Organizer
Gadget news
Samsung trolls Apple for announcing features that already exist on Samsung devices
8:14 pm | June 10, 2025

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Comments: Off

Yesterday Apple held its big keynote at the Worldwide Developers Conference, announcing iOS 26, watchOS 26, as well as some new AI features. Samsung's US arm couldn't help but throw shade at Apple, however, for features that already exist on Samsung devices. It all started with a dig regarding Apple's massive UI redesign across all of its operating systems. Customizable apps? Floating bars? That sleek glass UI? Looks… familiar 🤔— Samsung Mobile US (@SamsungMobileUS) June 9, 2025 Then, Samsung US moved on to live translations, which its devices have had "for a while now". New to...

I wore the Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 for 2 weeks, and it’s impressively cheap for the sheer amount of features it packs
7:41 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Computers Fitness Trackers Gadgets Health & Fitness | Tags: , , , | Comments: Off

Samsung Galaxy Fit 3: One minute review

Samsung isn't a brand I immediately associate with affordable smart tech, but the Galaxy Fit 3 is one of the cheapest proprietary fitness trackers on the market. Even Google's Fitbit Inspire 3 band, which a few years ago seemed like a sensible entry point to the best fitness trackers, is double the price.

Samsung launched the Fit 3 in several territories in early 2024, but its US debut only came this January. It replaces and builds on the Galaxy Fit 2 – a good-looking budget band that we found had questionable heart rate accuracy – with some noticeable improvements to design and tracking.

The Fit 3 has a refined design with a bigger, brighter screen to accommodate wider stats viewing. It can now monitor blood oxygenation levels and also has a decent swim stroke counter. But while the Fit 2 worked with some iPhone models, the Fit 3 does no such thing. This tracker is only compatible with Android 10 or above, which I've already seen complaints about in some online reviews: Samsung doesn't make this super clear when you shop online.

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 watch in grey worn on a female wrist

(Image credit: Lauren Scott)

While Apple hasn't focused any effort on serving up its own entry into the best cheap fitness trackers game, it seems Samsung wants to tap into this underserved corner of the market alongside its premium Galaxy Watch range. In short, the Fit 3 records and displays your steps walked, calories burned, heart rate, stress levels, sleep, and more, with just a few swipes and taps on its touchscreen.

As a runner, I was frustrated that the Fit 3 didn't have GPS, but at such a low price, I'm not sure you can expect it to. It's a simple, accessible device that monitors your everyday health data without costing a fortune.

It offers smartwatch-style notifications and music controls, plus weather info and the usual collection of customizable watch faces to choose from on the Samsung Galaxy Wearable app. Navigating through screens is easy and enjoyable thanks to a responsive touchscreen and very clear menu design. As someone used to Garmin's convoluted settings and screens, the Fit 3 was a breath of fresh air.

Samsung says that the battery should last 13 days, and I found I'd get at least 10, while tracking at least three short runs and wearing the band overnight during that time. Having worn many of the more advanced fitness devices on the market, I didn't feel shortchanged by the Fit 3's everyday health metrics, but I did sometimes question the accuracy of its heart rate during intense workouts.

It's simply brilliant value, though, with a lovely screen, clear stats and encouraging insights to help you improve your everyday health. Without on-board GPS, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone serious about running, but if it's your first fitness tracker or you don't have a lot to spend, the Fit 3 is a brilliant option.

Don't look at it if you've got an iPhone – but if you're a Samsung user, I'd still question whether investing all that money in a premium Galaxy Watch would give you greater accuracy and health features.

Samsung Galaxy Fit 3: Price and availability

  • Priced at around $59 / £49 / AU$139
  • The cheapest Samsung Galaxy fitness device
  • Made available in the US from January 2025

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 was released in Asia, Europe, and Latin America in early 2024. It didn't launch in the US until January 9, 2025. There are three colors to choose from (Gray, Silver and Pink Gold), all with the same RRP, but the Gray option, which is actually black in real life, gets reduced most often.

The device is easily Samsung's cheapest Galaxy fitness device, costing around $59 / £49 / AU$139, but even less if you pick up a regular Samsung or Amazon deal. Few devices can compete with the Fit 3's super-low price point, aside from the Google Fitbit Inspire 3, HUAWEI Band 9 and all those non-proprietary options on Amazon.

And unlike Fitbit, you don't have to pay for a premium membership to access all of the Galaxy Fit 3's features. Meaning the price you pay upfront is all you'll have to pay. The Samsung Health app is free, although it's worth noting (and I will again) that it only works with Android devices, pushing out the option for Apple users to buy the Fit 3.

  • Value score: 4.5/5

Samsung Galaxy Fit 3: Specifications

Dimensions

42.9 x 28.8 x 9.9 mm

Weight

18.5 g

Case/bezel

Aluminum

Display

1.6-inch 256 x 402px AMOLED display

GPS

No

Battery life

Up to 13 days

Connection

Bluetooth v5.3

Sensors

Accelerometer, Barometer, Gyro Sensor, Optical Heart Rate Sensor, Light Sensor

Waterproofing

5ATM/IP68

Samsung Galaxy Fit 3: Design

  • Responsive 1.6-inch AMOLED display
  • Flexible silicone strap
  • Water resistant to up to 50 meters

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 looks very different to its predecessor. Its 1.6-inch display is 0.5 inches bigger, with a wider, rectangular view in comparison, which allows you to see more stats without having to open your phone. I'd say the Fit 3 looks more like a smartwatch than the long, thin Fit 2, and with a 2.78x higher resolution on the display (now 256 x 402 px), it's a lot crisper too.

You can set up the screen to be always-on (which will drain the battery faster) or to illuminate when you move your wrist upwards. I went for this option to save power, but sometimes had to raise my arm multiple times to turn it on. On the plus side, the screen was easy to see in bright sunlight, and the auto-brightness feature worked well to adapt to different environments.

Where the screen was integrated into the band of the Fit 2, the Fit 3's tracker is easily detachable with a press of a button on the back. I love the ease of customization here. With the old Fit 2, you were stuck with the color of the band. But the 3's design is more similar to the Apple Watch, and you can swap out the silicone strap if you want to change your style.

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 watch in grey worn on a female wrist

(Image credit: Lauren Scott)

I think it's vital that fitness trackers are comfortable enough to wear for long periods – ideally overnight if you're going to use the sleep tracking features. At 18.5g, the Fit 3 is lightweight, and half the weight of my usual Garmin running watch, but I found wearing it uncomfortable sometimes.

Because the sensor sticks out from the back of the device, it doesn't sit flush with your skin. When I tightened the strap during workouts to get an accurate heart rate, or when my wrists got hot in warm weather, I'd get a deep imprint and have to take the Fit 3 off to give my skin a breather.

Overall, though, the Fit 3 feels well-made, and durable enough to withstand the elements, sweat and tough workouts. Its 5ATM waterproof rating provided peace of mind when swimming and showering.

The AMOLED screen is big and bright enough for those still wanting a smaller fitness band, and you soon get used to the basic touch gestures for moving across the settings and screens. A swipe-down brings up the home menu and settings, or a hold-down lets you change the watch face. The new button on the side brings you back to the home screen with a press or to the exercise with a double-press.

You'll need the Samsung Galaxy Wearable app and Samsung Health app to use the Fit 3. Once set up, the Wearable app lets you customize the view and order of tiles on the device and add more watch faces. Thankfully, it's also easy and intuitive to use, with fun themes and color coding to make information easy to scan.

  • Design score: 4/5

Samsung Galaxy Fit 3: Features

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 watch in grey worn on a female wrist

(Image credit: Lauren Scott)
  • Music playback and phone notifications
  • Tracks over 100 workouts (although not all are useful)
  • Records sleep stages

Being a budget tracker, it's no surprise that the Fit 3 omits many of the key features seen in Samsung's watch range. To keep the price down (and presumably battery life up), the Fit 3's smartphone connectivity is based on Bluetooth, and there's no Wi-Fi. The main benefit of Wi-Fi is a longer range for syncing data (helpful if you're exercising outdoors without a phone), but it makes no difference to the experience here.

Where the best Samsung watches offer impressive GPS for runners, the Fit 3 relies on being connected to a phone for route tracking. In short, you can't run (or cycle) phone-free and expect to record a truly accurate distance and pace.

Compared to the previous Galaxy Fit 2, though, the Fit 3 does have notable new features, including blood oxygen and heart rate variability sensors, a route tracker, and a barometer. A new light sensor also enables the optional always-on display mode I mentioned in the Design section.

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 watch in grey worn on a female wrist

(Image credit: Lauren Scott)

The Fit 3 doesn't have a built-in speaker or microphone, but you can answer calls directly from the screen and control your music or podcast playback when in range of your phone. The customizable vibration alerts are also useful for setting alarms.

The Fit 3 runs on a simplified FreeRTOS operating system, but you can’t access the Wear OS app store or connect to any third-party apps (such as Strava and Spotify). While the Fit 3 works with phones on Android 10 or later, certain features are only available on the best Samsung phones.

These include snore detection, which uses the phone's microphone to record and analyze audio, plus the ability to trigger the phone's camera with a button on the Fit 3. I used a Google Pixel phone to test the Fit 3, so I wasn't able to try either of these features, but they feel like gimmicks rather than dealbreakers for most enthusiast exercisers.

Given that the Fit 3 is destined for those early on their fitness journey, it makes sense for Samsung to have left out GPS tracking and ECG readings, which would have pushed the price up and perhaps been ignored by beginners anyway. What's left is a feature set worthy of the Fit 3's price tag – albeit too basic for certain users. There are over 100 workouts to choose from, although many of these are nothing more than a calorie counter, which I'll come to next.

  • Features score: 3.5/5

Samsung Galaxy Fit 3: Performance

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 watch on a female wrist in the sun

(Image credit: Lauren Scott)
  • Sleep scores missed data
  • (Mostly) accurate heart rate readings
  • Smooth and glitch-free use

This is a tracker designed for simplicity, so I hoped the Fit 3 setup would be straightforward. It comes in a small box with its band already attached, a USB-C charging cable (with no plug, which feels standard in a plastic-saving 2025) and a few booklets I mostly ignored.

First, I discovered I need two apps – Samsung Health and Galaxy Wearable – to set up the Fit 3, but it didn't take longer than five minutes to unbox and connect it to my partner's Pixel rather than my own incompatible iPhone. It took some more faff through permission screens, and another five minutes, to set up a Samsung account, but I suspect this is a step you could skip if you've had a previous Samsung device.

Once set up, I found navigating the tracker was smooth in every situation. Even when I had wet or sweaty hands, the touch response was accurate, which is a great result for a tracker you want to use while swimming and pushing yourself.

The Fit 3's 208mAh battery is around 30% bigger than the Fit 2's, and while I was impressed during testing, I never quite made it to the company’s 13-day maximum. I enabled the always-on display (taking it off during sleep) and got just over 5 full days before it conked out.

Putting the display back to a normal 15-second timer, and recording a 30-minute workout each day, it lasted 8 days. A dull charge took me 68 minutes, which is far shy of the Apple Watch 10 but half the time it takes me to charge up my older Garmin Forerunner 265S. So what? Well, you get much more juice than the majority of smartwatches, which is great if you don't want to be recharging constantly.

Screenshots from the Samsung Health app

(Image credit: Lauren Scott)

The Fit 3 has over 100 workout options, and you can set your favorites so they're easy to find. I certainly didn't test every one, but I did cover the basics – walking, running, swimming – plus some more rogue options like crunches, dancing and burpees. I expected a movement like crunches or bicep curls to capture repetitions, but you get a similarly generic screen to walking with duration, calories and average heart rate. It's not particularly useful.

To test the Fit 3's fitness and sleep tracking accuracy, I wore it alongside the Garmin Forerunner 265 constantly. When I checked at the end of each day, I found that my steps were different by about 500 steps higher on my Garmin, but over 17,000 steps, that didn't feel unreasonable.

The device came unstuck when I went for a five kilometer run without a phone. Because there's no GPS, the Fit 3 has to estimate your distance (I'd guess) based on height and steps. So after finishing the run, where my Forerunner had recorded 5K (three miles) exactly, the Fit 3 was at 2.81 miles. Of course, this deviance would rack up over longer distances.

My heart rate reading was much closer, with the Fit 3 within about five beats per minute (bpm) of the Forerunner at all times. I'm trying to focus on more Zone 2 training, and love how the Fit 3 displays heart rate zones while running or working out. I also tried out machines at the gym with heart rate monitors to cross-reference the Fit 3's readings. Again, it was within 3-8 bpm of a treadmill and stairmaster machine.

Screenshots from the Samsung Health app

(Image credit: Lauren Scott)

After all that exercise, I wore the Fit 3 to bed over a few weeks to record my sleep times and stages, blood oxygen, and (most importantly) to find out what sleep animal Samsung gave me.

Every morning, I read my sleep score to see how long and well I slept, but unfortunately, I often found it much lower than the relative scores from my Forerunner. On the night before writing this review, I got an actual sleep time of 6 hours 54 minutes, REM sleep 45 minutes on the Fit 3. On my Garmin, it was 8 hours 12, and 2 hours 26 REM.

Digging into any detailed metrics from the Fit 3 requires you to open the Samsung Health App. There, the sleep data is easy to read and attractively presented, with sleep stages on a color-coded scale. Personally, I can't feel confident that the Fit 3 sleep data is accurate, and I stopped wearing it in bed after a week.

Wearables have a long way to go in general when it comes to sleep, and the same goes for women's cycle tracking. I liked being able to log my period in the Samsung app and seeing my predicted fertile window, powered by Natural Cycles, and I suspect the timings would get more accurate the more input you give it. But again, the initial stats felt too much like guesstimates.

If all that sounds negative, it isn't meant to. The Fit 3 never lagged and never failed to log a workout or connect back to the smartphone. Notifications came through instantly, and while sleep tracking could be more reliable, wearables' data gaps tend to improve over time: Samsung's sleep tracking on devices such as the Samsung Galaxy Ring is highly rated.

  • Performance score: 4/5

Scorecard

Category

Comment

Score

Value

An impressively low price for the features and ease-of-use.

4.5/5

Design

Loved the bright screen, but found the band less comfortable than other devices.

4/5

Features

Without GPS the device is more limited, but workout tracking is great.

4/5

Performance

Accurate heart rate tracking, a smooth if not basic app and impressive 10-day battery life.

3.5/5

The Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 watch in grey worn on a female wrist

(Image credit: Lauren Scott)

Samsung Galaxy Fit 3: Should I buy?

Buy it if...

You've got a Samsung Galaxy phone

The most streamlined experience is achieved by pairing the Fit 3 with a Samsung Galaxy device. It's a great budget tracker if that's the case.

You're a general gym-goer

If you want to track calories from gym classes or common exercise machines, the Fit 3 works well.

You're a beginner to fitness tracking

The Fit 3 makes fitness tracking simple and accessible. It doesn't have advanced metrics, but the stats it records paint a useful health picture.

Don't buy it if...

You’re on an Apple device

You can't connect the Fit 3 to an iPhone at all, which will be a disappointment to many Apple users.

You want GPS

You won't be able to record your location data unless the device is connected to a phone, which is no good for phone-free running, walking or cycling.

Also consider

Fitbit Luxe

It's four times more expensive than the Fit 3, but if you're looking for something more stylish, the Luxe has a gorgeous design. Sadly, it also lacks GPS.

Read our full Fitbit Luxe review

Amazfit Active 2

If you want something that looks more like a watch than a tracker, but at a similarly low price, this sub-$99 option offers excellent health tracking and a long battery.

Read our full Amazfit Active 2 review

How I tested the Samsung Galaxy Fit 3

I wore the Samsung Galaxy Fit 3 for over two weeks on one wrist, keeping my usual Garmin Forerunner 265S on the other (for stats comparison). It was linked to my partner's Google Pixel 8 Pro as my iPhone wasn't compatible. I wore the device overnight to test the sleep metrics over a sustained period and how well the battery lasted.

I tracked more than 10 workout types, including a few 5 km parkruns, Fiit workouts at home, aerobics, hikes, and even dancing. I logged heart rate and stress measurements at different times of day during testing and set up the female cycle tracking feature on the accompanying Samsung Health app.

MediaTek Dimensity 9500’s announcement date tipped
7:01 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Comments: Off

Qualcomm is unveiling the Snapdragon 8 Elite 2 in late September, and its main competitor will undoubtedly be MediaTek's Dimensity 9500. With that in mind, you may have been wondering when to expect it to be announced. According to a new rumor from the prolific Chinese leaker who goes by Digital Chat Station on Weibo, MediaTek will one-up Qualcomm by unveiling its next flagship chipset even earlier. Chinese smartphone makers are expected to then introduce their next-gen flagship devices (the ones that usually come in October to December) quite quickly after the chips take the stage...

Honor Magic V5 to come in a shiny new color
6:02 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Comments: Off

Honor is rumored to be skipping the number 4 and going from the Magic V3 which launched last year to the Magic V5 which we're expecting in a few weeks (blame tetraphobia). Now a new rumor out of China purportedly shares the Magic V5's colorways, and one stands out - gold. It used to be all the rage many years ago, then it fell out of fashion, and while you can still find hints of it here and there, it's been a while since we've had a properly shiny gold smartphone. Honor Magic V3 Aside from the blingy colorway, there will also be three other options: black, white, and Dunhuang,...

Honor Magic V5 to come in a shiny new color
6:02 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Comments: Off

Honor is rumored to be skipping the number 4 and going from the Magic V3 which launched last year to the Magic V5 which we're expecting in a few weeks (blame tetraphobia). Now a new rumor out of China purportedly shares the Magic V5's colorways, and one stands out - gold. It used to be all the rage many years ago, then it fell out of fashion, and while you can still find hints of it here and there, it's been a while since we've had a properly shiny gold smartphone. Honor Magic V3 Aside from the blingy colorway, there will also be three other options: black, white, and Dunhuang,...

macOS Tahoe 26 is the last version for Intel-powered Macs and only some are supported
5:04 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Comments: Off

The new macOS Tahoe 26 is part of Apple’s push for a unified UI, but some Mac owners will not get to experience it as Tahoe drops support for certain Intel-powered Macs. And while some Intel-powered Macs will get Tahoe, this is the last macOS version that they will receive. When macOS Sequoia was unveiled last year, it dropped support for 2018 MacBook Airs, but 2020 ones (with 10th gen Intel CPUs) were still able to update. Come next year, only Apple Silicon Macs will be getting updated. Above is the list of which Macs are getting updated to Tahoe 26 – all Apple Silicon Macs, plus...

Google Android 16 coming today
4:10 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Comments: Off

While all eyes were on the new iOS 26, Google announced that the Android 16 final release will come out later today. Mind you, this doesn’t mean “final” as in “last”, it’s just the end of the beta period. This is only for supported Pixel phones (Pixel 6-series and newer). They need to be running either Android 15 or an Android 16 beta. Other manufacturers should have final updates ready soon, given that they have followed Google with their own beta releases. It's almost time for the Android 16 final release! See you back here tomorrow. 😉 pic.twitter.com/oChA0pxeFa— Android Developers...

I tested the successor to my favorite cheap Earfun headphones and sadly, there’s one major problem
4:00 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Audio Computers Gadgets Headphones Wireless Headphones | Tags: , | Comments: Off

Earfun Tune Pro: Two minute review

Budget audio brand Earfun has continued its foray into the over-ear headphone game with the Earfun Tune Pro, an affordable pair of over-ears which unfortunately don’t live up to Earfun’s usually-impressive track record. Some of the best cheap headphones I've tested, they are not.

Earfun’s first over-ears, the Wave Pro, were some of our top-rated affordable headphones, easily earning (for a while, at least) a place on our list of the best headphones you can buy. And they were always going to be a tough act to follow. The fact that they’re still available to buy now also makes them a big (and honestly, more viable) rival to the Tune Pro.

I won’t beat around the bush: the big problem with the headphones is that they just don’t sound good. Earfun’s typical ability to punch well above its weight somehow didn’t grace the new and rather ironically-named Tune Pro. The cans lack serious bass, endure frequent peaking that ruins percussion, and don’t offer much in the way of an organised, layered soundstage to let you appreciate the separation and detail of instruments.

You can’t expect Bose- or Sony-tier audio in cans that cost under $/£100 but there are plenty of budget headphones for the same price that outstrip the Tune Pro. So as you'll see as we get into the meat of this review, it's hard to recommend the cans.

I also found the Earfuns pretty uncomfortable to wear for long periods of time. The pressure they exerted on my head grew noticeable after only a few hours of use. It’s not great and neither of these are concerns was something I experienced with the Wave Pro.

Why not go lower than 3 stars? Well, the Earfun magic is present in a few other areas. Take, for example, the battery life: these headphones will last a monumental 120 hours (with ANC turned off) before you’ll need to charge them. That’s five straight days of music before they need powering up and I don’t need to tell you how important a long battery life can be for certain subsets of users. There are very few headphones on the market that come even close to this score.

Earfun has also included its usual range of features on its app: multiple ANC modes (perhaps too many – more on this later), an in-depth equalizer and a feature that’s all too uncommon on headphones: a listening test to automatically create your own sound mix. This latter is a lovely little extra that lots of rivals don’t have.

While the audio quality lets things down big-time, I can see the admirable battery life and listening test drawing in some users who prefer functionality over sound quality. It’s just that those are more caveats than I usually have to add in an Earfun review – a brand I usually champion in the ‘cheap and cheerful’ stakes.

Earfun Tune Pro review: Specifications

Component

Value

Water resistant

N/A

Battery life (quoted)

120 hours (ANC off) 80 hours (ANC on)

Bluetooth type

Bluetooth 5.4

Weight

289g

Driver

40mm + 10mm

Earfun Tune Pro review: Price and availability

The Earfun Tune Pro atop a bronze table.

(Image credit: Future)
  • Released in May 2025
  • RRP of $89.99 / £79.99 (roughly AU$160)
  • Already available at $69.99 / £59.99 (no AU sales)

The Earfun Tune Pro were announced in May 2025 for a retail price of $89.99 / £79.99 (roughly AU$160 though they're not on sale in Australia at the time of writing, unlike many other products from the company).

Don’t tell Amazon that though, because the retailer lists in multiple regions that the cans were released in September 2024. It offers them for the discounted price of $69.99 / £59.99 (at the time of writing) despite them being new.

However much you pay for them, the Earfun Tune Pro are clearly budget headphones. They’re the middle of Earfun’s three over-ear options, sitting equally between the more expensive Wave Pro and cheaper Wave Life.

Earfun Tune Pro review: Design

The Earfun Tune Pro on a man's head.

(Image credit: Future)
  • Chunky cans with 3.5mm jack and physical buttons
  • Uncomfortable for long play sessions
  • No IP rating for waterproofing

As you can see from pictures, Earfun has kept things simple with the Tune Pro, playing close to the formula for over-ear headphones.

The cans weigh 289g and are made from plastic, so they don’t feel too heavy when you’re wearing them. That doesn’t mean they’re exactly comfortable though, and I could only listen for a few hours before needing to give my head a break.

The ear cups are quite thick, sticking from your head about 50% more than your average pair of over-ears (judging by the few pairs I had on hand). I don’t imagine this is to blame for the comfort issues but it does make the cans look imposing when you wear them.

The Earfun Tune Pro atop a bronze table.

Evidence of how easily-bendable the hook is. (Image credit: Future)

Earfun has ensured that the Tune Pro have some versatility in size as the band can be extended or retracted quite a distance (if you do have a larger head, check out our roundup feature of headphones with longer extendable arms) while the cups can be rotated around 100 degrees – and they also fold up if you want to put them in a bag.

Onto the buttons. On the right cup you’ve got a volume rocker, power button and 3.5mm headphone jack – yes, the Tune Pro supports wired audio – while the left earpiece has an ANC button and the USB-C charging port.

The buttons don’t stick out that far from the casework and so, despite little knobs to make them a bit more prominent, I still found them pretty hard to locate just with my fingers. Instead, I generally relied on my phone to change volume and ANC.

Earfun’s website makes no mention of any kind of IP rating for the Tune Pro so I’d recommend keeping them high and dry.

  • Design score: 3.5/5

Earfun Tune Pro review: Features

The Earfun Tune Pro atop a bronze table.

(Image credit: Future)
  • Incredbly battery life
  • Range of ANC modes, all fine
  • Equalizer with listening test

Earfun headphones always out-rep the competition in the features department and things are no different for the Tune Pro. The real highlight of these cans is the battery life, which according to Earfun stretches to an incredible 120 hours with ANC turned off and a still-admirable 80 hours with it turned on.

I can count on one hand the number of sets of headphones that beat or match that battery life, and it’s a vital figure for people who rarely get time to charge up their headphones for one reason or another. I would’ve loved cans like these when I last went travelling.

Next up, ANC is… present, I’ll say that much. It’s fine, but far from best-in-class and about what you’d expect for the price. It’s useful for covering up certain annoying background noises like a dishwasher in another room or distant traffic going past your house, but it won’t make your commute near-silent or ensure you can hear your music when vacuuming at home.

A few different ANC presets are available in the Earfun app. Default, which I take to be ‘off’, is Normal but there’s Ambient Sound to allow nearby noises through, Wind noise cancellation which is just designed for the infuriating sound of wind that always baffles headphone ANC, and lastly Comfort ANC and Strong ANC. I take these latter to be ‘medium’ and ‘high’ strengths to Normal’s ‘off’, but this is based purely on the icons in the app and nothing else.

The Earfun Tune Pro atop a bronze table.

(Image credit: Future)

I’ve complained in past reviews about Earfun’s array of ANC modes being a bit overwhelming. Why? Because it’s hard to know which mode you should be using at any one time, and it’s also a chore to open up the Earfun app to switch if you decide you want to (the ANC button on the cans only cycles through the first three options, not the two full-blooded ANC ones).

A few more features available through the the Earfun app include the ability to toggle low-latency modes for gaming or a wide-soundstage mode for movies and TV, and a way to change what the buttons on the ear cups do. However, the major one to note is an equalizer.

As with past Earfuns, the Tune Pro offers a wide range of EQ modes based on different genres of music or increasing or decreasing bass or treble. There are plenty of options and it’s worth playing around to find your perfect preset, though a 10-band custom EQ mode lets you create your own mix too. A brief test also creates a bespoke equalizer mix for you and I was pretty happy with the mix it created for me.

For call handling, the Earfun Tune Pro feature five mics (presumably per earpiece, although Earfun doesn't express this as such. But anything else would be odd) as well as an algorithm to clear up your voice when others hear you.

  • Features score: 4/5

Earfun Tune Pro review: Sound performance

The Earfun Tune Pro atop a bronze table.

(Image credit: Future)
  • 40mm + 10mm drivers
  • Distorting sound, lacking bass
  • Limited sound stage

Given the price you’re paying for the Tune Pro, you’re probably not expecting the most ear-pleasing audio in the world, and it’s a good thing to set your expectations low because these Earfun headphones don’t sound great, even for the money.

Specs-wise, the headphones pack both a 40mm and 10mm driver in each can which should ostensibly provide extra oomph in the bass department, but theory is a far cry from fact.

Perhaps the biggest issue, noticeable constantly, is the audio peaking through the treble, which crushes hi-hats into mere hisses and devolves powerful guitar lines into crunchy oblivion. At the other end of the frequency scale, the tuning here boosts the bass drum so much that it frequently overrides vocals. It’s hard to enjoy songs without percussion and detail through the mids to provide rhythm, and the Tune Pro don’t offer much of that.

You’re not getting much expansion or detail through the soundstage here either, with music presented as a somewhat homogenous mush instead of a collection of separate, distinct and layered instruments given enough room to be impactful. The confusing mix here also masks the detail and dynamic nuance in my music, while also sapping some of the charm and emotion from vocals. If you care about the musicality within your favorite songs, these sadly aren’t the cans for you.

If there’s anything to be said for the Earfun Tune Pro's audio quality, it’s that the max volume goes pretty loud, so you’re never going to struggle to hear songs even if you turn ANC off.

  • Sound performance score: 2.5/5

Earfun Tune Pro: Value

The Earfun Tune Pro atop a bronze table.

(Image credit: Future)

Usually when qualifying the value of cheap headphones, I simply point to the price and say “yes”, but it’s not quite as easy as that for the Tune Pro.

While the headphones are admittedly very affordable, they’re not the only cheap headphones in existence, and others will get you more bang for your buck. That’s literal, with many other low-cost options getting you better audio quality.

The only other important factor is the feature set, which admittedly is pretty competitive on the Earfun Tune Pro. So if you aren’t that bothered about the sound and care more about longevity and the presence of an equalizer, these claw back some value points.

  • Value score: 3.5/5

Earfun Tune Pro review: scorecard

Category

Comment

Score

Value

You get what you pay for, but you're not too far out of pocket for the Earfuns.

3.5/5

Design

The Tune Pro is a bit too big and bulky to be fully comfortable to wear, but it has 3.5mm.

3.5/5

Features

For budget cans, the feature set is solid. The battery life is laudable and the EQ (and its test) are too.

4/5

Sound

A range of issues with the audio quality makes it hard to award many points in this department.

2.5/5

Earfun Tune Pro: Should I buy?

The Earfun Tune Pro atop a bronze table.

(Image credit: Future)

Buy them if...

You need lots of battery power

With 120 hours in the tank, the Earfun Tune Pro are great headphones for people who can't find themselves to a charging point every day, or simply forget to do so regularly.

The EQ tuner sounds useful

A listening test is a mode we don't often see in budget headphones, so if you want a digital way of improving your music, this may be enough to sway you.

You need headphones that fold down

Not every pair of headphones on the market folds down to be easily transportable, and some are really hard to fit in a bag. Not these Earfuns!

Don't buy them if...

You care about audio quality

It's unfair to say that audio quality is the only important factor of a pair of headphones... but if you prioritise sound-per-pound value, skip these particular Earfuns.

You have a large noggin

People with small heads may not have the uncomfortable wear problem that I did, but if your cranium is medium or large sized, you'll struggle to listen to the Earfuns for a few hours.

Also consider

Component

Earfun Tune Pro

1More Sonoflow Pro HQ51

Earfun Wave Pro

Water resistant

NA

NA

NA

Battery life

120 hours (ANC off) 80 hours (ANC on)

100 hours (ANC off) 65 hours (ANC on)

80 hours (ANC off) 55 hours (ANC on)

Bluetooth type

Bluetooth 5.4

Bluetooth 5.4

Bluetooth 5.3

Weight

289g

246g

268g

Driver

40mm + 10mm

40mm

40mm

Earfun Wave Pro

Everything we wanted the Tune to be: these cheap headphones cost pretty good, feel more comfortable to wear and mostly match the Tune's feature set. The battery life isn't as good though.

Read our full Earfun Wave Pro review

1More Sonoflow Pro HQ51 

The cans that displaced the Wave Pro as our top-rated budget headphones. The 1More have good sound and great ANC, with a battery life that's not much shorter than the Earfun. However there are a few build concerns.

Read our full 1More Sonoflow Pro HQ51 review

How I tested

The Earfun Tune Pro atop a bronze table.

(Image credit: Future)

I used the Earfun Tune Pro for three weeks in order to write this review, and some extra time during the writing process itself.

During testing I used the Earfun alongside a few devices, most frequently my Android smartphone via Bluetooth but sometimes an iPod Classic via 3.5mm. Listening was generally music but I also listened to some some spoken-word, games and TV shows too. Testing was done at home and around my neighborhood.

I've been testing audio products for TechRadar for over 6 years and currently test several headphones or earbuds each month. This has included many past Earfun products – including the slightly older Wave Pro.

Read more about how we test

  • First reviewed: June 2025
I used the Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 to carry my photography gear – and it’s the best budget camera bag I’ve traveled with
3:48 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Camera Accessories Cameras Computers Gadgets | Comments: Off

Lowepro Tahoe BP 150: two-minute review

The temptation for most photographers is to carry as much gear as possible. After all, you don’t want to get caught without the right kit for the situation. Many of the best camera bags will let you do exactly that: pack your entire arsenal of lenses and accessories, so you’ll never miss a shot.

That’s not what the Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 is about. This is a neatly packaged backpack with just enough space for your shooting essentials, plus a handful of extras. That limited capacity means most enthusiasts will need to leave a couple of lenses at home. But the pay-off is a pack that majors in portability.

It’s also one that balances functionality with affordability. One of the cheapest Lowepro backpacks you can buy, the Tahoe BP 150 is a no-nonsense solution for toting a lean photography setup on your travels. Impressively for the money, it’s also one that comes with very few compromises.

The main compartment might be relatively modest, but clever division allows you to make the most of the available space. The top third is taken up by a zippered box pocket which is stitched in place, with a flexible base that can be moved using velcro tabs. So can the padded walls which structure the rest of the space.

Depending on what you shoot with, you’ll need to spend a bit of time playing with the position of these dividers to find a layout which best suits your setup. With some experimenting, you’ll discover that the Tahoe BP 150 can carry quite a lot more than you’d first expect, although a couple more of the small dividers would make the space even more versatile.

As it is, the bag can comfortably fit an APS-C mirrorless body with a prime lens attached, along with a telephoto and a standard zoom, plus a charger with room to spare. You could squeeze a pancake lens and a small flashgun in there, too. A larger DSLR body makes for more of an awkward fit, while enthusiasts with top-tier glass will find that the capacity soon evaporates.

Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 camera backpack

(Image credit: Chris Rowlands)

This might be a backpack for traveling light, but Lowepro has still put thought into optimizing it. There’s an SD card slot on the inside of the main flap, while the front panel is angled slightly to create a usable space in the secondary pocket. That’s where you’ll find a key clip, accessory slots and a tablet sleeve that’s just big enough to fit a 13-inch MacBook Air.

There’s also a solution for traveling with tripods. Elasticated mesh pockets sit on either side of the pack, together with clips for securing tripods in place. Realistically, the shallow depth of the pockets means you wouldn’t want to risk keeping anything taller than a mini-tripod on the outside of the Tahoe BP 150.

The only design blunder to speak of is the position of the tripod clips. These fasten across the zipper for the main compartment, which means you have to undo them every time you want to access your camera kit. This isn’t a quick-access pack at the best of times, with a fair bit of unzipping needed to get at your gear. Having clips in the mix quickly becomes frustrating.

Still, the LowePro Tahoe BP 150 is otherwise a camera bag that hits the sweet spot of practicality, price and protection. Despite its compact dimensions, the shell benefits from padding in all the right places. Granted, I wouldn’t want it chucked around on a baggage carousel, but I never felt that my gear was at risk while wearing it.

The same goes for the straps and back panel. This is far from a technical pack and you don’t get the kind of support or adjustment found on the Lowepro PhotoSport BP 24L AW III, but there’s enough cushioning to make the Tahoe BP 150 comfortable to carry fully loaded on a journey.

From the zips to the seams, the whole thing feels durable. That’s not a surprise from Lowepro, but it’s a welcome fact for the price. And it’s all the more impressive when you consider that the Tahoe BP 150 weighs just 800g, making it one of the lightest camera bags you can buy.

The one thing missing is a rain cover. The backpack is water-resistant enough to shake off a summer shower, but it’s not fully waterproof. Then again, given how affordable it is, you could always buy a third-party rain cover if you’re worried about downpours.

If you want an unfussy backpack with minimal bloat and travel-friendly dimensions, it’s hard to go wrong with the LowePro Tahoe BP 150. Other camera bags might be bigger and more adaptable, but this one gets the basics right at the right price.

Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 review: price

The Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 has been available to buy since 2015. At launch, it was priced around $95 / £85 / AU$175. The backpack’s price has dropped several times over the last few years and it can now be found online for around $75 / £65 / AU$100.

A quick look at price tracking websites also confirms that the Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 is regularly discounted during sale events, such as Amazon Prime Day. It’s already a great-value camera bag, but if you want an even better deal, we suggest holding out in case it’s reduced again in the next seasonal sale.

The Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 is available in four color variations: blue (as tested here), black, red and green (which features urban camouflage pattern detailing).

Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 review: specs

External dimensions

27.5 x 21.7 x 40.3cm

Internal dimensions

25.5 x 12.8 x 36cm

Weight

800g

Total volume

11L

Carry-on friendly

Yes

Tablet sleeve

Yes

Waterproofing

Water-resistant

 Should I buy the Lowepro Tahoe BP 150? 

Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 camera backpack

(Image credit: Chris Rowlands)

Buy it if...

You’re on a tight budget
Reasonably priced and often discounted, the Lowepro Tahoe 150 is the best-value camera bag you can buy. You won’t find a quality backpack with the same features for less.

You have a compact setup
Tidily designed with no wasted space, the Tahoe 150’s internal velcro dividers can be rearranged to fit an APS-C mirrorless camera body, plus a couple of lenses and accessories.

You travel with your camera
Padded straps make the Tahoe 150 a comfortable bag to carry. A lightweight build doesn’t add much to the load, while its compact dimensions meet most airline carry-on restrictions.

Don't buy it if...

You have a lot of gear
The Tahoe 150 is designed for traveling light. Photographers with a lot of gear will find its storage capacity too modest to fit their full setup, especially with larger lenses.

You use large tripods
Mesh pockets and securing clips mean you can stash mini tripods on the outside of the Tahoe BP 150, but this isn’t a practical solution for carrying full-size stands.

You shoot in all weathers
The Tahoe BP 150’s padded body has enough water-resistance to shield your gear from unexpected showers, but it’s not fully waterproof. You’ll need to look elsewhere for total protection.

Lowepro Tahoe BP 150 review: Also consider

Lowepro Tahoe 150

Lowepro PhotoSport BP 24L AW III

Mindshift Backlight 26L

External dimensions

27.5 x 21.7 x 40.3cm

27 x 22 x 50cm

29 x 51.5 x 20cm

Internal dimensions

25.5 x 12.8 x 36cm

26 x 13 x 48cm

26 x 49 x 15cm

Weight

800g

1500g

1800g

Total volume

11L

24L

26L

Carry-on friendly

Yes

Yes

Yes

Tablet sleeve

Yes

No

Yes

Waterproofing

Water-resistant

Rain cover

Rain cover

Lowepro PhotoSport BP 24L AW III
Another lightweight camera backpack from Lowepro, the PhotoSport BP 24L AW III is a premium solution for adventurous photographers. Technical straps and back support mean it’s comfortable to trek with. The padded insert has limited capacity, but packing space and a rain cover make it a good choice for expeditions.
Read more in our
in-depth Lowepro PhotoSport BP 24L AW III review

Mindshift Backlight 26L
If you want a camera backpack with more capacity, the Mindshift Backlight 26L is a functional solution for toting your gear. Its main compartment has plenty of space, while a device sleeve, bottle pockets and nine liters of personal storage mean you don’t have to pack light for your trip.
Read more in our in-depth Mindshift Backlight 26L review

How I tested the Lowepro Tahoe 150

  • Packed with a DSLR and two lenses, plus accessories
  • Carried around daily for a fortnight
  • Wore in all weather conditions

When testing the Lowepro Tahoe BP 150, my aim was to assess its real-world practicality for different photographers. That started with loading it up. To get an idea of its true capacity, I played around with fitting both APS-C and DSLR shooting setups into it. I re-arranged the internal dividers several times, to see what combinations of camera body, lenses and accessories it could take.

I also packed out the Tahoe BP 150 with as many accessories as possible, including a mini trip on the side and a laptop in the front sleeve. This was partly to see just how much gear it was realistically able to accommodate, but also to get a feel for how comfortable the bag was to carry when fully laden.

With that in mind, I walked with the Lowepro on my back every day for a few weeks. This first-hand experience gave me a genuine impression of what the Tahoe BP 150 is like to work and travel with, including how easy it is to access the various pockets and compartments on the move. I also wore the backpack in different weather conditions, to put its water-resistance to the test.

First reviewed June 2025

vivo Y400 Pro’s specs and design revealed by an Amazon listing ahead of launch
2:42 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Mobile phones news | Comments: Off

Yesterday, we heard about the vivo Y400 Pro, which would arrive as a successor to the Y300 Pro unveiled last September. The Y400 Pro's leaked image revealed its design, and we also learned about its specs. And while there's no word from vivo yet about the Y400 Pro's launch, Amazon.in has listed the Y400 Pro on its website with its official images, giving us our best look yet at the upcoming smartphone. Amazon has posted images of the same white-colored Y400 Pro that we saw previously. It's called Freestyle White, and Amazon says the vivo Y400 Pro will come with the Dimensity 7300 SoC, a...

« Previous PageNext Page »