The highs and lows of Pantech: check out some of the maker's best and worst phones over the years


Founded in 1991, Pantech was once a company that successfully sparred with its more popular compatriots, Samsung and LG, but if recent reports are to be believed, the large handset maker might cease to exist soon. Due to one reason or another, the handset maker couldn't position itself as a leading player in the post-feature phone era and establish itself as a viable competition in the Android era.

Like any other manufacturer, Pantech also had its highs and lows - some of its phones were actually pretty good, while others are best forgotten. In lieu with the rumors that the manufacturer is about to hang it up, we decided to delve in and explore what were the best and worst Pantech devices of all time.


Pantech Perception 


One of Pantech's 2013 budget offerings, the Perception, was quite a disappointing device - it did not only come with an outdated version of Android, it also had a pretty poor camera performance, while calling someone made you sound like a cyborg.

Pantech Pocket


Blame it on the sluggish performance, the unimpressive rear camera, or the appalling display, but the Pantech Pocket is probably among the reasons why Pantech is where it is now. Yes, we know it's a device from late 2011, but it is the perfect example of phone that will only impress you if it catches fire after midnight.


Pantech Swift


Arguably the worst Pantech phone we've ever reviewed, the Pantech Swift was a feature phone running on Qualcomm's Brew mobile platform. Apart from the notable build of the handset, we can highlight nothing else about the handset in question.



Pantech Discover


With Android 4.0 on board, the Pantech Discover was an affordable 4.8-inch device from early 2013. Save for its sub-par display and unimpressive performance, the Discover was the living proof that Pantech can actually make nice phones if it really put its heart into it.

This notable Pantech device from 2012 was one of the most affordable ways to experience Android Jelly Bean at its time. With a 4.3-inch screen (which pretty standard as per 2012's standards) and a Snapdragon S4 humming inside, the Pantech Flex offered a lot of buck for the money.



Pantech Burst


By far one of the best Pantech phones that have ever set foot in our office. The Burst had a dual-core 1.5GHz chipset, LTE, a 4" AMOLED display at the front, a 5MP rear camera, microSD card slot, and a 1,650mAh battery - it was certainly not a powerhouse, but turned out to be a surprisingly-adequate device which also commanded a low price. 

FEATURED VIDEO

15 Comments

1. crazymonkey05

Posts: 189; Member since: Nov 20, 2012

Hey PA, what about the Pantech Vega iron series? Those phones looked stunning and beautiful.

14. Neo_Huang

Posts: 1067; Member since: Dec 06, 2013

They haven't reviewed those.

2. waystriker

Posts: 9; Member since: Jun 22, 2012

I believe PA have forgotten Pantech Korean Version for South Korea only, I'm currently using the last model of Pantech phone, it's Sky Vega A910L, with SD801 onboard, everything works very smoothly, especially the camera with OIS, great in low-light condition. I love Pantech, but sadly they're filing for bankruptcy.

3. NexusX

Posts: 613; Member since: May 16, 2013

this is a problem for the korean economy, an economy dominated by few conglomerates backed by governments would discourage competition this is the reason why you'd never see a price drop in samsung, lg flagships. if they keep this up, their electronic industry would soon be surpassed by the chinese in both pricing and technological advance since they are all running same software and hardware difference is getting more and more negligible lack of patent protection in china have their benefits sometimes...just look at all the high-end cheap android phones coming out of china. you'd wonder how these small chinese oems are staying afloat financially. i guess when an industry is as saturated as making android phones, quantities>qualities

5. NomNom

Posts: 1; Member since: Apr 22, 2015

This is why Chinese companies are disgusting. China has no respect for other people's intellectual property, and they profit tremendously from it by selling lots of cheap junk to poor people. While on the other hand you have legit companies bite the dust because of unfair competition. Only way to teach a criminal like China is to stay away from their cheap imitations.

7. NexusX

Posts: 613; Member since: May 16, 2013

so samsung, the biggest south korean company, with full government backing never copied or stole any tech from their competitors? didn't samsung use to make shiit for the western market like the chinese do before they got big? are you saying that poor people do not deserve to be connected as people of the first world? internet is made for the first world?

8. NexusX

Posts: 613; Member since: May 16, 2013

one has to be delusional to look at samsung's latest flagship and not see any design clue from iphone. at least the chinese have the decencies to reasonably price their knockoffs

9. seven7dust unregistered

samsung got convicted of religiously copying the iPhone 3g with their first galaxy s clone phone , now again everyone agrees they couldn't make a good phone with the s5 and suffered profit loss. so they copied yet again, samsung is a convicted copycat , you can't have it both ways, when it comes Chinese companies many like oppo are original far more than samsung and their iPhone copy home button galaxy phones.

10. pendragon0202

Posts: 164; Member since: Feb 23, 2015

So name me a company who doesn't? Just because Benz has made an automobile Ford or GM has to make cars with 6 wheels just to avoid copying? When the Japanese saw their own bow and arrow were no match for the western Muskets, they purchased few from the Portuguese and mass manufactured "copies" of their own. And that is how we humans improved the technology. SONY has copied RCA and Zenith for their TVs during 70's and yet they eventually became a technology leader later on. Samsung copied SONY and so on. Toyota seeing their limitation on global brand in terms of luxury segment had to create LEXUS and emulated Mercedes and BMW during the 80's and no one denied how much their initial designs "copied" the Germans. But LEXUS is a fine car now and we as consumers have nothing but benefitting from them. Germans had to lower their price increase and improve their product to fend off the Japanese competition. Industry and technology evolved by "copying" and "improving". You call knock offs without any technology of their own "copycats". But you cannot call Samsung with the biggest spending on R&D, who also happen to be one of companies with most mobile related patent a cheap copy cat just because the bottom part of the S6 resembles the iPhone. For that matter I respect companies like Huawei who actually invest on their R&D compared to some Chinese OEMs who merely assembles parts and make iPhone knock offs. And that is how we as consumers will benefit through competition.

11. NexusX

Posts: 613; Member since: May 16, 2013

Copying is learning, learning leads to creating, I'm all for competition, I'm saying criminalizing entire country like china for learning and boycotting their products is backward

12. NexusX

Posts: 613; Member since: May 16, 2013

I'm not accusing anyone of copying, all I'm saying is south Korea needs to encourage domestic competition, if they want what's best for their economy. The Chinese OEM's are still competing for the biggest pie of china, onCE they start realizing their share of the pie is getting smaller, they'd flood the international market with their cheap phones that are just as capable as Samsung, lg flagships, if Samsung and lg stops shipping, SK economy would take huge hit

15. OrangeConsultant

Posts: 1; Member since: Apr 27, 2015

@seven7dust You must be of the type that believes OJ Simpson was innocent. There's a reason that proper legal systems include the appeals process. Mistakes happen. That verdict is going to be shortlived because Samsung will most likely prevail in the appeals court for 2 significant reasons. Pior art and jury tampering by the jury foreman. There's a plethora of prior art that invalidates Apple's bogus patents, including Samsung's own products. The USPTO is infamous for granting invalid patents, so Apple should have never been able to sue anyone in the first place. Which leads to the 2nd point. This crucial evidence of prior art was obfuscated by the jury foreman during deliberation and he intentionally misled the jury. This jury foreman also lied during the voir dire process, which puts another black mark on the verdict. Also you can't have it both ways. If you're going to point to one court ruling to call someone a convicted copycat, then you need to also call Apple a convicted copycat too because Apple lost the majority of the trials around the world against Samsung. Truth is Apple copied Samsung's round home button design on the SGH-Z610 released a year before the iPhone came out, while Apple also copied the LG Prada design released several months before the iPhone. This is just two examples out of many. Facts show that Apple is the one that religiously copies so much, that it's almost shocking they're not Chinese.

4. osanilevich

Posts: 287; Member since: Sep 29, 2009

>pantech article >only one slider phone

6. gaming64 unregistered

The design looks like 2011 phones. It never seemed updated. I can see why it went bankrupt :(

13. corporateJP

Posts: 2458; Member since: Nov 28, 2009

These guys haven't made a solid phone in ten years, not since that dual-slider feature phone...

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.