I hope that 4x optical zoom isn't the only special feature justifying that price. Because it would be cheaper to get a more reasonably priced but still an excellent phone and a separate camera with a 10-12x optical zoom and far more superior optics for the same price. A 1300 dollars phone should either boast some extraordinary functionality or carry an Apple logo. Since it's not an Apple that can cost anything and still sell like hot cakes, it should have an integrated fuel cell or something.

There is no way that Chinese branded phone will successfully sell at 1300 usd. This is just the continuation of their dual pricing strategy. under which they make the bulk of their business selling cheap phones, and the higher price segment is there just for the sake of propelling the brand, and not completly eroding it by selling cheapos.

no way, no one will buy it over S7E, even if it's better. I do plan to buy Mate 9 to replace mine s7e, it seems to be great device, but **** 1300$ is way way way too much, 600$ would be stretching it.

It's $1.3K for the top spec version. I wouldn't be surprised if the normal 64GB version is $700-800 USD which puts it in the same price range as other flagships. Still, I think it's a mistake aiming for the ludicrous artificial price point of flagships in the West. If they wanted to bust into the western market they should have aimed for $400 USD like OnePlus and ZTE. I bought an Axon 7 for $520 (+13% tax) CAD, and aside from a sub-par camera it's a flagship device in every other way. I'd have to be insane to pay the $1050+ price for traditional company flagships which have the same hardware. Oh and for the record, that sub-par camera is 20 MP with OIS and decent software, it's just not great in low light as it obviously has less light gathered per pixel versus the modern 12 MP sensors which give clearer images.

It's $1.3K for the top spec version. I wouldn't be surprised if the normal 64GB version is $700-800 USD which puts it in the same price range as other flagships. Still, I think it's a mistake aiming for the ludicrous artificial price point of flagships in the West. If they wanted to bust into the western market they should have aimed for $400 USD like OnePlus and ZTE. I bought an Axon 7 for $520 (+13% tax) CAD, and aside from a sub-par camera it's a flagship device in every other way. I'd have to be insane to pay the $1050+ price for traditional company flagships which have the same hardware.

Eh, maybe. It really depends on how you define "high end" and what matters to you. The problem on the Android side is that no manufacturer seems to understand what a true high end device is. Samsung comes close - but their software mucks it up. Take the Pixel XL for example, one of the biggest complaints is lack of waterproofing - ok, but it lacks a bunch of other stuff - some of which I feel like should have been "solved" by now and simply included in every phone. 4x4 MIMO NVMe storage Bluetooth AptX Aqstic DAC is ok but it's no Wolfson OIS (Yes I know it has EIS/HDR+ but EIS has weird artifacts when intentionally panning and HDR+ does multiple captures which is an issue during moving shots) Single Bottom Speaker (down from dual front facing in 6P) They put a giant piece of non-gorilla glass on the back - for seemingly no purpose other then to devalue resale with scratches. The glass would be a good reason to include wireless charging, but it doesn't have it. It has a cloth earpiece -- why? No dual high/low frequency mics for better sound quality (HTC had this and it made a huge difference but no one seems to do it anymore) It doesn't have a pressure sensitive screen It doesn't have a telescopic lens. The iphone has a separate DAC for controlling the haptic feedback system (largely unnecessary but why not) Like some of these features, for example the last one - is it worth it? I don't know, but I feel like if I'm spending $850 (Pixel XL 128) then I want at least some combination of those features. I feel like that little stuff is the stuff that should set the "high end" phones apart from the One Plus's. Obviously I don't expect other people to value those features the same way I do - but yeah, if you're going to charge $1300 for a phone it better have like the best of what everyone else already does and then some. But a lot of these new phones (especially android ones) are actually taking a step back in some areas (removing features/or implementing cheaper features) and still charging "high end" prices.

I hope it sells in a total number of 1 (1 sold device). Tech-wise no phone can cost such amount of money unless it is made of some unique high-pressure grown crystal diamond monolith case and all components and chips are soldered by blind nurses... but looks like this "phone" is pretty average at best.

So how can one explain the $1k cost of an Iphone or a Pixel then? $1300 is not a lot more than 1k.. IMO any phone that costs 1k+ is seriously taking the piss. Especially when you consider what that 1k gets you in the iPhone, Pixel, or this phone. These flagships are becoming more and more expensive, and offering less incentive to upgrade. Maybe huawei is finally realizing how stupid consumers actually are to be willing to spend so much on phones that they will just move on from in 2 years, that they want to take advantage the same way that Apple and Google are.

but yeah, if you're going to charge $1300 for a phone it better have like the best of what everyone else already does and then some. But a lot of these new phones (especially android ones) are actually taking a step back in some areas (removing features/or implementing cheaper features) and still charging "high end" prices.

The thing is, it's not possible for a phone to have enough of any things to justify the premium of costing double or more the alternatives. For example the A7 I bought has: - Snapdragon 820 SoC - 4GB LPDDR4 - 64GB blazing fast storage which for some reason they don't advertise (I get 400MB+ writes and 1800MB+ reads per second in PassMark) - Solid unibody aluminium design - 5.5" 1440p Samsung AMOLED display (seems to be the same thing as in the S7 Edge) with Gorilla Glass 4 - 32 bit DAC and powerful amp - Dolby Atmos - Super fast and accurate fingerprint scanner - Good front facing speakers - Decent 20MP camera with OIS, 4K video, 8MP selfie cam - Android 6 upgradable to 7 - 2 year full proper warranty (covers breaks) - Nifty gimmick features added to the software which I like - Dual SIM or SIM + micro SD - Camera is covered by sapphire - 3250 mAH battery with QC3 - Is even Day Dream compatible What the hell could possibly be improved over this to justify doubling the price? The only places improvement is possible for its generation, which is still the latest, is the camera, pointlessly adding more RAM, and possibly having a bigger battery. As far as hardware goes, that's about it. And none of the big name flagships offer more than 4GB RAM, even if it did who would pay double for a better camera, more RAM, and a slightly bigger battery? I'm not sure what type of storage it uses, but whatever the Pixel has is unlikely to be much faster. The Pixel has a newer revision of the SoC, the 821, but that's expected for something that came out much later. That and a better camera. That's it. That's all the expensive Google Pixel has over the Axon 7, and it loses to the A7 in some fields, such as sound. I believe they even use the exact same screen. Oh, and the Pixel XL has a 3450mAH battery which in real life battery performance means nothing.

$1300 for a Chinese and Android phone lol. Is it the Canadian dollar btw? :P