vB Easy Archive - Thinking about going from a 8400 to the katana...

Pages: 1

Thinking about going from a 8400 to the katana...
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: FLSprintUser

I currently have the Sanyo 8400. I am wondering how it compares with the Katana.

Does it have the call screening feature?
Does it have a screen buddy?
Is the screen better than the Sanyo 8400?
How is the battery life?
Is the reception as good as other Sanyo's?
Does it have themes?

I am just a basic phone user that talks and texts alot and surfs the web only once or twice a month. Even though analog is being phased out as we speak, I like the idea that this phone still has analog on it because I travel through some rural rural parts of Michigan and Florida where believe it or not, their is no digital signal. I hate the idea that most recent phones have analog phased out when some of their roaming network is still analog. Its also helpful here in Florida when the hurricanes hit and everyone is using their cell phone and you keep on getting busy signals. When I had my Sanyo 8200, i put my phone on analog roam only and got my calls to go through.

DO you think I should shell out the extra 20 bucks for the Motorola Razr?

Posted by: oz1192

the kan of tuna is not that good the sound sucks and it has alot of flaws stay with 8400 just my 2cets

Posted by: tkrandall

huh?

My son's Katana is a great phone. Reception is great and it is a stable platform. Where the phone "falls short" for some is things like it is not a multimedia phone, the camera in only VGA, and the Bluetooth is crippled (no file transfer other than vcard). But then again, better features than these are not promised for the Katana, either. I do wish they would have a follow-on Katana that would be more 2006-ish features EVDO, multimedia, etc - it would sell very well I believe.

Posted by: fractured

Quote:

Originally Posted by oz1192

the kan of tuna is not that good the sound sucks and it has alot of flaws stay with 8400 just my 2cets

I have no idea where you get this from, but I have the opposite experience. I actually went from an 8400 to a Katana and couldn't be happier. I found the earpiece (receiving) volume on the 8400 to be low and bassy at times. On the Katana it's consistently loud and clear. Reception seems to be typical Sanyo quality. I use my phone to make and receive calls only, so I could care less about the features; I have a Blackberry for data, texting, IM, e-mail, etc.

Posted by: Freak4Dell

The Katana is a good phone, but it is definitely no comparison to the 8400. It just does not have the features that the 8400 does.

If you don't use the features of the 8400, and would rather have the analog, the Katana might be the best choice for you.

As for your questions:

1. I don't know
2. I don't think so.
3. The screen is actually around the same. I haven't compared them side by side to see if the brightness levels are different, but the quality of the screen is about the same.
4. Battery life isn't bad. It's pretty good for a thin phone. The bigger phones will get better battery life, but that's just because a thin phone=smaller battery, so less battery capacity.
5. The reception is excellent. Call quality and clarity were great when I used that phone. Even in some locations where I only get 1 bar, it was like I was getting full signal.
6. No, no themes. Sorry.

I'd say get the Katana over the RAZR because you wouldn't use the features. The RAZR is old news, and everybody has it now. Sure, it might be different on the inside, but when people look at you holding it, it still looks like a plain old RAZR. Besides, Motorola couldn't come close to achieving the same call quality as a Sanyo. The only things that might be able to do it are the high-end Samsungs.