Moto X: The camera on this phone is an absolute joke

[tmann202]

Agreed...I am on my third moto x...the photos are also very inconsistent indoors..the same "still" indoor scene looks entirely different from one snap to the next...its difficult (at least for me ) to carry a newly invested phone which has a camera that is inferior to my almost one and a half year old phone. While I am at it, the sound quality is also poorer than my iphone 5 (more than obvious if you use a high end headphone). I still prefer android..and other features of the moto x are lustworthy (I am staring at the walnut back with the metallic orange accents while I complete the RMA request) but this was not the replacement i was hoping for. I will wait now for the xperia z1 compact if it ever makes it to these shores...

For discussion in another thread, but anyway as soon as my phone arrives I will be installing a new music player. The consensus best sounding one is Neutron although the interface isn't top notch.

 

[someguy01234]

that makes no sense at all.

No, I'm going to have to agree on that point. iPhones have some of the best sound quality out of headphone jack, they use high quality sound chips. Most Android phones aren't tuned as well. This don't tell the whole story and I don't generally quote gsmarena, but this is one aspect they get right in their review:
iPhone: http://cdn.gsmarena.com/vv/reviewsimg/apple-iphone-5s/gsmarena_a001.png
Moto X: http://cdn.gsmarena.com/vv/reviewsimg/moto-x/gsmarena_a001.png

Ideally for the most accurate sound you want a completely flat line. With that said, the Moto X still have very good dynamic so I'm still happy with it, but it can't qualify as audiophile grade. If you notice in the graph, the bass frequencies is really rolled off and missing some high end clarity as well.

It's still one of the best sounding Android phone I had in term of speaker which is well tuned, even better than the iPhone 5 which sound harsher to me. But if you want absolute accurate headphone output I would go with iPhone or Galaxy S/S3/S4. The Galaxy S, S3 and S4 use Wolfson sound chip which are very high quality (but too bad the unneeded Samsung software suite ruin the phone).

But returning the Moto X three times in hope of a better camera is a lost cause. Wait for software updates or use a third party camera app.

ps. Beats doesn't count.

sent via Le Motonovo X

 

[tmann202]

No, I'm going to have to agree on that point. iPhones have some of the best sound quality out of headphone jack, they use high quality sound chips. Most Android phones aren't tuned as well. This don't tell the whole story and I don't generally quote gsmarena, but this is one aspect they get right in their review:
iPhone: http://cdn.gsmarena.com/vv/reviewsimg/apple-iphone-5s/gsmarena_a001.png
Moto X: http://cdn.gsmarena.com/vv/reviewsimg/moto-x/gsmarena_a001.png

Ideally for the most accurate sound you want a completely flat line. With that said, the Moto X still have very good dynamic so I'm still happy with it, but it can't qualify as audiophile grade. If you notice in the graph, the bass frequencies is really rolled off and missing some high end clarity as well.

It's still one of the best sounding Android phone I had in term of speaker which is well tuned, even better than the iPhone 5 which sound harsher to me. But if you want absolute accurate headphone output I would go with iPhone or Galaxy S/S3/S4. The Galaxy S, S3 and S4 use Wolfson sound chip which are very high quality (but too bad the unneeded Samsung software suite ruin the phone).

But returning the Moto X three times in hope of a better camera is a lost cause. Wait for software updates or use a third party camera app.

ps. Beats doesn't count.

sent via Le Motonovo X

or better yet a dedicated audio player.

also FYI I'm pretty sure I read that that US Galaxies do not have the Wolfson chip.

 

[someguy01234]

or better yet a dedicated audio player.

also FYI I'm pretty sure I read that that US Galaxies do not have the Wolfson chip.

That is correct, for S3 and S4 only, but I don't buy carrier locked phones (unless used and unlocking it).

You can get a used Samsung Captivate for $60 on eBay and use Voodoo Sound with it to get great sound, better than an mp3 player at the same price.

sent via Le Motonovo X

 

[tmann202]

That is correct, for S3 and S4 only, but I don't buy carrier locked phones (unless used and unlocking it).

You can get a used Samsung Captivate for $60 on eBay and use Voodoo Sound with it to get great sound, better than an mp3 player at the same price.

sent via Le Motonovo X

I have never heard that phone, but I'd be surprised if any phone can sound as good as say a Sansa Clip Zip, especially a Rockboxed one, which you can get for $30-$35.

 

[Haalcyon]

I have never heard it, but I'd be surprised if any phone can sound as good as say a Sansa Clip Zip, especially a Rockboxed one, which you can get for $30-$35.

TBH, I think most phones/portable players are used in places with the extra audio quality can't really be heard unless you're listening at unhealthy volumes. Now, if you're talking about a relatively quiet office that's a different story but anywhere outside listening to headphones and there's going to be so much background noise that I wonder if someone could tell the difference between say something really good like an iPhone or a G2 and something with average sound like a Note 3 or Moto X.


Sent from my liberated Titanium iPad Air LTE 

 

[tmann202]

TBH, I think most phones/portable players are used in places with the extra audio quality can't really be heard unless you're listening at unhealthy volumes. Now, if you're talking about a relatively quiet office that's a different story but anywhere outside listening to headphones and there's going to be so much background noise that I wonder if someone could tell the difference between say something really good like an iPhone or a G2 and something with average sound like a Note 3 or Moto X.


Sent from my liberated Titanium iPad Air LTE 

Without a doubt, with a decent pair of IEMs that block out some background noise (so you DON'T have to have them at earbleed levels) you can tell the difference between a decent dedicated player and a phone. Although I was glad to see somewhere that someone thought that Neutron on a Moto X sounded almost as good as their Clip Zip.

 

[Haalcyon]

Without a doubt, with a decent pair of IEMs that block out some background noise (so you DON'T have to have them at earbleed levels) you can tell the difference between a decent dedicated player and a phone. Although I was glad to see somewhere that someone thought that Neutron on a Moto X sounded almost as good as their Clip Zip.

Ahh, thanks for the correction.


Sent from my liberated Titanium iPad Air LTE 

 

[anon(4931742)]

The low light abilities are a joke. Daylight photos and videos are quite acceptable for a smartphone.

Try after the 4.4.2 Update. I could see a significant difference in low light pics. Especially, when taken without flash.

 

[anon(4931742)]

Few pics which i tried today

 

[someguy01234]

I have never heard that phone, but I'd be surprised if any phone can sound as good as say a Sansa Clip Zip, especially a Rockboxed one, which you can get for $30-$35.

There are many Galaxy S variants: Vibrant (t-mo), Captivate (att), Infuse 4G (att, with Galaxy SII body and screen but Galaxy S performance), Galaxy S 4G (t-mo), Fascinate (vzn), Nexus S.

They all use this WM8994 WolfsonDAC. And SuperCurio's Voodoo Sound app can tune its hardware to provide direct lineout.

To this day, it is still one of the best sounding Android phone. Consider all Galaxy S have 16gb of internal, aside from Nexus they have mirosd slot support. That makes for 48gb of storage for music. And you get a bigger screen and lots of apps to chose from, it's a very good choice for an mp3 player.

 

[Cane Prevost]

Many of the washed out pics look like misused HDR. Don't have the phone yet so can't test. If you use HDR in the wrong setting it will wash out photos and make them look hazy.

 

[tmann202]

Few pics which i tried today
View attachment 104352
View attachment 104354
View attachment 104356
View attachment 104357

These are with the standard camera and no adjustments? If so, doesn't look too bad.


.

 

[Omkar Guru]

Can you please taek a few pics in relatively dark environment and upload full size pic. This will seal the deal for me, currently only camera is holding me from shooting for an Ebony Moto X.

Thanks in advance

 

[anon(4931742)]

These are with the standard camera and no adjustments? If so, doesn't look too bad.
.

Yes, stock camera with no post processing except for cropping on two pics.

 

[redeyss]

Can you please taek a few pics in relatively dark environment and upload full size pic. This will seal the deal for me, currently only camera is holding me from shooting for an Ebony Moto X.

Thanks in advance

Here are two identical pics in low light, one taken with MX and the other Lumia 925. What can I say, I use a MX because I like it!!

Sent from my XT1053 using AC Forums mobile app

 

[Cozume]

Here are two identical pics in low light, one taken with MX and the other Lumia 925. What can I say, I use a MX because I like it!!

It looks like the Moto X flash didn't go off.

 

[redeyss]

No flash on either camera, lumia set to night mode.

This is a totally unfair comparison as the lumia is well known for its low light performance but I do it to make a point. Don't attempt certain shots on the MX and you won't be disappointed.

Sent from my XT1053 using AC Forums mobile app

 

[Cozume]

No flash on either camera, lumia set to night mode.

I would like to see the Moto X with auto flash on vs. lumia in night mode. That seems like a better comparison since Moto X doesn't have night mode.

 

[redeyss]

Here is MX (1st) with flash vs. Lumia night mode(2nd). I like the flash of the x except the red eye I often get.

Sent from my XT1053 using AC Forums mobile app