Share this Story

LG Posts Lineup Teaser Video Ahead of MWC

LG Barcelona MWC Tease

Starting next week, the mobile landscape will change greatly as LG is set to announce and show off their new 2013 smartphone lineup at MWC in Barcelona. While we have already seen their new Optimus G Pro in the flesh, this new teaser video hints that we might be seeing a couple of mystery devices as well. 

As you will notice in the video, they put emphasis on a few letters such as G, F, and V. What each letters means, whether they stand for the the name of a new device or something along those lines, who knows.

As for OEM’s teasing devices, I’m about worn out after HTC’s month-long campaign.


Via: LG

  • Overall LG now has better build quality than samsung devices, they do not feel cheap at all and lg has lately been taking samsungs features and ideas and taking it one step further, <3 my optimus g can't wait for the pro.

  • michael arazan

    This Video makes LG look like their releasing a GQ like magazine, not a device

  • baconslayer09

    My opinion of LG has changed quite a bit since I bought my Nexus 4. They’re definitely upping their game.

  • Good_Ole_Pinocchio

    Hmmm.. Baby brother LG. Definitely gunning for Sammy. I’ll keep my eye on them… But not yet….. They’re almost there.

    • nightscout13

      LG has always been second tier to Samsung. And I think they always will be.

      • darkknezz

        recently yes but if you look back before the smartphone boom samsung was second tier to LG. That’s a fact Jack!

        • nightscout13

          If you look at the big picture, you’re wrong. TV’s, gadgets, LG was always second place. Especially TV’s. For example, LG uses passive 3D, Samsung uses Active 3D. With passive 3D you lose 50% of the pixels.

          • RhodBerth

            LG’s passive 3D TV’s are considered to be better 3D TV’s then Samsung’s active 3D TV’s, by almost everyone who used both of them.

            I first bought an active samsung 3D TV, and hardly used it for 3D purposes. The active glasses were uneasy, and expensive, the screen was flickering unless I watched in a dark room, and it caused headaches.

            Now I have an LG 3D passive TV, and all these problems are gone.

            Indeed, if you look very closely from a short distance, you can see small black lines b/c of the passive effect. That’s the downside. But it’s not noticeble when you’re watching a movie in Full HD.

            And it is a lot better then uneasy thick glasses that flicker and cause headaches.

            I had setup both the LG and Samsung 3D TV next to eachother, putted Avatar Full HD on on both. putted on 2 glasses on top of eachother, so that I could easily switch. I didn’t notice a quality difference, though the LG was definitely easier on the eyes.

            It comes down to the question, are you an visio-phile that wants the best TV quality, and want to accept the side effects, then pick the active TV from Samsung. Like an audiophile would always prefer an old vinyl above an mp3.

            But if you’re an average TV watcher, then don’t even bother to consider the Active TV.

            Like I said, I started with the Samsung and was simply turned over.

          • nightscout13

            I first started with a 58″ Plasma Samsung 3D. Loved it. Kids broke the Plasma. So I then bought a 55″ LG Passive 3D. I was appalled at the difference in 3D quality. You lose HALF the resolution to the passive system. That is unacceptable. Some people have headaches from passive 3D technology too, so don’t think that somehow passive = safer. I hated the loss of pixels so much, that I sold the LG, and bought a Samsung 3D LED, which I have now, and I LOVE it. So much better than passive. I couldn’t even enjoy passive, too much pixel loss. The only people I can imagine that would enjoy a Passive 3D experience, are people with blurred vision, that can’t tell the difference anyway.

          • RhodBerth

            So you bought a new TV, broke it, then bought an LG, which you hated, so you bought a Samsung TV again. That must mean that you’re a visiophile, b/c I doubt that many people would spend that much money on their new TV, especially if it’s only about the 3D, which is about 5% of the movies one watches and 0% of the TV one watches…

            Further you only talk about the missing pixels, which is hardly noticable. Like I said, unless you really really focus. But I admit, it’s there.
            You ignore all the rest I said. Watching active during daylight is simply terrible. You totally ignore that, together with the expensive and annoying glasses. The other factually truth is that active 3D also makes you lose half the screen. your left eye is covered 50% of the time and so is your right eye covered 50% of the time.
            The thing is that for both active and passive your mind makes up most of it.

            I can show you my TV setup of when I had both tv’s side to side: http://plomp.eu/IMG1914.jpg. Can you show both your TV’s?

            You’re so black/white in your opinion. I can hardly believe that you have truely had both passive and active tv’s.

          • nightscout13

            First, the 3 TV purchases happened over a time period of 1.5 years. My first 3D TV was in 2010. Second, passive 3D is just as horrible in sunlight as active 3D. Who the fack watches 3D in the sunlight? Do you watch 3D movies at the theater with no roof during the day? Anyone can pull pictures off the internet and claim they have a certain gadget, not saying you did that, but a photo proves nothing. Besides, I have only my es6580 right now, I don’t have the other TV’s like i mentioned earlier. I don’t need your approval regarding my factual ownership of my TV. I know I have it, and that’s what satisfies me. You bring up the 50% left 50% right S.B.S. thing, but you forget that with passive it’s also the same way. You have the side-by-side video, PLUS you lose 50% pixels. I don’t understand how you think that the quality is better on passive, when there are hundreds of reviews pointing out otherwise. here’s one: http://cnet.co/Kb12hs

            I understand that you want to defend your decision for purchasing and liking your passive 3D TV, and that’s fine. Whatever floats your boat man, I’m not gonna hate on you for liking what you like. But don’t try to make it seem like passive is a better experience than active. Maybe for you passive is better, but for the majority of people who have actually tried both, Active is better hands down. If you want quality, you go with active. The glasses are now $20 each on samsung.com that doesn’t seem expensive to me……

          • RhodBerth

            1. I confirmed that the quality is better on active.
            2. I can make a new picture with that same background right now, just tell me what I should put in front of the TV (now just only the LG) proof it’s really my house 😉
            3. I confirmed that both active and passive have the ‘50% loss’ thing. Active loses eye sight 50% of the time (50% for left, 50% for right), passive loses half the screen lines. In the end both are hardly noticable.
            4. I wasn’t saying that I was watching TV in full sunlight, I said during daylight. In the summer I often watch movies in the evening, while it’s bright outside. with passive 3D that’s possible. With active it’s hardly possible.
            5. I don’t want to defend my purchase. I made a purchase and changed mind. I just hope that 3D will break through b/c I’m a 3D lover. (I have a 3D laptop, a 3D phone/camera and a 3D TV). Everybody I know that has a passive TV hardly watched 3D movies b/c of the troubles I mentioned. And they all say that my passive is much better for general experience. (though quality is better on active). I just hope that people won’t buy an active 3D TV, and then reject 3D based on that experience. That’s my point.

            I would advise people to experience both systems and then decide. And then they could take the things I mentioned in consideration.
            What matters most to them, the quality or the experience.

          • nightscout13

            What size TV are you using, and how far are you sitting when using 3D. I sit about 7 feet from a 55″

          • RhodBerth

            LG 42LM620s (42″)
            About 3,5 meter.

      • LionStone

        I think that might change with the Optimus G Pro…that thing neuters the Note 2.

        • nightscout13

          You need to remember that the Optimus G Pro will go against the Note 3, not the Note 2. You’re comparing it to the wrong phone.

          • LionStone

            Yea, I think it’ll be nicer than the 3 also. Idk, maybe if the N3 has a really great screen but I don’t think it will?

          • nightscout13

            We’ll just have to wait and see.

  • Well, hopefully they’ll announce stuff that’ll make people G a F