x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Samsung Shark S5350 Rivals and Competitors

Phone RivalsClick on a rival to jump to it.

Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • The camera lacks flash

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches vs 4.32 x 1.77 x 0.43 inches)
  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
  • Low-resolution video capture
  • Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment

in-depth comparison



Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • The camera lacks flash

Sony Ericsson W902 Sony Ericsson W902


  • Lacks microSD slot for storage expansion

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches vs 4.33 x 1.93 x 0.46 inches)
  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
  • Low-resolution video capture
  • Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment

in-depth comparison



Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches)
  • The camera lacks flash

Nokia 5320 XpressMusic Nokia 5320 XpressMusic


  • Single-core processor
  • Too little RAM memory (128 MB RAM)
  • Low-resolution camera (2 megapixels)
  • Lacks global positioning system (GPS)

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi vs 200 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • Low-resolution video capture
  • Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment

in-depth comparison



Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • The camera lacks flash
  • Low-resolution video capture
  • Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment

Sony Ericsson Elm Sony Ericsson Elm


  • Proprietary USB connector - have to use its cable instead of a standard microUSB

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches vs 4.33 x 1.77 x 0.55 inches)
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)

in-depth comparison



Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • The camera lacks flash
  • Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment

Nokia E52 Nokia E52


  • Single-core processor
  • Low-resolution camera (3.2 megapixels)

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches vs 4.57 x 1.93 x 0.39 inches)
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi vs 167 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • Low-resolution video capture

in-depth comparison



Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • Low-resolution video capture
  • Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches vs 4.08 x 1.75 x 0.38 inches)
  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi vs 200 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • The camera lacks flash

in-depth comparison



Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • The camera lacks flash

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches vs 4.28 x 1.82 x 0.46 inches)
  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
  • Low-resolution video capture
  • Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment

in-depth comparison



More Rivals

Latest stories