How heavy is too heavy?

[pdxmatts]

And yet those people probably don't even notice. Good thing theres people like you to watch out for them.

If you think telling people to go to the gym is the best advise, then I am glad to disagree

 

[DanielDD]

With a weight difference of 59 grams between the two, I find it hard to believe that you don't feel a difference

It's true. I know there is a weight difference, but I don't feel the difference unless I'm holding both at the same time and specifically looking for it. I don't find the 8 Plus heavy at all

 

[prometheus00]

One thing to consider is that the extra weight contributes to the phones fragility in drops, particularity now that it's a glass sandwich. In a drop the force the phone hits the ground with is directly proportional to it's mass (F=ma).

 

[joeblow7777]

To put the weight debate in perspective, I was just able to get a reading of 21g on an electronic balance by blowing on it.

 

[Z3man]

To put the weight debate in perspective, I was just able to get a reading of 21g on an electronic balance by blowing on it.

What do you get if you fart on it?

 

[mcdj]

23lb.

 

[sean000]

I checked the Nokia museum online and my first Nokia (in 1999 work gave me a 1996 model) weighed in at 246 grams. Of course they quickly got smaller and lighter. My employer soon upgraded me to the ubiquitous Nokia 6180 series, which was around 150 grams. I also had the original Blackberry, which was still around 150. Just before I got the iPhone 3G I had a Motorola Razr V3, which was only 95g.

Of course with all of those phones I frequently carried a PalmOS based PDA, an mp3 player (or before that a CD walkman), a camera, and sometimes a laptop. The X is just 174g and replaces most of that stuff. Yes it weighs more than my iPhone 6, but my iPhone 6 is slow and takes mediocre photos.

Sean

 

[cleanair]

Can the X really replace a camera? I thought cell phone cameras are always going to be lower in quality than a digital camera.

 

[sean000]

Can the X really replace a camera? I thought cell phone cameras are always going to be lower in quality than a digital camera.

It depends on what camera you are comparing the iPhone X to, and what type of photograph. I've been shooting with Nikon DSLR cameras since 2004, and these days I shoot mostly with an Olympus OM-D m4/3 camera (also interchangeable lenses, but smaller sensor than my Nikon). There is another very long thread on this topic that has been peaking over the last 48 hours. Here's a summary of my opinion 🙂

No single camera+lens combo is great for every type of photo, so a lot of it comes down to what you like to photograph, what the conditions are, and what your expectations are. Interchangeable lens cameras exist to provide flexibility and maximum quality. Superzooms exist, but they have their compromises in terms of lens quality. For general photography and snapshots in good light, typically shared on social media, the iPhone X will compare quite well to any camera covering a similar field of view. It may not always have the pop and detail of shots taken with more expensive cameras and lenses, but results will look great for a lot of shots. A smartphone also won't be as nice to shoot with as a camera with a viewfinder and manual controls, but it will be easier to carry. This is why the smartphone has pretty much already killed the compact point-and-shoot camera market. Smartphone cameras reached the "good enough" level for the general public a few years ago. At that point they were already better cameras than the 120mm film compacts and disc film cameras that were so popular in the 1980's and 90's.

DSLRs and other interchangeable lens cameras (and some high-end compact cameras with built in lenses) have larger sensors (not just higher resolution, but physically larger) that perform better in lower light and also scale up to large prints better than smaller sensors producing similar resolution. They can also pair with high-end lenses designed to deliver maximum detail and contrast. Larger sensors with longer focal length lenses also allow you to control depth of field more... blurring the background when you want to. Small sensors with short focal lengths, like you find in smartphones, have enormous depth of field... everything is in focus even when the telephoto lens is used. This is why current flagship smartphones use software to blend exposures and blur the background. Of course that doesn't always end up looking as natural as when it is done using optics, but dot projector technology is changing that and the software will keep getting better.

So in short the X can't really replace a high-end compact camera or an interchangeable lens camera with a bag full of lenses for all types of shots, but for some types of shots you'd be hard-pressed to see the differences. What the X can easily replace is a small-sensor compact point & shoot camera that has a 3x zoom and no viewfinder.

Sean

 

[myscrnnm]

I don't know that a phone can be "too heavy." I personally like my smartphones to be denser because it gives it a sense of heft and quality. It also makes them easier to hold. I think we're at a point where mobile phones are so slim and compact that weight is not a concern.

 

[Tom G.]

I can't believe that there is a post about the weight of various iPhones. I started in "cell phones" with a bag phone that I bought through a program set up by the company that I worked for. In those days you had to be in a group plan in order to get your cost per minute down to an almost acceptable level.

When my iPhone begins to approach the weight of that Motorola bag phone (which weighed about 8 to 10 pounds) then I'll start to think about the issue of weight. I'm 73 years old and don't have any problem with the weight of my present iPhone 7+ or my 12.9" iPad Pro, or my MacBook pro. I assure you that the weight of my iPhone X when it gets here will be of no consequence at all.

Unless it out ways that old bag phone, but I don't think it will.