x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Nokia Lumia 630 Review

Nokia Lumia 630

Posted: , by Victor H.




The 5-megapixel camera is of middling quality - it captures images with good detail, but colors are often way off.

The Lumia 630 comes with a 5-megapixel auto-focus camera. Unfortunately, the camera has no flash, and there is no front-facing camera either. Looking at the tech detail sheet, you’d see this 5-megapixel shooter comes with a tiny, even for smartphone standards, 1/4” image sensor. On top of that sensor sits a wide 28mm lens with rather narrow f/2.4 aperture.

Nokia, however, stands out with a great camera app, Nokia Camera, available exclusively for Lumia handsets. Nokia Camera has got a very convenient interface, rich in manual controls that don’t get in the way when you don’t need them. The camera app is a bit slow to start (especiall cold-start), but once it’s loaded navigating the interface is quick and convenient, with intuitive and handy sliders for features like focus (you have manual focus!), white balance, ISO, etc. Interestingly, in the app drawer, you can find another camera app that has a slightly different look, but is similar in functionality. We prefer the Nokia Camera interface, though.

When it comes to the actual quality of images shot on the 5-megapixel shooter, though, we’ve seen better. Images are not terrible by any means - they are definitely usable, and in fact they have good detail. However, colors are definitely off and this is the biggest issue for this camera. Some of the pictures look blueish, some - a bit greenish, but generally colors are not accurately represented, and images all tend to look as if they were taken through, say, a rusty glass. The speed of capturing images is also nothing to write home about - auto-focusing is on the slow side, and there is also no HDR mode.

Indoors, images turn out similar in quality, with a tendency to blur detail more because of the scarce lighting, but colors are still on the cold side.

Image size:
Use our samples comparison tool to see photos from more phones

Camera speed

Taking a pic (sec)Lower is better Taking an HDR pic (sec)Lower is better CamSpeed score Higher is better CamSpeed score with flash Higher is better
Nokia Lumia 630 6.5
No data
No data
Motorola Moto G 3
Sony Xperia M 3.3
Nokia Lumia 620 4.2
No data
View all

The 5-megapixel shooter records video at up to 720p at 30 frames per second, and the quality of the recordings is again okay, but not particularly good. Videos turn out fairly smooth, with almost no dropped frames, but they lack a lot in details and dynamics, to the point where naturally appearing color gradients in the sky appear in stripes rather than smoothly flowing. There’s also a pronouncedrolling shutter effect. On a more positive node, sound recorded from the mics is of decent quality.


The vivid display is a great asset for video on the go, and Nokia’s MixRadio music app offers affordable music streaming.

With a vivid 4.5” display, the Lumia 630 has got the core asset for enjoying media on the go. It chewed through major video codecs with ease and we were able to play back 720p files with no slowdown.

For music, Nokia’s MixRadio is traditionally a great option for enjoying music on the go. It has Spotify-like on-demand music streaming at a very low price, but you can also use a lot of the functionality for free. In addition, you also have Microsoft’s standard Music application with tight integration for the rich Xbox Music catalog, where you can purchase tunes. Music output via the loudspeaker is indeed loud and sounds very decent.

Audio output

Headphones output power (Volts)
Higher is better
Nokia Lumia 630 0.58
Motorola Moto G 0.53
Sony Xperia M 0.15
Nokia Lumia 620 0.48
Loudspeaker loudness (dB)
Higher is better
Nokia Lumia 630 74
Motorola Moto G 87
Sony Xperia M 79
Nokia Lumia 620 74
View all

  • Options

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 03:55

1. BattleBrat (Posts: 1476; Member since: 26 Oct 2011)

Victor H, could you please be so kind as to contact me. I have an idea for an article

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 03:57

2. eldyagustius (Posts: 177; Member since: 30 Oct 2013)

is BBM preinstalled in this phone?

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 04:48

7. NotAGeek (Posts: 279; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)

I think that's only for the indonesian market

posted on 20 Jul 2014, 17:20

27. hideyaku89 (Posts: 1; Member since: 15 Oct 2011)

no, it's not,, I bought 630 3 dayss a go and there's no BBM preinstaled

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 04:14

3. peace247 (Posts: 498; Member since: 26 Apr 2014)

Ambient light sensor for call...?
I think it is the proximity sensor...

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 05:32

14. billgates (banned) (Posts: 555; Member since: 29 May 2014)

Not in this phone sir.

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 04:14

4. hipnotika (Posts: 353; Member since: 06 Mar 2013)

no flash :(

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 04:23 4

5. andro. (Posts: 1999; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)

Ive seen this phone on sale with some mobile networks for 130 euros on prepay,its a decent offering for that. Think the review slightly forgets its a budget level smartphone

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 04:57 1

8. boosook (Posts: 1442; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)

The problem is that it's not so budget level... Nokia set a price which is too high for a phone with so many limitations (512MB of ram, no flash, no front camera, no ambient light sensor and all the other things listed in the CONS section of the review).
It has almost the same price of the Moto G, yet the Moto G is in another league... it has an HD screen, more ram, it's faster (look at the tests) and it's a full-featured smartphone.
The 630 sits between the Moto E and the Moto G, but its price is close to the latter.

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 05:04 1

10. lalalaman (Posts: 637; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)

moto g is much more expensive in my country....around $55 higher than 630

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 05:14 3

11. boosook (Posts: 1442; Member since: 19 Nov 2012)

IMHO it's worth them! :)

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 05:38 3

15. ihavenoname (Posts: 1693; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)

It's DEFINITELY worth it.

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 05:22 1

13. muhsen (Posts: 281; Member since: 07 Jun 2012)

in the Uk, it costs the same as Moto E which is alot worse( S400 vs S200).
While reviewing, they should have considered all countries, not just theirs.

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 06:21 2

17. eldyagustius (Posts: 177; Member since: 30 Oct 2013)

512MB for windows phone is enough if you compared it with android smartphones..

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 06:39 1

18. dr.c33 (Posts: 19; Member since: 31 May 2014)

Ok, I bet you want the Lumia 930 to come with 512 MB of RAM too right? Yes I admit Windows Phone is fluid even with 512 MB of RAM, and Android isn't (but it is far more capable). The point is, you are paying a lot for 512MB of RAM. That's like saying just because WP always runs smooth, L930 should come with the least capable hardware possible and demand a high price.

WP should use its fluidity as an advantage and not as an excuse. Yes, implement 512 MB of RAM is fluid, but cut the price down by at least $50 USD while you are at it.

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 19:55

23. eldyagustius (Posts: 177; Member since: 30 Oct 2013)

I think the lumia 630 is fairly cheap like 520 in my country though it has only 512MB RAM.

posted on 06 Jun 2014, 07:44

24. dr.c33 (Posts: 19; Member since: 31 May 2014)

No it isn't. It's bordering $200. You know what I can get with $200? On the android side, Moto G and Xiaomi 2S and Hongmi Note. On the WP side, I can get the HTC 8X with a 720P screen and slimmer profile. If I just add 50 bucks I can get a L920.

Stop making excuses for this thing they call a "budget" phone.

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 04:28

6. ihavenoname (Posts: 1693; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)

I'd say that good device for price. However, eventhough Moto G is slightly more expensive in some regions, I'd still have it all day. It has much better screen, build quality is very good and solid, it has customizable back plates, better OS, as PA said, slightly better camera with flash. But you can't go seriously wrong with either.

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 05:02 2

9. lalalaman (Posts: 637; Member since: 19 Aug 2013)

well dual sim version is $170 in my country whereas Moto G is around $220....that makes both of them great devices for their price range....i wonder why it is expensive in US

Plus nokia should have named that phone Lumia 530,it is nowhere near 6xx series specs....

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 05:21 4

12. muhsen (Posts: 281; Member since: 07 Jun 2012)

that's weird, Gsmarena has named the 630 as one of the best 5mpx shooters and PA says it's middling ????!! PA camera reviews have always been questionable (iphones taking the lead sometimes against the likes of Sony Xperia flagships). so I would go for Gsmarena words.http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_lumia_630-review-1080p8.php
Also, most competitors phones mentioned r totally wrong to be placed here or priced wrong. The moto G for example costs 150 pounds in the UK while the 630 price is 90-110 pounds, that's a big difference specially when u know that moto G doesn't have an Sd slot while the 630 does. The Galaxy Grand is of a totally different category and costs double the price of the 630, I don't understand how it's mentioned here. The moto E ,which is worse than the 630, costs the same, and PA forgets to mention that 630 has a S400 processor while the moto E has S200 processor which is alot worse.
All in all, PA fails miserably in reviews, better stick to news. For readers, Gsmarena review for this phone is thorough, fair and not out of reality as this one is, so consider it more than this review when buying ( this goes for all Gsmarena reviews actually).http://www.gsmarena.com/nokia_lumia_630-review-1080.php

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 05:46 1

16. Super3310 (Posts: 91; Member since: 06 May 2014)

I agree with u

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 08:16 1

19. jojon (Posts: 360; Member since: 11 Feb 2014)

agree entirely muhsen

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 08:23 2

20. sbw44 (Posts: 433; Member since: 04 Dec 2012)

Exactly! most reviews of the 630 mentions it has a great camera, one saying its camera is so good that you would think its from a phone that's twice as much. trustedreviews says "But image quality is a fair bit better than, say the Motorola Moto G and Moto E. You can create some nice-looking photos, if not ones you can successfully crop into."

So when it comes to camera's never and I mean NEVER thrust PA! They have no idea to use cameras!

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 10:17

21. sgodsell (Posts: 4896; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)

Then there are others that can take the moto g camera and make it come out looking so much better then the 630. Also the moto g has a fast focus camera. The 630 does not. In fact the moto g camera can be used to take slow motion videos. Oh and it has a camera flash. All of which the 630 does not have.
In truth the 630 and the moto g should not be compared. The moto g is superior to any lumia 5xx, 6xx, 7xxx devices. The moto e is comparable to the lumia 630.

posted on 15 Jul 2014, 22:27

26. Leandrop (Posts: 10; Member since: 25 Nov 2012)

Are you kidding me? I have a Lumia 720 wich sports PureView lens and it is by far better than Moto G on the camera level. Besides Moto G is really hard to use outside, unusable under direct sunlight. You can use Lumia 630 outside with no problems at all and even though it lacks a flash it manages to take pretty good images. I am not saying 630 is superior but here in Argentina Moto G is not as cheap as everyone thinks ( 2600 argentinian pesos in a two year contract or almost usd $305) while Lumia 630 will cost much less (aproximately 1600 argentinian pesos - usd $188 in a two year contract as well).

So, yes. Lumia 630 is not at the same price point as Moto G. Actually, Moto G is quite expensive costing as much as Nexus 4 in Argentina.

posted on 04 Jun 2014, 11:50 4

22. Mohammad_Abu-Shukur (Posts: 25; Member since: 08 Nov 2013)

1 thing to say
going to get it

posted on 18 Jun 2014, 07:49

25. MikiSam (Posts: 1; Member since: 17 Jun 2014)

Price varies per market and in Thailand, I bought this phone for US$150, no contract. Regardless of the price tho, I feel this phone is a major surprise. It is fast, offers tons of great features and actually beats all smartphones in some areas (it set a World Guinness Record for fastest keyboard). But over all, the combination of its features is excellent. The PROs:
- wonderful keyboard with unique MS swipe technology
- Gorilla 3 screen wrapped in pleasant plastic
- fast performance, good battery life
- expandable memory up to 128GB
- replaceable battery
- lifetime offline HERE maps - better then Google, Apple or Blackberry maps
- good camera with realistic colored and good exposed shots
- two SIMs
- all that for US$150 (!)

The CONs:
- lack of flash (is a minor inconvenience)
- no headphones in the box
- disabled time feature on locked screen that most Lumias have

I am very happy with this phone.

posted on 28 Aug 2014, 11:46

28. nuna12 (Posts: 12; Member since: 16 Aug 2014)

This is even more important now that Microsoft plans to drop Nokia’s feature phones and focus solely on Windows Phone.

posted on 28 Aug 2014, 11:46

29. nuna12 (Posts: 12; Member since: 16 Aug 2014)

During our testing, we were lucky to get through a full 24 hours without getting nagged about "critically low" battery levels.

posted on 30 Dec 2014, 12:58

30. FOXBOUND (Posts: 5; Member since: 07 Apr 2013)

I bought the Lumia 630 for 97 euros off contract, good deal !

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Nokia Lumia 630

Nokia Lumia 630

OS: Windows Phone 8.1
view full specs
PhoneArena rating:
Display4.5 inches, 480 x 854 pixels (218 ppi) IPS LCD
Camera5 megapixels
Qualcomm Snapdragon 400, Quad-core, 1200 MHz, ARM Cortex-A7 processor
0.5 GB RAM
Size5.10 x 2.63 x 0.36 inches
(129.5 x 66.7 x 9.2 mm)
4.73 oz  (134 g)
Battery1830 mAh, 16.4 hours talk time

Latest stories