2,990, there are dozens of alternatives that offer better performance and reliability.

For a bit more money, you can get a Formlabs Form 2 SLA printer – a device that is far superior to the M300 in terms of print quality and is generally considered one of the best 3D printers for consumers on the market. It's worth noting, however, that Form2's resin-based printing technology makes it somewhat more difficult (and sticky) to work with.

If the SLA print does not sound appealing and you prefer to use an FDM printer, we recommend the Ultimaker 2+. It offers better printing performance, a comparatively large build area and none of the annoying problems that plague the M300. For $ 2,999, you even get the Extended Edition, which has a larger footprint and allows you to build larger parts.

Another good choice would be the Lulzbot Taz 6, which doesn't look nearly as good as the M300, but is far more reliable, upgradeable, and optimized. If you are looking for a workhorse that can do work for work, the Taz 6 is the printer for you. It is also a few hundred dollars cheaper and offers an almost identical turnaround.

How long it will take?

The M300's robust construction and excellent build quality will likely keep this printer running for a long, long time. However, the software, software, and firmware of this printer are already out of date and need to be updated. When Zotrax releases an update that fixes some issues, this printer keeps ticking for years.

Should you buy it

At this point, no. With other options that offer more for your money, the M300 is not a printer that we can recommend – at least not at the moment. The large build volume, impressive print quality, and robust structure are tempting, but the myriad design flaws and limited control over printing parameters make it one of the most frustrating printers we've ever used. If these problems were fixed, the M300 would be a dream, but at the moment you should spend your money somewhere else.

Editor's recommendations




30 Apr
Blog

Motorola Moto Edge Plus Review: Yet Another Android Flagship

Moto Edge Plus

Moto Edge Plus review: overshadowed by giants

"The Moto Edge Plus looks like the future."

  • Beautiful "Endless Edge" display

  • Sleek, futuristic design

  • Sharp 108MP camera

  • Good performance

  • Massive battery

  • Fat and heavy

  • The aspect ratio of 21: 9 is cumbersome

  • Mediocre front and telephoto

Motorola's new flagship, the Moto Edge Plus, looks like something from the HBO Westworld series. The show shows handheld devices as edgeless displays, which, apart from a sharp, bright screen, largely lack any recognition features. Actually, they are not smartphones – just intelligent devices, a mixture of tablet, phone and PC.

The Moto Edge Plus feels like a big step towards Westworld's fiction. It's almost the entire screen, and thanks to a fast Qualcomm processor, 5G support, lots of RAM, and a smooth 90 Hz display, it responds to your touch with unnatural speed. There is a subtle Motorola logo on the back. Otherwise it is elegant and without branding.

Despite its futuristic design, Motorola also tries to undercut the competition. The Moto Edge Plus costs "only" $ 1,000. This is a lot, but also less than first-class flagships from Apple and Samsung. This is a daring, bold phone.

display

Motorola's Moto Edge Plus has an obvious, massive headline feature that you stare at every time you pick up the phone. This is the 6.7-inch "Endless Edge" display.

Phones with slim, curved-edge displays aren't brand new (believe it or not, the Samsung Galaxy Note Edge is five years old), but the Moto Edge Plus is part of a new generation that takes it to the extreme. The edges wrap a full 90 degrees around the sides, with the side panels being practically eliminated when looking directly at the phone.

Moto Edge PlusMatthew S. Smith / Digital Trends

Phones like the Huawei Mate 30 Pro adopted this design concept last year, but the Moto Edge Plus is all-in. Perhaps more importantly, it's widespread in the U.S., while Huawei and Oppo phones are hard to find and use in North America. This is practically a first for an average US smartphone buyer.

The Endless Edge display is a beautiful OLED touchscreen with a long list of features, including FHD + resolution, 90 Hz refresh rate, 10-bit color support, and HDR10 + certification. The unusual and dramatic aspect ratio of 21: 9 results in a phone that feels large and narrow. This is an advantage when writing SMS, surfing the Internet or reading, because it increases the content that you can see without increasing the width of the phone.

Moto Edge PlusMatthew S. Smith / Digital Trends

However, it can be a problem when streaming videos or games, since most are produced with an aspect ratio of 16: 9. A 21: 9 display shows black bars on the sides when 16: 9 content is displayed, effectively reducing the usable screen area. For most videos and some games, you can enlarge the content to take up the entire display. However, this cuts off part of the image.

The touchscreen can also be difficult to use. It looks seductive and futuristic, but it makes it difficult to handle the phone without activating touch when it is not intended to. This was not a problem for me while surfing the Internet, but it did become a problem when playing. I never found a handle in Minecraft that was comfortable and avoided accidental touches.

Moto Edge PlusMatthew S. Smith / Digital Trends

The display has two more quirks. First, when viewing a website or document, text is often displayed on both sides of the phone. Although it remains legible, it looks strange. The extreme curve also distorts color and brightness at the edges due to the odd viewing angle. This is obvious when you see a uniform color streak on the display, e.g. B. the pure white background of many websites. I got used to it, but I would certainly call it a mistake.

Your appetite for the Moto Edge Plus mainly depends on whether you fall in love with this screen. It's insane and futuristic, but not flawless. Phone freaks like to adapt to the quirks of the display and enjoy the striking look. However, if you're more interested in function than shape, consider a more traditional large-screen phone like the Galaxy S20 Plus.

design

The Moto Edge Plus is a phone that was developed around the display. Its large, narrow, blocky body is tailored to the high, narrow aspect ratio of 21: 9.

But wow, it's an eye catcher.

Would you like to know what the phone feels like? Get a Hershey chocolate bar. I admit that I didn't have a candy bar to do a side-by-side comparison, but my mind immediately jumped to that comparison.

Despite the rounded edges, the phone feels chunky compared to an Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max or Samsung Galaxy S20 Plus. According to official information, the size of the phone is bulky 0.37 inches. The iPhone 11 Pro Max is 0.32 inches thick, the Samsung Galaxy S20 Plus is 0.31 inches and the OnePlus 8 Pro is 0.33 inches. This makes it more difficult to hold the phone than its slim profile suggests.

Moto Edge PlusMatthew S. Smith / Digital Trends

It's weirdly slippery. Even the slightest incline lets the phone slip slowly. It spontaneously threw itself from the edge of my desk, couch, and several chairs. It always feels ready to get out of your grip.

The phone also feels top-heavy because it is large and you naturally hold the phone near its bottom. My test device weighed 7.2 ounces on my kitchen scale. This is more than a Galaxy S20 Plus, but less than Apple's iPhone 11 Pro Max. This is a large phone that, like its competition, can be uncomfortable to hold in bed or while lying on a sofa.

But wow, it's an eye catcher. The entire Moto 2020 product line is clearly designed to offer luxury design at lower prices, and the Edge Plus is successful. The noble blue finish of my test device in combination with the slim appearance of the phone results in an elegant, professional device. The Moto Edge Plus seems to belong in a boardroom or private jet.

Optical fingerprint reader

The Moto Edge Plus uses an optical fingerprint reader for secure login. It appears in the lower quarter of the phone and is easy to use.

However, it does not avoid the shortcomings that have caused this technology. While fingerprint recognition usually worked, it often took a moment to recognize my fingerprint. This is sluggish compared to the almost instant login that traditional systems can offer. The system also has major problems with water, lint, or dirt on your hands.

5G, WiFi and ports

The Moto Edge Plus supports both mmWave and Sub-6 Hz 5G networks and, according to Motorola, can reach network speeds of 4 Gbit / s under ideal conditions. I couldn't test this myself because 5G wasn't deployed in my region. Still, it's good to see support for both 5G networks as this should improve connectivity and unlock access to the fastest speeds possible. New Android flagships will offer this feature in 2020, while the iPhone doesn't yet offer 5G support.

The phone is exclusive to Verizon. You must be a Verizon subscriber to use this phone or be ready to switch to the Verizon network.

You will also find support for Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1. I would expect to see the latest wireless connectivity standards in a new flagship phone, but it's good to see that Motorola didn't skip any features to keep the $ 1,000 price tag going.

The wired connectivity includes USB 3.0 Type C and a 3.5 mm audio jack, both of which are located on the bottom lip of the phone.

Camera quality

Moto Edge PlusMatthew S. Smith / Digital Trends

The camera is the other heading feature of Motos Edge Plus. The triple lens system features a 108-megapixel main shooter, a 16-megapixel ultrawide lens and an 8-megapixel telephoto lens. It also includes optical image stabilization, video stabilization and laser auto focus with a time-of-flight sensor.

Yes, 108MP. As with the Endless Edge display, the phone's 108-megapixel camera isn't a unique feature, but it is up-to-date and somewhat unexpected on a $ 1,000 phone. If you're in the U.S., the Samsung Galaxy S20 Ultra is just a generally available phone with this feature. And it costs $ 1,400.

That's a lot of megapixels. But translated into an excellent camera?

Main camera quality

Although it has a 108MP sensor, pixel binning is enabled by default on the Moto Edge Plus. This technique, called Moto Quad Pixel Technology, combines the light of four pixels into one. This reduces the output to 27 MP, but increases the brightness, contrast and color of the image – at least in theory.

At first glance, the Moto Edge Plus makes a strong impression. When shooting outdoors, the camera vibrates with a lively, saturated appearance, as is common with flagship cell phones. These shots will surely draw your attention and look great on a variety of screens.

However, I feel that the Moto Edge Plus has color problems. My close-up of a flower makes it look almost fluorescent while it was lukewarm in real life. Colors can become so extreme that they destroy details and remove subtle patterns or flaws that would otherwise be visible. It's not bad for Instagram, but sometimes far from reality.

The color was distorted in the opposite direction when I took indoor pictures with moderate to dim lighting. While the pictures looked sharp and bright, the colors appeared. The camera seemed particularly confused by the yellow wall of my kitchen and often leaned towards a faint, dark pastel that is not accurate at all.

Portrait mode solidly improves the appearance of portrait photos and works quite well even in moderate lighting, although it is more grainy than photos taken with a Samsung Galaxy S20 Plus or Apple's iPhone 11 Pro Max. My curly hair is, as always, a mode stress test, and Motorola’s camera is sure to have problems with broken curls, but the slight halo that dances around the edges of my frizz is not uncommon. Every portrait mode I've ever tried had problems coping with my locks.

The Moto Edge Plus is best suited for taking photos at a moderate distance with moderate to bright lighting. Breathtaking pictures can be taken in these conditions, but the main camera is not as versatile as I hoped.

108MP Ultra-Res / Tele quality

While the 108MP sensor uses pixel binning by default, you can disable this mode and take full 108MP photos. However, if you do this, you will encounter some problems. Using the 108MP Ultra-Res mode significantly extends photo processing time. The photos themselves are huge and take up a lot more space than the standard photos with 27 MP.

You will be disappointed if you expect an obvious improvement in clarity. The 27MP photos are output with a resolution of 6,016 x 4,512 – already well above 4K. The 108MP photos are output with a resolution of 12.032 x 9.024. This is much higher, but you need a display with a resolution well above 4K to see the difference.

Motorola does not know this problem and quickly points out the additional versatility of a high-resolution photo. A high-resolution image can improve the digital zoom because, first of all, more details have to be edited. However, the Moto Edge Plus also has an 8 megapixel telephoto camera with 3x optical zoom.

I decided to compare them side by side by taking photos of text from a distance and then cropping them to see which ones showed the most detailed.

motorola moto edge plus review 108mpcrop2 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn2.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/108mpcrop2-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https: / /www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7108MP ultra-res mode

motorola moto edge plus review telephotocrop2 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn3.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/telephotocrop2-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https: / /www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA73x telephoto camera

motorola moto edge plus review 108mpcrop1 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn4.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/108mpcrop1-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https: / /www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7108MP ultra-res mode

motorola moto edge plus review telephotocrop1 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn5.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/telephotocrop1-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https: / /www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA73x telephoto camera

The results are fascinating.

The telephoto lens clearly delivers superior sharpness. This is not an insult to Ultra Res mode because the detail here is impressive. These narrow crops contain less than 1 percent of the over 108,576,768 pixels in the 108MP photo. Nevertheless, the crop of the telephoto lens is easier to read.

However, you will notice a clear difference in the appearance of each shot. Photos from Ultra Res mode are significantly more colorful than those from the 8MP camera. This makes sense since the 108MP main camera has an aperture of 1: 1.8, while the telephoto camera has an aperture of 1: 2.4 and therefore captures less light.

Overall, these results lead to the assumption that experienced smartphone photographers will find a lot to discover. The ultra-res mode and the telephoto lens are each suitable for different situations. On the other hand, less experienced photographers (like me) are likely to ignore Ultra Res mode and use the telephoto lens when zoom is required.

Ultrawide and macro quality

A 16 megapixel ultrawide camera offers a field of view of 117 degrees for more expansive shots and works well. The dramatic photos you're likely to take with an Ultrawide lens go well with the Moto Edge Plus' tendency to oversaturate colors.

motorola moto edge plus review motoedgeplusultrawide1 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn6.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/motoedgeplusultrawide1-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https: / /www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7

motorola moto edge plus review motoedgeplusultrawide2 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn7.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/motoedgeplusultrawide2-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https: / /www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7

Are the results realistic? No – but that's not what an ultra-wide smartphone camera is about. It's a fun, versatile option that gives a sense of scale and size that is normally not possible on a smartphone. I enjoyed it and the photos I took are easily some of the best I could take during my review.

The phone's macro mode has a job to do, but this job is probably more specific than expected. It can deliver solid quality if it comes very, very close to a subject. I speak at most a few inches away. Otherwise, I found that the main camera could take sharper, more colorful photos.

Front camera

The Moto Edge Plus has a 25-megapixel front camera that, like the main camera, has quad-pixel technology. 6.2MP images are output as standard.

My quarantine haircut doesn't make me the best subject, but I think the camera is solid. Photos of it are vivid, clear and crisp. The photo shows the overly saturated appearance of other cameras, but I think this is less of a problem for selfies. My skin tone certainly doesn't "glow", but here is a hint of warmth.

However, you need adequate lighting to get the most out of the camera. Even if pixel binning is activated, the front-facing camera cannot avoid a grainy appearance even with poor interior lighting, not to mention a really dark environment. There is no night mode or the like to improve quality with limited lighting.

Summary of camera quality

The Moto Edge Plus camera offers owners many options in the hope that some will stay. Some do it. Outdoor shots look great on the main camera, which does its best in good lighting with colorful landscapes. It's Instagram-friendly and sacrifices balance and realism for a lively, saturated look that stands out on every display.

I like the 108MP camera. This is not often used by most owners, but it increases the versatility of the phone. You can take pictures in 108MP Ultra-Res mode and crop them later for best results.

It's a great camera system, but it's not noticeable. All modern flagship phones offer excellent picture quality. The Moto Edge Plus can take spectacular photos, but it didn't blow me away.

Video quality

The Moto Edge Plus brings the warmth to the video specs. It can record videos with a resolution of up to 6K or 1080p videos with up to 60 frames per second (frames per second). Other features include optical image stabilization, video portrait mode, and a video snapshot function that can be used to retrieve 20 megapixel still images from the video while filming.

I have little experience with video recording on smartphones, so I cannot seriously test the video quality. Still, I found the video quality strong, with sharp details and vivid colors.

The phone continued to perform well when recording 6K video. I did not notice any significant delay or processing time before or after recording with 6K.

There is also a slow motion mode that captures up to 120 fps at FHD resolution or 240 fps at HD resolution.

Audio

Stereo speakers tuned by Waves, a Grammy award-winning audio technology company, give the Moto Edge Plus its voice. And, boy, does it really scream?

At full volume, the phone delivers a strong, balanced sound that can handle a wide range of content, from bass-heavy tracks to the most hectic action films. The phone doesn't deliver most of the bass, but it does offer a clear, distortion-resistant experience. Dialogues or vocals can also be distinguished from the roar of a jet engine or a constant, deep bass beat.

performance

A Qualcomm 865 processor supplies the Moto Edge Plus with power. This is the latest and best offer from Qualcomm, which serves eight cores. This is paired with 12 GB of RAM and 256 GB of storage connected via the UFS 3.0 storage standard. Motorola does not offer models with more storage space, and SD card expansion is not an option.

Since most Android phones are based on Qualcomm processors, the Moto Edge Plus has no particular advantage over the competition. Still, this is a fast processor. Only Apple's excellent A13 Bionic will defeat him.

  • Geekbench 5 single core: 910
  • Geekbench 5 multi-core: 3,297
  • 3DMark Sling Shot: 9,415

I noticed in previous reviews that smartphone performance has reached the point where most phones are "good enough". Still, you will feel the difference between a flagship like the Moto Edge Plus and any phone with a mid-range Qualcomm 600 processor.

The Moto Edge Plus flies through content and rarely hesitates even when you scroll through large lists of high-resolution images or videos. It's not flawless, but it's close. Combine this with the 90 Hz screen, which is more responsive than the 60 Hz screens that used to dominate flagship phones, for a pleasant experience.

The Moto Edge Plus flies through content.

I mentioned that Apple's A13 Bionic is faster, which you can see from benchmarks. For example, the iPhone SE from Apple scored 1,324 points for Geekbench single-core and 3,192 points for Geekbench multi-core. This means that the $ 400 Apple phone is significantly faster than the Moto Edge Plus in terms of per-core processor performance. The iPhone SE is also competitive in the multi-core area. But do you see this speed in practice?

I only noticed it when using the camera. For example, if you take a lot of pictures in succession, I noticed that current-generation iPhones can take multiple photos quickly and feel a little more responsive. I also notice a more responsive feeling in multitasking applications (despite the RAM memory in the Moto Edge Plus).

Nevertheless, "good enough" remains in force. Does a modern iPhone feel more responsive? Yes. Is it really important with 99% of usage? No, it doesn't.

Qualcomm's 865 has a built-in Adreno 650 GPU and can handle any game Android can give you. After all, this is Qualcomm's current top tier component. There is no superior chip for an Android game developer. Games fly, run with high frame rates and excellent quality settings.

I don't have an iPhone 11 Pro Max for direct comparison, but 3DMark's benchmark results make me believe that the iPhone 11 Pro Max and Moto Edge Plus offer an approximately equivalent experience. And since many other Android flagships have the same Qualcomm 865 part with the same Adreno GPU, you probably won't notice a big difference between them either.

As I said earlier, I have some complaints about how the design of the phone can make playing games more difficult when I rely on touchscreen controls, but I can not degrade performance in any way.

Battery life

A massive 5000 mAh battery powers the Moto Edge Plus. Batteries of this size are not uncommon in 2020, but this still gives the Edge Plus a capacity advantage over most of its competitors. The OnePlus 8 Pro has a 4,510 mAh battery, the Samsung Galaxy S20 Plus has a 4,500 mAh battery and the Apple iPhone 11 Pro Max has a 3,969 mAh battery.

I assume that most people will end the day with 30 to 50 percent of the remaining battery.

Motorola gives the battery life after two days, and in my experience, that was the case. You can extend it to three days if you make little calls, or use it in a single day if you do everything you can to play games. I assume that most people will end the day with 30 to 50 percent of the remaining battery.

The phone supports an included 18-watt quick charger or 15-watt wireless charging. It also supports wireless power distribution up to 5 watts. These numbers aren't impressive for a flagship phone because the Samsung Galaxy S20 Plus can charge up to 25 watts and the OnePlus 8 Pro supports 30 watts. However, given the long battery life, I don't think mediocre charging is worth worrying about.

software

Motorola ships the Moto Edge Plus with a relatively flawless version of Android 10. Much of the bloatware on my device came from Verizon, not Motorola, but even this mess was minimal. Apps like My Verizon can be largely ignored if you don't want to watch them.

The Moto Edge Plus has Moto promotions, a special bonus that can be found in all Motorola phones. These gesture-based shortcuts provide quick access to some common functions. For example, a quick double-chop process opens the flashlight, or you can quickly twist your wrist twice to open the camera.

Moto Edge PlusMatthew S. Smith / Digital Trends

I've been a Moto fan for many years after jumping on board the Moto G3 for the first time, and Moto promotions are a major reason for my preference. I love her. They are simple, reliable and affect functions that you use every day.

The camera app is my biggest complaint. The rudimentary look is not uncommon on Android phones, but it looks unaffected. It's not as attractive as the iOS camera app or the one you find on Google's pixel phones, and the tendency to rely on small icons and option lists can be anything but intuitive. It's usable, but not as user-friendly as some of its competitors.

Motorola informed me that the Endless Edge display is being used for notifications during my briefing over the phone, and I noticed that it was lighting up. However, I have not gained any value from the light show. I was hardly surprised. Any phone that offers a curved edge display has in some way claimed to provide helpful notifications, and it has never shown me a real utility.

Our opinion

Motorola's Moto Edge Plus is solid, but struggles to stand out from a crowded field. Apple, Samsung, LG, OnePlus, Oppo and Huawei offer their own flagships. In most cases, these companies offer several. They all have huge screens and lots of functions. You can opt for the Moto Edge because of the 108-megapixel camera or the extreme display, but these features aren't a must for most buyers.

Is there a better alternative?

Yes. That is the problem with the Moto Edge Plus.

It's a nice phone, but there's a lot to choose from. Most buyers in this price range will likely opt for the Samsung Galaxy S20 Plus, a reliable choice with a stunning yet functional design. There is also the OnePlus 8 Pro, which loses some ground in the camera specifications, but makes up for it with a larger 120 Hz screen.

If you want a flagship experience on a budget, Google Pixel 4 XL is a great choice. You can also wait for the Moto Edge to come later this year. It's a stripped-down version of the Moto Edge Plus that retains the screen, but is downgraded to a 64-megapixel camera, among other things. However, Motorola has not announced its price.

The iPhone Pro Max from Apple is another top choice. Here, too, the iPhone offers a design that better combines form and function. It outperforms the Edge Plus and, in my opinion, offers superior camera quality overall. However, since it is an iPhone, Android users need to consider changing the operating system in their decision.

Do you want more options? Check out our favorite 2020 smartphones.

How long it will take?

The Moto Edge Plus is a fast, full-featured phone that runs the latest version of Android. Therefore, it should perform well in the coming years. Support for new Android operating system versions will stop working after a few years, a problem that is common with Android smartphones.

Should you buy it

No. The Moto Edge Plus is a good phone that doesn't stand out in the impressive lineup of Android flagships from 2020.

Editor's recommendations




29 Apr
Blog

Samsung Galaxy A51 Review: Can It Beat The Competition?

Samsung Galaxy A51 Main

Samsung Galaxy A51 review: everything about the display

"The Samsung Galaxy A51 offers the best display at this price."

  • Modern design

  • Excellent display

  • Good photos with enough light

  • Good battery life

  • A headphone jack

  • Poor performance

  • Slower fingerprint sensor

  • Doesn't get operating system updates quickly

Flagship phones are becoming increasingly expensive. While there was a time when you could get the best of the best for $ 600 to $ 700, today you have to pay at least $ 900. The result? Midrange phones also have to get better – and this is where the Samsung Galaxy A51 comes in.

The device is a continuation of the Samsung Galaxy A50 from last year. It offers a modern design and some high-end features, while sacrificing things like peak performance and some camera features. But at $ 400, the phone has a lot of competition. And it's serious competition – like the new iPhone SE, which many currently consider the best phone under $ 400.

Is the Samsung Galaxy A51 a good option? Let’s take a closer look.

design

The Galaxy A series has long been about offering premium features in a low-performing, low-cost package – and these premium features typically include a modern design. This also applies here, and this is one of the main ways that the phone is better than the iPhone SE, which shares an aging design with the iPhone 8.

On the front of the phone is a borderless display with a hole in the middle for the front-facing camera. The modern design trends continue to the rear, with the rectangular camera joint on the top left – similar to that of the Galaxy S20 series. The camera bump doesn't stick out much from the back of the phone at all, which ensures that it doesn't wobble too hard on the desk. It's a nice touch, and I hope manufacturers continue to rely on dishwashing cameras.

Samsung Galaxy A51 Back "class =" m carousel - picture dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn2.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/samsung-galaxy-a51-1-640x640.jpg "srcset = "https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP//yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7

Samsung Galaxy A51 punch "class =" m-carousel - picture dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn3.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/samsung-galaxy-a51-5-640x640.jpg "srcset = "https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7

The SIM compartment is on the left, an on / off switch and a volume rocker are on the right. There is a USB-C port and a headphone jack on the bottom. This is an enticing option for audiophiles.

The edge-to-edge display ensures that the phone feels comfortable in the hand and can be easily inserted into the pocket. While there's a fairly large 6.5-inch display here – 6.24 x 2.90 x 0.31 inches – most people won't find it too big for everyday use. Sure, it's bigger than the iPhone SE, but at the same time, the iPhone SE is only equipped with a 4.7-inch display. It's also bigger than the Google Pixel 3a – but the Pixel 3a also retains an outdated design with a big forehead and a big chin.

Sure, it's not as high quality as the over $ 1,000 Galaxy S20 series, and the back of this phone is made of plastic instead of glass, but it has many of the same design elements, and despite the plastic, it doesn't really feel cheap at. There are some colors, including silver, black, and blue, and although they all look good, I particularly like the colorful blue model.

display

As already mentioned, the display of the Samsung Galaxy A51 is 6.5 inches tall and the quality is above average for a phone in this price range. There is more than enough display here for most, and only the most avid pixel keepers will have a problem with it.

The resolution of the display is 1,080 x 2,400, but what is perhaps more important is an AMOLED display that provides deep black levels and vivid colors. This puts the phone ahead of the iPhone SE when you consider that Apple only uses OLED technology in the most expensive and latest models. It also gives the device a leg against the Moto G stylus, which corresponds to the resolution, but is equipped with LCD technology.

It's nice to see better display technology moving into cheaper phones. In the coming year or two, we should also see cheaper phones with a resolution of 1,440p – but in my experience, an AMOLED display is more than a higher resolution.

There is an optical fingerprint sensor under the display. The sensor works fine and has recognized my printout most of the time. It was a little slow and it can get annoying, but it's rarely a real annoyance.

performance

While the Galaxy A51 has an overall design similar to that of more expensive phones, performance is one of the downsides. And unfortunately it is relatively important here.

Under the hood is a Samsung Exynos 9611 processor with 4 GB, 6 GB or 8 GB RAM, depending on which model you choose. I am reviewing the 4 GB model.

It's a bit of a shame that Samsung doesn't have a more powerful chipset installed. While the Exynos 9611 is being marketed as a new chip, it's actually just a recycled Exynos 9610 that enables the 48-megapixel main camera sensor. The Exynos 9610 was introduced in last year's Galaxy A50 and was already somewhat undersupplied at this point. In a world with the iPhone SE equipped with A13 and even the Google Pixel 3a equipped with Snapdragon 670, the Galaxy A51 is extremely slow.

That means daily use. The phone often skipped a beat or two while performing basic tasks, and the animations weren't as smooth as they could have been. Mobile gaming delivered similar results with regularly missing frames and slow loading times.

Benchmarks confirm the poor performance.

GeekBench 5: 315 single-core, 1,281 multi-core

For Samsung, it is unfortunate that Apple has launched the iPhone SE, which absolutely dominates the Galaxy A51 in terms of benchmarks and daily use. In fact, users are beginning to expect better performance from lower-end phones, and the Galaxy A51 doesn't perform.

software

Samsung's One user interface has gotten better and better over the years and the leagues better than in the old days of TouchWiz and Samsung Experience – but it's still quite far from standard Android. If you're looking for a stock experience, try the Pixel 3a instead.

That said, a user interface has its own aesthetic, and some like it. I personally prefer the cleaner look of standard Android, but luckily Samsung doesn't go too far in the area of ​​bloatware like LG UX.

In this phone, you get the second iteration of One UI, One UI 2.0, created over Android 10. It looks good and is easy to get used to if you are from another manufacturer.

As with other Samsung phones, the Galaxy A51 is unlikely to receive quick software updates. The flagship of the Galaxy S series is slow enough to receive updates and is a priority for Samsung. You will likely receive one or two updates for the A51, but don't expect them to be on time. You need to deal with Bixby on the Galaxy A51 as there is no native way to map the Bixby shortcut to another wizard.

Camera quality

Samsung Galaxy A51 camera

Flagship phones are pushing the boundaries of what we expected from a smartphone camera, mostly thanks to machine learning and the use of multiple lenses. The Samsung Galaxy A51 also jumps into the multiple lens train with a quad lens camera. You get a 48-megapixel main sensor as well as a 12-megapixel ultrawide sensor, a 5-megapixel macro sensor and a 5-megapixel depth sensor.

Of course, the number of sensors and megapixels doesn't ultimately determine the quality of the photos, but in the right situation, the photos are pretty good. The phone has some competition in the camera department. The iPhone SE uses Apple's A13 processor for better image processing and ultimately good photos, while the Google Pixel 3a has the same image quality that the Pixel series has become known for. Places the Pixel series on the front of the camera quality package.

Photos look great on the A51 with its 48-megapixel main sensor and in well-lit surroundings. You get a lot of details. Photos aren't as deep as those taken with the iPhone 11 Pro and Pixel 4, but they're still vivid. The ultra wide-angle lens is a big deal here too – it provides much better landscape shots and a generally more versatile camera experience.

However, if you get rid of the good lighting, you're out of luck. The Galaxy A51 just can't keep up with Apple and Google's machine learning skills. The Google Pixel 3a still takes excellent photos in low light conditions, although the iPhone SE is a little missing here too.

There's also a macro lens here, but it doesn't have its own autofocus. You can get some good results with some work, but it seems to be a feature that most people don't use.

Battery life

Samsung Galaxy A51 Below

The compromise between lower-performing chipsets and lower-resolution displays is usually longer battery life. Combined with the fact that the Galaxy A51 already has a 4,000 mAh battery, you get a day on which you are put under relatively high stress. I was able to get through part of the next day without any problems, and I suspect that most people will have a similar experience.

Unlike some other phones in this price range, the Samsung Galaxy A51 does not offer wireless charging. It has a 15 watt quick charge, which is rather slow for this technology.

Price, availability and guarantee

The Samsung Galaxy A51 costs $ 400 and is, as already mentioned, in the same price range as the iPhone SE, Google Pixel 3a and the Motorola Moto G Stylus. The device is available from the Samsung website, Verizon and Sprint. Verizon actually offers the phone for $ 10 a month for 24 months, which reduces the total to just $ 240.

The warranty on the phone is a fairly normal 1 year contract for manufacturing defects. So don't expect to return the phone if you drop it and the screen is cracked.

Our opinion

The Samsung Galaxy A51 is a solid phone, but it can compete with an even more solid competition. However, this doesn't make this a bad option. With a great display, modern design and decent camera performance under the right conditions, the Galaxy A51 has a lot to offer.

It's worth noting that while the Galaxy A51 has an official MSRP of $ 399, it's available from online retailers at a cheaper price. It becomes a more attractive option if you can pick it up for less than $ 300, which is sometimes possible.

Are there alternatives?

The Galaxy A51 has a lot to offer, but others offer more. When you're ready to switch to iOS, the iPhone SE offers much better performance. This is the best option for most. If you want to stay in the Android ecosystem, I recommend opting for the Pixel 3a or better and waiting for the Pixel 4a.

How long it will take?

The Galaxy A51 should last two years, but will likely feel slow towards the end of this term. It has no official IP rating. So if you drop it in the water, you may be out of luck. Thanks to the plastic back, it should survive if you drop it at the right angle. However, if you drop them on the screen, cracks can occur, as is the case with any modern smartphone.

Should you buy one?

No. Apple's iPhone SE and Google's Pixel 3a remain better options.

Editor's recommendations




29 Apr
Blog

Level Lock Review: Innovation at a Significant Price

Level lock in the door

Level Lock Review: A furtive, expensive Smart Lock

"A miracle of technology that stores all the components of an intelligent lock."

  • Discreet, minimalist design

  • Quick installation

  • Shared access with guests

  • Locks itself automatically

  • Expensive

  • Can't tell if the door stays open

Intelligent locks have become more sophisticated. Some high-end models offer fingerprint unlocking, shared access codes, traffic jam protection, and other innovative features. While they all strive to provide comfort and security to homeowners, they all have one thing in common: a distinctive design. You know that the striking properties make it an intelligent lock, e.g. B. a digital / physical keyboard that is clearly positioned in front of a door.

This can accidentally make them targets, especially for some crafty hackers with a shameful agenda. Who wants to come home to find a compromised Smart Lock? Against this trend, the Level Lock pays off as an invisible Smart Lock and represents a drastic departure from its competitors.

Complete the installation in less than 10 minutes

The beauty of Level Lock is its quick and easy installation, which took no more than 10 minutes to complete. From start to finish, the process is far more rational than any other Smart Lock installation I've done. All you have to do is replace the latch, install the new motor and then attach the lock housing.

All components are hidden and invisible, so my door has the same look and finish as before – something I can't say about other smart locks. How is it powered? There is a single CR2 battery that fits discreetly into the latch and enables the six-stage stainless steel transmission to operate. Although this is unusual, the “normal” use of the CR2 battery is designed to last for more than a year. So far it has taken me two months, but there is no indication in the app of how much juice is left.

The best thing about the level lock is that you can't tell it's just a smart lock by just looking at the door. So there is no reason for anyone to deal with it. You still use most of the original components of your existing lock, such as the rotary knob, the lock cylinder and the keys.

Simple functions

Unlike its contemporaries, the level lock pales in comparison to features, especially when you consider the price of $ 249. It works just like any other smart lock because you can lock / unlock it with a smartphone. As for the rest? There is the automatic locking function that locks my door within a set period of time after the break. It's useful when you're in a hurry, but even the longest setting (1 minute) is pretty short – so it would be nice to have longer options.

All components are hidden and not visible.

Homeowners will appreciate Level Lock's shared access via an invitation. This is useful if you plan to be away and need a friend, neighbor, or family member to check your place – or if you happen to offer your home on Airbnb. You can grant them either administrator or guest rights and set specific dates and times for access to the lock.

Apple users get an additional incentive because the level lock supports HomeKit and gives iPhone or Apple Watch owners the ability to lock / unlock by asking Siri to do so. It's a shame that Amazon Alexa and Google Assistant are not supported. I have turned to Level and although there are plans to expand to other platforms in the future, there are currently no details.

These functions have been standard with standard smart locks so far, and an obvious omission would notify me if my door stays ajar. In all cases where I have deliberately kept it open, the automatic locking function is activated and the locking process is initiated – even though the door is open. I would expect a smart lock to be smart enough to determine whether a door is actually closed or not, but that doesn't happen here. Notifications will be sent to me if the lock is blocked and cannot be locked completely.

A hollow bar

As mentioned above, Level can achieve a minimalist design by hollowing out the latch to act as a battery compartment at the same time. The integrity of the lock is addressed. I haven't tried to kick my door down to test it yet, but Level assures that it is built from the ground up for strength and durability. The company is even brave enough to claim that it exceeds the highest industry standards and has been stress-tested for over 1,000,000 cycles to maintain its structural and operational shape.

Level Lock hollow boltJohn Velasco / Digital Trends

Our opinion

The level lock doesn't seem to differ too much from its competitors due to its list of features, but it does set a technical benchmark for design. That alone makes it bothersome and innovative.

Is there a better alternative?

For the price? Yes! The level lock is expensive at $ 229. In the same price range, the Lockly Secure Pro for $ 300 offers an extensive range of features such as fingerprint unlocking and a digital keyboard for access for a little more.

Conversely, at the other end of the spectrum is the $ 100 Wyze Lock. You save a lot more for the same functions as the level lock.

How long it will take?

There is a two-year limited warranty that covers material and workmanship defects under normal use.

Should you buy it

Yes. The level lock is hidden in your door. There is no keyboard outside your door that makes it clear that it is an intelligent lock.

Editor's recommendations




29 Apr
Blog

Robo C2 Review | Digital Trends

Robo C2 rating

"The C2's excellent user interface warmed our hearts, but the unheated print bed gave us cold feet."

  • Excellent printing performance

  • User-friendly control panel

  • Robust, slim design

  • No heated bed

  • Requires frequent maintenance

We won't say a word when we say that Robos 3D printers are some of our favorites among a variety of mid-range models. What is not to love about the company? It started in 2012 as a Kickstarter project among a group of students from San Diego State University and is now one of the largest 3D printer manufacturers in the United States.

As the successor to the company's breakthrough R1 printer, the C2 is part of the company's ongoing effort to make 3D printing accessible to everyone through intuitive interface designs, reliable printing, quality results and a price that the average consumer can afford. With the first three points, the C2 generally met our expectations – although the price might be a bit too high for some. Here's what we thought of it after a few months of intensive testing.

Features and specifications

Compared to most mid-range printers, the C2 has a footprint at the larger end of the spectrum that's five inches long, five inches wide, and six inches high. This is certainly not a huge envelope, but it is large enough to hold most of the objects you can find in Thingiverse and other online object repositories.

Robo C2 rating
Robo C2 rating

Ed Oswald / Digital Trends

The only disadvantage? The printer's build platform is not heated. While this reduces the device's power consumption during printing, it also makes the C2 more susceptible to warping and poor adhesion, which increases the likelihood that you will get a faulty print and have to start over.

This is a huge improvement over the functional design of the R1 – the company's first product.

Fortunately, you don't have to mess around with bed calibration – it comes with an automatic leveling feature that makes it a breeze to keep the printer in good condition.

Finally, interact with the C2 through a large, bright 3.5-inch touchscreen at the bottom of the printer. The user interface is intuitive and contains wizards that can be used to guide beginners through typical maintenance processes.

All in all, this printer offers a fairly good selection of features for $ 800.

Setup and configuration

Good news for less mechanics: the C2 is almost completely assembled. All you need to do is attach the print bed, attach the spool holder, attach the filament guide tube to the machine, and pass some plastic filament through. This is all a bit standard when it comes to setting up 3D printers – but Robo makes it easy with a top-notch walkthrough wizard.

Robo C2 verification "data-image-id =" 1320073Ed Oswald / Digital Trends

Ed Oswald / Digital Trends

Even if you are new to 3D printing, you should have no problem getting the C2 up and running in about 20 minutes. We left the setup to someone completely unfamiliar with the technology, and they still managed to get the machine up and running with little trouble. Setup is not always that easy, so we appreciate the company's efforts here.

A quick tip: While Robo's instructions recommend completing the Wi-Fi setup after running a test print, we recommend doing the Wi-Fi connection process first. It will make your life easier and there is really no reason to end up doing it.

Construction quality and design

Robo receives good grades for the design of the C2. This is a huge improvement over the functional design of the R1 – the company's first product. While a 3D printer may never be something you want as a showpiece in your living room, here Robo has at least one design that looks slim on a table top.

The C2's touchscreen is one of our favorite features.

The beauty of the C2 is not just skin deep. The design of the machine also feels robust. Weighing just over 20 pounds, it's not a particularly heavy printer, but it's still heavy and sturdy enough to withstand shaking and shuddering while the print nozzle is moving at high speed. This ultimately leads to more accurate and consistent print results, but we'll cover all of these fun things in a moment.

Overall, the design of the printer is a win – although it has some flaws that we simply cannot overlook. The most outrageous of these is the C2's unheated print bed mentioned above, which forces you to use adhesive pads that need to be changed regularly to ensure adhesion. With this type of setup, you cannot determine when liability will fail. You have to get used to changing the pads regularly.

It's also limited to a single extruder, which is a bit of a disappointment given that an increasing number of printers for the $ 800 price tag for the C2 now include double extruder setups. To be fair, you have the option to add a second extruder or even replace extruder modules – but all of this is available separately.

User interface and software

The C2's touchscreen is one of our favorite features. There you will find almost all the important features and functions that you need to access. However, we found it a little difficult to use the smaller screen – especially when it was time to enter our WiFi password (the keyboard was just too small). Despite these minor problems, the actual user interface is one of the most user-friendly of all printers that we have ever tested.

If you're looking for a workhorse that doesn't require a lot of maintenance, this is probably not the printer for you.

As with desktop software, the C2 is designed for use with a customized version of Cura. Cura is also one of the most feature rich and intuitive slicer programs currently available, making the software easy to use. Unfortunately, you have to set everything up manually, but again Robo's well-written instructions save the day. As long as you know how to read and follow instructions, you'll be fine.

If you are patient enough, we strongly recommend performing the additional step of installing the Octoprint plugin so that you can print directly from Cura. It's a good deal of work to set up, but we think that convenience is worth the one-time effort.

Printing performance

To get a feel for how well the C2 works, we went through our standard test print suite along with some random objects to get things mixed up. These include the infamous 3DBenchy torture test tractor and the CTRL-V benchmark, both of which are intended to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of a printer.

Robo C2 verification "data-image-id =" 1320068Ed Oswald / Digital Trends

Ed Oswald / Digital Trends

With all of our prints, the results were admirable for a printer in this price range. Fine details came into their own (especially at higher resolutions), and the C2 had minimal problems with tricky features like unsupported spans and overhangs. Objects were also very consistent from layer to layer. The printer suffered almost no wobble on the Z axis – which is probably due to Robo's robust construction.

Overall, the C2 offers solid print performance, but unfortunately its otherwise admirable print jobs were too often hampered by the device's only shortcoming: the unheated print bed.

His admirable print jobs were often hampered by his only shortcoming: the unheated print bed.

Since the surface of the printer does not heat up, it is difficult to fix the printouts correctly. And more importantly, stay anchored until the object is complete. We found that we exchanged the painter's tape-like adhesive pads about every half a dozen prints, because if we didn't, the prints would lift off the build plate and screw everything up. Even when printing with rafts (supporting structures to improve bed adhesion), we were not always confident that the C2 would successfully complete a specific print job.

In other words, while this printer prints wonderfully under optimal conditions, it is definitely not the most reliable device we have ever tested.

Maintenance, repairability and upgradeability

Maintenance with Robo 3D printers is largely easy thanks to the example wizards mentioned above. No matter what goes wrong or which parameters you need to adjust, the integrated software from Robo makes it a breeze.

Software updates can be sent wirelessly to the C2 or downloaded and installed on a USB stick by opening them directly on the printer. The USB stick option is useful because you can print directly from there – in case you don't want to (or can't) connect the printer to a Wi-Fi network.

In the case of hardware problems, the C2 seems to be easy to repair (at least for the basic things), since most of the important components are easily accessible. Fortunately, we didn't have any hardware issues during our tests, but we're confident that if we did, we could fix them ourselves. Robo provides extensive troubleshooting and repair documentation on its website.

Warranty information

The Robo C2 has a one-year warranty with a spare parts service.

Our opinion

Simply put, we loved the C2. It is a good looking and powerful printer that is ready to use. The device's intuitive and user-friendly interface makes it an excellent choice for beginners in 3D printing. That said, it's definitely not perfect. Robo's decision to omit the critical heat bed feature may have kept the price down, but also resulted in a printer that is less reliable and requires less maintenance than some of its competitors.

Is there a better alternative?

At $ 800, the Robo C2 offers a lot of money – but because the 3D printing scene is currently so competitive, there are many printers that offer similar features at a cheaper price.

There are many printers that offer similar features at a cheaper price.

For $ 700, you can purchase the Maker Ultimate printer from Monoprice: a device with a larger construction area (7.8 x 7.8 x 6.8 inches), a heated bed and functions for automatic leveling. However, the Monoprice user interface is nowhere near as sophisticated or accessible and does not have a touchscreen.

Another notable competitor is Robo's previous printer: the Robo R1 +. The company no longer manufactures them, but you can easily find them for sale online. The R1 + doesn't have any of the fancy new connectivity options or a clear user interface of the C2, but it does have a heated bed and a larger build area. Depending on where you find one for sale, you can grab one of these puppies for around $ 500 to $ 700.

If you're not afraid to assemble something more, you can also buy a Prusa i3 MK2 kit for around $ 700. The i3's design, which emerged from the open source RepRap project, has been tested, optimized and perfected by thousands of different 3D printing enthusiasts over the years – so it's a pretty solid little machine. It's bigger, smarter, and more powerful than the Robo C2, but you have to build it yourself.

How long it will take?

We have no doubt that the C2 will offer you years of trouble-free service. But as I said, you can expect constant improvements to ensure high quality prints: it's just a reality of how relatively new 3D printing technology is. As far as we know, Robo plans to maintain these printers with software and firmware updates in the foreseeable future. Given the fact that the company still offers parts for previous generation printers, we don't see why this isn't the case for the C2.

Should you buy it

If you're brand new to 3D printing and looking for something that is extremely simple and easy to use, then yes – the C2 is one of the most user-friendly machines you'll find in the under $ 1,000 price range, and you should buy it.

If you value reliability and printing performance more, we recommend that you look elsewhere. The fact that this printer doesn't have a heated bed makes it less reliable than others we've tried. If you're looking for a workhorse that doesn't require a lot of maintenance, this is probably not the printer for you.

Editor's recommendations




28 Apr
Blog

Google Pixel Buds 2 Review: New Design, Better Sound

Pixel buds 2

Google Pixel Buds 2 is currently under review: new design, better sound

"Google's latest Pixel Buds significantly improve audio quality."

  • Optimized setup

  • Attractive look

  • Excellent language integration

  • Useful functions

  • Average battery life

  • No noise cancellation technology

This is an ongoing review. We'll update this review after spending a few days with Google's new Pixel Buds.

It was only a matter of time before Google brought its first real competitor into the real wireless earphone arena. To be honest, I'm surprised it took so long.

Google today launched its second-generation Pixel Buds, a pair of earphones for $ 179 that scraps the wire that holds the originals together and adds new design elements and countless features. I didn't have enough time with the Pixel Buds for a full review, but I listened long enough to have some thoughts.

Out of the box

The packaging for the Pixel Buds – technically the Pixel Buds 2, for which I will use the official name of Google in this test – is tiny, white and decorated with various pictures of the buds themselves. Inside are the buds, which are in a wireless charging case, as well as additional earplugs, a USB-C charging cable and the corresponding documentation.

Google Pixel BudsNick Woodard / Digital Trends

I usually unpack everything, take a quick look at the product, and then check the quick start guide to see if there are any setup quirks that I need to stick to. But I never opened the brochure with the Pixel Buds.

When I pulled the first bud out of the shell, a notification appeared on my Pixel 2 smartphone asking me to pair with the buds. A second prompt followed, instructing me to download the associated app and starting the rest of the setup process from there.

All thanks to the "Fast Pair on Android" function from Google, which allows you to pair your Pixel or Android 6.0+ device with the earphones immediately. I'm the first to admit that most earphone setups are fairly simple, but this was as simple and rational as possible, and more closely matches how Apple's AirPods work.

The original buds, which were $ 20 cheaper when they first released, had a fair amount of connectivity issues. It's a small sample size, but I haven't seen any of these issues in my time with the new Pixel Buds that have Bluetooth 5 technology.

design

The Pixel Buds aren't the smallest earbuds in the game (at 5.3 grams, they outweigh Apple AirPods by over a gram each), but they're not the heaviest either – both the Samsung Galaxy Buds + and Amazon Echo Buds weigh more . You are right in the wheelhouse, which is all we can ask of most earphones these days.

Google Pixel BudsNick Woodard / Digital Trends

However, it is the actual design of the Pixel Buds that fascinates me the most. In our view, the original pixel buds were loose-fitting, and although they never fell out, they didn't create the seal in your ear canal that is important for noise isolation. Google has listened and created a pair that is almost flush with your ears and offers a much safer feeling. I managed to do a five-mile run in my first few hours with the buds and had no problem moving it around during transportation.

The Pixel Buds will only be available in the cute color "Clear White" at launch, but then with the options "Fast Black", "All Mint" and "Oh So Orange". The charging case is more like an egg than the pill-shaped carriers that Samsung and others have adopted. It's also heavier than any case except the Echo Buds, but still pocket-friendly.

properties

At first glance, the functions of the Pixel Buds remind me of a classic baseball power hit. You will meet some doubles and homers if you can tolerate a hint here and there.

Google Pixel BudsNick Woodard / Digital Trends

Double: A weatherproof IPX4 degree of protection that protects you from splashes and sweat. You won't want to submerge them, but the Pixel Buds should be strong enough for training.

Home run: The Pixel Buds are the first Hotword-enabled earphones from Google Assistant. So you just have to say "Hey Google" or "OK ​​Google" to have your own voice assistant at your disposal. This is of course not new to the industry as Amazon and Apple are ahead in this regard. But Google made it effortless to use, to the point where I preferred to ask Google to change a title or increase the volume using the built-in gesture commands on the bud. These are easy to use, but the hands-free function of the buds is more attractive.

Swing and a miss: The Pixel Buds have a battery life of five hours on a single charge. Which, to be fair, is on par with the Apple AirPods and Amazon Echo Buds. But five hours is not much anymore, not when the Samsung Galaxy Buds + sets standards with 11 hours of playback time. With the included charging case, which is QI certified and can be charged wirelessly with any compatible charger, the Pixel Buds have a remarkable total life of 24 hours.

Double: The return of Google Translate via the conversation mode with Google Assistant or the Google Translate app. The feature was a highlight of the first generation Pixel Buds and remains an entertaining tool to translate the words you or others speak into different languages. It is an advantage that not everyone will use, but which can be used again and again when needed. The same applies to the possibility to ask Google directly how to get anywhere, or to read out notifications from practically every app on your device. Not absolutely necessary, but neat.

Look dismayed: Google has decided against adding noise cancellation technology to the second generation buds, and I think this is a missed opportunity. Sure, the fit is much better this time, which allows passive noise reduction. And yes, Apple's second-generation AirPods don't offer this feature at $ 20 more. But the Amazon Echo Buds did it, and they sell for $ 50 less than the Pixel Buds. It's not a drawback that the Pixel Buds don't have noise reduction, but if they really wanted to make a current move in the real wireless earbud category, this would have been the way to go.

Audio quality

When I started hearing the Pixel Buds, I wanted to be sure of what I was hearing. So I passed it on to my partner, played the track that Brothers Osborne had just auditioned (Love the Lonely Out of You) and asked her for a description of the sound.

Google Pixel BudsNick Woodard / Digital Trends

She took the word I was thinking of – crisp. The Pixel Buds have custom 12mm dynamic speaker drivers and a design Google has called "hybrid acoustic design", designed to seal the outside of the earbuds, but with spatial vents to reduce the feeling of a clogged ear. The result is music for your ears.

It will take me a couple of hours before I can justify the comparison with one of the top competitors I mentioned. And they are definitely not comparable to something like the Sennheiser Momentum Wireless 2, but who is it? That being said, I can definitely say that the Pixel Buds have improved by leaps and bounds compared to the sound of the first version, which, as we put it, was "okay". The lower end is there, but not overbearing, the vocals are as clear as a day and the middle section is well balanced.

Google Pixel BudsNick Woodard / Digital Trends

There is no equalizer in the Pixel Buds app, but I probably wouldn't use it even if there was one. Songs like The Wood Brothers & # 39; Luckiest Man were a pleasure and made me feel like I could hear the strings behind every single note. Google also suggested listening to 8D content on YouTube that re-produced existing songs to sound as if they were moving in the listener. It's not music that is specific to the Pixel Buds, but it does help when solid-sounding buds recreate Freddie Mercury's legendary vocals that dance back and forth over your head.

The few calls I made were clear, and those at the other end of the conversation noticed that I sounded better than trying other buds. The Pixel Buds have a pair of beam-shaping microphones that are designed to focus on your voice for listening in louder conditions or on the go. It's been a limited experience so far, but so good so far.

I would be very happy if I didn't mention the Adaptive Sound function in the Pixel Buds. In the same way that you can have your phone automatically adjust the brightness depending on the environment, Google gives you the ability to adjust the volume of the Pixel Buds depending on your location. It's subtle, but it should be, and I thought it was good if I walked outside on a busy street.

Conclusion

The pixel buds are filled to the brim with functions. However, in order to access the best ones, you have to be at least partially invested in the Google / Android ecosystem. They have significantly improved the design and audio quality of the originals, but have given the latest version an average battery life and lacked the ability to suppress noise.

I will repeat this assessment again after spending more time with these buds. Currently, Google’s Pixel Buds have made some important adjustments. Because of this, they may be the best Android earbuds you can get right now. But they left room to grow. There may be too much space in today's fast paced real wireless world.

Editor's recommendations




«‹7778798081›»