Fujifilm Instax Pal 2: Two-minute review

I’ve never seen my teenage son more animated about a camera than he was about the Instax Pal 2 — and he’s seen his fair share over the course of my years reviewing gear.

It’s tactile and sensory, with its exaggerated sound effects, clicky winding lever, joystick, dampened dial, and pop-out USB-C connector. For my son, it was like a fidget toy. And I have to confess it was for me too.

The emphasis here is on toy, mind you — he could happily fiddle with the controls for hours without taking a single photo.

Even with my Serious Camera Reviewer hat on, I’m enamored with the Pal 2; it's cute, it's dinky, and there’s enough here to keep my attention.

There's the winding lever that scrolls through the Instax mini, square and wide film formats (or no border at all); the dampened dial for the various picture effects; the joystick that you use to navigate a sub-menu with options for self-timer, flash and display modes, and which you can also press to open the main menu.

Then there’s the cut-out optical viewfinder, and a top-down, 1.3-inch screen for waist-level photography, a red playback button and clear ‘back’ button. Every control is unique, and characterful.

Fujifilm’s design department clearly knows its market — the Pal 2 is latest in a long line of quirky, retro fun models that include the original Pal, the X half and the Instax Mini Evo Cinema.

In a way it’s easy to forget that this palm-sized bundle of retro fun is a camera at all; but that's what it is, and it’s one with very basic tech inside: a tiny 1/3.06-inch sensor with 10MP JPEG photos, shot through a 28mm equivalent f/2.2 lens, with an LED flash for close-up low-light shots. There's no video here, just a 10-shot Animation mode.

It’s also Wi-Fi / Bluetooth-equipped, meaning users can wirelessly connect to a smart device and use the Instax Pal app for image uploads and sharing (the Pal app wasn't updated for the Pal 2 at the time of my review), or to one of Fujifilm’s Instax link printers for uploads or direct printing onto Instax film. There’s that pop-out USB-C for charging, too.

But — and it's a big but — it’s very expensive. The Pal 2 is not priced like the toy camera it is.

You can get four Kodak Charmeras for the price of one Instax Pal 2 and have some change left over. Yes, the Pal 2 is more camera than the Charmera in every way, but they are in the same novelty camera category, and the Charmera knows its place better.

Yes, my son loves the Pal 2, but it’s not in pocket-money saving territory, and it would be a stretch as a birthday gift.

It's easy to be won over by the Pal 2 — this is a retro, pocket digital camera with wireless image uploads and Instax printing. But when the Instax Mini Evo costs the same, and that camera has a larger body and screen, and can print images selected from the gallery directly, the Pal 2 feels like a stretch. If its price comes down, like the X half's did (by about 40%), then it might be a different picture.

Fujifilm Instax Pal 2 review: Price and release date

• Announced in September 2026
• Priced at $169.95 / £149.99 / AU$249
• Available in two colorways; black with silver trim, or white with silver trim

The Fujifilm Instax Pal 2 costs $169.95 / £149.99 / AU$249 and is available in two colorways: black with silver trim, or white with silver trim. It comes with a small rubber selfie stand, which fixes in place by slotting around the lens, and a wrist strap.

Fujifilm Instax Pal 2 review: specs

Fujifilm Instax Pal 2 review: Design

• Weighs just 3oz / 87g, fits in a pocket
• Cool retro look and multi-sensory controls
• Twin displays: LCD and cutout optical viewfinder

It might share the name as the original Pal, but the two cameras bear little resemblance to each other. The original Pal’s golf ball-like exterior is cast aside in favor of retro-style, mini Fujifilm camera-like body.

Fujifilm has packed a lot of controls and features into the tiny, palm-sized body, including a cut-out viewfinder, 1.3-inch top LCD, winding lever, on/off dial, a joystick set within another dial, playback and back buttons, a pop-out USB-C, and a tiny selfie mirror, tripod mount, microSD card slot, and LED flash.

Each control has its own distinct character, and it took me no time at all to memorize each one, meaning I could instinctively locate them.

For the most part, I only found myself scrolling through the Instax film types (glorified aspect ratios) using the winding lever, and using the six picture styles, and the flash settings, self-timer and display mode options in the sub-menu. There’s little else to experiment with, besides perhaps exposure compensation, which is buried in the menu.

You can choose whether to display the selected picture style on the LCD display (kind of like a film roll), or the live view, when composing images. I'd hardly say composition is critical though, because the lens is a wide-angle 28mm optic, meaning you can blindly point the Pal 2 in the direction of your subject and it will be in the shot.

There’s plenty to like about the design of the Instax Pal 2. It’s a highly enjoyable camera to play around with, and it earned plenty of admiring comments from other tech journalists when I was attending another event.

Fujifilm Instax Pal 2 review: Performance

• Wide-angle 28mm f/2.2 lens
• 10MP JPEGs, plus a 10-shot animation mode
• Bluetooth / Wi-Fi equipped for wireless image uploads and printing

The charming, tactile and dinky design is the major appeal of the Instax Pal 2 — you’re not buying it for its technically impressive images and high-speed performance.

Take the JPEG-only photos (up to 10MP, depending on the aspect ratio) from the tiny 1/3.06-inch sensor and 28mm f/2.2 lens. There's no getting away from the fact they're lo-fi images; they're Better than the Charmera’s, but no match for your phone’s.

Don’t expect much detail in highlights, either — they blow out with the camera’s exposure metering left to its own devices, although ±2EV exposure compensation is buried in the camera’s main menu, so it is possibly to go for dark, moody photos too.

The six color profiles are all towards the vintage end of the scale, with options for Soft, Muted, Cool, Flare, Mono and Pure (see below). If you want a punchy, vivid setting, you’re out of luck. The picture style and aspect ratio used at the time of shooting, whether that’s mini, square, wide or no border, are locked in.

Technically this is a photo-only camera, but if you turn the winding lever clockwise (instead of counter clockwise for the Instax film borders), you can enter a burst-shooting 'animation' mode that takes up to 10 photos in a sequence and then pieces them into a single stop motion-like clip (see above).

There’s a built-in battery that's recharged through USB-C — and you’ll need to do that regularly, because battery life is poor. A combination of me playing around with the camera settings and taking around 50-75 images saw battery life depleted by three quarters, so you’ll struggle to get through a full day of shooting.

Shutter lag — the time between pressing the shutter button and the camera actually taking the photo — can get really frustrating, and it’s made worse with the LED flash active. You'll need to hold the camera steady after pressing the shutter, and hope that your subject stays still, otherwise you'll miss the shot

I had the flash mostly set to auto, and it mostly only fired in low light — this isn’t a flash-on for every photo setup, as is the case with some Instax mini cameras.

As with any wide-angle camera, but especially so with the Pal 2's small picture size, it pays to have your subject close and filling the frame to maximize the impact of the photo — this isn’t a camera for taking landscape images, in which detail will be lost.

A curiosity is that the camera limits users to 100 shots between connections to the Pal app, whether that's shooting onto the internal memory or the microSD card. This isn't an issue when shooting onto the internal memory, since there's only space for 100 shots, but I found it a frustrating and unnecessary restriction when shooting to the card.

The original Instax Pal app is also designed for the Pal 2, but at the time of writing there wasn't an update for the app, so I haven't been able to try it out with the latest camera yet. I'll update this review once I've tried wireless uploads and printing.

Should I buy the Fujifilm Instax Pal 2?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Fujifilm Instax Pal 2 review: also consider

How I tested the Fujifilm Instax Pal 2

• Fujifilm loaned me the black and silver version of the Instax Pal 2 for three weeks
• I kept the camera with me at all times, and took it to China for a work trip
• I've shot around 150 photos using the various picture styles and aspect ratios (Instax borders)

Instax loaned me the black-with-silver-trim version of the Pal 2 for a few weeks, during which time I’ve kept it on me as an everyday camera, and taken it to China on a work trip.

I’ve used the various picture effects, aspect ratios (Instax film types), the self-timer and the LED flash, and tried the 10-frame animation mode.

At the time of my review, the Instax Pal app wasn't updated for use with the Pal 2 (on Android, at least). I'll update this review once I've paired the camera with the app and used it properly.

• First reviewed: September 2026
• Read more about how we test

Canon EOS R8 Mark II: One-minute review

It might look like a Sony or Nikon, but I can assure you that the EOS R8 Mark II is a Canon camera. It's the realization of a long-rumored model that was expected to be a digital remake of the AE-1 analog SLR camera to mark that camera's its 50th anniversary, only those rumors proved unfounded, with Canon working in a "modern twist".

I can see the faint resemblance between the two cameras, and I like the EOS R8 Mark II's angular look, but I also think Canon has missed a trick by not going all-out retro here, in the way Nikon did with its Zf.

Design should have been the major selling point here, but instead we have a camera that blends in, and that's not a compliment. This makes it harder to forgive the dated elements of the camera that have been carried over from the original EOS R8.

That's not to say the EOS R8 Mark II isn't a decent upgrade from the EOS R8 — it adds in-body image stabilization that's rated up to 7.5EV to the 24MP full-frame sensor, plus an AF joystick (Canon calls it a multi-controller) which makes autofocus selection simpler.

Video specs are also improved, autofocus performance enhanced, and pre-capture appears for the first time in a Canon camera at this price point.

The EOS R8 Mark II is a better camera than the EOS R8, but it also carries the same LCD and EVF displays, and the same tiny battery and entry-level build quality. These dated elements only highlight how much better a camera the Nikon Z5 II is — and that camera from 2025 costs less.

Still, if you're a Canon fan and committed to its system, the EOS R8 Mark II is a solid upgrade of the EOS R8, and a sensible alternative to the pricier EOS R6 Mark III for users who don't need the premium design, superior battery life and various high-end features.

Canon EOS R8 Mark II: Price and release date

• Announced on September 16, 2026, priced from $1,899 / £1,729 / AU$2,529
• Available in 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM kit for £2,119 / AU$2,859 (or with the 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM lens for $2,099) in the US
• Dedicated Extension Grip (EC-G2) costs $99 / £89 / AU$169
• Goes on sale from October 20

Canon is expected to sell the EOS R8 Mark II from October 20, with a body-only price of $1,899 / £1,729 / AU$2,529, which rises to £2,119 / AU$2,859 for the 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM kit (not to be confused with the pricier 24-105mm F4 L IS USM), while in the US there's a 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM kit for $2,099. Other bundles will be available, including one with an additional battery.

Canon also launched a grip for the EOS R8 Mark II, which costs $99 / £89 / AU$169. It's a grip only, and doesn't feature a battery, but it does feature a hinge allowing direct access to the camera's battery door.

Canon EOS R8 Mark II specs

Canon EOS R8 Mark II: Design

• Major new look for an interchangeable-lens Canon camera
• Multi-controller and tally lamp added
• Single SD card slot relocated to a dedicated side access door
• Same LCD and EVF displays as the EOS R8
• Body not weather resistant

I've already covered the new look of the EOS R8 Mark II. Whether that fresh design is going to be worked into other Canon cameras or remain exclusive to the R8 series, or if an unadulterated retro mirrorless body is on the way, we'll have to wait and see. I asked a Canon spokesperson about the prospect of an all-out retro body, and they didn't rule it out.

I've included a side-by-side photo of the EOS R8 and and EOS R8 Mark II, below, and you can see the sharper lines, and the deeper and textured grip of the new model, which for me evoke the look of Sony bodies more than Canon heritage.

One welcome addition is Canon's multi-controller button, which can be used to select the autofocus point among other things, and is a much loved feature by users who like to control to how their camera autofocuses, included point selection.

I really appreciated the placement of the multi-controller alongside the AF-ON (autofocus) button, which are both within a slight move of your thumb where it naturally rests in the grip. As such, it was entirely possible to hold the camera and make autofocus point selection one-handed.

A tally lamp has been added to indicate when video recording is active, while the single SD card slot has been relocated to a dedicated door on the grip-side of the camera, whereas in the EOS R8 it was found behind the same door as the battery on the underside.

Sadly, Canon hasn't used the space saved in the battery compartment (and deeper handgrip) to fit in a larger-capacity battery. The EOS R8 Mark II uses the same battery as its predecessor — shot life was already a major weak point — and has an even lower battery life when the power-hungry image stabilization feature is active, being rated at 220 shots when using the viewfinder (or 340 shots with the LCD).

Nor has the quality of the body been improved — Canon notes that the EOS R8 Mark II's body materials are part aluminum alloy, part polycarbonate, and it's not weather resistant. The controls, and the build quality, really do feel entry-level.

The 3.0-inch 1.62m-dot vari-angle LCD and 0.39-inch 2.36m-dot EVF displays are unchanged from the EOS R8, and look fairly dated when you compare them to the Nikon Z5 II's displays.

Canon EOS R8 Mark II: Performance

• 24.2MP full-frame sensor now equipped with 7.5EV image stabilization
• Digic X processor unique to the camera, 40fps burst shooting
• 4K video up to 60fps, oversampled from 6K, plus 1080p up to 180fps

The addition of in-body image stabilization (IBIS) is the major upgrade offered by the EOS R8 Mark II, and its effectiveness is rated up to 7.5EV. This feature makes life simpler shooting handheld in many scenarios — whether that's for sharp images in low light or with telephoto lenses, creative long-exposure shots, or run-and-gun video.

The sensor that incorporates the IBIS is otherwise the same as the one in the EOS R8 — a full-frame 24.2MP CMOS unit which is a decent all-purpose sensor. Nothing too exciting in 2026, but dependable.

Maximum burst-shooting speeds are once again up to 40fps, using the electronic shutter. Not that there's a choice — if you didn't already know it, the EOS R8 Mark II, like its predecessor, doesn't have a mechanical shutter.

Canon has added Pre-Continuous Shooting (more widely known as pre-capture) to the EOS R8 Mark II. In short, the camera is able to continually buffer up to 0.5 seconds while the shutter is half pressed, before the user fully presses the button to take photos. In this case, you get up to 20 photos spanning the half-second before you start photos — it's a really useful feature for wildlife and action photography, for when your reactions aren't otherwise up to speed. The feature was introduced in the EOS R5 Mark II, and the EOS R8 Mark II is the first Canon at this price point to get it.

Video recording has been improved in several ways. First of all, 4K footage is oversampled from 6K, so it should look sharper. Secondly, 4K frame rates have been upped to 60fps, while 1080p goes up to 180fps — that's 6x slow motion. Thirdly, there's the aforementioned IBIS, which makes smooth handheld shooting all the more possible. And then there are additional color profiles to choose from, including 'filmtone' looks and other picture styles which can be added using the Canon EOS Utility app.

Canon has also added a new 'defocus' feature, which can add a creative blur effect (not aperture dependent), and alter the speed of focus transitions. I haven't had the time yet to test any of the EOS R8 Mark II's video features, but I will do for my upcoming in-depth review.

Dual Pixel CMOS AF II powers the camera's autofocus, which like before includes subject detection of people, animals and vehicles, but which Canon says offers an improved performance. For example, the camera's focus sensitivity in low light has been improved, being rated to -7.5EV.

‘Register People Priority’ is a neat addition — users can select specific people’s faces, storing up to 10 people for the camera to prioritize. It's a handy feature for scenarios like a wedding, where you might want to keep the bride and groom in sharp focus among a sea of faces.

Canon EOS R8 Mark II: also consider

How I tested the Canon EOS R8 Mark II

• I had a two hour hands-on session with the camera and kit lens
• I spent the time getting a feel for the camera, and took some sample photos
• Canon provided the EOS R8 and EOS R6 Mark III for comparisons

I've only used the EOS R8 Mark II for a couple of hours at Canon Europe's offices in London. During this time, I got a proper feel for the camera, and paired it with the 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM lens that the camera is available with in a kit.

Canon supplied me with the original EOS R8 and EOS R6 Mark III, so I was able to make direct comparisons between the three cameras, though only how they handle — I didn't have time to take like-for-like pictures.

I took a stroll in the outside space, and took various photos of birdlife, foliage and buildings. Look out for our in-depth review of the EOS R8 Mark II, coming soon.

• First reviewed: September 2026
• Read more about how we test

Fujifilm Instax Mini 13: Two-minute review

The Instax Mini 13 is the newest instant-print camera in Fujifilm’s long-standing lineup of budget, easy-to-use party snappers. These film cameras are a great way to capture memories at shindigs, weddings and the sort, and this latest model is no different.

Like most Instax mini cameras, the Instax Mini 13 has a 60mm f/12.7 optical-grade plastic lens, making it ideal for close-up snaps and selfies that require a fixed field of focus. It even has an additional close-up mode to give you a little extra control over the focal length.

These are all features already found in the Instax Mini 12, which we rate as the best instant camera for most people for its point-and-shoot simplicity — but the Instax Mini 13 does have a few small tricks up its sleeve to warrant it being the step up model in the range.

The biggest upgrade from its predecessor that was released in 2023 is the addition of a self-timer, which is normally found on more expensive models like the Instax Mini 99 that retails for more than double the price.

And while the self-timer is the most significant upgrade from the Instax Mini 12, there are other small differences, including a fresh, playful ribbed design with new pastel colors, and a small, rubber wedge that hangs on the strap for propping the camera up on a table.

If I were to sum up the Instax Mini 13 in three words, I'd say it's cheap, cheerful and charming, which is exactly what you want from a fun instant camera that's a piece of cake to use.

Fujifilm Instax Mini 13 review: price and release date

• Announced in March 2026
• Shipping began in Australia on March 31
• Released in the US and UK in late June
• Priced at $94 / £79 / AU$139

As noted in our Instax Mini 12 review, many of us camera nerds have come to expect a new Instax Mini instant camera every three years from the brand, so it was surprising that this model ended up having a staggered global rollout, without much fanfare. Aussies were the first to get their hands on the new camera on March 31, followed by the US and UK on June 25.

Even more surprising is the fact that those of us in the UK didn't see the same 15% price jump from the cost of the previous generation, with the Instax Mini 13 being priced at £79 — the same as the Instax Mini 12 at launch. Those in the US and Australia weren't as lucky, however, with the Instax Mini 13 seeing an 18% increase from the Instax Mini 12 to $94 and 16% to AU$139.

Fujifilm Instax Mini 13 review: specs

Fujifilm Instax Mini 13 review: design

• A fun, ribbed design for added grip
• Five different color options to choose from
• Comes with a handy accessory on the strap for propping the camera up

The most striking update to the Instax Mini 13 is the rounded, ribbed design and five new pastel colorways, which have been called Candy Pink, Frost Blue (featured in this review), Clay White, Lagoon Green and Dreamy Purple.

Although the new design does bring a new poppy look to the camera, the trade-off is that it's a bit bulkier and heavier than the likes of the Instax Mini 12. If that's a problem, and you're more so after a slimmer and compact build, take a look at our Instax Mini 99 review instead.

That model also has a built-in tripod thread at the bottom of the camera to help with taking group shots, which is one of the reasons why it's the more expensive, premium model. But the Instax Mini 13 brings a thoughtful budget accessory to help you stabilize shots: a rubber wedge attached to the strap that you can use to adjust the angle of the camera when placed on a surface.

Fujifilm Instax Mini 13: performance

• Incredibly easy to use — just point-and-shoot and print
• Best for taking short-range images, like selfies
• For optimum results, make sure to hold the camera about 30cm away

The biggest selling point of the Instax Mini 13 is the fact that it's so straightforward and easy to use. Simply load up Instax’s credit card-sized Mini Film pack of 10, spin the lens dial to turn it on, and you’re all set to go.

With a shutter speed range between 1/2 a second and 1/250 a second, and a film sensitivity rating of ISO 800, it's best used in well-lit spaces, as you'll run the risk of overexposing a shot if you were to shoot in direct, bright sunlight.

At night, the constant-firing flash will automatically adjust itself to different light levels on its own, but it's important to keep in mind the distance of your subject. As mentioned earlier, it's best to use it for close-up shots to get the best quality images. And the optimum range for the flash is the same, with a distance of 30cm to two metres being the most effective.

To make selfies ever easier to capture, the Instax Mini 13 has a self-timer that works brilliantly to stabilize any photograph by reducing the chances of blurring from pressing the shutter button. You simply have to spin the dial that's fitted around the shutter button to activate it. One rotation sets the timer at two seconds, which you can tell is on by the blinking light, while holding it down activates the 10 second timer.

My only gripe is that the self-timer doesn't give you a countdown light for when it's about to take the picture (say, the blinking light speeding up). Yes, I know I can simply count the seconds down myself from pressing the button, but when you're already trying to frame yourself in the small mirror that can easily be forgotten to do.

Should I buy the Fujifilm Instax Mini 13?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Fujifilm Instax Mini 13 review: also consider

How I tested the Fujifilm Instax Mini 13

• I took the Instax Mini 13 to several events over the course of two months
• Experimented with holding the camera at different distances to determine the best for image quality
• Printed 20 Instax Mini prints, which were scanned into the Instax UP! app

Being an instant camera fan, I knew the best places to bring the Instax Mini 13 to. From a friend's 30th birthday party to a Harry Styles concert, I snapped away to see how it performed in different lighting environments.

I went through two packs of Instax Mini film — the classic white border type and the Instax Mini Rainbow edition that prints out different colors. Unfortunately, the Pastel Galaxy film that was launched alongside the Instax Mini 13 wasn't available to test.

To show off some of the sample pictures I snapped over the two months that I tested the camera for, I scanned the prints onto my phone using the Instax UP! app.

• First reviewed: September 2026
• Read more about how we test

Potensic Atom 3: One-minute review

Many have tried and failed to produce drones to rival DJI's, but the Potensic Atom 3 is a DJI drone alternative that's actually worth considering — and not just on paper, but in actual flight conditions.

The folding quadcopter impresses with level 5 wind resistance and a 10% bigger battery than its predecessor, the Atom 2, making for robust flight performance even in tricky conditions. It's gargantuan RC PTD 2 touchscreen controller (in the pricier bundle) feels top-drawer, too.

Its 3-axis gimbal camera isn't half-bad, either — being equipped with a 1/1.3-inch sensor and offering 4K video up to 60fps in standard, HDR or Log profiles, slow-motion recording, and up to 50MP stills in RAW and JPEG.

The larger sensor, higher 4K video frame rates and bitrates, plus improved battery life and transmission range are all meaningful upgrades on the Atom 2, and make the Atom 3 a compelling DJI Mini rival, especially given Potensic's competitive pricing.

Despite a few handling issues (which I'll get into below), the Atom 3 could have pinched top spot in our beginner drones guide... six months ago. The bad news for Potensic is that the DJI Lito X1 is now in the picture, raising the bar for any would-be challengers.

For practically the same money, the Lito X1 is the slightly more polished drone overall — and it features object sensing, which the Atom 3 lacks, delivering this incredibly useful feature at a new-low price point (compared to DJI's Mini 5 Pro). Ultimately, the Lito X1 gives consumers so much for the money that the fight here feels unfair.

Would I still recommend the Atom 3? Absolutely. It's way better than the Ruko U11Mini 4K, which we recently tested, and the next best thing for consumers who don't want, or can't buy, a DJI drone (US pricing is displayed on the Potensic website, suggesting it could become available there, unlike new DJI products, but currently Potensic is locked out of the US too). Ultimately, Potensic's best drone yet is a highly capable beginner option — but it remains one big step behind the DJI competition.

Potensic Atom 3: Price and availability

• Priced from $429.99 / £339.99
• Touchscreen RC3 controller bundle costs $424.99 / £499
• Available now direct from Potensic and via Amazon; not available in Australia at launch

The Potensic Atom 3 is available now directly through Potensic's website and via Amazon in the UK. There's US pricing on the Potensic site, but the company told me the Atom 3 is not available there, while it's yet to hit stores in Australia.

Pricing varies considerably depending on the region and the bundle. In the UK, the base package costs £339.99, with the price rising to £579.99 for the Fly More Combo with RC PTD 2 bundle (which I tested), which includes two additional batteries, a charging hub, case, and the touchscreen RC PTD 2 controller in place of the standard smartphone-based remote.

US pricing starts at $429.99, while the Fly More Combo, which includes the standard smartphone-based remote, costs $549.99. At the time of writing only two of the five bundles have pricing — none of which include bundles with the touchscreen RC PTD 2 controller. However, despite pricing being on the Potensic site, the drone is not available there "due to FCC regulations", Potensic told me, and that "our team is actively working on the relevant certification to make it available in the future".

At the time of writing, the Potensic Atom 3 is not available in Australia, but Potensic does have a dedicated Australia website which is the best place to check for future availability.

DJI's Lito X1 is the Atom 3's obvious rival, and it costs from £359 at Amazon UK, so just a little extra money gets you that drone's massively useful object-sensing feature. However, like other DJI drones, the Lito X1 is not available to buy in the US.

• Price score: 4/5

Potensic Atom 3: Specs

Potensic Atom 3: Design and build quality

• Folding mini design, weighing under 249g
• USB-C charging and MicroSD card slot, but no internal storage
• Optional touchscreen RC PTD 2 controller is huge

The Atom 3's hard-plastic design is strikingly similar to recent models in DJI's Mini and Lito series of sub-250g folding quadcopter drones. It's a familiar formula — the drone folds down to a coat pocket-able size and, like most beginner models, weighs under 249g. Sub-250g drones are exempt from the strictest drone registration requirements in most regions, including the UK and US.

At the rear of the drone is a USB-C slot for charging the device directly, and for transferring images from the inserted microSD card. The card slot is also at the rear — there's no internal storage.

I was able to transfer files directly onto a MacBook Pro via that USB-C wired connection, but when I tried connecting the memory card directly my computer was unable to read it. Another option for file transfer is to download the desired files through the Potensic app, which is a reliable albeit slower process.

A clip-on cover ably protects the camera and gimbal mechanism when the drone isn't in use, and this is locked in place with a rear clip by stretching an elasticated band that connects the two (see above).

The Fly More Combo (with RC PTD 2 remote controller), which Potensic supplied for this review, comes with a padded zipped case that holds the drone, the charging hub with its two additional batteries, and the sizable controller. The case is notably larger than the one for the equivalent DJI Mini 4K bundle.

The touchscreen controller feels high-quality; the screen is huge, detailed, and provides a 1080p feed up to 60fps, with Potensic's latest PixSync 5.0 video transmission system boosting the range from 10km to up to 16km, and reducing latency to 150ms. In short, the on-screen feed is smooth and immersive beyond distances that you'll ever realistically fly over.

I found certain movements of the controller's joysticks a little jerky, which spoiled some of my footage, but with practice I was able to find the sweet spots of those controls for smoother moves.

• Design score: 4.5/5

Potensic Atom 3: Features and flight performance

• Battery life quoted at up to 40 minutes; the drone typically lasted around 20 minutes in real-world testing
• No object sensing, just the usual downward-facing sensors for landing and takeoff
• Decent selection of flight and tracking moves, but some have frustrating restrictions

Potensic quotes a battery life of 40 minutes for the Atom 3, which is an improvement over the Atom 2, thanks to a 10% (approx) higher-capacity 2,590mAh unit, and on paper, this performance beats the comparable DJI; however, I didn't get close to this in real-world use.

The best battery performance I got during testing was more like 25 minutes on a calm day, while in windy coastal conditions I rarely, if ever, got more than 20 minutes. The drone's level 5 wind-resistance rating (19-24mph) seems fair, though — I used the Atom 3 in such conditions, and I found flight to be impressively stable and smooth, even if headwinds further drained the battery as I fought to bring the drone home when power was low.

When battery life drops to 10%, the drone automatically initiates landing (avoiding it simply dropping from the sky), so that's something to bear in mind, especially if you're flying over risky areas such as bodies of water.

The Atom 3 has downward-facing sensors for takeoff and landing, with the useful Return to Home feature, but there are no front-, side- or rear-facing sensors, like you get with pricier drones equipped with omni-directional object sensing.

Six months ago I wouldn't have expected any more from a drone at this price point, but DJI has since brought object sensing to the much more affordable Lito X1. If Potensic is to go up a level, adding this incredibly useful feature is the logical next step for the Atom series.

Return to Home (RTH) worked flawlessly, with the drone automatically updating its position at takeoff — there's also an on-screen guide indicating where the RTH position is in relation to where the drone is in the air. It's possible to update the RTH position mid-flight, say if you move to a different location during flight and want it to land at your new location.

For regular flight, there are three speeds to choose from, with the Sport Mode being the quickest at 16m/s (horizontal), 5m/s ascent and 4m/s descent. It's not the quickest drone around, but it's zippy enough for beginner use.

I really did miss object sensing, given that I regularly fly in object-packed areas to capture dynamic footage, so I needed to be extra cautious about where I flew the drone. It is possible to get smooth and stable-looking footage, though, after much practice to get a feel for the controller's joysticks.

There's a good selection of DJI-style 'QuickShot' flight moves, which perform an automated move using a selected subject as the reference point. To do this, you drag a box over the subject using the controller's touchscreen (or your smartphone's screen if using the basic controller). There are seven automated moves in all, including pull-away, rocket and boomerang.

I was happy to see three tracking modes too: Follow, Parallel and Spotlight, each of which keep your subject in the center of the frame as they move. 'Follow' tracks your moving subject from behind (though remember there's no object sensing), while 'Parallel' does the same but from the side. 'Spotlight' simply keeps the subject central as they move around the frame.

The tracking modes are hamstrung by several frustrating limitations, while the omission of object sensing further limits where you can fly. For example, to initiate Follow, the angle of the camera needs to be pointed down a certain degree — in other words the drone needs to be quite high up.

For me, the most dynamic 'follow' footage would be from a lower angle. It's possible to override the limit in the app's menu, which requires checking the option to say that propellor guards are installed (whether in reality they are or are not). Even with the options selected to free up the drone for tracking from a lower altitude, I regularly found that the drone reset itself, reimposing the restriction.

I also found that the tracking functions gave up altogether in less-open areas, when the GNSS (GPS/ GLOSNASS / Galileo / BeiDou) signal was weak. One example was trying to get tracking video of myself biking in my local woods — the drone kept stopping just a second or so into sequences. I had no such issues in the same scenario when testing the DJI Mini 5 Pro (which also has omni-directional object sensing).

Those flight moves are great to have, but adding object sensing, and addressing the other limitations, would make them way more useful for dynamic footage.

• Flight performance score: 3.5/5

Potensic Atom 3: Image and video quality

• 1/1.3-inch CMOS sensor, 4K video up to 60fps
• Wider 24mm f/2.8 lens (vs 26mm f/1.8 lens of the Atom 2)
• RAW stills and flat P-Log video color profile provide editing latitude

Video and photo quality are an upgrade from the older Atom 2, with the Atom 3's camera using a larger 1/1.3-inch CMOS sensor that's comparable to those in the DJI Mini 4 Pro / Lito X1, rather than the Atom 2's 1/2-inch sensor. There's also a slight change to the lens — it's a wider 24mm f/2.8, where the Atom 2 uses a 26mm lens with brighter f/1.8 aperture, which somewhat counters the sensor-based advantage the Atom 3 has.

4K video recording up to 60fps can be done the easy way or the hands-on way, using the standard or detail-rich HDR profiles for ready-to-go footage, or the flat P-Log profile, which holds more detail in highlight and shadow areas, but which requires editing to taste later.

I tried all three profiles at 30fps and 60fps, and then took P-log footage to Adobe Premiere Pro for editing and compared the footage. There are incremental image quality gains when using P-Log, but on the whole I found myself happy with the quality of HDR footage, saving myself the editing hassle.

In addition to 4K video, there's slow-motion capture up to 7x, but only in 1080p HD resolution. Meanwhile, stills are reasonable: 12.5MP as standard, or 50MP in the '8K' mode, with JPEG and RAW formats available.

Where photo quality impresses is in how much tonal depth is retained, although images benefit from a little sharpening afterwards. Another option for further increasing shadow and highlight detail is the 'bracket' mode, which combines multiple photos at different brightness values into one with a wider range of tones, but the standard mode already does a good job.

Interval and burst shooting modes are also included, while a panorama mode combines multiple images into one ultra-wide perspective that covers 180 degrees, with the drone automatically capturing multiple frames one after the other.

I'd say image quality is just about on par with the DJI Lito X1 / Mini 4 Pro, and it's clearly a cut above the recent Ruko model.

• Image and video quality score: 4.5/5

Potensic Atom 3: Testing scorecard

Should you buy the Potensic Atom 3?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Potensic Atom 3: also consider

How I tested the Potensic Atom 3

• I tested the Atom 3 in a range of conditions — in daylight and at dusk, and in both calm and windy weather
• I shot video at every available resolution and frame rate combination, and still photos in all modes
• I assessed battery life and wind resistance over several flights in various conditions

Potensic sent me the Atom 3 Fly More Combo kit with the RC PTD 2 touchscreen controller. The kit included the drone, battery hub with three batteries, controller, ND filter pack, spare propellors and a USB-C to USB-C charging cable.

I conducted multiple flights in daylight and in low light at dawn / dusk, and in both calm and particularly windy coastal conditions. I tried the various flight settings and modes, and regularly ran the three batteries down, making notes of real flight times and flight stability.

I took the same video sequences in the various color modes; standard, HDR and P-Log, and at 30fps, 60fps and 6x slow motion, and compared the 4K footage. I also tried the various photo modes, including RAW & JPEG capture, panorama and 8K (48MP) modes. I edited photos in Adobe Camera Raw and videos in Premiere Pro.

• First reviewed: September 2026
• Read more about how we test

Insta360 Luna Pro: Two-minute review

I'll be honest: my first reaction to the Insta360 Luna Pro wasn't really about the camera itself — more its price tag. At $599.99/£599.99/AU$859.99, it sits close enough to the flagship Luna Ultra model (at least in the USA and UK) that I've been wondering whether Insta360 has left itself room for a proper budget option in this range. The Pro doesn't offer a significant saving over the Ultra, which I suspect will drive many buyers into opting for the latter simply because it features a second lens for a similar price.

That's not a knock on the Luna Pro itself, though, because it handles its actual job — smooth, hands-free footage you don't have to think about — with real aplomb. Popping the touchscreen module free from the body and using it as a standalone remote is a neat trick, and it's just as handy here as it was on the Ultra. Tracking is another standout feature for me: click the joystick once, or tap a subject on screen, and the Luna Pro locks on and stays locked on, whether I was walking, gesturing or just generally being difficult to follow. But all that is also available on the Luna Ultra.

I did come away with a couple of gripes concerning the Pro (both of which, incidently, one could also level at the Ultra). The little wire tripod tucked into the handle is more fiddly than useful once you're off a flat surface. Battery life also isn't quite what Insta360 claims — you can expect closer to 90 minutes than the quoted 240 (for 1080p) if you're shooting 8K with the screen switched on.

Photos are also an afterthought here — they're soft and low on contrast, and in most cases a smartphone will do a better job. Video is a much stronger story, particularly once you dip below the headline 8K resolution into the more practical 4K modes, and vertical shooters will get unexpected bragging rights over owners of the Ultra thanks to the Pro's sharper 9:16 footage. The fact that the Pro has just the one lens does affect things, of course: push the digital zoom past 2x and the drop-off in detail becomes obvious immediately.

So where does that leave the Luna Pro? As a piece of hardware, it's a likeable and very capable little camera that does almost everything I wanted it to. As a purchase decision, it's a trickier sell than Insta360 probably intended, sitting just a little too close to its more versatile sibling for comfort.

Insta360 Luna Pro: Price and release date

• Launched on September 10, 2026, priced at $599.99 / £599.99 / AU$859.99
• Only one bundle available at launch
• Costs $170 / £50 / AU$370 less than the flagship Luna Ultra

At $599.99 / £599.99 / AU$859.99, the Luna Pro undercuts Insta360's flagship Luna Ultra ($769.99 / £649 / AU$1,229.99) by a relatively modest margin, especially in the UK, where the difference works out to less than £50, or $170 in the US. That's a narrower gap than I was expecting, given the Pro features only one lens while the Ultra has two, and it puts the newer camera in a slightly awkward position; it's not quite the budget-friendly alternative you might expect a single-lens model to be (like the DJI Osmo Pocket 4 is).

Insta360 Luna Pro specs

Insta360 Luna Pro: Design

• Effectively a single-lens version of the Luna Ultra
• Clever detachable touchscreen module, complete with its own built-in mic
• A rubber cap replaces the Ultra's bulky protective case

Strip away the second lens and the Luna Pro is basically the Luna Ultra all over again. The dimensions and weight between the two cameras are barely different (the Pro is about half an inch shorter and 20g lighter than its dual-lens sibling), so if you've read my colleague Tim Coleman's take on the Ultra's design, most of the same applies here too: the Pro, like the Ultra, has a stick-like, gimbal-topped body that sits comfortably in the hand, with the option to extend the included handle for a more secure grip.

Its signature design feature is unchanged, too: the entire touchscreen-and-controls module pops free, working as a standalone remote with a 20m range and its own built-in microphone. It's just as useful here for solo shooting as it is on the Ultra.

One design compromise that did stand out to me during my time with the camera is the thin wire tripod that extends from the handle base — another thing carried over from the Ultra. On a genuinely flat surface, like a tabletop, it holds the Luna Pro upright well enough, but it offers little stability on uneven ground, and it's fiddly to pull out in the first place. Thankfully there's a standard tripod thread on the base too, so a proper mini tripod is only ever a few twists away.

The included protective case is also more basic than the Ultra's: it's just a rubber cap over the lens and gimbal, which trades some protection for a slimmer profile and much easier removal and replacement.

Insta360 Luna Pro: Performance

• Dual-chip setup (4nm flagship chip plus dedicated imaging chip)
• Sticky, reliable subject tracking, and smooth stabilization whether shooting horizon-level or FPV-style
• Video up to 8K 30fps or 4K 120fps in 16:9 mode, 4K 30fps in 9:16

The Insta360 Luna Pro pairs the same 1-inch sensor and 20mm-equivalent f/1.8 lens found on the Ultra's main camera with a leaner dual-chip setup — a 4nm flagship chip and a dedicated imaging chip. The Ultra has three chips.

On paper that sounds like a step down, but in practice I rarely found the Luna Pro underpowered or sluggish. Subject tracking is a particular highlight: a single joystick click will pick out people and animals automatically, or you can tap a subject on the touchscreen and even adjust its position within the frame, which is useful if you don't want it to be dead center. It's sticky and dependable throughout. Stabilization is equally impressive, delivering smooth, level footage on the move, with the option to switch to a more dynamic FPV-style movement if you want it.

Insta360 rates the 1,550mAh battery at 240 minutes, but that figure is sneakily based on 1080p 24fps recording with the screen and Wi-Fi both switched off, which isn't how most people will use this camera. Shooting 8K at 30fps with the screen active, a much more realistic scenario, drained the battery in around 90 minutes during testing. That's still a respectable battery life in my book, so I'm not sure why Insta360 saw fit to base its claims on an underpowered setting.

The camera runs a little warm under sustained use of its more demanding modes like 4K120fps and 8K30fps in particular, but during my testing, it took more than 75 minutes of continuous 8K recording before it shut itself down. What I'd consider normal use never triggered any overheating issues.

The four microphones (three on the main body, one on the detachable module) handle audio reasonably well, and 32-bit recording is on offer for anyone editing seriously. Still, anyone prioritizing audio quality should consider buying an Insta360 Mic Air or Mic Pro, both of which pair directly and add proper wind protection and noise cancellation.

Moving on to image quality, and photos are the camera's weak point: detail and contrast are both underwhelming, and it's not a device worth buying for stills alone. Frankly, in most cases you'd be better off using your smartphone for snaps than pulling out the Pro.

Video is a different story: footage looks clean and sharp in good lighting, across Standard, Dolby Vision and I-Log color profiles, though the 120Mbps maximum bitrate (shared with the Ultra) seems quite modest. 8K is the headline spec, of course, but I think 4K is a much more practical everyday choice thanks to its smaller files, greater range of frame rate options (up to 120fps), and the fact it still offers plenty of detail.

Slow motion goes up to 4x at 4K (120fps) or 8x in 1080p (240fps) and, surprisingly, vertical shooters get a genuine edge over the Ultra here: 4K30fps in 9:16 (built from 6K oversampling) versus the Ultra's ceiling of just 3K. One thing to note about vertical footage though: while the Ultra can hit 60fps in that mode, the Pro tops out at 30fps.

The digital zoom is the clearest trade-off for losing that second lens, and the Pro lacks the reach of its pricier cousin. Up to 2x magnification, Insta360's "lossless zoom" claim holds up in practice, but push it further and the digital crop shows, with softer detail and muddier edges.

Should I buy the Insta360 Luna Pro?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Insta360 Luna Pro: also consider

How I tested the Insta360 Luna Pro

• Insta360 sent me the Luna Pro's basic box bundle ahead of launch
• I shot footage and photos at all available resolutions, and tested the slow motion and PureVideo special shooting modes
• I tested battery life and thermal management by running the camera continuously

I was sent a Luna Pro sample ahead of the launch day, allowing me time to test the Luna Pro over a few days. I shot a mix of horizontal, vertical and slow motion video across its available resolutions and color profiles, and put its subject tracking and stabilization through everyday use. I also took photos in and outdoors, in both JPEG and DNG format. I ran the camera's battery down twice to test its battery life, and tested its thermal performance too, to see how real-world use compares to Insta360's claims.

• First reviewed: September 2026
• Read more about how we test

Kodak PixPro AZ653: two-Minute Review

If you thought bridge cameras (aka superzoom cameras) were a thing of the past, you’re probably not alone. This area of the photography market hasn’t received too much attention over the past few years, especially now that the lower end of the mirrorless camera arena has some solid options, providing decent specs at a reasonable price.

However, the main selling point of bridges camera has always been the expansive zoom range, something the Kodak PixPro AZ653 has in absolute abundance. The 24-1560mm equivalent zoom lens will cover just about every subject you could possibly hope to encounter, from everyday street scenes to distant wildlife. My favorite lens is my 70-200mm f/2.8 'trinity' zoom, but after having such a long zoom range at my fingertips, it has been tough to go back to a mere 2.8x zoom, even if that lens' wider aperture and quality are streets above for quality.

If you’re after a lightweight camera to take with you on your travels, and you don’t know exactly what photographic opportunities you’re likely to come across, the AZ653 is a petite option that will cover every base.

Autofocus is smooth, if not the fastest you can find on a camera at this price point. It certainly won’t be able to keep up with the fastest animal subjects, so if you’re looking for a wildlife camera, you might be better off with an interchangeable lens model that uses high-end phase detection AF. For slower animals at a distance, however, the massive focal range positions the AZ653 as a good, budget-friendly safari camera.

Image quality, meanwhile, is impressive for a bridge camera, especially one with such a small sensor. The limited area of the chip does place limitations on what the camera can achieve, because of the tiny photo sites, but in good light at least, images are sharp and detailed, even if they do suffer from extreme color noise.

Handling, meanwhile, is decidedly DSLR-like, which is a good thing if you’re used to a larger camera body. It’s comfortable to hold and to operate single-handed, while all of the controls are logically placed. Having a manual control ring on the lens is a huge bonus too, giving the AZ653 a premium edge and a professional look to boot.

It might not be an image quality match for a pro-level mirrorless camera, nor is it going to outgun even the entry-level interchangeable lens offerings from Canon or Nikon, but the Kodak AZ653 is a powerful bridge camera that goes easy on the shoulder and on the bank balance.

Kodak PixPro AZ653: Price and release date

• $449 / £349 / AU$ 750.99
• Available worldwide now
• Limited availability/ backorder lists current in the UK

The AZ653 is designed largely for entry-level users who aren’t ready to invest in an interchangeable lens system, or photographers looking to minimize their kit. The camera is available globally, priced affordably at $449 / £349 / AU$ 750.99.

This makes it significantly cheaper than buying a mirrorless camera with a comparable specification and adding a super telephoto lens. For example, a Canon EOS R100 and RF800mm F11 STM telephoto prime lens would set you back a combined price of approximately $1228 / £1359 / AU$ 2000.

It also costs around 7x less than the Sony RX10 V — a premium bridge camera launched this year, which is superior in most regards except for its lesser zoom range.

• Price score: 4/5

Kodak AZ653: Specs

Kodak PixPro AZ653: design

• Small and lightweight body made possible by the small sensor format
• Reasonable build quality, though mostly plastic
• Fixed 3-inch LCD makes composing shots difficult

Bridge cameras are, by definition, designed to bring together the size and weight benefits of a compact camera with the superior handling characteristics of a DSLR or mirrorless model. By bridging this gap, cameras like the AZ653 are able to offer a generally unrivalled balance of portability and versatility. At least, that’s the objective.

Of course, this was far more of an obvious benefit before the advent of the mirrorless revolution. The difference in size and weight between a Bridge camera and a DSLR such as the Nikon D850 was far more pronounced than between the AZ653 and an entry-level mirrorless model like the Canon EOS R100 or Nikon Z30. Even higher-end cameras like the Canon EOS R6 Mark III, Nikon Z50 II, Sony a7C II, or Fujifilm X-T5 with a standard zoom lens have a comparable footprint.

That last part is important, though. The lens on the AZ653 is anything but standard. As soon as you take the vast zoom range into account, the projected weight differences diverge dramatically. I say projected since the exact dimensions of a mirrorless equivalent to the 65x zoom can only be estimated – no such lens exists.

The EFL (Effective Focal Length) 24-1560mm F2.9-6.7 optic is only possible because of the smaller 1/2.3in sensor at the heart of the camera, and if you were to try and build a similar lens with an image circle big enough to cover an APS-C or full-frame sensor, it would be more like a telescope than a photography optic.

The Kodak AZ653 is well-proportioned and very comfortable to hold. The deep handgrip is reassuring and allowed a firm grip even with my large-ish hands. Despite the body’s small size, there is ample room for around three fingers on the lower part of the grip at one time, while the forefinger sits precisely over the shutter button.

The zoom control surrounds the shutter release and operates with minimal travel, allowing rapid activation of the power zoom. A nice touch is the ability to zoom using the control ring on the lens instead, which is a far more intuitive action for photographers who have committed two-handed camera work to muscle memory. The downside is an artificially long zoom travel; it takes multiple twists of the ring to zoom from the widest focal length to the longest.

The feel of the zoom indicates it's an electronic fly-by-wire system, where the ring isn’t physically connected to anything mechanical, but merely acts as a switch that drives a motor to move the lens elements.

With an optical system this long, the operation is slow and at times, a little stuttery – the zoom stops halfway through its journey and there’s an obvious pause while the onboard computer recalculates where it should be placing the elements. This proved frustrating during my testing, and resulted in multiple missed shots.

Manual focus was a little more successful when using the ring, and I could make relatively precise adjustments. You can access this by moving the position of a switch on the lens barrel, which is another nod to the DSLR influence and adds to the professional experience. The magnified preview image is low-resolution, however, and isn’t especially useful.

The camera features a PASM mode (exposure) dial on the top plate, next to the power button. This provides access to the usual array of control modes, including full Manual and Auto, along with several creative shooting positions, including Scene modes, a Wireless mode for remote operation and file sharing, Movie Mode, Face Beautifier mode for in-camera retouching, and a Custom setting position.

The dial itself is too easily moved in my opinion. In several cases, I’d switched mode without realising, either because I’d nudged the dial with my finger or while getting the camera in and out of my bag, which again meant some missed shots.

The build quality is actually quite good. It is largely made from plastic, but this feels reinforced and not significantly inferior to many recent mid-range mirrorless cameras. I wouldn’t necessarily trust its resistance to rain and dust as such, but the outer shell doesn’t give the impression of cheapness, while the rubberised grip and viewfinder surround lend a more premium edge.

• Design score: 3.5/5

Kodak PixPro AZ653: performance

• The power zoom system is slow, especially when using the lens control ring
• The camera is not as quick to boot up and shut down as comparably priced mirrorless models
• Focus speed itself is quite snappy

With such a long zoom range, there’s always a risk of sluggish autofocus performance. This is often purely because of the additional glass elements needed to provide such a great magnification, making it a more demanding task for the autofocus motors. That being said, the actual dimensions of the optical system are much smaller than the effective image results – the lens is a physical 4.3mm to 279.5mm unit.

As such, the elements are quickly moved into position once the camera has found the correct focus distance, with minimal delay. It’s not quite as smooth as the stepper motors or ultrasonic drives found in many top-level mirrorless optics, nor is it as quiet, but it puts in a respectable performance for the price.

The limiting factor is going to be the autofocus system in the camera itself. Unlike the majority of mirrorless cameras, which use phase-detection AF, the AZ653 shares the slower contrast detection system found in many compact cameras, smartphones and older interchangeable lens bodies.

Without dwelling for too long on the technical specifics, phase-detection autofocus uses specialized sensors to measure the focus position of the lens by looking at how front- or back-focused the light projected through it is. Meanwhile, the AZ653’s contrast-detection AF merely looks for edges of objects in the frame to estimate how far it has to move the lens to get the maximum contrast.

As such, contrast detection has a tendency to hunt, moving the lens elements back and forth to test the correct placement. As expected, this slows down reaction times and isn’t suitable for rapid sports and animal subjects.

The EVF is small but fairly detailed. All of the relevant camera settings are displayed, and it is sharp enough to judge focus with ease. The LCD, on the other hand, is underwhelming. It makes use of only 460K dots, which isn’t enough to accurately assess the quality of captured images.

All files look smudged, not helped by the matte texture of the screen itself. The non-glossy surface makes it easier to preview images in bright light, but critical sharpness is almost impossible to check with any sense of confidence.

• Performance score: 3.5/5

Kodak PixPro AZ653: Image quality

• Surprising quality in good lighting
• Mushy JPEGs even at low ISO settings
• Limited to Full HD (1080p) video - no 4K or greater

Image quality is quite surprising. In good light, RAW format files from the AZ653 are rich in detail, and the lens is able to deliver crisp results. Having the RAW capability is a huge bonus and can honestly be considered a staple feature of an enthusiast camera now that many smartphones come equipped with their own RAW mode.

Kodak has been smart not to overstretch the sensor with resolution. The 20 million pixels are more than enough for everyday uses, and by keeping pixel count lower than most APS-C and Micro 4/3 cameras, the AZ653 is able to maintain a workable level of noise control and a reasonable dynamic range.

Sure, highlights clip more easily than when shooting the same scene on both the AZ653 and an APS-C model like the 26MP Fujifilm X100VI, but the performance is better than many larger-sensor cameras of last decade.

In-camera JPEG shooting is a different matter, and the quality is far less impressive. Default noise reduction is too aggressive and fine detail is rapidly obliterated, creating a smudged look common to compact cameras. Color noise reduction itself isn’t especially effective either, leaving behind too many colored blotches.

When shooting RAW, I was able to increase the ISO to about 800 before grain became a major problem which is, once again, impressive. My advice would be to increase the sensitivity of the AZ653 rather than to brighten underexposed RAW files — unlike many of the more ISO-invariant cameras we see today — this should produce a better balance of image texture and noise pattern.

Regarding lens quality, sharpness does drop off towards the long end of the zoom range. The slightly blurred results reminded me of shots taken with a budget Tamron 70-300mm DSLR lens I used to own back in the day – fine detail just isn’t present, almost as if your shots were taken through a greasy window. Files are usable on Instagram, but won’t be suitable for prints.

• Image quality score: 3/5

Testing Scorecard

Should I buy the Kodak PixPro AZ653?

Buy it if…

Don’t buy it if…

Also consider

How I tested the Kodak PixPro AZ653

• I spent around two and a half weeks with the AZ653
• Images were taken in both good light and low-light conditions, shooting in JPEG mode and RAW
• Most images were shot handheld to test the usability at longer focal lengths

I spent several weeks shooting with the PixPro AZ653, taking in multiple different lighting conditions. I shot in both JPEG and RAW formats to see how differently the built-in processing algorithms might process the images to my own RAW workflow.

Since one of the reasons to buy a bridge camera is for weight saving, I decided to shoot mainly handheld, as this would be how many users would experience the camera. I wanted to thoroughly check the ease with which someone might capture sharp images at the longer focal lengths.

I mainly used Aperture Priority (A) and Manual (M) modes for both creative freedom and to test the auto exposure systems.

To explore the noise performance, I shot with the camera at each ISO setting, from 100 through to 3200, using a tripod to ensure any drop in sharpness was not due to camera shake at the lower sensitivities. I also worked through the focal range, capturing the same scenes from the widest to the longest zoom settings.

First reviewed: September 2026