x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.

Samsung Shark S5350 Rivals and Competitors

Phone RivalsClick on a rival to jump to it.

Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • Low-resolution video capture

Samsung Shark 3 S3550 Samsung Shark 3 S3550


  • Slow data means slow Internet browsing (EDGE)

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches vs 3.77 x 1.80 x 0.57 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
  • 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 autofocus
  • The camera lacks flash

Samsung Shark 2 S5550 Samsung Shark 2 S5550


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

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • 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


  • Low-resolution video capture

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches)
  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • The camera lacks flash
  • Lacks an ambient light sensor for automatic screen brightness adjustment

in-depth comparison



Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


  • Lacks Wi-Fi
  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)
  • The camera lacks autofocus
  • The camera lacks flash
  • Low-resolution video capture

Samsung SGH-L700 Samsung SGH-L700


  • Slow data means slow Internet browsing (EDGE, UMTS)

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Small dimensions (4.54 x 1.84 x 0.47 inches vs 4.29 x 1.81 x 0.50 inches)
  • 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)
  • 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 Hazel Sony Ericsson Hazel


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

Common for both Pros & Cons

  • Low pixel density screen (182 ppi vs 154 ppi)
  • Low resolution display (240 x 320 pixels)

in-depth comparison



Samsung Shark S5350 Samsung Shark S5350


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

Nokia 5310 XpressMusic Nokia 5310 XpressMusic


  • Slow data means slow Internet browsing (EDGE)

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


  • 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



More Rivals

Latest stories