Oppo Find-X all-screen phone hides its cameras in a pop-up pod

To many users, Google's Android mobile OS represents increased choice in devices when compared to its most popular alternative. Just a few days ago, the flagship Android handset market looked like it would embrace the big-screen-and-a-notch design trend with all eight of a Snapdragon SoC's big.LITTLE arms. Vivo's Nex first bucked this trend, and now the Find-X handset from BBK Electronics' brand-mate Oppo joins the party with user-facing cameras that pop up from behind a full-coverage display. Better yet, the Find-X will reportedly be the first Oppo phone to officially hit American shores.

One might expect two high-end phones from the same Chinese conglomerate to be pretty similar, but the Vivo Nex and the Oppo Find-X have multiple small differences, just like Europe. The most obvious difference between the cousins is the smooth glass back on the Find-X compared to the texture on the reverse side of the Nex. The Find-X is a smaller phone overall, sporting a 6.42″ (16.3 cm) AMOLED screen rather than the ultra-jumbo 6.6″ display on the Nex. The screen's resolution is 2340×1080, which works out to a pixel density of 401 PPI and a 2.17:1 aspect ratio. The manufacturer says the display covers a whopping 93.8% of the phone's face.

Hardware-wise, no prizes will be given for guessing that the Find-X gets a Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 SoC, 8 GB of memory, and 256 GB of storage. The company only announced the single memory and storage configuration, but that could change before the handset makes its way to America. That large storage capacity is handy since the Find-X has no microSD card slot. The phone also lacks a headphone jack.

Oppo Find-X with the camera pod sticking out

The Find-X's user-facing has an f/2 lens and a 25-megapixel sensor, and sits in a rather clever-looking motorized pod that reveals itself from behind the screen. The moving pod also contains an illuminator, an infrared camera, a range sensor, and a dot projector that work together as inputs for the Find-X's 3D facial recognition features. Mechanical engineers will doubtless fear failure of the pod's moving parts, but Oppo says it tested them to last 300,000 movement cycles. There's no fingerprint scanner on the handset as an alternate authentication method.

The pod-mounted rear-facing camera setup has two sensors, one a 16-MP unit with an f/2.0 lens and and the other a 20-MP snapper with an f/2.2 lens. The 20-MP snapper is only there to provide depth-estimation capabilities for the phone's bokeh simulation. As one would expect, Oppo has spiced the camera setup with all kinds of “AI-powered” enhancement features.

 

Users can charge the 3730-mAh battery using the USB 2.0 Type-C port on the bottom of the phone. Oppo bakes in its proprietary VOOC Flash Charge technology that promises to take a depleted pack to 75% capacity in just half an hour. On the software side, Oppo dips Android 8.1 Oreo in its own Color OS 5.1 coating before installing it on the Find-X.

Oppo's Find-X will require that prospective buyers find a pretty sizable amount of cash. European shoppers will have to fork over €999 (about $960 without VAT). Although Oppo reportedly promised a US release, there's no word yet on stateside pricing or availability. The company will release the phone into some unnamed markets in August, and the rest of the world should follow later. There will also be a Lamborghini version of the Find-X that costs 70% more and adds faster charging and the Italian manufacturer's logo.

Comments closed
    • DPete27
    • 1 year ago

    The resurgence of the slider phone!! We’re in phase 2 of the full circle.

    • ronch
    • 1 year ago

    They should brand the sliding/hiding camera “Pic-a-Boo! I See You!” Camera.

    • ronch
    • 1 year ago

    At this point aren’t we a little bored with all these phones coming out yet? Faster SOCs, more RAM, more storage, notched displays, etc. I just need a phone that feels snappy enough, can call and text, can hold maybe 64GB worth of stuff, has a good enough display (say, 720p with a decent color gamut), a good camera, and a big battery. That’s about it. You can get those in a phone that costs about $200.

    • willyolioleo
    • 1 year ago

    motorized moving parts that stick out on a phone.

    that’s going to be in a tight pocket.

    yeah, nothing can go wrong here.

      • ronch
      • 1 year ago

      It’s recommended that the user periodically dab a bit of snake oil on the sides of the motorized tray holding the camera to keep it working smoothly.

    • albundy
    • 1 year ago

    a thousand dollar china phone. hysterical. you would think they would have better pricing buying the soc and ram from down the street.

    • jihadjoe
    • 1 year ago

    > USB 2.0 Type-C

    Now that’s a unique connector I’ve never seen before!

      • nico1982
      • 1 year ago

      Early adopters of the Type-C connector, like the Nokia N1, had USB 2.0 ports.

        • jihadjoe
        • 1 year ago

        Wow. That is a weird design decision, considering Type-C and indeed the Nokia N1 came out more than 6 years after USB 3.0.

    • Chrispy_
    • 1 year ago

    Personally I’m wondering how many people actually buy these $1000 phones. Just like the laptop and tablet markets, there’s a widening gulf between “normal” and “flagship” price points, whilst the technical and performance differences between the two sectors is shrinking.

    In the games development sector, this is call ‘harvesting the whale tails’ as the richest 1% are willing to spend more money than the other 99% of their customer base combined. Sure, this phone might be nice at €999 but that’s 5x more expensive than the excellent Moto G6.

    Manufacturers are learning fast that the profit margins are very high for the MUST HAVE FASHION-STATEMENT DISPLAY OF WEALTH FLAGSHIP customers, and this demographic all have very short memories of flawed design and will just buy a newer model if the current one has problems, rather than look outside the trending fashion bubble. That’s fine, they’re entitled to do that as long as they keep making decent, usable, phones at a price point reflective of the sealed, disposable product with a 2-year lifecycle.

    Edit:
    Just some further thought on this – I work in the design industry (architecture) which is heavily skewed towards Apple compared to most other industries, and though not a particularly large firm, I can draw on the employees and associated support contractors as a roughly ~1000 sample size of the employed population. 48% of the employees use Apple phones (I have empirical tracked data to confirm this stat from both our Microsoft and Meraki portals) and 39% of the employees use Android. The rest either don’t use our email or WiFi on their device, because we have zero BB and zero Windows Mobile as of 2018.

    Here’s the thing, of the Apple users, most are iPhone 6(S) or lower, and only 14 Apple users are running an 8 or an X. That’s barely 3% of the Apple users willing to pay over £500, and looking through that sorted list manually, NONE of them earn less than 6x minimum wage, based on my guess that they definitely earn more than me from rank/position alone.

    On the Android side of things, there is a huge range of devices (some brands I don’t even recognise, thanks to our heavily multi-cultural employee sample) but the obvious flagships like the S8, Pixel, Note8 etc are vanishingly rare compared to the devices that originally sold for £200-300. Sadly, the range and variety of phones makes it too much effort at-a-glance for me to bother getting precise stats for, but I’d eyeball it as 1% of our Android-using employees have a phone that retailed for over £500.

    So, within an architectural environment where almost everyone is a qualified professional with an 8+ year training process before they’re accredited, you’d assume the average wage and level of disposable income is disproportionately high compared to the national, or even Western average. Add to that the above-average Apple marketshare because it’s in the UK, and compound that with the Apple-bias of architectural design and you’d be forgiven for expecting anything other than a sea of iPhone X phones.

    Nope. These $1000 phones are too damn expensive, even in a skewed sample that would favour $1000 buyers, they are exclusively limited to the Director/Partner level of our company – the same demographic who buy these things no matter how good or bad they are and genuinely don’t care about the phone’s tech/features/capabilities as long as they can make and recieve phonecalls and run a small sample of the most common apps. These people simply don’t focus on phones, because they’re too busy running a company.

    Edit 2:
    Wow. That may be the biggest wall of text I’ve ever posted, sucks being on call but I figure at least some of you find that stuff mildly interesting and mashing my keyboard is passing the time admirably; 40 minutes to go!

      • Kretschmer
      • 1 year ago

      Apple suggests that it’s a huge market.

      Edit: It might be a New York thing, but you see a lot of iPhone Xs here.

        • Chrispy_
        • 1 year ago

        I’m not denying that. Even 0.1% is a big number when you multiply by the entire global population.

        I just hope that these whale-tails continue to subsidize technology advances for the rest of us, and part of me is gnashing my teeth in quiet rage because the technology is being driven forwards by “what is most appealing to the idiot tax demographic” rather than “what is the best option for the majority of users”

        It’s a give and take scenario but I don’t like how the whale-tail demographic reward terrible, flawed design. Maybe I’ve been watching too many [url=https://www.youtube.com/user/rossmanngroup<]Louis Rossmann videos[/url<] recently, though 😉

      • Pancake
      • 1 year ago

      $1000 isn’t a lot of money compared to buying a car or a house.

      My observation is that it’s young low-income low-education level people that tend to get flagship phones. Because it’s an affordable status symbol amongst their peers and they spend a lot of their waking hours poking at the things.

      If you’re a well educated high income professional you have far less time to go playing with phones and are smart enough to have better things to do with your money like invest it or buy real status symbols.

      Of course, there are far more poor dumb people than rich smart people. So Apple have got their marketing correct. As someone educated and fairly well-off their ads do not appeal to me. I find the people and scenes portrayed in them crude and disgusting.

      • FireGryphon
      • 1 year ago

      This is a great post.

      My own experience confirms this anecdotally. I know a lot of people with iPhones, but I can’t name a single person I know with even a 7, let alone 8 or X. Android phones follow suit.

      I think people are coming to the realization that they don’t need a great phone to make and receive calls or surf the web a bit. I imagine that the only reason one needs the greatest phone is for gaming or some other niche purpose, which doesn’t apply to most of us.

      • ronch
      • 1 year ago

      I agree with pretty much everything you said there. I’ll add something else though. In some parts of the world, China particularly, many people seem to buy iPhones just because it’s the ‘greatest’ phone out there that’ll make a good status symbol. You know how Chinese mainlanders are; it’s all about “Hey look at me I’m rich!” in a humble brag sort of way. Many of them don’t even fiddle with their phones and use them only for calling and texting, and are too busy calling suppliers and all to play with their phones all day.

    • DancinJack
    • 1 year ago

    NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. No moving parts on phones! What the heck were they thinking here?

    “No one will get sand in there, ever.”

      • Chrispy_
      • 1 year ago

      People seem to have been successfully using cameras at the beach without instantly destroying their cameras since celuloid film came to mass market almost 130 years ago.

      I know people are incredibly clumsy and seem to break their fragile $1000 phones on a regular basis, but the risk of getting sand in the mechanism is probably outweighed by the risk of scratching an exposed lens on the back of the phone.

      • Kretschmer
      • 1 year ago

      I’m much less likely to break a mechanism while taking a photo than I am to get a fingerprint on the exposed lens.

      • FireGryphon
      • 1 year ago

      Moving parts on a device that gets knocked around and dropped is asking for trouble.

        • DPete27
        • 1 year ago

        Not to mention, how would you go about putting a case on this thing? Pretty sure you can’t.

          • Chrispy_
          • 1 year ago

          Oh wait, I’m thinking of another phone that has a little pop-out camera.

          This is the one with the whole phone that grows by half an inch. Yeah, the only aftermarket cases that will fit that will be unable to offer protection to the entire top edge of the phone, two of the four corners must remain exposed by default.

          Unless they make the case in two sections and the case itself includes a slider….

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This