- Clippertoday
- Compare
- S1c vs X3.2
EZVIZ S1c vs Lamax X3.2
What S1c does better (0) and where X3.2 wins (6) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
S1cX3.2
| S1c | X3.2 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 58 mm | 44 mm | +14 mm |
| Width | 20.6 mm | 60 mm | −39.4 mm |
| Depth | 45 mm | 33 mm | +12 mm |
| Weight | 100 g | 65 g | +35 g |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is S1c better than X3.2?
S1c has no measurable advantages in this pair.
Why is X3.2 better than S1c?
- Max video resolution1080p vs 2.7K
- Max frame rate (slow motion)50 fps vs 120 fps2.4×
- Weight100 g vs 65 g+53%
- Photo resolution8 MP vs 12 MP+50%
- Battery life (recording)120 min vs 135 min+12%
- Depth45 mm vs 33 mm+36%
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Weight | 100 g | 65 g |
| Width | 20.6 mm | 60 mm |
| Height | 58 mm | 44 mm |
| Depth | 45 mm | 33 mm |
| Waterproof without case | 0 m | — |
| Waterproof with housing | 40 m | 40 m |
| Ingress protection | IP66 | — |
| Min operating temperature | -20 °C | — |
| Max operating temperature | 45 °C | — |
| Video | ||
| Max video resolution | 1080p | 2.7K |
| Max frame rate (slow motion) | 50 fps | 120 fps |
| Timelapse / hyperlapse | Yes | Yes |
| Sensor & photo | ||
| Sensor size | 1/3" | — |
| Sensor size (optical format) | 0.33″ | — |
| Photo resolution | 8 MP | 12 MP |
| Stabilisation | ||
| Stabilisation system | Elektronischer Bildstabilisator (EIS) | — |
| Electronic image stabilisation | Yes | — |
| Screens | ||
| Main screen size | 2″ | 2″ |
| Touchscreen | Yes | — |
| Battery | ||
| Battery capacity | — | 1,200 mAh |
| Battery life (recording) | 120 min | 135 min |
| Connectivity | ||
| Wi-Fi | Yes | Yes |
| Bluetooth | Yes | — |
| Storage & features | ||
| microSD card slot | Yes | Yes |
| Max memory card | — | 128 GB |
