Since the debut of the Insta360 Luna Ultra just a few weeks ago, influencers have been rushing to compare it to the DJI Osmo Pocket 4, the Osmo Pocket 4P, and even pre-release examples of the Muse 2 Pro to determine which is the better pocket gimbal camera solution. Personally, I don’t believe this is the question most Americans are asking themselves.

Currently, DJI finds themselves in the unenviable position of not being able to sell most of their new catalogue of products in the United States.  So Americans can’t go to DJI’s web store and order a new Pocket 4 or Pocket 4P even if they wanted to.  Sure, you can always go on Amazon or eBay and order one either directly or indirectly sourced from outside of the United States.  But making purchases through these unauthorized “grey market” channels represents a significant risk – you receive no warranty support for these products from DJI if purchased by US customers through grey market channels.

So the real question that most US based customers are asking themselves is, do I pay for the Insta360 Luna Ultra (which faces no restrictions on being sold in the United States), or will DJI previous generation pocket gimbal camera, the Osmo Pocket 3 (which still can be purchased directly from DJI without restriction in the US) be the better choice?  Before going further, I should point out that I’ve done an individual review with the DJI Osmo Pocket 3 and I’ve also recently reviewed the Insta360 Luna Ultra.  I purchased both devices with my own money and did not receive review units or any promotional consideration from DJI or Insta360.

ISN’T NEWER BETTER?

The knee-jerk response when comparing these two devices might be to assume that the Luna Ultra will stomp the Pocket 3 in every comparable category because the Pocket 3 is an almost 3-year older device.  The DJI Osmo Pocket 3 debuted in October of 2023 while the Insta360 Luna Ultra started shipping in June of 2026.  But these two devices have quite a bit in common – it’s widely reported that Insta360 lured away many DJI employees which helped spring the development of several products forward, including the Antigravity A1 and the Luna Ultra.  A tactic which has led both companies to file a series of lawsuits filed against one another in both China and the US.  As an American, I find two Chinese company suing one another over various IP violations deliciously ironic.  But I digress…

The point here is that both the Pocket 3 and the Luna Ultra have a great deal in common, not the least of which being both devices share a one-inch sensor.  Which means one shouldn’t have a tremendous advantage in image quality over the other. Both devices also have an approximately 20mm field of view from the lens of their main camera, which can be expanded to a 15mm field of view using the included wide-angle lens adapter that magnetically attaches over the main camera lens.  Both have an integrated gimbal that helps stabilize video while moving, and both offer a nearly identical “Creator Combo” accessory package which expands both capability and convenience for each of these devices.   Quite honestly, these two video recording devices have more in common than not.

So which should you buy?  Keep in mind that the DJI Osmo Pocket 3 was and remains an extremely popular device.  The Pocket 3 reportedly held the #1 position in Japan’s dedicated video camera market from its October 2023 launch until it was finally displaced by the Pocket 4 in 2026.  In fact, throughout 2024 and 2025, the Pocket 3 was frequently out of stock worldwide.  I purchased mine in 2024 and consider myself fortunate to have found one.  The camera-only unit currently retails for $499.00 but has been trending between $400 – and $450 as of this writing.  For many casual users, the camera-only option will be enough.  However, the DJI Osmo Pocket 3 Creator Combo has really dropped in price – it retails for $629 but has been trending lower since the Pocket 4 was introduced and can be had for just $512.00 as of this writing.

First and foremost, the Luna Ultra is a content creator’s tool.  It’s incredibly capable in this regard, but the feature set isn’t necessarily aligned to the casual user.  The camera only option is $769.00.  Add the Creator Bundle and you’re at $969.00.  The big features gained for the extra spend over the Pocket 3 is the detachable remote, the 60mm camera in addition to the 20mm camera Luna Ultra has in common with the Pocket 3, as well as the ability to losslessly zoom from 1x to 6x (20mm – 120mm effective FOV).  Another big reason that I and many other creators are excited about the Luna Ultra is the ability to record in a true 10-bit LOG file format (more on that below).  Here again, most casual users have no desire or experience color grading log files.  Most will simply turn on the camera and record in the standard profile – which is excellent.  But you don’t have to have a 6x zoom capability or even need I-LOG to capture videos of the kids and make memories on vacation.  Yes, the Luna Ultra’s removable wireless remote is slick.  But the Pocket 3 still can be remotely controlled via DJI’s smart phone app.

SUBJECT TRACKING

Both cameras offer excellent subject tracking that’s intuitive and reliable. Where the Luna Ultra distinguishes itself is in the amount of control it gives you over composition. Rather than always centering the subject, the Luna Ultra provides a Rule of Thirds grid that allows you to choose where you want the subject positioned within the frame. This makes it much easier to create more cinematic compositions while showcasing the environment around your subject.

You can achieve a similar result with the Pocket 3 by manually adjusting the framing with the joystick, but it’s considerably more fiddly and far less precise. For creators who care about composition, I found the Luna Ultra‘s tracking system to be noticeably more refined and enjoyable to use.

The Pocket 3 was and remains popular because it’s small, lightweight, and produces fantastic results while being simple to use…and at an accessible price point.

COMPARING VIDEO QUALITY

The features and respective spec sheets are one thing.  Using them and experiencing the actual output of both cameras is another.  I started by comparing the normal/standard profile video files each camera generates.   One of the things I’ve most appreciated about the videos I’ve produced with the Pocket 3 is how film-like it appears straight out of camera – it doesn’t have that clinically sharp look which many digital cameras have, which isn’t always the most flattering for human subjects.     Truth be told, I probably prefer the out of the camera look of the Pocket 3 footage slightly better to the Luna Ultra.  I say “probably” because the Luna Ultra has a “Beautify” setting/filter which is essentially a real-time portrait enhancement filter.  Adjusting the parameters in this Beautify filter (at lower-level settings) gives me slightly preferable results without making me look like my face is made of plastic.  In the standard profile, the Pocket 3 still holds up extremely well, and may be preferable to a user who doesn’t want to fuss with making any changes to settings on the camera.  But if you have a minimal level of initiative/sophistication and are willing to play with the Beautify filter on the Luna Ultra, you can potentially get slightly better results in the standard video profile on the Luna Ultra.  Alternatively, you could also try working with a “Mist” filter on the Luna Ultra that would also soften the clinically sharp look the camera has on people as well – either solution works so it will come down to personal preference.

Most casual users don’t know how/won’t want to grade log footage, but I did compare the Pocket 3’s Pro Mode D-Log M to the Luna Ultra’s Pro Mode I-Log.  It’s a bit of an apples to oranges comparison because DJI’s D-Log M which used on some of their older/lower end devices isn’t a true log file.  That said, if a casual user is looking for capabilities they can learn about later and grow into by slowly transition from the “Normal” file output to the Pro mode D-Log M, the Pocket 3 is terrific.  DJI has a REC.709 conversion LUT you can download on their website which works with any video editor that supports LUTs.  Just apply the DJI conversion LUT and BAM!  Your footage instantly looks appreciably better/more professional than footage recorded in Normal mode.  And you’ll still have some latitude to push/pull on the highlights, shadows, and color saturation.

Insta360’s I-Log is in a different class – a truly professional production quality class.  I-Log is compatible with the ACES (Academy Color Encoding System) workflow, which is the professional color management system used in high-end film and television production.  If you use a video editor that also supports an ACES work flow like DaVinci Resolve, it will be MUCH easier matching the footage you record from different devices/camera and making all the footage appear to seamlessly “match.”  I use a color grading utility/plug-in for Final Cut Pro called CineDream, and learned they plan to offer an update in the next couple of months that will add native profile support for Insta360 Luna Ultra I-Log.  Until that native support happens, I’ll continue to use the Insta360 REC.709 conversion LUT for I-Log that is a fantastic starting point for color grading I-Log footage.  In some cases, the converted footage needs little to no further editing.  But because I-Log is a true Log file, there’s tons of latitude to push/pull on highlights and shadows as well as overall contrast and color saturation.  Whether you’re talking about A roll or B roll footage, the availability of I-Log on the Insta360 elevates the device to something that can genuinely be used in professional video production.

Both Standard Profile and Pro I-Log footage can be recorded using either the Standard or High bitrate settings on the Luna Ultra.  If your goal is to capture the maximum amount of detail with the least compression, choose High.  However, after considerable testing, I actually prefer recording talking-head and vlog footage using the Standard bitrate setting. The slightly softer rendering takes just enough of the digital edge off skin texture that I find it produces a more flattering image without noticeably sacrificing overall quality. For products, architecture, and landscapes where preserving every bit of detail is the priority, I’d switch to High. And if you want to soften skin even further, adding a light Mist filter to the lens is another excellent option.

SOUND QUALITY COMPARISON

I compared vlog style video footage coming from both cameras where audio was captured by the integrated microphones of the respective cameras – this one surprised me.  The audio was excellent on both – I couldn’t really tell a difference.  Where the Luna Ultra really pulls away is with its four-microphone array and software that allows you to leverage different capabilities with the microphones.  In “front and back” mode for example, the integrated mics ignore sound coming from the sides and focus exclusively on sound coming from the areas immediately in front of and behind the camera.  Perfect if you’re interviewing someone or having a conversation with them and want just your voice and theirs recorded.  Again, for more casual users, chances are they’ll be able to rely only on the integrated mic on either camera as their only audio source and they’ll be more than happy with the audio.  The Luna Ultra has the additional option of using the mic on detachable remote which is also shockingly good.  That means you aren’t tethered to the device when using it which opens all sorts of creative possibilities.

For users who are looking to step up their audio game in the videos they create with both devices, both DJI and Insta360 offer multiple options for wireless mic systems supported within their respective ecosystems.  The “Creator Combo/Bundle” options available for either camera system includes one free wireless mic – the Mic 2 for the Pocket 3 and the Mic Pro for the Luna Ultra.  The good news is, truly professional grade audio can be achieved with either camera/wireless mic option.  I’ll be the first to admit, I’m not an audio guy.  As a pro photographer that tries to record videos for YouTube, the audio piece is often the hardest for me.  But I’ve worked extensively using ChatGPT to create an audio preset that does an excellent job of shaping the audio from the Mic 2 and optimizing it for my voice.  I’ve yet to do the same with the Mic Pro – I find it works pretty darn well straight out of the camera with minimal tweaking required.   I’ve done a standalone review of the Mic 2 and am working on a stand alone review of the Mic Pro.  I find both to be true pro-grade solutions, but the Mic Pro does offer some interesting new features like the E-Ink display on the front and several different and genuinely useful sound profiles.

FINAL THOUGHTS

As much as I’m over the moon with the Luna Ultra and consider it to be a content creator’s dream, I think that most US based consumers will still be better served by the DJI Osmo Pocket 3.  Most casual users won’t want the added learning curve and complexity of using many of the Luna Ultra’s higher-level capabilities, or the higher price tag.  At around a $400.00 price point, the Pocket 3 is a no-brainer – dead simple for the uninitiated and offers room the learn and grow for those that take the initiative.  It’s also a bit smaller than the Luna Ultra so it will take up slightly less space in the bag or suitcase – always a good thing when vacationing/traveling.  And while I haven’t (yet) tested either the next generation Pocket 4 or the Pocket 4P (direct competitor to the Luna Ultra) I’m pretty comfortable stating the Pocket 3 will be the better value choice by comparison.  If your goal is to capture family vacations, everyday memories, and travel videos with minimal effort, I still believe the DJI Osmo Pocket 3 offers the best value for most American buyers.

If, however, you’re a creator who enjoys learning new tools, color grading, experimenting with focal lengths, producing more cinematic content, and has the extra money to spend, the Insta360 Luna Ultra is the more capable camera. It demands more from its owner—but rewards that effort with capabilities that simply aren’t available on the Pocket 3.