I don't mean to sound cynical here, but if you've seen one modern Motorola smartphone, you've just seen them all. Seriously. Motorola is still enamored with those curved backs, clean faces and dimpled logos. Other details of the design are carryovers too, including the headphone jack centered along the phone's top edge, and the faintest hints of color circling the 8-megapixel rear camera. All of that taken together means this year's Moto G looks an awful lot like last year's batch of Motorola handsets with just a few notable differences.

For one, a more expansive, 5-inch 720p display fills the front -- it's barely bounded by bezels on the left and right, while a shiny pair of front-facing speaker grilles above and below the screen helps the G pull off a convincing Moto E impersonation. You won't notice the tiny, white notification light next to the pinprick of a front-facing camera until someone shoots you an email or writes on your Facebook wall, though your eye will occasionally dart to the proximity sensor sitting below the topmost speaker (especially if your phone is white, like mine was). That's about it in terms of visual flair -- the G in its default state is as subtle as ever, but you can trick it out with any number of Motorola's colorful backplates and cases.

As it turns out, that bigger screen winds up being a blessing and a curse. Your apps and emails have more room to stretch out and breathe, but this year's Moto G is also a little less comfortable to hold because of it. That's a shame since Motorola did an outstanding job making the new Moto X feel slimmer than it is by tapering the sides. Here, those edges are flat and substantial, and while they don't make the phone feel small, they do give your hands more surface area to grip -- not a bad deal for any butterfingers reading this. You might also notice a hint of slack between the removable back plate and the rest of the phone, but that's just me being nitpicky.

If you thought the Moto G's looks were more of the same, just wait until you see what's lurking inside. This year's model has the same quad-core 1.2GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 as its predecessor, along with the same 1GB of RAM. That both generations of the G basically share a brain isn't necessarily a bad thing -- we quite enjoyed the horsepower we squeezed out of it last year -- but I couldn't help but hope Motorola would use a more powerful configuration this year.

The similarities don't end there either: Both versions of the G run with the same non-removable 2,070mAh battery, which, at first blush, seems a silly choice. Why would anyone stick the same ol' battery in a new device with a bigger screen to light up? It's another one of those price-performance balancing acts Motorola had to cope with, and since this thing has the same brain and the same lack of LTE support (HSPA all the way) as the original G, I guess popping in a more powerful cell wasn't deemed crucial. If it makes you feel any better, though, there's now a microSD card slot behind the back cover to supplement the meager 8GB of storage, and an alternate version of the phone sports two SIM card slots instead of one.

Of all the surprises that first Moto G brought to the table, its 4.5-inch, 720p screen was one of the most pleasant. Impressive clarity? Accurate colors? Solid viewing angles? The original G had them all, and the sequel's 5-inch display fares almost as well. Yes, almost. There are a few bummers at play here, but the most notable is the slight dip in sharpness since the screen uses the same number of pixels to fill even more space. If you've got a spare moment, you can peer very intently and pick out those individual pixels; you're ultimately left with a screen that looks softer and less crisp than the one that came before it. The bigger question, though, is how much that actually matters. My answer? Hardly at all. It's not going to be a dealbreaker for anyone but the most persnickety screen hounds.

More importantly, the Gorilla Glass 3-clad display is spacious, bright and plenty vivid, though colors didn't seem quite as poppy and saturated as they did on the original Moto G. Personally, I prefer it when colors border on lurid (gotta love those AMOLED screens), so the screen feels just a little lifeless to me. Of course, though, your mileage will vary on that one. Alas, things take a turn when you start looking at dark pages or videos: My review unit has some pretty noticeable backlight bleeding at four discrete spots near the center of the screen. Those stray photons shouldn't be terribly bothersome for most, but my eyes couldn't help but gravitate toward them while poking through a dark app or sitting in dimly lit rooms.

On the plus side, the silver-trimmed speakers bounding that screen are a damned sight better than the single, wimpy driver that sat low on the original G's rear end. The difference is dramatic -- they get louder than you'd expect without getting too muddy or distorted -- but don't expect any HTC One-style auditory revelations when you crank things up.

Hate bloatware? Love the buttery smoothness of unfettered Android? You'll find plenty to like here. We can actually keep this bit short and sweet: The Moto G's build of Android 4.4.4 is just about untouched, a feat that (for better or worse) wasn't replicated by its big brother. Sadly, this also means that the thoughtful tricks the Moto X could pull off are nowhere to be found. This shouldn't come as a shock: The G still lacks the additional processing cores that made those tricks possible, but they're hard to give up if you've used them (or have seen them in action) on a Moto X.

With the exception of Motorola's Migrate, Assist and Alert apps, there's just about nothing non-Googly in origin here. Thankfully, those apps occasionally come in pretty handy. As the name implies, Motorola Migrate lets you transfer messages, contacts and calendar events (whatever doesn't come through when you set up the phone with your Google account, really) from another Android phone or straight from Apple's iCloud. Assist pitches in when it can tell you're in a meeting or when it's your bedtime by automatically silencing itself.

Alert, on the other hand, is a sort of a location-based, catchall app where you can broadcast your location to friends (à la Glympse), as well as set up notifications for preset contacts and emergency services if you ever feel you're in danger. Setting up that list of important contacts doesn't take more than a few moments, and triggering the emergency mode is just as simple -- a single tap of a button initiates a 5-second countdown before your phone starts reaching out to everyone on the list. All told, it's a largely dummy-proof lifeline should your situation go south in a heartbeat. Here's hoping you won't ever need to use it as one.

None of the smartphones that Motorola pieced together over the last 12 months have had cameras that have blown us away -- care to take a guess at how the Moto G fared? Bingo! Welcome back to the middle of the road, at least compared to the current crop of smartphones floating around the market. That might sound like I'm damning the G with faint praise, but believe me: The 8-megapixel sensor Motorola's got in there is a big, big improvement over the 5-megapixel camera in last year's model.

As usual, photons are your friends and you're going to want as many of them around as possible if you want to coax your Moto G into performing its best. Under those conditions, expect to see lively colors and a bountiful amount of detail (the fact that HDR is set to "Auto" by default usually helps with that). It actually does pretty well once the light starts to fade, too -- graininess becomes a problem after a while, but the sensor is more than capable of coping when the sun dips behind clouds or starts to inch closer to the horizon.Up front, the tiny 2-megapixel, front-facing camera performs about as well as you'd expect. It'll do in a pinch when it's time for a video Hangout, but I've noticed the same sort of ghostly delay when trying to frame up a shot that I did on the Moto X. Strangely, the issue isn't as prominent here as it was on the higher-end X, so you won't get too frustrated trying to snap a decent selfie or eight. Meanwhile, flipping into video mode is a quick process but the results definitely won't wow: video resolution tops out at 720p and footage is all too often soft and unsatisfying.

I've praised Motorola's dead-simple camera interface in the past, and I'll do it again: The one-touch process of snapping a photo is impossible to screw up, and the settings offer enough depth to enable some handsome shots without overwhelming you with options. That said, it does take some getting used to. Tapping anywhere on the screen to snap a photo seems awfully smart until you realize that lots of other camera apps have you tap on the screen to focus or control exposure; if that sounds like what your current phone does, prepare to fight your muscle memory for a while. The fact that you've also got to drag a reticle around to change focus and then tap means it'll sometimes take longer to capture a scene than Motorola would like you to think.

The Moto G's spec list doesn't do it many favors. Here's the thing to remember, though: While it uses a year-old chipset, the 2014 Moto G runs lean. The lack of an obnoxious, overwrought user interface means it can dedicate that available horsepower to more important things, and it shows. I spent my days testing the G as I usually do: sending off messages, jumping into Hangouts, scrolling through long web pages, firing up apps, flipping among those apps as they run and generally being a fidgety brat trying to stymie those long-in-the-tooth internals. The verdict? Once again, the Moto G handled just about everything I threw at it with grace and gusto. Jumping out of Asphalt 8 (which ran more than admirably even at the highest settings) into The Battle Cats for a spot of feline world domination made the phone seize up for a few moments while it tried to cope, but it was almost always snappy and responsive, even while I did my best to break it.Meanwhile, the tale of the tape tells a familiar story. The results above are in line with what we squeezed out of the first Moto G, but for some reason, I had a hell of time trying to complete the GFXBench test; it kept returning an "Out Of Memory" error when attempting to render 1080p footage offscreen. Ill omen? Perhaps, but the G didn't disappoint when it came to running graphically intensive apps (and it isn't the first Moto handset that balked at that particular test, so I wouldn't worry about it too much).

The Galaxy Alpha is the most beautiful Samsung device I've ever handled. It's the very first device to take advantage of the company's brand-new design language, which features polished aluminum sides, chamfered edges, a thin profile and a polycarbonate (plastic) back; the same design is used on the Galaxy Note 4 and Galaxy Note Edge (and arguably, the iPhone 5/5s and last year's HTC One), but the Alpha is the first to actually make it off the production line. It's simple, yet elegant; minimal, yet profuse. Featuring a 4.7-inch frame and 6.7mm thickness, the Alpha is more than sufficiently sleek and svelte.

Thanks to its slim, compact frame, I had absolutely no problem hanging onto the Alpha. Not only can I wrap my hand around the whole thing, but also its straight sides offer my fingers plenty of space to grip. It's also incredibly light, weighing 4.06 ounces (115g); that's half an ounce lighter than the iPhone 6. In fact, it almost feels like it isn't substantial enough; in my palms, I'm often reminded of a dummy phone -- fake versions of the real thing that manufacturers send to retail stores.

I'd be tempted to think of the Galaxy Alpha as a GS5 mini, if the name weren't already taken; in many respects, it's a smaller version of Samsung's current 5.1-inch flagship smartphone. It packs the same Snapdragon 801 chipset (though an Exynos option is also available in certain markets), so it should be similarly powerful, and it also comes with a fingerprint scanner, heart rate monitor and Samsung's TouchWiz UI. But while the Alpha easily beats the GS5 in style (while matching it in oomph), the rest of the spec sheet isn't as impressive. It's not waterproof; it lacks a microSD slot; the battery is smaller; it uses a lower-res camera; and it doesn't come with an IR blaster. It also features a lower-res 720p Super AMOLED display.

Since it's not designed to simply be a miniature GS5, these omissions theoretically shouldn't be a big issue. It still packs plenty of a punch, after all, and even the 720p display is considered top-of-the-line for similarly sized devices. (Also, with smaller phones, manufacturers don't have as much space to cram in extra components.) The problem is that you're paying a premium price for the premium look; you can get the Alpha on AT&T in the US for $200 on-contract, or $613 with no contract attached. This is the same on-contract price as the GS5, and only $37 cheaper at full retail. To be fair, AT&T's Galaxy S5 only comes with 16GB internal storage, whereas the Alpha gets 32GB, so that explains some of the difference. Even so, the GS5 at least has a microSD slot for expandable memory.

What's even weirder is that while the Alpha doesn't come with any waterproofing or water-resistance of any kind, iFixit did a teardown of the phone and discovered that it comes with many of the gaskets and other internal parts necessary for keeping water out. In other words, Samsung didn't finish what it started.

The bottom edge of the device houses a micro-USB 2.0 connector -- Samsung's moved away from the unsightly 3.0 ports that take up extra room -- along with a speaker grille and mic. On the left is a volume rocker, which appears to have received the same amount of attention to design as the rest of the phone. There's a 3.5mm headphone jack on top and a power button on the right. Additionally, the top and bottom of the phone feature a pair of antenna stripes, which are common on metal phones because they provide a place to send and receive cellular and wireless signals.

The Alpha also comes with a removable back cover with a textured polycarbonate back that's similar to what you'll find on the Galaxy S5. On the Alpha, however, the dimples are much tinier and the matte surface doesn't feel as slick; the Alpha definitely offers more friction. There's a 12-megapixel camera in the top-center, and since the module is thicker than the phone itself, there's a hump to make the transition between the camera and back cover seem a bit more gradual. (One of my biggest issues with the iPhone 6's design is that the camera abruptly sticks out from the rest of the frame.) The LED flash and heart rate monitor are to the camera's left, arranged in a vertical fashion, and the logos include just the AT&T globe near the top and the phone's name near the bottom. Underneath the back cover, you'll find a removable 1,860mAh battery and nano-SIM slot.

The new location of the heart rate monitor works out okay if you hold the phone in your right hand, but it can be troublesome if you prefer your left; the camera hump gets in the way, and I had to keep looking at my finger to make sure it was in the right place. Which brings me to another point: The Galaxy S5's sensor was placed at the bottom of a cavity, while the Alpha's version is nearly flush with the rest of the back. This makes it more difficult to find the sensor without peeking around the phone to make sure I'm actually in the right spot.

An aluminum frame comes with trade-offs. Sure, it looks great, feels robust and has an aura of high quality, but as I saw with the iPhone 6, the material isn't immune to blemishes; after just a few days, I started seeing scratches and even a couple dings along the chamfered edges. This means that how it looks after a year of use will depend on how you treat it. If it's constantly rubbing up against other hard materials, it's not going to fare well.

As mentioned earlier, the Alpha has a 4.7-inch 720p Super AMOLED panel. On paper, this doesn't sound very good since many new flagships have Quad HD displays. For a handset of its size, however, 720p is still acceptable: The first Moto X was of the same quality. Ditto for the Sony Xperia Z3 Compact, which is one-tenth of an inch smaller. The iPhone 6, meanwhile, is slightly better at 1,334 x 750 (326 pixels per inch). With the Alpha, you'll get a pixel density of 312 ppi, which is still respectable. Of course, the Super AMOLED panel ensures that colors are more saturated than most IPS options, and the viewing angles are simply average and nothing special. If you're looking for a compact phone, the display will neither make nor break the decision for you -- it's perfectly fine, as long as you don't mind some slightly inaccurate colors.

Admittedly, the software section is going to be as small as the device itself, since there's very little to differentiate it from the Galaxy S5. The variance in screen size doesn't impact the user experience, nor does it mean you'll enjoy fewer features. The Alpha uses TouchWiz layered on top of Android 4.4.4 KitKat, which is still technically the latest consumer-facing version of Google's mobile OS (it'll soon be replaced by Android L, but Samsung's lineup should get the new update not too long after it becomes publicly available to the masses).

This version of TouchWiz is what you'd expect: It's consistent with every other version of TouchWiz. The UI is exactly the same as on the Galaxy S5, with a vast notification panel, bubbly settings menu and suite of preinstalled Google and Samsung apps. There's also My Magazine, which is a feature that's been on several Galaxy devices over the last two years. (You can also remove it, if you don't want to use it.) It's essentially an extra home screen panel that provides real-time news and social feeds, and looks a lot like Flipboard and HTC's BlinkFeed. Multi Window is also present, so you can still view two apps at once in a split-screen mode, despite having such a small screen. You'll also get Air View, which lets you check out extra details about calendar appointments and larger thumbnails for pictures and videos just by hovering your finger over the display.

Lastly, you'll get other common Samsung features like Easy mode, Blocking mode and Private mode (the latter of which hides and secures sensitive information so your random friends won't find it), as well as Smart stay and the ever-present toolbox of customized app shortcuts that continuously floats on top of the screen.

The Alpha is thinner than the GS5, which means the camera module isn't quite as large. Instead of a 16-megapixel sensor, you'll get a 12MP shooter on the back with an aperture of f/2.2 and focal length of 4.8mm (the same as on the GS5). So, don't expect a radically different imaging experience here. The user interface hasn't changed, either: Separate shutter buttons for stills and video sit alongside the mode-selection button and gallery link, and settings and shortcuts reside on the opposite sidebar. You get the same default modes here as you do on the GS5 -- the usual Panorama, Dual Camera, Beauty Face and Shot & more modes -- and you can download extra modes, like Animated Photo (add animation to your pictures), Surround Shot (Samsung's version of Photo Sphere), Sports, and Sound & shot (audio accompanies the image). The GS5 gets an extra mode for sequence shots, while the Alpha lets you choose which modes actually show up in your menu -- if you only use one or two, you can get rid of the extra clutter.

The settings here are identical as well. HDR, selective focus (in which you can choose to focus on the foreground, background or both), ISO (up to 800), audio zoom and plenty of effects are featured, although there's no way to manually change white balance, exposure or shutter speed.

Just like on the GS5, the Alpha has multiple resolution options. Whichever you choose will have an impact on the aspect ratio. If you want the highest resolution possible, you're going to have to settle for 16:9 (widescreen), while the best standard 4:3 shots you can get will come out at eight megapixels.

The camera sports Samsung's ISOCELL tech, which I detailed in my GS5 review. In short, it's designed to improve sharpness and deliver better low-light performance and more accurate colors. On the GS5, I noted that performance was indeed better, albeit slightly, and I got nearly the same kind of results from the Alpha. In fact, aside from the difference in resolution (and thus, fewer details and less leeway for digital zoom), the Alpha's images were very similar to ones I took with the flagship. It does well in daylight and produces realistic colors, and is overall a reliable camera, but it's not very good at taking pictures of moving things. I had a difficult time snapping shots of cars or people without blurring.

It's also not very good in low-light situations, but this is nothing new for Samsung phones -- the company's struggled with this for a long time, and ISOCELL is designed to make it better. Sadly, there's been no improvement here from the GS5; on the contrary, it's a bit worse. Even when my night shots turned out (I say "when" since quite a few were hopelessly dark), they were noisy, lacking in sharpness and not worth sharing with friends or family. I'm not saying it's impossible to get a solid low-light shot, but it's not as easy as it should be. (Click here for a gallery of all my sample shots.)

The US version of the Alpha uses the same Snapdragon 801 chipset as the one found on the GS5, which is comprised of a quad-core 2.5GHz Krait 400 CPU, Adreno 330 GPU and 2GB of RAM. Before I began testing the device, I expected to see the same kind of performance that I've enjoyed on its big brother. Sure enough, I wasn't disappointed: Most apps loaded up quickly, and games like Asphalt 8 and Beach Buggy Racing ran smoothly. I did notice the occasional frame skip, but this was the exception, not the rule. When you look at the benchmarks, it's clear there's very little difference between the two in terms of overall performance.The Alpha also has a small 1,860mAh battery, which was my primary concern going into the review. Could it handle my everyday demands and still get me through the day? After all, if I can't go a full day without worrying about finding an outlet before I can get home, it's not worth using as my daily driver -- especially when plenty of other devices are up to the task. The Alpha barely makes it to the end of the day with moderate usage; on heavier days when I'm streaming music, reading e-books, taking pictures, staying social and keeping up with nonstop emails, I get around 13 hours.

With the Alpha, Samsung included the same fingerprint sensor that it used on the GS5, and it requires the same swipe-down action. Its performance on the flagship was mediocre at best -- it often took me multiple swipes to get the phone to recognize my prints, and was even worse when I tried to do it at an angle. Unfortunately, I only saw minor improvements here, despite the fact that Samsung has had six months to improve the sensor and its integration with software. Admittedly, it's a little better when I swipe from different angles, but it still takes multiple attempts even when my fingers and thumbs are straight on. There's certainly some practice involved, and it does get better over time as you learn the sensor's quirks (you have to do it at a certain speed, and you have to make sure you've covered the sensor with the right parts of your finger).

When making phone calls, I had no trouble hearing the other end of the line, but the external speaker didn't fare well. I pitted the Alpha against BoomSound on the HTC One M8, which produced a much louder and fuller audio performance; I could hear more bass and mids on HTC's flagship than I could on the Alpha. The GS5 was also slightly louder, though the difference between the two was marginal -- the audio just wasn't impressive on either Galaxy.

Cellular connectivity will vary by market and operator. The AT&T model I reviewed comes with nine-band LTE support (for bands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 17 and 29), tri-band HSPA+ (850/1900/2100) and quad-band GSM/EDGE. You'll also get NFC, DLNA, WiFi Direct, Bluetooth 4.0+LE and dual-band 802.11ac support (along with a/b/g/n as well).

It wasn't long ago that most phone makers used 4.7-inch screens on their flagships, but now any top-of-the-line phone going smaller than five inches is just unthinkable -- unless, of course, you're Apple. For that reason, it's great to see Samsung come out with a premium-looking device whose specs aren't too far removed from the same-sized iPhone 6, which is available in 16GB for $200 on-contract and $650 off. (If you're looking for extra storage space, the Alpha tops the iPhone at the same price point.)

But these two phones aren't the only options in the sub-5-inch space. The Sony Xperia Z3 Compact is a 4.6-inch 720p handset that features many of the same specs as its bigger flagship brother, and actually bests the Alpha in pixel density, battery, camera resolution and external storage capacity. As of this writing, the phone isn't available in the US, so it's only an option for our readers in Europe and Asia -- that is, unless you choose to go through online importers. You'll find that the Z3 Compact is a good deal cheaper than the Alpha: On Expansys, the Z3 Compact goes for £420 ($530), while the Alpha is available for £515 ($650). Despite the Alpha's great looks, it's difficult to justify it over the Compact.

As beautiful as the Galaxy Alpha may be, its price leads to its ultimate downfall. The only reason you'd want to pick this over the Galaxy S5, which is available for a similar price, is that you prefer a smaller size or more solid build. But even then, this design isn't a one-and-done; you'll be able to get the same fit and finish on the Note 4 and Note Edge (albeit with larger screens). Furthermore, it's not the best sub-5-inch Android device on the market, thanks to the Sony Z3 Compact, which comes with better battery life, camera and external storage.

More important is what this new design direction means to Samsung's future. Even though the aluminum build isn't perfect, Samsung's latest smartphones are the best-looking handsets the manufacturer has produced in years. For a company suffering from slowing sales and looking for new ways to compete with the iPhone, devices like the Alpha are essential. This makes it all the more unfortunate that the fantastic design is one of few things that helps it stand out from the crowd. On the upside, though, this is just the beginning; more good-looking Samsung phones are on the way.

With the Lumia 830, priced at around $450, Microsoft looks to bring the metal frame and PureView camera branding of high-end Lumias down to the mid-range smartphone level. Of course, there's always the risk of making the wrong sacrifices when trying to lower the price, so did Microsoft shave too many corners off of the 830's aluminum body? I've spent the past week with the global version of the phone as my daily driver to find out.

While the lower-tier Lumia 735/730 handsets stick to tried-and-true polycarbonate bodies, the Lumia 830 follows in the aluminum-ringed footsteps of the Icon and 930. A solid frame of metal surrounds the 830's squared-off body, interrupted by two pairs of thin plastic strips on the top and bottom edges (for the radio frequencies to pass through). At 139.4 x 70.7 x 8.5mm, it checks in at 2.4mm taller, 0.3mm narrower and 1.3mm thinner than its higher-end predecessors. Its 150g weight puts it 17 grams lighter as well.

That metal frame is flanked on the front by a sheet of Gorilla Glass 3 that rises slightly above the aluminum body. Thankfully, the display gently tapers at the edges, making for a smooth transition from the glass to the thin metal along the bezels. No sharp, abrupt borders here.

Around back, a removable plastic cover allows access to the swappable battery as well as the nano-SIM and microSD slots. The latter of which supports up to 128GB cards to supplement the 16GB of onboard memory. (Sorry, no 32GB or higher model here.) The backplate puffs out even further from the aluminum frame than the front display, creating a curved rear that makes the phone actually quite comfortable in my palm despite the flat-sided aluminum frame. Its matte finish feels nice to the touch, while also resisting greasy fingerprints. If you're not a fan of my review unit's orange hue, there other colors to consider -- though the selection in the US may differ from what's offered elsewhere. Microsoft is also offering various colorful flip cover shells (with wireless charging support) if you'd like some extra protection.

As for ports and buttons, the Lumia 830 mostly sticks to the standard set seen on many a Lumia over the years. On the right edge, you'll find a volume rocker near the top, a power key in the middle and a dedicated camera key toward the bottom. The headphone jack sits front and center along the top edge. I was somewhat surprised to find the micro-USB port up there as well (it's been on the bottom on most of my past phones). In regular use, I found that placement a bit tricky when I had the 830 mounted in a cradle in my car -- it was a bit odd to see a charging cable sprouting upward out of my phone. That said, there's always the built-in,Qi-compatible wireless charging if you find the charge port's location troublesome.

The most notable feature on the rear, of course, is the Lumia 830's PureView camera module, located in the top-center of the backplate. Here, Microsoft Mobile mimics the look of theLumia 1020's signature camera, with a black, circular panel surrounding the 830's 10-megapixel camera and LED flash. Of course, this is more "inspiration" than it is direct "imitation." You won't find the 1020's massive, Ritz cracker-size main shooter protruding from the back. No, we're dealing with more modest equipment here, so the disc on the 830's rear is much smaller than its ancestor's. What's more, the removable cover adds a slight ridge around the rear camera, providing a bit of protection.

Toward the bottom of the back panel is the 830's main speaker grille. While that location might not be as ideal as, say, the 1020's bottom-edge speaker, it's placed where the rear starts to taper, giving it a bit of breathing room when the phone is placed face-up on a table.

While the 830 matches the 5-inch screen size of the Icon/930 line, Microsoft shed some pixels (and helped lower the price) by opting for a 1,280 x 720 display instead of a 1080p panel. We're also dealing with an IPS LCD here, rather than the AMOLED unit found on its older siblings. Whether that's a plus or a minus likely depends on how much you enjoy/detest AMOLED's highly saturated colors. I find the 830's screen pleasing for the most part, with accurate colors and good viewing angles in most directions. However, I did notice washed-out colors while watching movies at extreme positions, especially toward the lower left and right in landscape mode.

Recent improvements to the Windows Phone OS have more or less put Microsoft's mobile offering on an even footing (as far as core features) with the likes of Android and iOS. The latest upgrades to WP8.1 include support for folders on the home screen, more options and languages for the Cortana voice assistant and faster browsing through Internet Explorer. In addition, Lumia models will be getting an update called "Denim," which tacks on camera improvements, more options for the Glance Screen feature and voice activation on certain Lumia models -- just say, "Hey, Cortana" to fire up the voice assistant while the phone's idle. On top of those additions, the OS also boasts a solid notification center, home screen wallpapers and swiping support in the keyboard.

The Lumia's Glance Screen, which offers the time, date and some notifications when the display is off, makes the 830 a perfect bedside alarm clock since it stays onscreen while the phone is charging. No more groggily trying to find your phone's power toggle in the middle of the night just to see how much time you got left to sleep.

Out of the box, my unlocked review unit came with the standard Lumia offerings (including Here Drive, Skype and Mix Radio), as well as a smattering of third-party apps like Facebook and Flipboard. Thankfully, if you're not interested in any of the preloaded options, they're easy enough to uninstall to reclaim some storage space.

Of course, it's not all great news. The continued additions to the OS (plus other, Lumia-specific features) have resulted in an unorganized and ungainly settings menu. The latest incarnation of WP's stock music player has you flicking upward on the album art to change tracks. After years of swiping right to left (since back in the Zune HD days), I'm finding this new gesture annoying and less intuitive. And then there's the app question. While the situation has greatly improved of late, there's still a chance your favorite app or game may not yet be offered on the platform.

Beyond that, Google still refuses to offer official options for services like Gmail, Hangouts and YouTube. So if you're deeply integrated in Google's ecosystem, but prefer the feel of Windows Phone, you'll need to resort to third-party options like IM+ for Hangouts or Metrotube for YouTube. Of course, Microsoft offers its own suite of tools, like Office, OneNote and OneDrive, that play quite nicely with Windows Phone 8.1.

You may consider alternative apps even when official support exists. Case in point: While there is a beta-tagged version of Instagram available, it lacks several editing tools seen on Android and iOS. Meanwhile, the third-party app 6tag offers some interesting options, like collages and letterboxing photos with wide aspect ratios to fit them in Instagram's square format.

Whether that app deficit actually affects you depends, of course, on your specific needs. Can you get by without dedicated Gmail or YouTube apps? Will you be satisfied with an official Instagram app that's not yet as robust as its Android/iOS counterparts? Comfortable with resorting to third-party alternatives? I can't answer that for you, unfortunately. So if you are considering Windows Phone, be sure to check the app marketplace to know what you're getting yourself into.

With the Lumia 830, Microsoft isn't bringing just the design language of the Icon and 930 down to a lower price bracket. It's also placing the "PureView" badge on a more affordable option as well. Sure, the 830 doesn't boast the resolution of the 20MP Icon or 930, much less the Lumia 1020's 41 megapixels. Instead, it stakes its claim to the PureView name via optical image stabilization and the promise of improved responsiveness.

Before I dive into the details, though, it's worth stating that my review unit didn't arrive with the Lumia Denim update. So, I was unable to test that firmware's biggest additions, including much-improved overall speed, a Lumia Camera app that replaces Nokia Camera and a capture mode that lets you merge the results of flash and non-flash versions of the same shot, letting you set a balanced look for the final image. I'll be sure to update my thoughts once I spend some quality time with the new features.

Even without those Denim improvements, I enjoyed my time taking photos with the 830's 10MP main shooter. On a daytime stroll through downtown Tacoma, Washington, the phone capably handled any shot I attempted. White balance in good light was accurate, though it occasionally took a few seconds to settle on the right color temperature. It did tend toward cooler (bluer) temps in low-light situations, though the Nokia Camera app's manual options let me fix that quickly.

Interestingly, the 830 also preferred bluish white balance when I tried to take orange-heavy photos of autumn leaves or pumpkin patches. For what it's worth, images of the same fall leaves taken with an iPhone 6 produced much more accurate colors, but that's admittedly competing in a completely different price bracket.

Quirky white balance aside, the camera's optical image stabilization let me take some solid photos in low-light environments, both indoors and out. Close-up shots of sushi in a dark restaurant and portraits of fellow passengers on a bumpy car ride produced relatively clean photos, though if your jitteriness is simply out of control, the 830 won't produce miracles.

Image quality starts declining when the light gets seriously low. A few interior shots of a dark, empty chapel showed a significant amount of noise, a loss of detail and muted colors, but not quite what I'd label as "unusable." Of course, what's unacceptable for a huge wall print isn't the same as what's unacceptable for an Instagram post. By that I mean, if you keep your expectations in check (e.g., using a mid-range phone for social network-worthy photos), you should be fine with the results in most settings.

The rear shooter's stabilization also applies to video recording (up to 1080p/30). Quality in good light is nice and sharp, though it tends to struggle in darker settings. It also takes slightly longer to adjust to different lighting levels than an iPhone 6. On the plus side, that stabilization feature does a respectable job smoothing out video, especially when you're on the move. We're not talking pocket Steadicam here, of course, but back-to-back videos of me jogging around with an iPhone 6 and the 830 resulted in steadier footage on the Lumia.

Unlike the selfie-targeting 5MP front shooter on the lower-tier Lumia 735/730, the 0.9MP unit we have here is strictly average. It's fine for quick snaps and Skype, but not much else. Fortunately, the available Lumia Selfie app lets you use the rear shooter for self-portraits (an audio cue signals when your face is in the frame).

For the most part, the Lumia 830 does the PureView name proud. It doesn't have the megapixel count of the 1020 or the Icon/930, so you'll have less leeway when it comes to cropping. But it's a mid-tier camera I would be happy to use on a daily basis. The auto white balance could be more reliable and the LED flash is simply average, but these are minor flies in a largely effective ointment. If the Denim update only improves things, I'll have even less to complain about at this price level.

For high-resolution photo samples from the Lumia 830, click here.

The quad-core 1.2GHz Snapdragon 400 and 1GB of RAM powering the Lumia 830 may be decidedly mid-range, but its general performance doesn't leave too much to be desired. Apps launch and close swiftly, and general navigation around the Windows Phone 8.1 UI is fluid and stutter-free. Browsing mobile web pages was a pleasant experience, though there was a good bit of tiling when zooming in and out of desktop sites.In general, we're talking about a solid performer here. Push the phone hard enough, though, and you can see the limits of its mid-level hardware. In a fast-moving, 3D game like Asphalt 8, the Lumia 830 turns in merely adequate, and definitely not silky-smooth, frame rates. And if the game's graphics don't clue you in, the frequent audio breakup during races should be a clear sign this isn't going to be a mobile-gaming powerhouse.

Other games can give the 830 a workout as well. While endless runner Temple Run 2 stays smooth most of the time, certain turns, especially during water slide areas, cause things to slow down a bit. It's not just fast-moving 3D games, either. Strangely, frame rates in the relatively simple Jetpack Joyride dip noticeably whenever you hit a large patch of coins. You'd think that would make the frantic game easier, but it's really a bit jarring.

On the bright side, the Lumia 830 offers solid battery life with its removable 2,200mAh cell. In our standard video-rundown test, where we loop an HD video while email, Facebook and Twitter run in the background, the 830 managed 10 hours and 39 minutes before calling it quits. That's actually a bit longer than the 10 hours Microsoft estimates for video playback. In real-world use, the phone regularly saw me through full workdays filled with emails, social networking, lunchtime Instagrams, gaming and even a few actual phone calls.

Speaking of, voice calls featured clear conversations on both ends and the speakerphone performed admirably in my car. Even with the phone face-up on a table, the curved back allows enough clearance for sound to be heard without being muddled. That rear-facing speaker puts out voice and music at a decent level, though don't expect much, if any, bass to shine through

Overall, if mobile gaming is important to you, it may be worth investing in a phone with a bit more oomph to tackle current and future games. If you're mainly using your smartphone for more... serious pursuits, the Lumia 830 should handle those needs without breaking much of a sweat.

Since AT&T hasn't yet announced a US release date or price for the Lumia 830, it's a little tricky to size up how it'll fare against the competition here. That said, it is available elsewhere and in the UK, for example, EE is offering it on pay-as-you-go for £280 (about $450). Meanwhile, Amazon is offering an unlocked international version for around the same price. On EE, that puts it in roughly the same bracket as the 8GB iPhone 5c and the Ascend P7 (both listed at £300). I'd be quick to dismiss the 5c, as it offers less onboard storage (and no microSD slot) and what's essentially two-year-old hardware. The P7, on the other hand, represents a solid competitor at this price range. You won't get the Lumia's full-featured camera app, but it does boast a 1080p display and an 8MP front-facing camera.

If you can do without the 830's solid, aluminum chassis and stabilized camera, take a look at its lower-priced sibling, the Lumia 735 (around €219, or about $279). It offers the same Snapdragon 400 heart in a polycarbonate body, with a much better 5MP selfie camera on the front. Although, if you're looking in that lower price bracket, don't forget the Moto G ($180), which also features similar quad-core internals, along with official support for Google's ecosystem.

In the end, the Lumia 830 is clearly a "bridge" device. It's got the high-end looks and capable camera of flagship-level phones, along with the performance and display resolution of mid-range and budget models. Whether Microsoft Mobile made the right trade-offs really depends on what you want out of your smartphone. Does having a solid camera (that's due to get even better) trump average gaming performance? Does using an ever-improving voice assistant mean more to you than having official support for Google's ecosystem? Personally, I can live with most of the sacrifices that have been made. I don't think I'm missing much with the 720p screen and merely average front-facing camera. But the spotty performance in games and Microsoft's continuing struggle to land the latest and best apps give me pause.