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

DJI Mic Mini 2S: two-minute review

Until now, DJI's compact wireless mic lineup has had a clear budget option in the Mic Mini series and a clear flagship in the Mic series, with a gulf of features and price separating the two. The Mic Mini 2S changes things, and slots right into that gulf. It's not quite a flagship-killer, but with this release, DJI now has three tiers of small wireless mic — and this middle one is very appealing.

Much of the flagship DJI Mic 3's DNA has trickled down into the Mic Mini 2S: internal recording, 32-bit float support, AI-driven noise cancellation, adaptive gain modes, fast file transfers. These were all things that, until now, meant paying a premium. The Mini 2S borrows them wholesale, wraps them in the same pocket-sized transmitter and case as the standard Mic Mini 2, and undercuts the Mic 3 comfortably on price.

Audio quality is superb. Whether I was recording via the receiver connected to a camera or going wireless direct to an OsmoAudio device, the results were clean, full-bodied and detailed. An impressive feat for a supposedly budget offering.

Noise cancellation is another highlight. The new AI-assisted system handled everything I threw at it, from a droning desk fan to a chatter-filled pub garden, with a level of polish that puts some real distance between the Mini 2S and its S-less little sibling. It's not quite at the level of the class-leading Insta360 Mic Pro, but it's a comfortable step up from the standard Mic Mini 2's basic noise reduction.

Having tested both the Mic Mini 2 and Mic 3 extensively as well as the Mini 2S, I'd say the average creator might struggle to justify paying the Mic 3 premium now. Those with more demanding needs still have reasons to look past the Mini 2S, though: the Mic 3 offers more than double the onboard storage per transmitter, a touchscreen receiver display for on-the-fly monitoring, dual-file recording, onboard timecode, and more granular gain control — stuff which probably matters for professional productions.

For everyone else, the Mini 2S is the new sweet spot in DJI's range. It's a tiny mic that really punches above its weight.

DJI Mic Mini 2S: price and release date

• Released August 4 2026, priced from £59 / AU$99 to £183 / AU$328
• Sold in four separate bundles, plus individual transmitters, charging cases and cover sets
• Available globally — aside from in the US

The Mic Mini 2S launched globally on August 4 2026, not long after the Mic Mini 2's April 2026 arrival. I say "globally", but as with every other DJI product released recently, it isn't officially available in the US, with the company blaming ongoing regulatory hurdles.

The Mini 2S comes in a wide range of configurations. At the low end, a single transmitter (TX) costs £59 / AU$99, while receivers (RX) add to the cost. The core bundles are the DJI Mic Mini 2S (1 TX + 1 RX) and the DJI Mic Mini 2S (1 TX + 1 Mobile RX + Charging Case), both priced at £79 / AU$149. Stepping up, the DJI Mic Mini 2S (2 TX + 1 RX + Charging Case) costs £169 / AU$279, while the priciest option, at £183 / AU$328, has 2 TX + 1 RX + Charging Case as well as a Mobile RX.

It's a big price jump over the Mic Mini 2, where equivalent bundles cost roughly half as much: £29 for a standalone transmitter and £89 for the full 2 TX + 1 RX + Charging Case kit. It also puts the Mini 2S's 2 TX + 1 RX + Charging Case at the same price as the entry-level Mic 3 bundle (£169 for 1 TX + 1 RX).

DJI Mic Mini 2S: specs

DJI Mic Mini 2S: Design

• Looks nearly identical to the Mic Mini 2
• Features swappable magnetic covers in range of colors
• Redesigned charging case now fits the 3.5mm cable

If you've seen the Mic Mini 2, you already know what the Mini 2S looks like. DJI has barely touched the exterior: the transmitters are the same size with the same interchangeable magnetic front covers (available in the same range of colors, from timeless black to a fetching shade of magenta). The receiver, too, is essentially unchanged, which means there's no onboard display to keep an eye on gain or adjust settings; you'll need to open up the Mimo app on your smartphone to do that.

The family resemblance is generally no bad thing. At just 0.4oz / 12g with a cover attached, I barely noticed the transmitter magnet-attached to my shirt, and I couldn't feel it at all when clipped to the peak of a baseball cap. The detachable clip still rotates through 360 degrees (in 90-degree increments) so the mic capsule can be aimed correctly whichever way you've mounted it, and the magnet option remains handy for thinner fabrics where a clip might snag.

There is one small but positive design change: DJI has found room for the 3.5mm cable inside the charging case (something the Mic Mini 2's case couldn't manage) which means the entire two-transmitter setup, cables, windshields and mounting options included, now fits in one pocketable case. With portability being a huge part of the appeal for a mic like this, it's a step in the right direction.

DJI Mic Mini 2S: Performance

• Offers internal recording with 14.5GB of storage space on transmitters
• Includes AI noise cancelling, improving on the Mic Mini 2's system
• Transmitter battery life roughly in line with Mic Mini 2's, and better than Mic 3's

The Mic Mini 2S's marquee upgrade over the Mic Mini 2 is internal recording, which I think is a huge deal. Every previous Mic Mini had to transmit to something — either a receiver, or an OsmoAudio device — to be of any use, but the Mini 2S transmitter can function just fine all on its own. With around 14.5GB of usable storage on each transmitter, it can store up to 28 hours of 24-bit recordings, or around 22 hours of 32-bit float recordings.

For those who aren't familiar, 32-bit float (which is available on the DJI Mic 3 but not the Mic Mini or Mini 2) doesn't inherently make your recordings sound better, but rather dramatically widens the available dynamic range. If levels unexpectedly spike or dip during a recording, 32-bit float gives you far more room to correct for that in post without clipping or losing detail. It's less about raw quality and more about insuring you're covered when recording in unpredictable environments.

Another upgrade over the Mic Mini 2 is 4TX + 1RX support, meaning you can record from four separate transmitters onto a single receiver. I'd say this is a much more situational addition: handy if you're recording podcasts, panel discussions or similar, but not something most solo creators will need day to day.

File transfers are roughly twice as fast as the Mic Mini 2's when pulling recordings off the transmitter via the charging case. If you're regularly transferring lengthy 32-bit float recordings, those saved minutes might add up — but again, it's a situational improvement.

Noise canceling is where I noticed the clearest real-world improvement over the Mic Mini 2. The Mini 2S's AI-assisted system does a better job than the older mic's more basic noise reduction: it very nearly eliminated a loud desk fan running in my office, and noticeably cut through background chatter when I tested it in a busy pub garden so that my and my wife's voices remained nice and clear. For context, I still rate the Insta360 Mic Pro as the best noise-canceling wireless mic I've tested, but it also costs considerably more than this.

Alongside noise canceling, the Mini 2S also gets DJI's adaptive gain features, Clipping Control and Loudness Balance (previously available on the DJI Mic 3 but not the Mic Mini 2). The former automatically pulls back gain to stop sudden loud moments from distorting, while the latter lifts quieter sounds to even out levels — useful if you're recording somewhere volume might swing unpredictably.

The Mic Mini 2S's audio quality is superb no matter how you use it. It supports quality up to 96kHz/24-bit with the receiver connected to a camera, or up to 48kHz/24-bit over a direct OsmoAudio connection, plus the aforementioned 32-bit float. Frankly, I don't think most people (myself definitely included) would be able to reliably pick a Mini 2S recording out from one made on the considerably pricier flagship Mic 3, which says a lot about how good this is for a supposedly budget microphone.

On the battery life front, things are roughly the same as they were on the Mic Mini 2: a transmitter can record for a round 11 hours on a full charge, while the receiver can keep going for around ten. With two transmitters, the receiver and a charging case, you can expect around 40 hours of combined use before needing to track down a power socket.

That's a bit worse than the Mic Mini 2 (which offers 11.5 hours, 10 hours and 48 hours across the transmitter, receiver and charging case), but much better than the Mic 3 (8 hours, 10 hours and 28 hours respectively).

Should I buy the DJI Mic Mini 2S?

Buy it if…

Don’t buy it if…

DJI Mic Mini 2S: also consider

How I tested the DJI Mic Mini 2S

• Two weeks of testing indoors and outdoors
• Connected to Panasonic Lumix GH6, iPhone 13, OnePlus Pad and DJI Osmo Action 6
• Also tested using internal recording without a receiver or camera

I was sent a review sample of the DJI Mic Mini 2S (2 TX + 1 RX + Charging Case) kit, and tested it for a couple of weeks, putting it through its paces in a range of indoor and outdoor conditions from quiet offices to windy walks and busy public spaces. I paired it with my Panasonic Lumix GH6 mirrorless camera, my iPhone 13, a OnePlus Pad tablet and the DJI Osmo Action 6 via OsmoAudio, testing both wireless transmission and manual connections. I also tested the Mini 2S's headline new feature directly, using the transmitter as a standalone recorder with no receiver or camera involved at all.

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

Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO: one-minute review

If you're searching for a high-quality and compact lens for your Sony or Nikon mirrorless camera, then the excellent value Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO is well worth considering.

Compared to Nikon and Sony's own alternatives, the Viltrox 26mm f/2.8 strikes a balance of premium design, compact size and reasonable pricing most compellingly of all.

For $299 / £279 (approximately AU$500), you get a wide-angle prime with bright f/2.8 aperture, rugged metal body that measures just 25.8mm in length, rubber-sealed mount, twin dials and a fabulous magnetic lens cap design.

Not only is the Viltrox lens around half the price of the Nikon alternative, but it packs more features, while Sony's closest alternative is a physically larger and pricier 24mm F2.8.

Viltrox's lens isn't perfect, mind you; optically it's not the sharpest lens I've used and the maximum f/2.8 aperture setting is prone to flare, which reduces contrast. Autofocus can be a little fussy too.

Those drawbacks aside, the Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO is another high-quality hit from the established Chinese lens manufacturer that deserves to live on your Sony or Nikon camera.

Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO: price and availability

• Available in Sony E and Nikon Z-mount versions
• It costs $299 / £279 (around AU$500), with a 10% discount at launch
• A magnetic lens cap and filter is supplied

The Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO full-frame lens launched for Sony E-mount and Nikon Z mount mirrorless cameras. It can also be used with either's APS-C cameras, with which it has an effective 39mm focal length. The lens costs $299 / £279 (not directly available in Australia), but I regularly see 10-15% discounts on the Viltrox site and at Amazon. At the time of writing, there's 10% off the 26mm lens.

Viltrox has another autofocus pancake lens, the 28mm f/4.5, which is just one third of the price. However, that lens is much more basic, and for a fair comparison on value, consider Nikon's own 26mm f/2.8 pancake lens, which has a slightly simpler design yet is almost double the price.

Sony's choices are much more varied — there are low-cost (and lower quality) options such as the 20mm F2.8, while premium options such as the 24mm F2.8 are pricier and physically much larger. TTArtisan sells a AF 27mm f/2.8 pancake lens that costs around $130 / £110 less, but I've not tested that lens.

So while the 26mm F2.8 EVO is hardly cheap for a Viltrox lens, it is still excellent value considering its quality and the available alternatives. I think it's an excellent quality to size and price ratio. For other primes, check out my best Sony lenses and best Nikon lenses guides.

Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO: specs

Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO: design

• Just 25.8mm in length and 6oz / 170g
• Metal components, rubber-sealed mount
• Clever magnetic lens hood

Lightweight, rugged and convenient, the Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO fits the bill for everyday photography.

It's clearly made from premium materials, with a metal barrel and rear mount with rubber seal to keep out moisture and dust.

And despite its compact dimensions, the lens fits an impressive number of controls, squeezing in focus and aperture control rings. Unsurprisingly, each ring is very narrow, and getting a secure grip on the focus ring is a little fiddly, but I certainly prefer having those shrunk-down controls rather than none at all.

The aperture ring is clicked with no option to de-click it for video use. Again, I'm not surprised about this given how small the lens is — there really is no spare space to fit this control.

Like all recent Viltrox lenses, the 26mm pancake features a USB-C port in its rear mount, through which firmware updates can be installed.

The simple optical construction comprises eight elements in six groups, and includes two aspherical elements. The front lens element is tiny. In fact, the 43mm filter thread isn't even built into the lens itself, but the supplied lens hood.

Said dual-purpose lens hood is suitably compact, but I found it didn't provide the sort of protection against lens flare that I would hope for (more on this in the performance section).

The lens hood has a neat trick up its sleeve mind you — it's magnetic. The supplied lens cap snaps onto the lens hood magnetically, doing away with the traditional pinch lock lens cap design. The hood screws onto the lens, but you can bypass the hood because the front of the lens is also magnetic.

Viltrox's neat magnetic system is a revelation, and I hope other lens manufacturers follow suit. It might not be suitable for all lens types mind you, say those with floating lens elements which use electromagnetism, such as Viltrox's own 85mm F1.4 Pro.

Close focusing goes down to 0.2m, which delivers a maximum 0.2x magnification. This is no close up lens, therefore, but I've certainly tested plenty of lenses with a lesser maximum magnification factor.

At launch, the 26mm lens is available in Sony E and Nikon Z-mount versions. There's no word yet on L-mount or X-mount versions (nor Canon RF, as per usual).

To truly appreciate the benefit of its compact dimensions and lightweight 6oz / 170g design, cameras such as the Sony A7C series and the Nikon Z f series are a good bet. And as a full-frame lens, you can also use it with APS-C cameras with a 1.5x crop factor, such as the Sony A6700 and Nikon Z50 II. It could be a fabulous option with the Lumix S9 or Sigma BF too, should an L-mount version land.

Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO: Performance

• Bright maximum f/2.8, but risk of strong lens flare at this setting
• Detail is impressively sharp for such a small lens
• Autofocus is decent, but I've used snappier lenses

Viltrox's smaller 28mm F4.5 lens wins for compact size and price, but for image quality, the 26mm F2.8 EVO is a step up.

True, it's not the sharpest lens I've ever used, but optical quality impresses, especially given how small and lightweight the lens is.

I regularly used the lens' maximum f/2.8 aperture setting, with which it's possible to get shallow depth of field and pleasant enough bokeh. There's no discernible drop in sharpness at this setting from the peak f/5.6 to f/8 settings, either.

However, lens flare is prominent at f/2.8 when shooting towards the sun and strong light sources, which massively reduces contrast. In some scenarios I rather liked the effect — it was at times characterful and dreamy. At other times, I wished the distortion was better controlled.

Vignetting (darker corners) is also visible at f/2.8, though nothing too dramatic, and remains even up to f/8. The worst of these lens distortions would be less noticeable when pairing the lens with an APS-C camera where the outer portion of the image is cropped out. Otherwise, using f/4 to f/11 aperture settings delivered impressively sharp images, generally free from severe lens distortion.

I tested the lens exclusively with a Nikon Z6 II camera. Not the latest mirrorless camera by any means (that'll be the Z6 III), but one with snappy autofocus and subject detection modes. Even still, I found myself fighting focus hunting more than usual when using the Viltrox lens, compared to a lens like, say, my Nikon 24-70mm F2.8 S.

I'll try the Viltrox 26mm lens with another camera when I get the chance, but so far I'm not fully impressed with its autofocus performance.

Should I buy the Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

How I tested the Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO

• Viltrox sent me the Z-mount version of the 26mm lens
• I paired it with my own full-frame Nikon Z6 II
• I regularly used the lens for a month, across a wide range of scenarios

I used the Z-mount version of the Viltrox AF 26mm F2.8 EVO lens with my own Nikon Z6 II full-frame mirrorless camera regularly over the course of one month. My main focus was real world use over technical studio-based tests, though I typically use lenses in scenarios that test their technical capabilities.

For example, I took the same photo in a sequence to see how quality compares using each of the lens' full aperture settings, starting at f/2.8 through to f/16. I checked for bokeh, lens distortion and sharpness at each setting, too.

I was particularly keen to check quality of the maximum f/2.8 aperture, and how the lens copes in strong daylight, especially with such a small lens hood supplied. I photographed landscapes, portraits and documentary-style moments.

First reviewed August 2026

Insta360 X6: two-minute review

10 years after Insta360 launched its first 360 camera, the X6 arrives as the anniversary flagship — and it arrives in a much, much busier 360 camera market. This time, Insta360 is defending its home turf against a resurgent GoPro Max 2 and a highly capable debut from DJI in the Osmo 360. There's a feeling, then, that the X6 has to be something more than just an annual refresh.

For the most part, it delivers. The squat body houses a pair of larger 1/1.1-inch sensors, and while I wouldn't call the resulting jump in image quality dramatic when set directly against the X5's footage, its effect on where the X6 sits against the wider field is significant.

The GoPro Max 2 has owned daylight sharpness in this category since launch, and the Insta360 X5 has owned the night. The X6 is the first small 360 camera I've tested that doesn't ask you to pick one or the other — it's excellent in both conditions, which makes it, in my view, the best-performing 360 camera you can currently buy.

It's a similar story with durability. Waterproof to 20m without a case and 60m with one, the X6 comfortably out-swims both the Osmo 360 and the Max 2, and its lenses remain just as easy (and now cheaper) to replace if you scratch one . Battery life is another strong point: Insta360's 140-minute claim at 8K/30fps held up closely in my testing, with zero overheating during continuous filming.

Where things get messier is the software. The X6 introduces some exciting additions for serious creators, like 10-bit color across every shooting mode including low light, native Dolby Vision, and forthcoming native DaVinci Resolve support, but the mobile app I tested struggled badly, crashing repeatedly during editing and export. I'm hoping the launch app is a lot more robust. The desktop app fared much better, but lacks the AI auto-editing tools that make the mobile experience so appealing on paper.

All of this comes at a premium price, too: the X6 is comfortably the most expensive small 360 camera around. Whether that premium is worth paying will come down to how much you value best-in-class image quality and hardware.

I've also directly compared the Insta360 X6 and Insta360 X5 in real video recording scenarios — check out my early verdict.

Insta360 X6 specs

Insta360 X6: Price and availability

• Launched worldwide on August 12, 2026
• Standard bundle costs $699.99 / £619 / AU$1,049.99
• Essentials Bundle is $799.99 / £709 / AU$1,159.99

The Insta360 X6 launched on August 12, 2026, priced from $699.99 / £619 / AU$1,049.99 for the Standard bundle. This gets you the camera itself, a USB-C cable, a protective pouch, a lens cloth and a quick-start guide, but nothing else.

Also available is the Essentials Bundle, priced at $799.99 / £709 / AU$1,159.99. This adds a second Xtreme battery, a 114cm invisible selfie stick, a rubber lens cap, a fast-charge case and an extended warranty, and it might be a sensible starting point if you think you'll use those accessories.

It's quite a price jump over where the X5 launched ($549.99 / £519.99 / AU$929.99 for its own Standard bundle), and it also puts real distance between the X6 and rivals like the DJI Osmo 360 (priced from £409.99 / AU$759 at launch) and GoPro Max 2 ($499.99 / £449.99 / AU$849.95). The X6 is the priciest small 360 camera on the market.

One thing worth budgeting for regardless of which bundle you choose: while the X6 has 47GB of usable built-in storage, 8K footage eats through that fast (more on this in the Design section), so factor in a high-capacity microSD card if you don't already have a spare lying around.

• Price score: 3.5/5

Insta360 X6: Design

• IP68-rated and waterproof to 20m (60m with optional dive case)
• Replaceable lenses claimed to be 5x more scratch-resistant than X5's
• 2.32-inch OLED touchscreen with always-on support

The X6 weighs 6.9oz / 196g, and is noticeably squatter and squarer than its X4 and X5 predecessors, a change I'd put down to the need to accommodate the larger 1/1.1-inch sensors inside. That extra width also allows room for a wider screen (albeit one that's slightly smaller than the X5's): a 2.32-inch OLED display that supports an always-on mode, a step up from the screens on the last couple of Insta360 X cameras.

That screen also introduces a pressure-sensitive, haptic touch interface, requiring a firmer press to access certain options. It's a clever party trick, but in practice I didn't find it added much to the experience — it feels more like a gimmick for now than a true usability upgrade.

For mounting purposes, you get the same setup as the X5: a standard 1/4-inch tripod thread and Insta360's proprietary magnetic clip mount on the bottom. Between these and adapters for GoPro-style mounting fingers, you can securely bolt the X6 to pretty much anything. During testing, I used the supplied selfie stick for on-foot and cycling footage, and also tested the SmallRig Vehicle Suction Cup Support Kit for car-mounted shots, both of which worked brilliantly.

On the durability front, the X6 is IP68-rated and waterproof to 20m without any additional housing, rising to 60m with Insta360's official dive case (which costs a whopping $179.99 / £158.99 / AU$269.99). This comfortably outclasses the competition: the DJI Osmo 360 tops out at 10m (and DJI itself discourages underwater use, citing stitching issues), while the GoPro Max 2 manages just 5m. If unhoused underwater shooting matters to you, the X6 is the clear class leader.

Insta360 says the X6's lenses are five times more scratch-resistant than the X5's, and cheaper to replace, too. I didn't manage to scratch mine during testing — which speaks well of that durability claim — so I didn't get to experience the swap process, but the X6 offers the same easy-replacement design as the X5, with the replacement kit including all the tools you need to quickly remove the old lens, clean up any debris and attach a new one.

Alongside the usual microSD card slot, the X6 packs 47GB of usable built-in storage — enough for around 50 minutes of 8K/30fps footage, and a useful safety net if you forget a card or fill one up mid-session. Getting footage off the camera is quick, too: Wi-Fi 6.0 supports wireless transfers of up to 100MB/s, while wired USB 3.0 hits 450MB/s. Both speeds are worth having, because as I found out during testing, the X6's video files get enormous very quickly (more on that in the Performance section).

• Design score: 5/5

Insta360 X6: Performance

• Insta360 claims 140 minutes of 8K/30fps recording; I got 136 minutes in testing
• On-device AI Director auto-edits your day's footage overnight
• The mobile app was prone to crashing during testing, especially on older phones

The X6's 2600mAh Xtreme battery is rated for 140 minutes of continuous 8K/30fps recording, a claimed 51% improvement over the X5. I put that figure to the test, and got 136 minutes before the battery gave out, so Insta360's number holds up well in practice. I also didn't experience any overheating during that stretch, which is impressive given that I was testing through an unusually hot UK summer. Charging is fast, too: Insta360 claims 0 to 80% in 24 minutes with a fast charger, and I found those figures accurate.

Insta360 positions the X6 as "three cameras in one": a 360 camera, a single-lens action cam, and a subject-tracking gimbal-style vlogging camera. In practice, I gravitated almost entirely toward the 360 mode. The X6's size and shape make it a bit unwieldy for hardcore action-camera use compared to something like a GoPro Hero or Insta360's own Ace Pro 2, so I'd treat that mode as a useful fallback rather than a primary draw. The vlogging mode fares better: InstaFrame 2.0 does a genuinely good job of replicating a gimbal-mounted vlogging camera, keeping a chosen subject framed, horizon-levelled and stabilized regardless of how the X6 itself is positioned. You select your subject with a simple double-tap on the screen.

On the color and post-production side, the X6 supports the 10-bit I-Log flat profile, and — significantly for demanding creators — that 10-bit depth now carries across every shooting mode, including the PureVideo low-light mode, which wasn't the case on the X5. It's also the first 360 camera with native in-camera Dolby Vision. Perhaps the biggest software win here is native DaVinci Resolve compatibility, a first for a 360 camera — though this requires Resolve 22, which wasn't available at the time of testing, so I wasn't able to try it pre-launch. As a Resolve user myself, I'll be checking this out as soon as it lands.

The headline software feature is AI Director, an on-device auto-editing system clearly designed around a simple pitch: shoot footage throughout the day, plug the X6 in to charge overnight, and wake up to a finished (but still adjustable) vlog ready to watch in the app.

Unfortunately, my experience with the Insta360 app itself was rocky. I tested beta versions on both an iPhone 13 and a OnePlus Pad Android tablet, and on the iPhone the app struggled badly, crashing repeatedly during anything demanding — including simply exporting an edited video. This isn't a new problem in my experience reviewing Insta360 cameras, but it was pronounced here; Insta360's own reviewer notes suggest an iPhone 15 is the oldest model considered capable of running the app properly, which is a tough ask given that not everyone upgrades their phone every couple of years.

The app fared somewhat better on the OnePlus Pad, letting me test AI-assisted editing of individual clips, though longer clips took a while to process. Results were generally solid, if not something I'd say beats a hand-edited video. I wasn't able to test the app's other AI editing trick — stitching together multiple shorter clips automatically, complete with transitions and music — on either device: it crashed the iPhone app outright, and simply refused to let me add clips to the editor on Android.

One other app frustration: there's no way to switch between color profiles remotely. If you want to shoot in I-Log or Dolby Vision rather than the standard profile, you have to make that change on the camera itself, which is annoying if, say, the X6 is mounted on a pole on top of your car, as it was during part of my testing.

The desktop Insta360 Studio app, run on my M2 MacBook Air, offered a much more stable experience, though it lacks the AI auto-editing tools found on mobile. What it does offer is more precise manual editing on a larger screen, which I personally find easier to work with regardless of stability. I was able to trim, reframe and export finished clips directly from the X6 to my SSD without needing to move the original files off the camera first, which was a lifesaver given the next issue.

That issue is file size: 8K/30fps footage eats through roughly 1GB of storage per minute, so the X6's 47GB of built-in storage fills up fast, and I ran into storage problems fitting longer clips onto both my phone and my laptop. Factoring in the mobile app's instability — which I do expect to be much improved after launch — I found it far easier to manage and trim footage using the desktop app instead.

Audio is handled by a new 360-degree windproof mic array that "actively filters" wind noise, plus a dedicated hidden mic built specifically for motorcycle riders, designed to cut wind further and clarify engine sound — a niche inclusion, but I suppose a welcome one if it applies to you.

I tested the built-in wind filter, and it works, up to a point: noise was noticeably reduced compared with other modes, but not eliminated. For that, I'd recommend pairing the X6 with Insta360's Mic Pro, which I also tested alongside the camera — it essentially eliminates wind noise altogether, and offers the best noise-cancelling I've experienced from a small wireless mic.

• Performance score: 4/5

Insta360 X6: Image quality

• Dual 1/1.1-inch sensors, up from the X5's 1/1.28-inch pair
• 360 video now tops out at 8K/50fps
• 10-bit available across all video modes, including the PureVideo low-light mode

The X6's biggest hardware change is its new dual 1/1.1-inch square sensors, up from the 1/1.28-inch sensors in the X5; that's 33% more sensor area, and around four times the light intake per frame versus its predecessor. That upgrade also brings a higher frame-rate ceiling in 360 mode, with 8K now available at up to 50fps, versus the X5's 30fps cap. Photo resolution climbs too, topping out at 120MP for 360 shots and 42MP in flat mode.

In good lighting, the difference between X5 and X6 footage is there, but it's incremental rather than transformative. I do have to mention AdaptiveTone 2.0 though, which captures two exposures per frame for noticeably better handling of bright skies and high-contrast scenes than I've seen from Insta360 before. I would have previously said the GoPro Max 2 offered the best 360 image quality in good lighting, but now I think the X6 might have equalled or possibly even bettered it.

It's after dark that the X6 really separates itself from the pack, though. The PureVideo low-light mode was already a strength of the X5, but the combination of the larger sensors and 10-bit color now being supported across every shooting mode — including PureVideo itself — pushes noise levels down further still. Neither the DJI Osmo 360's SuperNight mode nor the GoPro Max 2's standard mode (which lacks a dedicated low-light option entirely) come close. I can comfortably say the X6 is the best 360 camera for low-light shooting currently available.

So that's daylight footage that rivals the sharpest in the category, and the best low-light performance by a mile. The X6 is the first small 360 camera I've tested that doesn't force you to accept a trade-off between the two. Where I'd previously have pointed daylight shooters toward the Max 2, and night owls toward the X5, the X6 simply offers the best all-round image quality on the market, in any light.

• Image quality score: 5/5

Insta360 X6: testing scorecard

Should I buy the Insta360 X6?

Buy it if...

You want the best 360 camera image quality around
The X6 delivers the sharpest, cleanest footage overall of any small 360 camera I've tested — no more choosing between daylight sharpness and low-light performance.

You need serious underwater durability
IP68-rated and waterproof to 20m without a case, or 60m with Insta360's official dive housing, the X6 comfortably out-swims both the DJI Osmo 360 and GoPro Max 2.

You're a demanding video creator
10-bit color across every shooting mode, native Dolby Vision, and forthcoming native DaVinci Resolve support make the X6 suited to serious post-production work.

Don't buy it if...

You're on a budget
At $699.99 / £619 / AU$1,049.99, the X6 is now the most expensive small 360 camera around, and by some margin. The DJI Osmo 360 and GoPro Max 2 both undercut it significantly.

You own an older phone
Insta360's guidance recommends an iPhone 15 or newer to get a stable experience from the mobile app. I found it crashed repeatedly on my iPhone 13, particularly when editing or exporting footage.

You want flawless software out of the box
Between the app's instability and its inability to switch color profiles remotely, the X6's hardware is currently running ahead of its software. This should improve post-launch, but it's worth going in with realistic expectations.

Also consider

How I tested the Insta360 X6

• I tested a full production unit (with beta firmware and software) for three weeks
• I shot day and night footage during a hot English summer
• I tested the X6 with and without Insta360's Mic Pro wireless microphone

I tested the Insta360 X6 for three weeks, shooting throughout an unusually hot English summer to see how it handled sustained use in warm conditions. I recorded both day and night footage across a range of situations, mounting the camera on the supplied selfie stick for on-foot and cycling shots, and on a SmallRig suction cup mount for car-mounted clips.

I tested audio both with the X6's built-in mics and paired with Insta360's Mic Pro wireless microphone, to compare the camera's own wind reduction against a dedicated external solution.

For editing, I reframed and trimmed footage using the Insta360 Studio desktop app before exporting for final edits and color grading in DaVinci Resolve.

• First reviewed August 2026