Verizon gets Samsung Galaxy Camera with cheaper data plan

Samsung's Galaxy Camera, a point-and-shoot that runs the Android OS, has made its way over to Verizon after launching on AT&T last month.

At $550, Verizon's Galaxy Camera is $50 more expensive than AT&T's version, but it does have a couple advantages: A data plan for the camera only costs $5 per month on Verizon if you're on its Share Everything plan, compared to $10 on AT&T (although Verizon says this is a “promotional price”). Also, the data itself is faster, because it uses Verizon's 4G LTE network, whereas the AT&T version only connects to slower HSPA+ networks.

Otherwise, both cameras have the same specs. There's a 16-megapixel CMOS sensor, a 21x zoom lens, an aperture of F2.8 to F5.9 and optical image stabilization. Video records in 1080p at 30 frames per second, or in 720p at 60 frames per second.

Around back, the Galaxy Camera runs Android 4.1 Jelly Bean on a 4.8-inch 720p display, and it has full Google Play Store access for downloading apps such as Instagram and Facebook. Other specs include a 1.4 GHz quad-core processor, 1 GB of RAM, 8 GB of internal storage and a microSD card slot for up to 64 GB of additional storage.

Verizon's cheaper data plan makes the idea of a connected camera a bit more palatable, but it still seems like a lot to pay if you're not constantly uploading photos on the road. Keep in mind that Verizon's Share Everything plans allow your smartphone to serve as a wireless hotspot at no extra charge. Most users should just skip the data plan altogether and connect the camera to their phone's hotspot to share and upload photos.

The Galaxy Camera is available now through Verizon's Website.

For comprehensive coverage of the Android ecosystem, visit Greenbot.com.

Related:
Shop ▾
arrow up Amazon Shop buttons are programmatically attached to all reviews, regardless of products' final review scores. Our parent company, IDG, receives advertisement revenue for shopping activity generated by the links. Because the buttons are attached programmatically, they should not be interpreted as editorial endorsements.

Subscribe to the Digital Photo Newsletter

Comments