News

• Daisy One: new headphones from a new brand — and they're not cheap
• No app, heavier than average build, smaller drivers…
• …but I truly think the dedicated on-ear 'Still Mode' button could be a winner

You’ve never heard of Daisy (the Californian tech company; you may have heard of the flower) but it wants you to hear of it. Or hear it…’s debut over-ear headphones, which are called the Daisy One.

These new cans retail at the not-insignificant price point of $399 / £364 (about AU$700), money which could, it's important to say, be buying you some Sony or Bose cans. So why buy these instead? Refreshingly, rather than play the heavy-hitters at their own game, Daisy's throwing out the rule book on how to convince you.

Take the cans’ audio chops; instead of using the same 40mm drivers that almost everyone opts for, Daisy’s gone for a 35mm option, tuned by former Harman engineers and weighted towards the low-end. That’s pretty uncommon in pricier wireless models, where neutral sound is the typically the goal.

Then there’s the design: it’s heavier than average, at 318g, and uses a more slender, metallic look than your average over-ears and comes in silver, dark green or blue (no traditional 'charcoal' option here).

Perhaps the biggest selling point — something many brands (and reviewers) could consider a minus — is the lack of an app. Instead, controls are done on the headphone, with a dial for volume controls and play/pause, and a dedicated button that plays soundscapes recorded from around California. And what a dial/button it is! It puts me in mind of Montblanc's bijou earbuds or indeed the tip of a Montblanc pen.

What this button offers is called the 'Still Mode', and it includes access to rainfall sounds, five-minute breathwork tracks, ocean tides and more, but from the headphones themselves — ie. without the need to open an app or keep your phone connected to its source device.

There is a noise cancellation listed on the spec sheet too, but perhaps Daisy knows it can't beat the class-leaders at that game. Where most flagship cans want to give you silence with ever-improved ANC algorithms, Daisy is pushing a different route straight to the desired effect of said silence: a calmer mind — and one that is better able to focus.

By turning traditional headphone flaws (see the lack of an app and a slightly smaller driver) into selling points, Daisy makes it clear that it’s trying something different.

It’s not clear if that’s by design, or by accident. In an interview with Wired, company CEO Jack Mulroe confirmed the designers were “from outside the audio industry”. So the brand brings some fresh perspectives, but potentially some shortcomings — Mulroe admits “I tweaked out on transparency for months” when trying to fix its issues.

In recent years, we’ve seen that headphone fans will welcome in new brands, perhaps more so than in other tech sectors. The likes of the CMF Headphone Pro, Nothing Headphone (a) and Soundcore Space 2 have proven popular (at least, I’ve seen people out and about wearing them) and you can see from the very end of the next train carriage that they’re not from the traditional Sony, Bose or Sennheiser roster.

We've seen other headphone startups try to help wearers stay calm and focus, albeit using very different tech. Take Neurable's 'brain-hacking' headphones, which monitor your brain activity while you wear them and thus aim to help you achieve a flow state. But Daisy's this approach is different again, and it does strike me that by taking a more hands-off approach (and leaving our gray matter alone) Daisy's approach perhaps sounds more conducive to calmness…

Ultimately, it’s always good to see a new brands step up to the plate, especially if it thinks it can do things differently to the big dogs. It’ll be very interesting to see what impact the Daisy One has, and where the company goes from here.

One of my favorite things about the best music streaming services is that they’ve evolved into more than just audio platforms — they give you the freedom to create your own digital music space.

Take Spotify for example, the platform I’ve been using for over a decade. Not only does its algorithm learn to understand your tastes (though it takes quite a bit of time and effort to train it), creating playlists and folders gives you another way to make your Spotify space your own.

One of Spotify’s most handy features is pins, which places select playlists, albums, and artists, as well as audiobooks and podcasts to the top of your Library for quick and easy access, but the four-pin limit is a pain point that pretty much every subscriber has been asking Spotify to upgrade since the pins feature was rolled out some five years ago.

In the case of Apple Music, you can pin up to six different items which, while it’s still a small number, is better than four. Users have been begging Spotify to increase this number for years — and you’ll be relieved to learn that change is finally coming.

I first spotted signs of a possible update after coming across a Reddit post (see below) in which a user shared that they had somehow found a way to pin more than four items in their Library. Apparently all they did was update their Spotify app, but other users responding in the comments saw no such change — myself included.

After coming across the post, I reached out to Spotify, which confirmed that it’s increasing the four-pin limit, which was one of the improvements I wanted the most in 2026. A spokesperson shared the following comment:

“Spotify is updating the number of items listeners can pin at the top of Your Library from 4 to 20. This gives our users more flexibility to keep the music, playlists, podcasts, audiobooks, and creators they care about most within easy reach. It's still rolling out and will be available for Free and Premium listeners around the world in the next month”.

I can imagine many people will read this and question the fuss over such a small feature, but there’s a lot more to it. For those who are seasoned Spotify users, the platform is much more than a music haven — it’s their source for podcasts and audiobooks.

When you factor this in, having only four pins across music, podcasts, and audiobooks is rather stingy — "Does Spotify think we only listen to 1 of each at a time?", someone commented on the post shared to the Spotify Community page. But it’s not just about being able to pin music, podcasts, and audiobooks simultaneously; it’s about enhancing the user experience.

Whenever you follow a new artist, pre-save an upcoming album, or save a new playlist, it all appears as one messy collection in Your Library. This forces you to scroll through a hoarding eyesore to find what it is you’re looking for, so pinning items bumps your most-used content to the top saving you bags of scrolling time.

Though you can simply search for the playlist you want to listen to, regular listeners have tons of them (I know I do), so it’s much easier having all of your music there at the tap of a button in Your Library. For others, it’s about more than making your playlists easier to navigate; it's about having more say in how you choose to curate your digital music collection — “we should get full control”, another user puts it plainly.

All things considered, then, avid Spotify users everywhere will welcome this update with open arms.

For a company that prides itself on delivering polished, functioning hardware and software, Apple dropped the ball with its original AI-powered Clean Up tool.

Not only did this Apple Intelligence feature arrive almost a year after similar tools from Samsung and Google, but by all accounts, it was objectively worse at removing unwanted objects in images than those big-name rivals. We tested Clean Up against Galaxy AI last year, and found that the former “comes incredibly short of the mark when Samsung’s offering is capable of truly achieving what it sets out to do.” Ouch.

But Apple has promised to make things right in iOS 27. At WWDC 2026, the company announced that Clean Up will be faster and more capable in your iPhone’s next software update — and so I put that claim to the test by comparing Clean Up as it exists in iOS 26 against Clean Up as it exists in the iOS 27 developer beta (if you’re keen to try an early version of iOS 27 for yourself, here’s how to download the iOS 27 developer beta).

Before we dive into the image comparisons, an important note: Clean Up is better in iOS 27 because it’s capable of engaging Apple’s powerful Foundation models when needed. Say, for instance, you want to remove an obstruction from your face; your iPhone will employ a ‘High Quality’ version of Clean Up that taps into Apple’s own Private Cloud Compute servers to access these Foundation models. But it doesn’t do this all the time.

For small touch-up jobs, your iPhone employs a ‘Fast’ version of Clean Up that uses Apple's on-device AI models to complete your request, just as it does in iOS 26 (albeit not under this 'Fast' banner). This version is (surprise!) faster than the ‘High Quality’ alternative, but it's also not as effective at removing objects.

In iOS 27, your iPhone defaults to using an ‘Auto’ version of Clean Up that switches between ‘High Quality’ and ‘Fast’ depending on the edit request you’re making, but you can force your iPhone to use one or the other by selecting your chosen mode in a drop-down menu.

For this comparison, I stuck to ‘Auto’ to test how well my iPhone recognizes when (and when not) to use the more power-intensive ‘High Quality’ version of Clean Up — and because most people will use Clean Up in this default ‘Auto’ mode. I also wanted to see whether ‘Fast’ in iOS 27 — which my iPhone surely used for a few of the photos below — is more effective than it is in iOS 26.

I've added a separate section for comparing ‘Fast’ and ‘High Quality’ results in iOS 27, which is the starkest example of how much Apple's Clean Up tool has been improved.

And, of course, my results are based on the iOS 27 developer beta, not the finished version of iOS 27. There's every chance that Clean Up will be improved further once iOS 27 proper arrives later this year.

In this first example, iOS 26 leaves behind an unnatural smear in place of the dog, while iOS 27 adds a more detailed, natural-looking replacement. The latter looks more like a bush than grass — and the end of the dog's tail is still visible in both examples — but iOS 27 delivers the better overall result.

iOS 26 actually delivers the better result here, leaving behind a slightly less visible L-shape than iOS 27. I suspect this is an example of that 'Fast' version of Clean Up in action, and that if I manually selected 'High Quality', the iOS 27 version would be superior (see the 'Fast' vs 'High Quality' comparison at the bottom of the page to see what I mean). This comparison also proves that 'Fast' in iOS 27 doesn't always deliver superior results to Clean Up in iOS 26 (at least as far as the developer beta goes).

Again, I'd say iOS 26 delivers the better result in this example — focus on the llama's erased head in both photos to see what I mean.

This is the first example in which I'm convinced my iOS 27-enabled iPhone switched from 'Fast' to 'High Quality'. When asking Clean Up to remove the long strands of hair over my left eye, the iOS 26 version completely botches the job, adding random ugly smears and not actually removing anything. The iOS 27 version, meanwhile, serves up a genuinely impressive result. It's not completely devoid of fakery, but it's certainly the more usable of the two results.

Now you see him, now you don't. At first glance, both iOS 26 and iOS 27 appear to do a similarly OK job at removing Bad Bunny from the roof of La Casita, but if you look closely, iOS 26 doesn't recognize that there are stairs behind him. The iOS 27 result isn't that much better, but it's the objectively superior of the two.

Another slim win for iOS 27 here. Neither version of Clean Up completely removes the dog's shadow, but iOS 27 makes a slightly better go of it than iOS 26.

In this example, the iOS 27 result is the much better of the two. Not only does iOS 26 leave behind a smeary cloud, but it also adds a random shape and (badly) generates an extra helping of mountain in the background. None of these mistakes are visible in the iOS 27 result.

iOS 27 wins again here, but not by much. The dark splodges left behind in the iOS 26 result are a tad more visible than those in the iOS 27 result, and I'd be more comfortable passing the latter off as reality.

This is probably the most challenging request of the bunch. I'm sitting on a backless bench while pedalling a piece of urban gym equipment, and I asked Clean Up to remove me, but keep everything else intact. iOS 26 fails miserably, and while iOS 27 doesn't totally succeed either — it leaves my right foot behind and removes the end of the bench entirely — it does do a better job of replacing what it removes with real-looking imagery.

Here's an example of the different results you can achieve by manually selecting the 'Fast' and 'High Quality' versions of Clean Up in iOS 27.

As you can see, the difference is huge. The 'Fast' result is a total mess, while the 'High Quality' result is genuinely real-looking. The latter isn't perfect — it's changed the menu art, for instance, and reduced the menu count from two to one — but I suspect that's because a portion of the menu was caught in the circle I drew around the coffee cup (and for that reason, I hope Apple reduces the thickness of the Clean Up line when iOS 27 releases in full later this year).

In all but three of the comparisons, the iOS 27 developer beta version of Clean Up delivered the better result; however, it's clear that, when your iPhone opts for the 'Fast' version of the feature, the gulf in quality is not dramatic. In fact, in some examples, the iOS 26 result is better — so it's probably best to think of 'Fast' Clean Up and iOS 26 Clean Up as the same tool.

It's a different story for the 'High Quality' version of Clean Up in the iOS 27 developer beta, which delivered vastly superior results to Clean Up in iOS 26 when my iPhone auto-selected that option, or when I manually enabled it (as in the coffee cup example).

This proves beyond doubt that Apple has improved Clean Up in iOS 27 as it exists right now — but unless users manually select this 'High Quality' option (or always request complex edits that trigger its automatic use), the difference in Clean Up's capabilities may not be all that noticeable.

Again, though, I've been careful to specify that these iOS 27 results are from the developer beta — Apple will likely further tweak Clean Up between now and iOS 27's September release, so I expect the tool to get even better.

Type: color multifunction laser printer

Functions: Print, scan, copy, fax, ADF

Connectivity: Ethernet, USB, Wi-Fi

Data storage slots: USB Host

Max print speed: 25ppm

Max paper size: Letter / A4

Print quality: 600x600 dpi (4,800 dpi color)

Memory: 1GB

Apple AirPrint: yes

Consumables included: 4 x toner cartridges (750 black, 500 color pages)

Dimensions: 16.18 x 15.71 x 13.58in (411 x 399 x 345 mm (WxDxH)

Weight: 42.9lbs/19.5kg

The first real fruit of the Xerox/Lexmark collaboration is a mid-priced multifunction laser printer aimed at hybrid workers and small businesses looking for high performance from a compact device that doesn’t need IT support.

It’s essentially Lexmark hardware with Xerox software and support, which sounds to me like the best of both worlds. The Lexmark print engine has proved fast and efficient in the past, but I much prefer the Xerox interface and Easy Assist App, so let’s see if this middle-of-the-road office all-in-one is worthy to wear the refreshed Xerox logo.

The Xerox C255a is impressively compact for a four-in-one device with two paper inputs and a 50-sheet automatic document feeder (ADF). The main tray can hold up to 250 sheets of A4 or letter paper, while the slot-loading multipurpose tray is for single sheets or envelopes. It’s smaller than the Brother MFC-L8970CDW in all dimensions, which is good, but it’s a pity the display is less than half that printer’s size at just 2.8 inches. At least there’s a USB Host port beside the front panel, in addition to the USB data port at the rear.

It looks much like the Lexmark MC3326i on which this new model is based, except that it now has a playfully shaped plastic front panel that bends its top right corner outwards just enough to look like a furling sheet of paper, while offering an easy way to open up the toner compartment door. The black and gray livery looks smart and it’s showcasing the reworked Xerox logo, which now features a kind of crosshead screw icon that looks like a nod to Lexmark’s green square logo.

It’s reassuringly heavy at just under 20kg or 43lbs and it feels well made, from fifty percent recycled plastic. The toner cartridges lock into place with a satisfying click and the paper drawer opens smoothly. In short, build quality is a strong point. You can even add an optional swivel cabinet or adjustable stand, but sadly, you can’t add another paper cassette.

As the company’s mid-priced model, the Xerox C255a has all the features on my check list to be among the best small business printers. Wi-Fi with AirPrint and Chromebook compatibility is built in, there’s a USB flash memory slot, strong security and a manual paper feed in addition to the main tray. It can auto duplex print, of course, but it can’t auto duplex scan. That feature is reserved for the step-up Xerox C325.

The print rate is also appreciably slower than the Xerox C325. That said, our Xerox C255a is no slouch at 26ppm (pages per minute) in simplex mode and it doesn’t slow down much when duplexing. I think it’s fast enough for the needs of most businesses.

Print resolution is the usual 600x600 DPI which matches the scan resolution, while color printing is enhanced to 4,800 DPI. The 1GHz processor and 1GB of RAM is an improvement on the old Lexmark and Xerox’s recommended duty cycle of up to 50,000 pages per month suggests that this is a printer that can handle a very heavy workload.

I found the setup procedure to be quick and painless and did not need to reach for the single-page quick start guide. You just have to remove all the transport packaging, load your paper, power up and follow the on-screen prompts to get online and print the first test page.

The inbuilt 2.8-inch display is rather small, but it’s intuitive and Xerox’s setup procedure makes it easy to link your smartphone so you can use the helpful Easy Assist companion app to get your printer onto your Wi-Fi network for the first time.

Day-to-day operation is simplified by the user-friendly OS which I think Xerox always did better than Lexmark. The Lexmark MC3326i always suffered from a lazy touchscreen and more convoluted menu system, which I’m happy to say has been much improved.

Firstly, the pages of crisp dark text on plain paper pumped out by the Xerox C255a look great and explain why Xerox was so keen to purchase Lexmark’s print engine. It’s not the quietest laser printer in its class, nor the fastest, but the black on white print quality is consistently excellent. Characters printed at small point sizes always appear legible and well delineated when viewed through a magnifying glass.

Mixed color documents are less impressive because the C/M/Y toner, which doesn’t appear to have changed since the Lexmark days, is somewhat dull. The color tones are actually quite natural and consistent, but they certainly don’t pop in the way that they do with the HP Color LaserJet Pro 4201dw, for example. I don’t think this is a problem for printing handouts and reports etc, but photographs, even when printed on laser photo paper, tend to look flat and disappointing.

The scanner bed and ADF both worked flawlessly during the tests and made accurate multipage copies swiftly and without paper jams. The duplicates appeared noticeably paler than the originals, but not enough to be a problem. As a digital copier, the Xerox C255a is fine, but without single-pass dual scanning, that’s not its strongest suit.

The Xerox C255a ships with four pre-loaded starter cartridges containing just enough toner to print 750 black and pages, or 500 in color. That means they’re less than a third full because Xerox’s standard carts yield 1,200 color and 1,300 black pages, while the high-capacity carts yield up to 2500 color and 3,000 black pages.

With the highest yield black Xerox cartridges costing around US$100 or £98, the cost per page can be reasonably competitive, although it’s by no means the lowest running cost among laser printers in this class.

Apart from the badge, the cartridges look identical to those of the Lexmark MC33261i and contain the same toner, so we can assume they’re compatible.

Apart from replacing the toner cartridges, the Xerox C255a may require a new waste toner cartridge costing around $20 when the original becomes full.

The imaging drums are not built into the toner cartridges in this case, so they will also need to be swapped out if you notice serious deterioration in print quality or you receive the dreaded ‘Replace Drum’ message on the display.

None of those things should happen before around 40,000 prints, so I’d say this is a low-maintenance device.

The Xerox C255a performed well enough in all of my tests to recommend it to both home workers with high print demands and small businesses in a shared office. It’s compact enough to sit on your desk at home, while also having the print speed and paper/ink capacity to serve a small workgroup, and thanks to the intuitive touchscreen interface and strong app support, you’re unlikely to need IT backup.

It’s not the quietest of laser printers, nor the fastest and it lacks high-end features like NFC or single-pass dual scanning, but crucially, it does have all the essentials, such as Wi-Fi with AirPrint, an ADF and robust security. There’s not much toner in the starter cartridges, but Xerox’s high-yield refills are reasonably priced. Build quality is also reassuringly solid and having tested the Lexmark on which this Xerox is based, I can confirm that it’s a genuine improvement rather than just a rebrand.

For more top-rated options, I've tested out the best home printers and the best laser printers.

• iPhone Photography Awards 2026 winners announced, with top prize going to Robyn Jensen
• Their winning image of a volcano eruption was taken on an iPhone 15 Pro
• 12 other category winners announced, along with the varied iPhones used

The iPhone Photography Awards has announced its prize winners for 2026 — and the image that received the Grand Prix genuinely stopped me in my tracks.

Shot by Robyn Jensen from the Cayman Islands and submitted in the 'Nature' category, the winning image is a stunning low-light capture of a volcanic eruption in Yepocapa, Chimaltenango, Guatemala. Showing the moment a gout of ash erupts from the crater of the volcano, with red-hot trails cascading down around it, the image frames the moment of drama perfectly against a starlit night sky.

What's more, this image wasn't even shot on the latest iPhone, but was captured on a phone two generations old — the iPhone 15 Pro. I love how effectively it uses the phone's inherent qualities to its advantage; for instance, the smaller sensor of the iPhone 15 Pro, or any smartphone, is going to have a more limited dynamic range than a mirrorless or premium compact camera.

Robyn has made use of that, exposing for the brightest spot in the image — the lava and the light it's casting on the underside of the ash cloud — and allowing the rest to be shrouded in darkness. This heightens the impact of the image, sacrificing detail in the mountain for legibility of the key subject. But fortunately, we just about get those beautiful stars in the background.

Robyn has also used the wider 24mm equivalent lens, resisting the temptation to zoom in with the telephoto, and doing this allows us to appreciate the moment in its fuller context, giving a sense of scale. Her exposure is a full second long, meaning either the phone was mounted to a support, or she was aided by the iPhone 15 Pro's excellent OIS (optical image stabilization). And the phone has pushed her ISO to 12,500, and still come away with a pretty clean shot. It's a superb image, and a deserving winner.

Something I particularly love about the iPhone Awards is the sheer breadth of style and subject matter, and this couldn't be better illustrated than by the contrast between Robyn's image and the winner of the Gold award, an image submitted in the 'Children' category by Hungarian photographer Gellért Gombai. A beautiful grab shot of a precious summer moment, its interplay of light and shadow is heightened by the decision to convert to monochrome — and it was shot on an even older phone, the iPhone X released in 2017!

And this sense of breadth continues when you look at the Silver and Bronze winners (below) — even though they're both by American photographers and are both images of animals! Arnold Plotnick's street shot of a cat, Silver winner, has a feel of total serendipity, a perfectly framed moment well-spotted. Also note how again, the lower dynamic range from the iPhone actually helps the image, with the loss of detail in the cat's fur and the doorway shadow increasing the shot's contrast and impact.

Catherine Wang's Bronze winner, meanwhile, couldn't be more different. It's a meticulously set-up still life, with the elements of the watermelon, mug and parrot clearly having been arranged very precisely, and the end result looking like something from a gallery wall.

For me, almost all of the winning images exemplify one of the iPhone's strongest assets for photographers — it's the camera you always have on you. While there are exceptions, such as Catherine Wang's still-life, most of the images have the unmistakeable feel of grab shots, of a photographer who was at the right place at the right time, and had the means to make the most of it.

Images like the pattern of frost on a car, a pair of dogs peeking out of a window, a child preparing for a leap over a puddle. These aren't things you set up; they're moments you spot, and many of them are moments that anyone might have spotted.

I'm particularly galled by the fact that the Gold prize was won by a shot of a cat in the street. Do you have any idea how shots of cats in the street I have on my camera roll? Loads! And do you have any idea how many of them are as good as Arnold Plotnick's? None!

But my personal bitterness notwithstanding, the iPhone Photography Awards have produced a superb crop of images this year, and in doing so have provided some pertinent reminders of two of photography's most important lessons. First, you don't need the latest tech to make great images. Second, the best camera is always — always — the one you have on you.

You can see the full selection of images, including second and third place winners, at the iPhone Photography Awards website.

Can you believe it? We're at the midway point of 2026 already. That means one thing: it's time for our half-year 5-star reviews roundup. So far this year we've tested over 600 gadgets, games and appliances across all of our channels. That's way too many to put into a single roundup, so for this mini retrospective I've focused only on physical products, and only the five-star awardees.

These are the gadgets that soared through our rigorous tests, and shone in crowded markets. They're the products we just couldn't find fault with. There are speakers that wowed us with their "crystal clear, fathoms deep" sound, a "perfect" Android tablet that rivals the best Apple can offer, a soundbar that raises the — er — bar for soundbars in 2026, and a mini fan that blew the competition away.

Without further ado, let's begin our showcase of the best products we've tested so far in 2026. Click the More details button for more info and each one, and a link to the full review.

Read the full review

• Beautifully detailed
• Exceptional low end
• Lightweight and comfortable

• Very expensive
• Very high impedance

Read our full review

• Poised, direct and expressive sound
• Great low-frequency speed and control
• Built and finished to high standard

• Less expressive at lower volumes
• Too big to really be ‘bookshelf’ speakers

Read the full review

• Great sound for its size
• Attractive edge lighting
• Highly waterproof and durable

• Can be beaten for battery life
• Limited bass due to compact form
• Can't change color of the lights

Read our full review

• Amazing audio with exceptional bass output
• Impressive clarity and detail, especially using USB-C
• Phenomenally sturdy and waterproof
• Great value in spite of fairly high price

• Bulkier than its predecessor
• No mic for hands-free calls
• Battery life isn’t class-leading

Read the full review

• Phenomenal, clear articulation of sound
• Outsized bassy weight
• Great price for sound stability

• Slight treble over-presence
• Sometimes-overzealous bass reflex
• No bi-wiring capabilities

Read our full review

• Excellent ANC
• Great-looking, comfortable design
• Packed with features

• Lossless only for Huawei phones
• Slightly chunkier than rivals
• No foam eartips

Read our full review

• Expansive, organized and vigorous sound
• Great standard of build and finish, numerous colorways
• Interesting and extensive specification

• Overconfident low-frequency response
• Loses some composure at the biggest volumes
• Must overcome some outstanding opposition

Read the full review

• Incredibly thin and very lightweight
• Beautiful, high refresh rate OLED screen
• Unbelievable value
• Excellent speakers
• Almost unbeatable update support
• Great new PC mode

• Slight battery downgrade compared to the MagicPad 3

Read our full review

• Winning design
• Powerful
• Busting with AI
• Still excellent cameras
• Privacy display
• No price hike
• S Pen included

• An iterative update
• No more titanium
• Still no MagSafe-style wireless charging
• Not every AI works as promised or expected

Read our full review

• Great build quality
• Ultra-low click and sensor latency
• HITS switches are pure brilliance
• Comfortable, ergonomic shape that suits all grip types

• No left-handed version
• Not cheap (but honestly, worth it)

Read our full review

• Sublime HDR Performance
• Brilliant colors and contrast
• A semi-gloss coating that does an impressive job of reducing reflections
• A multitude of image-tinkering options to suit persnickety workers and gamers

• Not cheap
• Not a flashy, ostentatious, RGB-laden gaming monitor

Read our full review

Read our full review

• Competitive price
• Excellent Wi-Fi performance
• 2.5Gb Ethernet ports
• Well-designed app

• Limited parental controls
• Design is a little gimmicky

Read our full review

• Controls are easy to master
• Grinder is quiet in use
• Flat-bottom porta filter is a stroke of design genius
• Excellent espresso shots and frothed milk
• Very good looking

• Expensive for its feature set

Read the full review

• Outstanding picture quality
• Massively better at beating reflections
• Phenomenal gaming performance and features
• Well laid-out webOS smart TV platform

• Still a pricey set to buy
• No HDR10+ or promise of Dolby Vision 2
• UK remote still feels cheap

Read the full review

• Powerful, engaging and detailed sound profile
• Good connectivity options
• Easy to set up and use

• Premium price
• Design needs an update
• LED display still tricky to read

Read our full review

• Superb high-end OLED picture quality
• Detailed, accurate sound
• Sublime Ambilight feature

• Only two full HDMI 2.1 ports
• Motion requires some tweaking

Read our full review

• Find My range is way better
• Much louder chime
• Design unchanged to fit all your existing AirTag accessories
• Apple Watch support
• Same security and privacy features
• Price unchanged

• Why only in white?

Read our full review

• Simple to use, even for beginners
• Much easier to clean than most bean-to-cup coffee makers
• Smart, sleek design
• Very reasonably priced

• Grind size can't be adjusted
• No steam wand (although there's an optional standalone milk frother)

Read the full review

• Strong mechanical security credentials
• Built-in Wi-Fi (no hub required)
• Matter support for smart home compatibility
• Fast, quiet motor
• Multiple access methods
• Straightforward installation

• Premium pricing
• Internal unit still protrudes
• Charging lead isn’t universal

Read our full review

• Powerful concentrated air flow
• Runs for up to 6.5 hours on a single charge
• Stylish, unusual design
• Significantly cheaper than closest competitor

• Air intake holes are easy to cover with your hand when holding

Read our full review

• Gorgeous design
• All components feel solidly made
• Consistent brewing results
• Prepares hot and cold drinks
• Detailed customization options
• Excellent mobile app experience

• Ground coffee hatch has a tendency to steam up
• Needs to cool down completely before preparing cold drinks

Read our full review

• Stellar image quality
• Wide f/1.4 aperture
• Arca-swiss tripod food
• Fast focusing

• Large and heavy build
• Expensive
• Limited mount options
• No optical stabilization

Read our full review

• Great 10-bit image quality from dual sensor setup
• Choice of control methods
• Agile, speedy and safe flyer
• Good value for money

• Other DJI drones beat it on image quality
• Buying both FPV and standard controllers could push up the price
• No manual FPV flight option

Read our full review

• Great video quality for the price, especially with Lito X1
• Omnidirectional obstacle avoidance included
• Better battery life than the Neo 2 and Flip

• Camera doesn't rotate for 9:16 content
• Soft digital zoom
• No built-in storage on Lito 1 model

Read our full review

• Image quality
• Build quality
• Optical image stabilization
• 1.4x magnification
• Compatible with teleconverters

• Expensive
• A little bigger than other 100mm macro lenses
• No tripod foot collar

Read the full review

• Class-leading resolution
• Speedy sensor and burst shooting
• Neat and rugged design with helpful touches
• Sticky subject-detection autofocus

• New battery type, meaning Sony's older battery isn't compatible
• If you don't need the improved speed, the A7R V is a better-value choice
• Still no open-gate video recording
• Still uses pricey CFXepress Type A cards for optimum performance

Read our full review

• New 33MP sensor
• 7K open gate video
• Useful and intuitive autofocus features
• Refined shooting experience

• Restricted recording times on some formats
• Slightly worse dynamic range than rivals
• Canon's R-Mount is still closed
• More expensive than Mark II

Read the full review

• Light for this type of lens
• New optical design improves image quality, including bokeh
• Tripod collar is fully removable
• Rugged build quality
• Works with teleconverters

• Pricey
• Still large
• No display, nor focus distance markings

Read the full review

• Incredibly lightweight and comfortable
• High-end sound backed up by studio-grade drivers
• Sleek, premium design
• Great materials

• Middling software features

Read our full review

• Stylish lenticular design
• Durable and well-built
• More game card slots than pricier rivals

• Slightly susceptible to fingerprints
• Not big enough to house your dock
• A little bulkier than Nintendo's official case

Read our full review

• Incredibly easy to set up straight out of the box
• Lightweight design ensures comfort for longer sessions
• 70 hour battery life means no charging frustrations
• Crystal clear audio to immerse you in all sorts of games

• Cable is a bit unwieldy for the Bluetooth dongle
• No on-ear or in-ear storage for microphone when disconnected

Read the full review

• Exceptional audio performance
• Highly stylish aesthetics do not disappoint
• Class-leading battery life
• A staggering wireless range
• Swarm 2 software is top-notch
• An almost XLR quality mic

• Clamping force takes a while to adjust to

Read our full review

• Entertaining design
• Superb sound quality
• High power output

• A little fiddly
• No iPhone app

Read the full review

• Small, lightweight and customizable transmitters
• Affordable price
• Versatile connectivity and mounting options
• Reliable performance

• Apple Lightning adapter not included
• No monitoring display on receiver
• Few reasons to upgrade from original Mic Mini

Read the full review

• Best-in-class noise cancelling in testing
• Pro-level features
• E-ink display sets it apart from rivals
• Cold-shoe shotgun mic mounting option

• Windshields won't fit in charging case
• Insta360 camera integration still feels incomplete
• No Lightning adapter in the box

Read the full review

• Superbly portable
• Superb sound
• Plug and play operation

• Relatively low power output
• No balanced output
• Cable feels fragile

Read our full review

• Sound quality impresses, especially detail retrieval
• ‘Thorough’ doesn’t begin to cover specification
• Three nicely realized control options

• Needs to matched with high-end gear
• Control app is extensive but dull

The Keychron G5 is a small and lightweight symmetrical gaming mouse designed for both work and play.

It sports a gamer-centric design, with nondescript patterns embossed all over the unit. I can’t say I found these appealing, looking dated as they did, but at least they’re reasonably discreet, given they’re close to the same shade of black as the base color. Their texture feels good in the hand, too.

With its small and ergonomic, it sits low to the ground, while the mouse buttons slope downwards quite prominently, and feature deep indents to secure your fingers. The sidewalls are similarly cinched, and the whole unit is narrower and less bulky than many of the best gaming mice.

It’s no surprise, then, that the G5 is also very light. Weighing just 43g, it's one of the lightest models around. Despite this, it feels well-made: the plastics used are solid and premium-feeling, and put together without a hint of looseness or rattle. All the various buttons feel stable and tightly installed, too.

However, there aren’t many of them. There are no extra inputs beyond the usual, not even a DPI button, which may prove inconvenient for those wishing to switch between productivity and gaming regularly.

All this isn’t to say the G5 is bereft of features, though. Thanks to Keychron’s Web Launcher software, accessible via your browser, there are plenty of input customizations and performance tweaks on tap. Remapping assignments include various system and media shortcuts, (although these are confined to the most basic ones), macros (a macro creator is featured here for this purpose), and DPI and polling rate toggles.

There’s also a remapping mode called Gaming Keys, which allows you to assign a key or mouse button that repeatedly triggers while holding down your chosen button. As well as selecting the number of times it fires, you can also alter the rate of fire in millisecond increments, from 10ms to 1000ms.

As for performance tweaks, there are three settings for the lift-off distance (0.7mm, 1mm, and 2mm), as well as toggles for motion sync, angle snap, and ripple control. You can also adjust the debounce times for every button on the G5, not just the left and right clicks. Each has a slider with a range of 0-20ms, adjustable in millisecond increments.

It’s somewhat disappointing that the G5 uses a web app for these customizations, as I usually prefer standalone apps for the sake of convenience and ease of use. However, I have to say that Keychron’s works better than many others I’ve tried, proving responsive and stable during my time with it.

In action, the G5 is very effective. It glides very smoothly and easily, thanks to that aforementioned weight and the frictionless skates. Its ergonomic proportions and textured sides made for a comfortable grip and problem-free lift-offs as well.

However, in wired mode, this maneuverability is somewhat compromised, owing to the resistance introduced by the USB cable. I didn’t find the dragging sensation as strong as other gaming mouse cables I’ve experienced, and the upwardly curved jack does help to free the cable from your desktop, like a mouse bungee does. Unfortunately, the benefit here is comparatively marginal; ultimately the cable was still detrimental to my movements.

The left and right clicks were also heavier than I expected, which I noticed when playing Counter-Strike 2. They failed to provide the snappiness I was after when spamming clicks. But they’re not heavy to the point of being prohibitive and they’re nicely damped, which lends them a satisfying feel.

Oddly, the scroll wheel is perhaps the most pleasing input of them all. Its soft yet textured material feels good and offers a secure grip, while the notching of the wheel itself feels excellent. It’s solid enough to prevent misfires, yet loose enough to allow for fast flicks when needed, such as when navigating web pages or documents. The middle click is also easy to actuate without triggering accidental scrolls.

Connectivity is very good, too. It connected to my devices via Bluetooth and the 2.4GHz USB dongle without issue, and I didn’t experience any drops or lag in my connections. Hot-switching between devices is also easy, thanks to the underside selector. However, I did find that the DPI value I set when connected via the dongle didn’t carry over when I hot-switched to Bluetooth, an issue that’s exacerbated by the absence of a DPI button on the G5.

I wasn’t able to extensively test the battery life of the G5, but it doesn’t seem to be particularly enduring. After about a day of use, switching between two different PCs connected via the two wireless modes, the battery depleted by about 10%.

The G5 isn’t exactly a budget mouse, but it represents good value considering its build quality, performance, customization options and multiple connectivity modes. It might not have many inputs compared to others in the sector, and the clicks are a bit too heavy for certain situations, but these are about its only drawbacks. All in all, then, the G5 makes a compelling rival to the big hitters in the space.

• $109.99 (about £80 / AU$160)
• Available now in black
• Good value for the spec

The Keychron G5 costs $109.99 (about £80 / AU$160) and is available now in black only. It can be bought directly from Keychron’s website, where international shipping is offered. Charges and additional taxes depend on your region.

For an 8K gaming mouse with multiple connectivity modes and a supremely lightweight construction, the G5 represents good value for money. Pointers from the big brands with comparable specs usually cost more, such as the Razer DeathAdder V4 Pro. This mouse lacks Bluetooth support as well, although we were mighty impressed with its performance when we reviewed it, ranking among the best esports mice you can get right now.

If you need more inputs, the Logitech G502 X Plus is a prime candidate. The line to which this mouse belongs has been a perennial favorite of the gaming community for years. It features 13 buttons, all customizable thanks to Logitech’s versatile G Hub software. What’s more, it’s about the same price as the G5.

Value

Expensive in absolute terms, but for a 43g 8K mouse with multiple connectivity options and plenty of customizations, it’s a good deal.

4.5 / 5

Design

Small, super light, and very comfortable. The pattern looks a little dated, though.

4.5 / 5

Performance

Very smooth and satisfying, but those heavy clicks do let the side down a little. Connectivity is mostly great, save for the DPI reset issue.

4 / 5

Final score

The G5 mightn’t suit every gamer, but it’s certainly worth considering if you prize lightness and a comfortable form.

4 / 5

You want something comfortable
At just 43g, the G5 is easy to move around, and the small yet ergonomic shape is easy to grip, too.

You like to tinker
Keychron’s web app offers all sorts of customizations and tweaks that should please pro-level gamers.

You want plenty of inputs
The G5 only gets the basic buttons — there’s not even a DPI cycler, although you could remap another button for this purpose.

You want the snappiest clicks
While clicks are satisfyingly damped, I found them a little too heavy for spamming quickly.

Razer DeathAdder V4 Pro
If you want to play like the pros, this is the mouse for you. We loved how well it performed when we reviewed it, and were even taken by its fantastic optical scroll wheel. It’s costlier than the G5 and lacks the same multiple wireless connectivity options, but the V4 Pro is just about the best pure gaming pointer right now in our eyes. Read our full Razer DeathAdder V4 Pro review.

Logitech G502 X Plus
The G502 line has been acclaimed by gamers for years, and this edition is no less impressive. It has a lot more buttons than the G5, all of which are programmable. It also has an ergonomic shape, although it’s much larger and heavier, so not ideal for those looking to shed the weight. Read our full Logitech G502 X Plus review.

• Tested for a few days
• Used for working and gaming
• Extensive gaming mouse experience

I tested the Keychron G5 for a few days, during which time I used it for gaming, working, and general browsing.

I played Counter-Strike 2, a stern test for peripherals given the demands it places on quick movements and accurate aiming. I also made sure to try out as many of the mouse’s customization features via the Keychron Web Launcher.

I’ve been PC gaming for over a decade, and have used a large number of gaming mice in that time. I’ve also reviewed plenty of them, across a broad range of price points, form factors, and feature sets.

• Read more about how we test
• First reviewed: July 2026

• Former PlayStation boss Shawn Layden says Sony's decision to scrap physical discs is "fairly dramatic"
• Layden recalls a time when digital sales "were zero percent" because Sony didn't have a market
• He believes the move will also mean the PS6 won't have a disc drive

Former PlayStation Worldwide Studios boss Shawn Layden has shared his opinion on Sony's decision to stop producing physical discs and its plan to move all-digital, calling it "a fairly dramatic decision."

Speaking in an interview with Eurogamer following the bombshell news, the PlayStation veteran of 32 years confirmed that he had "no idea it was going to happen and "don't necessarily agree with it."

As for why he thinks Sony has made the decision, he suggested, "Maybe it's just too prohibitively expensive to stamp out discs," but believes that any big move to discontinue a product, feature, or model is "largely" a "straight spreadsheet [decision]."

"What are disc sales compared to digital sales? And I'm old enough to remember when digital sales were like 10 percent - I'm old enough to remember when digital sales were zero percent because we didn't have a digital market! And that number just grew over time," Layden said.

The ex-PlayStation leader suggested the COVID pandemic played a role in accelerating the purchase and consumption of digital games over physical, and believes that Sony's decision could mean the PS6 won't have a disc drive.

Analysts have also determined that the next-gen PS6 console will launch in late 2028 and won't have a disc drive, or at the very least, one will be sold separately "to play older PS4 and PS5 games on disc."

In fact, Layden revealed that ditching the PlayStation's disc drive was something the company considered for a year while he worked there.

"I've been asked this question every year for the last 20 years. 'When are you guys going to just give up on the disc drive?' My feeling with that was always: well, when I get to a place where I'm comfortable enough to believe that worldwide, broadband throughput is good enough to support that download experience, good enough to reach the majority of customers," Layden said.

He clarified, "Majority does not mean entirety, so there is a point, a tipping point, where if I have 80 percent of the opportunity, which represents 95 percent of the revenue source, what's my incentive to keep the lights on for the other 20 percent if it's effectively only 5 percent of the business? See what I'm saying? At some point, it just becomes obvious that we can't keep this whole thing running just for this very small slice of opportunity."

While Layden admits that Sony had always been "pretty good" at determining the risk of overestimating regional internet infrastructure, "because unlike Xbox, PlayStation had a wider global fanbase, and not just in the numbers, but in the reach, because Sony Corp had reach all over the world," there are also players who do not have access to the internet, such as people in military bases.

"The idea that they could still buy a PlayStation 4 game, throw it in a machine, and play was important. You don't want to leave those people behind," Layden said.

"I don't know what went on in those conversations, but it's a fairly dramatic decision."

As Sony plans to scrap physical discs, there are also concerns about the inability to resell games or buy them second-hand in the future, which Layden said "used to be a huge factor" in the business, but the rise of digital games "kind of quashed that used-game business, and made it hard for folks who were making a nickel in the secondary market by selling them."

However, he doesn't necessarily believe this drove Sony's decision because it's been happening over time, but thinks "we've reached some kind of homeostasis where it's in a weird sort of balance."

"Second-hand gaming still occurs, obviously, but it's not material anymore to the business to worry about, I think," Layden added.

Following Sony's announcement, new reports claimed that the company is testing a disc-to-digital feature for existing consoles and could also release a next-gen Project Helix console without a disc drive.

While there's no telling whether Microsoft plans to follow Sony's all-digital business practice later on, Layden believes the huge decision could influence other companies, including Microsoft and Nintendo, to follow suit.

"Certainly, this is an industry where if one company, particularly the leader of the industry, makes a decision of this magnitude, that's going to heavily influence what the other ones do," he said.