There is nothing particularly wrong with your solution.

But my personal preference would be that those methods are not that useful. And just complicate the interface of whatever object they are part off.

The `void moveCameraTo(double latitude, double longitude)` doesn't really simplify the code, as I see no problem simply calling `moveCameraTo(new LatLng(latitude, longitude));` in it's place. This method also smells of primitive obsession.

The `void moveCameraTo(Location location)` could be better solved by proving `Location.ToLatLng()` method and calling `moveCameraTo(location.ToLatLng())`.

If such a methods were truly necessary, I would prefer them as extension methods instead of instance methods. Usage of extension methods would become really obvious if you tried abstract away and unit-test this instance. As it would be much easier to just fake out single method instead of multiple overloads with simple conversions.

> I think that with this way I eliminate the responsibility of knowing what is a LatLng in another class, for example.

I see no reason why this would be a problem. As long as your code references class that contains `void moveCameraTo(LatLng latLng)`, it still indirectly depends on `LatLng`. Even if that class is never directly instantiated.

> And you do not need to prepare the data before calling the function.

I don't understand what you mean. If it means creating new instance or transforming classes from one into another, I see no problem with that.