The Moto G (2015) Review
by Brandon Chester on August 19, 2015 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Smartphones
- Mobile
Display
Since a smartphone is primarily a large display that you interact with, it's important that manufacturers prioritize including a high quality display. As smartphones advanced we first saw increases to display resolution to improve sharpness, as well as a shift from TN displays to VA or IPS panels in order to improve viewing angle. With specs like resolution reaching a point where there isn't much more improvement to be made, manufacturers have moved on to improving display accuracy. While some have begun to focus on the color accuracy of their mid-range devices, others have not. To evaluate the various aspects of a display we use X-Rite's i1Pro 2 spectrophotometer along with their i1Display Pro colorimeter, and SpectraCal's CalMAN 5 software.
The Moto G has a good peak brightness, although the black level is higher than most recent devices, including the 2015 Moto E. What makes the Moto G somewhat difficult to use outdoors despite its brightness is the fact that the display seems fairly reflective, and the capacitive touch sensors show up very easily in the light which creates a pattern that obscures the content on the LCD.
The Moto G's gamma is very accurate, but the overall greyscale accuracy is let down by the panel's blue shift. The white point average is 7627K, which is noticeably more blue than the desired average of 6504K. From 20% grey onward one can notice the blue tint in grey shades, and in the end the average error is a somewhat disappointing 4.5532, with the error in the lightest shades being even higher at around six. In all of these aspects, the 2015 Moto G's display actually regresses significantly from the 2014 model. It's not clear if this is just model variance, or if this is applicable to all versions, but in any case it is disappointing.
In our saturation sweep test we see that blue has a degree of over-saturation at all points, with saturations past 60% overshooting significantly. Red demonstrates some saturation compression, and there's general inaccuracy in yellow, cyan, and most of all, magenta. This is another situation where the 2015 Moto G's display regresses compared to the 2014 edition, and it's to a much more significant degree than the greyscale test, with the older 2014 Moto G having achieved a result that rivals high end smartphones.
Due to the inaccuracy in the greyscale and in rendering primary and secondary colors there's not much hope for accurate reproduction of color mixtures on the 2015 Moto G's display. Shades of green tend to have a decent level of accuracy, but most other colors and shades of grey suffer from over-saturation or under-saturation depending on what primary/secondary color they most relate to, and are just generally inaccurate. When using the Moto G this was fairly evident to me throughout the UI, particularly on icons that I see very often such as those for Google's own apps.
While I don't know how consistent the calibration across Motorola's devices is, based on the results measured for our samples of the 2014 and 2015 Moto G it's clear that the display of the 2015 model regresses in most respects. Peak brightness increases substantially which is appreciated, and maintaining black level has boosted contrast. Unfortunately, the display is far too blue, and this causes significant greyscale errors despite the display's relatively straight and accurate gamma. The inaccuracies in rendering primary and secondary colors combined with the greyscale errors means that there aren't many shades the display actually does render accurately outside of some that primarily consist of a green component. Ultimately I'm let down by the Moto G's display, because this year's model saw no upgrade to resolution, and I had hoped that there would be some improvement, or at the very least no reduction in the display accuracy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
90 Comments
View All Comments
Cod3rror - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link
I wish Motorola hadn't released two different versions (1GB / 2GB). I knew what would happen and what I expected is exactly what happened... almost all retailers and carriers in Europe/UK are stocking only the 1GB version and 2GB is nowhere to be found. Plus, because of the weak Euro, the 2GB version, if ordered from Motorola UK, comes out at 300 euro, which is very expensive. But don't get me wrong, even if it cost almost the same, the retailers and carriers would still stock the cheaper version.dan.swain - Saturday, September 12, 2015 - link
I agree with you, My wife has the Moto G 2015 16GB. Got it from Moto website the sales experience was terrible but I couldn't just buy the 16Gb in a shop so frustration ensued. The phone itself is great though, my wife can get multiple days out if it. At just over £200 it seemed a better deal than £200 Apple wanted for a refurbished IPhone 5c.wurizen - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link
It seems like this review confirms my suspicion of the new Moto G 2015 regarding the back cover flush gate. Feeling the back cover of a phone inch forward or push inwards when gripping it is a sign of a cheap phone to me. And we know that this is a cheap, budget phone, but, the Moto G 2014 doesn't have this issue. I am also looking at the profile picture of the Moto G 2015 and it looks bulkier than the Moto G 2014. Or it seems bulkier because the removable back cover of the 2015 is not halfway but below the Power and Volume buttons. Whereas, the Moto G 2014's back cover is exactly halfway from front to back, so it goes halfway up from the Power and Volume buttons making the phone--on a design perspective--look and feel balanced!What makes me sad is that I don't think Motorola had to sacrifice this decrease in "Phone Feel" and "Phone Ergonomics" or "Phone Design." Whatever you wanna call it.
I mean, did the design of the Moto G 2015 change because Motorola wanted it to be waterproof? Or, did Motorola purposely make a fatter Moto G 2015 so people will buy their other more expensive phones? Let the conspiracy theories begin!
My other gripe is that Best Buy, which is the only store I know in the U.S. that carries the Moto G unlocked version doesn't even have the new Moto G 2015 on display so customers can feel and hold it in their hands. I mean, imagine Samsung or Apple doing this? It would never happen. Yet, Motorola is letting Best Buy not have a display version. I also asked if they had the phone on sale and if they could open a box and let me hold one. But, they said that they didn't have any available. I then asked if they had sold out and they said, yes.
Also, there is no white version available at Best Buy and no 2 GB/16 GB variant available. Just the 1GB RAM and black one.
Can someone tell me why this is? What kind of marketing scheme is at work here?
Demon-Xanth - Thursday, August 20, 2015 - link
The reason why no 2/16 variant is that they are basically sold out everywhere. I'm guessing production focused on the black 1/8 due to anticipated demand. They aren't mythical devices. Just selling like cold beer at a county fair. Yes, I will be replacing my ATT XT1045 with a retail 2/16 when I can. The only problems I've had have been I'd like more RAM, a better camera, less "extra apps", and updates that aren't delayed until the second coming of christ. This covers all of them.stlc8tr - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link
"I don't think anyone buying a device like the Moto G will have adopted an 802.11ac router at this point anyway due to cost reasons."An AC router is roughly $75 on Amazon. It's not exactly a huge outlay so I think more points should be deducted for the lack of 5Ghz support. The 2.4Ghz band can be very crowded so being limited to only 2.4Ghz is a serious flaw, IMO.
Moto1 - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link
Dude, its 179$. Seriously?stlc8tr - Thursday, August 20, 2015 - link
Yes, I'm serious. In my neighborhood, there are so many 2.4Ghz WiFi networks that using my 2.4Ghz WiFi is hit or miss. I can't even use a Chromecast as the streaming times out half the time.So I avoid any devices that are 2.4Ghz only.
neogodless - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link
As this is a phone, could you comment on the speaker quality at all? It sounds like it still has stereo speakers like the 2014 model. Are they the exact same?hans_ober - Wednesday, August 19, 2015 - link
They're not stereo, bottom is a loudspeaker.neogodless - Tuesday, August 25, 2015 - link
That's too bad! The 2014 had stereo. In the search for "no compromises" including stereo speakers, I ended up with a Nexus 6.