I have to agree with
@VasilisV_3CX on this. Years ago we purchased some Grandstream phones (unsupported at the time) and they worked fine, but we NEVER used the video conferencing feature after the initial tests. Not because the feature did not work (they worked fine), but the ease of using other tools (3CX webmeeting, Teams, Zoom) caused us to gravitate away from physical phones (for video).
I have a Yealink T49G sitting on my desk, but just as we never used the Granstream phones, we never used the Yealink phones for video either. Frankly, I don't use a physical phone at all anymore.
This is going back several years ago, but at that time Webmeeting, Teams, and Zoom all handled low-bandwidth situations better than either of the physical phones we tried, and bandwidth issues with the phones increased as we added more participants. Perhaps the phones have improved since our testing. The only advantages the phones had over using a tool like 3CX Webmeeting were:
- No need for a headset
- No need for a computer
- No user challenges with selecting the correct audio / video drivers
For a two-person video call, the screen size was not a problem with either phone, but as you would expect a computer monitor (I use a 4K TV as a monitor) works much better as the number of participants increases, not to mention many of the other features built into the web-based tools such as screen sharing.
For what it is worth, in my experience, spending money on expensive video phones is a complete waste of money. Nobody will use the video feature after the first week.
