Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review

Introduction


Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review
The Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016 edition, aka A7 6) launches early in 2016 to set the tone for mid-range phones: those that are not as expensive as the finest Galaxy S series and iPhones, but also a level above the Moto Gs of this world.

The Galaxy A7 (2016) is a 5.5-inch smartphone – it's large, but probably not as big as it's screen diagonal would suggest.

The first thing to know about the Galaxy A7 (2016) is that it looks and feels stunningly good, stylish. While carrying the phone for a week or so while reviewing it, people noticed it and asked about it, often complimenting it.

You know there are supposed to be some compromises with mid-range phones, but the one area where Samsung did not compromise was looks.

The rest is TouchWiz running on top of Android 5.1 Lollipop on a Snapdragon 615 system chip with 3GB of RAM, a fingerprint scanner with support for Samsung Pay, a 13-megapixel camera with OIS and a fairly large, 3,300mAh battery. At the moment of this writing, the phone is on sale in only a few European markets. It is expected to become more widespread in February, while plans for US availability of the phone are unclear. One version with AT&T 4G LTE bands has passed FCC certification, though, so there is a chance that it might come to the States in the future. Now, let’s see how it all plays out in real life.

In the box:

  • Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)
  • 2A - 5V wall charger
  • microUSB Cable
  • User manual
  • SIM ejector tool

Design

Super stylish, eye-catchy design, very solid feel in the hand. Built to near perfection.

The Galaxy A7 (2016) looks a lot like Samsung’s current flagship, the Galaxy S6.

The frame is made out of metal, the physical buttons are also made of metal, while the front and back are Gorilla Glass 4 with a slight curve towards the edges. The A7 (2016) feels monolithic in the hand, reassuringly solid.

We’ve already touched on this in the intro, but let’s make it abundantly clear: this phone looks every bit as stylish and well made as the top phones out there and it’s impossible to tell just by the looks that we’re dealing with a mid-range phone. In the hand, it has some nice heft to it, but it’s not too heavy and does not tip over when you hold it. Despite rocking a glass on the back and front, it does not catch a lot of fingerprint marks and looks fairly clean, so you don’t have to frantically wipe it every few hours.

In terms of color, it comes in a choice of gold, white, black and pink gold, and we have the gold version up for review.

It’s also fairly compact for a 5.5” phone: its width is just 2.92” (74.1mm), while the popular iPhone 6s Plus that also has a 5.5” display has a width of 3.07” (77.9mm). The A7 (2016) is also not as tall at 5.96” vs 6.23” on the 6s Plus. Both phones are equally thin at 7.3mm, so big props to Samsung for making a 5.5” phone fit in such compact dimensions.

The buttons are in the typical for Samsung layout: a large, physical home key (with a fingerprint scanner in it) below the display, a back button on the right and a multitasking key on the left (both are capacitive keys with a backlight that appears for a short while when you touch them). The lock key is on the right, while the two separate volume buttons are on the left, and all are made of metal and feel very clicky and quality-made. On the bottom, there is a microUSB port for charging, a 3.5mm headset jack and a speaker grill as well as a microphone. Up top, there is only a secondary mic.

It’s worth noting that the phone does not have an LED notification light, so there is no way to know if you have a missed call or notification without actually turning the screen on. We can’t say we miss the notification light all that much: with the notification avalanche on modern phones, a notification light is also a big distraction, always urging you to pick up your phone. Sometimes it can be useful, though, so for many the lack of it would be a downside.

This is a dual SIM phone: it features a hybrid SIM card tray on the right - you can either use this phone with two SIM cards, or use just one SIM card and use the second slot for a microSD card to expand storage.


Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)

Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)

Dimensions

5.96 x 2.92 x 0.29 inches

151.5 x 74.1 x 7.3 mm

Weight

5.96 oz (169 g)

Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)

Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)

Dimensions

5.7 x 2.8 x 0.29 inches

144.8 x 71 x 7.3 mm

Weight

5.47 oz (155 g)

Motorola Moto X Pure Edition (2015)

Motorola Moto X Pure Edition (2015)

Dimensions

6.06 x 3 x 0.44 inches

153.9 x 76.2 x 11.06 mm

Weight

6.31 oz (179 g)

Honor 5X

Honor 5X

Dimensions

5.96 x 3 x 0.32 inches

151.3 x 76.3 x 8.15 mm

Weight

5.57 oz (158 g)

Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)

Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016)

Dimensions

5.96 x 2.92 x 0.29 inches

151.5 x 74.1 x 7.3 mm

Weight

5.96 oz (169 g)

Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)

Samsung Galaxy A5 (2016)

Dimensions

5.7 x 2.8 x 0.29 inches

144.8 x 71 x 7.3 mm

Weight

5.47 oz (155 g)

Motorola Moto X Pure Edition (2015)

Motorola Moto X Pure Edition (2015)

Dimensions

6.06 x 3 x 0.44 inches

153.9 x 76.2 x 11.06 mm

Weight

6.31 oz (179 g)

Honor 5X

Honor 5X

Dimensions

5.96 x 3 x 0.32 inches

151.3 x 76.3 x 8.15 mm

Weight

5.57 oz (158 g)

To see the phones in real size or compare them with other models, visit our Visual Phone Size Comparison page

Samsung Galaxy A7 (2016) review

Display

One good looking display with pleasing colors.

The Galaxy A7 (2016) features a 5.5-inch Super AMOLED display with a resolution of 1080 x 1920 pixels.

This makes for a sharp-looking display: at this resolution, it is nearly impossible to notice pixelization or any jagged edges to images on the screen.

What about the colors, though? Samsung’s AMOLED displays come with the nice function that allows users to choose how the screen looks. The default ‘Adaptive’ display mode features unrealistically oversaturated colors and bluish whites, which come together for a very punchy, but wildly unrealistic, cartoony look to everything.

We switch all our Samsung AMOLED displays to the ‘Basic’ mode (you do this by going into Settings - Display - Screen Mode), as this is the mode that conforms to the sRGB color standard, the de facto standard for all images and video. Sticking with Basic Mode and the sRGB standard means that you see images the way those who captured those images intended you to see them. Every other screen mode and standard results in images that get some sort of artificial boost that ruins the way those who took pictures and made movies intended for them to be seen.

Great news is that in Basic Mode, the screen on the Galaxy A7 (2016) looks very good. Whites are just a tad on the green side, but for all else, this is a well balanced display.

Outdoors, this is not the brightest of screens (peak brightness reaches just 369 nits), but it blocks out reflections fairly well, so we found it not all that uncomfortable to use. At night, it can go all the way down to the minimum level of 1 nit, which makes it easy on the eyes, something that is great for those who can’t fall asleep without their phone. The light sensor also works very well, set the phone to automatic brightness and it will adjust the levels very adequately. Viewing angles are also solid, but there is a pronounced color shift towards blue when you view the display at an angle.



FEATURED VIDEO

41 Comments

1. GreenMan

Posts: 2694; Member since: Nov 09, 2015

6.5?! Oh my sweet Lord... Angry Mob (a REALLY angry one) in 3... 2... 1... Now, where did I put those darn corns... Ah, forget pop-corns, I'm ordering a PIZZA!!!

8. another1

Posts: 157; Member since: Dec 25, 2015

Samsung needs to deal with it's #1 problem: LAG Stutter, pause, poor animations, or whatever you want to call it, continues to be a huge problem for Samsung. Hardcore Samsung fans (or just owners that need to justify their purchases) try to deny it and say Samsung phones are near lag free. They are not. #HereComeTheSamsungApologists

16. Predator-X

Posts: 44; Member since: Jan 07, 2016

No one phone is lag free that counts even for iphones

27. marorun

Posts: 5029; Member since: Mar 30, 2015

A7 with 3 gb ram and SD615 lag much more than my moto x play with same soc and 2 gb ram.

30. hung2900

Posts: 966; Member since: Mar 02, 2012

But the Exynos version is VERY snappy. I played the A7 for few days and I cannot believe the phone scored 6.5.

32. iushnt

Posts: 3062; Member since: Feb 06, 2013

That's why you should get exynos model.

37. Tommikke

Posts: 69; Member since: Nov 21, 2015

Yeah, Exynos -variant is MUCH faster

40. AstronautJones

Posts: 305; Member since: Aug 01, 2012

Shouldn't Samsung owners be the one to comment about supposed TouchWiz lag? Sounds like even you are admitting the ones complaining don't even have the phone.

2. AkoSiKuting

Posts: 88; Member since: Dec 09, 2015

poor gaming, shutter lag, pricey, not surprice :) Samsung!

29. kevkyle

Posts: 104; Member since: Oct 21, 2012

not surprised:)......tamang spelling with a "d" past tense kasi....

31. NoToFanboys

Posts: 3231; Member since: Oct 03, 2015

Ignorant post and 12 ignorant likers LOL

39. srgonu

Posts: 511; Member since: Feb 13, 2012

Disable stupid flip board from home screen settings and stutter will be gone. I see how much it affects on my note edge.

3. sebstin

Posts: 173; Member since: Dec 03, 2015

Just 6.5? Blu Vivo XL was given 7.5 rating.. Vow,, whats happening?

9. another1

Posts: 157; Member since: Dec 25, 2015

Samsung Lag. That's what's happening. No one wants a laggy smartphone in 2016.

13. GreenMan

Posts: 2694; Member since: Nov 09, 2015

@ another1 Well, judging by the comments; seems like many still fancy a laggy smartphone... Perhaps they love that 5 Year old NOSTALGIA of Android Eclair and/or Gingerbread...???

10. GreenMan

Posts: 2694; Member since: Nov 09, 2015

@sebstin Vivo XL scored a 7.5??? So basically, because this phone's front panel reads "Samsung", it ought to score an 8+ no matter what??? Nothing is happening, mate... It's called: UNBIASED CRITIQUE... Hats off to P.A...

23. Planterz

Posts: 2120; Member since: Apr 30, 2012

Blu Vivo XL costs $150USD ($100 at release). The A7 costs 400 Euros (~$440). Need more explanation?

36. nodes

Posts: 1152; Member since: Mar 06, 2014

and surprise surprise, $150 phone performs better. $450 Android phone that runs on SD615 and doesn't have Notification LED, seriously Samsung?

4. Wiencon

Posts: 2278; Member since: Aug 06, 2014

If only the whole A series was 0.5 inch smaller :( Why couldn't they make A5 4.5", A7 5.0" and A9 5.5"

5. quintessential

Posts: 86; Member since: Mar 11, 2015

WOW for once, PA isnt giving Samsung a 9 /10 for a review ... which is a miracle ! Samsung must have stopped paying I guess. LMAO

6. TyrionLannister unregistered

Enough Internet for today.

11. GreenMan

Posts: 2694; Member since: Nov 09, 2015

@quintessential Yeah, either that... Or maybe they've stopped manufacturing good stuff... Have you thought of that?

7. GreenMan

Posts: 2694; Member since: Nov 09, 2015

Tell you what, lads... I'm an Android Purist so I may sound a bit biased but The Nexus 5X is a ZILLION times better than this huge, big behemoth of a Smartphone that's 'infested' with a TON of bloat. It doesn't worth it, period... If you're a "Phablet Jockey", then simply grab The 6P... Its more expensive but worth each and every single extra penny...

12. SamsungPhanboy

Posts: 765; Member since: Mar 31, 2015

Touchwiz must die, or be revamped.

14. jellmoo

Posts: 2533; Member since: Oct 31, 2011

Wow... There goes my theory about Samsung getting automatic high scores. Sadly, this just further reinforces the nonsensical rating system that PA uses.

35. medtxa

Posts: 1655; Member since: Jun 02, 2014

and maybe PA only use 8 above rating for flagship.

15. max1c

Posts: 103; Member since: Oct 11, 2014

Way overpriced and no Android 6.0. Waste of money. Should have been $250-300 max.

17. Youraveragejoe

Posts: 134; Member since: Oct 31, 2014

Anything except the S series and Note series from Samsung is s**t. Period.

25. johanbiff

Posts: 415; Member since: Mar 31, 2015

nah.. the Alpha is great!

18. johanbiff

Posts: 415; Member since: Mar 31, 2015

I also have a Samsung(S6) but 6.5 seems fair for what it is, bad choise puting the 615 in that phone IMO.
Galaxy A7 (2016)
  • Display 5.5" 1080 x 1920 pixels
  • Camera 13 MP / 5 MP front
  • Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 615, Octa-core, 1600 MHz
  • Storage 16 GB + microSDXC
  • Battery 3300 mAh(17h 3G talk time)

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.