- Clippertoday
- Compare
- Pro 2.0 vs QooCam EGO
Insta360 Pro 2.0 vs Kandao QooCam EGO
What Pro 2.0 does better (4) and where QooCam EGO wins (2) — every spec side by side.
8.1Photo5.2
Why is Pro 2.0 better than QooCam EGO?
- Max video resolution8K vs 1080p
- Battery capacity5,000 mAh vs 1,340 mAh3.7×
- Max frame rate (slow motion)120 fps vs 60 fps2×
- Max field of view360° vs 79°4.6×
Why is QooCam EGO better than Pro 2.0?
- Weight1,550 g vs 160 g9.7×
- Aperturef/2.4 vs f/1.8+33%
Specifications
Side by side
| Design & durability | ||
| Weight | 1,550 g | 160 g |
| Width | — | 94 mm |
| Height | — | 52.8 mm |
| Depth | — | 22 mm |
| Video | ||
| Max video resolution | 8K | 1080p |
| 4K frame rate (max) | 120 fps | — |
| Max frame rate (slow motion) | 120 fps | 60 fps |
| HDR video | Yes | — |
| H.265 / HEVC | — | Yes |
| Timelapse / hyperlapse | Yes | — |
| Sensor & photo | ||
| Photo resolution | 60 MP | — |
| Aperture | f/2.4 | f/1.8 |
| Max field of view | 360° | 79° |
| RAW photos | Yes | Yes |
| Stabilisation | ||
| Stabilisation system | Elektronischer Bildstabilisator (EIS) | 6-Achsen Stabilisation |
| Electronic image stabilisation | Yes | Yes |
| Screens | ||
| Main screen size | — | 2.54″ |
| Touchscreen | — | Yes |
| Audio | ||
| External microphone support | Yes | — |
| Battery | ||
| Battery capacity | 5,000 mAh | 1,340 mAh |
| Connectivity | ||
| Wi-Fi | Yes | Yes |
| GPS | Yes | — |
| Storage & features | ||
| microSD card slot | Yes | Yes |
