Would LG tarnish the Viewty name with a 2 megapixel camera?
The Viewty name has always been reserved for LG’s megapixel heavyweights, so seeing it associated with the unannounced and previously unseen GW300 has us seriously confused. One theory floating around is that the GW300 will bolster up the low-end of the Viewty line, but that still doesn’t make much sense considering even the most basic phones these days are pushing well past the 2 megapixel mark. Here we have a phone with a full-QWERTY keypad, QVGA display, Bluetooth, 10MB of internal memory and a microSD slot, and it’s going to sully the Viewty name instead of launching as a budget messaging phone? Of course it is possible that this just an early internal name and the GW300 will be given some random name like the LG Daguerreotype at launch. Actually, that would be rather fitting for a phone with a 2 megapixel camera, would it not?
Realistically it’s unlikely any cell phone cameras will take advantage of 2 or more megapixel, or that most users will have a need for 2 or more megapixel. Camera phone development should be more focused on lens quality than megapixel ratings. Anything more than 3 or 4 megapixel in a cameraphone is idiotic, because the lens technology to support it isn’t there yet. Sure, you might have a 5 megapixel image from a higher end device in the Viewty line, but it likely will be just as usable as a 2 megapixel image, while keeping the cost of the device down.
Michael Bettiol is a gay ass tool
I really don’t think that this will bear the Viewty brand. In the UK it will be available as simply GW300: http://www.lgcentral.com/2009/08/lg-gw300-for-orange-uk-coming-soon.html
I don’t think anyone got the memo.. 2MP is the new 16MP.
To be honest, the lack of a good camera on my previous phones discouraged me from taking any pictures (I have a DSLR for taking nicer shots) but it seems to be that 3+MP AF cameras seem to be the norm now, so come on, LG.
But in reality, people pay for titles, not features. The concept is comparable to Macs.
That’d be a damn shame. Then again, Justin got it right from the very beginning. They should be focused on making the optics as good as possible, to take advantage of all those megapixels.
Absolutely. A gigantic photo is worthless if it’s not crisp and clear. Size does matter — but when you take a photo from your 15,000 megapixel pre-paid cell phone, what exactly are you looking at?
You know some cellphones do take marvelous photos (Nokia N82, Motozine ZN5 just to name a FEW). Of course cameras will always be better but there are many camera phones that use fantastic optics.
Just look at Samsung’s portfolio for good camera phones. We’ve kicked this dead horse a million times already.
it’s wrong, this is the answers on french blog :
http://www.david-tate.fr/La-France-seme-la-panique-USA-avec
Thank God we still live in a world where you can get internet privacy, even if it comes at a price. Since we the people have been deemed unworthy to maintain our own internet privacy, what has the world come to?