path: root/reviews.txt

Reviews 

# ifixit Hub Solder Iron

The right to repair movement has a catchy name, but before you can worry about the right to repair, you need the ability to repair. If you don't know how to take your device apart, there's no since worrying about whether it's legal to do so. Without basic repair skills, and a helping of innate curiosity, the right to repair is useless.

This is where iFixit's new Hub Soldering Iron enters the fray. iFixit, a longtime support of the right to repair, with thousands of tutorials online to help you actually repair things, is now making a soldering iron to help you roll up your sleeves and get into the physical world of repair.


## Soldering

I grew up around soldering. My father built his own tube-powered ham radio gear, but for whatever reason I never actually did any soldering until rather late in my repair life. An electrician friend of mine was appalled that I didn't solder on a regular basis and gifted me a bare bones soldering iron, which was all I had for an embarrassingly long time. 

While a cheap soldering iron is better than no soldering iron, I've come to think the reason many people are intimidated by soldering is cheap soldering pens. Cheap tools are the source of many a problem, but with soldering irons the big one is that they don't get hot enough, which makes the solder stick to the tip rather than flowing nicely where you want it. Cheap irons also lack interchangeable tips, which make soldering easy by tailoring the shape to your application.

iFixit's new Hub Soldering iron is actually several products. The core is the Smart Soldering Iron for $80. It's powered by USB-C, and comes with beveled 1.5 mm tip. (there are currently six other tips available, and more coming over time. Then there's the Portable Soldering Station for $250 which includes the iron and a battery pack designed for the iron. The final option is the everything version, the $300 Soldering Toolkit which includes the iron, the battery pack, along with useful tools like wire strippers, flush cutters, solder, flux, holder cleaner and more. I tested the latter.

The thing that jumps out at you the most when first opening the kit is the magnetic cap. This is a thing of genius. Not only does it cover the tip, you can put it on even when the tip is hot and it will automatically power down to the idle temperature (which you can set in the app). Every soldering iron should have a cap like this and this feature alone makes iFixit's soldering iron great for beginners.

There are other user-friendly features too, like an LED light system that warns you when the iron is hot, motion sensors to detect when it set it down for a while (which cause it to automatically shut off). The motion sensors can also detect if you drop it and again shut it off automatically. I tested all three of these features and they worked without issue. 

Ergonomically the iFixit soldering iron is comfortable to hold, and the triangular grip means it won't go rolling around if you set it down for a second. The body itself is spare, with just a power button and a small LED ring that indicates when the iron is hot, cool, and heating. I love the locking USB-C cable at the top, which ensures you won't accidentally unplug it.

I don't currently have an board-based projects to test the iron with, but I soldered a few wires together to add XT60 plugs and fixed a balance lead wire on a home built lithium battery which I've been avoiding because it felt like a job that was too delicate for my soldering iron.  

In every case what impressed me most was how fast the iron was ready to go. Remove the tip and it's ready to go almost instantly (somewhere between 3 and five seconds in my testing). 

Because I live off primarily solar power, which is mainly (most efficiently) delivered via 12V wall outlets, I have always wanted a USB-C iron. Alas, I don't have any wall outlets that can deliver the needed 100W of power. 

Luckily iFixit's battery pack solves the problem. But before I get into the battery pack and accessories, a word on the tips. They aren't interchangeable with similar USB-C irons like the Miniware or open source [Pinecil](https://pine64.com/product/pinecil-smart-mini-portable-soldering-iron/). The problem is that iFixit's soldering iron is delivering 100W of power while others only manage 60W or 80W. One one hand it's nice that this thing can deliver 100W, because it heats up faster and gets hotter. But it is disappointing not to be able to swap tips if you have a bunch from other irons (unlike traditional soldering iron tip, USB-C powered soldering iron tips the temperature sensor and heater core inside the actual tip). iFixit is selling additional tips for $20 each (which is cheaper than some competitors).

If you opt to get the 55 watt-hour battery combo kit, you've got a nice, truly portable soldering station. The battery pack has two USB-C outputs, which churn out provide 100W of power. The unit can also skip the battery and provide passthrough power if it's plugged into a wall outlet. 

The power pack is also where you can set the temperature of the iron with a good old fashioned knob rather than the web interface. This design is probably going to be main complaint about this iron from those with more soldering experience, namely that there's no way to adjust temperature on the iron, like you can with the tiny, and popular, Pinecil. Personally I almost never adjust temperature on the fly. I set the temp for whatever solder I'm using and pretty much leave it there. Because of that I found adjusting the temp through the web-based interface to be easy enough that it didn't bother me. That said, it would be nice to be able to access this interface through the phone. At the moment iFixit's tool depends on the [WebSerial protocol](https://caniuse.com/web-serial) which is currently only supported by the desktop version of Chromium browsers (Chrome, Edge, Vivaldi, etc). iFixit is working on a way to control it via your phone, but at the moment that doesn't work.

As you would expect iFixit's soldering iron is user repairable. The company even includes a screwdriver and spudger tool to help you take it apart. I took apart both the iron and the battery pack and am happy to say there it was incredibly simple, there's no weird glues or anything like that. 

I think what iFixit has made here is incredibly well designed and goes a long way toward making soldering more approachable for newcomers, which is what iFixit CEO Kyle Weins tells WIRED was a big part of the project -- demystifying soldering. To that end I think this makes a great way to get started soldering. It's on the pricier side for the all-in-one combo package, but it's all you're ever likely to need and it's repairable. This is also just about the only soldering tool I'd be comfortable gifting should you have a repair enthusiast on your gift list.






---








Eventually, frustrated by my cheapo for the thousandth time, I upgraded to a slightly nicer soldering setup with a stand (an older version of [this Weller](https://www.amazon.com/Weller-Digital-Soldering-Station-Precision/dp/B09XZBWJ5H/)), but as a tool I never gave it much thought beyond that.

That's where

But to be more than a consumer of stuff, to not be dependent, you must first believe that you can repair it. That willingness to try—in spite of, or to spite, the stickers—is where it starts, whether you’re trying to fix your laptop or replace your head gasket.

One of the cornerstones of repairing any digital device is soldering, a basic repair skill far too few of us pocess.  

# Bote LowRider Aero Tandem 11'6" Review

It's summer. It's hotter than a pepper sprout. You're going to the lake. Should you bring the kayak or the paddle board? Choices. The paddle board industry has an answer to this dilemma: the hybrid inflatable SUP with a kayak seat. The best of both worlds. Maybe. 

Bote has long included a kayak seat with some of its pricier offerings, like the Bote Aero Breeze ([7/10, WIRED Review](https://www.wired.com/review/breeze-aero-inflatable-paddle-board/)) we tested last year, but the new Bote Lowrider comes in a tandem option, adding two seats and anchor points for Bote's Bac rack system, making it possible to have a SUP and a full fishing rig of a kayak in a single craft. It is the best of many worlds.

## tk

The Bote Lowrider comes in two sizes. The 10-foot 6-inch single person version (with a single seat) and the 11-foot 6-inch tandem version which features two seats. I tested the latter, though nearly everything here will apply to the former as well, it's just a foot shorter and only has one seat.

The Lowrider is the widest SUP in Bote's lineup at 36 inches. It's big. Really big. This makes the Lowrider very stable, which is what you want when you're trying to use it as a tandem sit on top kayak (or even a single sit on top). It also makes it both a very beginner-friendly paddleboard since you don't need insane balance to use it, or, if you do have insane balance, a good platform for SUP yoga and the like. Although I remain convinced SUP yoga is something people only do in promotional videos.

The first thing I noticed when taking the Lowrider out of the storage bag (which is much nicer than Bote's older bags, more on that below) was the massive rear fin. It's a good tk inches longer than the detachable fin on the Aero Breeze, and by far the deepest fin I've seen on a paddleboard. A sailor friend of mine quipped "that paddle board has a [draft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_(hull))."

That deep fin makes the Lowrider track straighter, which means you aren't constantly veering and correcting coarse as you paddle. Relative to the Aero Breeze and other boards I've used there is far less side to side movement when stand up paddling. The larger surface area of the fin also makes the board a bit more stable in rough water, especially when combined with the width of this board. 

I've long wanted to do some multi-day paddleboarding trips, and I've gone so far as to load up about three-quarters of my gear, only to decided it just wasn't going to work. The Lowrider, however, is capable of such feats. I did not have time to actually do a trip, but I did load it up and paddle around. As you might expect, it was heavy, sat lower in the water, and was slow to turn, but it wasn't that bad, especially if you put the seat on so you can switch back and forth between standing and sitting. It's probably outside most people's use cases, but if you're a weirdo like me, know that this is probably your best bet for paddlepacking.

Speaking of the seats, they're quite comfortable and stable. They have a strap that allows you to adjust the amount you're laying back. They never get quite as upright as you'd be in a kayak, but I paddled several miles and had no back strain or other pain. One thing to keep in mind if you're a seasoned kayaker: you're much higher on the water than you would be in a kayak. You aren't going to want to paddle anything technical, but it's still a stable, comfortable experience, and the board is plenty maneuverable. Cruising flat water it was surprisingly fast and agile (for something this size) and the Lowrider didn't blink even when I took it out in a 15 knot wind with pretty good chop. To my mind this is one of the best reasons to get a hybrid, on those rough days when you aren't going to be standing up, you can still get out on the water.

The seats can be attached in a variety of ways, there are three tie down points on each side of the board. Then two more tie down anchors which can be used to attach a Kula cooler or similar. There are also two magnapod anchors that will hold your [magnapod tumbler](https://www.boteboard.com/collections/magnepod-accessories/products/magnetumbler-20oz-with-lid-seafoam) or [speaker](https://www.boteboard.com/collections/magnepod-accessories/products/magneboom-surge-waterproof-speaker) in place.


# Ricoh GR IIIx Review


Reviewers have a strange relationship with gadgets. They move through our lives like water, they come, they go again. It's a rare gadget that I spend any time thinking of after it's returned, but every now and then it happens. In 2019 my WIRED editor visited me and San Miguel de Allende Mexico and brought with him the then-new Ricoh GR III.

Though we both loved the camera, as sometimes happens, a review never saw the light of day. Fast forward to now. I was putting together our new guide to compact cameras and need to test the GR IIIx, which is very close to the same camera, but with a 40mm lens instead of the 28mm lens in the GR III. After spending a month with the GR IIIx, I realized I had to review it, because five years later, it's still the best point and shoot camera I've ever used.

## Nearer to Perfection

Why even bother with a compact camera in the age of the smartphone? The counter argument is that your phone is (probably) always with you, and the best camera is the one you have on you, so why bother with another device? And if you're going to bother with another device, make it a huge mirrorless rig with a big fancy f/1.2 lens that will take far better, sharper, larger images.

If that works for you, then by all means stick to that setup. I happen to dislike carrying a phone all the time, I much prefer a compact camera in my pocket. Even when I do have my phone I still prefer to take pictures with a camera. I find it easier to think about light, timing, and composition when I am holding a camera. It's not so much that the camera is that much better in terms of specs (though it is), but that I produce better results using it. 

What I do like about a phone is how well it fits in your pocket compared to my Sony A7RII. This is where the Ricoh GR III comes in. It's only moderately thicker than a phone (at tk inches it's about twice as thick as a Pixel with a case. The GR III weighs tk pounds and disappears into the pocket of most pants with hardly a bulge. 

Despite that compact size, the GR III packs a 24.2-megapixel APS-C sensor, which is at the heart of why it's our favorite compact cameras. At the time of writing there is no other camera this small with an APS-C sensor. (There used to be two others in this class, [Fujifilm's x70](https://www.wired.com/2016/04/review-fujifilm-x70/) and [Nikon's Coolpix A](https://www.wired.com/2016/02/nikon-takes-aim-sony-trio-superpowered-compacts/). Both have been discontinued). While [sensor size isn't everything](https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-choose-a-camera/#sensor), the GR III's sensor is capable of delivering remarkably crisp, contrasty, detailed images that are on par with what I get from my Sony A7RII.

The original GR III launched in 2019 with the equivelent of a 28-mm lens. Ricoh followed this up in 2021 with the GR IIIx, which is very nearly the same camera, but with a 40-mm equivalent lens. They're both fantastic, the primary difference is the lens. I happen to love 40-mm lenses so I've spent more time with the GR IIIx, but for most people who want an all-around capable pocket camera, I'd suggest the 28-mm version is more versatile.

Both lenses are capable of tack-sharp images with an impressive, soft bokeh that you don't usually get with a camera and sensor of this size. There's also a nice macro mode that adds a bit of versatility to an already impressive package. That said, if you want a zoom, this is obviously not the camera for you (you'd be wanting the Sony RX100 VII).

There are three things that set the Ricoh GRIII above the compact camera pack. The first is the APS-C sensor. The second is the size. This camera can go everywhere with you and it doesn't get in the way. I often find, no matter how discrete I try to be, pulling out a full size camera with a decent (read, large) lens on the front and everyone in a scene notices and changes, however subtly. The GRIII on the other hand is small enough that you can pull it out without attracting attention or ruining a scene (it also doesn't make you look like a rich tourist when you're traveling). 

The third reason I, and legions of other photographers love this camera are all the little extras. I mentioned the macro mode, but there's also a very useful built-in neutral density filter for shooting longer exposure images without overexposing (think blurring flowing water for example). The other mode I love it Snap Focus. 

Snap Focus mode allows you to set a pre-determined focus distance. This is probably most usefult to "street" photographers, but I find it works pretty well with kids and pets too. It's sort of like setting your f-stop to f/8 and then knowing that everything between say 6 feet and 40 feet will be in focus. Except that Snap Focus means you can have that focus distance range regardless of what your aperture is (though with a larger aperture the focus panel will be smaller). 

I don't actually use Snap Focus as my focus mode, I leave that at spot autofocus, but I turn on "full press snap:", which means that I can use two modes of focus. If I half press the shutter button the GRIII focuses normally. If I quickly press the shutter button it uses Snap Focus and fires off the shot at my predetermined focus distance (I typically set it to 1.5 meters). I can't tell you how many images have been saved by this setting. 

Other little features I love are the USB-C charging port (common today, but fairly ahead of the curve in 2019), built in film simulations, and an easy-to-use user interface. The film simulations out of the box are not quite as diverse as Fujifilm's, but there are very nearly as many ways to customize them, and Ricoh enthusasists have created plenty of "recipes" to simulate old film stock and the like.

Okay, so why almost perfect? What's not to like? Video. The GRIII can shoot HD video, but it's barely useable. Don't plan on shooting video with this thing. Pretend it doesn't even shoot video. You'll be better off thinking that way. There's no built-in flash either. And the battery life is also not that great. I got about 150 shots, less in low light when the built-in IBIS is working harder. Also be forewarned the GRIII goes from one bar of battery to blinking red on a flash. Fortunately the batteries are small so carrying a spare isn't too bad. I also don't like that it's not completely weather sealed. I've not had an issue with dust, but that seems to be the one complaint some owners have, dust getting on the sensor.

Despite these niggles, the GRIII is to my mind, still the best compact digital camera you can buy, even five years later. Many people ask if perhaps they should wait for an update, perhaps there's a GRIV on the horizon? I have no insight there, but I will say that Ricoh has always answered the question by saying that it would update the GR series when it saw a way to improve it, and honestly, aside from the previous paragraph I really can't think of much that needs improvement.





# Insta360 Go 3S Review

Insta360's Go 3 was an incredibly fun action camera with a unique, tiny form factor that makes possible shots you just can't get with more traditional GoPro-style cameras. Now the company has released the Go 3S, an update that adds support for 4K video, higher bit rates for smoother video, and improved battery life.

## Sensor Improvements

Externally the Go 3S is difficult to distinguish from the Go 3. They're the same size, the rear flip up screen is unchanged and the USB-C port is in the same spot. The main visible difference is the lens guard which is bigger and thicker. I like this change because it makes it much easier to pull the lens portion out of the Action Pod, as Insta360 calls the body portion of the design.

The only other minor external changes I found are the more-textured, easier to grip edges for the camera lens portion and the power and Q buttons on the side. Otherwise all the significant changes in the Go 3S are inside the camera.

The headline feature of the Insta360 Go 3S is undoubtedly the 4k video.  I said in my [review of the Go 3](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-go-3-action-camera/) that "I never once noticed the 2.7K footage from the Go 3 being 2.7K, which is to say, unless you shoot side-by-side with a [4K camera], most people would never be able to tell the image quality difference." 

I stand by that, but when you are putting 2.7K side by side with 4K in the same video, you can tell the difference. For instance I always found it difficult to mix footage from the Go 3 with footage from my GoPro, which I often shoot in 5.3K. This is where the real appeal of the new Go 3S lies. The 4K footage does objectively look better (though again, you need to put it side by side to see it), more importantly, it mixes naturally with 4K footage from other cameras like the GoPro Hero 12 ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/gopro-hero-12-black/)) or the Insta360 Ace Pro ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-ace-pro-action-camera/)).

What impressed me that most about video from the Go 3S wasn't so much the additional sharpness, which is there, but the lack of pixelation, particularly in motion shots. Where the Go 3 tended to get quite pixelated in motion shots (e.g. while riding a bike), the Go 3S does not. This improvement is likely due more to the Go 3's higher bit rate (120 Mbits/s vs 80 MBits/s) than the 4K video, but either way it's a welcome improvement. That said there is still a good bit of pixelation at higher frame rates, so I recommend avoiding them. Shooting at 120 fps isn't too bad, but the 200 fps mode is often unusable (the quality of the footage depends a lot on lighting, but even in pretty good lighting, 200 fps is too much for this sensor and lens to handle well).

The other very noticeable difference between video from the Go 3 and Go 3S is the improved dynamic range and color. The Go 3S has much better tonal range in shadows, showing a lot more detail. There was also none of the (slight) magenta color cast that I sometimes got with the Go 3.

Before you get too excited about smoother, sharper video, there are some other changes to the Go 3S to keep in mind. The first is that sensor has changed. Previous Go cameras used an oversized sensor that allowed you to shoot either vertical or horizontal footage (using Freeframe mode) regardless of how the camera was oriented. This changes in the 3S. From my testing and experimenting it seems that the new sensor is horizontal and software is making up the difference. This results in slightly less clear vertical video than what you can get with the Go 3. 

In fact, as somehow who exclusively shoots horizontally for longer form content, I would never have noticed this change were it not for legions of offended Reddit users endlessly arguing about it. Suffice to say that, If you're a huge fan of the Go 3's Freeframe mode, which you then crop to vertical video, the Go 3S might be a step backwards. I prefer to think this is Insta360's clever plan to encourage you to shoot horizontal video, as the gods intended.

Another change worth noting is the lens, which loses about 15% of it’s field of view compared to the Go 3. The Go 3 had a 35mm equivalent of an 11mm lens, which the Go 3S has the 35mm equivalent of a 16mm lens. In practice this didn't amount to much of a difference, the field of view is slightly narrower. 

There is, however, a nice new ultra-wide mode in the Go 3S dubbed MegaView. This view is close to UltraWide, but does some barrel distortion correction to give a more natural look. The almost completely distortion-free Narrow view is also still around, as are Dewarp and UltraWide. From my testing the new MegaView falls somewhere between UltraWide and Dewarp: less barrel distortion than Ultrawide, more than Dewarp. I found it quite useful for continuous horizons, for example on the water, where it can be tricky to shoot and avoid the bubble-shaped horizon line.

Speaking of in-camera processing like MegaView, the stabilization engine has been updated again. It crops aggressively, but the Max stabilization setting manages to produce footage that's on par with what you'd get from a high-end gimbal. The one catch here is that enabling the Max stabilization adds some lag to the preview on the rear screen. It's not a huge deal, but if can be awkward if you're actively monitoring with the screen.

Among the other new features are a new portrait color profile, presumably aimed at vloggers, but honestly, I couldn't tell much difference between this and default color profile.

Finally there is one new feature that I thoroughly dislike: rotating the camera vertically means you shoot vertical video, holding it horizontally means you shoot horizontally. I freely admit that this absolutely makes sense in almost every case, but it doesn't make sense with the pendant, where I want to wear the camera vertically and still shoot horizontally like I could with the Go 3. Alas that's not how it works anymore, probably due again to the different sensor.

Despite that complaint the Go 3S is very much the camera I was wanting when I tested the Go 3 last year. The sharper, smoother footage puts it on par with every other action camera out there, but the form factor remains unique and fun. The magnetic system means you can stick the pod portion of the camera just about anywhere, enabling all kinds of shots that would be difficult to pull off with any other camera. 

Should you upgrade? If you have the Go 3, probably not. The 4K footage is slightly better, and color rendering truer to life, but in the grand scheme of online video uploads... neither are going to change your videos much. Interestingly, what you can do if you already have the Go 3 is [buy just the Go 3S camera module for $240](https://store.insta360.com/product/go-3s-standalone-camera) and use it with your Go 3 Action Pod. Yes, the camera itself is backwards compatible with the Go 3 Action Pod. Kudos to Insta360 for that.

Otherwise, if you're in the market for an action cam, the Insta360 Go 3S is a compelling option. Have a look at my [guide to action cameras](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-action-cameras/) to see the full range of possibilities, but the Go 3S is hard to beat when it comes to versatility and fun.









# Fujifilm X100VI Review

Fujifilm's new X100VI might be the most anticipated new camera... ever. An optimist might say that's because it makes great images, is reasonably priced, and is probably best at photographing people, which is what most non-pros do with cameras. A pessimist would argue that there are plenty of cameras capable of all that, the X100VI's popularity has to do with TikTok.

Which ever you want to believe, The X100VI is here and... it's already back-ordered everywhere, lending some credence to the TikTok theory. The good news is that, should you ever manage to get one, there's a new 40 megapixel sensor, which, combined with better autofocus and improved in-body image stabilization (IBIS) really does add up to a better camera.

## Strong Foundations

Fujifilm's X100 series of cameras has remained true to its design since the original X100 launched back in 2010. Fujifilm has tweaked the body a little here and there, but the X100VI (Fujifilm calls it the X100 6) is so similar to the X100V you'd be hard pressed to tell them apart.

If you pull out a scale you'd notice that the new X100VI is 1.5 ounces (43 grams) heavier. It's also technically 2mm thicker. Neither is enough to notice. For all intents and purposes, the outside of the X100VI is the same at the X100V. The dials are in the same place, with a dedicated shutter speed dial, pull-up ISO dial, a dedicated exposure compensation dial, and an aperture ring on the same 23mm lens.

What's new in the X100VI is the new 40 megapixel sensor (up from 24 megapixels), which is the same 40 megapixel sensor in last year's X-T5 ([9/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/fujifilm-x-t5-mirrorless-camera/)). This is Fujifilm's highest resolution APS-C processor on the market and the first that, in my experience, is every bit as good as a full-frame sensor. It's sharp, but doesn't have the higher noise issues that sometimes come with more megapixels on a small sensor. 

As I said in the X-T5 review, the real power here is the new X-Processor which decodes the sensor data. There are a few things here to like that weren't as conspicuous in the X-T5. The first is reduced power consumption. The battery remains unchanged from the previous model, but Fujifilm is claiming 450 images per battery, up from 420. That might not sound huge, but remember that the sensor size nearly doubled, and frankly, any gain here is a big win.

That said, in practice, I got nowhere near that number of shots. The problem lies in Fujifilm's wonderful film simulations, which I use extensively. These "recipes" let you simulate the look of old film stock (I'm partial to the Tri-X recipe here). Rendering these JPGs in camera takes some overhead, which decreases battery life. From my testing, the major culprit appears to be the clarity setting, but whatever the case if you plan to use these --- and you should!—plan on less battery life.

Battery life aside, the other thing I love about the pairing of the X-Trans 5 sensor and X-Processor is the colors. There's a really wonderful tonality with great color contrast. Golden hour light especially renders so well in these images.

Probably the most common complaint about the X100V is the autofocus, which, let's be frank, aren't good. I have some good news and some bad. First off autofocus is much better. It's faster and more precise. I found this to most true when using the new tracking and object recognition modes. I was especially impressed with the eye and face recognition modes, noth of which were great at keeping even fast moving children sharp in the frame.

Suffice to say the autofocus improvements are welcome. They might not be up to pro-level flagship mirrorless standareds, but that's not what the X100VI is, nor is that the target audience. The autofocus here is perfect for an everyday camera.

What's not so great is how crazy loud this thing is when trying to focus. I did not shoot much video, but what I did shoot, definitely had some lens focusing noise in it. That's a shame considering the video improvements. 

I mentioned above the lens is the same as the previous model. I was pleasantly surprised to find that the new sensor did not reveal any get shortcomings in the older lens. I honestly expected the X100VI images to be a little soft due to the lens, but that has not been my experience in testing.

The big downside to the lens remains though: no weather sealing. If you want a weather sealed camera you'll need to spring for Fujifilm's AR-X100 ($50) and pick up some kind of 49mm filter. Is it too much to ask for weather sealing at this price? Leica's Q3 has it, though Ricoh's GRIII does not, so maybe it is too much at this price.

The other big new feature in the X100VI is the main selling point for me: 6-stops of IBIS. As someone who shoots almost entirely in available light and likes to shoot in low light, the IBIS is a game changer. Thanks to the IBIS, the X100VI is capable of shots that are not possible in previous models. In some ways you could almost say IBIS in a camera this small is overkill, but then I was able to get tack-sharp images from the X100VI hand holding for up to 1 second, which is something I don't recall being about to do with any other camera I've used.

Two other small new additions worth mentioning are support for the HEIF image file format, and slightly lower base ISO of 125 (down from 160).

The rest of what makes the X100VI great is unchanged from previous versions. The X100 series has always been a very versatile camera thanks to features like the close focusing lens, optical or digital viewfinder, and various film emulations (20 in all for X100VI), to say nothing of the underappreciated features like the built-in 4-stop neutral-density filter, and the leaf-shutter that synchronizes with the flash up to 1/4,000.






















# Mystery Ranch Coulee 30 Pack Review

One of the great skills an adventurer needs to hone is how to pack. It sounds trivial, but it isn't. Adventures go awry because of poor packing. The ice ax needs to be where the ice ax needs to be. Learning where the ice ax needs to be is part of the adventure, but once you know, you know. This is true for everything you bring, no matter where you go, whether you're backpacking the PCT, climbing crags in the Wind River range, or sailing for Tahiti. 

To learn to pack like a master you have to study how the masters pack. For me, this has meant years of hanging out with river guides, trail crews, forest service employees, and sailors. This is how I've come to find things like NRS straps, Helly Hanson foulies, and Mystery Ranch packs. Almost everyone I know who works in the back country, relies on a Mystery Ranch pack. I've yet to try one of the company's larger packs, but in the Coulee 30, which Mystery Ranch launched last year, is one of the best daypacks I've ever used.

The Coulee 30 strikes the right balance between weight, comfort, organization, and capacity to make an excellent daypack that's capable of overnight trips if you have lightweight gear. 

## Design and Fit

The Coulee 30 is not the kind of ultralight daypack that trail runners will stop and ask about (which has happened with my [Mountainsmith waist pack](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-fanny-packs/#5da895bb182de80009f7fd87)). At 2.7 pounds for the men's L/XL I tested, this is definitely on the heavy side for a day pack, but that weight translations to a solid back with an incredibly comfortable suspension system. I've carried as much 28 pounds in this pack and it was still comfortable.

The suspension is adjustable, allowing you to customize the fit (something of a rarity at this pack capacity). There’s a hook and loop fastener that moves the shoulder yoke up and down to wherever is best for your body. It's not the easiest thing to adjust, which is good I suppose, since means it won't move around, but it is something of a pain to get adjusted. Luckily you should only have to do this a few times to get the fit dialed in. If you're on the border with regard to pack size (I fall in between the S/M and L/XL) I suggest sizing up. It's easier to make the larger pack fit a slightly smaller torso than it is to upsize the S/M size.

Both the back panel and S-shaped shoulder straps are nicely padded, and once you have the fit dialed in, the Coulee 30 is incredibly comfortable, even with heavy loads. There are adjustment straps at the shoulders to transfer weight forward and backward as needed and while there aren't true straps like that on the waist belt, way the waist belt is constructed makes it easy to transfer most of the weight to it by loosening and tightening the main buckle. The sternum strap is a little smaller than I'd like, but it does the job.

The hipbelt is entirely optional, you can unclip it from the buckles and slide it out in situations where it would get in the way (wearing a climbing harness for example). I primarily use the Coulee with the hip belt in, in part because I find the two stash pockets incredibly handy to store all the rocks and other trail findings my kids are hand me during hikes.

The back pads are aerated to some degree, though if I had a gripe about this pack it's that it does get a little warm and sweaty at times. Not enough to be a huge deal, but it might not by my top pick if I were heading in to the [Big Thicket](https://www.nps.gov/bith/index.htm) in late summer.

## The Y Factor

Much of what I love about this pack is Mystery Ranch’s signature Y-shaped, three-zipper access design system. There are three zippers, two on each side of the pack lid, and one running down the middle of the back of the pack. They all meet in a Y below the lid. There are nice long pull loops on all the zippers, which is handy for closing it up, but to open I stick my hand in the Y and pull the lid up. If I'm after something deeper, I'll unzip the middle zipper to find it.

The internal organization of the Coulee 30... doesn't exist. It's just one main pocket. As I've written elsewhere, this is how I like packs. I prefer to build my own little kits using smaller bags to organize (it's bags all the way down people), but if you like lots of little internal stash pockets, be warned, this not the pack for you.

The outside of the back is a different story. In addition to the two side pockets on the hip belt, there's a top pocket with a zipper right behind your head. This is quite large and features a mesh bottom so you can see the contents when you open the main compartment. There are four pockets on the back of the pack as well. Two side pockets made of a stretchy nylon, are nice for water bottles and other longer items. One of the two side compression straps passed right above these pockets so you can use that to securely hold larger items you put in these pockets.

There are two additional expandable pockets on the back of the pack, which are good for smaller items (each has a 2L capacity). I like that these pockets have expandable fabric folds, which means stuffing them full doesn't steal volume from the main compartment. I tend to keep smaller, frequently access things in here, snacks, rain jacket, tenkara pole, etc. The side compression straps are attached to these pockets as well, so you can cinch them down nice and tight. 

There's also a variety of webbing and loops around the pack, three loops on the bottom, and some webbing with shock cording just above the four outside pockets. To be honest, I have never attached anything to the stitched webbing. Unlike everything else on this pack, the webbing is very thin and does not inspire confidence. About all I've done with it is use the shock chord to keep a travel tripod (otherwise secured in the back pocket) from moving around too much. My only other gripe about this pack is the top handle, which is a single thin piece of webbing that also isn't up to the standards of the rest of the pack. 

I do like that the Coulee is compatible with most of Mystery Ranch's organizational extras, like the Wingman AFP, which attaches to the shoulder straps to give you somewhere to put your sunglasses, or GoPro, or whatever you want to have always at hand.












# Evergoods Civic Panel Loader 24L Backpack Review

I've had a mild obsession with bags since grade school. I really wanted a Jansport backpack. All the cool kids had Jansports. What I got was a generic copy on sale at the local sporting good store—almost a Jansport, but not quite. It wasn't the label, I didn't care who made the bag. It was build quality. The zipper snagged on the generic version. The rear pocket wasn't as big. 

I've obsessed over quality bags and backpacks ever since, and it's been worth it. A good bag or backpack is an investment. My Lowe Alpine backpack lasted over 20 years. My Belstaff shoulder bag was in its second decade when I sold it for more money than I originally paid. 

This rarefied category of expensive bags worth owning is currently, in my book held by GoRuck, Mystery Ranch, Mountainsmith, and the latest entrant: Evergoods. The Evergoods Civic Panel Loader 24L backpack has been my only bag through a series of trips this spring and tk.

## GoRuck Heritage

Suppose you love the solid manufacturing, heavy-duty construction, and waist belt-free design of a GoRuck pack, but you're less sold on the "tactical" styling and Molle webbing? This is where Evergoods comes from. Co-founded by the former head of product at Goruck and a former Patagonia R&D designer, Evergoods is exactly what those two pedigrees imply: military-inspired, heavy-duty construction and durability, paired with a more outdoorsy-meets-commuter design aesthetic. Throw in the fact that it's made in the U.S. (Bozeman, MT) and uses an eco-friendly, solution-dyeing process for its black fabric, and you have a bag worthy of consideration. 

Evergoods Civic Panel Loader 24L has a very clean, minimalist design on the outside. This belies the considerable amount of organizational options available, some of which are so well hidden that I didn't discover them until I went to write this review (never noticed the pen loops in the front panel pocket). I rather like this, I am not fond of bags with dozens of zippers jangling and endless pockets festooned all over them. 

As the name implies, this is a 24 liter bag. It weighs in at 3.1lbs (1406g), which is on the heavy side for a bag of this size (18 x 7 x 11.5 inches). That weight comes from Evergood's custom heavy-duty 840d ballistic nylon, which is water repellent (though it's worth noting, not fully water proof), and the aluminum stays. All of which is technical bag-speak for, it's well-made, but on the heavy side. The only catch is, you'll probably want to carry some kind of rain cover if you live in the Pacific Northwest or other wet region.

One of the more interesting aspects of the CPL24 is that it's built to function as both a backpack (what I would call upright) and sideways, or as I think of it, briefcase mode. There are handles on the top and the side, so you can carry it whichever way you like. The side handle was great going through airports. What's remarkable about the design is that it really does work well no matter which way you carry it. 

## Organizational Genius

My favorite part of the Civic Panel Loader 24, hereafter CPL24, is the massive main compartment that fully unzips on three sides (with zipper counter-pull tabs at each end). The design allows you to load and unload the CPL24 like it's a suitcase. The interior is lined with a light gray, 420d HT nylon, which makes it easier to see the contents.

The back side of the main compartment flap has two pockets, a smaller one at the top with a horizontal zipper, and then a larger mesh pouch with a vertical zipper. When opening the bag from the top, you get quick access to the small inside top pocket. When opening it from the side (in briefcase mode) you get access to the vertical zipper (now horizontal because briefcase mode) of the internal mesh pocket without opening the entire bag.

The main interior compartment is cavernous. There's a stretch fabric pocket against the frame for separating out flat objects, papers, perhaps even a tablet. I didn't use this, but I did appreciate the attention to detail in the fact that there's gaps at the base to let any debris come out. If you have kids, and they get anywhere near your bag, you will have "debris".

The rest of the main compartment is a large open space you can organize however you like. Evergoods sent me a 2L Civic Access Pouch, one of the company's interior organizational bags for packs like the CPL24. The Access Pouch happened to fit my camera gear so perfectly I went out and bought one for myself. The 2L pouch fits nicely in the bottom of the CPL24, or you can stack two of them side by side vertically, and even fit a third along the top. Evergoods also makes a smaller, 1L Civic Access Pouch that I turned into a sketching kit, with a notebook, pencil, small watercolor tin, and brushes.

You can of course use any smaller bags you like to organize the interior of the CPL24, but I must say, Evergoods' Civic Access pouches are the best small organizer bags I've tried. They're well worth a look even if you don't like the CPL24.

There are a few other pockets tucked away on the outside of the CPL24. My favorite being the small top pocket behind the shoulder straps. Evergoods calls this the yoke pocket. It's great for small stuff you want accessible, wallet, glasses, keys on the key leash, etc.

There's a vertical zipper running down the side of the pack, near the front that gives access to the dedicated laptop compartment, which is huge. It had no trouble swallowing a 16-inch Lenovo 9i. There's a pocket in the laptop compartment that acts as a divider, allowing you to also bring along a file folder or even a second laptop if you need it. The best part about the laptop compartment is that it's completely suspended within the bag, no matter how you set it down, your laptop or tablet will never touch the floor, making it well protected.

The front face of the bag has a fold running down it that hides a zippered admin pocket, which contains a few smaller pockets (and the pen loops I missed) for organizing things. I found this the least useful of the CPL24 because when the pack is fully packed in the main compartment, it compresses this pocket, making it tough to access. My solution was to use this pocket to hold the 1L Civic Access Pouch, which I could pull free and search, without the compression from the main compartment making it hard to dig through.

## Suspension and Carry

The CPL24 uses a curved yoke design to contours to your shoulders. This is part of why that top outside stash pocket is so roomy, the shoulder straps are curving out from the back padding. This gives you a pretty good fit, without tons of straps and buckles to adjust. The CPL24 is designed to ride high, and is most comfortable when carried this way.

The shoulder straps are nicely padded and comfortable even with a heavy load. The chest strap keeps the shoulder straps well fitted and overall I found the CPL24 to be comfortable to wear.

It's also very easy to carry in briefcase mode, thanks to the generously-sized handle on the side. The problem with briefcase mode is that the straps kind of just dangle and tend to get hung up on things. It's not that bad. I made it through two trips and three airports without incident, but it would have been nice to have some way to either strap them out of the way, or tuck them somewhere. Clever users on Reddit have come up with a [variety of solutions](https://old.reddit.com/r/EVERGOODS/comments/18s7f7g/cpl_24l_v3_new_owners_thoughts_and_tips/kf5mri8/).

In addition to the side and top handles mentioned above, there are two small loops at each end of the side handle that you can use to clip things on, either with a carabiner or a strap of some kind. I didn't feel need for this, but it's there if you need it.

What you won't find is any webbing on the shoulder straps for attaching things. I do sometimes put a glasses holder on my straps and was a little disappointed not to be able to do that here, but it's not enough to be a deal breaker for what's otherwise an excellent bag.

And that's what this is, a simple, but truly great bag that has stood up to considerable use. The Evergood's CPL24 isn't cheap, but it's well worth the investment.






# Instax Mini 99 Review

Fujifilm's New Instax Mini 99 is an Instax camera for those who love manual controls and creative effects. It's not the sharpest Instax I've tested—that remains the Mini Evo—but it might be the most analog and the most capable.

The $200 price tag is well above the entry-level point and shoot Instax cameras, but here you get exposure and shutter control, a swatch of color effects, even the ability to simulate light leaks just like those thrift store camera finds collect dust on your shelf.

## Camera Fashion

Except for the colorful and bubbly entry-level cameras, Fujifilm's Instax design tends toward a retro-camera vibe, which holds true for the Mini 99. The 99 is all-black, instead of the silver and black found in the Mini 90, but otherwise bears more than a passing resemblance. Fujifilm hasn't officially said the 99 replaces the 90, but they feel close enough to each other that I'd be surprised in the Mini 90 continues.

The lens of the Mini 99 is the same as the Mini 90. It's a 60mm lens made of plastic. It works out to roughly the same as a 35mm lens in 35mm format (or if you prefer, somewhere between 1x and 2x on your iPhone). The shutter is fixed at f/12.7, which means you'll be relying on the flash in all but bright, sunny, outdoor shots. That said, unlike quite a few other Instax models, with the Mini 99 you can turn off the flash for those well-lit shots.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the Mini 99, and something new for the Instax line, are the manual focus options. The Mini 99 does not have true manual focus where you turn a dial on the lens to get precise focus, rather there are three zones of focus—close up (0.3-0.6 meters), midrange (0.6-3 meters), and infinity (3m-infinity). For those not metric-savvy that works out to 1-2 feet, 2-10 feet, and 10-infinity. While that's not as precise as a true manual focus camera, it's more control than you typically get with Instax.

I find the manual focus to be a little inconsistent. Or rather the results were less dramatic than I expected. Keep in mind that the aperture is f/12.7, which means the field of focus is pretty wide, even with the focus zone controls. The Mini 99 is capable of bokeh (the name for out of focus regions in a photo), but only in very specific situations, like a portrait, and even then you have to use the closest focus which means your subject's face will mostly fill the frame anyway. That said, being able to play with focus at all is a step up from most Instax cameras where focus is fixed and the 1-foot close focus distance is nice for macro-style shots like flowers.

The Mini 99's design makes use of two dials, one that acts like an exposure compensation dial, allowing you to adjust Exposure Value (EV) two stops brighter and two darker. I found the L (Lighten) and L+ useful when shooting against snow, which has a tendency to overwhelm small sensors like this one. It's also good for strongly backlit scenes, though those are not Instax's strong suit, don't expect too much. The D (Darken) and D- settings proved less useful as they tended to make images overly dark. I could see them being more useful with black and white film, adding a bit of drama perhaps.

The second dial allows you to add a series of color effects to your shots. Options include Faded Green (FG), Warm Tone (WT), Light Blue (LB), Soft Magenta (SM), Sepia (SP), and Light Leak (LL). Behind the scenes Fujifilm is using LEDs to tone your images and, in the case of Light Leak, simulate a light leak on the film. The results are fun, I especially like the Warm Tone, though once I was done testing, I shot most of my images in Normal (N) mode.

The dials are easy to use, but unfortunately they're also very easy to accidentally turn when the camera is in your pocket or bag. After ruining a couple images because the EV dial had been turned in my pocket, I learned to always check the dials before shooting. It would be nice to have the dials lock in place a little better.

What I found far more fun than the color effects were the shutter speed controls. There are 4 modes available here. The normal mode, an indoor mode (for low light, slower shutter), Sports mode (denoted by a figure running) with a faster shutter, and B for Bulb, which yes, allows you to keep the shutter open as long as you like. In theory you can do night shots with Bulb mode, though in my testing this is tricky as there's no cable release.

The other fun shooting mode is double exposure. I'll confess that I have become used to shooting double exposure's with digital, which allows for more precise framing since you can see the first image, so my first few attempts with Instax were pretty bad. But with a little practice I found this one of the more interesting ways to use the Mini 99. It also gave me something to do with some very expired Instax film that I had lying about. Double exposures, combined with the strange effects of expired film made for some interesting shots.

The Mini 99 uses a removable, rechargeable battery (a NP-70S). Fujifilm is claiming 100 photos per charge. It's a little difficult to test that, but this feels about right, possibly even on the conservative side. I used about one-third of the battery shooting four rolls of film (and its worth noting most of that was shot in near freezing conditions which always results in subpar battery performance). For most use cases the provided single battery is going to be fine. I did not notice much in the way of power lose when not using the camera in the month that I tested. It's also worth noting that you don't charge the battery directly, Fujifilm provides a separate USB-C charger which is nice if you want multiple batteries.

A self-timer and flash control round out the options on the Mini 99, making it one of, if not the most flexible, capable Instax camera in Fujifilm's Instax lineup. See our [Guide to Instax Cameras]() for more options, but if you want manual controls the Mini 99 is the camera to get. The only downside to the Mini 99 in my testing is that in my testing the images it produces are not as sharp as the Mini Evo. The manual controls of the Mini 99, especially the focusing controls, do give you some creative options the Evo doesn't have, but if you're after pure image quality the Mini Evo remains the Instax of choice. If on the other hand you want more manual controls and the fun the color effects The Mini 99 is a fine Instax camera.



# Insta360 X4 Review

I never found much use for 360 cameras until using Insta360's new X4. The Insta360 X4's 8K video resolution is finally high enough resolution that you can capture 360 video, crop to a standard 16:9 frame, and actually have good looking video that you can mix with footage from other cameras. The X4 is where 360 footage finally leaves the action sports niche and enters the realm of useful-to-filmmakers.

That's not to say the X4 isn't a great action sports camera, it is, especially with its newfound ability to capture slow-motion-friendly 100 frames per second footage in 4K (single lens mode). In fact, the X4 is first 360 camera that can effectively replace your action cam, and give you some of the best 360 footage on the market.

## tk

The X4 looks and feels nearly identical to the X3 ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-x3-360-action-camera/)) that preceded it. It's marginally taller and thicker, and at 7.1 ounces, 20 percent heavier, but the basic design remains unchanged (the main reason for the larger body seems to be the larger battery). 

There are still two lenses—which now get lens covers, yay!—mounted to the of a body that reminds me of an old Nokia candy bar phone. The back of the camera has a 2.5-inch screen, now made of Gorilla glass, and the buttons on the side remain the same—power and a customizable Q button. One the back there's a button to start shooting and another menu button that can be customized like the Q button. 

The big news in the X4 is the jump to 8K h.265 360 video recording, up from the X3's 5.7K video. The 8K footage can be recorded at up to 30 frame per second (fps). It's worth noting that the X4 has the same sensor as the X3, what's been upgraded here is the processor, which now has the power to record more detail at higher resolution and frame rates.

Before I dig into the X4's video quality, know that there are two potential use cases for 360 cameras. The first is to shoot video for virtual reality headsets (VR) where the viewer will see everything the camera captured and can choose where to look. The second use for 360 video, which I would argue is still more common, is to capture every direction at once, and later "re-frame" in software, with the editor deciding where the focus should be and presenting the footage in a normal 16:9 movie frame. All of my testing was done with the latter scenario in mind.

In practice, this is the first 360 camera I've used where the video footage is still very sharp and clear even when reframed to 16:9. You still have to deal with the stitch line, which is there the edges of the two lenses meet and software (imperfectly) fills in the gaps, but otherwise post-production use of this footage feels like, well, just editing video. I mixed it with footage from a Sony A7RII, GoPro Hero 12, Insta360 Ace Pro, and aside from the wider angle of view, it's hard to tell the footage apart.

That alone is enough for me to say that this is the 360 camera filmmakers will want. The 8K footage still doesn't reframe to 4K (you'll have to wait for 12K footage before that's possible), but it looks good enough for anything you're going to put online.

It's not just the high end specs that have changed in the X4 either, frame speeds have been improved in lower resolution footage, with new options to shoot 5.7K video at 60fps, 4K at 100fps, and 4K at 60fps when shooting in wide angle mode. None of that is earth shattering, but it does give you some better slo-mo options thanks to the higher frame rates.

The color profile options remain the same as the X3: Standard, Vivid, and Log (for those who prefer to color in post). I shot primarily in Standard and found to colors to be nicely rendered, perhaps a little on the warm side. I find Vivid too garish, and of course if you plan to mix footage with other cameras, you'll want to shoot everything in Log and do your coloring in software.

Testing action cameras is always one of the best parts of this job, but it was especially fun with the Insta360 X4. I don't even like shooting 360 video, but shooting 360 video knowing that I can crop, reframe, and still get sharp, clean footage with lots of detail and smooth pans? Yes please. In many ways the Insta360 is like adding a small film crew to your bag, especially if you get the hilariously oversized 9.8 ft selfie stick, which makes it possible to fake surprisingly realistic boom shots.

At $99 the new [Extended Edition Selfie Stick](https://www.amazon.com/Insta360-Extended-Selfie-Action-Camera/dp/B08ZCTD6KW/) isn't cheap, but is well worth it for the versatility it creates when paired with the X4. Fully extended and held behind you while you walk, it mimics a low flying drone tracking shot, but without the whole crash-in-the-trees thing.

Speaking of trees, and shade, and shadow, the X4 definitely excels in bright sunlight. High contrast scenes like a forest floor at midday are more challenging (this is true for any camera). HDR mode can help sometimes, but then you lose the ability to shoot Log. Once you move into low light, or indoors, the X4 starts to show considerable noise and there's a noticeable loss of detail. It's still useable footage in most cases, but this is not the camera I would reach for if shooting in very low light or at night. But then, no action camera is really any good in low light situations. The nature of the trade off between size and image quality means small cameras will always struggle in low light.

Audio in the X4 is largely unchanged from the previous model. There's Auto Wind Reduction (the default), Active Wind Reduction, Stereo, and Direction Focus. I found that Active Wind Reduction did the best when mounted on my bike, but you really want a high quality external mics for the best sound. You'll need Insta360's USB-C mic adapter to connect external mics. 

While most people will likely buy the X4 for video, it does do still images as well. Photo resolution is the same as it was in X3—18 megapixel 360 images, with an option to do 72 megapixel composite images of scenes where nothing is moving. When using it in what I think of as action camera mode, that is, just one lens, you can shoot 9 MP stills or 36 MP high res images. 

Insta360 has also introduced hand gestures to stop and start recording, these mirror what I tested in the Ace Pro ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-ace-pro-action-camera/)) last year. I much prefer gestures to voice control. Because it's a 360 camera, gestures are even more useful than an action cam since you don't need to be in front of the camera, it'll pick up your gesture no matter where you are in the shot. (Sidenote, the hacker in me could not help testing to see if you can also use these gestures to stop someone else's X4 from recording, the answer is yes, yes you can. Use that information responsibly kids.)

If you're thinking that 8K recording must take a toll on battery life, you're half right. It does, but it's not significant because Insta360 has increased the battery size in the X4. Insta360 claims 75 minutes of shooting time when recording at 8K 30fps. I didn't get quite that much in the real world, but I was consistently able to shoot over an hour of footage without needing to recharge. So far it's still cool where I am so I wasn't really able to test overheating, but the X4 definitely gets hot when shooting 8K. It never shut off on me, but the ambient temps during testing were rarely over 60F.




Overall though the X4 is hands down the best 360 camera on the market right now. There are other 8K 360 cameras out there, but none of the ones I've tested can match the X4's video quality. That said, it'll be interesting to see what Insta360 does with the One RS 1-inch 360 camera, if it gets a version 2. With a larger sensor, and better lenses, the One RS stands to quickly usurp the X4 if it gets 8K video, at least in image quality. However the One RS is not much of an action camera, and is expensive enough that I'd be uncomfortable strapping it to my handlebars. A more direct competitor for the X4 will likely be the GoPro Max, which is overdue for an update. For the time being though, the X4 is a fantastic 360 camera well worth the investment if you're looking to shoot 360 footage.







✅ New Gesture Control & Voice Control 2.0
kkkk
✅ Powerful 2290mAh Battery & New Removable Lens Guards
✅ IInvisible Selfie Stick Effect, 360 Reframing, also Garmin & Apple Stats Integration




There's also a greater range of frame rates, and you can record slow-motion video up to 100fps in 4K (the X3 recorded 100fps in 3K), and the single-lens mode can now shoot in 60fps where the X3 was limited to 30fps. This increased flexibility enables you to mix up the feel of your shots, and also makes you feel like the X4 is a competent standard action camera, especially with modes like FreeFrame, which enables you to mix up aspect ratios. 
# /e/OS Review

The Android mobile operating system is open source, which means anyone can, in theory, build their own mobile operating system based on the [Android Open Source Project](https://source.android.com) (AOSP). Why then are there not many different versions of Android to choose from? 

The good news is that there are a few alternatives to Android, and some of them are excellent, better in my experience than the version of Android that ships with your phone. But that fact that there are only three or four such options highlights the fact that there is more, much more, to the mobile experience than the operating system.

Your Android phone's operating system is open source, but it's also running device-specific drivers, Google's various Play Services APIs, and many, many default apps, most of which are not open source, but absolutely key to a good mobile experience. 

All of this stuff is another layer atop the Android operating system and its this layer which is very difficult for other projects to reproduce. It's not that hard for projects to get the AOSP code running, but very difficult to create a great mobile user experience on top of it.

One project that has managed to create a really great user experience on top of AOSP is /e/OS. For the past six months I've used nothing else and I am here to say that the Android alternatives world has never been better. If you're looking to get out of the Google box, come on in, the water is fine.

It's worth pausing here to answer the question of why you'd want to use an Android alternative like /e/OS. Despite my general dislike of surveillance capitalism, initially it was not privacy-related issues that drove me from Andoird, but poor user-experience. I got tired of Android's constant updates. It felt like Windows. Every time I picked up my phone the internet was ridiculously slow because Android was downloading yet another update and prompting me to install it. I lived through Windows 98, once was enough.

Several years ago, fed up with Android, I installed LineageOS (probably the best known of the Android alternatives) and never looked back. LineageOS is a solid platform and provides a good set of basic applications. I never had any trouble with the open source apps I primarily rely on, nor did I have much trouble with the handful of proprietary apps I use (WhatsApp likes to complain when it runs on an alt OS, but it functions fine). Outside of work I don't depend on or use any Google services so my transition away from stock Android was smooth.

However, due to my position at WIRED I still needed to install the Google Play Services layer on LineageOS, otherwise apps I need for work—Slack, Airtable, Gmail, etc—did not work properly. 

While I like LineageOS, the fact that Google was still embedded into my device bothered me because my perspective changed. The underlying assumptions of stock Android began to annoy me. The boot screen was what did it. When you unlock the boot loader of your phone (which is necessary to load an alternative OS) there's a message every time you reboot warning that "software integrity cannot be guaranteed." That is true, it can't, and that could be bad if you happen to be Jason Bourne (more on this below), but what bothers me isn't the techincal details, but the underlying assumptions, namely that the corporation making your device *can* be trusted. 

Perhaps I read too much into these things. Perhaps I dream too much of what's starting to look like an unlikely future where mobile devices are general purpose computers modifiable as you see fit. Whatever the case, I certainly don't trust device manufacturers or Google, especially [on my phone](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/03/android-sends-20x-more-data-to-google-than-ios-sends-to-apple-study-says/), and I wanted Google out of my LineageOS (don't worry Google fanboys, I dislike Apple too). I needed something to replace Google Play Services, which is not open source and therefore can't be run outside Google's version of Android.

While Android is open source, Google has taken a page from the Microsoft playbook of old and uses things like its new "Play Integrity" APIs to ensure that apps will only work with Google's version of Android. This way Google can wave the open source flag while effectively preventing downstream forks from working. Most of the developers I spoke to believe that these anti-competitive practices will ultimately be regulated by governments. I do not share their optimism on that. Google's monopoly is subtle and built out of code, which is difficult for the non-technical to parse. However that susses out legally, in the mean time, a tremendous amount of effort has gone into trying to replicate these proprietary APIs to ensure most apps will work on alternative operating systems.

Luckily for me, I am not the first person to need a Google Play Service alternative. There are several options out there, but the best in my experience is the [Micro G project](https://microg.org). Micro G is a free software clone of Google’s proprietary core libraries and applications, replacing most of the proprietary APIs Google uses. This means your de-Googled phone can still handle geo location correctly, along with a few other core services third-party apps expect.

I ended up combining LineageOS and Micro G to have a phone that was fully de-Googled, but also fully functional, with a couple of exceptions I'll cover below.

The catch is that installing LineageOS and Micro G requires a little technical expertise. You'll need to be able to run command line software and be comfortable rooting your device.

This is where we finally get to /e/OS. Installing LineageOS is not for everyone. That's one of the main problems /e/OS set out to solve. And indeed it has, you can buy a Fairphone pre-loaded with /e/OS and have an excellent, Google-free mobile experience with almost no hassle. I tested this using a Fairphone 4 that Murena, the company that handles the hardware /e/OS supports, but you don't have to buy a Fairphone. Murena sells refurbished Pixel 5s pre-loaded with eOS, as well as its own Murena One (not currently available in the U.S).

I did not specifically test Murena's refurbished Pixels, but when it was time to send back the Fairphone I loaded /e/OS on a Pixel 6a and continue to use it to this day (if you've installed LineageOS, the process for /e/OS is nearly identical save the files you're "side loading"). 

So what exactly is /e/OS? Well, it starts with a base system of LineageOS, adds in Micro G to handle all the Googlely things, and then focuses on replicating the rest of a good mobile OS experience—syncing data through its own servers, providing online backups, and making sure all your favorite apps run as expected. That's very similar to what I achieved on my own with LineageOS and Micro G, but with zero effort on the user's part.

That's not what makes /e/OS special though. The real difference between /e/OS and other versions of Android is the privacy-first design. The core of /e/OS's privacy features lie in the Advanced Privacy app and widget. Here you can block trackers, along with other features such as hiding your IP address or geolocation when you feel like it. The IP and Geo spoofing are nice for limited use cases, but the main privacy feature for most of us is the ability to block trackers in apps. 

The one depressing thing about using /e/OS is getting to see in stark detail how many apps are constantly transmitting data back to servers. Sure, /e/OS blocks all that out of the box so you're not transmitting any data, but everyone else is. 

Thanks to the Advanced Privacy app, I can tell you that in the last 10 days /e/OS has blocked 3,030 apps from contacting tracking servers. While there are apps I am not surprised to see in this list, like Delta's app, which I only had installed for a trip, there are others I was disappointed to see in there, like my birding apps. Both Audubon's app and Cornell's eBird app contain trackers. Ironically /e/OS's System app is in this list. Yes, out of the box /e/OS blocks itself.

An added bonus of this feature is that you'll see very few ads on /e/OS.

While I like the privacy features of /e/OS, and have even taken to spoofing my geo data much of the time, the real killer feature to me is the /e/OS app store, which is named the App Lounge. When I used Lineage I installed apps from several different apps stores. There's F-Droid, which hosts open source apps, UptoDown, which a few apps I use support (Vivaldi being the main one), and then I had a few I could only get through the Google Play Store. As anyone using LineageOS can tell you, it's a lot to keep track of. The /e/OS App Lounge combines apps from a variety of sources, including the Play Store and F-Droid, among others, making them all available in one place (you can also opt to only show open source apps). 

Also nice is the option to stay anonymous when connecting to any of the app stores, although, you will need to to be logged in to get apps you paid for, since those are tied to your user id. I have also had the anonymous login fail a few times, giving me token errors. This is one of the few places I've had issues with /e/OS.

The App Lounge uses a familiar design that looks a bit like Google Play, but adds a few features. This first is that App Lounge provides privacy information about each app, grading it on a 1 to 10 scale, where 1 is horrible for privacy and 10 generally means no trackers. The App Lounge also grades apps according to which permissions they require. The fewer permissions (like access to your photos or geodata) the higher the rating. It's a nice way of providing what is often complex information in a way that anyone can easily parse. In a win for the larger Android-alt community, /e/OS claims to be working on making the App Lounge available as an app that came be installed anywhere (in the mean time, the [Aurora Store](https://auroraoss.com) is close).

## What Doesn't Work

As much as I love /e/OS it's not perfect. I have had some minor issues with geo data. I live on the road, so my location changes every couple of weeks. Sometimes /e/OS is slow to pick up on this and the Maps app will show me search results based on where I was last week. The included Maps app itself is still rough around the edges (and it uses some proprietary code). It's better and more accurate than every other map app I've tried, but it still isn't as good as Google Maps. I don't care what you think of Google, its Map app is unmatched. I still use it as a backup with the default /e/OS app doesn't find what I need.

The other big missing feature for me is Speech-to-text. Right now /e/OS ships without speech-to-text at all. There's a good summary of the options available in the /e/OS forums. None of them are ideal, but I've managed to get by with a combination of Sayboard and GBoard. Yes, it's a pain to switch between keyboards. The good news is that this feature is on the roadmap for /e/OS in 2024. This will also open the door to an /e/OS assistant, which is not currently available. The project is unclear about what form this might take, given the privacy implications of interacting with a server to answer queries, but one possibility is a Large Language Model run locally.

The other missing option is a full backup. At the moment your media, calendar, contacts, and files are backup up if you create a murena.io account, but applications and any settings/data are not backed up. Again, hopefully that will be changing later this year.

In my experience, apps generally just work. I have not had any problems running apps beyond those I've mentioned above.

## Security Issues

It would be remiss not to the point out that to install alternative OSes on your phone requires unlocking the bootloader, which does open a door to attackers. Unfortunately, re-locking the bootloader often does not go well. I have never tried it, given that it's an easy way to brick your phone. 

The reason phones ship with locked bootloaders is to protect against a kind of attack called "[Evil Maid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil_maid_attack)" (it would also protect against a rootkit being installed). The way bootloader locking prevents this is to require a private encryption key (which only the phone manufacturer has) to "sign" the OS that's about to load. Without this key, the OS isn't allowed to load. This ensures third parties don't modify or replace the operating system with malicious versions.

The question is, is it bad to have an unlocked bootloader? If you are the target of an attack by state-level groups, then yes, you should not used unlocked bootloaders. Like I said above, if you're a super spy, avoid /e/OS. Also avoid using a phone at all. In the world most of us live in there are no hackers posing as waiters to swipe our phones over lunch and install malicious operating systems, which is what you have to do to pull off a bootloader attack. A bootloader attack requires the attacker to gain possession of the hardware.

I have been running various OSes for years with unlocked bootloaders and have not had an issue. I bring this up mostly because everyone should be informed and make this choice for themselves. In my case I know there is an insecurity here, I am okay with it.

Also, to be clear, despite my initial dislike of the unlocked bootloader message above, this issue is not Google's fault, it's the hardware makers fault. In fact there is a system out there that handles your phone's bootloader just like Microsoft's UEFI system works on a laptop, but hardware manufacturers have not implemented it. Google actually has in the Pixel phones so I can in theory relock my bootloader, but I don't. The risk of a bricked phone is more real in my case than the risk of an Evil Maid attack. It's also worth noting that if you do want an OS that can re-lock the bootloader, GrapheneOS makes that possible. I have not use GrapheneOS, but it is another option. For me though /e/OS does everything I need and does a good job of staying out of my way the rest of the time.

A phone's operating system may not matter to everyone, but if you're someone who wants to leave the binary world of Apple and Google behind, more out of their browsing experience, /e/OS is well worth a try. 







# Easy 35 Review


We might be deep in the digital age, but film photography has never gone away. Like records, which lived on through tapes, CDs, and now digital music, film continues despite the ubiquity of the digital camera. However, while you can DIY develop film quite easily, making prints yourself with an enlarger remains a cumbersome process that requires a dedicated space. The more economical alternative is to scan your film and print it digitally.

The problem is that professional scanning is expensive and pro-level scanners are also expensive (not as expensive as enlarging your house to make way for a darkroom, but still not cheap). One popular solution is to photograph your negatives with a high resolution digital camera. The resulting RAW file can then be touched up, sharpened, and printed like any other digital file.

The problem is that photographing your images isn't as easy as it sounds. That's where Valoi's Easy 35 film scanning kit comes in. It's everything you need to "scan" your 35mm film in one simple to use kit. It's a breeze to setup, fast to scan, and produces great results.

## A Series of Tubes  
Scanning film by photographing it is tricky business. You need a good light source, you need to keep the film absolutely flat, and you have to have the camera and lens aligned with the film so there's no distortion.

Film photographers have been building scanning rigs for years now and there is a ton of great advice on [Reddit](https://old.reddit.com/r/AnalogCommunity/) and [elsewhere](https://forums.negativelabpro.com/t/lets-see-your-dslr-film-scanning-setup/27/256), but if you want an off the shelf solution that eliminates the learning curve, the Valoi Easy35 film scanning kit is the best option I've found.

The Easy35 consists of a lightbox with brightness and temperature controls for the backlight and slots on each side to feed your film through. Inside there's a film holder that helps your film slide through and line up. Then there are a series of tubes that form a light-tight tunnel between the film you're photographing and the sensor in your digital camera.

The result is consistently excellent digital images of your film with very little effort.

There are some caveats though. The big one is that this only works for 35mm film. If you're shooting medium format or larger, this won't work. That a shame because 120 and larger film is where you still have a resolution advantage over digital. I'd love to see Valoi build a 120 scanner down the road, but for now it's 35mm and smaller (there's a 110 adapter if you shoot 110 cartridges).

The next caveat is that you need to have some kind of DSLR camera with interchangable lenses. It doesn't have to be the best DSLR, but the quality of your results will depend on the quality of the camera and lens you're using. A 100MP Fujifilm GFX is generally going to give you better results than a micro4/3s camera. I tested with Sony A7RII, which has a 42MP sensor, and a Sony A7II which has a 24MP sensor and was quite happy with the results in both cases.

I did not test lower resolution cameras, but from reading others experience around the web, 12-18 megapixel sensors will also provide excellent results from APS-C or full frame cameras.

You'll need is a suitable macro lens to pair with the Easy35. Valoi has a [list of suggested lenses](https://www.valoi.co/easy35lens) on its website. I bought the budget lens Valoi recommends for use with Sony full frame cameras, and Sigma loaned WIRED a 70mm F/2.8 Macro lens, Valoi's top choice for my camera. 

I put up a [page with the results of both lenses](https://luxagraf.net/easy-35-film-scanner-test) (along with a professional scan from Richard's Photo Lab) so you can see the results. There are also links to the RAW files if you'd like to develop them yourself. The results surprised me. Both images look quite good to me. The Sigma is sharper, but I managed to get the roughly the same sharpness by editing the Nikon scan a bit in Darktable. 


The real difference in lenses is that the Sigma requires less effort. Its autofocus works well, the resulting images require less post processing, and it makes digitizing your negative faster. (It's also a much better general purpose macro lens. If you're looking for a good macro for the Sony FF system, I was very impressed with the Sigma.)

## A Scanner Brightly

Once you have a compatible lens, you need to attach the right combination of extension tubes to be able to focus on the light box Valoi provides. You could do the math on this with the minimum focus distance of your lens, but I did it by trial and error until I got it to where the film filled the frame, but I could still focus.

Once you're all set up, you feed in your film and start shooting your "scans". It really is that easy. It took about 5 minutes to set up, and because I don't use the lens for much else, I just leave it set up so it's always ready to go when I want to scan.

With a bit of practice I was able to scan a cut roll of black and white negatives in about 5 minutes. Having tried to scan this way using a light pad, cheap film holder, and home-made mount, let me say upfront that the Easy35 is well worth the money just for the amount of time and frustration it will save you. Not only is the setup a snap compared to homemade rig, the speed at which you can shoot is much better, and I never had to re-shoot. With a homemade rig I almost always had one or two images per roll that needed to be re-shot because the film wasn't flat or the holder wasn't lined up correctly.

This is the most hassle-free method of converting film negatives to digital RAW files that I've tried.

After some experimentation, I discovered a few tricks to getting better results. First off, ditch the dust filter, it gets in the way more than it helps. Get a pair of [cotton gloves](https://cna.st/affiliate-link/TdsMtFs7CeQKqD1JYZF39TD7Qzw5RXxoJoRi9K9q9Cx3oCHdma3hKor6UN47weXUmSrYpvMwXBN9utaGHkdyLQPVvEMnnXTzMjLccnJp8EuTbTAXGQBeHMyK8GZ35CrGNR72g1YxzoJk8GGP1vbPQAkgutSZtz6fh1qPvA4vAfTVTjkhU3YhvWPfQF7NzZSBfEFF5VhXBBRBXH){: rel="sponsored" isAffiliateLink="true"} and wear them every time you handle your film whether you are scanning or otherwise. Make sure to use the Easy35 sprocket holder, even if, like me, you don't care about showing the sprockets, they help line up the film and you end up doing less rotating in post. 

I should also note that there are quite a few people on the web who have [encountered significant vignetting](https://old.reddit.com/r/AnalogCommunity/comments/1c4inne/valoi_easy_35_issues_solved_jjc/) using the Easy35. Worse, it would seem to be asymmetrical vignetting, which makes it very hard to correct for in a RAW editor (you can shoot an image of the light source alone and use flat field correction if your RAW editor supports custom correction profiles). All that said, I encountered no vignetting, no orange haze, no image issues at all in my scanning. That's not to say those who do are somehow wrong, just that I strongly suggest stilling to the lenses Valoi recommends if you want to avoid any issues.

In the end I like the Easy35 for its speed and ease of use. It eliminates most of the headaches I've had in design custom scanning rigs and it takes up far less space than anything else I've seen. Stored away (but read to scan) it's almost the same size as my 300mm lens, which is tiny compared to most DIY scanning rigs I've seen. That said, if you love building your own tools than by all means, build away. For everyone else, the Easy35 hits the sweet spot between easy to use and reasonably affordable.


# XPS Review

Dell's XPS laptops have always been roughly the Windows answer to Apple's MacBook Pro line. It shouldn't be surprising then that Dell, like Apple, has moved away from it's 15-inch XPS laptop to two models, the XPS 14-inch and XPS 16-inch. 

Both share nearly identical designs and features, though the 16-inch model has a larger screen and battery (in our tests that balanced out to give roughly the same battery life as the 14-inch model). The result are pair of premium Windows machines, with premium prices to match.

## Sorta Svelte

As a long time fan of the XPS 13 I was really hoping the XPS 14 would be a slightly larger version of the XPS 13 Plus, but it really isn't. The XPS 14 is actually more a slighter smaller version of the XPS 15, which is to say while it's relatively light at 3.7 pounds, at tk inches thick it definitely leans more toward the bulky 15-inch XPS of old than the ultralight, ultra thin XPS 13. 

Once I got over this disappointment though there's a lot to like in these new form factors. The design is exquisite, the XPS team has out-Appled Apple in some ways, with the barren, uninterrupted off-white expanse that is the trackpad and palm rests. If you're into a clean, minimalist aesthetic, this is the laptop you want.

About that invisible trackpad: turns out your muscle memory of where a trackpad is is good enough that you probably don't need to see it. At least that was the case in my testing. Is it a little gimmicky? Sure. But that smooth white expanse, putting lines in that is like walking across an unbroken field of freshly fallen snow, what sort of monster would do that?

The trackpad is responsive, which is to say, better than the similar haptic pad in the XPS 13 Plus. Tracking, scrolling, clicking, everything was very smooth and reminiscent of Apple's Macbook trackpads (except you can't see Dell's version).

The keyboard is similarly controversial. First let's say it: yes the XPS 14 and 16 carry over the capacitive touch buttons instead of function keys that Dell debuted in the XPS 13 Plus. I am not especially bothered by this because I have never touch-typed function keys. In fact I just don't use function keys enough to be bothered by the capacitive buttons. If you do however use them a lot or touch type them, forget about the XPS—you will hate this keyboard.

I found the slightly large keys simultaneously annoying and easy enough to type with. In fact I even did a touch typing test on this versus my daily machine (a Lenovo T14) and I was quite sure I'd be slower on the Dell, but I wasn't. I'm not sure what it is, but I just don't like the look of this keyboard. Fortunately, the aesthetics of it have nothing to do with its effectiveness. The one exception to that is the backspace key, which is a little left of normal to make room for the power button (which is also a finger print reader). This wasn't a deal breaker for me, but it did take a few days to adjust to.

The port selection on both the 14 and 16 is fairly limited. There are three, all USB-C, certified Thunderbolt 4. Dell also includes a dongle with USB-A and HDMI ports if you need them. There's a headphone jack On the right side (thank god) and a microSD card slot. I don't want to pick on Dell here because they're certainly not alone, but what the heck does anyone need a microSD card slot for? A full size SD card slot would be fantastically useful, a microSD card slot... not so much. Major kudos to the first laptop maker to bring back the full size SD card slot.

The webcams with the XPS 14 and 16 are surprisingly good, better than most other built-in web cams I've tested this year.

## Pretty Pricey

Dell is selling a number of configurations between these two sizes, but I absolutely do not recommend the base model. The problem with the base model is the screen, which is 1920 x 1200 screen. At 14 inches that works out to a pixels per inch (PPI) of 154. While I have not used this model, I have spent plenty of time testing similar specced screens and you should never pay 1,700 for a laptop with 154 PPI screen (for comparison, a 14-inch Macbook Pro has a PPI of 254). Worse, the 16-inch base model also ships with a 1920 x 1200 screen, which is a PPI so low that frankly it should only be in cheap laptops under $500.

Just don't by the base model mmmkay?

The models I tested both had the gorgeous 3840 x 2400 OLED screens, which are things of beauty, but do bring the base price of both models up by $300. That puts the price of the minimum config I would recommend at $2,000 for the XPS 14 and $2,200 for the XPS 16. Keep in mind that that price only gets you 8 gigabytes of RAM, no dedicated graphics, and a tk GB SSD. While you can always add your own SSD, the RAM is not upgradable.

Adding the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4050 bumps the price of the 14-inch model to $2,400. This is the config I tested, and frankly performance was wanting in demanding tasks.  

## Middling Performance

I was surprised by the benchmarks I got from the XPS 14 with the RTX 4050, but not in a good way. My results were surprisingly lower than other laptops using the same chip, particularly in Geekbench, which measures graphics performance. After looking up some specs and puzzling through the test results I've come to the conclusion that Dell is underpowering the RTX 4050. The XPS 14 only gives the RTX 4050 40 watts, which is just above the bare minimum of 30 watts that Nvidia recommends. On one hand that keeps down heat, which means the fans spin up less and the battery lasts longer. Indeed, the fans on the XPS 14 and 16 ran less than other laptops I've been testing, at least until I started doing more demanding things like editing video.

The cost of that efficacy though is performance. While the XPS 14 performed roughly on par with similarly specced Windows laptops we've tested this spring, and is very snappy for average tasks like browsing the web or editing documents—neither of which ever caused the fans to spin or the laptops to get warm—the bad news is that if you want a video editing workstation, the XPS is not the best choice. More to the point, the Macbook Pro with the M3 Pro chip costs the same, and quite frankly crushes the XPS, which is disappointing for anyone wanting a Macbook Pro equivalent Windows machine.

For all that performance hit, battery life is still just okay. In everyday use browsing the web, writing documents, and watching the occasional YouTube video, I managed about 6 hours. That's actually pretty much smack dab in the middle of the pack for a laptop with an OLED screen and dedicated graphics. If there's anything to complain about it's really Windows laptops in general. Will anyone ever manage to make a Windows machine with the kind of battery life Apple gets out of the Macbook Pro? So far the answer is no, which is disappointing.

Side note for Linux users: as you would expect, battery life was worse under Linux. Dell also confirmed that for now there will be no official Developer Edition of the XPS 14 or 16. The Linux-support version of the XPS is limited to the 13-inch Plus model. I was able to get Arch running, but the trackpad never worked correctly.

## Recommendation

The XPS 14 and 16 are both beautiful, well-design machines. They're plenty capable for most use cases, though heavy gamers and video editors will want to look elsewhere. My main gripe against both is that they're expensive for what you get. However, if you don't mind paying a premium for first-class build quality with very clean, eye-catching design, then the XPS 14 and 16 are solid laptops.



# Celstron Trailseeker 8x32ED

I started birding around the age of 0. This is what happens when your parents are birders. I had my first binoculars at 5, an ancient pair of Bushnell 10x50 that I would use when my father wasn't. They were huge, so heavy I could barely lift them, but the world they opened up was well worth the neck strain. Forty five years later, still birding, I am less sold on the neck strain.

These days, when I head out of the house, my binocular of choice is 8x32, especially Celestron's Trailseeker 8x32 ED binoculars, which offer the best combination of image, quality, durability, and price that I've been able to find. Many a time have I brought these to my eye and thought something like, I can't believe these are only $320. They perform well above their price, indeed they match the performance of several I've tested that are double this price.

## Trailseeker Optical Performance
Celestron's Trailseeker 8x32 ED binoculars have phase and dielectric-coated BaK-4 prisms, which is rare in this size binocular at this price. What that means is that all air-to-glass surfaces are coated with multiple layers of anti-reflective coatings. That means very little light is lost within the prism. More light is reflected off the prism and gets to your eye delivering a brighter, sharper, more contrasty image.

In practice the Trailseeker's deliver an excellent image, with a sweet spot—where the image is sharpest and contrasty—that's absolutely tack sharp and occupies roughly 60 percent of the image, expanding out from the center. That's very good for a $320 pair of binoculars. The image does soften a bit out toward the edges, but not to a degree that I notice unless I go looking for it.

The edges are still sharp enough that I catch motion, at which point I can move the binoculars to center the bird or whatever it is into the sharper center. Additionally, based on my testing, most of the minimal distortion that there is near the edge can be corrected by focusing for the edges. I never felt the need to do this in real world use, but for the sake of testing I did discover it's possible to do (with a corresponding loss of sharpness in the center, since you're adapting to curvature distortion at the edges).

There's very little in the way of chromatic aberrations with these binoculars. I really had to work to find situations where I noticed any purple fringing. Color is vivid with a relatively neutral cast, if anything these tend toward a warm rendition of colors which works well for birding.

Are there binoculars with a larger sweet spot with less focus fall off? Yes there are, but they're generally larger and much more expensive. In terms of what you get for what you pay, these Celestrons are at the top of the pack optically speaking, based on my testing.

The Trailseeker 8x32 binoculars offer a field of view that stretches to 409 feet at 100 feet, which is wide for this magnification at this price. Competitors typically only hit about 390 feet. That might not sound like much, but using these alongside the Nocs 8x32 (which have a field of view of 387 feet) the difference was very noticeable. That extra room goes a long way to helping the Trailseekers avoid the "tunnel vision" feeling that sometimes happens with smaller binoculars.

## Trailseeker Ergonomics and Functionality
Celestron has chose a very traditional, single hinge design for almost all of it's binoculars. The large, smooth focus knob is just forward of the hinge, well past the eyecup. I find the positioning ideal as my index finger rests on the focus knob, and my pinky still has room to rest against the barrel and isn't in danger of drifting into the front of the glass as sometimes happens with smaller binoculars.

Focusing knobs are one of those things that come down to personal taste (shout out to the old [Knob Feel](https://knobfeel.tumblr.com) website), but I happen to love the focus knob on the Trailseekers. All of Celestron's focusing knobs are large and smooth with good tension that makes for smooth focusing. I don't think I've ever overshot focus with a pair of Celestrons. This is also partly due to the depth of focus being very good in the Trailseerks—it's easy to see when you're close.

The eyecups rotate out with one intermediate click that gives you the option to leave them at about 50 percent. I wear glasses so I usually have the eyecups collapsed, but they're plenty comfortable with a slight inward curvature that helps cup your eye. The diopter is just forward of the right eyecup and is stiff enough that it stays where you put it.

The outer rubber of the body has a bit of texture to it where you grip it on the sides, which makes it easy to hold. Celestron provides a nice, well padded strap, though I am partial to an all cotton strap I got years ago. There's also a chest harness included with the Trailseeker 8x32. I am not a fan of chest harnesses, but this one performed well enough in my testing.

## Conclusion
As someone with not-so-great vision (I've worn glasses since I was 15) I still love my 10x42 binoculars, but they're heavy and in an effort to lighten my load, especially when hiking, I've discovered that an 8x32 binocular provides a nice compromise between optical performance and portability.

As long as the light is good, until the sun actually sets, I see almost no difference from my 10x42s. Yes, the 10x42 have a larger exit pupil, which gives you a roomier image, but most of the time I'm birding, I'm not roaming around the scene, I've got the bird in the sweet spot or am moving my binoculars to get the bird in the sweet spot.

If you're looking for something for hunting, where low-light performance in late evening and early morning under tree canopy is paramount, then go for the 8X42 Trailseekers, which I also tested and are also excellent.



Considering the binocular as a whole I think it is certainly worth consideration. Its light physical weight and compact size coupled with its very good center of field performance will make it an attractive package to many individuals.

# Nemo Sleeping Pad Review



Nemo Equipment's Tensor sleeping pad was my introduction to ultralight sleeping pads. I'll confess that when I unwrapped that Tensor (went for the insulated version) and inflated it for the first time five years ago my first thought was of a hiker joke I'd seen on reddit: inflatable sleeping pads are for people who want to sleep on the ground, just not right away.

How would this impossibly thin, light, seeming fragile pad not leave me on the ground after a couple of night on the trail? Fast-forward five years. That sleeping pad had been under me for over 50 nights now and it still hasn't left me anywhere but comfortable and well-rested. That's not to say it can't fail, many a pad has left me on the ground over the decades, but so far the Nemo Tensor is still going strong.

Last fall Nemo sent me review samples of its new Tensor line, which has been revamped for 2024 and now consists of three pads of varying degrees of thickness and R-value, each tailored to specific backcountry needs.

## The Three Little Pads

Nemo's 2024 makeover for the Tensor line of pads consists of three pads: the Tensor Trail, which is the lightest, but has the lowest R value, the Tensor All-Season, which has an R-value of 5.4, and the Tensor Extreme Conditions, which boasts a whooping 8.5 R-value, and has the highest warmth-to-weight ratio currently on the market.

All of three those come in four sizes regular, regular mummy, regular wide, and long wide. Put it all together and that's 12 different pads to choose from from a single line of pads from a single manufacturer. This is why we have an entire [guide devoted to sleeping pads](https://www.wired.com/story/best-sleeping-pads/) to help you pick the best one for your needs.

The construction of the Tensor pads hasn't changed for the two update pads. Nemo is still using a quilt-like design that helps baffles stay inflated and eliminates the springy sensation you get with vertical baffles. Insulation still consists of a metallized film. The difference in R-value is primarily connected to how many layers of insulating metal film the pad has. The Trail uses one layer, the All-Season gets two layers, and the Extreme uses four layers (and a different type of baffle, more on that below).

Also new this year is a marginally beefier fabric on the bottom of these pads. Nemo is now using 40D nylon on the bottom to make it more durable. Take that Reddit funny guy. 

All of Nemo's new pads are made of bluesign-approved nylon and come with the company's vortex pump sack, which works very well to inflate your bag via the zero-profile valve. I really wish there were some kind of standard for these valves so I could use the Nemo pump sack with other pads, but there isn't (I'm looking at you Therm-a-rest Neoair). There's also a stuff sack to store your pad. The Nemo lifetime warranty covers any manufacturing defects, which is nice, but for more immediate solutions to that much-feared puncture remember to bring the repair kit that's included with each pad. 

## Our Pick: The Nemo Tensor All-Season 

If you want an all-around pad that will keep you comfortable not just in the summer, but on those shoulder seasons as well, so you can head into the wilds even when there's no camper nearby to retreat to, the All-Season is the way to go.

The All-season uses the same baffle construction as the Trail, but adds a second layer of metal film which increases the R-value to 5.4. It also sports the same 3.5 inches of cushioning found in the Trail.

The All-Season is only a few ounces heavier than the Trail at 22 ounces for a regular wide, and the packed size is nearly the same. Given that it's only $30 more, barely heavier than the ultralight Trail, and offers almost double the R-value I think this is the best sleeping pad for most people out of Nemo's current Tensor lineup.

I did not test the 2024 version, but the differences between the previous model, which I have tested are minimal. It's also very similar to the Insulated Tensor I've been using for years (the All-Season has a higher R-value, and is actually lighter than mine). Given that the real point of a sleeping pad is warmth, going for the higher R-value for a barely noticeable weight increase seems like a no-brainer to me—get the All-Season. 

If you don't need the R-value of the All-Season, and you really want to save two ounces, the 2024 Tensor Trail remains the lightest Nemo mattress. For 2024 the R-value gets a marginal increase from 2.5 to 2.8, which still makes it very much a summer-only pad. The thickness has increased from 3 inches to 3.5 inches, and the 

The most amazing thing to me about the changes is that, it got warmer, thicker, more durable and... lighter. The weight of the regular has decreased by .4 oz to 13.5 oz, a small, but welcome decrease. Even the regular wide, which I recommend for most people, is down to 20 oz.

The 2024 Nemo Tensor Trail remains a good pad for ultralight, summer backpacking trips. I don't think the differences between this and the previous model are enough to warrant an upgrade if you have the older version, but if you've been wanting an ultralight pad that's super comfortable, light, and packs down small, this is the way to go. I spent three nights on this pad last fall, including one very windy, cold November night in the dunes of the outer banks, and I was plenty warm. The caveat here is that I sleep hot.

The final Nemo pad in the 2024 lineup is a brand new cold weather sleeping pad, the Tensor Extreme, which is designed for cold weather camping, particularly sleeping on the snow. The Extreme uses what Nemo calls an apex baffle-design along with four layers of proprietary Thermal Mirror film. It all sounds very impressive and when it was announced the whole internet seemed to ask is the Nemo Tensor Extreme worth it?

After spending a week sleeping on this pad I would argue yes. I can say for sure that this is the lightest, warmest sleeping pad I've ever slept on. That said, I have not had the opportunity to test it down into the lower end of its temperature rating, nor have I slept on snow with it. I can say that the difference in warmth between the Extreme and the Trail was, well, extreme. That is to say that I absolutely, almost immediately, noticed the difference when moving from one to the other.

Given the tiny pack size and lightweight to R-value ratio, this also seems like a no-brainer. If I were heading out on a cold weather trip, this is pad I would bring. Now given the kind of conditions this pad is designed for I would also bring a closed cell foam pad like our top-pick [Therm-a-Rest Z-Lite](https://www.rei.com/product/829826/therm-a-rest-z-lite-sol-sleeping-pad). The more distance between your sleeping bag and the snow the better off you will be. While I have no doubt the Extreme does well on snow, having two pads with a combined weight of only 36 ounces and an R-value of 10 is the best of both worlds.




nemo tensor
backpacking
baffles
bluesign
regular wide
sleeping bag
backcountry
long wide
packed size
stuff sack
therm-a-rest
ultralight sleeping pad
hiker
neoair
regular mummy
Typical: 2–6
‌
rei
Typical: 2–6
‌
repair kit
Typical: 1–2
‌
tensor all-season
Typical: 4–12
‌
thermal mirror
Typical: 1–3
‌
vortex pump sack
Typical: 1–2
‌
zero-profile
Typical: 1–3
‌
air pads
Typical: 1–2
‌
baffle design





# Hasselblad 907X and CFV 100C 

Hasselblad's new 100 megapixel medium format camera system is capable of truly stunning images and totally incapable of shooting video. This is a photographer's camera for those lucky enough to still be photographers, without demanding video workload tacked on to every job. If that's you, this is the camera you want.

The CFV 100C is a new 100 megapixel digital back which will pair with both Hasselblad's 907X digital body (the smallest medium format camera on the market), as well as older 501c Hasselblads. Throw in an optional drip and you have a medium format digital camera system that can be used like an old Hasselblad film camera (shooting waist level), a more versital digital version using the flip screen of the 907X, or for more traditional SLR-style shooting with the grip. 

## The 907X with CFV 100C

Like most photographers I do not have a Hasselblad 501c just lying about, so I did all my testing using the 907X with the CFV 100c. This combo is incredibly compact, comfortable to shoot with at both waist level and eye level, and easy to carry around.

The 907X portion of the rig is incredibly thin and really little more than something that connects an XCD series lens to the 100C sensor back. The brains and sensor of the package are in the new CFV 100C digital back. 

The 100 megapixel sensor is the same that Hasselblad used in the X2D and it remains mind blowing. Not only is the resolution incredible, but the RAW files capture 15 stops of dynamic range, 16-bit color, and offer some of the best color rendering I've ever seen in a digital sensor. It's difficult to quantify exactly what it is that makes these files special, but I rarely even felt the need to edit them. They already look the way I want them to. 

Naturally this will be up to photographic style and personal taste, but for me at least, Hasselblad's color and tone rendering, even in JPG files, is second to none.

They are huge files though. Be forewarned that the RAW files are around 200 MB each and even JPGs can be up in the high 80 MB range. Like the X2D this camera includes a 1-terabyte drive and a CF Express card slot to expand that storage capacity even more.

The sensor and storage is the same as the X2D, which was underwhelming to me. Its DSLR-style body made shooting with the X2D feel more like using a very high resolution Nikon. Combine that with the lack of video features—which I would prefer to have in a more DSLR form factor—and the X2D fell flat for me.

The 907X with the 100C are the polar opposite despite sharing a sensor. This is the camera Hasselblad fans have been wanting. It's everything that made film Hasselblad's special with a digital soul. It might not actually last as long as the film cameras (electronics being finicky after all), but in every other way it carries that Hasselblad tradition on.

That's not to say there aren't modern improvements here. Autofocus, a place even recent Hasselblad's have struggled, is much better here. There's face detection (no, not eye, just face), which works quite well in all but very low light. I would prefer eye detect, but this works in most situations. That said, I prefer manual focusing most of the time.

Before I get into why I love this camera, let's talk about what it can't do because the missing features are exactly what make this camera special. The big one is that there's no IBIS support. That's right, no image stabilization. While I called it light for a medium format camera (it weighs 1.3 lbs without a lens) this is still somewhat large, somewhat heavy, and totally lacking in image stabilization. That means in all but bright light situations you're probably going to need a tripod.

There's also no electronic viewfinder. There is an optional optical viewfinder you can buy, but it doesn't help focus. To focus you either rely on the autofocus (which is decent, more on that below) or you do what I did 90 percent of the time, and manually focus by zooming on the digital screen.

Would it surprise you to know there's no burst mode? Like none at all. You take a picture. Then you take another. All the wildlife and sports photographers just left.

No viewfinder, no IBIS, no video, no mind-bending frames per second shooting. What's left? A camera that shoots like a medium format film camera. 

To compose you use the rear screen, which is a 3.2-inch 2.36 million pixel display (which works out to a 1024 x 786 screen in 3.2 inches, it's very sharp and plenty bright). It's also a touch display and responds to pinch-to-zoom and other gestures. There is no side to side articulation. You can view it flat against the back (how I used it when shooting with the grip), out at a 45 degree angle (useful on a tripod) or fully extended at 90 degrees (for waist-level shooting).

The screen is relatively bright, but in direct sunlight it can be hard to see. I used a trick I learned years ago shooting with the [Panasonic GF1](https://www.wired.com/2010/02/a-month-with-the-lumix-gf1-and-why-i-no-longer-use-the-nikon-d700/)—overexpose your image to compose, then once everything is focused and positioned where you want, you can set the exposure.

Almost every setting you want to tweak is readily available either through the touchscreen display or the five buttons running along the bottom of it. My personal favorite is the single button press to call up a live histogram.

While the rear screen is what makes this Hasselblad so much like a 500 series film camera, there is an optional grip that turns the 907X 100C into something that feels and operates much more like a modern digital camera. The grip adds two command wheels, four fully customizable buttons, and a gorgeous-looking little joystick for moving your autofocus point around. I like this versatility, and I can definitely see the grip's appeal in situations like a studio portrait shoot, beyond testing it for this review, I really didn't use it.

It might have some nods to the digital camera world, but the heart and soul of the 907X 100C is in the past. And I would argue that to get the most out of this rig you have to slow down and return to a more film-like photography mindset. 

I hand-held plenty of shot out hiking with my kids and got great results even well into the evenings, but there were plenty of times when I had to stop and set up the tripod. I'll admit that at first I found this moderately annoying. I didn't really want to slow down. But I had to so I did and that in turn made me think through compositions more. It made me move a bit to left, or squat down and reframe. All things I should be doing all the time, but often I don't. The Hasselblad forced me to be more deliberate and more conscious of my compositions 

Obviously, this style of shoot works for things landscapes, portraits, possibly even street photography, and it doesn't work for other things. No sane person ever took a Hasselblad to a sporting event. If the 907X 100C fits the style of shooting you do, and you have the money, this is the finest digital camera I have shot with in a very long time, possibly ever.

That said, I only got to spend a week shooting with the 907X 100C, which isn't enough time to find all those quirks that might drive you crazy in the long run. I can say that in the time I used it I didn't hit any alarming quirks, which doesn't mean they aren't there, but it's a sign that maybe they aren't that bad.

The last thing that must be said is Hasselblad's are expensive. The 907X 100C is $8,200. Throw in a 55mm lens as general purpose lens, maybe a 120mm for portraits and you have yourself a roughly $17,000 camera system. If you have the money, and don't need the IBIS, the 907X 100C is a fantastic camera.






For this review I tested the 28mm and 90mm XCD lenses (the equivalent of a 17mm and 55mm in 35mm format). Having used the 38 and 55 previously, when I tested the X2D, I can now say that off the lenses available currently, I would go for the 55mm in part for the focal length (equivalent to 35mm for full frame cameras), but also because it produced the best images.



medium format (645 sensor size) 16-bit mount for Hasselblad's XCD lens series. 

color powerhouse that will allow you to see life in a very beautiful and soulful way. 

In addition to the doubled resolution the auto focus has been improved with phase detect (vs contrast detect) and face detection has also been added. There is now a 1TB SSD drive inside of the 100c camera back and the card slot is now of the CFexpress variety. All very good upgrades. Hasselblad has also (thank you) removed the video features of the 907x just as they did with the X2D 100c. It doesn’t need video as this is truly a pure photographers camera. For those who love to seek out the shot, find it, and snap one or two frames and move along. I consider this an artists camera as well, for those who love quality in build, feel and output. It’s a superb option for portraits as well as environmental portraits.

Seems like yesterday when I was walking through the woods snapping photographs with the then new Hasselblad 907X 50C. While it has been about three years since then, the 907x 50c became one of my all time favorite cameras, if not my all out #1 favorite digital camera ever. I loved it for the vintage look and feel, the overall quality of the camera itself and of course the 50 MP sensor that delivered true to life color and depth.

The 907x 50c and 100c are cameras that I put in the “very special” category.

The reason I say this is because there is nothing like shooting with one of these beautiful cameras. The experience is quite unique and the best part is that the file quality is astonishing. I loved the sensor in the 50c but the one here in the 100c is extraordinary and even better. Take a look at this beautiful camera which is indeed the smallest large sensor camera available as of Jan 2024.

The design is classic Hasselblad. The CFV 100C is designed to resemble a classic Hasselblad 500 series film back. The different being that here you get a 100 megapixel sensor, a flip up rear screen, and some buttons to control your settings. 

This may not be ground breaking design, but that's fine because the shooting experience is very much like it was with film Hasselblads. I can't think of anything that's hugely different here. You can flip up the rear screen and shoot waist level just like you would with a tk film body. The touch screen makes it easy to zoom in and check focus or details in your composition, and all your common settings are just a few button presses away.

While the waist-level shooting capablities are excellent, not everyone is going to want to shoot that way. That's why Hasselblad is also selling an add-on grip that turns the shooting experience into something more like a DSLR. There's no viewfinder, but the grip allows you to hold the camera 





# UG Monk Analog Review

Many years ago I asked my most accomplished, successful friend what his secret to success was. His answer was simple, but it also changed my life. He said, "I make lists of all the stuff I need to do, then I do it." He happened to use 3 by 5 index cards for his lists, so I copied the idea. 

Over time I took his simple system and worked it into my life, and decades on I still start most days by pulling out an index card and getting to work on whatever it says I need to do. At the end of the day I glance at a longer list of projects (not on an index card), and a list of more strategic goals, along with my calendar, and decide what to put on the index card for tomorrow. 

I wrote about this system in our [guide to paper planners](https://www.wired.com/story/best-paper-planners/) and a WIRED reader emailed me and asked if I had ever heard of [Analog](https://ugmonk.com/pages/analog), which is an index card-based system that's similar to mine. I reached out to Jeff Sheldon, founder of UG Monk the company that makes Analog and he sent over an Analog Starter Kit. 

I've been using Analog for a couple of months now and I am happy to say that it's an excellent way to organize your day and get things done. It's simple, elegant, beautifully made and, well, analog. I wouldn't say it replaced my decades-old system, but it sure does make it look a whole lot nicer.

## Getting Things Done With Analog

There's a slogan on the Analog site that reads "Analog doesn't replace your digital tools, it works alongside them by helping you focus on your most important work." I think that's important to keep in mind. While I use and have almost always used a completely paper-based system, you don't have to. And I don't really either, I keep track of appointments on a digital calendar and I use a custom-built bookmarking system to keep track of everything I need to do for my job here at WIRED. 

Still, when it comes to planning my days and making lists of what I want to accomplish now, I have always been a fan for paper. That's where Analog comes in.

Analog consists of a very cleverly-designed, beautifully-made wooden box (available in either Walnut or Maple), some custom printed index cards, and a metal divider/lid that keeps everything neat and tidy. It's designed to sit on your desk, show you what you need to do, and look good doing it.

There are three colored index cards, white cards for today, cream colored cards for next day, and darker cards for those someday/maybe tasks. The paper is 100 pound smooth, uncoated paper that's sturdy enough to stand up in the provided slot so that you can see your tasks for the day. The back of all the cards has a very faint dot grid printed onto it.

It helps if you're familiar with David Allen's method of organization when you start using Analog. It's not necessary, and not everything in David Allen's Getting Things Done can be done with Analog, but if you are familiar with Allen's concepts like next action lists and someday/maybe lists, you'll hit the ground running with Analog.

If not, don't worry, there are several videos on the Analog site that explain how the system works, and how you can use it to get things done. 

Over time you can bend Analog to work like you do. After experimenting for a while, I was able to turn it into what I needed (about a year ago I started time-blocking my days, which Analog doesn't really cover, but I've put my time block schedules on the back of my daily cards).

If I wanted to get fancier with my time block scheduling, there is the [Analog Weekly kit](), which has a pre-printed card that would allow me to plot my entire week on similarly quality paper, with a matching wood holder. As nice at the Weekly kit is, I found it quite convenient to have my schedule on my daily card. 

The Analog starter kit I tested includes three Analog card packs, each of which include 50 index cards (35 Today cards, 10 Next cards, 5 Someday cards). If you subscribe you can get refill three-packs for $30 sent out every three months. Otherwise if you buy refill three-packs for $39. 

You can also use plain index cards if you like, although good quality, heavy index cards like the ones Analog sells aren't much cheaper than buying the refill from Analog. I keep a good stock of nice index cards around for note taking, and I used those in the Analog holder without issue. That said, I will be buying refills because I like the rounded corners and dot grid backs of the Analog cards (in part because I don't mix them up with cards that need to get filed in my notes holder).

This I think gets to the heart of what makes Analog great: it's a highly fetishized way of organizing something very ordinary. 

Do you need Analog? No, you can go get index cards at a fraction of the price and accomplish the same thing. Will you though? Maybe. I did years ago. Would I today if the habit weren't already ingrained? I'm not sure. I might try some apps and disappear into the rabbit hole of productivity suggestions online. I might re-read David Allen books and try to program a completely custom system that's absolutely perfect and then never use it (guilty). So sure, there are other ways of tracking what you need to do, but Analog is elegant and doesn't involve looking at your phone, which is always a time suck.

Analog works because it's fetishized. It sits there, looking good on your desk, with an inviting quality that says, "hey, you should use me." Because what jumped out at you when I told story of my friend? If you're like me, what jumped out was the bit about index cards. But you know which part matters? The part where he said, "**then I do it**." All the lists in the world will do you no good if you don't do the things on them. 








# Nemo Mayfly 2-Person Tent Review

Nemo Equipment's backpacking gear is not cheap, but it's some of the lightest, best-made, and well-thought-out gear you'll find on the market. The company's new Mayfly Osmo 2-person backpacking tent exemplifies this, it's quick to set up, lightweight, cleverly-designed, and in my testing, durable enough for life on the trail.

The Mayfly comes in 2- and 3-person versions and sits in Nemo's backpacking tent line between the ultralight Dragonfly and Hornet series and the roomier, heavier Dagger series ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/nemo-dagger-osmo-3p-tent-2023/)). The Mayfly is a good choice for backpackers looking to pick up a quality Nemo tent that weighs a little more but at $400 costs quite a bit less money than the ultralight Hornet.

## The Basics

The Mayfly is a 2-person, 3-season backpacking tent with a trail weight of 3 pounds, 8 ounces. Purists might take issue, but to me that puts it firmly in the ultralight tent category. Split between two people each is carrying under 2 pounds. That's not as light as the Nemo Hornet, which has a trail weight of just 2 pounds, but it's well under our suggestion to keep tent weight under 2.5 pounds per person. The Mayfly is also $250 cheaper than the Hornet, making it easier on the pocketbook if you're just starting out.

The Mayfly uses a semi-freestanding design, much like the MSR Freelite we [reviewed last year](https://www.wired.com/review/msr-freelite-2-person-backpacking-tent/). This design saves on weight since there's fewer poles, but it does mean you have to stake out or otherwise secure the foot-end of the tent. If you're headed somewhere you might camp on hard rock, it's worth adding some extra cord in case you need to get creative stake these out. 

There are two tent poles, both aluminum. One is a hubbed three-piece pole that forks above the door. The second spreader pole goes across the middle and helps maintain the steep sidewalls that make the Mayfly surprisingly roomy for its dimensions. 

The Mayfly offers 27.9 square feet of living space, with two 7 square foot vestibule areas for gear storage. In practice this works out to a livable, though not roomy tent for two. Since I happened to be testing Nemo's new Tensor Trail sleeping pads as well, I can say that two of those fit side by side, but just barely (see photo). There's a few inches of room down at the feet for gear, but whatever you put down there will be touching the sidewalls, which is often a recipe for wet gear. 

At this weight, the Mayfly's living space is about average. It's nearly identical living space to the Big Agnes Tiger Wall UL 2, and it's a couple square feet smaller than the MSR Freelite. In practice I did not notice this, in fact the Mayfly feels bigger than the Freelite thanks to wider roof (though it's worth nothing the Freelite is almost a pound lighter). The Mayfly is a good size for couples or anyone who doesn't mind being a bit chummy with their partner. It was a perfect fit for me and my 9-year-old son.

The doors are quite large and it was easy to get in and out of them, which was my main gripe about the Dagger, which is much harder to access. The floor of the Mayfly is made of 68D ripstop polyester, and feel more substantial than others I've used. That said, I always recommend carrying a ground sheet of some kind, whether [a piece of Tyvek](https://www.reddit.com/r/Ultralight/comments/v987fg/diy_footprint_tyvek_thickness_alternative/) you cut to shape or the [Mayfly footprint Nemo sells for $70](https://www.nemoequipment.com/collections/footprint/products/mayfly-osmo-backpacking-footprint).

Setup and take down are both super fast and easy. I was able to get the Mayfly up in under three minutes without reading the directions. Adding the fly and staking and guying it out completely takes a bit longer, but the basic tent is very quick to setup. The poles snap into Nemo's custom Axial corner anchors, and the color-coded webbing makes it simple to figure out which loops go to which pole. 

The corner anchors deserve special mention, the snap in pole loop is nice enough, but the clip in rain fly anchors are genius. Because they attach both the pole and the rain fly to a single point, you can adjust the tension just by tightening or loosening a single strap. It's the best tent pitching system I've used.  

As you would expect, Nemo gives you some stakes and guy lines, which get the job done though I prefer MSR's [Carbon Core stakes](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B006ZJI83Q?tag=bravesoftwa04-20&linkCode=osi&th=1&psc=1&language=en_US). They're expensive, but they're the strongest ultralight stakes I've tested, provided you use the properly. Nemo also includes a pole splint should you damage a pole on the trail. 

Like the Dagger I reviewed last year, the Mayfly's rainfly uses Nemo's OSMO fabric. Osmo fabric is a nylon-polyester blend made with 100 percent recycled nylon and polyester yarns, woven in such a way that it stretches less and repels water more than nylon alone. It's also made without the use of flame-retardant chemicals or fluorinated water repellents (PFC and PFAS). Osmo is also now [bluesign approved](https://www.bluesign.com/en/), which is a certification that ensures fabrics meet certain ecological and chemical requirements that lower their overall impact. After reading Alden Wicker's [To Dye For](https://www.amazon.com/Dye-Toxic-Fashion-Making-Sick-ebook/dp/B0BGXKYY7D) I've become somewhat cynical about claims of this sort, but given how toxic many outdoor fabrics are, it's nice to see Nemo making an effort in this direction.

In practice, Osmo does a good job of repelling rain and as you can see from the photos, the rain fly does indeed stay nice and tight.

Overall the Mayfly is a very solid tent. It's best suited for backpacking. You could use it in the front country as well, but if you're just car camping you'd probably be better off with something cheaper, heavier, and roomier. Within the realm of backpacking tents the Mayfly is a good entry-level option. It's reasonably priced for what you get, and you get everything you need to hit the trail.


Dagger is designed to be versatile. The symmetric pole structure lends itself to be a super roomy backpacking tent, but durable enough for car camping. For customers who want one tent to suit most adventures, Dagger is a good balance of weight and space. With OSMO fabric, included Landing Zone, and more space than the competition, it’s a performance product for an experienced user.

 

Mayfly OSMO, on the other hand, is a dedicated backpacking tent for an entry-level backpacker. The tapered floorplan and semi-freestanding pole structure mean it doesn’t have the spaciousness of Dagger, so customers will find it too small and fussy for car camping. It’s a good choice for a backpacker looking for premium features (OSMO fly, custom hardware) on a budget, or for someone who values comfort and durability > weight savings.



# Nikon Zf Review

The Nikon Zf is Nikon's latest full-frame Z-series camera though you'd be forgiven for thinking it was a film camera. With a design borrowed from Nikons of yore, but a decidedly modern 24MP BSI CMOS sensor, the Zf is in many ways the best of both worlds—high quality digital sensor married with dial and button heavy case. Think of it as a full frame version of Nikon's popular Zfc camera.

The result is a camera that's a ton of fun to shoot. I almost never had to go hunting around in menus, and using it was very nearly as simple as using my FE2. It doesn't have the speed you'd want for wildlife or sports, but for everything else, this camera is hard to beat.

## Classic Stylings

I've seen quite a few people compare the Zf design to [the 1970s FM2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nikon_FM2_in_black.jpg), but I don't think you need to go back that far, [the Nikon Df has similar lines](https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/1526/nikon-df.html)), as does [the Zfc](https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/mirrorless-cameras/z-fc.html), which is the APS-C little brother to this new Zf.

|||||Image of FE2 Side by Side|||||

One thing to note, whichever old Nikon you think it looks like, it's decidedly larger and heavier. As you can see in the picture above, next to my film FE2 (which is very similar to the FM2), it's about 20 percent larger all the way around and weighs almost 6 ounces more.

Much of the Zf's weight is a good thing, it's because this thing is incredibly solid. The body is all-metal and totally weather sealed. The two large dials are both made of brass and turning them feels just like turning the dials on an old film camera. The Zf is the best constructed digital camera body I've ever tested. It's a tank. In a good way. 

The cost of great construction comes in the weight—22.29 ounces without a lens, and 40 ounces with the included Nikkor 24-70 f/4 lens. That's not outrageous, but it sometimes feels that way because there's almost no grip. The little lip provided reminds me of my old Nikon F3, which was also awkward to hold after a while. This isn't a huge deal, there are plenty of [third-party grips](https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1788762-REG/smallrig_4262_l_shape_grip_for_nikon.html) you can add.

Other than the weight, the handling of the Zf is excellent. The dials are easy to turn and allow you to set shutter speed, ISO, exposure compensation, shooting mode, metering mode, and shutter speed without even lifting the camera to your eye. Note that shutter speed is displayed on a screen and with most lenses will be changed via a dial since quite a few Z lenses lack aperture rings.

One thing I didn't like is the lack of joystick on the back. There's a D-pad to control things like the focus point, but a joystick is just faster and smoother to operate. 

On the plus side, another aspect that reminded me of film camera is the big bright viewfinder. Like Nikon viewfinders on the F-series, this 3.68M dot OLED viewfinder is a pleasure to use.

The only caveat there is that nearly everything I liked about using the Zf is because it reminds me of my old Nikons. As someone who learned photography on 1980s Nikon film cameras, this is very much a 1980s Nikon film camera, at least on the outside.

On the inside the Zf has a very nice 24 megapixel CMOS sensor, which appears to be very similar to the sensor in the Z6 II. That's a few years old at this point, but it's still very capable. The sensor is paired with a new processor (the Expeed 7 processor), which gives the Zf some tricks other Nikons lack. 

The best of these is the autofocus system. The Expeed 7 processor brings subject recognition in the 3D tracking (which is borrowed from the very high end Z9), and it is amazingly accurate. I didn't shoot any sporting events, nor do I have a wildlife lens, but it had no issues tracking my kids running around. That's not to say it didn't miss focus at times, but far less than most camera's I've tested. 

Speaking of speed, the Zf can shoot at up to 11 frames per second when going for Raw images and up to 15 fps in JPEG mode. The Zf also offers a JPEG-only shooting mode that uses video 
to capture 30fps images similar to what you'll find in the Z9. The 11fps is going to be fine for 96 percent of people, but probably not wildlife, sports, and some other edge cases.

One very nice feature in the Zf is a black and white mode. There are two things that make this better than the black and white mode in most cameras. First, you can activate it with a switch under the right side dial. No hunting around in menus, you just flip the switch and flip it back when you're done. This enabled me to use black and white mode not just to record black and white images, but as a quick was to view a scene without color, which I find helps with composition. Sometimes elements you don't notice as distracting until later, become so when you view the scene in black and white. This is the number one thing I will miss about the Nikon Zf.

The Black and white images themselves are also better than most. You don't get Fujifilm-level image customization, but there are a few options. You can shoot in three modes, plain monochrome, "flat mono", and "deep tone mono". There isn't a huge difference between these three, and there's no way to customize the profiles the way you can in a Fujifilm camera, but it's a start. I'd like to see Nikon expand on this feature in future cameras.

While I did not expect it given the obvious nods to Nikon's film past, the Zf is a surprisingly capable video camera. It shoots up to 4K/60 using an APS-C size crop of the sensor. If you want to use the whole sensor you can get 4K/30. That's not going to wow video professionals, but again, it's good enough for most photographers who just want the possibility of shooting some 4K footage.

Overall I loved shooting with the Zf and were I in the market for a new camera this is the camera I would buy. That said, there are few things about Zf I truly dislike. The first is the card slots. There are two of them. One is a standard SD card slot supporting UHS II cards. The second is a MicroSD card slot that only supports UHS I. The slow speeds I could live with, but it's so difficult to get the microSD card in an out that I ended up just leaving it in and treating it as an emergency overflow. There should have been too matched full size SD card slots.

The other thing I thoroughly dislike is that it doesn't ship with a battery charger. A $2,000 camera shouldn't require you to buy a separate battery charger (for $80 retail no less). 

As noted above, the Zf wouldn't be my top pick for sports or wildlife, in part because of the autofocus and shooting speed, but also because the 24 megapixel sensor, while sharp, and delivering those characteristic Nikon colors, is probably not what wildlife and sports pros are after. The Z7 and especially the Z9, with their much higher megapixel sensors and faster autofocus are the cameras you want for wildlife and sports.

Nikon did not have one to send me, but I think the ideal lens for this camera is probably the new Nikkor Z 40mm f/2 Special Edition. This may be personal prejudice, but something about this camera cries out for a short, fixed-length lens—a fast 50, or in this case 40. It's going to balance well with the camera, and make a good reportage and street photography setup, both of which feel like ideal use cases for the Zf.







# Tuxedo InfinityBook Pro 14 - Gen8

These days mainstream PC makers like Dell and Lenovo offer laptops with Linux pre-installed. In most cases they're great laptops, but I've found that smaller manufacturers dedicated to creating hardware optimized for Linux often provide a better experience, especially if you run into issues with their machines. 

Perhaps the best example of this is System76 machines, which have consistently been among the best Linux laptops we've tested.

Tuxedo, out of Germany, is something like a European System76. The company makes a variety of laptops, but the one on that caught my eye was the InfinityBook Pro 14, which looks somewhat like a Macbook or Dell XPS and delivers an excellent Linux experience made all the better by some of the custom tools Tuxedo has developed.

## Hardware

The InfinityBook Pro 14 is a sleek, slim 14-inch laptop. At 17mm thick, it's not quite as thin as something like the Dell XPS 13, but it's not bulky by any means. It's reasonably small too at 12.2 inches by 8.2 inches (31 cm by 21.5 cm). It weighs 2.2 pounds. I carried it around comfortably in my Mountainsmith shoulder bag and it never felt overly heavy.

Two things immediately jumped out at me the first time I started up the InfinityBook. First the 2.8K screen is gorgeous. It's a 14-inch matte LCD with a 2880 by 1800 pixel resolution and it looks frankly amazing. The brightness can be cranked all the way to 400 nits and it supports the full sRGB color gamut, but it's really the matte part that got me. It's hard to find a matte display at this resolution and this one is the best I've seen lately.

The other thing I immediately noticed is the European-centric keyboard. Tuxedo sent me a German keyboard, which is fine, I touch type anyway so once I set the layout to US in the settings, the keyboard was mostly fine. Except for the Enter key. Most US keyboards use what's known as a ANSI design, which features a long thin Enter key. Tuxedo uses an ISO format keyboard, which has a taller Enter key with another key to the left of it. This is helpful for European users because it provides another accent key, but it's definitely something that will trip you up if you're used to the ANSI format keyboard. I got around this by remapping the extra accent key to Enter (using [Input Remapper](https://github.com/sezanzeb/input-remapper)) so that even if I mistyped I got the result I intended. 

I should note that otherwise the keyboard was quite nice. The keys are on the tall side for a chiclet-style keyboard and have a satisfying amount of travel. I was able to type just as fast as I do on my Thinkpad T14 (and the screen was much nicer than mine, did I mention that?)

Tuxedo also offers a wealth of [keyboard customization options](https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en/Individual-Keyboards.tuxedo). You can put pretty much anything you want on the keyboard, including nothing. You can also have your custom logo etched in the lid.

The InfinityBook Pro is built around an Intel Core i7-13700H. The model I tested had integrated graphics, but there is an option to configure your InfinityBook Pro with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 graphics card. I never felt the need for it, but if you plan to do anything more than light gaming, that's probably the way to go (although the screen refresh tops out at 90Hz). I did a good bit of video editing on this machine and while that did get the fan spinning, it was plenty fast enough for my needs.

Speaking of fans, the InfinityBook Pro 14 is equipped with a dual-fan cooling system, which is double what you'll get in most thin laptops of this design. It works well too, even exporting large 5.2K video footage down to 4K the laptop was never too hot to have in my lap.

As with most Linux laptops, battery life is good, but not quite what you can get with Macbooks. Doing our usual battery drain test (looping a 1080p video at 75 percent brightness) the InfinityBook Pro managed 6.5 hours. That said, in this case the results of our test are not very representative of real world battery life using the laptop. 

In the months I spent testing, I never once felt constrained by battery life. The display is plenty bright for web browsing and document work at about 40 percent, so that's generally where I left it unless I was editing photos or video. Average use, at 40 percent brightness, generally got me between 9 and 10 hours. A full day's work and some change. This can be further improved and tweaked using Tuxedo's excellent Control Center app (more on that below).

The InfinityBook offers a solid selection of ports. There's a Thunderbolt 4/USB-C port that can charge as well, a USB-C 3.2 Gen2 port, two USB-A ports, a full size SD card reader, HDMI port, headphone/mic port, and a separate power plug. The latter is the fastest way to charge up, though you can use a standard USB-C cord to charge. The catch with the latter is that you're going to want a 100 watt charger. My 60 watt charger worked, but under heavy load—exporting video for example—it could not keep up. Tuxedo's website has a whole page devoted to [the best settings to charge from USB-C](https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en/Charging-via-USB-C-power-supply-Power-Delivery-DC-In.tuxedo).

## Software

Like System76, Tuxedo laptops ship with a customized OS based on Ubuntu Linux, though they will run just about any Linux distribution (I tested Fedora to see if it worked and Arch because that's what I use most of the time). Tuxedo OS, which is built around the KDE desktop, provides a good, beginner-friendly Linux experience.  

Probably the best part about Tuxedo OS is the Tuxedo Control Center, which has some very good tools for managing power. There are a number of profiles provided, including a very low power option, which is what I used most of the time, along with some more performance-oriented profiles. What I really like though is that you can quickly and easily create your own profile, dialing in exactly that settings you need to optimize battery life for your particular workload. 

It does take some experimenting to figure out how much power you need (for example you can cap the number of cores the CPU uses) to get by, but once you do it's nice to have a custom low power and custom high power profiles. Set up a keyboard shortcut and you can flip between the two as needed. Even better, this app is available even if you opt to run a different OS. If you're using a Debian-based distro like Ubuntu, all you need to do is add the Tuxedo repository and install it. I used it in Arch via the AUR. 

One interesting thing I haven't encountered before is [Tuxedo's WebFAI](https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en/TUXEDO-WebFAI.tuxedo). The name is short for fully automated installation, and it provides about a dozen different distro/desktop combos all tweaked to work with Tuxedo's hardware. You can use them to create USB install sticks using an included app. The catch is that you can't download them over Wi-Fi. Tuxedo includes a USB to Ethernet adapter for laptops like the InfinityBook Pro (which doesn't have an Ethernet port). Unfortunately, as a Starlink user, I could not test this since Starlink does not offer wired connections (there is an adapter, but I do not have it). It is nevertheless a welcome feature that should make it easier for Linux newcomers to try different distros and desktops or reset a laptop to its factory settings.

As you may have noticed from the links I sprinkled through above, Tuxedo has excellent documentation. Just about every question you're likely to have has probably been answered in the company's [online documentation and FAQs](https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en/Infos/Help-Support.tuxedo). 

The InfinityBook Pro 14 is one of the best Linux laptops I've used. It stacks up very well against System76's Lemur Pro (our top Linux laptop for most people). The InfinityBook Pro offers a few things the System76 does not, including up to 64 gigabytes of RAM, and a nicer 2.8K screen. The Lemur Pro wins when it comes to storage though, with space for two drives and up to 8 terabytes of storage. 

The InfinityBook Pro 14 as I tested it, with an Intel i7 chip, 16 gigabytes of RAM and a 1-terabyte SSD is 1.226,05 Euro (including shipping to the US). That's less than a similarly specced Dell XPS Developer addition and gets you a laptop that's every bit as nice and powerful, as well as top-of-the-line Linux support.



# Ecoflow Glacier Refrigerator Review

When I first saw the Ecoflow Glacier, which was announced at last year's CES, my initial thought was, no one needs this. Well, not no one. I need it. But I live full time in a vintage RV. I am an outlier. Hardly anyone needs a portable, battery powered cooler. Or so I thought.

Not long after that I was at the beach in Florida when I saw two college age men lugging a massive ice maker, semi-portable fridge, and gas powered generator over the Florida dunes. I am wrong I thought. People do need the Ecoflow Glacier. It's not just me. The Ecoflow Glacier would have removed all the humor from the scene, but it always would have probably made this group's spring break a bit easier.

With an impressively large storage area, built-in ice makers, descent set of wheels, and an optional battery, the Ecoflow Glacier is everything you need to keep your food and drinks cool on a hot day at the beach, or a weekend in the wood. It probably still won't roll over sand dunes, but it's not that hard to carry.

## Features

EcoFlow targets the Glacier at full time RVers, vanlifers, and boat owners, but if you've got the space and money, it's a great replacement for an ice chest no matter where you live. It's a great option for weekend trips if you pick up the battery (sold separately), which will allow you to be off grid for up to 40 hours (less when ambient temps are higher). Throw in 200 watts of solar panels and you'll be able to have refrigeration nearly indefinitely so long as the sun is shining.

That said, out of the box the Ecoflow Glacier can't charge off solar, nor do you get the battery. It's still a fine fridge, and the price is competitive at $1,000 for the fridge. That gets you the unit itself, 12V and 120V chargers, a basket, and a divider. The divider allows you to split the main compartment into fridge and freezer sections. What's really nice is that when you're not using it the divider tucks neatly up into the lid, out of the way.

Everything about the Glacier is incredibly well designed. The seals are tight, but it's easy to open. It's light enough that I could carry it around easily enough with the included handles (it's 51 pounds empty). Once you load it up with food it gets harder, but two strong people can manage it. 

The control panel is well laid out and simple to use. I never had to read the manual. Speaking of which you don't get a manual, which I find disappointing, especially in a product aimed at people going off-grid. You can download the manual from Ecoflow, but I would have preferred paper.

The Glacier has a 38-liter capacity. For reference, that's about 60 12-ounce cans. You can use it as either a refrigerator or freezer, setting the temp to anywhere between 50°F to 32°F (10°C to 0°C) for the fridge mode, and 32° to -13°F (0°C -25°C) for the freezer mode. If you use the divider you end up with once section that's 23 liters and one that's 15. You can then set the temp independently, with either side as a freezer. The Glacier detects when the divider is in place, and automatically offers two temp settings on the screen, which is pretty slick. 

There is one catch to the divider. The left side can be as much as 77°F higher than the right, but the right side can only be 59°F higher than the left. This slightly strange limitation probably won't come up for most people since it's hard to come up with a scenario where you'd want that big of temperature difference. 

Temperature, along with everything else about the Glacier, can be controlled either through the app via Bluetooth, or you can add the unit to your Wi-Fi network. If you don't want to use the app you can always use the settings panel on the Glacier. There are nice big plus and minus buttons that make it really easy to control everything right at the unit. The app is excellent though and makes a nice option if you're planning to put it in a drawer in a van or RV.

There are some limitations to be aware of with the Glacier. It can't run directly off solar panels without the battery. You're not actually powering the Glacier, you're charging the batteries. Similarly you can't make ice off the 12V power supply. You have to have the battery (or be plugged into the wall). For these reasons I highly suggest you buy the battery. The battery also gives you a bidirectional 100W USB-C PD port, so you can charge your gadgets while also powering the fridge (powering both off solar if you have the panels).

## Testing

I tested the Ecoflow Glacier for over six months and found it delivers on all of Ecoflow's claims. It cools the fastest of any portable fridge I've ever tried, shockingly well in fact, and it held its internal temp in everything summer threw at it. 

For some context, I live full time on 12V refrigeration powered by solar panels. I have a [Vitrifrigo refrigerator](https://www.vitrifrigo.com/ww/en/) (which I don't recommend) and [an Engle freezer](https://engelcoolers.com/collections/powered-fridge-freezers/products/35-platinum-portable-car-fridge) (which I love, although it could be quieter). 

For most of last summer I swapped out the Engle with the Ecoflow Glacier. 

Inside the RV the Glacier very nearly reached it's efficiency claims of 40 hours off the 298 watt-hour battery. In ambient temps ranging from 75-85 Fahrenheit the Glacier's battery held up for 38 hours, which is impressive. 

When I put the Glacier outside in the direct sun in 90 degree ambient temps the battery was done after 36 hours. Still pretty impressive and even better it managed to hold its internal temps. I suppose you could call it toss up since the end result is possibly the same, but I'd rather have a dead battery than meat getting warmer without my realizing it. 

The thing that impressed me most about the Glacier is how fast it could cool down. I turned it off, left it in the sun on a 90 degree day, and then cranked it back on mid-afternoon. In 33 minutes the reading on the fridge said it was down to 40 degrees. A digital thermometer at the bottom inside didn't match that reading for another ten minutes, but either way that's very fast.

Then there's a ice maker. Frankly, I wish it wasn't there. I'd rather have a larger fridge space. That said, it was very fast, cranking out ice in around 15 minutes. It was a fun novelty, but you can't make enough fast enough to really justify the space it takes up. 

My main gripe about the Glacier is that the battery is Nickel Cobalt Manganese NCM, instead of a longer lasting chemistry like Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4). The NCM battery is much lighter, which is probably why Ecoflow used it, but it won't last nearly as long (typically NCM batteries start to degrade after 500-800 charge cycles. LiFePO4 batteries usually run more like 1000-1200 cycles). I do like that the battery is easily replaceable down the line should it stop holding a full charge, but it will cost you $300.

That's the main problem with the Glacier ecosystem, the costs add up. The basic Glacier is $999. The battery will set you back another $300. Wheels and rolling handle go for another $100. Throw in Ecoflow's 220 watt solar panel for around $500 and you're looking at $1,900. I've seen the Glacier and battery combo drop to around $1,000 so you can save a few hundred, but you're still looking at over $1,500 for that dream of off grid refrigeration. 

If you've got the money, the Ecoflow is 100 percent worth it. If you're living the van life with existing solar power this is by the far the most energy efficient cooler I've used. You get more refrigeration for less energy, which translates to more time off grid. Assuming the capacity meets your needs, this is the most energy efficient solution I've seen. 

If your primary use case for the Glacier is two to three day trips, cost-wise you're probably better off with a [great cooler]() like a Yeti. The Glacier is nice in these scenarios, but bring refrigeration into the great outdoors is going to cost you.









Let's be realistic here. 40 hours of claimed runtime from a 300Wh battery? As amazingly efficient as the Glacier is (in fact, it's one of the most efficient I have tested), the manufacturer's claim of 40 hours is a bit lofty. Is it achievable? Absolutely. In cooler, ambient temperatures/weather. Will it last that long in the hot, summer heat or in your car? In my tests, no. The most I was able to get was about 30 hours in 90F ambient weather, or about 23 hours when left in the car's trunk.

At about $1/Watt-hour, this battery is priced about right. It charges rapidly—in about 3-4 hours—with a USB-C PD 100W wall charger (I use Goal Zero's Sherpa 100 for portable charging, though I'd only be able to get this EF battery recharged by only about 33% with the Sherpa). Like many chargers, they start off fast and slow down as they reach about 80% so not to overcharge and overheat. I applaud EcoFlow in that they allow the extra battery to be recharged with a standard USB-C PD interface unlike some others who require the purchase of an expensive, proprietary wall charger to do so.

The battery could also be used as a standalone power bank to charge mobile devices with via the same USB-C PD port, including a laptop. However, I would not use the battery for that purpose as there are cheaper power banks you can use. I would reserve this EF battery for powering the EF Glacier it was designed for. Why? There is a limited lifetime on how long these batteries will last. See my next point.

Notable is that the battery uses Lithium-ion NMC and not Lithium-ion LiFePO4. This is an important distinction because EcoFlow's Delta power stations all use LiFePO4 for a variety of reasons.

Lithium-ion NMC batteries are lighter and smaller, but more volatile and pricier, less usable in extreme temperatures, and have a lower charge cycle count (battery lifetime) than LiFePO4.






Importantly, the Glacier cools down fast. EcoFlow claims it will drop the temperature from 86 degrees Fahrenheit (30 degrees Celsius) to 32 degrees Fahrenheit (0 degrees Celsius) in 15 minutes. In my battery test at home in a room measuring 64 degrees Fahrenheit (18 degrees Celsius), it took 17 minutes for the Glacier to cool down to my desired dual-zone temperatures of 42.8 degrees Fahrenheit (6 degrees Celsius) for the fridge and 14 degrees Fahrenheit (negative 10 degrees Celsius) for the freezer. The reported temperature on the built-in display and EcoFlow’s app aligned closely with my own thermometer, which measured 6 degrees Celsius and negative 9 degrees Celsius on the two sides. On the fridge side, I packed a jug of prechilled milk alongside bottles of room temperature tonic water, and in the freezer, I placed two bags of ice and half a loaf of bread. 

or anyone looking to bring modern luxuries into the great outdoors. Its list price starts at $1,099 / €1,199, but that’s before adding extras like a 297Wh battery for a day away from the grid, wheels and telescoping handle to make the 50.7-pound (23kg) unit more portable when its 38-liter (40-quart) capacity is maxed out with food and drinks, and up to 240W of solar panels to keep that beach party bumpin’ for as long as the sun will shine. 

# Zenbivy 25 Degree Original Bed 

The best days in life seem to start in a sleeping bag. Sure, you wake up sheathed in the annoying slickness of nylon, staring up at a wall of nylon, but once you free yourself from all that nylon, you're usually somewhere pretty awesome—the High Sierra, lakeside on Superior, in a tree house in Laos. Good things happen when you wake up in a sleeping bag.

I've never been fond of the sleeping bag part though. Who wants to sleep in something actually marketed under the name "mummy bag?"  

Fortunately I am not the only person who feels this way. The designers behind the Zenbivy sleep system came up with a solution—a modular sleeping system that's one part sleeping bag, one part Grandma's quilt, and very nearly the perfect way to sleep outdoors.

## It's Really That Good

The internet is filled with superlative reviews of the Zenbivy. It's almost universally praised as the "the best sleep I've ever had in the backcountry" and the like. I'll confess this made me skeptical. At this point in the life of the internet whenever I see something universally praised I assume that praise is being paid for by buying influencers. 

Except that with Zenbivy it's not influencers praising it, it's actual users on Reddit and reviewers I trust. Now, having spent a few weeks in the Zenbivy, I am here to join them. The 25 degree version of the Zenbivy original bed is the best sleep I've had in the backcountry, in a tent, and possibly just anywhere. 

I'm pretty sure if I'd spent anymore nights in the Zenbivy while leaving my wife and kids in typical mummy-style bags I'd be divorced and disowned. Fortunately I sent it back to Zenbivy in time to avert any drama. But I miss it. I want one. I may never go backpacking without one again.

Let's start with what makes the Zenbivy system so great: it's a sleeping bag, it's a quilt, it's a sheet, and thanks to its modularity it's several things in between as well. 

There are a few different Zenbivy systems, I tested the complete Zenbivy Bed, which uses the 2-piece quilt and sheet design common to all their systems, but also includes a sleeping pad, pillow and dry bag with compression straps. While the extras are nice to have, the core genius of the system is the fitted sheet and zippered quilt combo.

The Zenbivy system works by wrapping a fitted sheet over your sleeping pad. The sheet also has the hood portion of the sleeping bag attached to it. Then you lay the top quilt over that. This is the coolest, loosest way to use the system and how I did most of my testing since I sleep rather warm. However, should the temperature drop you can zip the quilt footbox up into a mummy bag configuration, and zip the upper sides to the bottom sheet. I did this on a couple of cooler nights in the Keewenaww peninsula, when the temp got close to freezing.

Most of the time though, I slept in quilt mode. Because the hood of the bag is part of the bottom sheet, you can keep quite warm even if you don't zip up the bag. It also eliminates the need to sleep in a hat, which I've never liked. 

As any ultralight hiker will tell you, quilts are nothing new. There are two things I think that make the Zenbivy special. The first and foremost is the sheet and fabric. The fabric on the sheet is a polyester 50D microfiber Pongee, which somehow manages to feel very close to regular sheets. Now, take that with some degree of salt. The fabric feels like home in the same sense that some food you wouldn't touch at home becomes pretty tasty when eaten fireside while you watch the reflection of alpenglow on peaks shimmer in an alpine lake.

Which is to say it's damn comfortable in the backcountry. 

What I didn't like as much was the sleeping pad that comes with the full Zenbivy bed. It's plenty comfortable, but it's also very heavy for what it is. I used it for a few car camping trips, but if you're primarily interested for backpacking I suggest skipping it in favor of something lighter. The sheet fit well on the Nemo Tensor, our [top pick ultralight pad](https://www.wired.com/story/best-sleeping-pads/#646e500ec859c4a1cdecc226), as well as a few other pads I was testing at the time. It's worth double checking the dimensions of your pad (if you already have one) against the sheet, but I did not run into any that gave me problems with the sheet.

The Zenbivy quilt and hood are 700 fill-power Hyperdry down, which uses a wax-based compound to achieve water resistants. That means there's no fluorocarbons, and Zenbivy meets the [Responsible Down Standard](https://textileexchange.org/responsible-down-standard/), so as far as possible the down is harvested in cruelty-free ways. I found the temp rating to be reasonably accurate, though I never experienced temps all the way down to 25 degrees. I also sleep very warm, so if you sleep cold, go with the 10 degree bag for three-season use.

Much as I love this system, I probably would not use it for winter or high altitude, severe weather trips. That's when you suck it up, crawl in the -40 mummy bag and console yourself with the thought of how good the world will look in the morning. 

The quilt portion of the Zenbivy bed uses very short baffles, which the company claims maximizes thermal efficiency by minimizing down-shift. I can vouch for the fact that the down doesn't shift around in use. The design uses vertical baffles around the upper body, which stops down from sliding off your shoulders in the night. From the waist down the quilt has horizontal baffles. As noted above, the foot box area, to just below the waist, can be zipped up, then drawn together with a drawstring and snapped in place to become the equivalent of a mummy bag foot box. The upper portion of the quilt zips to the bottom sheet for cooler nights. There's even an optional pillow that's quite comfortable and fits into the bottom sheet's hood.

The 25 degree bed in size large—which is what I tested and found fit my 5'10" frame well—weighs 2 pounds 14 ounces. The 10 degree bed size large (not tested) weighs 3 pounds 15 ounces. Neither will get an ultralight hikers excited, but I think both are acceptable considering how well I slept. Seriously, I have never slept even close to this well in the backcountry. 

I know what you're thinking, there must be something wrong with the Zenbivy? 

I thought the same thing. Then I spent pretty much the whole summer sleeping in it... and I really have nothing aside from the weight. My only other hesitation would be temperature, but that's easily dealt with by getting the warmer bag.

Even the price isn't bad compared the competition. At $329 for the sheet and large quilt (all you really need), that's actually less than most other backcountry quilts I've tested. Even throwing the pillow, and a compression dry bag only brings the total to $425—not cheap, but not any more than a good mummy bag.

If you hate sleeping bags, but want to spend more nights in the backcountry, this is the sleeping system you want.




# Insta360 Ace Pro Review

Just before the holidays Insta360 managed to sneak out two new action cameras that seem to have flown under the radar. The Ace and the Ace Pro are single lens action cameras along the lines of the GoPro Hero 12 and DJI Action 4. They sit in the middle of Insta360's tiny camera lineup, a little below the top end One RS with Leica mod, but above the tiny Go 3.

Unlike some hybrids, the Ace Pro is mostly the best of both worlds. For the right kind of videographer—think the action-oriented vlogging—this is the perfect camera.

## The Middle Way

The Ace Pro doesn't seem to be replacing Insta360's previous action cam, the One RS ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-one-rs-action-and-360-camera/)), which offers multiple lenses, making it both action camera and 360 camera. Instead the Ace Pro combines some elements from the One RS, along with some from the Go 3, to create what Insta360 seems preternaturally good creating: a hybrid camera that's functional, fun, and often better than the competition.

The Leica lens on the Ace Pro is reminiscent of the Leica "mod" for the One RS, though the Ace Pro lacks the 1-inch sensor found in One RS Leica mod. Instead there's a 1/1.3-inch sensor (more on that in a moment), which is paired with one of the best features from the Go 3, the flip up screen.

I will confess that I love my GoPro Hero 12. If I am shooting video, most of the time that's what I grab. It just works. I press a single button and get results I like. That said, ever since I used the Go 3 I've found myself drawn back to it. It is similarly simple and dependable, alas, it lacks 4K video. If only there were a Go 3 with 4K video.

In many ways the Ace Pro is that camera: it has 4K video—up to 8K in fact, but limited to 24 fps at that resolution—and it has the flip up screen in a waterproof, action camera body. It lacks the detachable camera-only unit of the Go 3, but for me the Leica lens and all the other features you'd expect from a rugged camera are more important than the tiny form factor.

The question then becomes, how well does the Ace Pro stack up against the GoPro Hero 12 or the DJI Action 4 ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/dji-osmo-action-4-camera/))? The answer is complicated. The good news is that you really can't go wrong with any of them. To figure out which is best for you, read on.

The standout features of the Ace Pro and the reason I would recommend it over the cheaper Ace camera is the Leica lens. It's a 16mm (full frame equivalent) wide-angle f/2.6 lens co-developed with Leica. Keep in mind that while Leica was involved, this is still very small lens. It's not a Noctilux. That said, in my experience testing this camera over the course of six weeks, the lens is every bit as good and very often superior to what you get with either the GoPro Hero 12 or the DJI Action 4. 

The Ace Pro uses a 1/1.3-inch sensor, which is what the Osmo Action 4 uses as well. I was unable to confirm whether these are the exact same sensor, but they're equal in size anyway. Whatever the case that's almost 50 percent larger than the GoPro Hero 12's sensor, but somewhat smaller than the 1-inch sensor of the One RS. 

As with the lens, the larger sensor, while larger, is still pretty small and the differences in image quality between any of these cameras is going to depend more on the exact shooting modes, lighting conditions, and other variables than sensor size. That said, shooting the Insta360 One RS, Ace Pro, and GoPro Hero 12 side-by-side did reveal how much more detail the One RS is capable of, despite being considerable older. If the highest video quality is what you're after, the One RS Leica mod remains the action cam to beat.

Sometimes you have to zoom in to see the difference though. What you see with the GoPro, Action 4, and One RS are more sharpening artifacts, which aren't there in the One RS footage.

How much this matter depends on what you do with your video.

If you're recording video that's primarily intended for Tikthk or Instagram this is all a moot point. The quality of video either of those services streams could be replicated with a pinhole camera. If that's your audience, get whatever camera is cheap and trending this week.

I found the footage from the Ace Pro to be largely indistinguishable from my GoPro Hero 12. Each has its strengths, the GoPro seems to handle extreme vibration and windy audio much better, while the Ace Pro had the edge in well-lit outdoor scenarios, thanks to excellent color rendition.

I almost never shoot anything but Log footage with my GoPro and do all my coloring in post production because I don't like the GoPro's color rendition defaults. With the Ace Pro I was pleasantly surprised to find the colors are quite good. They pop without appearing over saturated and skin tones of all shades rendered with true-to-life color. 

I should note though that there is no option to record log video on the Ace Pro, so if you don't like the color renditions there aren't a lot of ways around it.

Video resolution goes to 8K at 24 frames per second, which no other action cam can match. It's impressive on paper, and if you need to crop to 4K it might be handy, but the world is not currently set up for 8K footage. Go shoot 10 minutes worth and try opening it in Premiere or Final Cut if you don't believe me. There are also very few 8K monitors out there, and none that are affordable. Still, if you need 8K in an action cam, the Ace Pro is your only option.

What's slightly confusing to me is that the Ace Pro doesn't have a 5.3K or 6K setting like the non-Pro Ace camera. I'd love to see Insta360 add this down the road with a firmware update or the like. It's worth noting that Insta360 has a great track record of adding new features via firmware updates.

I did notice some softness in the corners of the Ace Pro footage at times when shooting in 4K. It's not particularly noticeable, in fact I would never have seen it were it not for some comments on Reddit talking about it. When I went back and looked, especially at footage in lower-light scenarios, like shooting indoors on a cloudy day, I did see it. I suspect this is not so much the lens as some of the in-camera processing, but I don't know for sure. Either way I would not call it a deal breaker unless you are a professional filmmaker.

Video stabilization in the Ace Pro likewise on par with it's rivals—better in some situations, not as good in others. For the most part, I was very happy with the Ace Pro's stabilization. It uses Insta360's FlowState formula which is also in the Go 3 and other Insta360 cameras. 

The fact is, it's a good time to be an action camera user because whether you buy and Ace Pro, Action 4, or GoPro Hero 12 you're going to have a camera that's capable of delivery excellent footage.

Overall I found audio in the Ace Pro to be the weakest link. It was entirely passable, especially for the vlogging use case, but it would very much benefit from an external microphone (as does any action camera, see our [guide the action cameras](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-action-cameras/) for some mic suggestions).

As I mentioned above though, the Ace Pro's flip out screen makes it much better for filming yourself. Yes the GoPro has a front screen, but it's tiny and nearly impossible to accurately frame with when you're staring into the sun. The Ace Pro's flip up screen is big, bright, and perfect for framing shots of yourself, which even I, much to my chagrin, find myself doing more and more these days. 

The flip screen also makes it easier to shoot from the waist. Naturally you can do this with any camera, but the ability to monitor it and see the results thanks to the screen, made me shoot this way more frequently. 

The Ace Pro does have a front screen, but it's just black-and-white, showing settings data, reminiscent of the GoPro Hero 9. Still in some ways this gives you the best of both worlds—you can see yourself in the big flip up, and see what all the video recording data as well. 

Insta360 is right to tout the Ace Pro's appeal to vloggers, this is by far the best action cam for vlogging. What I was less fond of is the way this shows in some of the settings. Out of the box the Ace Pro has the sharpening set to what I thought was 11, but turned out to not even be the highest setting. Footage sharpened to this degree looks fine on a mobile device, and presumably on Instagram and Tiktok, but if you want to do anything else with your video it looks like hot garbage. I strongly suggest dialing the sharpening back to medium or even low for all but the social video use case.

Battery life on the Ace Pro is good. I got 82 minutes recording 4K 30 footage, which isn't quite the 100 minutes Insta360 claims, but it's good enough to match the GoPro Hero 12 and DJI Action 4 (though the latter did manage a slightly better 98 minutes that resolution). Like the Action 4 the Ace Pro can juice back up in a hurry, grabbing an 80 percent charge in just 22 minutes. As with any action camera I suggest picking up an extra battery.

The one thing I don't like about the Ace Pro is that it's rather heavy at 6.3 ounces (180 grams). The Hero 12 Black weighs 5.4 ounces and the Action 4 is just 5.1 ounces. That might not sound like much, but it's noticeable when you hold them together and it's definitely going to be noticeable mounted to a helmet.

The final thing to weigh is the price. At $450, the Ace Pro is $50 more than a GoPro or Action 4. Whether the higher price is justified depends a lot on your use case. If you're primarily interested in a vanilla action cam, I would argue it's not worth the extra money. However, if you're looking for a hybrid camera that can handle some action sequences, some selfie video, and offers great color out of the box, then the extra $50 is well worth it. 





---





# Sony A7C R Review

Sony is no stranger to producing impressively small full-frame cameras. The original A7C took the innards of the larger A7 series and stuffed them in a more compact body. The tiny ZV-E1 went further, with a tiny body that looks positively comically attached to long lenses.

These smaller bodies always involve feature compromises. No one wants a heavy camera, but some features mean physical limitations. While the sensors may be the same, the viewfinders are smaller, and other features were sometimes absent. 

Enter the new Sony A7C R, which in my experience testing it for several weeks in North Carolina's Outer Banks, comes closest to providing everything you need in a camera and nothing you don't. The impressively small body is nevertheless comfortable to hold and carry around all day and has most of the features even a pro would want.

## All Things Great and Small

Two years ago I tested the original Sony A7C and found that, while the compact, rangefinder-style body was perfect for traveling, the viewfinder was too small and the tk sensor was a step back from the 40MP sensor in my Sony A7RII. It was tantalizingly close to everything I wanted, but not quite there.

The A7C R solves at least the sensor problem, and gets much closer to the ideal travel camera. It's still plenty small at 4.9 inches wide, 2.8 inches tall, and 2.5 inches deep. It weighs just under a pound at 15.2 ounces (430 grams) for the body. With the FE 28-60mm F4-5.6 lens Sony sent along for testing the total weight came to 21.1 ounces.

The 61 megapixel CMOS sensor in the new A7C R is the same sensor you'll find in Sony's A7R V, released a few months before the A7C R. It's one of the best sensor's I've tested, capable of excellent detail, with great dynamic range. The low light performance is impressive as well, with very little noise even well up into the 5 digit ISO options (the A7C R can shoot all the way up to ISO 102,400, but as you would expect, those images are very noisy). 

There's nothing about this sensor that I can think of complaining about. It's fantastic. The resulting RAW files are large—around 65 MB per image in my testing, with low light images being the largest. You can get this down to around 45 MB per image if you opt for compressed RAW, but at the time I was testing no software could open these files (Lightroom and others have since added support).

Along with the impressive sensor comes the same processing engine you'll find in the A7R V, which means improved subject detection, including human body, face, eye detection, along with body and eye for animals, and then general recognition of insects, vehicles, and aircraft. While all that this is useful for photography, where it really shines is in video. The A7C R very rarely missed focus in video and offers (along with the A7R V) some of the best video autofocus currently on the market.

While there are some similarities to the A7R V, they're not the same camera by any means. The A7C R isn't nearly as capable at video. The A7CR can shoot up to 4K/60p with a roughly 1.2x crop, but that's as high as the resolution gets. That's pretty good for such a compact body, but it will be noiser footage than you'd get from the oversampled footage of Sony's larger cameras like the A7R V and A9. 

Suffice to say that if you are looking for primarily a video camera, you're better off with the A7R V. The size trade off isn't worth losing the sharper, higher quality oversampled video that camera offers.

If, however, you're primarily wanting to shoot still images, but have solid video capabilities should you need them, the A7C R will get the job done.

The other thing I wanted after using the original A7C is a larger viewfinder and on this score, the A7C R does not really deliver. It's better than its predecessor, which was virtually unusable for me, but it's still cramped and low-resolution (2.36M dots) relative to its competition, both within the Sony lineup and the larger camera market. 

The good news is that the brightness has been cranked up and what you see is clearer than it was in the original, with a slightly higher 0.7x magnification. It's a step up from the original's 0.59x magnification, but I find even the A7C R's viewfinder too small to be comfortable. It works, I can compose well enough, but it's not a joy to use by any means. This is part of the trade off that comes with size, and to be fair, there isn't anything better out there for this size camera. 

The rest of the body is well thought out. The camera is comfortable to hold and operate with one hand. I found it very easy to use and the camera never got in my way when I was shooting. The hand grip matches roughly what you get with the rest of Sony's full frame alpha 7 cameras. There's a mode dial on top, making it simple to move between Manual, Shutter-priority, Aperture-priority, and Program modes, along with three programmable presets. I found I could adjust this dial easily with either forefinger or thumb, but it remains stiff enought that it never changed in my bag. There's dedicated video record button just back from the shutter button and switch that moves between video and still modes.

The rest of the button set is on the back of the body and offers everything you'd expect in the modern mirrorless camera. There's an impressive amount of customization available too so you can set up the buttons pretty much as you want them. There's no AF joystick-type controller like you'll find on some cameras, but you can use the rear touchscreen or directional pad to accomplish the same thing.

The rear screen is fully articulating, meaning you can position it just about anywhere, including my favorite: off, screen facing inward.

Battery life is great, Sony claims 470 image using the LCD and 520 if you stick to the EVF. I found the EVF claim to be accurate, I did not shoot with the LCD enough to test that aspect. Pros will not like that there's only one SD card slot, but I've yet to have an issue with just one card. Pardon me while I knock on wood. The A7C R supports a UHS-II SD card, which you'll need to handle the 4K/60p video.

The Sony A7C R is well balanced with the FE 28-60mm F4-5.6 lens Sony provided. I also shot extensively with my own lenses, mostly legacy Nikon glass which worked great with an adapter. 

I spent two weeks testing the A7C R and found it very capable. There's something a little uninspiring about the design, but that's true of all of Sony's cameras. They're like Lenovo laptops, no one buys them because they're cutting edge, they buy them because they're great devices that have the good sense to get out of your way and let you do what you want to do. 

If you want a lightweight kit and don't need the absolute top of the line features that only pro photographer's really need, the Sony A7C R is a fantastic camera. The viewfinder isn't the best—I'd suggest trying it out in person at your local camera shop to see what you think of it before you invest—but if you can get that past that this is an impressive camera in an impressively tiny package.



---




# System76 Lemur Pro Review


After years of searching for the perfect laptop, including making this search part of my full time job, I have given up. I am sorry to say, there is no such thing as the perfect laptop. There are too many variable at play, to many use cases to handle. All laptops have trade offs.

There are, however, some that come close enough to perfect, and System76's updated Lemur Pro is about as close to the perfect Linux laptop as you're likely to get. Part of that revolves around the simple, clean design, but much of it comes from the customization options available and the work System76 has put into the firmware and software that ships with the Lemur Pro.

## Hardware

System76's Lemur Pro line is the company's thin and light laptop. It's not a gaming rig, nor would it be my top pick for a dedicated video editing station (that said, I edited a ton of video on it, it's certainly capable, if not optimized for video). However, if you need a solid Linux laptop that's light enough to carry with you everywhere you go, offers a ton of expansion possibilities and just works, the Lemur Pro is almost everything I've been looking for in a Linux laptop.

The Lemur Pro is a 14-inch all-around laptop that's thin and lightweight. At just 2.5 pounds (1.15 kg) and .54 inches (1.65 cm) thick, you can slide the Lemur Pro in a small bag and forget you're even carrying it. System76 makes larger, more powerful laptops if you need that (see our guide to Linux laptops for our favorites), the Lemur Pro is the ultraportable in the line up.

The latest iteration of the Lemur Pro arrived earlier this year, with new, 13th generation Intel chips inside. The Lemur Pro starts at $1,150 for an Intel i5 machines with 8 gigabytes of RAM and 256-gigabyte SSD. The model I tested had a 5 GHz Intel Core i7 chip (1355U), 16 gigabytes of RAM, a 250-gigabyte SSD OS drive and a 1-terabyte SSD for storage. That brought the price to $1,474.

The price is reasonable for the hardware, perhaps a tad bit high, but part of what you're paying for is System76's excellent support for Linux, which is going to hard to come by in cheaper options. The Lemur Pro base model is also user upgradeable, so if you already have a couple PCIe SSDs and some RAM lying about you could upgrade the Lemur yourself.

Performance was very good for not having a dedicated graphics card. I happened to also be testing the GoPro Hero 12 (8/10, WIRED Recommends) while I had the Lemur Pro and did most of my video editing using it. While full time video editors would be better off with a dedicated graphics card, I was actually impressed with how well the Lemur Pro performed. I never had any lagging in the playback of 5.3K clips and rendering was quite speedy as well.

Where the Lemur Pro really shines is battery life. System76 claims 14 hours, I managed 11 hours in our battery drain test (looping a 1080p video) and in real world use I frequently eked out over 12 hours. That's off the charts better than any other Linux laptop I've tested recently. 

The Lemur Pro ships with a 65W barrel-type charger, but fortunately is also capable of USB-C charging (65W as well). I primarily charged it using my [Satechi wall charger](https://www.amazon.com/Satechi-108W-USB-C-3-Port-Charger/dp/B09888WNM4). Speaking of ports the Lemur Pro has one USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-A, one USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A, one Thunderbolt 4 port, a microSD card reader, and an HDMI port. There's also a 1080p webcam that offered decent video quality on Zoom calls.

## Pop_Os and Firmware

In the interests of testing what new users would get, I stuck with System76's Pop!_OS rather than installing my favorite Linux distro and desktop. I can't stand the Gnome Desktop, which Pop!_OS is based on, but System76 has gone through and customized, changed, and fixed everything that bugs me about Gnome and rendered it a usable experience. It's good enough that I felt no need to change anything (I did customize things to my liking). It's a testament to System76's design chops that they've been able to take something I can't stand and turn it into something I was happy to use. I never did install Arch (though I am sure it would have worked fine).



# GoPro Hero 12 Review

***

GoPro is to the action camera, what Kleenex is to tissues. I can't tell you how many people I have seen with GoPro knock-offs nevertheless refer to their camera as their "GoPro." For the average person looking to document their life, any small camera is a GoPro. 

While GoPro dominates the market mind share, its competitors—like DJI, Insta360, and others—are pushing the action camera in [new and interesting directions](https://www.wired.com/review/dji-osmo-action-4-camera/) with useful features like magnetic mounting systems, larger sensors, and simpler menus, while the GoPro Hero 12 offers none of those things. 

Despite that, when I head out the door I still grab my GoPro ahead of every other small camera I have and Hero 12 has been a good reminder why: it's everything that made the Hero camera great, but better.

## Incremental 

Side by side, the only visible difference between last year's Hero 11 Black ([8/10, WIRED Review](https://www.wired.com/review/gopro-hero-11-black/)) and this year's Hero 12 Black is the blue number on the side and a bit of blue speckling on the outer skin. Otherwise the body is the same, meaning all your accessories, lens filters, mods, and add-ons will work with the Hero 12. 

Even inside the two camera's aren't that different. The GoPro Hero 12 Black uses the same 8:7 aspect ratio sensor and GP2 processor as its predecessor, the Hero 11 . 

That might make this camera a tough sell for some. Indeed, if you are happy with your Hero 11, there is no need to upgrade. That said, there are several new features in the Hero 12 that make it a must-have upgrade: longer runtimes (with less overheating), 10-bit Log video, time code syncing, and a standard tripod mount.

The internet is rife with speculation that the GoPro Hero 12 is a firmware upgrade to the Hero 11. I have no insider information on that and I don't think it matters. GoPro improved the Hero 11, how they did doesn't really interest me. What interests me is that I have been shooting with Hero series cameras since the Hero 5 Black and the Hero 12 Black is the first model that has never overheated. 

If you shoot with your GoPro the way you're supposed to, you know strapped to your helmet or your bike or some other fast-moving thing with good airflow around it you've probably never overheated it. I have never had any problem with those shooting scenarios either. Unfortunately for me, I shoot a lot of video with my GoPro perched on a dashboard, in the direct sun, with almost no air at all moving around it. Previous models rarely shot more than 15 minutes in more demanding modes, like 5.3K 30p or 4K 120p. 

I've been shooting with the Hero 12 this way for over a month now and it has not overheated once. Not once. Battery run time is significantly longer as well, again this was primarily noticeable to me when shooting in modes that really strain the camera, especially 4K 120p.

It's worth noting that some of that improved battery time might come from a feature that's been removed, namely GPS. I never used the GPS feature, and GoPro says they removed it because their data said less than 1 percent of users actually used it. Predictably those 1 percent are outraged though. GoPro wouldn't give me any specifics, but I would not be surprised to see the GPS features added to a new version of the remote. This is the route that both DJI and Insta360 have gone.

There are several other new features in the Hero 12 that will be welcome to anyone who uses their GoPro in combination with other cameras. The big one is Timecode sync. Timecode sync ensures that your GoPro footage can be accurately lined up with other GoPros or any external audio or camera shots. Technically timecode sync is available in the Hero 10 and 11 if you use the GoPro Labs firmware, but in my experience it doesn't work well. That's changed with the Her0 12 where it is formally supported and works. This probably isn't something most people need, but it's nice to have it if you do.

Another features pros will like is support for Log video in for form of PG-Log, which gets you 10-bit "raw" video for maximum dynamic range and the widest range of post-production coloring and adjustments. There's also support for a new HDR video, in both 5.3K and 4K resolutions. It's a tone mapper, not actual HDR footage designed for an HDR display, and I honestly can't tell the difference between HDR and normal most of the time. The main thing I noticed was the highlights aren't quite a crushed and the sky tended to a more intense blue.

There's a new stabilization features as well, which GoPro calls AutoBoost. This is in addition to GoPro's existing stabilization features and what it tries to do is avoid cropping to get the stabilization. When AutoBoost is turned on the camera attmpts to maintain the same stabilization performance, but expand or contract the crop dynamically. This features I did notice, but mainly when shooting side-by-side with the Hero 11. In practice you might not see it, but it does produce smoother, better footage the previous models.




# DJI Osmo Action 4 Review

DJI's latest version of its action camera, the Osmo Action 4, looks like its predecessor, but under the skin there are plenty of upgrades that make it a worthy GoPro competitor. The Action 4 features a new, larger sensor, new lens, and more support for professional settings like Log video capture. 

Sticking with the magnetic mount system of the previous model, while improving the sensor, means the Action 4 one-ups the GoPro on a few fronts, including just how easy it is to move the Action 4 from mount to mount. 

## What's New

DJI's Action 4 arrived just before the new GoPro Hero 12. I will have a full review of that camera ready soon, but in the mean time I will note where I think the Hero 12 comes out ahead and where I think the Action 4 is a better choice.

DJI's announcement for the Action 4 touts the new 1/1.3-inch sensor, which the company claims offers better low-light image capture. While the larger sensor does mean more light gathering capability (and it's larger than both the previous Action 3, and the just announced GoPro Hero 12), I found the results to be a mixed bag.

Shooting side-by-side sunrise video I found that the GoPro came up with a better exposure. I matched it with the DJI, but I had to resort to manual settings, which you're never going to do in most scenarios where an action camera make sense—e.g. hiking, biking, climbing, etc. That said, in actual darkness, shooting around the campfire I did much prefer the results of the Action 4. Not only did it reveal more detail in the shadows, but I found the color rendering—always tricky when you mix firelight and electric light—to be much better than what I got from the Hero 12.

Suffice to say that in some scenarios the Action 4 wins, and in others the GoPro. Don't read too much into low light performance though. While DJI's sensor is an improvement, no sensor this small really does very well at night. Most of the time, in daylight, I found the performance of the two cameras very similar.

Most of the time I try to shoot Log video and do my color grading in software. The Action 4 can shoot in 10-bit D-Log M which gives you higher dynamic range footage, which then allows more color correction flexibility when editing. This trumps the Hero 11, which does not support true Log recording. But, to complicate your buying decision, the Hero 12 does support Log recording.

I should also note that, while the design of the Action 4 is essentially unchanged from that of the Action 3, there is one tiny, but important, difference: the lens protector thread size has changed. That means the lens protectors are not interchangable and any filters that rely on that thread may also be incompatible with the new model. On the plus side, the rubber ring that was always falling off the Action 3 is now permanently affixed in place on the Action 4.

Other new features include some improvements to audio recording in windy situations, support for the InvisiStick in all video modes. The InvisiStick is DJI's very long selfie stick that the camera will automatically edit out of your footage, much like 360 cameras do.

A small new feature that I really like is the ability to customize sharpening and noise reduction by a number system rather than just a series of presets.

## Where the Action 4 is Better Than a GoPro

Perhaps the most overlooked part action cameras is how easy they are to use on a day to day basis when you're shooting with them. It's here that DJI and it's quick release magnetic mounting system just blows GoPro out of the water. The magnetic mount is genius, I said it in my review of the Action 3 and I'll say it again, GoPro has to come up with a magnetic mount system. Unfortunately it still has not even with the brand new Hero 12. 

DJI hasn't changed a thing about the mount system so far as I could tell and that's great news. This mounting system is rock solid, dead simple to use, and makes moving your camera between mounts so simple. Unfortunately I actually own a GoPro so after the Action 4 goes back I have to return to unscrewing my camera every time I want to switch mounts (there are third-party magnetic mounts out there for the GoPro, [like this one](https://www.ulanzi.com/products/falcam-f22-gopro-mount-to-dji-action-mount-magnetic-base-3235), but I have not tested them).

The other ease of use feature I really like on the Action 4 is the front touchscreen. When you mount the camera facing you, it's easy to switch modes or tweak setting because the front screen is also a touchscreen and works just like the back screen. Not so on the Hero 11 or 12 where you need to turn the camera around to access settings.

Finally, the other place the Action 4 is nicer to use on an everyday basis is the dedicated Q or quick settings button. This button brings up a settings screen that allows you to quickly change the settings of the camera. I do mean settings too, you can program in all your favorite modes and with a single button press move from shooting 4K 60 video footage to a custom photo profile (or any other custom profile/shooting mode you want). It's the ability to jump between both shooting modes that the GoPro lacks. With the GoPro you have to first switch shooting modes, then switch profiles within that mode.

## Where a GoPro is Better Than the Action 4

Despite how much I like using the Action 4 on an everyday basis, there are several places the GoPro Hero 11 and 12 outshine the Action 4. The big one is the GoPro's ability to shoot 5K 60 frames per second video. I like 5K not for its resolution, but for the ability to crop footage after the fact and still have 4K video. The other use I have for 5.3K footage is grabbing still images from it, with the GoPro those still are nice, 24 megapixel images. Still, I recognize these may be edge use cases to most people.

The other place GoPro comes out ahead in my side-by-side testing is still photography. The RAW files have much better dynamic range and are sharper. Again though, most people are probably shooting video primarily so this made not be a factor in your decision.

Now the hard part, should you get an Action 4 or a GoPro Hero 12? This hard. Or easy, depending on how you look at it. Both the Action 4 and the GoPro Hero 12 are great cameras. No matter which one you get you're going to be capable of producing amazing video. 

The Action 4 has a better mounting system, better menu system, better battery life, and it recharges faster. That said, I ended up liking the footage from the Hero 12 more in most of my side-by-side tests (the exception, noted above, was night footage). The other place the Action 4 has an advantage is that the footage will integrate better with DJI drone footage, and it pairs nice with DJI's microphone ([8/10 WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/dji-mic/)), which is one of the best mics I've tested. Between the three of those you really have a well-integrated ecosystem of moviemaking tools that a GoPro alone can't match.

In the end, I think if you have never owned an action camera before, the Action 4 is the better choice for its superior ease-of-use, thanks to things like the Q menu system, and the front touch screen. If you already have a GoPro and want a second camera, or just like the GoPro's color rendering, then sticking with the Hero line probably makes more sense. 




# Superkop Manual Espresso Machine Review

Nothing makes me happier than when someone comes along and clears away all the technological clutter from a device to reveal it's simple mechanical underpinnings. When the result also looks better and works better than it's competitors, that's tech(less) nirvana, which is exactly what the Superkop espresso machine manages to achieve.

The Superkop is an entirely manual espresso maker that needs nothing more than hot water and espresso-ground coffee to brew up a delicious shot. There's no touchscreen, no needless phone app, no digital nonsense, just the essential element you need: great espresso. 

Since it doesn't require anything more than hot water, when the zombie apocalypse comes, you can heat that water over a trashcan fire, brew that delicious shot, and calmly look up from your still-functional Superkop at the impending Zombie horde and say, "bring it."

## Keep It Simple

Hand pump espresso machines aren’t a new idea. They are in fact the original idea.

They are still available today, mostly in the form of expensive, pro-level machines. La Pavoni is probably the best known brand, but most of its machines (and most modern pump machines) still require electricity (usually the heat the water). Go back further in history and you'll find very large, very complex hand pump machines designed for coffee shops. They’re amazing, often beautiful machines—some of them are Art Nouveau era masterworks—but not the sort of thing most of us can afford in our homes.

The most practical hand pump machine I've used (and our top pick in [our guide to portable espresso](https://www.wired.com/story/best-portable-espresso-makers/)) is the [Flair Signature ($239)](https://www.amazon.com/Flair-Signature-Espresso-Maker-Bundle/dp/B07B2JPNW8/), which is hand pumped, but uses your body to provide the pressure necessary to achieve the 9 to 11 bars required for espresso. This works if you’re able to provide that pressure, but it is the one weakness of the Flair—you need to be strong enough to get that pressure.

The Superkop steps into this market with a strong design aesthetic, albeit more industrial than Art Nouveau, but striking nonetheless and a clever way around the pressure problem. It uses a ratcheting mechanism in the handle to keep the pressure constant as you raise and lower the pump arm. It takes six pulls to get a full [Lungo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lungo) shot, but you don't need to pull hard at all. 

At the same time, you do have some control over how much pressure is applied. You can regulate the pressure by the speed of your pumping, and this, combined with the volume of beans and how finely you grind them are the tools you have to control the finished result. And don't worry, there is an overpressure value that releases at 20 bars so you won't break anything. That said, try as I might, I could not get this release to trigger so I would not worry about building up too much pressure.

As with all espresso machines, there is a learning curve to getting it where you want it. Use a scale to keep track of how much you're using and tweak your grind in small increments until you get it where you want it.

After the usual fiddling with the grind, tamping pressure, and amount of grounds, I was able to consistently pull excellent shots with the Superkop. They were in fact, better than what I've been able to get from the Flair Signature, and better than most consumer-level home espresso machines, in part I think because of the consistent, constant pressure the Superkop achieves.

Is it better than the espresso at your local coffee shop? That depends on too many factors to answer for everyone, but in many cases, yes, definitely. If you happen to live by a shop where the baristas really know what they're doing, maybe not, but in my experience traveling around the US for the last seven years, those are few and far between (if you have a good shop near you, [drop me a line](https://luxagraf.net/contact) so I can stop in if I'm in the area).

What I like about the Superkop goes beyond coffee though. This is a machine built to last a lifetime. Or more if you know what you're doing. It's very well made, out of solid metal (aluminum and stainless steel) and wood. The lever and portafilter are made of polished stainless, and the portafilter is the industry standard diameter of 58mm, which means you can swap it out with any other portafilter. 

The only plastic part is the water cup, which is made from polycarbonate plastic, in part because it holds you hot water at temperature without needing to be pre-heating (as you need to do with the Flair and other machines). 

The weak points, from a repair perspective, are the internal seals along with the gas spring, which causes the brewing piston to slide back up. Superkop sells replacement springs and seals, but says it does not expect them to need replacing for at least five years.

I should also note that, while I tested the standalone version which features a heavy wooden base, there is an optional wall mounting shelf if you have more wall space than counter space. I did not test it in this configuration, but I would want to make sure I could wall mount it into some studs or other strong support element. 

My final thoughts on the Superkop are that I wish there were more things like this, clever, mechanical things that solve problems without going digital. Should you buy one? They're definitely not cheap, but if you love espresso and want something that looks good in your home and will likely last a lifetime, the Superkop is a great machine.


# Cobb Grill Review

The Cobb Grill is much more than a grill. It's a grill and a oven, with a saute pan, chicken rack, flattop plate, and (optional) rotisserie that packs up like a stack of tetris blocks into a package you can easily carry over your shoulder. 

Don't let the grill in the name fool you, the Cobb is a summer cooking extravaganza in a bag and well worth the money if you want to up your camp cooking game.

## Corncob History

It's been six years since I had an oven. Technically the [1969 RV I call home](https://luxagraf.net/essay/turn-your-own-wrenches) does have an oven. It just doesn't work, which makes me effectively ovenless. In the last six years I've [used a waffle iron as an oven](https://www.wired.com/story/waffle-maker-rants-and-raves/), and learned to cook with a dutch oven over coals. The Dutch oven experience has given me a new appreciation for older methods of cooking. That's part of why, when Cobb Grills reached out to ask if I was interested in trying their cooker, I jumped at the opportunity.

While the Cobb is much more than a grill, I understand why that name is necessary in the United States where we never see people cooking over the kinds of small clay grill/ovens that the Cobb cooker was inspired by. The Cobb hails from South Africa and was originally made of clay (like most rural stoves around the world) to burn corn cobs (hence the name). That one grew into the Eco Cobb, an all-metal stove based on the clay version.

Fast-forward some years and the Cobb has evolved into a light weight cooker that pack up ingeniously to give you a portable cooking device that can grill, bake, saute, smoke, fry, and boil in a package that's smaller than most of the portable grills in our guide.

At first glance I was set to dislike the Cobb because it arrived with a box of custom charcoal and there is nothing I dislike in a grill so much as custom charcoal. What a blatant money grab. Fortunately, while the Cobb does make custom charcoal it calls Cobblestones—bonus points for that pun—they aren't necessary and after a couple of test cooks with the Cobblestones, I did everything else over brickets or coals scooped from a fire. It is a little trickier to get the heat precisely the way you want it with coals, but brickets I found worked fine and were simple to use.

## Cooking on the Cobb

There are several models of the Cobb, I tested the [Premiere Plus](https://www.cobbgrillamerica.com/shop/portable-grills/cobb-premier-plus-grill), which costs $235, and includes some extras like the Griddle+ and Roast Rack. I found the Premiere plus to be just big enough to feed five, though things did get crowded at times. The cooking surface of the Cobb Pr12″ diameter cook surfaceCobb also makes the Supreme, which is larger and would be a better pick if you're looking to cook for more than four on a regular basis.

The design is similar in all the models though. There's an outer wire shell, that holds the "moat", which catches fat drippings, or can be filled with liquids (wine for example) to season whatever you're cooking. I often threw some potatoes in the moat and let them cook in the fat of whatever was grilling above. The results were outstanding.

To be honest, I didn't grill that much on the Cobb. It works as a grill, but it lacks one component I consider essential: direct flame. The lack of direct flame does eliminates flare ups and smokiness (the Cobb is mostly smoke-free) but you don't get that nice sear and flavor of cooking over flame. To me that's fine. I already have a portable grill I love. What I don't have is an oven, so I did a lot of baking, roasting, even sauteing, on the Cobb. I made lamb and feta flatbread, roasted whole chickens, baked cobblers and crisps with fresh summer fruits, and even tried stir frying up some Yakisoba. 

The Cobb makes an excellent oven. Using a Cobblestone I was regularly able to get two and half hours of 300+ degree heat, more than enough to bake dinner and some dessert in most cases. After some experimenting I found that about 8-10 briquettes reliably generated about the same heat for about two hours. The hardest part of using briquettes was getting them started. I found that a bit paper grocery bag or egg carton below the charcoal basket did the trick, though I sometimes had to relight it several times. 

True to its claims the outside of the Cobb never got hot, or really even warm to the touch. The lid did sometimes get hot, but never as hot as I would have expected. The only thing I found awkward was what to do with the charcoal that was still burning after dinner was done. While the outside doesn't get hot, the inside obviously does and if you want to pack things up after you're done eating, you'll want to put out the Cobb right away because it does take a while to cool down. It wasn't any worse than any other grill—except maybe the Nomad, which can almost be transported hot—but it is something to keep in mind if you're taking the Cobb to the park or the beach for a cookout.

Cleaning the Cobb in the field is a little awkward, especially if you used the moat with some kind of liquid (or cooked something very fatty). If you're near water you can pour some in while it's still hot and then wipe it out when it cools. The good news is that if you can just get it home the Cobb is dishwasher safe and pretty easy to clean up in the sink too. 

While everything I made on the Cobb came out delicious, it would not be my top pick of ways to cook a stir fry or to smoke. It just doesn't get quite hot enough to truly stir fry, and it isn't quite big enough for more than a single rack of rib or small brisket. Everything else though, it handled quite well and the included cookbook features a bevy of great recipes from beer can chicken to Paella. 






# Insta360 Go 3 Review

The biggest change in the Go 3 is arguably not the Go itself but the charging case. The new charging case, which Insta360 calls the action pod, has buttons to control the camera and a small, flippable screen for monitoring your shots. When you drop the Go 3 into the Action Pod you essentially turn your Go 3 into a GoPro.

Compared to its predecessor the Go 3 camera is slightly bulkier. It's 9 grams heavier and a few millimeters larger in every direction, but unless you hold the two side-by-side you probably won't notice the size increase. It is worth noting that the size difference is enough to mean that any accessories for the Go 2 probably won't work with the Go 3 without some modifications. That said, the lens cover is interchangable so if you bought neutral density or other filters, those will work fine on the Go 3.


What's totally different is the charging case, which has morphed from a charging case to a kind of action camera base station. The Go 3 attaches to the Action Pod base via a very strong magnet, and then locks into place with two clips, one on each side. There's a button on the side of the case that releases the clips and then you can pull the camera unit off the magnet. In my testing the connection proved absolutely rock solid, including while riding around some very washboard dirt roads on the roof of my Wagoneer. 

The Action Pod serves three purposes, it's a charging unit, battery pack, and remote monitor. The latter is accomplished via a new 2.2 inch touchscreen, which can flip over the top to face forward so you can frame those vlogging shots. The screen is a huge leap forward over the Go 2's tiny offering and is even larger and easier to use than the screen on Insta360's action camera flagship, the One RS ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-one-rs-action-and-360-camera/))

The Go 3 comes with some nice accessories, all of which revolve around the magnetic mounting system, which means the mounts all work with either just the camera or the full Action Pod. There's a pivot mount with a reusable sticky base, pendant mount for chest-level POV shots, the easy clip, which is designed to clip to the brim of your hat. I primarily used the sticky base and pendant, though I also often just put it in my mouth, which works surprisingly well for a POV shot when you're, for example, paddleboarding.

The Go 3 sports the same 1/2.3 inch sensor and 11mm f/2.2 lens with a 134 degree field of view (for reference the GoPro Hero 11 Black's widest field of view is 122 degrees). Despite using the same sensor, the Go 3 adds quite a few new shooting modes, including stills and timelapse, as well as a higher resolution video, which can now be shot at up to 2.7K at 30 frames per second.

In addition to the standard 2.7k video, which is primarily what I ended up shooting, there is a Freeframe video mode, similar to what the Go 2 used. In this mode you can shoot the full field of view, but at a slightly lower 1440p resolution, and then crop when you're editing. This allows you to slightly reframe the scene after the fact. Not as extensively as a 360 degree camera, but you can center things you might not have noticed when you were shoot. Freeframe mode also means you can shoot one video and crop to 9:16, 16:9, 1:1, or whatever video dictates you need to follow. But remember, a kitten dies every time you pollute the world with vertical video.

I particularly liked timelapse mode, which has two very nice features. First is can be saved as either a video (for quick uploading to the web) or as a series of images (including RAW files) for further processing. There's also a timer option to turn the camera on at a pre-determined time, handy if you want to shoot some star trails but don't want to stay up all night to do it.

There's now two microphones on the Go 3 camera, and a new wind suppression setting that actually works quite well. Together these mean much, much better sound than what the Go 2 was capable of recording. 

In another step up from the Go 2, there are now no limits on clip length (other than battery life, which is quite good, around 45 minutes for just the camera, more when it's in the Pod). The notorious overheating issues of the Go 2 have been solved. Mostly. I have seen some reports around the web of the Go 3 overheating, but in months of testing I never encountered any heat issues, including during very long (30 minute) film times, which is a stark contrast to the Go 2, which seemed to overheat if you stared at it for too long.

Other new features include a slew of color profiles, with options customized for biking, urban landscapes, night, snow, and so on. I mostly shot in flat because I prefer to do my own color grading when editing, but it's nice to have plenty of options when you're shooting something that you don't plan to edit extensively.

Speaking of editing, Insta360's mobile app remains the same, which is a good thing. It's still the easiest, most trouble-free app of all the action camera makers out there.

All which is to say that the Go 3 is a very capable camera. The footage it produces isn't as good at what you'll get out of the GoPro Hero 11, which has a larger sensor capable 5.3K recording, but it's good enough for most people. If your primary use case is uploading to social media, there's no reason to shoot anything more than 1080p. I never once noticed the 2.7K footage from the Go 3 being 2.7K, which is to say, unless you shoot side-by-side with a GoPro, most people would never be able to tell the image quality difference.

Where the GoPro (or the DJI Action 3) really outshines the Go 3 is weather proofing. The Go 3 camera is waterproof to 5 meters, but the Action Pod with the camera attached is only IPX4, which means water resistant, so you should be fine shooting with it in the rain, but you cannot submerge it.

That said, if you don't need the higher resolution and aren't planning to shoot underwater much, the Go 3 is a compelling choice. The tiny size and magnetic mounting system mean you can get shots that you just can't with bigger cameras like the GoPro. More importantly, you can get those shots fast—I often just stuck the Go 3 to road signs, the side of my vehicle (when parked), and tk. It's amazing how much easier and fun it is to film when you don't need to setup a tripod. Insta360 has done a good job of emphasizing this with the included accessories too. In months of shooting, I have never once spent more than a minute or two getting the Go 3 mounted how I want it. 

Everyone I met while shooting wanted to know—is it better than a GoPro? I don't think that's the right question though, they're really two different beasts. The GoPro is a reliable, high resolution beauty of an action camera and has been our top pick for years now. I think the Go 3 is well worth considering even if you already have a GoPro. It's compact form and long battery life mean you can use it in ways you can't use a GoPro and it has allowed me to get shots I would previous not even have thought of shooting. For that reason alone I think it's worth the money if you're in the market for a tiny camera.




# Leica Review

The Leica Q3 is the latest version of the company's fixed-lens, autofocusing rangefinder camera. It's an incremental upgrade from the Q2, with enough new features to make it a worthy successor, including a new 60 megapixel sensor, but still retaining everything that made the Q2 a great camera.

The Leica Q3 sells for $5,995, slightly more than the Q2 debuted at, but at these prices who notices a $200 here and there? Interestingly, Leica is still selling the Q2 alongside the Q3,but unless the larger file size of the Q3 is too much for you, I can't see any reason to get the Q2 over the Q3. The Q3 addresses nearly every shortcoming of the Q2.

## Leica Quality

Buying a Leica is a significant investment. Leica's are very nearly the perfect camera for some kinds of photographers, and conversely, very much the wrong camera for other photographers. I loved the M4, which I was able to shoot with for several years in college because my fellow photography students were more interested in the then-new M6. At the time I was mostly interested in reportage photography and, to my mind at least, that is where Leica shines. The M4 had its quirks, but it was small, light, and less intrusive when you put it in someone's face to take a portrait.

All those things remain true of Leica's in the digital age. While I didn't spend enough time with the M11—Leica's flagship, interchangable lens camera system—to learn it's quirks and do a full review, it still very much felt like a Leica. The Q3 is the same way. Whether or not that makes it the right camera for you depend on both your budget and how you shoot.

But first, the specs. The big upgrade to the Q3 is a new 60 megapixel sensor and a new Maestro IV processor. Curiously, while the sensor size matches last year's M11, Leica says it's not the same sensor, which helps explain why the Q3 actually has a wider ISO range (50-100,000) than the M11. The DNG raw files the Q3 produces average about 70 megapixels, and even with the built-in 8 gigs of buffer in the processor, this is not the best camera if you need sports-shooting speeds.

The Q3 also gets a Leica first: 8K video capture at up to 30p (H.265). There's also Apple ProRes 422HQ support for 1080p video capture. While I would not suggest the Q3 is a videographers best friend—it's very clearly biased toward and made for still shooters—it's at least capable of recording impressive video.

The fixed 28mm f1.7 Summilux APSH lens is a mixed bag. It's a unique lens, capable of manual focusing, autofocusing, and macro shooting. And it does all of them pretty well. Just managing to make an autofocus lens also easy and smooth to focus manually is a feat almost no other lens maker seem to be capable of, so kuddos to Leica for that. Manual focus is Leica's signature thing though so that's expected. What I found more impressive is how well the lens resolves even with the higher resolution sensor. If you're worried that it wouldn't be capable, I'm hear to say: it is very capable.

Where the Q3 Summilux sometimes struggles is with autofocus. 

A big part of the Leica Q series appeal is that it offers autofocus, something the company otherwise does not really offer in rangefinder form (there is the SL-series, if you want an SLR-style Leica with autofocus). The Q3 touts an improved autofocus system that combines phase and contrast detection with subject tracking. The phase detection is the new element there and reading Leica's press materials it sounds an awful lot like the Depth-from-Defocus system used in Panasonic's Lumix S5 series, which isn't surprising since Panasonic and Leica frequently collaborate. 

In practice the Q3's autofocus hits what I call the 90 percent sweet spot. That is, it works as you want it to at least 90 percent of the time. It was very good at locking onto eyes and faces, as well as animals, especially in the Intelligent Auto Mode. Where it struggled at times was rapid changes in focal distance, think a child running toward you or an object speeding away. Again, in my testing this was far from a deal breaker, and to me simply reinforced the obvious, this isn't the camera you want for shooting sports (if the 28mm lens wasn't enough to drive that point home).

## Living with the Q3

Shooting with the Q3 was a true joy. And I say that as someone who has always struggled with the 28mm focal length. I still struggled with composition, but the camera itself was remarkably good at getting out of the way. The top and front are identical to the Q2, but the back has been redesigned and I much prefer the new button layout. 

The rear LCD now flips out, which is nice, I especially like shooting from the waist, which is easy to do with the tilting rear screen. But what I like even more is that the tilting rear screen forced Leica to move all the buttons to the right side, both above and below the D-pad. This makes it very easy to operate with one hand. Some of this comfort may lie in the fact that I'm used to roughly this layout from my Sony A7RII, but either way it makes for quick access to everything you need without needing to move the camera from your eye. In my experience this makes for less fiddling and more focus on the scene.

The EVF is 5.76M dot OLED screen that's bright and sharp. I never had any issues with manual focus. Unlike many systems I've used, which require a button press, just turning the lens zooms into allow for precise focusing. 

In the end I was able to shoot with the Q3 for nearly a month and in that time the only real criticism I could come up with is that I am not a huge fan of the 28mm lens. Actually that's not fair, I love this lens, I just lack experience composing images at this field of view. I am much more experience with, and comfortable with, the 35mm found in Fujifilm's X100V ([9/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/fujifilm-x100v/))

That said, the Q3 is so much fun to use that I enjoyed struggling with composition in the wider-than-I'm-used-to frame. It's the kind of camera you want to bring with you everywhere and it produces that kind of images that make you glad you had it with you. And that's about the highest praise I think you can give any tool.

I used to consider fixed focal length large sensor compact cameras a very niche camera. There was Ricoh's GR series, Fujifilm's X100 series (very much [inspired by the early Leica rangefinders](https://www.wired.com/2011/03/photos-leica-m3-and-fujifilm-x100-side-by-side/)), the Leica Q series. Then, for reasons which escape me since I don't use TikTok, everyone decided the Fujifilm X100V was the camera to have. Demand is such that it's hard to find one new and the used market is downright insane. While my cynicism leads me to believe that most of this demand is actually people who want to photograph themselves with the camera rather than actually use it, the fact remains the demand is there. 

As such, the Leica is clearly the king of that pack. The lens is sharper and better, the sensor larger, and the autofocus better or just as good as the Fuji. And with X100V prices well over the $1,500 selling price, the Leica almost doesn't even seem that expensive anymore. Almost. At $6,000 the Q3 is obviously not for everyone. It's not for me for instance, I remain irrationally attached to my Fujifilm X70, which is the camera I carry everywhere.

If you can afford it though, and are comfortable with the 28mm focal length, the Q3 is a great camera, capable of producing wonderfully sharp and detailed images that will not disappoint.




# Fire Max 11 review

The Fire Max 11 is Amazon's newest, largest, most powerful tablet. It's also a tablet no one wants or needs. 

Amazon has departed from its ultra-budget hardware to churn out a tablet that would be a decent mid-level Android tablet, if it ran the latest version of Android. But it doesn't run Android at all, it runs Amazon's Fire OS, a crippled, very nearly useless fork of Android that's now over two full year's worth of features behind Android. 

Take mid-level hardware, slap on an OS that's good for little more than consuming Amazon content, charge nearly as much as an iPad, and you end up with a tablet just can't keep up with [the competition](https://www.wired.com/gallery/the-best-tablets/). Even at half price, as Amazon's Fire Tablets usually are during Prime Day and other sales, the Fire Max 11 is a tough sell.

## Why the Fire 11 Sucks

I think most of what you need to know about the Fire Max 11 is in the naming. Out of the box this is the best Fire tablet Amazon has ever made for consuming Amazon content. It lives up to its name Max. The problem comes when you want to do anything other than consume Amazon content. If you do, this is not the tablet you want.

Amazon sells the Fire Max 11 for $230. For another $100 you can get what Amazon calls the productivity bundle, which adds a keyboard, cover, and stylus. But you're now in the price range of several much nicer tablets that offer a much better software experience.

Lest you think I have some pretentious dislike for Amazon's hardware, I would like to start by saying that I am typing this review up on a Fire 10 with a Finite keyboard. It's my main writing tool when I leave the house (or RV in my case) and half the time when I'm at home. I have modified the Fire's software, using the adb developer tool to turn off all of Amazon's apps, and install the apps I need to work (really just Vivaldi and Termux), but the Fire 10 is well able to handle my needs as a writer. Which is to say, for $100 on sale, with some slight modification, the Fire 10 is indeed capable of being useful for work and I think that's a great deal.

For that reason I was excited to try the Fire Max 11—what's not to like about a more powerful tablet, this one made of real metal instead of cheap plastic? The Fire Max 11 does deliver what Amazon is promising here. It's is by far the best Fire tablet the company has ever made.

The 11-inch 16:9 format screen features a nice 2000×1200 pixel 60 Hz display that's very glare-prone, but no worse than other tablets. The 16:9 format gives away that the first priority here is consuming movies (and reading if you rotate to portrait mode), but it's not great for productivity. It could be if Amazon tool some of the tools in Android 12L, which is optimised for tablets, but FireOS is based on an outdated version of Android that lacks any tabblet-friendly features. More on that in the minute.

There's a fingerprint reader is on the side power button, which is a first for Fire tablet. There's a MicroSD slot so you can expand your media storage and the keyboard now connects via pogo pins which allow it to charge and communicate. Previous Fire tablets like mine need to connect to keyboards via Bluetooth, which is inconsistent and slow on the best of days (and they must be charged separately). The Fire Max 11 also supports Wi-Fi 6 and has front and rear 8 megapixel cameras, making it a better video chat device as well.

Under the screen sites 4 gigabytes of RAM and a choice of either a 64 gigabyte or 128-gigabyte SSD (the larger storage is another $tk). The 11 is powered by a Mediatek MT8188J chip which uses an 8-core processor. 

Those specs put the Fire Max 11 firmly in the middle of the Android tablet range, more powerful than its Fire siblings, but certainly no OnePlus or Samsung level tablet. See our [guide to the best tablets](https://www.wired.com/gallery/the-best-tablets/) for our picks on higher end devices.

For Amazon though, this qualifies as a high end tablet, relative to the rest of the Fire line. 

It's made of metal and feels much more like a quality device than any other Fire. My experience using it for several weeks made me a little sad to go back to my very plasticky Fire 10. It's also noticeably faster than the Fire 10, though not enough that I would feel compelled to upgrade. And one potential deal breaker to be aware of, the keyboard and case are not self-supporting. To be productive with the productivity bundle you need to put in on a flat surface. 

The keyboard, while useable, is on the small side. I had a lot of trouble with the trackpad, which constantly accidentally clicked things when I brushed it with my palms while typing. Again, it's not bad enough to be a deal breaker, but it's more annoying than it should be at this price point. The stylus is laughably bad. Luckily for users there are almost no apps available in the Amazon App store that would make you want to use the stylus. And that's the core problem with the Fire Max 11—it's just not good enough for the money Amazon is charging.

The main problem with the Fire Max 11 is that to use it as more than a firehose blasting your eyeballs with Prime content you'll have to spend $330. Given that you can get a 9th-generation iPad on Amazon for $269 and a Bluetooth keyboard for $30 more... why would anyone buy a Fire Max 11? I don't know.

It's an okay tablet, but it's not anywhere near as powerful as even the base model iPad, nor the Pixel, nor the OnePlus, nor the second generation of Lenovo's Tab P11, all of which I would suggest are a better investment for all but the most diehard Amazon faithful.

The reason you should buy something else comes down to software. Fire OS, Amazon's proprietary fork of Android, is terrible. It's always been terrible and as far as I can tell, it will always be terrible. Its sole purpose is to deliver your eyeballs unto Amazon. It works well for that. You'll have no trouble finding all your favorite Amazon Prime features and perks through Fire OS. 

If you want to do anything else though you'll quickly find yourself fighting Fire OS to get it done. There's no Google apps, there's no Play Store, there's only the limited offerings of Amazon's App Store. I did try to install the Play Store using our instructions, but so far I have not been able to get it working. I will update that guide as soon as I get it figured out.

Even when I do though, I would suggest that [Lenovo's Tab P11](https://www.wired.com/gallery/the-best-tablets/#6436b7a1b084d83a4bb0ac97)), remains a better investment at these prices. 

The Fire Max 11 isn't terrible. Assuming you can pick one up later this year for 30 percent off (which could happen as soon as Prime Day), it's not a bad deal. Just be sure you're aware of the limitations that Fire OS puts on this otherwise decent hardware.



# Framework Laptop 13 

User repairable/upgradeable with DIY build options. Much-improved battery life. Excellent matte, 3:2 screen. Linux-friendly. Expandable, hot-swappable port system.

The Framework Laptop 13 is very close to the perfect computer for most people. It's powerful, user-serviceable, upgradeable, repairable, and more future-proof than any other laptop on the market.

There are only two reasons I could come up with not to buy the new Framework Laptop 13. The first is that you're video editor or gamer, in which case you want a dedicated video card, which the Framework 13 does not offer. The only other reason I can come up with is that you don't want to spend more than $1,000 on a laptop. 

For almost every other use case I think of, the Framework Laptop 13 is as good as its competitors *and* it's repairable, upgradable, and customizable, saving you money down the road. That's not to say it's perfect, but this third version of the Framework Laptop 13 is pretty darn close.

## The Perfect Upgrade

To really test the 2023 version of the Framework Laptop 13 I should have kept the model I reviewed last year. That way I could test the upgrade process, which involves swapping out the motherboard for the new one. Unfortunately our policy at WIRED is that we don't keep anything we test, so that's not possible. Framework did send me the DIY kit again, which is somewhat like the upgrade package in that it must be put together.

Whether you upgrade or are a first-time buyer picking up a new one, there are three things in the new Framework Laptop 13 that make this a worthwhile upgrade. The first is the larger battery. I don't know if it's all the battery, which gets bumped from 55 watt hours to 61 watt hours, or the new 13th-generation Intel chip, or some combination of the two, but battery life is much better this time around—even on Linux, more on that in a minute. 

The second reason to upgrade is the matte screen because there are matte screens and crap screens, full stop. The third improvement is that there's now an AMD-based Framework. Unfortunately it's not shipping yet, but you can pre-order the AMD boards, which are slated to ship later this year. And yes you can cross-upgrade from an Intel model to an AMD, though you will have to get new RAM and a new Wi-Fi card as well, which makes it a little more expensive. 

For this review though I'll be looking at the Intel i7 model (with the 13th-Gen i7-1360P processor) or the upgrade kit if you've already got an older Framework laptop. The unit Framework provided came with 16 gigabytes of RAM and a 1-terabyte SSD (a Western Digital SN770, [one of our favorite SSDs](https://www.wired.com/story/best-portable-external-storage-drives/#six)). The configuration I tested retails for $1,738.

You can configure your Framework with up to 64 gigabytes of RAM and use just about any PCIe Gen4 SSD. A fully maxxed out Framework Laptop 13, with 64 gigabytes of RAM and 2-terabyte SSD from Framework will set you back $2,018. You can save some money if already have an SSD,a nd of course you can start with a slower chip and upgrade just the motherboard down the road.

That is after all the main appeal of the Framework—you're in control. Or, at least a lot more in control than you are with a big box laptop. Every component in the Framework has a QR code on it that will take you to webpages that show you how to upgrade and change out your SSD, RAM, speakers, motherboard, and more. I've come to think that the existence of the MacBook made the Framework inevitable. It is the repairable Yin to Apple's locked up Yang. 

I happen to think that nothing goes as well with repairable, customizable hardware as Linux, a user-centric, customizable operating system. Last time around I installed Linux on the Framework, but this time Framework provided me with a Windows 11 key. I dutifully installed and used Windows long enough to run some benchmarks, perform a battery drain test, and get a feel for day to day life on a Windows Framework. And then I pulled that drive out, stuck in my own, and install Arch Linux. Ah, much better.

But first, Windows stats. The Framework's benchmark scores are very good. It beats the Dell XPS 13,a nd even holds its own against Apple's M2 until you get to graphics, where the Intel system falls apart. Again, this is not a gaming machine and it doesn't perform like one. For most of us though, with web-based workflows and document software, the i7 is more than enough. In fact, I would save a few dollars and go for the i5 model, though it is worth noting that that model has a different, smaller battery. That's a shame because the i7 model just eeks out a full day's battery life, and if the i5 model had this battery I have no doubt it would get a good 12-14 hours out of it. I never worried about bringing the charging cable around with me in testing, but I also never got much more than 9 hours in real world use. It's plenty for most people, and much better than last year's model. Even better, unless I was seriously stressing it while running benchmarks or rendering 5K video, I never heard the fan spin up.

One of my favorite parts of the Framework remains unchanged, which is the expansion card system for adding ports. You can have four expansion cards in at a time, but swap whatever you need in and out. For instance if you need an HDMI port for a presentation, snap it in and on all the days you don't have a presentation you can toss that one in the drawer and stick in a more useful USB-C port. There's even a port to add a drive. It's too bad the ports aren't slightly larger, because I'd love to see Framework add a port with a 2242 SSD that users could upgrade themselves. The port selection is pretty good as it is though.

The final thing worth noting in the new Framework is the screen. It's still a 13.5-inch screen with a 3:2 aspect ratio (a somewhat unusual 2,256 x 1,504 pixels) like last year's model, but it has a new matte coating that makes it usable just about everywhere. I was even able to more or less browse the web in direct sunlight with the brightness cranked up. It's one of the best screens I've tested this year. That said, bad news if you want to upgrade to OLED or 4K or something of that nature, this is the one and only panel. The good news is that this is the Framework, should the company ever offer a OLED display chances are good you'd be able to upgrade to it without buying a whole new laptop.

The keyboard remains unchanged and while it's not quite as nice as say an older Lenovo, it's one of my favorite chiclet-style keyboards. It has good travel (1.5mm) and a satisfying thunkiness to typing on it.

For existing Framework users I would say, upgrade your screen. The matte display is excellent. It's not shipping yet, but you can [order one for $179](https://frame.work/products/display-kit?v=FRANFX0001). The performance boost is probably not worth the upgrade from last year's model, but if you're on the original it might be, depending on your needs. 

If you're thinking of investing in your first Framework, I think now is the time. The kinks and rough edges have all been smoothed out and this is very nice machine with a bright, upgradable future. The only reason I can think of to wait is the AMD model, which we'll be sure to test as soon as we can get our hands on one.



# Acer Swift 14 review

Acer's new Swift 14, which replaces the Swift 5, is the company's MacBook Pro, which is to say it's a well-built, svelte, slickly-designed, all-metal portable with enough power and battery to help you get things done no matter where you are.

It's not perfect, and there are some better options for specific use cases, but for the price—$1,400 as tested—you'd be hard pressed to beat this package as an all-around great laptop.

## 

Laptop makers seem to have finally come up with a common naming convention, centered around the model name paired with not a random number, but the screen size of the laptop. Revolutionary. Genius. Wait until you tell your grandkids it took the industry three decades to come up with that. Thanks to Dell and Apple for leading the way. Anyway, here we are, finally. The Acer Swift 5 is gone. The Acer Swift 14 is here (as is the 16, and the Go, which replaces the Swift 3).

This year the Swift lineup features the Swift Go, which offers an OLED screen, and the Swift X, which offers a dedicated GPU, and the plain Swift which has a somewhat more premium look, coming in Green or Blue, with gold accents, but not the OLED screen or a dedicated GPU.

The Swift 14 looks nearly identical to last year's Swift 5, with an aluminium and magnesium chassis that has barely any flex to it, even when carried with one hand, holding by a corner, which I don't suggest you make a habit of, but it is something I do to every laptop I test and the good ones, like the Swift 14, don't flex. My ThinkPad T14 was jealous.

The unit I reviewed had an Intel Core i7 (13700H) processor with Iris Xe Graphics (shared memory), 16 gigabytes of RAM, a 1-terabyte SSD and 14-inch IPS WQXGA touch screen (2560 x 1600 pixels, 60 Hz refresh rate). The screen is 16:10, which I've come to much prefer to 16:9. That little extra bit is just... nice. There's also a cheaper Swift 14 model that uses a 1920x1200 pixel screen, slightly better than 1080p. 

All of that is wrapped in a 2.65 pound package that's just 12 inches wide and .59 inches thick.

The biggest news in the Swift 14 is the new 13th Generation Intel Core H-series processors, which are surprisingly snappy for Evo-certified processors. Obviously if you're interested in video editing or light gaming the Swift X with it's dedicated Nvidia GPU is the way to go, but in my testing the Swift 14 was plenty fast in everyday use, including web browsing with [a disturbing number of tabs open](https://www.wired.com/story/vivaldi-6-workspaces-tab-management/), chat apps, video conferencing and photo editing using [Darktable](https://darktable.org) which I ran via Windows Subsystem for Linux and it was still speedy.

As with last year's Swift 5, Acer is still touting the TwinAir dual-fan system and copper heat pipes which increase airflow, to keep things cool. The Swift 14 does manage to stay cool, though it's been a while since I noticed any laptop getting especially hot.

The Core i7 chip is an interesting choice here as it's a rather energy hungry processor at 45 watts. The benchmarks I got with the Swift 14 reflect the higher performance chip, but against similar offerings like the Lenovo Yoga 9i [8/10 WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/lenovo-yoga-9i-2-in-1-laptop/) which uses a very similar chip, it's not significantly different.

Where it is significantly different is in battery run time. I managed 6 hours and 14 minutes in our standard battery test, which loops a 1080p film (local) with the brightness at 75 percent. In real world testing, using it for work for a few weeks, I was rarely able to get a full day's work in without reaching for the cord. That's not a deal breaker to me, but it is something to consider and to me it reflects more on Intel than Acer. No one needs more power in their thin, light laptop Intel, what they need is better battery life. 

Where the Acer exceeds much of its competition—I'm looking at you Dell—is the plethora of ports available. There are 2 USB Type C ports (both Thunderbolt 4 / USB 4), two USB-A ports, and an HDMI 2.1 port. There's also support for  Wi-Fi 6. Even the webcam is great, with a 1440p camera capable of recording QHD video (which most video chat apps don't even support, but when they do, you'll be ahead of the game). 

Despite all that, there are some things I don't like about the Swift. The keyboard is mushy the way all Acer keyboards are, but I take this to be a matter of personal taste because clearly Acer customers must like these keyboards, they haven't changed in years. 

My other gripe is the Gorilla Glass branding on the top left corner of the screen. I thought this was a sticker for the first few days and I don't peel stickers off review units, but by day three it was getting to me so I went to peel it off and... not a sticker. That's there, forever. It may be that I am the only one bothered by this, but do be aware that Gorilla Glass and it's double registered trademark symbols are part and parcel of your Acer Swift 14 experience. What makes this extra ironic is the fact that according the Acer's own website, antimicrobial glass does not "provide any direct or implied health benefit." Don't get me wrong, I think Gorilla glass screens are great, but I don't need to be reminded I have it every time I glance at the screen.

Finally, how does the Swift 14 measure up to the other Swifts—the Go and the X? Well, I have not tested either, but on paper the Go is less stylish, less design focused option, which, curiously, offers an OLED screen option that the Swift 14 does not have. The Go might be worth a closer look if you don't care about the design styling of the Swift 14 and want to save a few dollars. The Swift X is for those who need more power since it adds a dedicated graphics card. Given that the Swift X if only $100 more, that would probably be my pick out of the three, although battery life will likely be worse.



# Vivaldi 6 Review

About tk years ago I got an email from an old contact at Opera, who said some ex-Opera designers and developers, including Opera's co-founder, Jon Von Tetzchner, were launching a new web browser, would I like to try an early beta? I did try it, and I never went back to another web browser. 

I've already called Vivaldi the web's best browser and that's still true, but somehow it manages to keep getting better. Version 6, which was released last week, brings a new method of managing tabs dubbed Workspaces. 

Vivaldi already had more ways to manage tabs than every other browser put together, so even I was wondering what Workspaces were going to be good for, but they turn out to be yet another great option to tame your tab jungle.

The usefulness of Workspaces is based on the premise that you have a lot of tabs open. I know I do, but every now and then someone will share their screen and I'll notice they only have a couple of tabs open. God bless you, if that's you. I want to be you, but I am in the middle or researching Norse exploration of North America for a homeschool lesson, trying to expand my collection of grilled meat on a skewer recipes, reading several 18th century sailing diaries on Archive.org, ordering parts for my Jeep, writing a post for my website, and reading several articles sent by friends. 

That's just in my personal profile Vivaldi. My work profile has 67 tabs open right now, researching a dozen different products I am in some stage of testing and writing about, including this one, natch.

My tabs would be absolute chaos and mayhem were it not for Vivaldi's tab management tools. Keeping work and personal separate is possible in any browser, but Vivaldi's tab tools also include the ability to group tabs in clusters, tile groups of them in a single window, and now, with Vivaldi 6, put them in Workspaces. 

I think of Workspaces as bit like virtual desktops on your PC—in this case they're all part of the same web browser, they're just visually cordoned off from each other. That's an important distinction by the way, you can't be logged into different Gmail accounts in different workspaces, hence the *virtual* desktop metaphor.

In my case, within my work profile I have a series of tabs related to Linux laptops, several tabs about sleeping pads, hard drives, solar panels, and other topics I research and write about. Then there are the core tabs I need for day to day work, like email and all the publishing tools we use. 

Prior to Workspaces I would group all these tabs by topic in tab stacks. This works, but I have found that once a tab stack gets over about four tabs, it's tough to navigate. Now, with Vivaldi 6, I group these topic-related tabs into Workspaces. I set a keyboard shortcut so that I can cycle through them and easily jump between topics. When my editor asks me something about an upcoming guide, I can quickly jump to the workspace with that topic and find the answer. This workflow feels clearer and cleaner than it did before Workspaces when I spent much more time hunting for tiny tabs.

Workspaces also make it easier to reduce the memory footprint of all those open tabs. Just as you would with an individual tab, or a tab stack, you can right-click and hibernate a whole Workspace. When you re-open your browser only the tabs in the current workspace load, which also helps to keep memory down.

The power of Workspaces goes beyond how I use them, especially if you start creating custom Command Chains (which arrived in Vivaldi 5.5). For example, you could combine switch workspace commands with switch themes to give all your workspaces a custom visual cue to know which workspace you're in. The Vivaldi blog has [details](https://vivaldi.com/blog/how-to/pawel-shows-you-how-to-play-with-workspaces-and-custom-icons-in-vivaldi/) on how to do that and add custom icons to your toolbar to switch to specific workspaces.

As powerful as Workspace are, there are a couple of things I think would improve them. I'd like a way to make pinned tabs exist across all Workspaces. Keeping with the example above, I'd like to see my work email tab in every Workspace, which would be possible if you could somehow pin tabs to be outside Workspaces. It would also be great to have some kind of visual workspace switcher accessible via keyboard shortcuts, something like the tab switcher, so I could jump between workspaces (it's possible to cycle through Workspaces with the keyboard, but when you have quite a few this can be a little slow).

Re-reading this I realize it sounds perhaps a little insane, but then I think Vivaldi is made for those of use who browse the web a bit more, um, thoroughly than normal people. 

Even if you aren't quite at this level of nonsense Workspaces can help add a little separation to your browser. Vivaldi's example includes separating work, shopping, and school. They're also good for keeping a web-based game hidden when the boss walks by (though I might suggest new job is a better long term bet). You could even use them something like Profiles for different family if you didn't need to keep account logins separate.

The biggest downside to Workspaces is that they're not currently available on mobile. On the desktop though, Workspaces in Vivaldi 6 provide yet another way to browse the web smarter.




In some ways Vivaldi is confusing to the uninitiated because there are so many possibilities. Managing tabs is s good example of this: there are now three distinct ways you can organize them. 



I use all three. The first way I divide things up is with two "profiles," one for work, one for personal. Profiles are the most isolated way to divide things up. There is no data sharing between profiles. That means you can login to your work Gmail account in your work profile and your personal Gmail account in your personal profile and there's no conflict because the two profiles are totally separate. This is more or less the same functionality Chrome offers, though Vivaldi is using its own implementation of profiles.

I've found profiles work best for high-level separations. For example I have two profiles, my wife has a profile, my kids have a profile. That way we can all have our own stuff, but within a single browser on a single device. 





Every now and then I see someone using 

# Lenovo Yoga 9i

Lenovo's latest Yoga 9i is everything a flagship laptop should be: powerful, sleek, and portable with an excellent 2.8K OLED display. The latest iteration of the 9i even includes Bowers & Wilkins speakers in the rotating soundbar hinge for some truly impressive sound (for a laptop).

The 9i uses Intel's 13th-generation processors with integrated graphics. That will be the only real rub for some, the lack of a dedicated graphics card. Otherwise this laptop is a tech-savvy traveler's dream.

## Hardware

The Yoga 9i has enough business vibes to it that no one is going to look at you funny when you lay it on the conference room table, but it's also very much not a Thinkpad. The 2023 Yoga 9i is a stylish, powerful 2-in-1 convertible with a unique, impressive soundbar. It's now on its eighth revision and at this point Lenovo pretty much has things down. This release is largely a spec bump. 

You’ll find the same rounded edges and overall elegant design as the last release, which is one of my favorite aspects. I wish more laptops embraced rounded edges. Why make sharp edges right where your wrists are going to rest for hours at time? Typing on the 9i was noticeably more comfortable on my wrists than my Lenovo T14 which has sharper edges. 

There are two colors available, a light "Oatmeal" and a darker gray model. All models use a 13th-generation Intel i7 chip (1360P) and come with 16 gigabytes of RAM (soldered, not upgradeable). Prices start at $1,700 for the 2.8K model with 512-gigabytes SSD, which I tested, and go up for the 4K OLED screen version with a 1-terabyte SSD. The price puts them in the luxury laptop range, and the design and overall 2-in-1 styling reflects that as well. 

Probably the most impressive aspect of the 9i is the sound. Lenovo has tucked two Bowers & Wilkins 2W tweeters into the hinge, and added two 3W woofers on the bottom. The result is absolutely the best sound I've ever heard come out of a laptop. Admittedly, laptops make a low bar when it comes to sound, but this thing sounds good. Like actually good. It's even better in "tent" mode, which is what you'd want for watching movies.

The 14-inch display is equally impressive. I was quite sure Lenovo had sent the 4K version until I checked the specs and realized I'd been using the 2.8K version for two weeks thinking it was a 4K. That actually made me think I'd probably skip the 4K version and get the improved battery life of a slightly less hi-res screen. The 2.8K screen also has a 90Hz refresh rate to the 4K's 60 Hz which makes the lower density screen slightly smoother and better for gaming.

Lenovo claims 100% DCI-P3 color accuracy and in my testing I found that my screen supported 100 percent of the sRGB space and 98 percent Adobe RGB color space. I mention my screen because Lenovo screen sometimes vary within the same product line, but these results are generally in keeping with what you'd expect for an OLED screen.

Unlike some other premium laptops these days—cough, Dell XPS 13, cough—there are plenty of port on the Yoga 9i. On the left side there are two USB-C Thunderbolt 4 ports, along with one USB-A port. On the right you get another USB-C port (oddly, not Thunderbolt 4, though you can charge with it), and headphone jack, and, sadly, a power button. I detest the power button on the side because I also seem to grab it when I carry it around, inadvertently shutting down the laptop. Not a deal breaker, but something to be aware of if you're similarly clumsy. 

The keyboard is one of the more interesting features of the Yoga 9i. It has flat chiclet style keys that are fine. Not nice, not all that pleasant to type on, but they work. What's interesting is the far right side of the keyboard has a series of 1-touch function keys for controlling performance settings, audio settings, color settings, even adding a background blur to the webcam with a single button. There's also a fingerprint reader. I actually found these keys very useful, particularly the power profile button. By dialing back the power when I was just browsing the web I was able to get more out of the battery. 

The touchpad is huge for a 14-inch laptop, on par with Apple’s MacBook Pro 14 in fact, and it worked well with the multi-touch gestures built-in to Windows. The Yoga 9i also comes with an active stylus. It works great for taking notes, and seems like maybe it would be okay for a little sketching as well. 

I am happy to report that the webcam in the Yoga 9i is actually pretty good. It's 2.1MP, with a 16:9 view, giving you 1080p video capture. It's not 5MP quality like you'll find in some recent machines, but it's the best webcam I've tested on a laptop this year.

The Yoga 9i has a 75 Watt-hour battery, which boasts the same Rapid Charge Boost feature found in other recent Lenovo's like the Slim Pro 7 ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/lenovo-slim-pro-7-amd-laptop)). I managed 11 hours and 17 minutes in our standard battery test, which loops a 1080p film (local) with the brightness at 75 percent. In more realistic testing, like just using it for work for a few weeks, I was able to regularly get 12 hours, sometimes more so long as I kept the brightness dialed back a bit. That's pretty good for an OLED laptop.

While there is much to love about Yoga 9i it is clearly not aimed at gamers. Even casual gamers will likely be disappointed by the integrated graphics performance. If, however, you're in the market for a stylish, reasonably powerful laptop with awesome sound and a great, movie-friendly screen, the Yoga 9i is a great choice.




# Lenovo Slim 7 Pro Review

Lenovo's new Slim Pro 7 manages to be both powerful enough to edit video, and portable enough—with enough battery life—to actually be useful o the road. That's a rare combination, especially at this price. 

That's not to say it's perfect, but the compromises it makes to achieve what it is are the right compromises to meet the needs of those who, for lack of a better term, get called content creatives. That is, video editors, photo editors, perhaps even programmers who appreciate a 2.5K screen.

## HD

The Slim Pro 7 is a 14-inch AMD-powered laptop that sits somewhere in the middle of the Lenovo Slim/Yoga lineup (Lenovo uses the Yoga branding in some markets, but not the U.S.). The Slim Pro 7 X is the more powerful version with a slightly better screen, while the Slim 7i is less powerful. The Slim Pro 7 then, is something of a Goldilocks, or at least it would like to be.

I tested the Slim Pro 7 with a new 7000 series AMD Ryzen 7 chip (7735HS) and both integrated Radeon graphics card and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050. It comes with 16 gigabytes of RAM (soldered, not upgradeable) and a 512-gigabyte SSD (upgradeable by anyone with a Torx screwdriver and a modicum of courage). 

Those components are wrapped in a very solid, all-aluminum chassis that didn't flex even when I picked it up with from the front with one hand. It's a solid, well-built machine, though it is on the heavy side at 3.5 pounds. It didn't mind toting it around, but it's not an ultralight by any means.

One of the highlights of this machine is the screen. This 14.5-inch display crams in 2560 x 1600 pixels, making it 2.5K resolution. It's touch capable, though I still haven't found much use for touch on a laptop. More interesting is the 90 Hz refresh rate, which isn't quite enough to make hard core gamers happy (if that's you, the Slim Pro 7 X is the machine you want, with it's 144Hz refresh rate), but it's makes everything else quite smooth. The screen has 16:10 ratio, giving you a little extra height of the more common 16:9. It doesn't sound like much, but I find it helpful when browsing the web. It also makes the preview pane in video editors a bit larger.

Speaking of editing video, I did, and the Slim Pro 7 handled it quite well. I used both Blender on Windows and Kdenlive on Linux. I had to enable GPU support in Kdenlive before I saw much performance boost, but in the end I was able to render out a 5 minutes of 5.2K footage in just over 12 minutes. For reference, my Lenovo X14 with an 6000 series AMD Ryzen 7 takes over 30 minutes to render the same footage. Presumable the main difference is the dedicated graphics card.

You don't need to edit video to appreciate the performance here, but if you aren't editing video or doing other GPU-intensive tasks this might be overkill for your needs. At the same time, the slower screen refresh rate means this isn't the best option for mobile gaming, though it would no doubt serve the casual gamer.

Performance like this often means poor battery life, but that's not really the case here. Lenovo has packed in a 73 watt hour battery that manages to get about 7 hours of battery life in real world use. That number will come down the more time you spend editing video, but it's still very impressive for a laptop with these specs. Suffice to say that for casual use you can just about eek out a day's work, but if you're headed to the coffee shop to edit video, bring the charger.

Unlike its port-cutting coompetitors, Lenovo always makes sure you have what you need in its laptops and the Slim Pro 7 is no exception. It's got two USB-C ports, both of which can change, one of which is USB-C 4.0. There's also a USB-A port for older peripherials and an HDMI port for plugging in a monitor. A headphone jack and webcam kill switch round out the sides of the Slim Pro 7.

While there is much to love about the Lenovo Slim Pro 7, there are things I dislike. My number one gripe is the location of the power button on the right side of the body, just about where I instinctively grab it to carry it around. I can't tell you how many times I accidentally shut down the machine doing this. I'd much prefer a power button up where it belongs, one the top of the laptop.

The webcam was also not that great. It's 1080p, but I found it looked rather dark much of the time. It's fine for casual video conferencing, but if you spend a lot of time in online meetings and otherwise love this laptop, check out our guide to the best webcams for something better.

The other thing that bothers me isn't Lenovo's fault, but Windows 11 remains a dumpster fire of frustration. It's hard to believe it's the successor to Windows 10. It feels much more like a buggy beta. I considered testing Windows 10 on the Slim Pro 7, but I don't have a copy anymore. Instead I installed Linux, which worked beautifully. I tested both System76's Pop_Os! (which I'd suggest for Linux beginners) and Arch Linux (which is what I use) and both worked great. 

If you're in the market for a mobile, video editing workstation that's truly portable, and don't mind sacrificing a bit power to retain that great battery life, the Slim Pro 7 is an excellent choice.



# Nocs Provisions Field Issue 8x32 Binoculars

Nocs Provisions, which makes some of [our favorite binoculars](https://www.wired.com/story/best-binoculars/), has a new model it calls the Field Issue, a 32mm binocular that hits the sweet spot between magnification, price, and weight.

While our binocular guide suggests 8x42 is the best all-around binocular size—and we stand by that—sometimes you want something lighter. Whether you're hiking all day, tk, or tk, sometimes the 8x42s get to be too heavy. That's where 8x32 comes in, it sacrifices some zoom to save a little weight.

Like the company's previous releases, Noc's Field Issue binoculars are colorfully coated with a soft, but rugged, ridged thermoplastic. A bit like Ruffles, but binoculars. The result is something that's tough, portable, and simple to use.

## Approachable

I've always thought of Nocs as the most approachable binoculars. They're colorful and friendly. If consumer products can be friendly. They don't scream *I am expensive and delicate* the way some binoculars do, and in fact they're neither. No false advertising here. That's part of why in the binocular guide I recommend them to both kids (especially the 7x25, which fits well in kid hands) and adults new to binoculars. 

The problem with that is that some people take that to mean they aren't serious binoculars and nothing could be farther from the truth. 

The Field Issue features fully multi-coated lenses and uses a BaK4 Prism, just like the rest of the Nocs line. BaK-4 prisms generally produce higher quality images, while cheaper binoculars often use BK-7 prisms. In real world terms what that means is that more light from the periphery of the field of view passes through the prisms to the eyepieces. The edges of your field of view are brighter with BaK4 prisms, and the middle isn't blown out by too much light, making your overall field of vision better.

That's not the end of the story though. All that light has to also pass through glass lenses on it's way too and from the prism and this is where the differences between $2,000 binoculars and $300 binoculars come in. Sorry, but Nocs are not Leicas. That said, they're very good. I hardly ever noticed the sort of chromatic aberrations and purple fringing that you get with many options in the price range. 

The 8x magnification is the equivalent of a 400 mm camera lens—and in fact the eye cup makes it easy to hold your smartphone up to snap a photo, Nocs even makes [a mount ($27, Nocs)](https://www.nocsprovisions.com/collections/accessories/products/photo-rig-smartphone-adapter-for-binoculars)—and offers, clear, sharp views. I also really love Nocs oversize focus wheels, they're smooth and I've never fumbled to find them. The focus dial is right where your fingers expect it and it's easy to turn as that bird flies away, keeping it in focus.

While the Nocs Pro Issue 8x42 binoculars do provide a bit better image, they're a full half pound heavier than the 16.7 oz Field Issue. The weight savings was very noticeable on an all-day hike in the baking April Florida sun. The IP7 rating helps too when you forget that you're wearing them and dive into the first pool of water you see.

I've also always liked that when you buy a pair of Nocs you get everything you need—eyepiece protectors, neck strap, and a drawstring pouch for safe storage. There's even a lens cloth included, something you rarely find with binoculars that cost twice this much. 

All Nocs come with a lifetime warranty, which I have not yet tested, but accounts around the web suggest that Nocs stands behind what they make. And all Nocs ship in a plastic-free, post-consumer recycled box printed with soy ink, which lessens the environmental impact a bit too.

If you're in the market for a new pair of binoculars that are light weight, well-built, and reasonably priced, Noc's Field Issue 8x32s make an excellent choice.
# Nomad Grill Review

The Nomad portable grill is to grills what the Yeti is to coolers: better in every way, but expensive. That both come from Texas is coincidence. Probably.

The Nomad is a new take on what a portable grill should be, or even can be. It's refreshingly low tech, compact, cooks phenomenally well, and unlike many "portable" grills, it can genuinely go anywhere. It's as close to a perfect portable grill as anything I've tested.

## Wandering Grill
I've [tested a lot of portable grills](https://www.wired.com/story/best-portable-grills/) over the years and the Nomad is hands down the best built portable grill I've ever used.

From the perforated, anodized-aluminum shell to the cast-aluminum grill boxes inside, everything about the Nomad feels solid and well-made. The heavy duty handles and latches are strong, even the grilling surface is held solidly in place with high-temperature resistant magnets.

The design of the Nomad is different than most grills. It's essentially a suitcase, which means you can carry it with one hand. The solid construction doesn't make it light—it's 28 pounds with one grill grate, 31 pounds if you opt to buy a second—but it's not awkward and unwieldy like our current top pick portable charcoal grill, Weber's Jumbo Joe.

When collapsed in suitcase carrying position the Nomad looks like a cross between something Jason Bourne would use as a carry on, and some kind of live animal cage. I told one person who asked about it that my kids had a pet wolverine and this was it's cage. For a second I think they believed me.

Once you get where you're going with your Nomad you can set it up on any flat surface. Thanks to the engineering behind the Nomad, it never gets hot enough to harm wood, metal, stone, or sand. I would not put it on a plastic table, but it should work fine everywhere from your truck tailgate to your local park's picnic table. While flat on the ground is the most awkward way to cook on the Nomad, it also works.

The Nomad is also pleasingly low tech. There are no Bluetooth temp sensors, apps, or anything else. This is grilling of the old school, relying on your skills and experience. The Nomad does have a built-in thermometer on left side of the "top", but there is no digital anything here. Thankfully. 

If you buy a Nomad and are in search of some grilling guidance, we love [American's Test Kitchen cookbooks](https://shop.americastestkitchen.com/america-s-test-kitchen-master-of-the-grill.html), and we have a guide to our [favorite summer cookbooks](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-cookbooks-summer-2022/). 

## Cooking on the Nomad

For typical high-temp grilling the Nomad folds in half giving you two sides to grill on. The catch is that the grill for the second side is sold separately and will set you back another $130. If you get the extra grill grate you'll have total of 425 square inches of cooking surface. Nomad claims this is enough for 30 burgers. I did not test the second grill grate, but cooking singled sided there was enough room for 12 burgers of the size I like them.

The other things to note is that this is a cambered grill, which means if you get both grills you'll need to flip on over before closing it up. Nomad also points out that you can cook with it flipped over, making it something like a veggie basket.

There are two features about the Nomad worth mentioning when it comes to cooking. The first is the twin air vents. In single sided mode you end up with one air vent at the bottom, one at the top. If you have both sides open they're both at the bottom. They're much smaller vents than what you'll find on typical grills, but they work well because of a second feature: the longitudinal raised slats. These ribs running the length of the grill pan hold Nomad's special charcoal cylinders off the bottom of the grill, making the air flow around the better and allowing you to maintain higher temperatures even with the lid closed.

The bad news is that if you use regular charcoal briquets the airflow isn't as good and you won't be able to get temps as high. I cooked my way through the sample box of Nomad Charcoal in about four cooks and then switched to the regular Kingsford briquets you can buy almost anywhere and was never able to get the Nomad back up above 400 with the lid closed.

That said, I can't think of many situations in which you'd want to get temps that high, aside from perhaps baking a pizza. If that's your use case, you can always buy more charcoal from Nomad. It's $36 for a 10 pound box.

While I do not like bespoke charcoal (I can't even believe I had to typed the phrase "bespoke charcoal") because of the price, Nomad's charcoal is better than what you get at the big box stores. It's denser, burns hotter and longer, and gives off less smoke. My kids even discovered it's good enough to double as art charcoal. If you've got the money to burn (literally), Nomad charcoal is worth it.

Since the Nomad can be closed up, suitcase-style, it can be used to smoke as well as grill. Smoking with the Nomad is a little trickier than with Weber's Jumbo Joe, at least at first. It took some careful tweaking of the vents to get the air flow to the point that it was maintaining the temperature I wanted, but once I had it dialed in, the temp held well, better than the Weber in fact.

The only thing I found annoying about smoking in the Nomad was needing to lift off the entire grill grate to feed in some fresh fuel. A hinged grill grate would be a nice option (especially since the magnets would hold it securely in place the rest of the time).

It's also worth noting that as a smoker you have slightly less room than the Jumbo Joe. A single side of the Nomad is 212 square inches, while the Jumbo Joe manages 240 square inches. In practice this isn't a huge difference. I managed to smoke nine chicken breasts, and another time I fit two racks of ribs. In fact, even without the second grill grate I never felt cramped cooking for five (two adults, three ravenous children) on the Nomad.

## Nomad tk
When I pulled the Nomad out of the box and looked inside my first thought was what a nightmare to clean. This turned out to be only partly true. Cleaning the Nomad on site is a bit of a pain. Flipping over a 28 pound suitcase to dump out the ash is awkward. The good news is that if you're just out for the day, you can close up the Nomad and head home without doing a thing. You don't even really need to wait for it to cool since the outside never gets more than warm.

Once you're at home a hose will make quick work of cleaning up the Nomad, a pressure washer will work even better, but I've been getting by just fine with a hose.

The grill grate takes a bit more effort to clean. I do not recommend using any thing but bristle-free scrapers, I've been cleaning mine periodically with a green scrubber and occasionally throwing some wood in at the end of a cook to burn off the grate. Follow that up with a fresh seasoning and your grate should be clean and ready to go for your next cook.

The Nomad is the best portable grill I've used. That said, the Weber Jumbo Joe remains a very good grill at the faction of the price of the Nomad. Still, if you've got the budget for the Nomad you will not find a better grill and it will not disappoint.



# System76 Pangolin Review

Linux may not have evolved (yet!) into the mainstream desktop operating system its advocates had hoped, but fans of free software have never had it so good. Dell, Lenovo, HP, Purism, and System76 all sell excellent Linux-based hardware. Time travel back to 2012 to shout the good news and you'll have trouble convincing even the Linux faithful that the future is even brighter than they're dreaming.

And yet here we are. For the past six weeks I've been working on a System76 Pangolin laptop without ever giving a thought to the fact that I am not using Windows. Everything just works. The operating system is integrated with the hardware. The hardware is outstanding (more in that below), and I am hard pressed to find anything to complain about.

## AMD Inside

System76 has been making Linux laptops for longer than most of the big names that it now competes against, and in most respects is way ahead of everyone else. The Pangolin line launched two years ago as the company's first AMD laptop. The latest iteration features a Ryzen 7 6800U processor, with 32 gigabytes of RAM, and up to 16 terabytes of SSD storage.

As you might expect, 16 terabytes does not come cheap. The base model Pangolin is a reasonable $1,300, which gets you a single 250 gigabyte SSD (with a slot for a second). Fully decked out at 16 terabytes you'd be looking at $4,213. Most of us don't need that much storage, but I especially like having two drive slots, which gives you a lot of flexibility to upgrade down the road. 

The 15-inch form factor is my least favorite part of this laptop—it's just too big for me—but if you love a huge screen and a 10-key number pad, the Pangolin delivers. That said, the big, wide screen is nice, and major bonus point for the matte display. The 1920×1080 FHD screen has a 144 Hz refresh rate, which is nice for gaming.

The size makes the Pangolin on the heavy side at just shy of 4 pounds. That's not overly heavy for a 15-inch laptop, but it definitely feels large coming from a 2.5 pound 13-inch laptop. The build quality is great. It's not quite Thinkpad-level great, but as close as you're going to get without buying a Thinkpad.

Pangolin remains impressively thin at under an inch despite the plethora of ports that System76 has packed in. There's Gigabit Ethernet, HDMI 2.0, a single USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C port (with DisplayPort support, but not Thunderbolt), three USB-A ports, a 3.5mm headphone/microphone combo jack, and a full size SD card reader. I can't tell you how much I miss full size SD card readers. Also note that unlike the previous model, this Pangolin can charge over USB-C. System76 provides a barrel-style charge cord, but I primarily it using my own USB-C charger (this [Satechi](https://www.amazon.com/Satechi-108W-USB-C-3-Port-Charger/dp/B09888WNM4)).

It's also worth noting that System76 has included a hardware camera kill switch for privacy. I was curious how this works and after a bit of tinkering, discovered that it does indeed completely drop the camera from the system bus. It's a nice little feature for those that want it—saves you some electrical tape anyway.

I really like the Pangolin's keyboard. The keys have a pleasant bounciness to them with a nice return. The keys seem every so slightly larger than what I am used to on my Lenovo, which took a minute to adjust to, but once I was comfortable I much prefer the System76 keyboard. That said, I am not a fan of number pads and the way they make the rest of the keyboard (and trackpad) off-center. It didn't bother me enough to be a deal-breaker, but I'd love to see an option to not have a number pad, I have no problem with dead space to the side of my keyboard. I should also mention that I am a key pounder and everyone in my family commented on how quiet the Pangolin keyboard was compared to, apparently every other laptop I type on.

The AMD Ryzen 7 6800U chip delivers impressive performance. Sysbench scores were well above any other Linux laptops I've tested recently (I got 4,786 events per second on a single core). It doesn't have a dedicated GPU, but I found the integrated graphics perform very well compared to previous generation AMD graphics. If you're looking for a full-time gaming rig, this probably isn't going to cut it, but for the casual gamer the Pangolin will be able to hold its own. The bottom line is this is a plenty powerful machine for most people. The only real limitation for some will be the 32 gigabytes of RAM, which is not upgradeable.

Battery life in Linux is often... not great. I am happy to report that the Pangolin managed 8.5 hours of battery life in our standard battery drain test, which involves playing a 1080p video at 75 percent brightness with networking turned off. That's actually quite good for a screen this size and the better news is that in real world use I almost always got through a full workday without needing a charger.



Downsides: 32 gb ram, no 4k, no Thunderbolt

## Pop_OS! Linux

As with all of System76’s Linux-powered laptops, the all-new Pangolin comes with System76’s custom built Pop!_OS Linux distribution installed. As I said when I reviewed HP's Dev One laptop, which also ran Pop!_OS, Pop!_OS provides the best user experience I've seen in a Linux desktop. It manages to be easy enough for Linux newcomers to find their way around, while still offers a good amount of power-user features. Want tiling windows? Just toggle a switch in a toolbar menu. There are loads of (customizable) keyboard shortcuts for developers who eschew the mouse, and there's plenty of trackpad gestures to control workspaces, window focus, and more. 

As a long time Linux user perhaps I am biased, but to my mind the user experience of Pop!_OS is better than what you'll get on macOS or Windows. 

If you do have an issue, this is one of the easiest systems to get some help. At the bottom of the Settings menu, there's a Support panel. From there you can get to online documentation, community support chat (which often includes system76 engineers), and, if all else fails, you can submit a support ticket, complete with log files for system76's support staff to help you out.

If you're a seasoned Linux user with your own prefered distro you can of course wipe Pop!_OS and install your favorite. I tested Arch Linux and it installed and worked without any special effort on my end.















Every time I review a System76 laptop some neckbeard shows up in the comments a bit like Comic Store guy from the Simpsons, "ahem, excuse me, this are actually just rebranded Clevo laptops," so let's get that out of the way first. Not really. System76 works with upstream manufacturers like Clevo to spec out systems with hardware components that work with Linux and then write drivers where needed to make sure that the finished product is a seamless experience. Naturally Clevo also offers up a similar-looking chassis for sale, but there's none of the custom firmware or drivers that make it works so well. 



# Fujifilm Instax Mini 12

I have an affinity for the tangible that probably betrays my age more than anything, but nowhere does this hit me as hard as in photography. I [love photo prints](). I love photo books. I love instant images like Fujifilm's Instax prints. 

Thank goodness for Fujifilm, which stepped in to save instant film when Polaroid dropped the ball at the beginning of the digital era.

Since then Fujifilm has turned out an array of Instax cameras and printers and I have been a sucker for nearly all of them. I still have the original SP-2 and SP-3 printers and still use them all the time.

Fuji's latest effort in this realm is the Instax Mini 12, which is the latest version of what I'd call the cheapest fun camera you can buy. It's an adorable little bubble of plastic that makes the best way to get started with Instax.

The Mini 12 replaces the Mini 11 and changes a couple of small things that are quite big deals.

The first is that Fujifilm has made parallax correction work in close up mode (enabled by twisting the lens to close up). That correction means you don't have to guess where the center of the frame is for close up objects. What you see is what you get now, eliminating those terrible, ill-framed close ups that sometimes happened with the Mini 11. 

I also really like the new twist lens. This is both how you get into close up mode, and how you turn the camera on. I'll confess I had to consult the manual the first time to figure this out (after pressing the shutting button a dozen different ways), but once the dim little light bulb in my brain started working again, I came to appreciate a design that makes it virtually impossible to turn this thing on by accident.

Other upgrades include a new automatic flash control that detects brightness levels and only fires when needed. That's a step up from the Mini 11 which fires the flash for every photo. That said, the Mini 12 fired the flash far more than I would have liked, but perhaps my dream of a good low light Instax camera is just that. Whatever the case the Mini 12 is certainly a step up when it comes to flash handling.

Some things remain the same. The lens is still a 2 element plastic lens (60mm f/12 equivalent). There is no focusing. Everything is auto exposure. If this camera has a motto it would be: keep it simple. There's also still the little mirror on the front for framing your selfies.  

The one thing I don't particularly like about the Instax 12 is the look. The body is in the same vein as the Mini 11, with a kind of Bob Ross, fluffy fluffy cloud vibe to both the shape and range of available colors. It's fun and playful and I can see why Fuji uses it, it turns the camera into a very friendly, approachable object. It screams *this is easy and fun*.

For those like me, wanting something more, well, camera-like, there is always the [Instax Mini 40 ($100)](https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-Instax-Mini-Instant-Camera/dp/B091D8C7RC) (or if you feel like splurging, the [Mini 90 ($205)](https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-Instax-Mini-Neo-Classic/dp/B00FR85IRK/)—see our [guide to instant cameras](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-instant-cameras/) for more options). 

## The App

To go along with the Mini 12 Fujifilm has released a new app called Instax Up. The app is free for Android and iOS. The key function is that it will "scan" (um, photograph) your Instax prints, allowing you to store and share them online. If you have photos in any other Instax apps, you can import them to Instax Up so everything is in one place.

Once an image is in the app you can edit it with a few simple controls, add notes, even geotag it using a map. If you amass a sizeable collection of scans you can filter and search by Instax film type, date scanned, or any tags you've added. You can also share the image to any other app on your phone.

Sigh. So yes, now you can post even your Instax selfies on Instagram. So much for the tangible. I get it, I get it. I am old and curmudgeonly. Fujifilm no doubt has a boatload of market research to prove the intelligence of this move. Me, I deleted the app as soon as I had proved to myself that it worked as advertised. 

In my world, Instax prints are something you stick on the wall, with tape. And they stay there until the sun bleaches those moments back to nothing, leaving us only the cool of the evening and those memories we etched in our minds.

Whatever the cause the Mini 12 is the cheapest, easiest way to enter the Instax world and it remains my top pick for anyone who wants a dead simple, incredibly fun camera.



# Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 Review

Dell's XPS 13 laptops are some of our favorites. The latest version did not wow us like past releases, but the XPS line remains thin, light, powerful enough, and an all-round good deal for a premium laptop. 

For years now Dell has produced a convertible, 2-in-1 version of the XPS 13 that was essentially the laptop verion, but with a 36-degree hinge. This year, however, Dell has done something different with the 2-in-1, offering a detachable keyboard with a tablet screen that has more in common with the Surface Pro 9 than the XPS 13 laptop.

In some ways the XPS 13 2-in-1 bests the Surface Pro at its own game, but in other, potentially important ways it does not.

## tk What Works

I've been testing Dell XPS 13s for seven years now. I even bought one years ago (the last developer edition with a nose cam alas) but my first impression of the new 2-in-1 version was: this is not an XPS 13. After weeks of using it, I still stand by that. There is much to like here, but thinking of this as an XPS 13 does this hybrid laptop-tablet a disservice. This is something else entirely.

Dell sells the XPS 13 2-in-1 in a variety of configurations, starting at $1,049, but that does not get you the keyboard folio, which is a $100 add-on. You definitely want the keyboard too, without it the XPS 13 is considerably less useful (mostly do to Windows 11's tablet limitations).

Call the starting price $1,149 then. That gets you an Intel Core i5, 8 gigabytes of RAM and a 256-gigabyte SSD. The configuration I tested had the i5 processor, but bumped the RAM to 16 gigabytes and the SSD to 512 gigabytes, which brings your total price to $1,299 (including the folio Keyboard). For reference a similarly specced Microfot Surface Pro 9 would set you back $1,399 and would only have a 256 gigabyte SSD. Fully decked out the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 with an i7 chip, 1 terabyte SSD, folio keyboard and stylus is $1,699 to the fully decked out Surface 9's $2,600 (though the Surface would have 32 gigabytes of RAM, which is not an option on the Dell).

The XPS is the clear winner when it comes to price, but there are some trade offs.

The XPS lacks the Surface's kickstand-style design, which allows you to rest the screen at any angle you like. The XPS 13 is held up by the folio, which slides down the back of the tablet, locking in place with magnets. That means it's limited to only those angles where there are magnets. The most obvious is the first, the angle you'd want for typing at a desk. After that you have to slowly slide the folio down until you feel it lock in place. In the end there are three possible angles (that I could find anyway), but switching between them is a not simple like it is with the Surface.

As with any folio-style keyboard typing in your lap is awkward, but possible. I wrote most of this review with it balanced in my lap. That said, if you primary want to type with this in your lap, I have a device for you: it's called a laptop. 

Typing on the Dell folio keyboard is not unlike typing on the XPS 13 Plus ([7/10 WIRED Review](https://www.wired.com/review/dell-xps-13-plus/)). The keypress is shallower than an ordinary laptop, but still deep enough that feel like you pressed something and the response is springy in a satisfying way. One thing to note, this keyboard does not tilt like the Surface Pro.

The other thing to consider here is that, given that most of us do want a keyboard, pairing a 1.6 pound tablet with a 1.26 pound keyboard give you a 2.8 pound device. The Dell XPS 13 laptop weighs 2.6 pounds and has a screen that can be adjusted to any angle. The main reason I can see to pick this over the laptop is for those who primarily want a Windows tablet.

When it comes to performance the 2-in-1 XPS 13 proved curiously powerful, considering its thermal limitations. In fact, it scored better in the Geekbench test suite than the XPS 13 laptop I briefly tested last year. In theory these are the same chip, and given the fanless design of the 2-in-1 I would expect *worse* performance. And yet, in benchmarks it came out slightly ahead. In real world use I did not struggle or encounter a long to lag. And I spend most of my time in Windows using Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL), which is notoriously heavy on the CPU. 

Suffice to say that performance of the i5 model, which uses a 12th-generation Intel U-Series processor, is good enough for most of the use cases in which you'd want a hybrid device like this. If you're thinking you want this for video editing, you are wrong, you do not. Nor is it a good gaming setup. But for browsing the web, working with documents, even editing very large spreadsheets, the XPS 13 was plenty snappy.

XPS 13 2-in-1 comes with a very different, and in my view much nicer, display from its laptop sibling. Like the Surface Pro it uses a 3:2 ration screen with a 2880 x 1920 pixel screen. With 500 nits of brightness, it works great outdoors and is plenty sharp. Dell also says there's support for DisplayHDR 400 and Dolby Vision, which you won't find in the XPS 13 laptop. It's also protected by Gorilla Glass Victus and its a touchscreen (it also works with the sold-separately pen)

Another place that the tablet XPS 13 outshines its laptop sibling is the webcam, which is a 5MP camera which streams very nice 1080p video. I'd really love to see this camera in the regular laptop.

Dell XPS 13s have never had many ports and every year we seem to get fewer. Like the XPS 13 laptop, the 2-in-1 has just two Thunderbolt 4 ports. You do get adapters for any USB A devices and a 3.5mm headphone jack, but seriously Dell, just build a headphone jack into the device.

Probably the biggest disappointment of the XPS 13 2-in-1 is battery life. In our standard local video playback battery test I got only 6 hours 43 minutes of battery life. In real life use I didn't ever manage to get through a workday without plugging in. Battery life is only marginally worse than the Surface Pro, so it's not bad for a Windows tablet, but it's a far cry from what you get from even an average laptop.

The final thing I will note is that so far there is no developer edition of the 2-in-1 with Ubuntu Linux install by default. I was able to install and run Arch Linux without any major issues, but you might run into some hardware compatibility issues with older Linux Kernels. Touch support varies considerably across Linux desktops, but in my experience it's generally no worse than Windows, which isn't that great.











# Fujifilm X-T5 Review

The Fujifilm X-T5 is the best camera the company has ever made and, for the right photographer, it might be the best camera you can buy right now.

Once the flagship mirrorless in the X series cameras, that role is now filled by the X-H2, which leaves the X-T5 free to become a great stills-oriented camera aimed at photographers. It's not perfect—the autofocus could be better—but if you love manual controls, the ergonomics of classic film cameras, and the distinctive color and character of Fujifilm's X series cameras this is the camera for you.

## Classic Style

The X-T5 represents a return to form for the X-T line. It's smaller and lighter than it's predecessor, and doesn't have much in the way of new video features. Instead it takes mainly stills-oriented features from the flagship X-H2—including the new 40-megapixel APS-C sensor, the fifth-generation X-Trans Processor, better autofocus, and in-body image stabilization.

The new sensor is the highlight. This is the first APS-C sensor that matches the image quality of what's in my Sony A7RII. It's not as large or high resolution as newer full-frame cameras like the Sony A7RIV, but it's good enough that, when editing images, I never found myself thinking "I wish I'd shot that in full frame." 

The X-T5 shoots surprisingly good video footage as well, but lacks some high-end features, like ProRes support (available over HDMI), that you'll find on the X-H2. Likewise the flip-out variable angle rear screen so handy for shooting video is gone (again, it's been relegated to the X-H series cameras). The clear message here is if you want a high-end hybrid still and video camera, the X-H2 is the camera for you. The new X-T5 is very much geared toward still photographers, and manages to find the near-perfect balance between technical chops and that ill-defined thing photographers call "character".

First the technical chops. As noted the 40 megapixel sensor is wonderfully detailed and doesn't fall victim to the higher noise issues that sometimes come with more megapixels. That said, this will depend somewhat on how and what you shoot. I tend to use fast lenses in low light situations, and rarely shoot over 1600 ISO. In testing I found that once you went over that, noise became more of an issue. 3200 is still usable, but I would not go above that.

There is also the fifth generation X-Trans processor, which Fuji claims is four times faster than the X-Trans 4. This is also part of the new autofocus system which, while very good within the Fuji X-series cameras, is not that great compared to what you get with Nikon or Canon systems. If you need extremely fast, completely accurate autofocus, you're better off with Nikon, Canon, or Sony. For most people's purposes though the autofocus of the X-T5 is good enough. What troubled me more than the speed was that sometimes, especially with eye-tracking turned on, the autofocus just missed. I've seen other reviewers with similar experiences, which makes me hope that this is something Fujifilm will address in a future firmware update.

While autofocus still isn't the best, the new in-camera image stabilization is fantastic. Fujifilm claims the IBIS system will buy you 7 stops of hand holding, but I found it was even better than that. I have fairly steady hands, but I was able to shoot quite a few usable images at 1/4 of a second hand held.

Now for the character, which I think of in two parts. First there is the distinctly Fuji output of the RAW files, and especially the in-camera JPGs, which can be customized, tweaked and tuned in ways that no other camera maker even begins to approach. When you meet rabid fans of Fujifilm cameras, this is usually the thing that hooked them. There are in fact hundreds of "recipes" around the web for tuning the in-camera JPGs to simulate various looks, from old film stock to whatever creative look you're into. I happen to like the [old film stock recipes](https://fujixweekly.com/recipes/) that Ritchie Roesch of Fuji X Weekly makes available.

The upgraded sensor hasn't lost the distinctive character of Fujifilm images, which to my mind is more than just the in-camera JPGs, Fujifilm lenses have a warmth and color rendition that's unique to the X Series. Everything Fujifilm fans love about color, rendering, and the character that these cameras and lenses produce remains with the new sensor.

The other half of that character is the design of the camera. The Fujifilm X-T5 looks more at home next to my old Nikon F3 than it does next to the Sony A7. I spent three weeks with the X-T5 and in that time I had two people come up to me and ask if I was shooting with a film camera. To me this captures the look and feel of this camera better than anything I could say. 

Some might argue that appearances don't matter or that Fuji cameras are for hipsters, but I think that misses the point. Form and function are intertwined, one serves the other. Film cameras were designed they way they were because it was the simplest method of making all the settings available to the user. The manual dials to control ISO, shutter speed, and (on most lenses) aperture aren't there to make the X-T5 look cool or retro, they serve a purpose: you can set all those things before you bring the viewfinder to your eye. That way the exposure is dialed in and you can focus on composing. The X-T5's manual features serve a purpose—to get the technical aspects of photography out of your way quickly so you can focus on the creative part. 

The only time I found the dials got in the way, was when I wanted to put the camera in full auto mode so my kids could try it. That requires turning the shutter speed dial, ISO dial, and lens aperture dial to A setting, which is cumbersome. But the X-T5 isn't priced or really aimed at entry-level photographers anyway so I don't see this as a huge issue.

Not everything can be controlled with dials. You'll still want to get into the menu system, which I found easy to navigate (but I am coming from Sony, which I think has the most confusing menus in a camera). There's no touch capability when browsing the menu system on the scree (as with previous models, the touch features are limited to focus and shooting). The first thing I do with any camera is turn off touch completely, but if that's something you want be aware that it's not here. You can navigate through using the D-pad, selecting options with the center button.

Finally, it's worth noting that this camera has a new battery system, which is frankly excellent, but as part of it there is no way to put a battery grip on the X-T5. I have never felt the need for a battery grip on any camera and definitely didn't on the X-T5, but if that's something you swear by, no that you aren't getting it here.

In the end what made me like that X-T5 so much is that it's a rather opinionated camera, but one that shares my opinions—autofocus is nice, but not necessary, all important settings should be dials, and what really matters is that undefinable something extra you see in the results. The only place the X-T5 and I part ways is that I want all that in a rangefinder body like the X-Pro or X-E series cameras. In the mean time though, the X-T5 is mighty tempting and as good as it gets for Fujifilm photographers.





# Nemo Osmo Dagger Review

Reasonably light, very spacious, and easy to set up and take down.
Interior comfort is fantastic—there’s sufficient room side-to-side and lengthwise for two people to comfortably sleep.
Large and functional vestibules make it easy to organize and stash gear.

New Osmo fabric is resists sagging in wet weather, holds up well in wind. More sustainable fabric. Reasonably light. Large, spacious vestibules. Roomy interior with excellent star gazing potential.


ility slant.
Nemo boosted interior storage with the latest model, and I had no trouble finding room for all of the essentials inside.

At a campground last week I watched someone set up what looked like an old-school canvas tent, complete with a wood burning stove in it (it is winter), and I thought see, you don't really need all that expensive high tech gear, army tents still work. When I got home I looked up that tent and realized it was more expensive than most of my backpacking equipment combined. Never mind, I'll stick with the lightweight nylon.

Recently I've been using Nemo's Osmo Dagger 3P tent, a three-person (sort of) freestanding, double-walled tent made of a new fabric Nemo calls Osmo. It's not cheap either, but the new Osmo fabric is a nylon polyester blend, made with 100 percent recycled nylon and polyester yarns woven in such a way that it stretches less and repels water more than nylon alone. It's also made without the use of flame-retardant chemicals or fluorinated water repellents (PFC and PFAS). Nemo is using this new fabric on its Dagger and Hornet Elite tents.

While the new fabric is a nice extra, what I like most about the Dagger 3P is just that it's a solid, roomy, lightweight tent capable of withstanding considerable wind without so much a ripple in the tent.

## Specs

Nemo makes both two and three person model of the Osmo Dagger. While I have only tested the three person version, aside from the dimensions and weight there isn't any difference between the two. In fact, given how roomy the three person is, this is one tent where I would say couples looking at the two person version don't need to size up to have enough room. 

The three person model is 90 by 70 in for a total of 41 square feet of living space. I had no trouble getting three 25-inch sleeping mats in it and the length was enough to accommodate my five feet ten inch height with about five inches to spare. The max height at the center of the tent is 42 inches, making it rather lower profile, which helps make it aerodynamic. That squat aerodynamic aspect proved welcome during a couple of very windy nights testing in the Porcupine Mountains, where local wind sheer was well over 50 MPH.

Setting the tent up wasn't hard. The Dagger comes with one multi-segmented pole that's single down the main length of the tent, forking at each end with a cross pole in the middle. The four end points fit into corner jakes feet connectors. The all-in-one design does mean the poles are slightly bulkier when packing it up, but it makes setup super simple. The cross-body pole does a good job of staking out the sides to create more vertical sidewalls for increased living space.

The sidewalls of the inner tent start off solid Osmo fabric for the first six inches, and then transition to white no-see-um mesh that's still see through, but less than black, which affords you a bit more privacy even with the rain fly off. The top of the tent is black mesh, which provides great ventilation and makes for excellent for stargazing on clear nights. That said, the huge amount of mesh means this tent is definitely in the three-season category. I did not have an opportunity to test it below freezing, but did spend several Autumn nights in the lower 40s Fahrenheit and was quite comfortable. 

The rainfly is where the bulk of the Osmo fabric comes in and I did indeed find that it lives up to its hype. I didn't encounter any torrential rains, but as noted it held up in some high winds and moderate rains.

This might sound incredibly shallow, but I also very much liked that the Dagger is a muted gray-green rather than the more neon color schemes of some other Nemo tents.

The rainfly provides two equal vestibules at either door. Doth have zippers at either end for venting or getting in and out. There's also two vent flaps at the top with stays to keep them open so condensation doesn't build up in a prolonged rain storm. The vestibules were plenty big enough to store three packs and three pair of boots, and you can get what Nemo calls landing zones—an option vestibule floor that clips into color-coded tabs on the tent and vestibule, creating a little gear hammock just off the ground. 

Inside organization is a little bit limited. There are some side pockets on the walls and overhead pockets that are primarily intended to hold a headlamp and diffuse the light. Personally I just need a pocket for glasses and a headlamp, which the Dagger offers, but if you like tons of storage space, that's something to keep in mind with the Dagger.

The Dagger is what Nemo calls an ultralight tent, which means it's light, packs small, but also that it's a little more fragile than a heavier, more traditional nylon tent. I didn't have a footprint, but I would highly suggest one to help protect the floor. I also find that ultralight tents benefit from more careful attention to site selection, set-up, and breakdown. Spending a minute to clear sharp debris before you pitch your tent will go a long way to helping it last.

## Conclusion

I really love this tent. It's lightweight, packs small and is easy to divide between hiking partners. Setup is quick and it sleeps three with gear. The new fabric performed well and is relatively environmentally friendly. It stacks up will against the competition as well. It is longer than the popular MSR Hubba Hubba, with more vestibule space. On the other hand the Hubba Hubba has more storage options in the form of a gear loft and larger pockets. 

For me though, the Nemo Osmo Dagger is one of the best tents on the market right now.




# Hasselblad X2D 100C Story

Hasselblad's name is synonymous with medium format photography. From the iconic 500 series film cameras to 2016's X1D, which was the first digital, compact (well, relatively), medium format mirrorless camera. The original X1D's image quality was outstanding, unfortunately the rest of the camera left much to be desired. Even the second model, which sped things up considerably, was still not quite there (6/10, WIRED Review).

Now Hasselblad has released the X2D 100C, along with some new XCD lenses, and I am happy to say, that this is the camera Hasselblad fans have been waiting for—it delivers stunning, massive RAW files, is plenty fast enough, and remains compact enough to feel like you're shooting with a DSLR. 

It's still a Hasselblad. At $8,200, plus another $4,000 or so for a lens, it's not an affordable camera, but for the right kind of photographer, the X2D delivers.

## What's New

The centerpiece of the X2D is the new sensor. The sensor is the same physical size as that of the X1D II, but the megapixel count is double. The sensor is 11,656 x 8742 pixels, which actually puts it slightly over 100 megapixels, and has a 4:3 aspect ratio. Hasselblad also touts the 15 stops of dynamic range the 16-bit files will deliver. If all that sounds familiar that might be because Fujifilm's GFX100 medium format mirrorless uses a very similar sensor (most likely it's the same sensor). 

That hefty sensor size renders some incredibly sharp images with very nice micro-contrast in the details. It is in every way better than the previous sensor Hasselblad used in the X1D, and one of the best on the market right now. The only downside is that you get some massive image files. If you end up with an X2D be sure to grab some spare SSD storage drives (and we have [a guide to SSDs here](https://www.wired.com/story/best-portable-external-storage-drives/)) because RAW files from this camera are over 200 megabytes per image. Even the "fine" JPEGs are between 60 and 80 megabytes, depending on the scene. 

The other, to my mind, even better upgrade in the X2D is the new processor. Huge image files are nice, but not so great if it takes forever to shoot them, as it did with the X1D. This time around I found that, while no speed demon, the X2D is fast enough that I didn't notice any lags. The processor upgrade is paired with an autofocus upgrade that now uses 294 phase detection points, which covers nearly all of the sensor. The autofocus also now uses phase detection, which helps make it noticeably faster.

While the autofocus system in the X2D is a huge improvement, it's nowhere near what you'll find in full frame flagship cameras like the Sony A9 or Canon R5. It reminded me a lot of Fujifilm's autofocus system, which on paper isn't very impressive, but out in the real world, at least for the kind of shooting I do, both the Fujifilm and Hasselblad autofocus is good enough 90 percent of the time. The X2D is not the camera I'd grab to shoot sporting events, and it definitely had some trouble in backlit scenes (which is where all autofocus systems fall down), but for most situations is was accurate enough, though it does tend to hunt at times. The toher thing to note here is that to get the full benefit of new autofocus speed you'll need to be using one of Hasselblad's new lenses. While the company's legacy glass will work with the X2D, it won't be nearly as fast focusing.

Other improvements in the X2D include in-body image stabilization, which Hasselblad says offers up to 7 stops of stabilization. The company says you can shoot handheld at up to one-second, which was borne out in my testing. I am lucky enough to have pretty steady hands, but I was able to shoot all the way up to 1.5 seconds without blur. On the flip side, any shake is very visible with a sensor that records this level of detail.

The viewfinder also sees a serious upgrade, moving to an OLED display with 5.76 million dots of resolution and a 60 frames per second refresh rate. It is quite simply the best digital viewfinder I've ever used. 

The rear touchscreen is similarly nice, I would even go so far as to call it phone-quality. It pairs nicely with Hasselblad's intuitive menu system (I was able to fine and change all the settings I needed quickly, without having to parse through a labrynth of menus).

Hasselblad has ditched the top dial it used on previous models for a small LCD screen on the top right side of the body that offers a quick overview of the current settings, including aperture, shutter speed, ISO, white balance and exposure mode, as well as how many shots are remaining and the current state of charge.

And finally the moment you've been waiting for, the video features in the X2D: there aren't any. I rather like that there's no video, despite my editor's protests that "it's a $13K camera system that doesn't shoot video?" Yes, yes it is. If you want a medium format camera that does video, the Fujifilm tk is what you're after. More on that camera in a minute.

While all the upgrades, the sensor, the gorgeous viewfinder, the faster processor, are all welcome—especially the processor, it would be difficult to oversell what an upgrade that is over the previous X1D, which, frankly, was just dog slow—my two favorite features in this camera are actually quite small and might even escape your notice at first. The first is that the X2D has a built-in 1 TB SSD. It also has a CFexpress Type B card slot, which you can use as primary, or a backup, but the SSD is incredibly nice to have. It was so much easier to just connect the camera to my laptop to dump files, which was orders of magnitude faster than using a card. It left me wondering why every camera maker doesn't offer an internal drive.

The second small, but welcome feature I loved was how fast the X2D charges. I never removed the battery. Instead I just plugged the camera into my laptop (via the USB 3.2 Gen 2 port), transferred over my shots, and then shut the camera off and left it sitting there why I did a bit of image editing. When the camera is off the LCD panel offers a percentage view of the battery's current charge. Needing to shut the camera off is the only downside, but otherwise it was so nice to just top off the camera charge at the end of the day and to not have to worry about charging up batteries. Hasselblad rates the X2D at 420 shots per charge. I never maxed it out, but out shooting one day I took 112 shots and when I got back the battery meter read 70 percent, which is pretty close to the spec sheet. 

## Lenses

Along with the new X2D Hasselblad is launching a new line of XCD V lenses. At the moment that consists of a 38mm, a 55mm, and a 90mm lens. I tested the 38 and 55. Note though that, if you already own any X1D lenses they’re all compatible with the X2D (for that matter if you have H6 lenses there’s an adaptor so you can use them with the X2D too). That said, the new lenses are very impressive.

My favorite feature is the excellent manual controls on these lenses. Pop the clutch ring forward and you can manually focus to your heart's content. The focus ring has good travel and works much better than older XCD lenses which used a focus-by-wired system that, frankly, wasn't very good. This ended up being my preferred method of shooting.

One thing to note, these, as with all other Hasselblad lenses, are leaf shutters, which means the shutter is built into the lens. This makes the lenses expensive, but it allows for very fast sync speeds. The ability to control ambient light (via fast sync speeds) has always made the Hasselblad almost unbeatable for environment portraiture.

## Should You Buy the X2D?

You can't evaluate this question without accounting for your budget. If the Hasselblad is in your budget, it's well worth considering. The shooting speed and autofocus performance, both of which are on the slow side, means many will be happier to trade the image quality of the Hasselblad for the speed of a Canon or Nikon full-frame. For those photographers the X2D is probably not the way to go.

For the right kind of photographer though the X2D is going to be one of the best cameras currently available. The richness of details in the RAW files, the lovely, slightly cool Hasselblad color rendering, and the leaf shutter make this camera (especially paired with new lenses) capable of incredibly shots you won't get from any other system. 






---

# Garmin Forerunner 255


The Garmin's Forerunner line of GPS-enabled fitness trackers is bewilderingly complex and the company updates Forerunner models so often even those of us who test them for a living have trouble keeping up sometimes. That's a good thing—new features are almost always a plus—but it does make picking the right model a challenge.

To further complicate your decision, Garmin recently updated its Forerunner 255. The latest model brings multi-band GPS support, barometric altimeter, and much-improved sleep tracking, among several dozen other welcome additions. 

The result is a multi-sport, runner-friendly watch. At $350, this is one of the best value-to-features watch in the Garmin lineup.

## New and Noteworthy

For years now I have used the Garmin 245, which falls in the middle of Garmin's Forerunner line, and is aimed mainly at runners. With the new 255, Garmin has retired the 245. At first I thought this might be a mistake, after spending several months with the new 255, I am inclined to agree with Garmin, this is better than the 245 in every way. 

As with any fitness tracker, how much any of this benefits you will depend on what you're doing. For reference, my workout routine is body weight-based, with alternating walking and sprinting sessions thrown in throughout the week. I also used the 255 on hikes, paddle boarding, and for sleep tracking.

Like nearly all non-touch Garmin watches the Forerunner 255 has five buttons: three on the left side and two on the right. I find the buttons more reliable to navigate with than the touch screen models, but the main thing to note is: there's no touch screen here. The watch face is fully customizable, with a good selection of default watch faces you can use to customize to your liking.

There are quite a few new features worth mentioning, but the one I was most excited about is the sleep tracking. The Forerunner 255 tracks heart rate variability (HRV), Sleep Stages, and gives you an overall Sleep Score, with a new Morning Report feature, similar to what Apple offers.

To try to test the accuracy of the Forerunner 255, I had my wife, who uses an Oura ring to track sleep, use it for a few weeks (it takes 19 days before the Forerunner will start making recommendations based on the sleep data it has collected). To keep this review to a reasonable length, the result was that she is no longer worried about replacing her Oura (given that company's trajectory). The Forerunner's data matched that of the Oura and is very nearly as comprehensive.  tk what's missing.

Of particular use is the new "Morning Report" feature, which gives you a nice summary of where your body is at, combining sleep data, recovery data, and training data along with the weather.It's a good way to get a quick overview of where you're at and what you want to do that day, training-wise.

The other thing that jumped out at me in the first week was the new auto-detection features. The Forerunner knew when I was doing pushup and logged them, it knew when I was walking, running, resting. It's particularly well-suited to interval training thanks to the automatic detection. Also useful are the training and recovery tools, which previous models I've used lack. They're not as comprehensive as what you'll find in the more expensive 955, but together with the sleep tracking they can give you a more accurate impression of where you're at and how to get to where you want to be.

Other features worth mentioning include, multi-band GPS support (with dual-frequency support), which makes for more accurate GPD tracking, a barometric altimeter and compass, useful for hitting the trail, and a ton more cycling support including VO2Max and the ability to connect to many bike gadgets via Bluetooth. The GPS support is worth noting because it is much more accurate, but it takes a heavy toll on the battery. 

I was able to get right around the advertised 30 hours using GPS-only, but enabling the multi-band support dropped that to just over 15 hours. Since super accurate GPS isn't something most people need all the time I suggest using it only when you need it, the same way you'd save battery life by turning off pulse ox and other battery-intensive features when you don't need them.

The final thing I find worth mentioning is that you can now fully configure your watch from the Garmin app on your phone. Naturally you can change settings from the watch, but the ability to set things up on your phone makes life so much easier, especially given the emphasis here on creating workout plans based on future events. The daily suggested workouts can be connect to future calendar events, for example an upcoming race, the app can use to automatically creating workouts for that distance.

## Conclusion

The Forerunner 255 comes in two sizes now, 42mm and 46mm. They are both $349. There is also the Forefunner 255 Music, which is $399 and can store tk hours of music (roughly tk songs). Although I tested the Music model, it's not a feature I use much. It works.

The problem with fitness trackers is that most of use only use maybe half of the features available. The question is, do you use the features the Forerunner 255 offers? Personally I find it a huge upgrade over the 245 and Venu for the sleep tracking features. 

Despite sometimes being billed as a triathlon watch, there are almost no swimming friendly features. If you're into triathlon, the 945 is the watch to get. It's expensive, but powerful. If you don't care about the sleep tracking features, have no need for new automatic run/walk/stand detection and similar features, the far cheaper Garmin 45 might fit the bill.








# Fire HD 8 and 8 Plus Review

As much as a I dislike Amazon as a company, nay, a cultural force, I find the company's cheap tablets strangely compelling. Fire tablets are one of the best values out there, and the new Fire HD 8 is no exception. 

Note though that I said "value". It's not the fastest, nor the fanciest, nor the sturdiest, but for the price the Fire HD 8 is a compelling option for those that are all-in on Amazon content—subscribe to Prime, love Alexa and so on.

The Fire HD 10 remains a more versatile tablet, but the smaller 8-inch models are worth a look if you don't want to spend that much.

## What's Right

Amazon has not messed with the design of the Fire HD 8. The 2022 version looks identical to the previous model, retaining the same screen, form factor and all-plastic construction. Like the previous model that all-plastic construction is surprisingly sturdy. I've dropped mine from about waist height on a hardwood floor several times without doing any damage. That said, it's not as well made as more expensive, metal tablets.

It is slightly lighter than the last model according to the spec sheet, but it's not something you're going to notice much. At tk pounds, the Fire HD 8 is pretty heavy for its size.

The 2.0 GHz hexa-core processor is new and in my testing was marginally faster. Amazon claims the new Fire HD 8 is 30 percent faster than the previous release, my experience using them side by side is that it's slightly faster, but in most tasks, like browsing the web or playing video, you won't notice a huge difference. Considered on its own, let's charitably say that this is not a speedy tablet. It gets the job done, but put it up against just about any other Android tablet on the market and it's going to lose. Again though, it's fast enough to do what it's designed to do, which is deliver Amazon content.

That Amazon content lands on an 8-inch 1280 x 800 pixel display, which is not great. It's the sort of thing that would send David Lynch into fits, but it works well enough if you don't care that much about deep rich colors and solid blacks. Pixelation is still painfully visible in text, but no worse than any other tablet at this price.

The Fire HD 8 is available in either 32-gigabytes or 64-gigabytes of storage. The more the better if you can afford it. You can expand that storage capacity up to 1-terabyte using the microSD card slot.

One of the highlights of the Fire HD 8 is the impressive battery life. Amazon is touting 13 hours, I only managed 10:22 streaming video, but that's still very good.The downside is that charging up is slow. The provided 5 watt charger took... so long I went and found a 15 watt charger. With the 15 watt I was able to get it recharged in under 3 hours. Still not fast but better than the provided option.

If you want slightly more power there is also the Fire HD 8 Plus, which offers an extra gigabyte of RAM, wireless charging, and a 5 megapixel camera (to the base models 2 megapixel—neither are very good so don't let this be the selling point of the Plus). The extra RAM is very welcome and makes the Plus model worth the extra money if you've got it. That said, the difference here is not as noticible as it is with the 10-inch Fire HD where the Plus model turns that slate into something you can get real work done on. If you want to get real work done, neither Fire HD 8 tablets are for you.

Along with the Plus model Amazon has quite a few other bundles, like the Fire HD 8 Kids models, which feature protective cases, some extra software and content bundles along with parental controls. There's also now a Gaming bundle that comes with a Luna Controller, though give the limiations of Fire OS, I can't imagine this appealing to many.

There in lies the main rub with Fire tablets—Amazon's software.

## What Wrong

Out of the box Amazon's Fire tablets offer an experience that reminds me most of the hyper ad-saturated world of Idiocracy. From the moment you try to unlock your Fire HD 8 you are confronted with an onslaught of ads and design dark patterns engineered to get you clicking on stuff, especially if you opt for the ad-supported models. Just don't. Spend the extra $20 to free yourself from some of the ads. Don't worry, you'll still have Amazon content pushed on you every time you so much as look at your Fire HD 8.

Fire OS has been updated to run on Android 11, which is still two full versions behind stock Android, but other than the app switching screen and few minor theme details, I could not tell much difference. Fire OS remains extremely limited by its App Store.

Out of the box Fire HD 8 tablets do not offer any Google apps, and no access to the Google Play store. The selection in the Amazon App Store is what you might call lacking. Want to watch YouTube? Chat on Slack? Nope, not happening. Even if you want to argue that this is tablet mostly for consumption, and doesn't need much of what's in the Google Play Store, YouTube is a glaring omission. My suggestion would be that if you have specific apps you want to use, browse Amazon's App Store before you buy to make sure what you want is available.

What about "sideloading" Google Play? We do have a guide on how to Install Google Play on Your Fire Tablet, but unfortunately that guide doesn't work for this model. Or at least it doesn't work with the current version of Fire OS. Some Reddit users who have recieved a software update to Fire OS 8.3.1.3 claim that they have been able to install and use Google Play. My review unit is so far stuck at Fire OS 8.2.1.2, which I can confirm will install the Google Play Store itself, but does not allow you to login and install any apps from it. I will update our guide with info on how to do it once I can confirm that it works.

## Conclusion


# GoPro Shrinkage

The Hero 11 Mini is 13 percent smaller than the Hero 11 Black. That doesn't sound like a whole lot, and in some ways it isn't, but for situations where wind resistence and drag are a factor—on your motorcycle helmet for example—it's a big enough deal that any size reduction helps. 

The Mini is about the same depth (technically it's actually 4mm wider) and height as the full size Hero 11. Where it's smaller is the width, which is 20mm less than the full size camera. To save that space GoPro got rid of all the screens on the Mini. In addition to the weight and size savings, this has the distinct advantage of making the Mini more rugged. The big screens on the Hero 11 Black are the most vulnerable points and most of the destroyed GoPro's I've seen have involved either the screen or the lens cracking. The Mini eliminates at least the possibility of destroying a screen. There is technically a tiny LCD on top of the camera to show you things like the current shooting mode, but in order to frame your shots and delve into settings the Mini requires the GoPro Quik app.

Until the Mini arrived I'll confess I had never really used the Quik app to set up my GoPro. Even shots where I am not going to be monitoring—like strapping it to the front of a paddleboard or surf board—I still set up everything using the back screen. 

The app works fine, and the transition from screen to app is easy to make—the app is mostly the same menus as you get with the screen interface, with one notable exception. At first I thought the Mini did not do Timelapse because it's not a menu item in the Quik app when paired with the Mini like it is with the Black. That is, in the UI for the Black there are three shooting modes: Video, Timelapse, and Photo. In the Quik UI for the Mini there is only one button: Video. But when you click to change your video settings, you'll also find Timelapse, along with all other special modes like Star Trails, Light Painting, and so on. 

Moving TimeLapse mode doesn't bother me that much once I figured it out, but what it means is that you can't save presets here in the main menu like you can in the Black. That makes switching video modes difficult. You either have to do it on the camera, which, using a single line LCD screen to navigate is a tedious and awkward process, or you have to pull out the app and change modes that way, which honestly, is also tedious. The message here is that if frequently changing shooting modes is part of your workflow, the Mini is not for you. That said, this seems like something that could easily be solved by a software or firmware update.

There are two other small design differences from the Hero 11 Black. The Mini has not one, but two sets of flip down feet for mounting. Like the full size, there are two feet on the bottom, but you also get a rear mount point to point the camera forward. Again, I see this as a huge advantage for helmet mounting since it will get you a forward looking shot without sticking the camera up as high on the helmet.

The other big difference is there's no removable battery. The good news is that the battery inside is the same as the Enduro that's now standard on the Black, so shooting times are pretty close. The Hero 11 Mini claims 73 minutes when shooting 5.3K at 30fps. I got 70. The same settings on the Hero 11 Black lasted 73 minutes. Pretty much a wash. The difference of course is that you can swap batteries on the Black and you can't on the Mini. You can however power it with an external power pack. As of this writing there is no pass through door for plugging in a USB cable, but you can just pull off the side door, plug in a USB-C cable it in that way.

The internals of Mini are nearly identical to the Black. The Mini uses the same nearly square sensor, shoots at the same video resolutions and frame rates, and to my eye and ear produces the same results. That said, there is one big thing missing and one small thing to be aware of.

The biggest missing features is that the Hero 11 Mini doesn't have a Photo mode. You can pull 24 megapixel stills out of 5.3K video clips—which, to be honest, is all I do anyway—but there is no dedicated photo mode, and no ability to shoot RAW photos like you have in the Black.

The other big missing feature is GPS. The Mini has no GPS support. 

## What Works and What Doesn't

The Mini does work great if you want something physically smaller. It is (I think) designed primarily for scenarios where you set it up, mount it, and shoot without changing anything. I was initially enthused about the Mini. I do a lot of shooting where I don't need a screen or monitor the footage at all. But, what I do do is change shooting modes quite a bit, especially frame rates and that's just too awkward to do to make the Mini enjoyable to use.

If you frequently change settings, spend the money to get the full size Hero 11 Black. On the other hand if you're planning to mount this on a helmet and go, the smaller form factor and cheaper price make the Mini an easy sell. Likewise if you've already got a full size GoPro the Mini could serve you well as a second camera—again because that's a scenario where you're likely to set up and shoot without changing settings.


# DJI Osmo Action 3

DJI can't make up its mind about what sort of action camera it wants to build. Every iteration gets better, from the original with its color front screen, to the second version with it's clever modular, magnetic design, to the latest version which is in many ways a synthesis of the best parts of the first two.

Design-wise and functionally there's much to like here. If the new Osmo Action 3 were going up against the GoPro Hero 10 it would be very competitive. Unfortunately the GoPro Hero 11 is [already on the scene](https://www.wired.com/review/gopro-hero-11-black/) and DJI's latest effort struggles to compete with the Hero 11's video and image quality.

That said, if you don't need vertical video, 5.3K footage, or the 27-megapixel stills of the Hero 11, the Osmo Action 3 is much more affordable and still makes a very solid action camera.

# Osmosis

The first Osmo Action brought a color screen to the front of the action camera, a move that GoPro later copied. Now DJI has upped the ante again by a touch screen to the front of the Osmo Action 3, allowing you to not just frame shots, but control the camera as well. 

It might sound cramped to try to touch the little screen, but it works surprisingly well. I had no trouble adjusting basic settings like mode, shooting resolution, and other oft-used settings.

When the Osmo Action 3 first arrived I'll confess I was disappointed to see that it came with a cage with mounting brackets on the bottom. I incorrectly assumed that was it for mounting. In fact DJI took the best part of the Action 2—the powerful magnetic mounting system—and brought it to the Action 3 in the form of a quick release mounting system. This is the first mounting system I've used that trumps the GoPro in many ways.

It's by far the fastest, easiest way to move, for instance, between a flexible tripod, and a helmet mount. There's no unscrewing and fiddling with the threaded screws of GoPro mounts. There are third-party quick release mounts for the GoPro that offer similar functionality, but they aren't as simple and elegant as what DJI has done with this magnetic mount. And despite what you might think, it's very hard to accidentally knock these magnets off—it never happened in my testing, which included a few attempts to hit it as hard as I could without breaking the camera.

The other place the Osmo Action 3 impresses is battery life. DJI claims 160 minutes. I only managed 140 (with the rear screen off, the front screen used about half that time), but that's still leaps and bounds beyond the GoPro Hero 11's 70 minutes, which seems downright paltry in comparison. Also impressive is the recharge time—I was able to get batteries fully recharged in 52 minutes. DJI is also selling what it calls a "multifunctional battery case", which is a very slick case that also serves as a charging hub, powering up three batteries at a time. Throw that in your bag and you've got well over six hours of shooting time before you need to recharge. To shoot six hours with the Hero 11 would require six batteries.

So far so good. Externally the Osmo Action 3 is chock full of clever innovations. Where it's less impressive is the sensor inside. The Osmo Action 3 sticks with the 4K resolution of its predecessor. Most of the time what will get the job done, but I have found that the Hero 10 and 11's 5.3K resolution comes in handy when you want to crop and still export to 4K. I am also fond of shooting at 5.3K for the ability to pull out higher resolution still images.

The Osmo Action offers the same framerates at 4K as you'll find in other action cams, allowing for 120 frames per second at 4K and 240 frames per second in 1080p, which is plenty of frames to get those dramatic slow motion shots you crave. When you switch to 120 fps, the Osmo will warn you that at 25 C, the camera will overheat in 9 minutes. 

While high quality video is part of the equation, what you really want in an action camera is a great stabilization system. DJI’s RockSteady isn't quite GoPro smooth, but it's pretty close. The main time you'll notice some noise and blurring is in low light (indoors for example). This wasn't really an issue in most of my footage, but the GoPro Hero 11 did clearly outperform the Action 3 in low light situations.

One thing DJI does really well is the 360 degree HorizonSteady, which corrects shakes for any horizontal rotation and keeps a straight horizon. It works really well and allowed me to get some shots I would have messed up otherwise, but alas it's limited to 2.7K footage. I'm looking forward to this working in 4K in a future version.

The least impressive aspect of the Osmo Action 3 is the still photos. With only 12 megapixels available in this sensor, the results just don't match up with what the GoPro Hero 11 is capable of with its 27 megapixel sensor. 

While there are a couple of limitations to be aware of–namely the 4K resolution limit, and so-so still images–overall the Osmo Action 3 is a compelling alternative to the GoPro, especially when you consider that it sells for just $329 with no annual subscription necessary to get that price. The Hero 11 on the other hand starts at $500. You can get the Hero 11 for $400 if you sign up for a one-year GoPro subscription, but that will renew at $100 per year. If you don't need the higher resolution or the backup and cloud services that a GoPro subscription offers, DJI's Osmo Action 3 makes a much cheaper alternative.







# Insta360 X3 Review

For years now Insta360 has been working to merge the world of 360 video with the action camera. The Insta360 One RS (8/10 WIRED Recommends) has an interchangeable lens system allows exactly this flexibility. Still, you do have to change lenses, which not the easiest thing to do in some situations.

Enter the Insta360 X3, successor to the One X2 (Insta360 has dropped the "One" in the name). This is primarily a 360 camera, but you can opt to shoot out of a single lens, which turns it into an action camera. This is where the X3 shines, it's the perfect camera for the 360 enthusiast who might occasionally want to shoot more straightforward action footage.

## What's New

The X3 retains the same raw video specs found in the X2, shooting 5.7K at 30 frames per second in 360 mode. That said, there is a larger half-inch, 48 megapixel sensor and a brighter lens, making the video output of the X3 significantly better than the X2. 

If I hadn't recently tested the Insta360 One RS 1-inch 360 Edition ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-one-rs-1-inch-360-edition/)) I'd be ready to say the X3 produces the best 360 video I've seen. But the One RS 1-inch 360 Edition does offer better video results thanks to its 1-inch sensor and those huge Leica lenses. Still, it's also over twice the price, significantly heavier, not fully waterproof, and more awkward to shoot with. 

Let's just say you'd be hard pressed to find higher quality 360 video in a camera the size and price of the Insta360 X3. At the very least it's leaps and bounds better than the X2, with far sharper details when I zoom in on a scene.

The X3 also introduces the ability to switch between lens modes, shooting 360 video through both lenses, or using a single lens to shoot traditional 4K video. It's worth noting that in single lens mode the frame rate is limited to 30, but otherwise it feels very much like shooting with a good 4K action camera. This adds an extra dimension to the X3 and makes it more competitive with Insta360's own One RS system. If you're primarily in it for 360 video, and only occasionally plan to shoot some action footage, this is the camera I'd recommend. If your use case is the reverse, the One RS is the way to go.

The X3 isn't just video though, it can also shoot spherical still images at 72 megapixels, which are impressively detailed. There are not many places online to post such images without cropping them down, but it's kind of a cool feature to play with. I had fun using this on a timer at the end of selfie stick for immersive street photography-type shots. You can later auto-animate these images into panning videos using the Insta360 app.

While the X3 looks very much like the X2, there are some welcome differences, including more physical buttons. Just below the screen there are two buttons, one to start and stop recording, and another switch between lens modes. On the side there's a power button and a Q button for quickly switching between your presets. The screen is also much larger (2.29 inches) and brighter in the X3, making it easy to use even in direct sunlight. The battery door and SD slot cover are also a bit tighter in this update, which helps the X3 remain waterproofed to a depth of 33ft (10 meters). There's also a new 1800mAh battery, which will get you decent shoot times. I managed over 1.5 hours shooting 4K. Insta360 claims 81 minutes shooting 5.7K video at 30p, which feels about right based on my testing.

It's worth noting that the larger battery and other changes do make the X3 slightly heavier, but I still found it quite comfortable to carry around and not to much on the end of a selfie stick either. 

As I've noted in other Insta360 cameras, the company's FlowState stabilization compares very well with anything else on the market, including the GoPro. When applied to 360 footage I do sometimes notice a bit of shimmery effect, particularly around the seams where the video is stitched together, but it's not hard to minimize this by making sure your main subject remains centered. 

Keep in mind that, while the video quality here is very impressive, 5.7K isn't nearly as sharp when it's spread across a full spherical scene, as it is when you shoot with a traditional single wide lens, which covers roughly 160 degrees of a scene. This won't be all that noticeable when you're viewing your footage in Insta360s app (or other 3D video player), but when you go to export your video to a traditional flat format player like YouTube, you will only get a 1920 x 1080 resolution video (to export "flat" video in 4K you'd need to shoot 360 footage in 12K). That said, the only camera I've used that outputs a better looking 1080p reframed video is the far more expensive One RS 1-inch Edition. The X3 produces truly impressive video, especially when you remember that this is a camera that's easy to hold with one hand.

If you want maximum resolution the X3 is capable of shooting 8K timelapse video, which looks amazing, even exported to flat formats.

As with it's other cameras, the X3 connects with Insta360's mobile editing app, which remains one of the best editing apps I've used. No, it's not Final Cut Pro, but for an app that runs on your phone it's impressive. Even if you have no idea what you're doing you'll be able to figure out keyframes, jump cuts, and other edits thanks to the built-in tutorials. There are also some automated editing tools, including nose cam, sky swap, and street lapse, which are all fun the play with. What's impressed me the most though about the app is all the helpful tutorials. Honestly, even if you don't own an Insta360 camera, the app is worth browsing just for the how-to info. For those that would like something more powerful than a phone to edit with, Insta360 also offers a desktop-based editor for Mac and Windows.

If 360 degree video is your thing, the new X3 represents the best value camera on the market right now. Insta360's One RS 1-inch Edition does produce better results, but it's $800 versus the X3 at $450. If you mostly shoot action footage and dabble in 360 the One RS is probably the better buy. But for those sold on 360 footage who want to dabble in action footage this is the camera to get. 


# Framework Laptop Review

The world is littered with the burnt, abandoned hulks of tech companies that promise big things and delivered nothing. Last year when Framework launched a modular, repairable, upgradeable laptop I was skeptical. WIRED did not review it in part because, however good it might have been, much of its appeal depends on the company continuing to exist. 

Well, here we are over a year later and not only does the company still exist, but they've made good on their promise, releasing a second version of the Framework laptop, along with modular components that owners of the first version can use to upgrade if they wish.

That's some measure of success, but then Framework needs to keep going for many more years to really fulfill its promise. Still, if you bought the Framework laptop today, and the company disappeared tomorrow, you'd still have a great laptop with easy access to upgrade the RAM and SSD, which is more than I can say for most laptops these days. That said, given how great this laptop is, I don't expect Framework to disappear any time soon.

## Modular Madness

The Framework laptop is available in two forms. The first is your typical ready-to-use laptop. You order the configuration you want, and you still get all the modularity, but it arrives complete and ready to use. The other option is the DIY version. Here you can increase your level of customization—already have a good SSD? Order your Framework with no drive and save—but the trade off is you'll need to crack open the case (a mere five screws) and install your hard drive, RAM and additional ports before you start using it. Then you'll have to install Windows or Linux.

Being a DIY person, I tried out the DIY version. Framework sent a laptop, 2 8-gigabyte RAM modules, and 500-gigabyte SSD. Opening the laptop was very easy thanks to the included Torx screwdriver, which also has a spudger at the other end. Once the RAM and SSD were installed I got to choose which ports I wanted. 

There are four port "slots" on a Framework laptop, which allows you to mix, match, and upgrade your port selection at any time. All the various options plug directly into the motherboard via USB-C and lock in place so they won't fall out. I opted for 2 USB-C slots, 1 USB-A, 1 micro-SD card reader, and the built-in headphone jack. Other expansion slot options include another USB-A, HDMI, DisplayPort, and Ethernet adapter. They're all hot swappable too so if you need to make a change on the fly you can. I would love to see a full size SD card reader option here, but maybe I am the last person still using an SD card since I haven't seen a full size reader on a laptop in years.

Once the laptop was all assembled and configured the way I wanted it was time to install an OS. Framework supports Windows 11 and a few different Linux distributions (while I was testing Framework released a Chromebook option as well, but this requires different hardware). Having used nothing but Linux for over 15 years now, I, obviously, installed Linux. I started with what I think is the best Linux option for newcomers, [System76's Pop_OS](https://pop.system76.com), which I covered in more detail in my [review of the HP Dev One](https://www.wired.com/review/hp-dev-one-linux-laptop/). I also tested Ubuntu, which Framework supports, and Arch Linux, which Framework does not officially support, but worked just fine (Framework does support Manjaro, which is based on Arch).

## How the Hardware Fares

Once I had Linux install and configured the way I like it (very minimal, using [SwayWM](https://swaywm.org) as a window manager), I ran a handful of benchmark tests, getting the results you would expect from the 12th-generation Intel i7 chip in the model I tested. Performance of the Framework is on par with other 12-generation Intel laptops I've tested this year. What I immediately noticed running the benchmark tests though is that the Framework's battery took a serious hit.

In more real world usage I was able to squeak out about 6 hours most of the time, which is acceptable, but not great. I was able to get that figure up to 7 after I installed and ran through some Linux-based battery optimization tools. There's a great page on the Framework Community forums with battery tips for Linux users. You could possibly get a little bit better results in Windows, but most benchmarks I have seen of Windows machines come in around the same time. 

The Framework features a 13.5-inch, 2256 x 1504 pixel display, with a 3:2 aspect ratio, making it great for document work (I love the extra vertical room a 3:2 screen offers). The screen is plenty bright, though it is quite reflective. Colors were good, though not as nice as the OLED screens that are increasingly turning up in laptops at similar price points. There's a black bezel around the screen which is magnetic. You can customize the color via the Framework marketplace. At the top of the screen there are hardware switches for the camera and microphone. The entire screen and all its components are replaceable and upgradeable. 

The keyboard is nice, with a generous 1.5 mm of travel for those of us who like to pound on our laptops, seeking that satisfying clack of a mechanical keyboard. It doesn't have that clack of course, but it still felt good to type on. I was less a fan of the trackpad which felt mushy when I clicked. It's upgradeable natch, so perhaps Framework can iterate on this down the road.

That is about all I have to say about the hardware itself. Up against recent releases like the new Surface Laptop, Asus, Dell XPS and others the Framework falls a little short. It's very nice, but it's not quite as "premium" as some others out there. What sets the Framework apart though is the serviceability and the potential to upgrade components down the road.

If you think about it, that feels backward. Once you use the Framework you'll find yourself wondering, why aren't all laptops built for people to service and upgrade them? If you know what you're doing you can upgrade the SSD in most laptops. Sometimes the RAM. But upgrade the motherboard? Unlikely. 

This, above all else, is the reason I am recommending the Framework. It's the best laptop you buy if your criteria includes being in control of what you own, being able to upgrade, downgrade, service, and repair your laptop. If you bought the first generation of Framework, congratulations, you're early to the future because you can [upgrade your motherboard right now](https://frame.work/products/12-gen-intel-upgrade-kit?v=FRUPGRDKIT02) if you want. 

As for the rest of us, no the Framework isn't perfect, I'd love to see better battery life and an AMD option, but it's close enough that I think it's worth the gamble. It'll be what I buy next time I need a new laptop.





# Components



good aspect:
But I simply accept that most laptops only have at best 4 year lifespans.
I mean, the nice thing about this is that the lifetime of each component is not tied to the others. If you break the chassis, you get a chassis; if you want a new CPU, you swap the main board; if they iterate on the touchpad, you swap the touchpad.

# GoPro Hero 11 Black

GoPro defined the action camera, and it remains the top pick in our action camera guide. The truth is I rarely use my GoPro for anything action related and, according to GoPro, I am not alone. This fits with what I've seen out in the world. Most people you see using GoPro's don't have them mounted on a helmet or strapped to their chest. 

GoPro's latest Hero 11 Black is still every bit the action camera for those that *do* mount it on their helmet and "bomb the slopes," as my editor likes to joke, but it's also a really great, lightweight, easy-to-use, well, camera. 

GoPro's latest iteration adds even more user-friendly features, including a new sensor format that makes it easier to shoot vertical video for popular platforms like Tik Tok, simplified settings, tk, and more.


# TK

Side-by-side the only difference between last year's Hero 10 Black and this year's Hero 11 Black is the blue number on the side. Otherwise the body is the same, meaning all your accessories, lens filters, mods, and add-ons will work with the Hero 11. 

However, unlike say, the iPhone 14, [which requires a magnifying glass](https://www.wired.com/review/apple-iphone-14/) to tell from it's predecessor, the Hero 11 Black brings quite a few welcome changes to the Hero line.

The biggest and most obvious change is the new sensor. The sensor is marginally bigger, but only vertically, which gives it an 8:7 aspect ratio. Previous models could shoot in 16:9 and 4:3, but the new 8:7 makes the Hero 11 a better choice for shooting the abomination that is vertical video. Just kidding, it makes life easier for you Tik Tok lovers, because you can now shoot in 8:7, crop to vertical for platforms that use that abomination *and* also crop to 16:9 for sane video sharing.

While I make fun of vertical video, I do recognize its popularity and I think that GoPro moving in this direction makes it an even more useful camera for a wider audience. Even those of us who dislike vertical video are often compelled to crop things for platforms that require it.

The larger sensor also allows for what GoPro is calling HyperView, and even wider angle shot than the SuperView option in the Hero 10. While this is useful in some tight settings—think rock climbing, for instance—the distortion at the corners is extreme.

The other good news with the new sensor is that you can now extract 24.7 megapixel stills from your videos. To me, this is one of the best things about a GoPro—shoot video so you don't miss anything and then just use the Quik app (or other software) to extract still images out of the video. This is how I manage to get great photos of my kids running around without dropping $2,000 on a super fast, fancy camera.

If you shoot stills with the GoPro those images also get a slight quality bump, up to 27 megapixels from 23 in the Hero 11. Far more interesting on the still front though is the ability to shoot RAW images in burst mode. Previously burst was limited to JPEG files. The ability to shoot RAW in this mode gives another option for the scenario above—where you want to end up with a still, but you also want to shoot continuously. Burst mode isn't video, so there's still some chance you'll miss that perfect moment, but that risk is offset somewhat by the advantage of being able to develop a RAW image in my RAW editing software.

The video specs are very close to the Hero 10. The Hero 11 can record 5.3K video (up from 5.2K) at up to 60fps, 4K at up to 120 frames per second, and 2.7K at up to 240 frame per second if you want to shoot high-res slow motion clips.

The final hardware change worth noting is that GoPro's longer lasting Enduro battery, previously available separately, is now standard in the Hero 11. GoPro claims that the Enduro extends shoot times by 38 percent. In my experience battery life is ultimately determined primarily by what you're doing. Taking the default use case—shooting 5.3K at 30 frames per second in sunny conditions—I was able to get one hour and 13 minutes of footage. That's much better than the standard battery that came with the Hero 10 and gave up the ghost well before the one hour mark. There are also numerous way to extend battery life, like turning off Wi-Fi and GPS if you don't need them, or enabling Extended Battery Mode, which limits your video quality, but it's better get the footage at 5.3K 30 frames per second than miss it because the 60 frames per second killed your battery.

The biggest news in the software department is The Hero 11's new option to shoot in 10-bit color. Shooting in 10-bit color gives you greater dynamic range when you shoot in a flat color profile and do all your color toning in post. In other words, 10-bit color is most useful to those who love editing video and fine tuning their color toning in their post production workflows. 

As somehow who largely dreads post production video editing, I was far more excited about some of the other new software-based features in the Hero 11 Black, especially the star trails feature. If you've ever tried shooting star trails before you know how laborious of a process it is, stacking hundreds of images, so this will probably blow your mind: the Hero 11 can shoot perfect star trail video with a single press of a button. And here again the ability to pull a 24 megapixel still out comes in handy to grab star trails images. 

Other new software modes include a light painting mode if you want to have some fun with a flashlight, and a vehicle lights mode to easily turns night time car lights into rivers of white and red.

In keeping with the idea of less work for the user there are now two modes available in the GoPro: Easy and Pro. The camera ships in Easy mode, and offers a streamlined interface for those who aren't going to wade deep into the GoPro's color settings and other fine tuning details. If you are a Pro, or just used to the old UI, it's, um, easy to switch to Pro, which is the familiar old GoPro interface. 

Another nice feature isn't directly related to the Hero 11, in fact it works with all GoPro's going all the way back the Hero 5, that is more control over Auto Highlights video. You do need to be a GoPro subscriber for this one, and you have to turn on Auto Upload. Once you do the Quik app will automatically generate edits and put them in your Quik app. That much has been around for a while, but GoPro will be introducing the ability to edit Auto Highlight Video without downloading the source files to your mobile device. You'll end up editing a low-resolution proxy, but then when you export or share to another app it'll send the high resolution version. Unfortunately this was not available for testing when I was writing this review.

Alongside the new Hero 11, GoPro is introducing a new camera, the Hero 11 Black Mini, which is a Hero 11 Black in a smaller form factor sans screens. That means there's no way to review your footage and no way to even frame the shot in many cases (you can pair it with the Quik app and frame that way). That might sound strange, but for many of GoPro's core uses cases, that is the people that really do strap GoPros to their body and go surfing or climbing or motocross riding, the weight savings and streamlined form factor trump screens (which you can't see anyway when it't on your head.

There's another aspect I like about the Mini though. A while back Leica released a digital rangefinder with no screen, that is, no way to review your images. The Leica was impractically expensive, but I rather liked the message behind it: just shoot. Stop checking to see if you "got the shot" and just shoot. The Hero 11 Mini reminds me of that ethos. As GoPro's head of Product pointed out to me, it's not the kind of camera that you sit there shooting at your kid's party—being less in the moment—rather you stick it in the corner, push record and go back to living. 

All that said, I did not actually test the Hero 11 Mini, and still think, for most people, the Hero 11 Black is the best action camera to buy.








# MSR Freelite 2-Person Backpacking Tent

My backpacking life is an endless struggle between my desire to carry as little weight as possible, and my desire for comfort in the backcountry. 

Lately comfort has come to mean good food. That is, real food, not boil-in-pouch food. If I can carve a little weight out of my basic kit—tent, sleeping bag, pad, clothes, etc—I can bring bacon and eggs without overloading myself. This is why the MSR Freelite first piqued my interest.

At just two-pounds for the two-person version, the new Freelite shaves 9 ounces off the previous model, but remains surprisingly spacious. It's well-ventilated, features plenty of storage pockets and gear lofts, and unlike many tents at this weight, offers two doors with two vestibules.

# Ultralight and a Little Tight

There are three Freelite models available, a 1-person, the 2-person I tested, and a 3-person. MSR bills the 2-person model I tested as a "semi-freestanding tent for backpacking pairs." I think what MSR means by that is that this tent is great for two people who don't mind being, well, close. 

At 50 inches wide, the Freelite offers room for your standard 25-inch wide inflatable pad. I tested it using a [pad from Sea to Summit](https://seatosummit.com/products/ultralight-insulated-mat), and the [Tensor pad from Nemo](https://www.nemoequipment.com/collections/ultralight-sleeping-pads/products/tensor). 

One of my favorite aspects of the Freelight is that there's no taper. The Freelite is truly rectangular: the width at the feet is the same at the width at the head. The tent is 82 inches long, and the inner walls are steep, making it good choice for taller folks. I am 5'11" so it's a little tough to truly test, but I would think it would be comfortable for people up to 6'3". 

While it's just wide enough to accommodate two, there isn't much room besides. For couples, or if, like me, you're backpacking with kids, this is the near perfect amount of sleeping space. I shared it with my 10-year-old and found it to be plenty roomy. If you don't want to be right next to your hiking partner, you might want to look at the [3-person model ($480)](https://www.msrgear.com/tents/backpacking-tents/freelite-3-person-ultralight-backpacking-tent/11513.html) which adds 12 ounces, but is over a foot wider.

One of the ways MSR has saved on weight in this tent is the pole structure, which consists of a central hub pole that sprouts out in three directions, and a cross-pole that fits over on top horizontally. The hubbed pole ends fit into aluminum grommets at the base of the tent. The grommet straps can then staked out using MSR's "Needle" stakes. Weighing a mere quarter of an ounce, these little stakes looked flimsy and made me a little nervous. I brought a few other stakes I needed to test as a backup, but in the end, I went with these. They're light and thin, but stood up to some heavy pounding with rocks, and worked great with guy loops at the base of each pole.

Once you have the grommet straps at the base staked and the hub poles set up, the tent clips in place and then you can install the cross pole. The cross pole helps increase headroom (38 inches tall by my measurements) and stretched the mesh side to side, allowing the Freelite to have nearly vertical sidewalls, which goes a long way to making this tent feel roomier. Altogether it took me about three minutes to set up.

One thing to bear in mind though is that this is not a free standing tent. You need to stake out both corners at the foot of the tent in order for it to function properly. Additionally there the vestibules require a stake each, making for a minimum of 4 tent stakes to pitch it. 

Staking out the foot of the Freelite was easy enough in the north woods of Michigan where I did my testing, but it's something to keep in mind if you are primarily camping on slickrock mesas out west where staking is impossible and the only options is tying guy lines to rocks. I did test using only rocks to set it up, and it definitely works if you have the rocks to do it, but a semi-freestanding design would probably not be my top pick for backpacking in the canyon country.

For those of us not camping on rock, the trade-off of needing to stake out the foot area is well worth the weight savings. 

The inside design offers a good amount of storage space. There's two gear loft pockets—each with enough room for a headlamp and pair of glasses, as well has two "media" pockets in the corners with a small hole at the bottom for headphones or a power cord if you bring that sort of thing in the backcountry.

The Freelite has a head end where the nylon fabric comes up higher to protect from wind gusts, and foot end that's all mesh. On cold nights I'd suggest sticking with the head as the head, but at my daughter's insistence we slept the other way for maximum star gazing through the mesh walls at the foot. The only downside to sleeping backwards is that it's harder to get in and out, and theoretically, a little colder.

There are doors on both sides of the Freelite, and both doors have vestibules, making it easy to get in and out without disturbing your tent mate. The zippers are lightweight, but were easy to use and didn't snag or catch in my testing. The vestibules open up wide and only open over the door so you can get in and out of the tent without having to climb over any gear stashed on the other side of the vestibule. 

Like the Nemo Hornet, which uses a similar design, the rainfly is cut higher at the head end of the tent to save on weight. While I did not have any problems with this, pay attention to how you stake out your rainfly because the higher portion of the rainfly is more likely to flap in the wind, and could potentially let water drip on the inner tent if the fly is not staked and guyed out properly. That said, I had no issues with it even on a very windy, gusty night of testing.

MSR stopped making tent-specific footprints a while back to cut down on waste. If you plan to camp on rough ground though I highly suggesting getting one. I did not test it, but MSR's [Universal Footprint 2-person Regular ($45)](https://www.msrgear.com/tents/tent-accessories/universal-footprint/universal-footprint.html) will fit the Freelite 2-person. 

The Freelite 2's square design and high headroom throughout make it somewhat unique. Similar tents include the [Nemo Hornet 2-person](https://www.rei.com/product/139940/nemo-hornet-2-tent), which is 6 ounces heavier and slopes off sharply at the feet making it less roomy, and the [Big Agnes Tiger Wall UL2](https://www.rei.com/product/188354/big-agnes-tiger-wall-ul-2-solution-dyed-tent), which is heavier, but does have slightly larger vestibules. That said, like the Nemo, the Tiger Wall slopes off sharply at the feet. We have not tried either, but based on specs, and my experience in the Freelite, I would take it over the Nemo. If your hiking partner is not your significant other, the roomier Tiger Wall UL 2 might be a better option.

The MSR Freelite 2 is one of the best ultralight 2-person tents I've tested. It's light enough to bring on a solo trip, large enough for couples, and is one of the cheaper options in this weight/size class. 






# Review title info
the main headline at the very top is always: Review: Company Product Name (ex: Review: Apple iPhone 14)
site headline (first one after the body copy) does not follow this format and is one where you can actually have a bit of fun. (ex: The OnePlus 10T Is Zippy but Bland)
Social headline can be the same as the site headline.
SEO Headline always has the following format: Apple iPhone 14 Review: Crazy Expensive but Fast
Pro tip: for deks, try not to have an echo, which means there's no repeated word from the headline above. (Ex: If the headline says "Apple" or "iPhone 14", don't say Apple or iPhone 14 in the dek.)

# Celestron StarSense Dobsonian TeleScope

We live in a time of abundance for the astronomy enthusiast. There are dozens of apps designed to help you navigate the skiess, find good viewing locations, and weather windows for optimal viewing. On top of all that optics have never been cheaper and integration between hardware and software has never been better.

Celestron's new StarSense Dobsonian telescope is a great example of that. With a smartphone cradle on the scope, and an app that's calibrated to it, you can easily find your way around the night sky even if you have no idea how to visually navigate the stars.

# Dobsonian

I've previously tested and loved Celestron's StarSense Explorer DX telescope ([9/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/celestron-starsense-explorer-telescope/)), which uses the same smartphone app and cradle. The tech here is both impressive and simple, combining the power of a star map in your phone with a mirror on the telescope to handle the navigation for you. The difference with the Dobsonian model is that it's much larger and more powerful.

A Dobsonian telescope is a Newtonian telescope, with what's know as an altazimuth mount. The mount, which turns in a circle and allows the scope to move up and down, supports the weight of a larger mirror, and put the balance point near the bottom of the scope. The result is a big telescope that's not too heavy and is easy to move around thanks to the ground mount.

Celestron has released two nearly identical models, one is an 8-inch scope and the one I tested, a 10-inch scope. Aside from the size (and thus light gathering power) the design is identical. 

The StarSense arrived in two packages, the base, which is packed and assembled like a piece of IKEA furniture, and a massive box containing the scope itself, which arrived fully assembled. All you have to do is put together the base, which took about 20 minutes and remains assembled. To move it around there's a handle for carrying (it's a little bulky but manageable). 

The scope also has a handle and is much lighter and easy to carry. It comes with dust covers to keep your mirrors protected when moving it around. The scope fits into the base and tightens down with two large knobs. You then position the scope using these knobs. Then attach the phone cradle mount. The last step is to add the star spotting scope which is used mainly to calibrate the app (or if you plan to navigate manually).

Once its assembled, you need to calibrate the scope using a fixed object about a quarter-mile away (I used a small building). Drop your phone in the holder, open the app and it will walk you through the process. 

This is the heart of the Celestron system—the phone cradle on the telescope that holds your phone in place. The app uses your phone's camera, pointed down into a mirror on the cradle, to figure out where your telescope is pointed, and then directs you which way to move it to find whatever you want to look at.

If you've never tried using a telescope without a smart app, it's difficult to understand the magnitude of what Celestron had with it's smartphone enabled telescopes. The best I can say is that although I took two semester of astronomy years ago in college, I still find using a telescope challenging. 

That's why I love the Celestron StarSense system, I don't have to spend hours trying to find stars for my kids to look at. I just pull up something in the app, and follow the arrows until I have it in the eyepiece, and I'm done. The kids look, there are oohs and ahs, and none of the frustration and waiting and loosing interest that would happen if I navigated by hand. Eliminating that overhead of learning how to use a telescope is a huge win for getting kids interested in astronomy. There is still much value in learning how to use a telescope, but that can come down the road after the interest is sparked.

Might I also suggest, if you're trying to get kids interested, that you start with the moon. It's huge, you can see tons of detail, and you can teach them some telescope technique, like looking at the edge of the object to find details. 

Another nice feature of the app, when you are looking at other objects in the sky, is the description section, which gives details on the object, and the observation suggestions. For example is you want to see a star cluster the StarSense will suggest a lower power eyepiece so you can see the whole cluster in a single view. 

How much you see through this telescope or any other does depend on where you live to some extent. Setting this up on a rooftop in Manhattan will not reveal nearly as many stars as I saw testing in around the north shore of Lake Superior. Light pollution in cities makes star viewing challenging. At the same time I was hampered at times by trees. The best views you'll get will be from the top of a mountain or out in the middle of the desert, which is why the portable aspect is important. 

Those question is, do you opt for the more expensive larger Dobsonian scopes, which definitely offer a better view of the stars, or go for the cheaper Explorer DX 102 refractor telescope, which is more portable? In the end I think both are great choices. I think the Dobsonian is particularly great if you have kids because the size makes it both impressive and the Dobsonian design is such that it's easier for kids to move it around and take part in the process of navigating the stars.




# Haikubox Review

Identifying birds by the song is the holy grail of bird watchers. Some people seem to be naturals, hearing a song once and remembering it forever. If you're like me—not one of those people—you've probably had the thought, why isn't there a [Shazam](https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-identify-songs-with-phone/) for birds?

Surely if Shazam can identify a song with a few seconds of bad audio playing over some blown out speakers, someone can figure out how to do the same for a bird singing clearly in a nearby tree.

That, in a nutshell, is what the creators of the Haikubox have done—created the Shazam of bird song.

That in itself is welcome and remarkable, but the Haikubox turns out to the much more than that. It's one of the rare pieces of technology that actually increases your connection to the world around you rather than cutting you off.

# Neural Net Smarts

Bird migration started early this year. I know this because my Haikubox told me. Not in so many words, but it started announcing new warblers arriving by the middle of August, which means they're already heading south to the their winter grounds in Central and South America.

With a full time job and three kids, I don't have time to get out and bird everyday so I likely would have missed the Cape May warblers when they came through for a couple weeks at the end of August. They never stay long and I always thought they stuck to the birch clearings a good mile up the road. Thanks the Haikubox, I know that while they do tend to spend their days elsewhere, they pass by my home in the mornings and I was able to see them because the Haikubox alerted me whenever it heard one.

This is magic of the Haikubox—it expands your world.

For something so remarkable, the Haikubox is decidedly prosaic in appearance. It's a 4-inch by 6-inch rounded square box about 2-inches thick. On the bottom is a sealed exit for the power cord and a small microphone that records sounds around the Haikubox. While the Haikubox is weather resistant and I have had no trouble with it in the rain, the company recommends keeping it out of direct sunlight and don't submerge it. Once you have a good spot, plug it in, connect it to your Wi-Fi network via the Haikubox Connect app and the Haikubox will start recording audio 24/7.

That's the end of the hardware, but that's not where the magic really lies. Once connected to your wireless network, the Haikubox send its recorded sounds to the servers at Cornell's world-renown ornithology lab.

The [Cornell Lab of Ornithology](https://www.birds.cornell.edu/home/) has thousands of bird song samples and a neural net for processing them. Neural networks are a form of machine learning software well-suited to recognizing patterns in audio—its how Siri and Google Assistant understand your voice—and can filter out bird songs from background noise. In order to find patterns though, the neural net first needs to learn what the pattern is, which is where [Cornell's library of bird song recordings]() comes in, it provides the training the AI needs to learn which sounds are bird songs and which ones are you watering the garden.

Cornell has been tweaking its neural net for some time. If you'd like to experience this without investing in a Haikubox, you can grab Cornell's Merlin Bird ID app, which relies on a small subset of the data and an AI processor similar to what the Haikubox uses. Haikubox create David Mann tells WIRED that the Haikubox uses a modified version of BirdNet, which is called BirdNet for Haikubox. 

Neither BirdNet nor BirdNet for Haikubox is perfect, but it's impressively accurate most of the time. Even better, you can use the Haikubox app to help the AI improve. 

# Haikubox App

To see which birds your Haikubox has heard and attempted to identify, you can use the Haikubox app for Android, iOS, or the web-based interface. The first time you open the app you set up an account and then you can login via that account from any device. The data in each app is the same, and I used all three in course of my testing. I found the mobile app more useful for notifications, but preferred to go through explore the species info in the web app, since I could open eBird and other extra info in background tabs.

Once your Haikubox has had a few hours to record it will begin to show you the species it thinks it has heard. Each identification gets a nice color image, a couple of links to Cornell's [All About Birds]() and eBird websites for more info on that species. There's also a button to listen to the Haikubox recording and an option to tell the AI whether or not it's correct. You can even say, "no it's a..." and enter the species name if you're confident you've got it right. If you're not a bird song expert don't worry, you can still let Haikubox know when it has recorded wind chimes or sprinklers or other noise that occasionally tricks it.

By default the Haikubox will show you a screen with the bird calls it has picked up on in the last two hours and has medium confidence about. You can change the duration to the last six hours, 12 hours, or 24 hours. The longer time spans are good for figuring out what's happening at night around your Haikubox. There are also two other confidence settings, high, and no filtering at all. The latter I found too noisy to be helpful. High is useful for eliminating most of the questionable sounds, but I stuck mainly with the default.

There are three other views available for your overall bird song data. One is real-time, which shows you what's outside right now. In my case this is almost exclusively red-breasted nuthatches and black-capped chickadees. Then there's a view with the top ten most frequently heard birds, and finally a screen with all the birds heard this year. I found this one useful for going through and confirming the neural net's guesses. One thing I suggest to Mann is adding a button to listen to a known-correct eBird recording next to what the Haikubox found. This was you could listen side by side and that might help with the tougher recordings.

And sometimes there are recordings that are tough to figure out. The Haikubox is convinced there's a mute swan around me, which is technically possible, though I have never seen one, nor has anyone else on eBird this summer. In cases like this I waffled. At first I marked it wrong because the audio was very indistinct, but then it came up again, and sounded almost exactly the same and I wasn't so sure anymore. I marked it "not sure" and started keeping an eye out for a mute swan whenever I'm near the lake shore.

That's part of what I like about the device though is that it provokes you to investigate the world more closely.

Another way the app does this is through alerts. The first alert I turned on what for new species. Whenever the Haikubox hears something that it hasn't, I get a message on my phone. But you can also turn on alerts for particular species. In the case of the cape may warbler mentioned above, I was out of town the first time it showed up, so I turned on an alert for every time the Haikubox hears one and, after a couple of days of missing them in spite of the alerts, I finally saw some.

## Conclusion

It's worth mentioning that by default the Haikubox shares its data with Haikubox's parent company, Loggerhead Instruments, as well as Cornell. Mann assured me there are multiple levels of filter designed to ensure that human voice is never stored. By default you can see other Haikubox's on the network. I found it fascinating to browse through and see what other people are recording, but if this feels like a violation of privacy to you, it's easy to turn off. Head to your Account page (the person icon in upper right) and click on the box that says "Make Private", and then click Save. Everything remains the same in terms of functionality, but other users will not be able to browse your data. In the spirit of sharing and citizen science I left mine open for all to see. 

There are two ways to buy the Haikubox. You can get one with a lifetime membership for $400, or you can buy one for $190 and pay a $70 a year membership fee to access the data. It's not cheap, but then bird watching in general is pretty cheap—all you need is [a good pair of binoculars](https://www.wired.com/story/best-binoculars/) and a guide book. Or maybe that's just how I am rationalizing the expense to myself.

Even if you're not a hardcore bird watcher, the Haikubox is a great way to expand your understanding of the world. It will awaken a curiosity and will lead you to deeper understanding of what's happening in the world around you. 


—Like ExpressVPN—







---
The art of birding by ear has always separated the truly gifted birder from the rest of us. But help is on the way for those of us who struggle. A scientific research project designed to track birds by their sounds has turned out to have a wonderfully practical use for the common birder.

It can decipher birdsongs the way the Shazam app identifies music.

---

# Pau Hana Solo Backcountry Stand Up Paddle Board

Inflatable paddle boards are great for those of us without the means to transport solid core boards, but they still aren't exactly small. While the [Bote board](https://www.wired.com/review/breeze-aero-inflatable-paddle-board/) that I loved did have backpack straps on the bag, it wasn't something you'd want to carry very far that way. 

What if the water you want to paddle doesn't have easy access for a car? That's where Pau Hana's new Solo Backcountry SUP comes in. It packs down impressively small, weighs only about 25 pounds, and comes with a dry bag backpack that actually comfortable. Will you want to bring it on a PCT thru hike? No. But if you want to get to some more remote waterways that require a hike or bike ride first, this is the board to get.

## 

The Backcountry in the name refers to the fact that this is a "hikeable" SUP. That is, it's small and light enough that you can theoretically hike in with it. Everything about it is indeed compact, from the included pump to the paddle itself. While this does involve tradeoffs (which I'll get to in a bit), it is impressive how small this board and all its gear gets. It's no bigger than your standard overnight backpacking pack and weighs about the same as what you'd bring on a week long trip—the board and everything you need to paddle weighs 23 pounds. Throw in a couple quarts of water, some snacks, and [a camera](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-action-cameras/), and you're looking at about thirty pounds for a day on the water. For reference, the loaded back weight of the Bote I tested previously is 48 pounds.

The Solo dry bag pack features a solid, but unpadded, hip belt and chest strap which help to stabilize the load when its on your back. I should note that while it is about the size and weight of your typical backpacking load, it rides very differently. You can't control where the weight falls on your back by rearranging small items like you can in a backpack. The result is that you bear most of the weight on your shoulders no matter what you do. The hip belt is mainly there to keep it from sliding around on your back. Even then I probably wouldn't be super happy going more than a few miles with it on my back. And don't forget that once you arrive you have to inflate it by hand too.

While I found the Solo portable enough to get to some places I had not been before, it will still be too much weight for some users to cart around of their backs. The good news is that the Solo also rides well on a rear bike rack, which is another possibility if the weight is a bit much for your back. 

The good news is, when you get the board out and inflate it, it's incredibly light: just 14.8 pounds, which makes it lightest board we've tested by a long shot. It does have a somewhat lower max rider weight though. Pau Hana says it will support riders up to 215 pounds.

The other 8.2 pounds in the 23 pound total are the compact pump, paddle, fins, repair kit, leash, and the dry bag backpack itself. The dry bag is an especially nice touch since, not only does it serve as a carrying bag, but when you get on the water it'll keep your stuff dry. Aside from the portability, the dry bag was my favorite feature of the Solo.


# On the Water

I found the Solo to be a very maneuverable board. I was a little disappointed that I didn't get to try it in the ocean because I think it would have been surfable. Wisconsin in oceanographically challenged though so I had to make do with lakes, albeit a rather large one. The downside to that maneuverability though is that the board was a little less stable than some others I've used. That's not to say it's difficult to ride or paddle, just that it takes a little more getting used to than some of the more forgiving, wider, beginner-friendly boards.

The deck has a nice grip texture that never gets slick or slippery and the construction feels very solid. Like many paddle boards the Solo uses a woven drop stitch, which ensures that when the threads hit their max length (when you've fully inflated it) they hold. The Solo uses a very lightweight surface material (one of the reasons it's so light), but it didn't feel any weaker for it and it has stood up well to plenty of rocky landings and underwater branches clawing at the bottom.

What I do not like about the Solo is the paddle. 

Every design decision involves some trade offs. Pau Hana wanted to make the Solo back down very small and so it ditched the traditional hard paddle for a soft paddle with a rigid bottom bar that adds some rigidity. The result is a paddle that packs up very small, but lacks power in the water. It works enough that you can get around, but there is definitely a loss of power. The soft paddle clamps onto the shaft with a plastic clamp that ended up breaking the second time I used it. I just tossed it and stuck a hose clamp on it instead, which works, but will of course rust eventually.

In the end though I didn't like the paddle and I decided to reversed the trade off and bring a solid plastic paddle along, strapped to the outside of the pack. It didn't make much difference to the weight or carry of the pack and it's an option I'd love to see Pau Hana add since not everyone has spare paddles lying around.

The other trade off worth mentioning is the small removable fins. You don't get anything like the stability of a three fin setup (with a bigger middle fin) here like you do on the Bote, that trade off didn't bother me, but it does make this a board better suited to those with some experience. The removable part was a little more worrying. I had quiet a bit of trouble getting one of the fins to lock in place and I've seen similar reports around the web, including one person who lost a fin. In my experience they lock in place pretty solidly, but getting them to do so can take some serious work. 

Finally, I have seen a number of people saying that their pump doesn't register PSI. I can see how they came to that conclusion because it seems to take forever to get it to register anything, but just keep going. Eventually you will get a PSI reading and I had no trouble getting it to the recommended 10-12 PSI.

# Portable Price Premium

Whether or not you should get the Solo boils down to a simple question: is the portability worth the price for you? If you primarily paddle in places with easy access, AKA you drive right on up, unload and launch, then the extra money isn't worth it. However, if you regularly find yourself wishing you could figure out a way to get your board into to some water that's just a little too far to carry your typical SUP, the Solo is might be worth it.

I enjoyed my time with the Solo and was able to launch from and explore places I never thought I'd be able to get to with a paddle board. That alone would make it well worth the investment in my view.





# Nighthawk M5 5G Router

Since I moved out of my house in Athens GA in 2017 and into an RV and later a rural farmhouse in South Carolina, I have relied entirely on mobile broadband for my connectivity. I started off with a Verizon MiFi hotspot, but quickly realized that that was not enough. I bought an MVNO plan with unlimited data on AT&T and later added a similar plan on T-Mobile. 

With the exception of the Verizon device all the MVNO plans I have used require you to bring your own device. You can technically use your phone for this. I have, and still do with Google Fi, but my internet experience changed considerably for the better when I got the Netgear Nighthawk M1 router. With an Ethernet port and MIMO antenna ports to improve reception via third-part antennas, I was able to squeeze more out of the limited network speeds you get in rural America.

I still use the M1. In fact I'll be uploading this story using the M1, but I dropped it once and cracked the case such that I can no longer use the Ethernet port. While I like the Gl.inet Spitz ([7/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/spitz-v2-4g-lte-wireless-router/)), it lacks a built-in battery, which is handy when you're traveling.

Enter the Nighthawk M5, the latest model in Netgear's 4/5G router line. It's essentially the M1, upgraded with a touchscreen and 5G support. Unfortunately it gets a price increase too—it's now $700. Still, if you depend on mobile broadband for internet, it may be worth the investment. 

## Why a Hotspot

If you have good cable, DSL, or fiber internet coming to your home, there's no reason to get a mobile hotspot. But if you live in a rural area where mobile broadband is the only option, a mobile hotspot like the Nighthawk M5 provides you with much better wireless range around your home (or RV), far longer battery life, and allows more devices on the network than using your phone. No, you don't *need* a mobile hotspot, but it sure is nice to have.

As with all things mobile we suggest buying the Netgear Nighthawk M5 unlocked so you can use it on whichever networks you prefer. Most of the listings I have seen for the M5 are unlocked, but I expect AT&T will eventually offer a locked version (they have done so with all of the previous Nighthawk M-series routers). I tested the M5 using an AT&T chip provided by Netgear and using a T-Mobile chip I pay for. The M5 is certified to work with AT&T, but also supports T-Mobile.

The best feature of the Nighthawk M5 is that it supports C-band 5G, which means you'll have better 5G reception (potentially, C-band support varies by carrier). What you don't get is mmWave 5G. That'll be disappointing for anyone wanting to use the M5 in a city where mmWave is supported, but for anyone in rural areas I think the lack of mmWave support this is a good thing because it means there are still MIMO antenna ports. To support mmWave the M5 would need to support different radio frequencies, which would mean no MIMO antenna support. Since mmWave support is almost nonexistent outside of cities, I'm happy to swap it for better antenna support for the frequencies that actually available in my area.

## TK

The Nighthawk M5 is about the size of a slice of Velveeta cheese and 1-inch thick. It's slightly larger and thicker than the M1, though not enough that you'll notice unless they're side by side. Like its processors the M5 is a square, black plastic hockey puck with an Ethernet port, a USB 3.1 Gen-2 port for charging and tethering, and TS-9 antenna ports on the back of the device.

On top of the M5 is a small 2.5-inch touchscreen display that offers control over most of the settings you'll regularly use, including setting up your network and controlling which devices are connected. For advanced settings you can connect to Netgear's configuration panel in your browser. 

Setting up the M5 via the touchscreen was incredibly simple and I had no issues getting connected and personalizing my network info. Once it was set up, I had no trouble connecting any devices. I turned to the web-based interface for more complicated tasks like changing the IP range for devices or using a custom DHCP server. There are also mobile apps for iOS and Android.

In my testing battery life was not as good and the M1, but still not too bad. I got around 12.5 hours in everyday use, working, streaming, etc. As with the M1, I found that heat has a lot to do with battery life. Do not, for example, leave the M5 on your dashboard in the sun, this is a recipe for overheating during that important Zoom call, which has happened to me with every almost mobile router I've tested. This is where the antenna comes in handy, since you can put it in the hot sun and keep the M5 out of it.

It's also possible to run the M5 without the battery, keeping it plugged in via the USB-C port. I recommend doing this when possible as it will extend the life of the battery—only run on battery when you have to.

I was a little disappointed in the WiFi range of the M5, it's considerably less than the M1, about 50 feet if you had good line of sight to the router, more like 25 feet if you had walls or other obstacles to deal with. That's fine for RV and Van dwellers, but not so great if you're in a house in the country.

The real problem with the Nighthawk M5 though isn't the device itself, it's the state of mobile broadband in rural America. Even with all three carriers at my disposal, the best speed I have ever achieved around the U.S. and Mexico is 45 Mbits per second down and 20 Mbit per second up. And that was only because I happened to be parked literally under a cell phone tower. My average speed is 25 MBit per second. Most mobile broadband plans also cap data at 50 to 100 gigabytes, which pretty much means you aren't going to spending your evenings on Netflix. Or not many of them anyway. This is what you deal with in rural America. 

Given that we're starting from a pretty dismal spot it makes sense to optimize what you can, which is why I like the Nighthawk routers. The M5 isn't cheap, but it offers good reception, can be extended with antennas, is easy to use and configure, and offers passable WiFi range. Given the C-band support, which isn't common yet in hotspot routers, this is your best bet if you have good AT&T or T-Mobile signal in your area.


# Review Ledger Nano X
If you're serious about owning crypto, you need a hardware wallet. For most people the Ledger Nano X, which offers a good balance between handholding and simplicity, and the security features you need to make sure your crypto stays under your control, is a good choice.

Crypto remains, despite the pretense of "big money" a very wild west environment. Hacks are common, with even some of the biggest names in the industry losing crypto to hackers. The simple fact is, if you don't have the private keys to your crypto purchases, you don't really control that money. At the same time, if you do have the keys, you need to keep them securely locked up, not just stashed on a hard drive. That's where Ledger's Nano X comes in.

## What You Buy When You Buy Cryptocurrencies
The first thing to understand about cryptocurrencies is that when you buy one, you are not buying a thing. There is no coin or bill like you have with traditional currencies. When you buy a cryptocurrency what you're buying is a public and private key, both cryptographically generated on the blockchain. These keys are unique and unlock your portion of the blockchain, which you can then spend anywhere that takes that currency.

Because this is very abstract and difficult to wrap your head around—and even more difficult to actually use in the real world—most of us buy our crypto through a crypto exchange or brokerage, like Coinbase or Kraken. The brokerage stores those private keys for us. A crypto brokerage is conceptually similar to a bank, but with some very important differences—most notably that your crypto brokerage is not insured by the federal government.

While you might be fine storing your crypto in an exchange, the truth is you don't really own that crypto. You are at the mercy of the exchange. If the exchanged is hacked and your private key stolen, you are out of luck (and money). Exchanges also sometimes disappear overnight, whether they declare bankruptcy or perhaps the founders decide to skip town with everyone's currency. All this and more has happened. If you want to truly own your crypto, you need a hardware wallet like the Nano X. If you don't have your private key on a hardware device under your control, you don't own any crypto.

## Cold Storage

Before we go further I need to mention one important thing. Only purchase your Nano X directly from Ledger. Any other source could potentially be compromised. Yes they are available on Amazon. Yes, it does appear to be a legitimate Ledger Storefront. I still highly recommend buying directly from Ledger. Ledger has free shipping so there is absolutely nothing to be gained by buying from Amazon and you introduce considerably risk in doing so.

That said, there could still be issues. Ledger will run you through some questions when you first set up your Nano X, but some obvious things to keep in mind. The Nano X should come shrink wrapped in plastic. The seed phrase should not be filled in. If anything seems fishy, stop and contact Ledger.

What you'll get when your Nano X arrives looks a bit like a swiveling USB stick, with a small screen on the front, in part because it *is* a USB stick with a screen on the front.

The Nano X is what's commonly referred to as a "cold storage," which means it stores your key offline. That eliminates the possibility of a hacker gaining access to your private keys on your hard drive, but it introduces another problem: what happens if you lose your Nano X? [WIRED has some first hand experience with the pain of losing crypto keys]().

Fortunately you can avoid making the mistakes WIRED made in the early days of crypto. You can lose the Nano X and still have access to your crypto. The key is the 24-word seed phrase you set up when you first connect the Nano X to your PC. Lose that seed phrase and yes, you would lose your crypto. But provided you hang on to that, and you're good. That seed phrase, not the hardware itself is what really what protects your crypto. The Nano X hardware device is a convenience device that makes sending and receiving crypto easier, but the real key is the passphrase.

Fortunately you can avoid making the mistakes WIRED made in the early days of crypto. You can lose the Nano X and still have access to your crypto. The key is the 24-word seed phrase you set up when you first connect the Nano X to your PC. Lose that seed phrase and yes, you would lose your crypto. That seed phrase, not the hardware itself if really what protects your crypto. The Nano X hardware device is a convenience that makes sending and receiving crypto easier.

The first thing your Ledger Nano X will do is walk you through is downloading the companion app, Ledger Live. There are versions available for just about every platform, I tested it on Linux. 

First you plugin your Nano X and run through all the verification steps. The Ledger apps makes this fairly simple, including generating the 24-word phrase, which is really just some random words. You will have to verify them. Remember this is the important part. Do not lose that phrase.

## Own Your Crypto

Once your Nano is set up, it's time to move your cryptocurrency out of any exchange accounts you've been using. To do this you'll use the Ledger Live app to set up an "account" for each currency you own.  This creates a Public Key to send your cryptocurrency too. And herein lies the main rub of the Nano X—not every currency is supported. All the big coins—Bitcoin, Etherum, LiteCoin, and dozens more—are supported. Ledger is also continually adding support. When I first started testing there was no support for Cardano, which I owned, but support has been added since then.

Once you have the public key, you can simply go to whatever exchange you've been using to buy your crypto and then send it to the address you generated in Ledger Live. *Pro tip:* the first time you do this, send a very, very small amount of crypto. My first transaction to my Nano X was for $3 worth of ETH. Once I verified it had arrived safely, then I transferred the rest. Start small, verify, then go for it.

Once all your crypto is moved over to the Nano X—that's it, you're done. Congrats, you own cryptocurrency. 

If you want to send crypto from your Nano X, you'll need to unlock your Nano X and attach it to your laptop (or you can connect to your phone via Bluetooth, but beyond testing this once to ensure it worked, I did not do this as I prefer a hardware connection).

## Conclusion and disclosure

I started testing the Ledger Nano X in 2021 and have used it for almost a full year now and I have never had any problems with it. I have not tested other wallets yet—the Trezor Model T is on my list for future coverage—but after using the Nano X for so long I really can't imagine what else I would want. I have sent Bitcoin to and from over a dozen exchanges without issue (a guide to best ways to trade crypto is coming, based on all this testing), I have traded directly from the Nano X using Coinify, and have sent Bitcoin directly from one Nano X to another. Everything just worked.

We at WIRED are sensitive to the potential conflict of interest involved in mentioning any cryptocurrencies in articles and normally do not own shares of anything we write about. In this case, that would be impossible though, so, full disclosure: in the process of testing the Nano X I traded cryptocurrencies and made a profit doing so. I sold the entirety of my crypto holdings in March 2022, and currently have no money invested in any cryptocurrencies.


# Insta360 One RS 1-inch 360 Edition

Insta360's One RS modular action camera is [one of our favorites](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-one-rs-action-and-360-camera/). The ability to swap lenses—from a typical action camera wide angle lens, to a 360 lens, to a Leica-designed lens with a 1-inch sensor—makes it more versatile than a GoPro. Insta360 is now building on that modular foundation with the new One RS 1-inch 360 Edition.

The 1-inch 360 Edition sports dual lenses and dual 1-inch sensors co-engineered with Leica, and builds on the system that One RS owners already have. The Core module is the same as the action camera, but the new 360 version adds a bigger battery, a case to hold the battery and core module, and a lenses unit with dual sensors and lenses that sits on top, a little like ice cream on a cone.

The result is a camera that produces that best looking video 360 video footage I've ever seen.

## The 360 View

Before I dive into the One RS 360 Edition, I should probably say that I have never been a huge fan of shooting 360 video. This is mostly because, well the human eye doesn't have a 360 degree view of the world, so um, how do you show 360 degree video to it? Sure, there's VR goggles that so far almost no one owns or uses, but even then, you can't see it all at once. The use case that makes sense to me is to capture an entire scene in 360 because you don't know ahead of time where you want to point the camera and then later, in post processing, edit the video into a normal view. This use case means you have to have a good video editor, and Insta360 is the only 360 camera system I've used that makes editing your 360 footage easy enough to make shooting it worthwhile.

That said, if you are into 360 degree footage for its own sake, this camera is remarkable. The footage I shot is sharper and captures more detail than any other 360 camera I've used, including several of Insta360's own past efforts. If 360 video is your thing, this is your camera.

Between the 2 sensors you get 6K video (a step up from the 5.3K that the 360 mod is able to shoot), and 21 megapixel still images. In combination with the improved sensors you get two huge lenses that are much more capable than the much smaller lenses on the 360 Mod sold with the action camera. 

The quality of video is noticeably better than what I was able to capture with the One RS. It's sharper and has less noise. This was especially obvious when shooting in low light and zooming in to look at leaves or grass or type on signs.

The thing to understand about the 6K video though is that it sounds like a crazy high resolution, and it would be in the normal camera, but the One RS 360 edition is capturing everything around you. Professional level cameras, shooting footage for the VR goggles no one buys are typically shooting 10K and up to achieve that level of detail. Still, 6K is a step up for consumer level cameras and the clarity here is good enough that if you're framing and cutting down to produce normal video, you shouldn't notice much difference in video quality from footage shot with a 4K camera. This is especially true if your video's destination is YouTube or TikTok, both of which heavily compress video anyway. 

This opens up the possibility of using the Insta360 One RS 360 Edition a one-person camera rig. Any 360 camera can do this of course, but the improved video quality on the 360 Edition mean that the reframed footage doesn't suffering the loss of quality you'd get doing this with most other 360 rigs.

The downside to the huge lenses on the 360 Edition is the weight. This is largest, heaviest 360 camera I've used. It feels especially awkward mounted at the end of a selfie stick. File that as reason #132 that you should never use a selfie stick. If you must though, know that Insta360 does not recommend a selfie stick over 4 feet when you're doing anything like running, biking, skiing, etc. That said, I stuck it out the window while I was driving 55 MPH and it was fine, so it's not like you can't stress it, just know that strong jolts could snap your selfie stick. 

The other possible downside to these lenses is that they're spherical and really hang out there. They seem like they'd scratch easily. Insta360 includes a soft rubber cover, but mine had a nasty habit of collecting sand on the inside if I was anywhere near a beach. For all that though, in over two months of testing, I have not scratched the lens. That hasn't stopped me from worrying that I will though. I should note that Insta360 sells a $79 add-on service which covers a one-time accidental damage repair for one year. That's better than nothing, but not nearly as good as GoPro's free replacement coverage for $50 a year.

As weirdly heavy as the One RS 360 edition feels at the end of the selfie stick, it's fine when you're holding it in your hand. It's a bit like carting around an ice cream cone. A good bit of the extra size and weight come from the much larger battery. Insta360 claims you can shoot for 62 minutes. I could not confirm that because I don't have an SD card large enough to hold that much 6K footage. More realistically, shooting a few minutes here, a few minutes there, I was able to get through a weekend's shooting without needing to recharge. Suffice to say that battery life will not be a filming limitation.

The microphones on the One RS 360 Editing are pretty good when the environment cooperates. If you're shooting in a windy situation though you're better off with an external mic. There's an adapter that connects to the side (and is automatically cropped out of your footage). I attached a Rode wireless mic and got much better audio that way.

Finally, it's worth noting that, unlike the previous One RS releases the 360 Edition is not an action camera. There's the big, potentially scratchable lenses, it's not waterproof without a case, and it lacks the high frame rates you want for slow motion footage.

## Editing 360

As noted above, there are very few places you can upload 360 footage. Facebook has a viewer, but in most cases you're going to be editing your footage down and panning through the 360 view. This adds overhead, but thankfully Insta360's Android and iOs apps are excellent. There's also a desktop app and an Adobe Premiere plugin. I have briefly tried the desktop app, but for the most part I find an iPad the best place to edit my Insta360 footage.

Nothing has changed here from previous releases. You can transfer files from the camera over to your phone or tablet and then edit. There is some compression happening when you edit on mobile and fewer export options. More serious videographers will want to use Insta360’s desktop app for Windows and macOS, which gives you a larger view of you footage and can export in Apple’s ProRes format, among others.

Much as I like Insta360's apps, I should note that for newcomers there will be a learning curve. They make editing 360 footage much easier than anything else I've tried, but they still require you know how to use keyframes and other video editing tools. There are good tutorials both in the app and online, and when you're getting started the automatically generated edits make a good starting point, but it does take some time to master the art of editing.

## Should You Buy It?

As much as I enjoyed shooting with this camera, I think the audience for it is limited. At $800 for the full kit and $650 if you've already got the core unit from the Insta360 One RS, this is a significant investment. The image quality is better than the smaller 360 mod on the action camera, but it's less rugged and if your footage ends up on TikTok anyway, you're not going to notice the image quality improvements.

Still, if you're all in on 360 footage and need the highest possible image quality in a consumer camera, the Insta360 One RS 360 Edition is what you want.



To be honest I am not even that big of an action camera fan. Even the action cameras I have, I have mostly because of how fast they turn on and start recording, not because I am putting them through their paces in extreme-sports-filled weekends. I say this not to denigrate what Insta360 has created here, because it really is remarkable


I understand the appeal of the 360 camera, but I 


This spring Insta360 updated its core module with more processing power, which made the camera a bit faster, but now that extra power makes more sense.


$800 
$650 if you already own the One RS core.



# HP Dev One Pop!_OS Linux laptop 

HP's latest Linux laptop sees the computer maker collaborating with erstwhile competitor (or at least fellow Linux laptop maker) System76. It sounds like an odd combo, given that System76 makes its own competing laptops, but the collaboration works.

The Dev One as HP is calling this laptop is a very nice Linux machine that packs enough punch for developers or creatives without hitting top-tier laptop prices. Even more impressive is the work HP and System76 have put into making Linux work perfectly with the AMD chipset.

Combining HP's hardware capabilities and industry experience with System76's Pop!_OS desktop has produced the best all around Linux laptop you can buy right now.

## HP Hardware
In a refreshing change from how most laptops are sold these days there is only one model of the Dev One. Another nice touch is that it gets a dedicated website, which makes ordering simple. Dell, are you listening to this?

The Dev One costs $1,100, which gets you a 14-inch laptop with a 1000 nit 1080p screen, an AMD Ryzen 7 5850 chip, integrated Radeon graphics, 16 gigabytes of RAM and a 1-terabyte NVMe M.2 2280 SSD. The RAM and SSD are user-upgradable (RAM support caps at 64 gigabytes). Getting into the components is simple, there are just five screws between you and any upgrades you want to make. The nearest Windows version of this same laptop gets a 9 out of 10 on iFixit's repairability scale.

As the name suggests the "Dev One" is aimed at the developer audience, much like Dell's XPS 13 Developer Edition. Despite the names though, these are really just laptops with Linux pre-installed. The Dev One will work well for almost any task, developer-related or otherwise. I am typing this review on a Dell XPS Developer Edition that doesn't see much development work at all these days, but it's still a fine laptop, don't let the "developer" deter you if you're not one.

That said, I did put the Dev One through some developer-type tasks. I set up a Python development environment which was no trouble thanks to the extensive repositories Pop!_OS offers, and ran benchmark tests geared toward developer tasks (i.e., CPU and RAM intensive tasks). The Dev One worked well for all these things, and it was no slouch at editing 4K video either thanks to that AMD chip. If benchmarks are your thing, have a look at the [tests Phoronix posted on openbenchmarking.org](https://openbenchmarking.org/result/2206123-PTS-HPDEVONE06). The results are impressive. The Dev One runs circles around many of its Intel-based competitors.

That said, I test a lot of laptops and I'll be honest, when the Dev One first arrived I was not immediately impressed. The design is conservative, I suppose that's fitting for the developer audience. It's not that the aluminum shell isn't attractive, it's just very middle of the road. This is no [XPS 13]() when it comes to design. Still the Dev One feels very well built, and is plenty portable at 3.24 pounds. It's thicker than the more svelte options out there, but one thing I do love is how easy it is to open. There's nothing worse than a laptop you have pry open with a fingernail, but the Dev One leaves plenty of space to easily pry open thanks to its bevel top.

Just in case you were wondering, this is not simply a HP Elitebook 845 with Linux slapped on it. Even the keyboard has been changed to give the Windows logo key it's proper name: Super. 

The Dev One's crazy bright 1080p LED screen is nice. I will admit that, coming from the 4K screen back to 1080p leaves something to be desired. I'd love to see the Dev One with a 4K option, but given the 53-watt-hour battery, that's probably not in the cards without some other changes as well. The 1080 screen works well with Linux though, there's no issues with scaling like I sometimes have to deal with on my 4K screen. And the 1000 nit brightness makes it easy to work outside, which is nice. Most of the time though I dialed the screen brightness down to 50 percent or less to conserve battery.

Battery life is okay. I managed seven hours doing light work in text editor and web browser with the brightness at 50 percent. That's not quite the all-day that HP claims, but it's pretty close. Turn up the screen though and start compiling software and the battery life drops significantly. I averaged about 3.5 hours whenever I did anything demanding. If there were one thing I could change about the Dev One it would be to drop in a bigger battery.

Where the Dev One shines is the AMD chipset. It is a workhorse. Not only did it crunch through everything I threw at it, the fans rarely spun up. There is no dedicated graphics card, but AMD's integrated graphics power is impressive, much better than what you get with Intel. In fact, for most people, even casual gamers, the Dev One is more than enough power. To really see it bog down, I had to go download and compile the Android Kernel, which is not something most people are going to regularly do.

AMD even stepped in and helped HP and System76 ensure that suspend and resume worked properly. Having installed Linux on AMD machines in the past as I have that is almost always the major pain point—suspend and resume never seem to work right. The changes that System76 and HP made were contributed back upstream so if you have an AMD machine with this chipset you too should have working suspend and resume whenever your distro updates to that Linux kernel. It's no surprise to see System76 contributing to the larger open source community, but I'm happy to see HP doing likewise.

One thing that you won't find here is Coreboot, the open source BIOS firmware. Most System76 PCs use Coreboot with the TianoCore firmware, and an open source Embedded Controller firmware as well. While Coreboot isn't in this version both companies have said they would like to include it in future releases.

## System76 Software

My opinion of the Dev One started to change once I actually spent some time with it. As already noted, the performance is impressive, but what really won my over was Pop!_OS. Pop!_OS is by far the best user experience I've seen in a Linux desktop. It strikes a great balance between being easy to use for Linux newcomers and well stocked with power user features. Want tiling windows? Just toggle a switch in a toolbar menu. There are loads of (customizable) keyboard shortcuts for developer who eschew the mouse, and there's plenty of trackpad gestures to control workspaces, window focus and more.

I say this as someone who prefers very minimal systems (I run [Sway](https://swaywm.org) on [Arch Linux](https://archlinux.org/)). In fact that's all I've used for going on five years now. That said, if I were buying the Dev One I would probably stick with Pop!_OS. 

Pop!_OS is one of the most customizable desktops I've used and unlike more complex window managers like Sway, the customization is done in well-designed settings apps. It's easier to use and more intuitive in my view than macOS, and certainly light years ahead of Windows 11 and its endless toggles.

It's worth asking what System76 gets out of this arrangement. Presumably there is some kinds of financial deal, but beyond that it gets System76's operating system and name on a tier-one laptop. That kinds of exposure has previously been limited to Ubuntu and maybe Fedora. It's good to see System76 getting some of the recognition it deserves.

Should you buy the Dev One? If you're in the market for a new Linux notebook, this is what I'd recommend. It's powerful, user-serviceable, has a fantastic OS, all the tools developers need and it doesn't cost a fortune. That's a combo that's tough to beat.

# Bote Breeze Aero Review 

Nothing says summer like a day on the water. Be it sailing, kayaking, canoeing, rowing, inner tubing, or some other method of floating, immersing yourself in water is the time-honored way to stay cool in the heat. Of all the ways you can get on the water, one of the easiest, and most fun, is the stand up paddle board (SUP).

I've been testing Bote's Breeze Aero inflatable paddle board for several months now in bays, marshes, and lakes, and I am here to say it has been a long time (like since I was a kid) since I've had this much fun on the water. If you're looking for a way to get a workout, explore the hidden corners of the marsh or lake, or keep your kids entertained and cool during those long summer days, the Breeze Aero can do it all.

## SUP Inflatable 

Paddle boards are versatile watercraft. They can be used to exploring narrow, winding waterways, or as a kind of floating platform for the kids to play on. Where the traditional paddle board doesn't excel is storage and transportation: they're big, heavy, and awkward to transport. That's where inflatable SUPs like the Breeze Aero come in: it's everything that's great about a solid paddle board, but it packs down for easy storage in an apartment or the trunk of your car.

There are even a few advantages to inflatable paddle boards: the additional buoyancy provided by the air makes them more stable, and they're much lighter and easier to carry (though let's face it, carrying an almost 12 foot long, 25 pound object is always awkward, especially if there's any wind). Falling on an inflatable SUP is also considerably less painful than a solid board, which is worth keeping in mind if you're buying with kids in mind.

The downside is that an inflatable SUP board takes time to set up since you need to inflate it, and attach the fin in the case of the Bote Breeze Aero. It's not too bad, about 10 minutes with the hand pump, less if you spring for [the automatic pump ($200)](https://www.boteboard.com/products/aeropump-auto-electric-pump-ii?variant=39445287501963). You have to bring the pump with you of course, which adds some weight. Inflatable SUPs are also slower—since they have to be thicker—and less maneuverable. That said, both of those qualities are a plus for beginners.

I've used both solid and inflatable paddle boards in the past and happen to much prefer the stability of inflatable boards. The Breeze Aero is my favorite of the inflatable boards I've tried. It strikes a good balance between weight, size, durability. It's not quite as tough as some triple-layer boards out there, but it's much lighter. The heavy duty PVC is held together with a composite drop stitch, which is a method of weaving together vertical fibers so that when the threads hit their max length (when you've fully inflated it) they hold. The end result in the Aero Breeze is a very study board that has stood up to everything I've thrown at it—including rocky landings, plenty of gnarled tree limbs clawing at its undersides, and transport on the roof of my car.

I wish I could say the same for the bag it came in, which arrived ripped, an experience that seems to somewhat common judging by other reviews around the web. Bote sent my a heavier duty replacement bag that has held up well, but unfortunately does not seem to be available on their website.

The Breeze Aero comes with a 3-piece adjustable paddle, a 10-inch removable fin (there are also to side fins that are permanently mounted), a repair kit, a hand pump, and the backpack. 

## On The Water

The Aero Breeze is a great beginner paddle board. While I've tested a few boards, I am still learning the finer points, especially in rough water. I found the Aero Breeze to be one of easiest, most stable boards I've tried. Even my kids had no trouble getting up and staying up on it.

With great stability tends to come a certain amount of sluggishness, but I found the Breeze Aero plenty maneuverable. I didn't run it through slalom courses or anything, but it responded well when I need to quickly point it into an oncoming boat wake for example. No inflatable will match the maneuverability of a solid board, but trade off between stability and maneuverability here is not as great as I had expected.

One thing I wasn't such a fan of are the permanently mounted side fins on the bottom of the board. They're small enough that it's hard to see what they're adding in terms of maneuverability and stability, but large enough that they make the board bulkier when folded up. I wish there were an option to have just the detachable 10-inch center fin.

One of the things I like about paddle boards is the way they can be adapted to a variety of needs. The bungie cords on the front of the Breeze allow for strapping down a cooler (Bote also owns Kula coolers) or anything else you might want to bring along. There are also tie downs for a seat that more or less turns your paddle board into a kayak. I used this setup to fish quite a bit and while I'm glad I never hooked anything huge (I'm not sure that would have ended well), it was fun and allowed me to cast into some places I wouldn't have been able to otherwise.

The kayak-style setup is also adds some more family-friendly options. I loaded all three of my kids (to be clear, this was way over the weight limit and I don't necessarily recommend it), with me in the center on the seat paddling and we explored areas of a nearby lake that we'd never been able to get into before. 

## Conclusion

As I noted above, the Breeze Aero is the most fun I've had on the water in a long time. It's a hefty investment, especially with the kayak-style seat, but one that will last and opens a whole range of family fun that we'd otherwise have no way to access. Did I mention it's also a workout? The day after my first long test paddle I was painfully sore. Exercise, play, exploration, fishing... what more do you need really?




# DJI Mic

DJI is still best known for its drones, but that hasn't stopped the company from expanding into interesting areaa, whether its action cams or laser-firing robots. The latest foray afield from drones is a wireless microphone system, dubbed the DJI Mic. 

If DJI's Action camera began life as a GoPro clone, the new Mic is something of a Rode Wireless Go clone. Just as the action cam bested the GoPro in several ways, DJI has managed to turn out a compelling alternative to what many consider the industry leading wireless microphone.

The DJI Mic is a clever system that's portable, easy to use, and offers good sound quality for the price. It's not going to be the best possible sound in a studio environment, but it's perfect for podcast interviews, field recordings, and vlogging when the receiver is mounted on a camera hot shoe.

## Carrying Case

DJI's Mic system consist of two transmission units and one receiver. The transmitters have a power and record button on the side, and a 3.5mm microphone jack, as well as a built-in microphone on the top. They have both a clip for attaching to clothing and a very powerful magnet for attaching to anything metal. It's a strong enough magnet that DJI recommends keeping it away from devices with SSDs and RAM.

The receiver features a touchscreen for controlling settings on the front, a power button and USB-C port on one side, and a headphone jack and 3.5mm line out jack on the other side. This means you can monitor your recording and feed it though to any camera that can accept audio input.

All this comes in a handy little carrying case that holds both microphone units, the receiver, a lightning adapter, and a USB-C adapter. This case serves as the charging unit for all three pieces in addition to keeping everything neat and tidy in your bag. A small pouch can then hold the case along with two provided windscreens for the mics and a couple of cords. The whole package is about twice the size of a deck of cards and very clever. 

I bring this up because we at WIRED use Rode wireless mics for all our video work and while the Rode's are similarly small, they lack the handy carrying case and are, frankly, a pain in the ass to deal with. They're always falling out of their velcro carrying pouch and disappearing into dark corner of my bag. Not so with the DJI Mic, which is always nice stored in its case and ready to go.

The clever case aside, there is much here that's comparable to Rode's popular wireless microphone system. Where DJI comes out ahead compared to Rode is wireless range. DJI claims 250 meters. I found this reasonably accurate so long as line of sight is available. That said, I have trouble thinking of common recording scenarios in which this is helpful, if it is though, you have it with the DJI.

The transmitters are heavier than I would have liked, but the clips held up well enough if you have a proper collared shirt. T-shirts are more challenging, but but I did get to stay. The included windscreens worked well, though a windy day at the beach still sounded, well windy, but in normal circumstance these will keep the breeze from interfering with your audio. 

The built-in microphones feature omnidirectional audio, which makes them useful for miking situations where you want to capture audio coming from several directions. Because they can be paired, you can even use them to record everyone around a conference table, for example, or any other situation where you have primary audio coming from multiple directions. 

The big question of course is how do they sound? Well, I am not a professional audio engineer, but I do do a lot of audio recording (primarily field recordings) and in most circumstances, to my ears the DJI sounded as good or better than the Rode Wireless Go. The transmitters seemed a little more finicky when using them directly as a lav-type mic. I had to play around the placement to get nice, crisp audio off a shirt collar—this would be one place I'd give the Rodes the edge—but as with most miking problems, the solution is playing with mic placement, not blaming the microphone.

That said, if you already have better microphones, the DJI transmitters might still be worth it for a wireless features alone. Just plug those fancy Sennheiser lavalier mics in to the 3.5mm jacks (via an adapter if need be) and you've got a nice wireless setup. For most of us though, I think the built-in mics are fine in most situations. 

Another reason to prefer the DJI to the Rodes is the entire experience of using them is much nicer. They're easier to charge thanks to the case. They're easier to carry around, again thanks to case. The touchscreen interface on the receiver makes it easy to quickly change settings, and I've never found another system that makes it easier to switch from recording with the DSLR to recording with your phone. Again, everything you need is right there in the case. And thanks to the USB (or lighting) adapter dumping your audio for editing is as simple as plugging it into your device and copying over the files.

For vloggers looking to step up their audio game, or for anyone doing podcast or interview recording DJI's system is well suited. It's good enough as-is, and if you want to invest in more expensive microphones down the road, it still makes a great wireless system for those mics.


# How to Switch to Google Fi

Since it launched in 2015, Google's Project Fi has become one of the best ways to get an affordable phone plan. Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T may be the best known cellular providers, but Google Fi offers better data plans, more international coverage, and the simplest set up and billing system you'll find. What's more the company recently raised the data cap on its Unlimited Plus plan.

In the beginning the catch was that Google Fi only worked on select phones, but these days it'll work on just about anything, though some features (like network switching) may be missing.

I activated my Google Fi chip using a Nokia 5.3, which is not an officially supported device, but it worked just fine. I also tested the sim in the [Spitz router](), a Sony Xperia, and am using it now in a One Plus 7 Pro (which is officially supported). All that said, you should [double check the compatibility of your current device before you buy a plan](https://fi.google.com/compatibility).

The reason I finally made the switch to Google Fi has to do with the data plans. Google likes to say that data is data is data. In other words, it shouldn't matter if you're calling, texting, or downloading web pages, it's all just data over the network. While I applaud that approach, the reality is Google is a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO), and it has to lease wireless capacity from T-Mobile, which has a decidedly different view of data.

Google Fi did recently up its data limits though, from 22 gigabytes a month to 50 gigabytes a month (for the same price). That's close enough to usable internet access for nomads and rural internet users like myself that I signed up.

Here's how it works.

## Pick a Plan

Google Fi offers three plans. All of them include unlimited calls and text and none of them require a contract. There are also no sign up fees, though you will still have to pay taxes and government fees. 

* **Simply Unlimited Plan $50/month** This plan is probably the best choice for most users. It offers high speed downloads up to 35 gigabytes, after which you'll be throttled. The catch is that this data is only good on your phone (technically 5 gigabytes can be used for tethering, but if that's your use case, the next plan is your best bet)
* **Unlimited Plus Plan $65/month** If you want to use your Google Fi connection for more than just your phone, this is the plan you want. It comes with unlimited tethering, even in Canada and Mexico. After you activate your Unlimited Plus plan you can put your chip in a 4G hotspot like the Gl.inet Spitz router (8/10 WIRED Recommends). This plan also gets you 100 gigabyte of storage with Google One.
* **Flexible Plan $20/month + $10 per gigabyte used** This is Google's pay as you go plan. It's a good choice if you don't use much data. Data speeds are capped after 15 gigabytes, but if you're routinely going over that you're much better off with one of the other plans.

All of the prices above are for a single line, they all go down slightly as you add more lines. For example I plan to add a second line to my Unlimited Plus Plan soon, which will make both lines $55 each, or $110 per month total (plus taxes and fees).

## Activate Your Chip

Once you've picked your plan and signed up Google will mail out a chip. It took a couple of days for mine to arrive, but I'll gladly take the slight delay if it saves me from setting foot in a T-Mobile store. 

Once your chip arrives, plug it in your compatible phone, download the Google Fi app (you'll need to be on WiFi to do this since your chip won't connect to the network yet), and follow the steps there. If you're porting in your old phone number it may take a little longer, but for me, setting up a new number it was up and running after about five minutes.

That's it, you're done. I have traveled and lived in rural areas for the last five years I've tried just about every phone and hotspot plan around and none of them are anywhere near this simple. The only one that comes close is Red Pocket mobile, which I still use in addition to Google Fi. If you're interested in some other options, check out our guide to [MVNO phone plans](https://www.wired.com/story/guide-to-mvno-phone-plans/). There are cheaper plans for those that don't need to data, but in terms of ease-of-use and reliability, Google Fi is hard to beat.

## Use Google Fi in a Hotspot

You must activate your Google Fi sim card with an Android Phone using the Google Fi app, but once the activation is done, you can put that chip in any device your plan allows. If you go with the Unlimited Plus plan that means you can put your chip in an iPad, Android tablet, or a 4/5G hotspot. I do that later and it works very well. You are still bound by the 50 gigabyte data limit though so make sure you don't go too crazy with the Netflix.

It used to be that to do this you had to ask Google for a data-only sim card. You will still see this advice all over the internet, but I confirmed with Google that a data-only sim is no longer necessary. tk—need to confirm this.

## FAQs, Tips and Tricks

* **Do I Need A Google Account?** Yes, you do need a Google account to sign up for Google Fi, but otherwise you don't need to be all-in on Google to use Fi. I have an Android phone and WIRED forces me to use Gmail, but otherwise I do not use any Google services other than Fi and it still works great.

* **Is Google Fi tracking my every move?** Yes, but so is your current provider. The Google Fi Terms of Service say that it won't sell Customer Proprietary Network Information—things like call location, details, and features you use—to anyone else.

* **I'm traveling and want to Use Google Fi abroad, will that work?** Yes. Fi's Terms of Service do require you to activate your service in the United States, but after that it should work anywhere Fi has [partnered with an in-country network](https://fi.google.com/about/international-rates). The one possible catch is long term travel. The ToS [says](https://support.google.com/fi/answer/6157794) that if you "use Fi service predominantly internationally, you may have your international capabilities suspended." There's no official clarification on what constitutes "predominantly", but unofficially I know several people who have been out of the U.S for years using Fi and have had no trouble. Still, as they say, your mileage may vary.

There are several features available through the Google Fi app that you might not discover at first.

One comes from Google's background with Google Voice, which has a feature that allows you to forward calls to any phone you like. This also possible in Google Fi. All you need to do is add a number to Fi's forwarding list and any time you get a call, it will ring both your cell phone and that secondary number—whether its a home phone, second cell, or the phone at the AirBnB you're at. This is very handy in places where your signal strength is iffy—just route the call to a landline. Similarly it can be worth enabling the Wi-Fi falling feature for times when you have access to Wi-Fi but not a cell signal.

Another feature that's becoming more and more useful as the number of spam calls I get goes ever upward is call blocking. Android and iOS calling apps can block calls, but that just sends the caller direct to voicemail and you still end up getting the voicemail. Block a call through the Google Fi app and the callers gets a message saying your number has been disconnected or is no longer in service. So far as they know, you've changed numbers. To set this up open the Fi app and look under Phone Settings for "Spam and blocked numbers." Tap "Manage Blocked numbers" and then you can add any number you like to the list. If you change your mind all you need to do is delete the listing.



## Setting it Up

Google Fi is a T-Mobile MNVO.


## Mobile Hotspot

Data is data is data. To everyone but an ISP.


# Coleman Cascade and 1900 Stove Review

At the end of every circle you find yourself back at the beginning. This is the best way to think about Coleman's new Cacade and 1900 series 3-in-1 stoves. After playing around with interesting designs in stove shape, burner design, and power, as well as cooking surfaces, Coleman is coming back around to where it started, with stoves that look much like the company's classics from the 1950s and before (which are still much sought after in the used market).

That doesn't mean these stoves are clones of the old ones. Both the Cascade series 2-burner and the 1900 series 2-burner features modern conveniences like electric ignition, hot plates, and grill plates, and both burn propane, not the mixed liquid fuel sources used in stoves of yore. Still, in other important ways, they are indeed throwbacks to an earlier age.

The result is a camp stove that's both classic in design and modern in function.

## Cast Iron Man

Outwardly the new Cascade series 2-burner camp stove and the 1900 series 2-burner camp stove are nearly identical. The difference lies in color. Cascade is green—a pale green, similar to the company's older stoves rather than the dark forest green it uses today—with silver lanches and hingers, while the 1900 series is black with gold latches and hinges, but they are otherwise exactly the same shape and dimension—25 inches wide, 12 inches deep and 16 inches tall when open.

That makes both slightly larger than the top pick in our guide to 2-burner camp stoves, the Coleman Classic, and just slightly smaller than our top pick for families, [the Primus Profile stove](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-camping-stoves/#612deb2cc614d797ab4b633c). In terms of usable space and room for pans though, both are every bit as spacious as the Primus. If, like me, you find the Classic slightly cramped (I am cooking for five when camping with the family), the Cascade and 1900 series are a much more usable size.

The Cascade and 1900 stoves also share the same windscreen design, which features deeply scooped sides that made me nervous at first—how could this possibly block wind as well as the much larger side windscreens on the Classic when they have so much less material? The answer is that they really only need to block wind at the base, to keep the flame from going out, and at the base they're no different than any other windscreen on any stove. I did much of my testing in the Outer Banks of North Carolina, in up to 30 knot winds, and both stoves did as well as could be expected, though it's worth noting that no stove will cook well in 30 knot winds.

The burners of both stoves are the same as what you'll find on the Coleman Classic. Which is to say that, while a larger pan will fit on the stove because it's wider than the Classic, the ring of flame is the same size. Both the Cascade 3-in-1 and the 1900 3-in-1 are capable of delivering 12,000 BTUs per burner. 

The burner size is toward the small side though, and it means that, with large pans, the outer edges get significantly less heat. Using a digital thermometer to temp around a 12-inch cast iron pan I found that temps varied by as much as 100 degrees from the center to the edge. Now it's possible to use this to your advantage, putting food you want to cook quickly in the center while rest is around edges, but I find this is more trouble than its worth in practice. The practical reality is that you'll get the best results with 10-inch and smaller pans, which heat much more evenly and in my testing rarely varied more the 50 degrees from center to edge. If you really need to evenly heat larger pans to get your group fed, I suggest something like the [Camp Chef Pro series stove](https://www.cabelas.com/shop/en/camp-chef-pro-series-deluxe-2-burner-camp-stove).

The good news is that Coleman's burner control knobs are the best I've used on a stove of this size. It's easy to light thanks to the electronic ignition switch and it's not difficult to dial it down to get your sauces simmering or crank it up to get the perfect sear on that Red Drum you landed surf fishing. 

What really sets these stoves apart from other Coleman offerings (like the Classic) is the cast iron grates. The heavy duty cast iron burner grates make cooking on these virtually indistinguishable from cooking on a gas stove in your home.

My number one issues with camp stoves—not just Coleman, but all camp stoves—is that over time the metal grates bend and warp. You can't heat and cool stainless steel bars for too long before they begin to warp. I've never really held this against any of the stoves I've used over the years because this is just how nearly all camp stoves are designed. Some are better than others, this is part of why the Primus is an upgrade pick in our guide, it has heavier metal grates than the Coleman Classic. That said, it too eventually began to warp. 

The warping doesn't affect the function of the stoves much, but having now cooked on these Coleman 3-in-1 stoves for a couple of weeks—it is really nice to know that it's never going to warp. They're incredibly stable and they're unlikely to develop a wobble over time. That's part of the throwback aspect of these stoves, they're built like things used to be built, with solid, heavy duty materials that will last. 

The 3-in-1 in the name refers to the cast iron grill pan and griddle, which come with both stoves so you can swap out the two-burner grate for a grill and griddle. I prefer grilling over charcoal or wood when camping, but sometimes it's nice to get some grill marks on your chicken without spending 15 minutes getting the charcoal ready (and it's your only option in places where fires aren't permitted—an ever-increasing number of places). I also found that you don't really have to remove two-burner, you can put the griddles on top of it, which gives you even more cooking versatility.

The flip side to the great construction and cooking abilities of both stoves is they aren't cheap at $210 and $230 for the black and gold 1900 series. For reference, you could buy 4 Coleman Classic stoves with the same money. However, the ability to fit larger pans make these a great option for families. If you have the money, and do enough camping to justify it, the Cascade 3-in-1 is a really nice upgrade and with some care and attention it should last decades. 




# GL.iNet Spitz 4G LTE wireless router

If you have fast internet, chances are good its because you like in the right part of a major Americal city. The rest of us get, well, this WIRED headline from 2007 sums is up nicely: [Rural America Will Never Get Fast Internet](https://www.wired.com/2007/08/rural-america-w/). Out here we get the scraps. These days, with 3G mostly shutdown, that's either nothing or, if you're lucky like me, 4G service.

Rural 4G service is essentially your phone plan, but it has to serve, well everything. It's always metered (Google Fi offers 50 gigabytes a month "unlimited", which is what I've been using lately), and usually slow relative to something like the cable or fiber internet available elsewhere. 

One thing I've found can really squeeze a bit more out of these shoddy connections is a good 4G modem. I've tested half a dozen now, and am working on a guide, but GL.iNet's Spitz 4G LTE router is one the best and at around $200, it's realtively affordable.

## Why You Need a Router 

Many of my neighbors in rural South Carolina just get by with their phones, either as their primary computing device or by using it as a hotspot. The phone-as-hotspot works, and for some it may work well enough, but in my case my phone doesn't get much reception indoors, so I've come to rely on 4G routers, which usually have larger antennas and get better reception. 

GL.iNet's Spitz 4G router looks like many other [routers in our guide](), albeit smaller. It's not until you open it up and find the sim card slot that you'd even know it was a 4G router. There's also a spot for a microSD card (up to 128 gigabytes) so you can use it as a media server if you like. The slot fits a micro sim. 

I tested the Spitz using a variety of sim cards from different carrier and MVNOs (which, if you're serious about having connectivity out here in the sticks you'll need). I initially tested using a T-Mobile sim, and an AT&T sim, but also got it to work with a Google Fi nano sim by carefully aligning it in the slot. I don't recommend this long term, but it works while you're waiting for your sim card adapter kit ([$4 Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/Pcs-SIM-Card-Adapter-Kit/dp/B09WXT962J/)) to arrive, which you will need to use a Google Fi, or other nano-size sim chip in the Spitz. Gl.iNet has a [guide to setting up Google Fi on the Spitz](https://medium.com/glinet/how-to-use-google-fi-sim-kit-on-spitz-gl-x750-4g-lte-wireless-router-north-american-version-5bb716360fb2).

The included LTE antennas manage to pick up signal that my phone can't. That said, it would be nice to have some MIMO ports to connect an external MIMO antenna. Otherwise though the hardware is simple and small. There are 5 LEDs on the top showing power status, WAN connection, 2.4Ghz, and 5Ghz activity and LTE connection status.

Once you've got your SIM card inserted you connect to the wifi network and point your web browser to the Spitz admin page. This is a big part of what makes the Spitz very powerful. Behind the scenes Spitz is using the open source [OpenWRT modem firmware](), which allows you to use some tools and access features normally only found on much more expensive routers, like network wide VPN access, ad-blocking, parental controls, time-based controls and much more.

Gl.iNet uses a custom skin, so if you're familiar with OpenWRT what you get with the Spitz will be slightly different. All the features are there—and you can install anything extra you want—but things might be in slightly different places than you're used to.

There's really too much that's great about OpenWRT to go into here, but I think it's worth pointing out to features that help make the Spitz great. That first is what's known as band locking. Cell towers use different bands that cover different swaths of frequencies. Depending on where you are and what sort of towers are around you, some bands may be faster than others. This is partly due to local support, partly due to congestion, and partly due to something mystical, which is to say factors beyond your control. However, much of the time I have found that changing bands can make a big difference to speed. 

The Spitz makes it easy to change bands by running what are called AT commands. That might sound complex (and some of it is) but changing bands is easy. All you have to do is pick the right options from the dropdown menu and then click send. The web interface said the command had failed, but when I checked the band had indeed been switched. After experimenting with this feature, flipping though bands over the course of several weeks I found that where I am band 4 gives me about 2Mbps faster speeds than other bands.

I also set up the Spitz to use Mullvad's VPN through the Wiregueard settings and now that I've set up a router-level VPN I'll never go back. Alas, sometimes I do leave the house so I keep the apps on all my devices for when I'm connected to other networks, but it's nice to not have to think about it at home.

I did not play around with network-wide ad-blocking or some of the other OpenWRT features, but you can browse the project's [wiki](https://openwrt.org/reasons_to_use_openwrt) for more details. 

It should also point out that while I think the main use for the Spitz is an a 4G modem, it can also be used as a repeater, a WAN extension, or tethered to your phone. I did not extensively test any of these scenarios other than the verify that they all worked. 

The real appeal of the Spitz though is the controls you get through the OpenWRT firmware, which allows a level of customization and potential to tune your reception that you won't get in most other routers. That said, years of experience with flaky 4G networks have taught me that nothing is garanteed. The savior in one situation won't necessarily help at all in another, which is another part of what I like about the Spitz—it's cheap (for a 4G router). 

There is one drawback to the Spitz, which is that it doesn't have a 12V power supply, which means it's not a great choice for road warriors living out of vans (unless you have an inverter). If that's your use case check out the [Mudi](https://www.gl-inet.com/products/gl-e750/), which features the same great firmware, but has a battery and charges off USB-C, making it much more mobile-friendly. If mobile isn't a concern though the Spitz makes a great option.




# Skydio 2+ Review

There will never been such a thing as the perfect drone for everyone. There are too many different reasons for owning a drone—some like to race, some like to shoot sweeping cinematic masterpieces, some want something to follow the fast-paced action. That said, if you fall into the latter category, the Skydio 2+ is darn near perfect for you.

It does have some shortcomings to be aware of, I'll get to that below, but the tracking and collision avoidance software in the Skydio 2+ is better than anything else I've used by and order of magnitude. Best of all, Skydio wraps this sophistication in an incredibly simple, easy-to-use flight control system.

## The Plus

Skydio started out with the R1, a drone that was impressive in its feature set—it was fully automated, no controller necessary—but prohibitively expense and seemed aimed more at the enterprise market. The company followed that up with the Skydio 2, which brought the price down and added some more consumer-friendly features. 

The initial version of the Skydio 2 had two pain points: it could only stay aloft for about 20 minutes, and many people had trouble keeping the drone connected to the Wi-Fi at the further edges of its limited range (3.5 kilometers in the first version). 

The Skydio 2+ hardware update addresses those two issues with a bigger, more powerful battery and two pop-up antennas, which increase the drone's range and provide a stronger signal.

The two hardware changes are minor, but welcome and the 2+ is all that Skydio is selling now. However, if you bought the 2, don't worry, the best of what's new in software will still work for you, and on this drone what's really impressive the software.

That said, there's one other thing I wish Skydio had improved and that's the camera. It's capable of 4K footage at 60 frames per second, which is fine for the average user, but flying it next to the higher resolution camera in the Autel Evo Lite+ really showed how last-generation the Skydio camera is at this point. It uses a 1/2.3 inch sensor, similar to what you'll find in the DJI Mavic Mini, rather than the 1-inch sensor you find in the Evo Lite+ or DJI Mavic Air. The Skydio still produces great video results, but given how far ahead of the competition the rest of this drone is, it's disappointing that the camera isn't similarly ahead. 

I should also note that I found the white balance to be less than stellar and there's no support for D-log video, which is a bit like a RAW image is too still photography, allowing you to apply color correction is software. If you don't plan to edit and color grade your video than the lack of D-log won't mean anything it will most likely mean pros will want to look elsewhere.

That's too bad because for pro photographers, the Skydio would otherwise be a great option (and it still is if you can live without D-log). The reason is that Skydio's automated flight features mean you don't need hours of flight experience to get great shots.

## Keyframe 

The, ahem, key to Skydio's Keyframe automated flight system lies in its approach to obstacle avoidance. Instead of looking for objects to avoid, the Skydio 2 uses six onboard navigation cameras to build a real-time 3D map of its surroundings. It then uses this information, along with some AI smarts, to navigate its way through places that other drones can't manage.

I tried as hard as I could to get the Skydio 2+ to crash into something while following me through some pretty dense trees, but it won't. It flew paths there was no way I could have flown on my own. The system is so good that after you use it a few time your trust in its abilities get to the point that I had to remind myself not to do certain things with the other drones I've been testing. Skydio's collision avoidance is without doubt the best I've ever used.

That alone is impressive, but all that was in the original Skydio 2. What Skydio launched at CES earlier this year with the announcement of the Skydio 2+ was a new automated flight system it calls Keyframe. Keyframe takes Skydio's sophisticated 3D modeling capabilities and turns it into an automated flight system. You can create 3D tracks for the drone to fly. 

All you need to do is fly to where you want to start, mark it onscreen in the app, then fly to the next spot you want to be, mark it, and so on using as many points as want. When you've got all your keyframe points set up, the Skydio 2+ will then fly through them, producing a smooth, continuous shot along your flight path. The results look far better than what I was able to do by hand. I also found the "Cable" automated flight path very handy. It works the same way, but with just a start and end point and then a slider to adjust flight speed between the two points.

## The Beacon

There are three ways to control the Skydio 2+. The first is through the iOS or Android app. If you opt to buy the cheapest "kit" Skydio sells, the Starter Kit, this is how you'll control the drone. To some degree the experience here depends on your device. I flew it using a OnePlus 7 Pro and found it workable, though I much preferred the controller. The controller is $180 extra, but well worth it in my opinion.

The third method of controlling the Skydio 2+ is the most interesting—using something called the Beacon. The Beacon reminded me of a Roku remote. It has no screen, but offers button controls of the basic features and it supports gestures. It's designed for use with the drone following you, and has it has built-in GPS which make the tracking more accurate. I found the gestures worked quite well and were handy when I walking, though less useful riding a bike or otherwise moving faster than walking. It's yet another thing that the Skydio 2+ offers that no other drone can really match.

That in the end is what makes the Skydio 2+ compelling—the ability to fly like a pro, without the time investment it takes a pro to get the skills they have. The unfortunate downside is the slightly shorter battery life, and less impressive camera compared to our current top pick for most people, the DJI Air 2S. If you can live without the 1-inch sensor though, and don't know D-log from a log, the Skydio 2+ makes a great entry point to the world of drone-based film making.



isn't as capable as the full controller, but it 

less capable, but still interesting—and will appeal more to those who want to focus on follow footage, but with more control. The Beacon is about the size of a small TV remote and expands on the rudimentary controls within the app with tactile buttons and, more interestingly, gesture controls. In short, hold down a button, wave the Beacon around, and the drone will follow.










# Autel Evo Lite+ review

For years now DJI has dominated the consumer drone space. A quick glance at our drone buying guide reveals that half of our picks, including the top three, are all DJI drones. Part of that is DJI's excellent products, but part of it is also the lack of competitors. Until this year, there just haven't been a lot of compelling drones out there. 

That is finally changing though. Late in 2021 Autel released four drones designed to compete with the entire DJI line. The most compelling, at least on paper is the Evo Lite+, which offers roughly feature parity with our top pick for most people, the DJI Air 2S, but then adds some extras that make it well worth the extra money, especially for those using their drones primarily as flying cameras.

## tk

As you might have noticed from the images in this article, Autel has adopted a very DJI-inspired design for the Evo Lite+. Unlike the Skydio 2+ (review forthcoming), which re-interprets DJI's folding wing design in its own way, Autel has stuck with the tried in true. In fact, you'd be forgiven for thinking the Evo Lite+ was a DJI Air 2S. 

The dimensions are close enough that you wouldn't be able to see a size difference unless you have the two side-by-side. Autel has some more playful color options than DJI's standard gray. I thought this might make the Autel easier to see, but I did not find this to be the case in my testing—at any real distance, they're both black dots. One small difference is the camera shape and cover. The Evo Lite+ has a more rounded camera and what I would call an awkward protective cover. It's not a deal breaker but it's a little tricky to get on and off.

The place you'll notice the most difference between the Air 2S and the Evo Lite+ is if you pick them up. At 1.8 pounds to the Air 2S's 1.3 pounds, the Evo Lite+ is significantly heavier. From what I can tell, the majority of this extra weight is in the larger battery and contributes to one of best things about the Evo Lite+: the over 40 minute flight time.

I am so used to DJI drones that at around 25 minutes of flying I automatically start feeling like it's time to bring it home. But with the Evo Lite+, at 25 minutes you've still got another ten minutes of flying time before you need to start think about bringing it home. That's 30 percent more flying time that what you get from the Air 2S.

Now I am not a drone racer, so I can't speak to that very well, but in terms of casual flying and filming, I did not notice the extra weight. The Evo Lite+ is plenty nimble in the air and stood up well to the high winds of North Carolina's Outer Banks (where I did the majority of my testing). 

## The Camera 

The Evo Lite+ packs a 1-inch, 20 megapixel CMOS sensor. This is identical to what you'll find in the Air 2S, with one exception: the Evo Lite+ has a variable aperture, which can be adjusted from f/2.8 to f11. The Air 2S has a fixed f/2.8 aperture. The ability to stop down the aperture in the Evo Lite+ is a huge advantage for both brightly lit scenes and to control depth of field. In many cases you can shoot scenes the Evo Lite+, and achieve a look that would require an additional neutral density to get the same look from the Air 2S.

The other thing the Evo Lite+ offers is better low light performance. The Air 2S has a maximum ISO of 6,400 (in manual video capture) or 1,600 if you're shooting D-log. The Evo Lite+ can shoot ISO 48,000 thanks to a dedicated Night Mode. Now that number might sound like a recipe for noisy, mostly useless video, but surprisingly its not. Autel's Dark Mode algorithm manages relatively crisp video without scene-ruining levels of noise, even in moonlight. That said, I have never actually flown a drone at night (other than to test this feature) so how useful this is will depend a little on how you shoot.

The camera you shoot with isn't the only camera that matters though. The EVO Lite+ also has obstacle avoidance sensors on the front, rear, and bottom of the drone. That mostly matches the Air 2, though DJI does have an upward looking sensor as well that can be important in some situations (like flying under tree branches). That said, the Evo Lite+ did a good job of avoiding everything I tried to run it into and I would say that overall its collision avoidance is on part with the Air 2S and should keep you out of trouble in most situations.

My big gripe with Autel's Evo Lite+ is that it lacks built-in geofencing. That means it's up to the user to make sure they're flying safely, where they can, and obeying all local laws. That's a lot to put on users given the tangle of laws out there governing when and where you can fly these days. While I am usually in favor of letting the user have control over everything, in this case I much prefer DJI's "restricted zone" message over having to figure out where I can and can't fly. For testing purposes I relied on the FAA's [B4UFly app](https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_fliers/where_can_i_fly/b4ufly/) ([Android](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=gov.faa.b4ufly2&gl=US), [iOS](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/b4ufly-drone-airspace-safety/id992427109)) to make sure I was during your flights.

Autel also doesn't have the AirSense alerts DJI offers. AirSense, which first showed up in DJI
s drones in 2020, tracks the location of nearby manned and unmanned aircraft and alerts you if you're near anything. I've never had Airsense trigger an alert about anything, and it isn't on any DJI drone prior to 2020, but it would be nice to see something similar in Autel's drones.

## App and Controller

Autel's Sky app for iOS and Android is very similar to DJI's apps and is intuitive and easy to use. The controller I was less thrilled with it. It looks like an Xbox controller, which is fine, but it lacks any storage space for the removable joysticks like you get with DJI drones. Worse, Autel doesn't provide an extra joystick like DJI does.

That said, the controller is easy to use and I had no trouble flying. By default the first time you take off the Sky app will put you in a beginner mode that limits speed and altitude. I suggest staying in this mode until you get comfortable and then turn it off. The Evo Lite+ is maybe slightly less responsive than the DJI Air 2S, due to the extra weight, but the weight is an advantage in the wind, which I dealt with a lot when testing. 

The Sky app offer a variety of flight modes, including Smooth, Standard, and Ludicrous. The latter enables a top speed of 42 miles an hour and more or less negates the obstacle avoidance features since you're not going to have time to react to any warning anyway. That said, it's fun to fly in Ludicrous mode.

Overall the Autel Evo Lite+ is the first drone I've tested that holds its own against DJI's very impressive offerings. If you want the control of a variable aperture camera, along with the increased flight time, and don't mind the slightly higher price, the Autel Evo Lite+ trumps the DJI Air 2S.






# Insta360 One RS Review

Insta360 has released its first hardware update for its modular action camera, the Insta360 One RS. The One RS builds on what the One R promised: namely, to combine the action and 360 degree video camera into a single, go-anywhere, do-anything package.

The One R remains one of my favorite action cameras, especially for those who want the option of shooting 360 video by swapping a lens. This is something the GoPro just can't match, even with with the Max mod, which offers a wider (but still not 360 degree) field of view. All that said, I rarely shoot with the One R for two reasons. The first is that to get the image stabilization it offered you had to process video using the Insta360 app. The second is that the image quality doesn't match what I can get from the GoPro Hero 10.

The new One RS solves both of these problems and makes this a camera worth considering if you're interested in stretching the shooting capabilities of your action camera.

## The 360 Degree View

I have to start with a confession: I hardly ever shoot 360 degree video. It's not a tool I find useful for the stories I want to tell. That said, I had, and have, a soft spot for the Insta360 One R and the way it turned the action cam into a 360 degree cam—the best of both worlds, assuming you need both worlds.

Like its predecessor, the Insta360 One RS is made up of three parts: the battery pack, the lens and sensor (which Insta360 calls a mod), and the processor (which Insta360 calls the "core"). All three parts have been significantly upgraded in this release. 

That makes the upgrade path, or in this case paths, a little unclear. The modular design means that some of the new things are in the lens modules and some are in the "core" or non-lens module. In the end to get the full upgrade you have to buy a whole new camera. So much for the modular upgrade path. While that's disappointing, there's enough here that's new and very much improved that I think a full upgrade is well worth it.

Let's start with what hasn't changed. The 360 lens and the Leica-designed 1-inch lens are unchanged. The 360 lens still shoots 6K footage, and the 1-inch still uses that same 1-inch sensor, which is still startlingly good for something this small.

What is new on the lens from with the One RS is a new version of the 4K lens, which I think of as the GoPro lens because, well, it produces images and footage pretty similar to what you'll get from a GoPro. The new version of the $K lens, which is now called the 4K boost, has a larger 1/2-inch sensor. This allows for 48 megapixel still images and clearer, sharper video capture. 

The new 4K lens stacks up well next to the GoPro Hero 10. It'll shoot 4K at 60fps in 16:9, and 6K in 2.35:1 aspect ratio. The GoPro Hero 10 does manage 120fps in 4K mode, which will provide better slow motion videos, but otherwise I found the 4K Boost lens to be on par with almost everything the GoPro can do. GoPro's image stabilization is slightly better when you push both to the absolute limit, but most of us aren't going to do that which makes the comparison mostly a wash.

The 4K Boost lens can be purchased as an upgrade and attached to your Insta360 One R and you could stop there. You'd get the higher resolution sensor and everything else would remain the same. 

However, as I noted above, the biggest problem with the Insta360 was that some of the action camera must-have features—like image stabilization—were tightly coupled with Insta360's mobile editing application. Because I prefer to edit video on a larger screen, using the software of my choice, I always disliked this aspect of the system. Clearly I am not alone, because the core module of the new One RS has been upgraded with built-in support for Insta360's FlowState stabilization system and horizon lock. There's no need to run your footage through the Insta360 mobile app just to get stabilized video.

If you're upgrading from the One R, that means you could buy just [the core bundle](https://store.insta360.com/product/one_rs) and stick with your existing 360 or 1-inch lenses and you'd also have a significant upgrade to your system for $270.  

The biggest upgrade though is to grab the whole new system, which will also get you a larger battery and a much-improved case in addition to the new modules.

The One R's case (which you need for full waterproofness, and to attach the camera to any mounts your might have) was fiddly and awkward to get on and off. The new case is much easier to use, you slide the body into place through the side, which means if you have the 1-inch Leica lens module you no longer have to take off the lens cover to get it in and out of the case. For me that alone makes the full camera system worth the upgrade.

There's also now an accessory to attach an external microphone (this one is not backward compatible, the One RS has an additional mic port). I tested this with a Rode and, as you would expect, audio quality was noticeably better than what you get from the camera. The simpler case also makes changing batteries less of a hassle.

## The Insta360 App

I know I said I didn't like using the app, but really what I didn't like is to have to pass my video through the app just to get the image stabilization. With that now happening in the camera, the app feels less cumbersome and lets you focus on editing your 360 footage, which is where it really shines. 

I still really like the Auto Frame feature, which parses through your clips and uses artificial intelligence–powered image recognition and tracking to frame shots for you. It's the fastest way I know of to turn 360 footage into something you can actually share with friends. Even when it doesn't get exactly what you want, it give you a good starting point to go back and refine it by hand to get the shot you wanted.

## Versus the GoPro Hero 10

I don't think there's much of a comparison to be made here—to my mind these are very different cameras with very different goals. If you just want an action camera, get the GoPro Hero 10. It's smaller, lighter, and shoots slightly better quality video. On the other hand, if you want a GoPro and a 360 camera in one package, the Insta360 is the system to get.

Yes it's bulkier, moderately heavier, and the image stabilization isn't quite as good, but it gives you options, and, personally, since I export video at 4K anyway (sometimes 1080p), the video quality trade off is negligible. 

The Insta360 One RS comes in a variety of configurations. The 4K edition, which is the new 4K boost lens, with the new core, and new battery is $300. If you want the 360 lens as well, and if you're new to the system, this is what you want, the Twin edition will set you back $550. There's also the 1-inch edition, which comes with the 360 lens and the Leica-designed 1-inch lens and also costs $550.



# Cuisinart Waffle Iron Review

If you think Waffle Irons are just for making waffles, I am here to change your world. 

Waffle irons are in fact the best way to make hash browns at home. They're also great for omelettes, cornbread, birthday cakes, cookies, falafel, and darn near anything else you can think to put in them. I know this because I have spent years [living a vintage RV with a broken oven](https://luxagraf.net/1969-dodge-travco-motorhome), [relying on a waffle iron](https://www.wired.com/story/waffle-maker-rants-and-raves/) for almost all my "baking."

If your waffle iron is going to do all that though, it needs to be up to the task. When I first bought a waffle iron it was on a whim and I went with the cheapest one I could find. It worked, but it only made two waffles at a time. Here's a recipe for conflict: have three kids and then get a waffle iron that only makes two waffles at a time.

When that ultra-budget model died I started looking around for a replacement that could make four waffles at a time and stand up to the greater level of not-technically-waffles abuse that I was going to throw at it. Most of all it needed to easy to clean. The Cuisinart 4-Slice Belgian Waffle Maker ticks most of these boxes and isn't terribly expensive either.

Cuisinart's Waffle iron is solidly made, with a sleek stainless lid, surrounded by sturdy plastic. It's pretty good size—it's roughly 14 inches deep, 10 inches wide, and 5 inches high—and will take up considerable counter space if you leave it out. Fortunately it's not too heavy (10 pounds) so I shove it in a cabinet under the counter when it's not being used.

The Cuisinart makes 1-inch thick waffles with reasonably deep holes. The results are not quite what I'd call a Belgian Waffle, but the precise meaning of that term is highly debatable—some say its the batter, some the thickness, some the shape. What matters from a I'm-not-just-making-waffles point of view is that the Cuisinart's waffle plates are cast aluminum, and well-coated in a non-stick material that really is non-stick.

I've been using it 2-3 times a week for several months and there's no sign of wear on the plates, no scratches in the non-stick, and still no sticking—and I never grease it before adding batter. And that's making hash browns, cornbread, two birthday cakes, and plenty of other non-waffle cooking.

The secret to long life of any non-stick coating is to never use metal tools of any kind on it. Get a good silicon spatula to help gently pry out your waffles. I use one very similar to [this Oxo ($12, Amazon)](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B096WDH52Z/). The silicon won't scratch the Cuisinart's plates and because it's heat-proof you won't metal your spatula.

The Cuisinart has a very simple, five-setting temperature control. A green indicator light lets you know when the waffle iron is ready, and then again when your waffles are done. That said, I almost never pay attention to the indicator light. Everyone in my family likes their waffles at different levels of brownness/crispiness so I'd constantly be fiddling with the temp settings to make everyone happy. Instead I set it 3 and then let the kids keep cooking it as much as they want. My pro tip here is to never open your waffle iron *before* the green light turns on, but don't assume your waffle is done just because the green light is on.

I found that the Cuisinart offers a good range of brownness through the 1-5 settings and errs on the undercooked side, which is to say that setting it to five won't burn your waffles.

Once you move beyond simple waffles to things like hash browns the temperature settings won't do you much good, in that case you'll want to time your cooking just like you would in an oven.

My one gripe when it arrived was that you can’t pop out the plates, which makes them easier to clean. So far, however, this has turned out to be a non-issue. I wipe it down with a damp rag after each use. It's also not that heavy, so you can turn it around to get a good angle on all sides. That said, it would be nice if those plates came out, because at some point the non-stick will start to fail—I've never owned anything non-stick that didn't eventually become stick—and it would be nice to know you can scrub them if you need to. That said, I don't consider the non-removable plates a deal breaker at all.

Whether or not you should spend $60 on the Cuisinart probably depends mostly on how often you make waffles. If waffles are a special treat you enjoy a couple times a year, a cheaper waffle iron might suffice. For those us who are more serious about waffles, the Cuisinart 









# Benchmade Knives

Benchmade is best known for its folding pocket knives and hunting knives, but the Oregon City-based company recently started expanding its collection into the kitchen. There's a set of steak knives, a very nice looking carving knife, and most recently, a three-piece set of chef knives.

I should say from the outset that I am generally opposed to knife sets, which typically include knives you don't really need. In this case though all three knives are knives every cook needs: there's a traditional eight-inch chef knife, a smaller six-inch utility knife, and a four-inch paring knife. 

For most cooks, aspiring or seasoned veterans, that's all the knives you need in one neat, handsome looking set.

## 

I got my start in professional cooking as a Garde Manger at Five and Ten in Athens GA, under chef [Hugh Acheson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Acheson). About six months after I started several of the more experienced chefs pooled their money and ordered custom Japanese knives. If memory serves it worked out to about $200 each, which was way out of my budget. I still thought of being a chef as a way to pay for college, not something I'd end up doing full time for the next seven years of my life. I did not go in on this deal and I have regretted it ever since. 

Which is to say that good knives cost good money. This Benchmade set is no exception. The cheapest handles and inlays will still set you back $750, or $250 a knife. The Maple handled set with carbon fiber bolster that I tested costs $910, over $300 per knife. Not cheap, but then, they do have a lifetime warranty so you can think of them as a one time investment. And if you're really interested in becoming a better cook, there are few investments that will pay off as well as a good knife and plenty of practice with it.

A good knife is more than a good tool, it's an extension of your hand. A good knife doesn't have to expensive, my favorite knife has no markings on it and I can't recall where it came from, but over the years it has become what a good knife, what all good tools, become—an extension of yourself. When you forget you are holding a knife, you have a good knife.

When the Benchmade set arrived I immediately grabbed the utility knife (what I would call a petty knife) and about ten minutes later I forgot I was holding it, it melded into my hand. The blade was thin and able to slide under the flashing on a skirt steak I was cleaning without me really have to plan it, my fingers moved, the knife obeyed. A good tool allows you to operate on instinct and experience that way.

The handles are comfortable, well balanced against the blade, although I questioned the wisdom of having pivot ring holes in a chef knife, where they're more likely to collect food and grime than in say folding knife. Otherwise those these are good looking, light, highly responsive knives. After several months of using them, I find that about 80 percent of the time, I still reach for the six-inch utility knife.

They hold an edge remarkably well, which means less time spent sharpening. I have only felt the need to sharpen them twice since I got them, which is far less than I sharpened my own knives in the same time period. Frankly, these seem to hold an edge better than my Benchmade folding knife. That may be due to Benchmade's proprietary SelectEdge technology, which uses 14 degree angle. That can be tricky to maintain, but I used a Work Sharp field sharpener ([$30 at Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/Work-Sharp-Guided-Field-Sharpener/dp/B009YKHZ96/), [$34 at Work Sharp](https://www.worksharptools.com/shop/sharpeners/manual/guided-field-sharpener/)), which has 20 degree guides, and then just brought it down to 14 from there.

I think it's worth noting that, more than a knife for the fanatic, these are great knives for the newcomer. They are somehow more approachable and easier to work with than many of the knives in our knife guide. I can't pin down exactly why that is, but I have observed it in the rest of my family.

Thanks to that knife guide, I test dozens of knives every year. All of them live in the kitchen drawer (I know, the horror, but it's a good stress test). The Benchmade knives are the first test knives my wife has ever used regularly (like me she usually prefers the unmarked knife of unknown origin). My kids also used these knives without hesitation. I don't have a logical explanation for this willingness of the inexperienced to dive right and grab these knives. Some of that might be that they're less exotic than many I test. They look like what most people think of when they think of chef knives. They don't have some crazy swirling pattern in the steel, and they don't look like they need hours of care when you're done with them (because they don't). But more than that, there's just something intangible about them that makes you want to pick them up and use them. They're good tools I think, and good tools tend to call out to you.

Knife fanatics might roll their eyes at this sort of thing, but these knives won't make them happy anyway. They will rightly object that there are harder steels out there. That's true, though there are two options for the Benchmade set, either CPM-154 or 440c, the former being what I tested. The other big objection to these would whether or not they are a good value for the money. For this price you could order custom knives like my fellow chefs did years ago. If custom knives interest you, I would pursue that idea. If you know enough about your personal taste in knives, and have the money to order a custom knife, then that is what you should do.

These Benchmade knives are a great choice for everyone else though. They're approachable, they're thin and light, they hold an edge remarkably well, they sharpen easily, and they come with a lifetime warranty. The latter is worth noting because in my testing the bolster fell off two of the knives. I'm not sure how or why this happened, and neither is Benchmade (I sent the knives back to them to try to figure it out). I do know that if it happened to you it would be covered by the lifetime warranty. However I can't find anyone else on the internet who has had this problem so my guess is I got an anomaly.
# Sony A7 IV 

Sony's new A7 IV full frame mirrorless camera is one of the best "entry level" mirrorless cameras on the market. Yes, there are higher resolution sensors, and you won't find some high end video features, but you'd be hard pressed to find a better all-around hybrid photo/video camera.

This update adds a new 33-megapixel sensor, an insane, nearly unlimited buffer capacity (meaning you can pretty much keep shooting uncompressed RAW/JPG until the battery runs out), a much improved autofocus system with better eye tracking, and support for more video capture modes, including Hybrid Log Gamma for playback on HDR TVs.

## What's New

Physically the A7 IV isn't much different, though the grip is considerably larger than previous models, giving the camera a chunkier feel. The new grip is very similar to what the A7S III uses. I found it less comfortable than my A7RII, but of course how it feels will depend on the size of your hands. I suggest checking one out at your local camera store if you can. Despite the increased size, this is still one of the more compact full frame cameras in our [mirrorless camera guide]().

The controls on the back remain fairly close to what you'll find on other recent A7 series cameras. There's a 4-way multi-controller that can also act as a dial, a joystick to position the autofocus point, and six buttons which are all programmable. It's enough external controls to ensure you really only need to dive into the menus once to set everything up the way you want. That's a good thing too because Sony's menu system is still labyrinthian and the less time you spend there the happier you will be. 

What's new and noteworthy about the A7 IV is mainly on the inside. The A7 IV uses a new 33-megapixel, backside illuminated CMOS sensor, which provides better resolution and potentially offers better image quality in low-light situations. The new sensor is a step up from the A7 III (which had a 24-megapixel sensor), as well as what you'll find in rivals like the Canon R6, Nikon Z6II, and Panasonic S1. 

At the same time the A7 IV is still very much the entry-level camera in Sony's line up. In terms of resolution the A7R IV, with its 60-megapixel sensor, remains in a class of its own. In terms of the rest of Sony's lineup, it's worth noting that it's very likely we'll see this same sensor wind up in the next A7C update, which I would expect later this year, and may well be worth waiting for if you want the smaller camera body.

Where the sensor is new, the A7 IV's processor comes from the video-centric Sony A7S III, where it was notable for it's dynamic range. The A7 IV gets a similar boost, offering 15 stops of dynamic range, which opens an incredibly rich range of post processing possibilities. The new processor also makes the A7 IV quite a bit speedier than its predecessor (Sony claims it's up to 8 times faster. I did not have A7 III around to compare the two, but certainly never felt like the A7 IV bogged down).

## Autofocus Power

Along with the processor and sensor the A7 IV brings Sony's new autofocus system first seen in the flagship A9, to the entry level A7. The improvement here is difficult to overstate. This system, which Sony calls "real-time tracking", is really smart and really fast. 

I test half dozen high-end mirrorless cameras a year, each one promising to be faster at autofocus and yet most of largely indistinguishable when judged by results. I will confess that, on my own time, I only ever shoot manual focus lenses. I've been shooting manual focus since I picked up my first Minolta SR-T in 1988 and I'm reasonably fast at this point. In most situation—excluding wildlife and sports—I get fewer out of focus images focusing manually than I do with the latest and greatest autofocus. That is, until the A7 IV.

The reason for my success with manual is two-fold. First there's practice and the muscle memory it builds. Those are important, but the second reason is that it's simple. I don't have to remember to switch modes as situations change, or move autofocus points using a touchscreen. All I have to do is turn the barrel of the lens. Similarly, Sony's new autofocus system is remarkably good not because it's fast (though it is that), but because it's simple. 

Sony's subject tracking makes it easy to highlight your subject and then the camera tracks it. All you do is put your auto focus points on the subject, then "half press" the shutter button as you would with any camera, but then the camera will "lock" not to that area of the frame, but to the actual subject. This means that when the subject moves across your frame, the camera continues to track it, adjusting the auto focus points to keep your subject in focus. 

This has two advantages over the "lock on" style systems you'll find in other cameras: The first is that it works. The second is also that it works.

This is the first focusing system I've been able to trust to the degree that I stopped thinking about focusing at all and way able to just concentrate on composition and lighting, even with a subject in motion as I swung the camera around to follow it. That freedom to, ahem, focus your attention elsewhere, enables you to compose better images. Everything else that's new about the A7 IV pales next to that. Let's face it, with yearly upgrade cycles it's rare that the latest model of anything is really much better than the one before it when it comes to the images you actually create. The A7 IV's autofocus is an exception, this really will help you make better pictures.

There are some other smaller things things to like here as well. The A7 IV’s buffer capacity is impressive. The combination of the new sensor and CFexpress card slot give the A7 IV an essentially unlimited buffer capacity. If you're a shutter mashing addict, you'll be happy here. I should also note that I found the color rendition in JPG files to be better than previous models. I primarily shoot RAW, but sometimes it's nice to have really nice JPG that requires no post processing and the A7 IV does a better job here than most Sony cameras.

The A7 IV uses the same battery as the A7 III. It's substantial battery that Sony rates at 520 shots, but in practice this battery will get you through the day. If you're a wedding photographer maybe you still need a spare in the bag, but the days of the A7 line requiring a sling of batteries to get through a day are thankfully behind us. 

The A7 IV is an all-around solid camera. Its sensor produces sharp images with impressive dynamic range. The autofocus system is good enough that you'll miss fewer shots, and have more video options than previous releases. The not so good news is that this release is priced less like an entry-level model: $2,500 for the body. That's $500 more than previous A7s, though there is now the smaller A7C, which is $1,800. If you can afford it though, the A7 IV definitely delivers. 





# Vivaldi 5

Vivaldi is one of our [favorite web browsers](https://www.wired.com/story/vivaldi-4-2021/), and it recently announced another major release. [Vivaldi 5.0 is available](https://vivaldi.com/) for Windows, Mac, Linux, and, perhaps most notably given the changes in this release, Android.

Version 5 of Vivaldi has some new features for the desktop, but much of what's new and intriguing in this release is focused on mobile, which for Vivaldi means Android (there is no iOS version of Vivaldi). Android tablets get special attention in this release, with several features aimed at improving the web browsing experience on tablets—something even Google hasn't managed to do.

In fact the idea of an app optimizing for Android tablets as almost unheard of these days, and one of our major complaints about [iPad alternatives](https://www.wired.com/gallery/the-best-tablets/)—the software experience is subpar.

With Vivaldi 5.0 though, at least you can have a great web browsing experience on your Android tablet.

The most welcome features on mobile is actually available on both phones and tablets: tab stacking. For the mobile user experience of tab stacking Vivaldi has opted to display stacks as a second row of tabs nested under a primary tab. To create a new tab stack you long press the new tab button, which will open that tab in a second row beneath the primary tab. If you switch to another top-level primary tab, the second row of tabs is hidden away, but the tab that contains them gets a kind of hollow, outlined look to let you know that there are multiple tabs nested under it. You can also create tab stacks by dragging and dropping tabs within the tab switching and organizer page.

Though I expected to tab stacking on tablets, I also found tab stacks very useful on phone screens. What I'd really like to see is syncing of the stacks, so I could pull a stack from my desktop browser straight over to my phone. Right now that's not possible. Still, even without the ability to sync stacks intact, I found tab stacking a great way to separate work and personal tabs on mobile. It's also a great way to "hide" a tab so if your kids pick up your phone this time of year, they don't see the potential gifts you're browsing.

The other big change on mobile is one of the new tablet-specific features. Vivaldi's various panels—which give quick access to bookmarks, history, notes, and downloads—are now actual side panels like they are in the desktop version. The caveat is that they're only this way if there's room on the screen to display them that way, which effectively means on tablets. In experimenting with a couple of phones and two Fire tablets, I found that the panels were side panels only on the Fire tablets, on phones the panels still overlay the entire screen, even in landscape mode.

Having the panels as sidebar overlays makes working with them easier, and less context-destroying then the old method which hides the tab you're currently using completely. This is especially useful with notes, which you can look through while the page you're currently browsing is still visible in the background. 

Other new features aimed at both tablet and phone users include more options for the tab bar. It can now be at the top or bottom of the screen, and you can now add close buttons for background tabs, and show them as favicons only (these two are both buried in settings and disabled by default). My favorite features though is that mobile tabs now change width dynamically, just like they would on the desktop browser. Fans of dark themes might enjoy the newfound ability to set a dark theme for specific pages.

## Desktop Changes

Not everything in Vivaldi 5 is about mobile. The desktop version gets two major new features: a translation panel and support for theme sharing. 

Vivaldi had previously introduced built-in translations for webpages, but the new panel allows you to translate just snippets of a page. You can even set it to automatically translate selected text. So you select something, open the translation panel, and your translation will appear below the original text in the panel. As with the full page version, translations are provided by [LingvaNex](https://lingvanex.com/).

Vivaldi has always been a very themable browser. You can even go so far as to completely restyle it with a custom CSS file, but for most users that's overkill. Vivaldi's built-in theming tools make it relatively easy to customize the colors and backgrounds the way you want, but now it's even simpler to change the look of Vivaldi by downloading user themes from the new [themes website](https://themes.vivaldi.net/).

## Conclusion

I've previously called Vivaldi [the best browser on the web](https://www.wired.com/story/vivaldi-4-2021/). I stand by that, but I have one caveat: part of what makes Vivaldi the best browser on the web is its near infinite level of customization. You get to make Vivaldi the best browser for *you*, but that does take a bit of work on your part. Vivaldi 4 introduced some expanded defaults that help new users get up and running faster, and Vivaldi 5 has added some new options on mobile, but the fact remains that if you don't want to dive into the settings and customize your browsing experience to your liking, Vivaldi may not completely wow you at first.

Then again it might, because it also has a host of features you won't find in any other browser—the ability to take and sync notes, an email client, RSS reader, full customization of keyboard shortcuts, mouse gestures, tabs stacks... [the list goes on](https://vivaldi.com/features/), and will no doubt continue to grow when Vivaldi 6 rolls around. 


"""

"""

# DJI Mavic 3

DJI may have dropped the "pro" from the Mavic name when it released the third version if its flagship drone, but make no mistake, with a brand new, high quality camera, two lenses, and full manual exposure control, the Mavic 3 is aimed squarely at video pros.

It's still a fun drone to fly, but the $2,200 price tag is there because of the camera and lenses, not the flying capabilities, impressive though those are.

If your primary use for a drone is capturing high quality photos and videos, this is the best drone on the market by a wide margin. Chances are you don't need footage this good, but it sure is fun and offers incredible results if you can afford it.

## Quality Image

The Mavic 3 is available in two versions, the standard model, which is what I tested, and a "Cine" model that adds more built-in storage (a 1-terabyte SSD to the standard's 8-gigabyte SSD), and support for ProRes 422 HQ video recording. The ProRes support is a big deal for video pros, and the file size of ProRes footage is the main reason for the larger SSD as well.

What's most impressive about this update to the largest and most powerful of DJI's Mavic series of drones is the new camera sensor. DJI has packed in a 20-megapixel Four Thirds CMOS sensor, the largest sensor available in the Mavic line (in terms of megapixels its the same as the 1-inch sensor in the [Mavic 2 Pro](https://www.wired.com/review/review-dji-mavic-2-pro/), but the sensor itself is larger, which means better detail). That means the Mavic 3 is capable of shooting 20 megapixel RAW still images, and video at 5.1K at 50fps, as well as 4K at 120 frames per second.

Sensor size isn't everything though, and the Mavic 3 also has features two different lenses. The primary lens is a 24mm prime, built in conjunction with Hasselblad. It features an adjustable aperture ranging from f/2.8 to f/11. This is the lens I shot with 99 percent of the time. It's one of the best small lenses I've ever shot, and the Mavic 3 is the first drone I've used that produced better results than the aging [DJI Phantom 4 Pro+](https://www.wired.com/2017/06/review-dji-phantom-4-pro-plus/).

The second lens is a 162mm telephoto lens with a 28x digital-optical hybrid zoom. This one records to a 12 megapixel, 1/2-inch CMOS sensor so the quality is nowhere near as good. It also lacks the manual controls (it's a fixed f/4.4 aperture) and can't shoot RAW, making it somewhat limited. Worse, in my testing, the results zoomed past about 8X were generally unusable, certainly unusable in a professional production. It's nice to have for certain situations where you need to zoom in, but it feels like DJI phoned this one in, perhaps it just didn't want to abandon the Mavic 2 Zoom capabilities. Just know that with the zoom enabled the image and video quality is nowhere near as nice as what you get out of the main lens.

And what you get out of the main lens is insanely good. The footage I captured with the Mavic 3 is some of the best drone footage I've shot in the twelve years I've been testing drones. It's the first of the Mavic line that I think can serve as a replacement for the neglected (let's be honest, abandoned) Phantom 4 Pro+. There will probably never be a Phantom 5, but that's okay, because the Mavic 3 is capable of filling that role.

It's not just image quality that's impressive though. One of the hardest things about shooting with a drone, particularly a fast moving drone, is keeping things in focus. To help speed up the Mavic 3's autofocus DJI has introduced what it calls Vision Detection Auto Focus. This system taps into the multiple vision sensors in the Mavic 3, the collision avoidance sensors, to speed up focusing. It's hard to say exactly how much this contributes, but focus is very fast, which is good because shooting at wider apertures (with smaller depth of field) means you need fast focusing.

## Design

The Mavic 3 is slightly larger than the Mavic 2, but it's also slightly lighter (8 grams lighter in the case of the standard model). The propellers are longer as well, and so are the 5000 mAh batteries, so if you're upgrading, unfortunately, none of your Mavic 2 spares will work with the Mavic 3. The batteries also now slide into the back instead of the top in the Mavic 2.

The changes to the battery are worth it though, because the larger capacity means the Mavic 3 can stay aloft for quite some time. Flight time depends on too many variables to give a single number, but flying in normal mode, shooting 4K video at 30 fps I was able to stay in flight for just over 30 minutes. Cutting back on shooting I was able to get to 41 minutes, which is very close the DJI's 46 minute claim, and almost 15 minutes longer than the Air 2S ([9/10 WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/dji-air-2s-drone/).

Along with the slight body design changes, DJI has greatly improved the obstacle avoidance system with six fisheye sensors and two wide angle sensors that add up to 360 degree obstacle avoidance that even works in Normal mode. The Air 2S has similar capabilities, though its avoidance cameras have some gaps that the Mavic 3 does not suffer from. 

The new system is impressive in practice. I was impressed enough with my initial tests that for the first time ever I set it the app to use the most conservative settings, and actually tried to run it into a tree. I still could have hit the tree, but the amount of warnings I got would have stopped any normal person long before any collision occurred. That said, no collision avoidance system is perfect, exercise caution when flying around obstacles. 

At the opposite end of the spectrum there's sport mode, which has no avoidance protection at all and can now reach speeds around 42 miles per hour.

The Mavic 3 will eventually have access to ActiveTrack 5, which DJI claims will be better at tracking subjects in automated flight modes. Which is to say the drone will move with the subject rather than just tracking with the camera. Consider the cliche shot of a car driving a windy mountain road, with ActiveTrack 5 you'd be able to automatically follow the car's movement. More interesting, DJI claims that the vision sensors will help track movement and even be able to relocate it should it disappear from the frame (again, think of the car on the road, momentarily lost in trees, ActiveTrack 5 should be able to find it when it re-emerges.

Unfortunately DJI has followed the lead of far too many tech companies these days of announcing features, but not delivering them. We used to call this vaporware, but it's become par for the course with camera and device makers. It's a trend we'd like to see end, but for now, suffice to say that if these features are potential selling points for you, don't buy the Mavic 3 just yet. DJI says the new features will be available via an update early 2022. 

Surprisingly, the Mavic 3 uses DJI's Fly app. I say surprisingly because this is clearly a drone aimed at pros and the company's Go 4 app has plenty of settings pros would love—white balance controls, Aperture Priority mode, and more—that aren't in the Fly app. It's not the Fly app is bad, it just feel aimed at a much more casual user than what the Mavic 3 is likely to attract.Still, the variable aperture controls are easy to use, and you can customize your settings to suit your workflow. Perhaps one day more advanced features will be added to the Fly app.

As it stands though the Mavic 3 is still an impressive drone. The Cine model especially, with the ability to shoot ProRes video, will be welcome news for professionals who need the high quality imagery. The Cine starts at $5,000 though, which is well beyond what more casual users are going to spend. 

The base model is not exactly cheap at $2,200, but it's more approachable than the Cine, and even the base model Mavic 3 produces the best quality video footage I've seen from a consumer drone. The long flight time, impressive obstacle avoidance features, and (in theory) ActiveTrack 5 make the Mavic 3 stand well above anything else on the market.


I got to test the Cine Premium combo. I am really impressed with the carrying case that converts to a back pack, the Intelligent flight batteries that are easy to insert, now in the back of the drone, and the close to 45 (realistic) minutes of flight time. It's nice to go out and know you'll have over two hours to get your desired shots with three fully-charged batteries. The drone is easy and enjoyable to fly and maneuver. I also found the new gimbal guard so much more convenient to attach and remove. The fact that omnidirectional obstacle avoidance worked when I was flying in Normal mode is a bonus.


# Action 2 Review

Drone maker DJI is no stranger to great small cameras and lenses. The company's drones capture some of the best aerial footage around, which is why DJI's first stab at an action cam, the Osmo Action, was a hit. It was more or less a GoPro clone, but it brought a full color front screen, which has since been copied by GoPro.

For its second take on the genre DJI appears to have cast a fond eye at another competitor—Insta360, which pioneered the interchangeable lens camera. Unfortunately while DJI's GoPro clone innovated in some really great ways, the Action 2 leaves much to be desired. 

On paper the Action 2's specs are solid, there's 4K video at 120 frames per second (fps), improved motion stabilization and a host of automatic capture modes, and other features that are at this point pretty standard on high end action cams. After spending a few weeks using the Action 2 though I am not impressed. I can think of only one reason I'd pick it over the GoPro Hero 10 or Insta360 One R: weight.

## DJI's Teeny Tiny Camera

The Action 2 isn't strictly an Insta360 One R clone. They're both modular, but with the One R the modularity consists of swapping different lens and sensor combos. DJI takes a different approach, making a single side of the ostensibly modular camera a functioning camera in itself. What you can add to that is either a battery pack with single back screen, which will be available in early 2022, or a dual screen module which is available now.

While the modular approach is welcome, when I first unpacked the Action 2 I was most taken with just the lens portion, which functions as a tiny little camera on its own. 

After all, if there's one thing that's not great about the GoPro Hero 10 Black, it's weight. Or at least I assume it would be annoying to have a 5.3-ounce weight on your head. I very rarely strap any camera to my person, I don't find the resulting footage particularly interesting, but I recognize that many people do exactly this and for them, the DJI Action is a compelling possibility.

If your primary use case for an action camera is in fact strapping it to your helmet while you, as my snowboarding roommate used to say in all earnestness, "bomb the slopes," then the DJI Action 2 will probably trump the GoPro and pretty much anything else on the market. It weighs in at 2 ounces, which is hardly even noticeable when it's on your helmet and certainly nothing like the over 5 ounces of a GoPro. The Action 2 is also tiny, which means less drag in wind and water.

If weight is the most important factor then the Action 2 makes sense. And in addition to the tiny featherweight form factor you can turn it into a more traditional action cam by adding the battery and screen modules to the mix. Here, however, is where the quirks and disadvantage of the Action 2 begin to show themselves.

DJI's magnetic attachment mechanism is, from a pure engineering standpoint, genius. It's solid and simple. You put the two cubes together and they snap in place. Doesn't get much easier than that. Two clips further secure the magnet, but you can still easily get it apart even with gloved hands. 

That said, you probably shouldn't try to take it apart with gloved hands because if you're wearing gloves then your probably in snow and only the lens portion of the camera is fully waterproof. Divers, fear not, there is a waterproof case you can buy for an extra $65 ([preorder](https://store.dji.com/product/dji-action-2-waterproof-case) rel=nofollow}), that will make the whole camera waterproof to 196 feet (60 meters). But then you lose the advantage of the fast change magnetic clip system.

The lack of complete waterproofing is moderately annoying, but not a deal breaker unless you're planning to primarily use your action came in the water, if so, this is definitely not what you want. 

On the plus side the magnetic clip system means there's no difficult to open doors or port covers. The camera lens unit is completely sealed. You can also even hot swap the additional side modules without cutting your shot, which is a trick the Insta360 One R cannot manage. 

Of course you should also consider that the primary battery of the standalone lens unit somewhere in that seal compartment is not user replaceable and will eventually need to be replaced somehow. This is alarming reminiscent of when laptops stopped offering user replaceable batteries and something that I really hope does not become a trend. 

Similarly, there's no micro SD card slot on the main camera. You get 32-gigabytes of storage in the camera module. To expand that you can clip on either of the side modules (screen or battery pack), which have an SD card slot on them. This sounds limiting, and it is, but battery life will stop you long before the 32-gigabytes of built-in storage is filled up.

The magnetic system has one other nice feature, though I am not sure DJI would condone this: you can snap it metal objects out in the world. Can't get your tripod close enough to that metal pole? No problem, just snap the camera directly to the pole. I must say I can't think of a recent situation where this would have been useful, but it is possible. I shot some gripping action footage of the kitchen cabinets from the oven's point of view by snapping the camera direction to the front of the oven. 

## Performance

Setting aside the odd, possibly-useful-in-some-situations design, the Action 2 is a solid enough camera. Video tops out at 4K at 120 fps, which is a considerable step up from the original Osmo Action, though it doesn't match the 5.3K video you find in the GoPro Hero 10 Black. For now the only use I've had for 5.3K video is the ability to crop and still output 4K, but as monitors and TVs continue to bump the pixel specs, higher res video will become more important.

The sensor captures 12 megapixel images and the lens will open up to an f/2.8 aperture. Given that most action is outdoors the f/2.8 lens will generally be fine, but I should note that I found low light performance—for example, shooting 4K video in a pine forest in the evening—noticeably noisier than the same scene shot with both a GoPro and the Insta360 One R.

Overall I found image and video quality to be good enough, but not as good as the GoPro Hero 9/10. This is just personal taste, but I find DJI's video to be overly contrasty. I prefer a more neutral recording that I could tone by hand later, but if you're going straight to YouTube or Instagram, the results are plenty good enough for either platform.

DJI has given its software-based features some love in this release too. RockSteady, the company's stabilization system is at version 2.0 and is really quite impressive. Between this and GoPro's recent improvements to its Hypersmooth stabilization, it's a bad time to be a gimbal maker. I can't see the need for one at this point. Which company has the better stabilization? They're close enough that in everyday use I couldn't tell any difference. If I really had to pick one I'd say DJI, but not by much. 

That said, for most people, I think the GoPro is a better choice. It's cheaper, image and video quality are marginally better, and every accessory on the market works with a GoPro. Very few accessories available are going to work with the Action 2, which makes the prospect of upgrading from a GoPro system potentially expensive.

As it stands the DJI Action 2 "Power Combo", which adds a battery pack and single screen, is $400. That's nominally cheaper than a GoPro Hero 10, but, you get no front screen. The much better value in my view is the "Dual Screen" combo which will set you back $520, but offers a front screen.








# Husqvarna 435X AWD Automower 

I hate mowing the lawn. A vast expanse of unproductive grass is a waste to begin with—why grass when you could have a garden, or an orchard, or all sorts of other useful plants. That I have to push around a device just to maintain this green wasteland makes it doubly insulting. 

Fortunately this summer I unleashed the Husqvarna 435X AWD Automower on my lawn and never had to think about mowing it again.

## Robot Love

The Husqvarna 435X is the high-end, AWD version of the company's robotic lawn mowers. It's not cheap at $5,000, but there are cheaper models that can accomplish the same thing. The 435X is specifically designed to handle sloping yards and rough terrain, both of which feature heavily at the house I rent. The 435X never had any issues and never missed a beat. It did get hung up on fallen tree branches from time to time, but that was the only trouble it ever had in over six months of testing.

The results of the 435X far exceeded my expectations. Admittedly, my expectations were low: just make it so I don't have to mow the lawn isn't asking much. The 435X is capable of much more than that, in fact it produced the healthiest, most well manicured lawn in our area, if I do say so. Every delivery person that every came to our house asked about the lawn and curious creature roaming it. The secret to the 435X's lawn care prowess lies in the spinning razor blades.

Yes, the 435X is a robot equipped with spinning razor blades (I always made a point to be polite and kind to it in hopes that it will remember me in the inevitable robot uprising of the future). Because it mows much more regularly than you, or any lawn service, the 435X cuts tiny pieces of glass at a time, and this is secret to a healthy lawn. When you let grass get long and then mow it back, even with a catcher you leave significant piles of cut grass behind and these smother the grass that's trying to grow, opening the ecological playground of your yard to weeds.

There is one secret to getting the perfect lawn from your robot helper: change the blades regularly. Husqvarna's official recommendation is to change your blades every 1-2 months with the caveat that it will vary depending on the type of grass and soil at your house. I found every two months to be about right. For testing purposes I let it go considerably longer and the quality of mowing suffered. I also found that it's good to check regularly to make sure all the blades are still there. I twice lost blades to limbs that had fallen and passed under the automower. 

The other thing you will still need to do is clear any debris that might end up on your lawn. At my house the lawn is shaded by some 100 year old pecan trees. They're wonderful for shade, but they do drop limbs pretty regularly in the wind and those limbs who hang up the 435X if I didn't clear them. Still, picking up the occasional limb is a small price to pay.

This isn't an issue with the 435X because it's relentless. It mows rain or shiny, night or day, whenever and however much you want it to mow. I played with this quite a bit, moving all day every day vs mowing only a couple of days for only a couple of hours. I did not keep precise track, but it seemed to cover the roughly 1 acre of lawn it was tasked with in about six hours of mowing. 

I found that the results for mowing daily were not noticeably different than mowing three days a week, so that's where it ran for most of the time I had it, three days a week, six hours a day. I did not notice any impact on my electric bill no matter how frequently it mowed. Scheduling is handled by the Husqvarna app, which makes it easy to set your times, or turn it off, as I once did when heavy rains caused our yard to flood. The 435X connects via Bluetooth and also has GPS for mapping your yard. The far edge of my yard was beyond Bluetooth range to my house, so occasionally the Automower would get stuck and I would not no because it couldn't transmit, but most of the time it was not an issue. If you're not a fan of the app you can use Alexa and Google voice commands as well. It's even possible to use IFTTT to send messages to other devices. 

The 435X is also something your mower or lawn care service probably isn't: silent. Every now and then the 435 would make a noise went it hit something like a small branch, but most of the time it was totally silent. 

That brings me to the safety features. The automower detects obstacles and will stop before the blades get near anything. I tested this with everything from my feet to a car I parked in the automower's mowing area and it never failed. The Automower also has an alarm that will sound and GPS tracking system that will allow police to locate the mower should it be stolen. The Automower would also be mostly useless to anyone who took it since you need to know a four-digit pin to gain control of it. All that said, I did put the base station charger at the back of the yard, well away from the street so that at night anyone driving by would be unlikely to see it.

The 435X is slightly differently shaped than other Husqvarna automowers so that it can handle slopes and uneven terrain. It's two section linked by a bridge. The front has two large wheels and headlights. It's also where you'll find the color LCD panel, which can be used to configure the mower without the app. The backend uses two smaller wheels on a pivot to turn the mower. Because the two sections are links, but slightly independent the 435X can handle uneven ground.

There are two things I don't like about the Automower 435X. The first is the price. There's no way around it, at $5,200 this is fantastically expensive. If you're already paying for a lawn service, it might not be too long before the price balances out for you, and you gain something that's hard to put a price on: silence. 

The other downside is that the range of automowers is limited. I live on a three-acre property and alas, the 435X could only mow one third of that area. Unfortunately, the 435X must be fenced by a metal strip in the ground so you can't mow one acre one week and another the next, just rotating them. 

Still, if you can afford it, the 435X is probably the best, most helpful device I've ever tested. 



# Lenovo Thinkpad X1 Extreme

The 15-inch X1 Extreme is the Thinkpad fan's Macbook Pro—the big, powerful photo and video editing machine creatives lust after. It's not cheap, but as they say, you get what you pay for and in the case of the X1 Extreme you get a lot for your money.


The biggest change in the fourth version of Lenovo's X1 Extreme is the new 16-inch display, with its 16:10 aspect ratio. The previous model had a 16:9 screen ratio, and I've written about the difference before when the Dell XPS series made the same change and I think it's worth saying again, this seems minor, but in practice that extra space is really nice. I think 16:10 is just about the perfect ratio for a laptop.

The new screen—including the 4K option— also makes the X1 Extreme even more directly comparable to the Dell XPS 15 (8/10 WIRED Recommends). 

If you like ThinkPads there's no comparison to the Dell. All the signature ThinkPad elements are here. The understated matte black design is interrupted only by a small X1 in red on the lid, and the red rub between the G, H, and B keys. ThinkPad keyboards aren't what they used to be, which to say this is no X220, but it's still pretty great. It has 1.8 millimeter keys, which is about as heavy as you can find these days. 

If you're not a ThinkPad fan though, there are some things you might like better about the Dell. Both use the same processors and (optional) graphics cards tk check cards, and while I did find some slight differences in performance, they were pretty minor and not something I noticed in everyday use. 

That said, there is a big difference: the Dell XPS 15 offers an OLED display option and the X1 Extreme does not. If you want a 15-inch OLED laptop the Dell XPS 15 is my suggestion. 

If on the other hand, you're happy with the three IPS screens Lenovo offers (one of which is a 4K screen) then the ThinkPad is worth considering. You certainly get more ports. There are dual Thunderbolt 4 ports, along with HDMI 2.1 (which can drive a 120Hz external monitor), a audio jack, and an AC power port on the left. The right side has two USB Type-A ports and a full-sized SD card slot. Every laptop should have a full size SD card slot. Said every photographer. I can't remember that last laptop I tested with a full size SD card slot, kudos to Lenovo for keeping that alive.

## This ThinkPad Goes to RTX 3080

One of my co-workers, who shall remain anonymous, quipped that the Surface Studio Laptop ([8/10 WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/microsoft-surface-laptop-studio/)) is a laptop for creatives made by people who'd never talked to any creatives. I don't completely agree, but you know who definitely talked to some creatives? Lenovo. At least they talked to some photographers and video creators. 

Everything my pro photographer friends complain about is solved here. A 4K screen with good battery life? Check. The power to not just watch movies, but edit and render them? How about an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 graphics card? Check. Did I mention there's a full size SD card slot? How about HDMI 2.1 for monitoring shoots? 

This is a powerhouse machine, especially the top end model with the Intel i9 chip paired with the RTX 3080. Even the massive Dell XPS 17 tops out at the RTX 3060 card. While the lack of OLDE option might be disappointing, the screen I used (tk resolution) was one of the best I've tested. The color gamut support is good too, with 100 percent sRGB coverage and 83.5 percent coverage of the DCI-P3 color gamut. The later puts it a mere .5 percent behind the OLED of the Dell XPS 15. The screen is plenty bright to at 400 nits.

Where the X1 Extreme really stands out is the option to get Nvidia RTX graphics cards. The high end configuration especially is notable for using the GeForce RTX 3080 card, which is a lot of graphics card for a 15-inch laptop. It's probably still not going to make gamers happy, but if you're editing video this is one the most powerful 15-inch options out there. 

The very nice 1080p webcam, and a pair of speakers on either side of the keyboard round out the X1 Extreme's nice extras. The speakers especially are some of the best I've heard in a laptop—clean, clear audio, and an impressive amount of bass with no distortion. 



Lenovo sent me the 2,560×1,600 model, which is right in the middle, as it’s also offered in UHD+ options, with Dolby Vision support. 













# Dell XPS 15 2021

The Dell XPS laptops are some of the nicest Windows computers on the market. The 13-inch model has long been a WIRED favorite ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/dell-xps-15-2020/)), and the new 15-inch gets the same upgrade that its smaller sibling got earlier this year: an OLED display.

Sporting a new 3.5K OLED touchscreen display, the Dell XPS 15 is one of the best 15-inch laptops on the market. It's got plenty of power thanks to the latest Intel processors, a great trackpad and keyboard, and a stunning new OLED display. The only downside is the battery life.


## Subhead 

The 2021 XPS 15 uses the same 11th-generation Intel chips as the previous model, which we did not review in detail since nothing else had changed. The big news for the latest XPS 15 iteration is the new (optional) OLED screen. As with the XPS 13 OLED we reviewed earlier this year, you have to opt for the more powerful, Intel i7 chips to get the OLED option. That means the screen on the i5 base model remains unchanged, it's a 1920 x 1200 pixel FHD+ screen. 

If you option for the i7 or i9-based XPS 15 then you can choose between the 4k UHD screen and the new 3.5K OLED. The question of which is better is... it depends. If resolution is everything then the 4K wins. The 4K also has a slight edge in battery life, though my comparison there is based on last year's 4K model vs this year's OLED model so it's not a strict apples-to-apples comparison.

The cheapest model with an OLED is $2,100. The model I tested featured the OLED, along with the 11th-generation Intel Core i7, Nvidia RTX 3050 Ti laptop GPU, 16 gigabytes of RAM, and a 512-gigabyte SSD. This configuration lists for $2,200. From there you can run it up to $4,600, adding the i9 Chip, up to 64 gigabytes of RAM and up to a whooping 8-terabytes of SSD space. There are some more reasonable configurations in between those two as well.

While the base mode with the i5 chip is fine for basic computing needs, I would suggest the OLED screen and faster chip if you can afford it. It's a wonderfully bright screen, and the razor thin bezels give it an immersive quality that's unmatched in the rest of the 15-inch laptops I've tested. Editing photos and video on this machine is a real pleasure, to the point that I found myself out taking photos just so I could process them in Darktable on the XPS 15. And I've found that glossy OLED screens seem to do better in bright light than FHD screens. Certainly the 400 nit screen here was fine in all but direct sunlight. The main problem the screen suffers from in direct sunlight is that the high gloss surface picks up finger prints like crazy. If you keep it nice and clean, the sunlight and glare won't be an issue.

The Nvidia RTX 3050 Ti graphics card is no slouch, especially when working with video. I happened to be testing this alongside the new Surface Laptop Studio, and in test after test, mostly real-world rendering in Premiere, the XPS came out ahead. The Studio does have the edge in screen refresh rates though, with 120 Hz to the XPS 15's 60 Hz.

As noted above, Dell hasn't changed much other than the screens. Ports are still the same, with three USB-C ports (with Thunderbolt 4 support), a headphone jack, and a MicroSD card reader.  I'd love to have a full size card reader, but at least there's three USB-C ports which is step up from the XPS 13, which only has two. 

The form factor is likewise unchanged. It's still the same slim, sleek, chassis with the same crazy thing, InfinityEdge bezels. It hasn't changed, but it's worth noting that the XPS 15 does weigh in at 4.2 pounds. Considering the size that's not too bad, but when you put it in a bag and lug it around for a day your shoulders will definitely know it's there.

Keyboard and touchpad are the same, I find the touchpad a bit too big, but I am primarily a keyboard and mouse person, so I may be alone in that criticism (which I could also apply to half a dozen other 15-inch laptops. The keyboard is not quite Thinkpad-level good, but it doesn't slow me down or present any problem. 

My only real gripe with the XPS 15 is battery life. It's not bad, but it's not that good either. In two weeks of testing I only once made it though a full day's work on the XPS 15's battery. In our less subjective battery drain test (looping a 1080p video at 75 percent brightness) it managed a scant 7 hours thirty minutes. In most cases that's not enough to leave the power cord behind (well, I guess you could if you brought along a [portable battery]()).  

Depending on your circumstances the battery life could be a problem. I rarely head out to work for more than a couple of hours so it doesn't bother me, but it's definitely something to keep in mind.

Otherwise though I think this is one of the best 15-inch laptops on the market. It lacks the hybrid capabilities of the new Surface Laptop Studio, but it out performed the Surface in my video testing. If you want a powerful 15-inch laptop and don't mind the shorter battery life, the XPS 15 is well worth considering.







# Acer Swift 3

At a time when every laptop seems to want to out-clever the next, the Acer's Swift 3 is refreshingly restrained. It's not trying to impress with ultra thin bezels or single piece of machined metal hand filed by artisan robots. It's a laptop. It's a well-designed, well-built laptop that won't break the bank. This is why last year's Acer Swift 3 was the top pick in our [guide to budget laptops](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-cheap-laptops/). 

Based the few weeks I've spent living with this year's modest update, I see no reason to change that pick. The Swift 3 is a solid, no-frills, fairly-priced machine. It's not going to play graphics-intensive games very well, but the battery life is fantastic—it'll get you through a day's work or a late night studying without breaking a sweat. 

## What's New 

Before I dive in, I need to clear up some confusion. Acer calls two somewhat different laptops by the same name, the Swift 3. Both version use 11th-generation Intel Core processors. Both have the same keyboard trackpad, and fingerprint readers, but one—the one I am reviewing here—has 14-inch, 16:9, 1080p IPS display. 

The other Swift 3, which I have not tested, uses a 13.5" (2256 x 1504) 3:2 IPS display. Internal components are the same, but the resolution and shape of the display is different. Still almost everything that follows will be the same regardless of which model you choose.

The new Swift 3 is a thin, silver, understated, innocuous looking laptop. It's all-metal construction feels solid and stands up well to life in a backpack, making it a good choice for the college-bound. It's also light, weighing just 2.6 pounds, which is pretty unheard of at the under $800 price point. As I said above, this is not laptop that's out to win design awards. It looks good, but mostly it's there to stay out of your way and let you get your work done.

The keyboard is neither the best nor the worst I've used. I like thicker, more ThindPad-style keyboards and keys, but for chiclet-style keys, these have good travel and are plenty fast to type on. The trackpad is a marked step up from other Acer's I've used. It's more responsive and doesn't have that mushy feel that some Acer trackpads have had.

Thanks to its slightly chunkier design, the Swift 3 has plenty of ports. There's two USB-A ports, a USB-C Thunderbolt port (which it can charge from if you have an adapter, or [portable battery](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-portable-chargers-power-banks/), that delivers enough power), a headphone jack and an HDMI out. There's no SD card port, so you will need a dongle to dump photos and videos from your digital camera, but otherwise you shouldn't need a bunch of adapters just to use the accessories you already own, which is nice.

The model I tested featured 16 gigabytes of RAM, and a 512-gigabytes SSD paired with an 11th-generation Intel i7 processor with Intel's new EVO rating, which means it's optimized for battery life, quick charging, and instant wake. Notice that doesn't include performance. Still, I was impressed with the performance of the Swift 3. It felt plenty fast in the everyday tasks I threw at it, including browsing the web, video conferencing, and even rendering some short 5.3K videos shot on the new GoPro Hero 10 Black. Is it as fast as $2,000 flagship machine? Of course not, but it's plenty fast enough for most use cases. That said, this is not a gaming laptop. There are no gaming laptops for under $800.  

One place the new Swift 3 is head and shoulder above its predecessor is battery life. I was easily able to get in a full day's work without needing a charger (and "work" in this case means using a web browser, editing photos, office documents, etc). I often managed over 14 hours with this workload and if I dimmed the screen to 75 percent, I was able to get over Acer's claimed 16 hours.  

The biggest physical change from the previous model is a new hinge that's been adjusted to make way for a new speaker, which has surprisingly good sound. Thanks to the 300 nit display, with 100 percent sRGB coverage, and the good sound, the Swift 3 is great for watching movies. Blacks in the shadows are nice and deep, and colors appear richly saturated without being overly so.

There is one thing I dislike about the Swift 3. It's the same thing I disliked about the last model—the non-USB charger. The Swift 3 *can* charge off the USB-C thunderbolt port, which makes the single pin charging cord even stranger. But you're stuck with the same small, fragile-looking single pin charger as the previous model. I say fragile, but my wife's Acer has the same plug, and it's three years old and the pin still works fine. Still, USB-C chargers, way of the future Acer.

Despite the charger issue I think Acer's Swift 3 is one of the best deals on the market right now. For $800 you get a laptop that's powerful enough for most people, has phenomenal battery life, a good screen, and great sound. For most of us that's more than enough.




# Lenovo X1 Carbon (2021)

Lenovo's X1 Carbon is one of the best laptops you can buy. At 2.5 pounds it's lightweight, thin, and very portable. It offers plenty of power for most tasks, all-day battery life, and—unlike it's competition—plenty of ports for all your accessories.

We're reviewed the [Linux version of the X1 Carbon](https://www.wired.com/review/lenovo-thinkpad-x1-carbon-linux-edition/) last year, and everything in this review applies to the updated version of machine too. The main change in the 2021 X1 Carbon is the move to 11th generation Intel processors, and the new slightly taller screen, which now has a 16:10 aspect ratio, just like the Dell XPS 13.

## Carbon Fiber

The new X1 Carbon is not a design revolution. It's last year's X1 Carbon with a new processor and slightly taller screen. That's a good thing though because the design of the X1 Carbon has always been very well done and doesn't need a makeover. It's lighter than most of the competition (especially the business class laptops like the Dell Latitude or tk), and the soft carbon fiber surface is a Thinkpad hallmark at this point. It depends on your aesthetic sense I suppose, but I've always much preferred the Thinkpad carbon fiber look and feel to aluminium and titanium laptops.

All the familiar, and deserved famous, Thinkpad elements are here: the keyboard is excellent, the red pointer nub is between the G H and B keys, and there are three buttons at the top of the trackpad. The keys 

There are also plenty of ports. Unlike other ultraportable—I'm looking at you XPS 13 and MacBook Air—there are two USB-C Thunderbolt 4 ports, two USB A ports, an HDMI 2.0 port, a headphone jack and a Kensington lock slot. The only thing missing is an SD or micro SD card slot. Still one dongle is better than the half dozen you need with other laptops.

The most noticeable change in the Gen 9 X1 Carbon is the new 16:10 screen size. As I said when Dell made the [same change to the XPS](https://www.wired.com/review/dell-xps-13-2020/), you wouldn't think this would be that big of a deal, but it really is noticeable in day to day work.

That extra half inch of screen means there's more vertical room for documents, web pages and spreadsheets, which means less scrolling and generally makes life more pleasant. When I sent the X1 Carbon back to Lenovo, my X250's 16:9 screen suddenly felt more cramped than usual. Suffice to say that the move to 16:10 is a good one for the X1 Carbon line. The body size and weight difference compared to the 16:9 model is negligible, and any extra screen you can eek out of a laptop is a win for the user.

I model I tested had the FHD+ (1920 x 1200-pixel) panel, but there's a 4K option available if you want it. There's no OLED screen for the X1 Carbon, which is disappointing. The 1080p version has a matte panel though which is a plus if you're working in brightly lit situations. It only gets to 365 nits of brightness, which isn't industry leading by any means, but it was plenty bright enough to sit outside on a summer day and do some work in the sunshine.

Perhaps the biggest disappointment, aside from the missing SD card slot, is the 720p webcam. No Lenovo I've used has had an outstanding webcam, but this one is bad enough that my colleagues commented on how bad it was when I used it for a Zoom meeting. Given the amount of Zoom meetings the average corporate worker is doing these days, this seems like a huge oversight on Lenovo's part. To be fair though, no computer maker seems to be willing to put a decent camera in a laptop, so if you really need high quality video you're [better off with a third-party webcam](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-webcams/).

With the slightly larger chassis from the 16:10 screen Lenovo was able to squeeze in a bigger battery, bring perhaps the most impressive battery life I've seen in a laptop this year: I regularly got well over 15 hours out of the battery in every day use. My daily workload consists of writing in Vim, browsing the web, email apps, office apps, watching videos, and some photo and video editing. The latter was the only thing I did that manage to put any noticeable dent in battery life, but that's to be expected.  

The trackpad has also been enlarged, a change I was less thrilled with. I rarely take my fingers off the keys, and I prefer to have more room for my palms, but that may be a writer's bias.

The change to 11th-generation Intel processors is also a welcome upgrade. The model I tested featured the i7 chip with 16 gigabytes of RAM, and 512-gigabyte SSD (note that the RAM is soldered, so there are no upgrades down the road). The PCMark benchmarks I ran put the X1 Carbon right beside the rest of the 11th-generation Intel Core processor laptops. It's fast, but there's no discrete GPU so don't plan on using this for graphics intensive games or rendering huge video files. For most people's needs though the i7 is plenty powerful enough. If you're primarily just working with office documents, watching HD movies, and browsing the web you save some money and go with the Intel i5 model.

I couldn't find the exact configuration I tested for sale on Lenovo's site, but there's a version with an i7 chip, 16 gigabytes of RAM, and 1-terabyte SSD that is currently on sale for $2,045. That's a reasonable price for those high-end spec, but the actual list price (not on sale) is supposedly $3,409 which is an insanely high price for this laptop. 

This is main problem with the X1 series (and for that matter Dell's Latitude series, many HPs and other "business" laptops), they're nice laptops, but the main buyers are large corporations, who don't pay these prices. Because consumer demand isn't as high the price is more than it should be. The solution is to wait for sales. If you can pick up an X1 Carbon with an i7 for around $2,000, or an i5 model for around $1,300, it's well worth it.




# Lenovo X12 Review

Should you get a laptop or a tablet? Both? This is the question behind the success of Microsoft's Surface Pro series. It's a laptop. It's a tablet. It's not the best at being either of those things, but it's good enough at both for most of us. 

There is however another type of computer consumer, those of us who just assume there will be three buttons on the top of the trackpad, a little red nub in the middle of the wonderfully tactile keyboard, and ports for all our accessories. Lenovo fans. What if you love Lenovos, but want a Surface-style device? 

The answer in the Lenovo X12: a Surface-like laptop-tablet built for Lenovo fans.

## Subhed

Like the Surface Pro 7, or the Dell Latitude 7320, the X12 detachable is neither the best laptop you can buy, nor the best tablet you can buy, but it is pretty good at being both of those things in a single package.

The first thing to understand it just how small the X12 is relative to a Lenovo laptop. I use an X270 most of the time, which is a 12-inch laptop, but, thanks to the X270's bezels, it dwarfs the X12. That said, the X12 is on the chunkier side for this class, the Surface Pro 7 is considerably thinner and more svelte, but that's about what you'd expect from Lenovo.

Still, the case uses the matte black finish typical of anything sporting Lenovo's Thinkpad logo. The flip-out kickstand is every bit as good as what you'll get with a Surface Pro and much more stable than the Dell Latitude 7320. It's comfortable to type in your lap and didn't wobble or tip when I used the touchscreen in that position.

Other things you'd expect from Lenovo are all present: the three-button trackpad, the red nub in the keyboard, and by far the best detachable keyboard I've tested. That said, it's still very much a tablet with a keyboard cover, not a true laptop keyboard of the kind that made Lenovo famous. My main complaint about the keyboard is the trackpad, which I found to unresponsive at times. 

The 12.3-inch display uses the 3:2 aspect ratio that's come to dominate the detachable space. It's nice to have a bit of extra vertical room for documents and webpages. The color of the X12 display is good, with well saturated blacks in movies. The color gamut covers 100% of the sRGB space and the screen is very bright—up to 400 nits—which helps cut through the glare in brightly lit situations.

What's missing in the Thinkpad X12 is what's missing in every detachable, namely ports. There are two USB-C ports on the left side of the X12, and (thankfully) a headphone jack. While that's a little limiting, it's not worse than what you'll find on just about any small, high-end laptop, detachable or otherwise. The difference is that here any dongle you attach is going to hanging off the side of the screen, which is awkward. 

The X12 features a pen loop on the right side of the keyboard. It's not as nice as the tucked-away pen storage Dell offers, but Lenovo does include the pen. It's not the most responsive pen I've used (the Apple Pencil is tough to beat in that regard), but it works fine for jotting down notes or sketching.

One pleasant surprise of the ThinkPad X12 was the battery life. Given how small and thin it is I wasn't expecting much, but I found that I never needed to charge it in the course of a day's work. It managed 9 hours 18 minutes in our video playback drain test, but I found it did even better than that in real world use. Of course it will depend on what you're doing, but with my workload chatting with co-workers on Slack, browsing the web, and writing in a text editor, I was often able to get very close to the 10-hour mark.

The base model Thinkpad X12 starts at $1,100, which gets you an 11-th generation Intel Core i3 processor, 8 gigabytes of RAM, and 128-gigabyte SSD. The model Lenovo sent me was a step up from the base model, with an 11th-generation i5 processor, 16 gigabytes of RAM, and a 512-gigabyte SSD. This configuration will set you back $1,279. This would be the configuration I'd suggest for most people. You can save a little money by going back to only 8 gigabytes of RAM, which is enough of light-duty computing.

There's also a higher-end i7-based configuration, but that strikes me as overkill for this machine. This isn't the device for gaming or video editing. Like other detachables, this is best suited to being an all-around machine—browsing the web, editing documents, video calls, watching movies on the couch, reading the news with a cup of coffee. Possibly this could change with Windows 11 supporting Android apps, thus (theoretically) making tablet-based gaming more appealing, but that's still too far in the future to say for sure.




#Dell XPS 13 (2021)

Dell recently released an updated version of one of our favorite laptops—the XPS 13. The specs haven't changed much, but there is one big change. The XPS 13 is now available with an optional OLED display. 

## Same Old Excellence

The Dell XPS line is one of the best selling Windows laptops on the market and for good reason, these are compact, powerful laptops with excellent 4K displays (if you opt for a 4K model), and the starting prices aren't too expensive (relatively speaking). If you want an ultrabook that lives up to that name, the XPS, especially the XPS 13, has long been our favorite.

The 2021 XPS 13 uses the same 11th Gen Intel Core chips as the previous model. There's still an option to get Intel Iris Xe graphics, and the RAM choices, 8, 16, or 32-gigabytes are also unchanged. All that was good about the last model is still good about this one.

Unfortunately, all that was not so good about the last model is also still present, namely the scant amount of ports. You get 2 USB-C Thunderbolt 4 capable ports, a headphone jack, and a micro SD card reader. I'd love to have third USB-C, since, if you're plugged in, and using a USB mouse, which I often am, I'm out of ports. 

My other gripe with the XPS 13 is battery life. The XPS 13 2021 edition managed 10.5 hours of runtime in our video drain test (which consists of looping a local 1080p video file). That's down a bit from last year's model and it's probably due to the OLED screen. But what was worse than the battery drain test was real world performance. The XPS 13 often struggled to get through a full day's work without a recharge. This puzzled me since I normally use an older XPS 13 (with a 4K display) and it has no trouble getting through the same day's work. Unfortunately, OLED is the culprit here. More on that in a minute.

For most people the XPS 13's battery life will do. It usually made it about six hours before I needed to plug in, which isn't the best or worst out there. I'd still like to see Dell make that the next area of micro-optimization though (since that's what Dell seems to be up to with the last two updates to the XPS 13).

## About that OLED

Now on to what's new—the OLED screen. The resolution of the OLED model I tested is 3.5K (3,456 x 2,160 pixels), not quite the 4K resolution of the UHD+ display I own (and love), but the difference isn't noticeable in practice. 

Put any OLED screen next to any non-OLED screen and what you notice isn't the resolution, but the colors. Whether it's TVs, phones, or now laptops, OLED colors leap off the screen, they're more vibrant, more saturated, and more life-like.

So what is OLED and why should you care? Well, the O is for organic (the LED is still light emitting diode). That's organic as in chemistry, not organic like the pesticide-free bananas you overpaid for at the supermarket. The light then is emitted by organic molecules, in most cases rings of carbon atoms.

In a traditional display there is a backlight and then the light is emitted through a layer of stuff (the stuff varies by display type) that then shows whatever color that pixel is supposed to show at that moment. In an OLED display each diode acts as its own backlight. There is no always-on, battery draining backlight. This is why blacks look so good on an OLED display, they really are the absence of light, not something covering up a still-shining light.

I know what you're thinking, if there's no backlight, why did the battery life seem to go downhill, shouldn't the OLED be using less power? Well, while there is no always-on backlight, when the screen is fully lit up—let's say by a mostly white webpage—then the OLED screen appears to use more energy. 

The answer, or an answer, is dark mode. Indeed all the OLED laptops I've tested have arrived with Windows in dark mode, which helps some (I turned it off and things did get worse), but if you're primarily on the web, which remains mostly white pages, OLED screens are probably going to tax your battery a bit more. I switched [Vivaldi]() to dark mode, and changed themes on Slack, Gmail and some other websites I use regularly and found that it did help. But overwhelmingly the web is bright and for now at least that's going to mean a hit to OLED's battery life.

The big question then is—should you go for the OLED screen? The answer is... it depends. If you want better battery life, stick with the 1080p. On the other hand, going back to my 4K screen after the OLED is, well, a little dim and washed out. I think I can live with the shorter battery life.







a completely lit up screen effectively 


Why does battery life shorten? It appears that, with current OLED panels, a fully lit screen uses a bit more power than an LCD screen. Remember, there’s no backlight with OLED. Instead, each individual pixel is lit, as needed. When all the pixels are lit, they’re downing a lot of juice.


Price: ~$1,699
Display: 13.4-inch OLED touchscreen (3,456 x 2,160 pixels)
CPU: 
RAM: 16 GB
Storage: 512 GB SSD (1/2 TB also available)
Ports: 2 Thunderbolt 4/USB-C ports, headphone jack, microSD card reader
Size: 11.6 x 7.8 x 0.5 inches
Weight: 2.8 pounds

## What is OLED and Why Should You Care

Organic LED (OLED) displays each pixel acts as its own backlight, whereas traditional LED TVs have one layer with the pixels and one layer that lights up the pixels. This is why you often see odd greys and poor shadow details in regular LED TVs; even dark scenes have to be lit at least somewhat. With OLED, contrast is perfect, because the blacks are totally black, thanks to the pixels being “off” when told to be black.



# Vecnos IQUI

Last year was just about the worst time possible to launch a 360-degree camera aimed at the consumer market—capture 350 views of you and all your friends out having fun! That just wasn't 2020. 

Somehow Vecnos, a brand [spun out](https://www.wired.com/story/vecnos-360-camera-company/) of the Japanese company Ricoh, managed to survive the pandemic collapse of social life, and has kept incrementally improving its Iqui 360 camera, which unlike most 360 cameras, isn't an action camera.

Last week the company release a new version with more colors available, and, more importantly, a significant update to its companion app.

## Around the World

360-degree content has yet to make it to the mainstream in large part because it's not easy to work with. Unlike a video captured with a smartphone or regular camera, 360 footage needs to be flattened out before it can be shared online. The typical “tiny globe” spherical images are the most common form of 360 photo found online because they're the easiest to share.

Facebook is one exception to this rule. It does allow you to share 360 images that your friends can pan and tilt and explore, but if you want to put your 360 vids and images on Instagram or Twitter or elsewhere you're probably going to have to edit them first.

And let's face, tweaking video footage before you can put it on the web? That's enough friction to keep most of us away.

Where 360 footage has found a toehold is in the action camera market. This partly because the major camera brands in this market have released 360 cameras, notably [GoPro](https://www.wired.com/review/gopro-hero-9-black/) and [Insta360](https://www.wired.com/review/insta360-one-r/), but it's also the nature of the use case. When you strap a camera to your head and point your mountain bike down a 30 degree slope you have no idea what the story is going to be. A head-on view as you wipe out might be good footage, but it also might miss the reason you wiped out—the Sasquatch that was off to the left, out of the field of view of the camera.

If you'd had a 360-degree view of the scene you could go back after the fact and use editing software to pan around inside that 360 footage, highlight Sasquatch, and then pan back to show yourself going head over heals.

The place that story loses most of us is using the video editing software. Editing video is complex, time-consuming, and most of the software you need requires more powerful (and more expensive) hardware to run. Those YouTube channels you follow that make everything look professional, easy and effortless? Those people do a ton of work, work the rest of us aren't going to do just to share some 360 degree footage with our twenty friends on Instagram.

Vecnos' Iqui camera aims to removes most of these barriers by simplifying the process of both capturing and sharing 360 photos and videos. It largely succeeds at the first goal.

## More Cameras, Less Distortion

Before testing the Iqui I would have called the phrase "consumer-oriented 360 camera" an oxymoron. But the Iqui goes a long way to making 360 cameras approachable to the non-professional, non-action-cam-loving market.

Perhaps the best trick is that this is probably the only 360 camera you won't need a manual to use. The design is simple and intuitive. There are three buttons: power, shutter, and switch to toggle between video and still images. The only thing you probably won't discover on your own is that you hold down the toggle button to pair the Iqui with your phone, but the app will walk you through that.

While the simplicity is good, the Iqui uses a proprietary charging plug, which, while not a deal breaker is annoying. The odd thing, for a camera otherwise so well designed, is that the adapter base has the USB-C plug on the bottom. That means to charge it, you have to lay it on its side. Why have a charging base to hold the camera if it can't hold the camera and charge? This is extra annoying because when you lay it on its side you risk scratching the lenses and there are a lot of lenses to potentially scratch.

Most consumer-oriented 360-degree cameras use dual lenses, one in front, one in back, each capturing 180 degree field of view. This makes them affordable, but leads to considerable distortion at the edges of each image. That means you often end up with ridiculously stretched faces and objects when the software stitches the images together.

The Iqui gets around this by squeezing four lenses in the camera, three shooting horizontally and one pointed straight up. That means there's less distortion in each image (because each camera has a smaller field of view), and less distortion in the final image as well. These are 360 images (and video) with far less distortion than you're used to. That alone makes the Iqui better than most of the 360 camera's I've tested.

That said, the image quality from the Iqui is not the best I've seen. It looks good when shared via the apps exporting options (more on that below), but if you zoom in on shadows there's a good bit of noise present. These also aren't the sharpest images, with details sometimes a bit mushy. Again, neither of these are noticeable in the final product when shared on the web, but keep in mind that you won't be getting ultra sharp images like you would from a traditional camera lens.

## The Software

Arguably the most important part of the Iqui camera isn't the camera, it's the Iquispin Android and iOS companion apps that make sharing your 360 photos and video a snap. The problem with Iquispin, is that in removing the complexity of sharing 360 photos and videos it also cut out several features. The result is an app that's intuitive, approachable for newbies, but somewhat limited.

This is where I need to mention that Vecnos, the company that makes Iqui, was spun out of Ricoh, which released the first consumer-oriented 360 camera, and more importantly, has a pretty great app for editing and sharing 360 footage from your phone.

The Iqui has pedigree in other words, which is why when I first tested it last year I was a little taken aback by how limited the app was. To get your images out of Iquispin and onto the web you have two options: a screenshot of a region of your 360 image, or an AI-generated video tilting and panning around the image. If you just want the image, like those you see here, they are saved directly to your phone.

There are filters that try to intelligently enhance images, and they work pretty well most of the time, but it would be nice to have some manual controls for those times when they don't. 

Last week's app update added a few more features, a facial detection system that uses AI to align the angles of each face in the 360-degree group photo, and a "beauty" filter that softens and brightens faces. If your idea of beauty correlates to heavily Photoshopped magazine covers, then the new filter has you covered. 

Unfortunately neither of those features don't change the fact that your editing and export options are limited. Still, this is primarily a software problem, and one that Vecnos can solve by updating its app, which is better than having to buy a whole new camera to get these features.

## Should You Buy One?

If your primary use case for a 360 camera is short videos panning around a 360 image of you and your friends, posted somewhere like Instagram, then the Iqui is one of the best cameras available. Its limitations won't get in your way and are easily trumped by the ease of use. The only hesitation I have is that it's a little pricey for what you get.

If you want a full-featured 360 camera, and are willing to spend the time and effort to edit your footage, there are other options out there that offer more features and will handle a greater range of shooting scenarios.









 

As mentioned, the app has evolved significantly since you first looked at IQUISPIN. The latest version adds two AI-enabled functions—“Magic,” which uses facial detection to choose the best automated motion and align angles with each face in a 360-degree group photo, and “Beauty,” with filters that soften and brighten facial features.

Also, Vecnos is announcing two accessories: a tripod adapter so you can use IQUI with any selfie stick or tripod with a traditional ¼” screw mount and a unique rubberized lens cap.

 






which is known for its imaging products and printers as well as some of the best 360 cameras around.

Ricoh will continue to make 360 cameras—the spherical videos captured by these devices have proven popular among amateurs and professionals creating immersive content. However, Shu Ubukata, the brains behind 360 imaging products like the original Theta series, will be leaving Ricoh (along with his team) to lead Vecnos as CEO. Vecnos will operate as a subsidiary of Ricoh, which is also the new brand's largest investor.
spun out of Ricoh Company, Ltd., today announced three new colors of its 360-
degree camera IQUI, in addition to a major update to its companion app,
IQUISPIN. IQUI is now available in gray, mint and pink on Amazon.com and at
b8ta, in addition to its original color, champagne gold. Vecnos will also launch
two new IQUI accessories this summer: a tripod adapter and a lens cap.
In the latest version of IQUISPIN, users can leverage artificial intelligence (AI)
via the new Magic editing function to automatically generate the ideal mini video
with just one tap. Magic uses facial detection to choose the best motion and
align angles with each face in a 360-degree photo, thereby significantly reducing
the time and effort required to transform a 360-degree photo into a mini video.
IQUISPIN also now offers a Beauty function featuring a selection of three different
facial filters that can be applied before transforming a photo into a mini video.
With the addition of the Beauty function, Vecnos is further streamlining

# Fire 10 HD

Wired: $150 is crazy cheap. It’s the easiest way to consume all things Amazon. Productivity bundle make real work possible, depending on your line of work. Battery life is comparable to any other tablet. MicroSD slot for extra storage. 

App selection is limited (no Google Play store). Runs an outdated version of Android. Keyboard bundle lacks a trackpad. Camera is terrible.


The Fire HD 10 isn't the best tablet you're ever going to use, not even close, but it is cheap, decently powerful, and good enough for many of us. 

Amazon's 2021 update to the 10-inch Fire HD 10 mirrors what we saw last year with the 8-inch model. There are now two Fire HD 10s, one with three gigabytes of RAM and a "Plus" model with 4 gigabytes of RAM. But Amazon has also added something it calls the Productivity Bundle, which consists of a Fire HD 10 tablet (3 gigabyte model), a Bluetooth keyboard case, and 12-month subscription to Microsoft 365 (which you should know, automatically renews if you don't cancel it). 

Yes, you read that right, Amazon is positioning the Fire HD 10 as a device you can get real work done on. Surprisingly, this turns out to be true so long as you don't need Google Apps to get work done. The Fire HD 10 is still hamstrung by Amazon's Fire OS, which lacks Apps (not just Google's) compared to Google's Play store. 

Still, with a keyboard and slightly better screen, the new Fire HD 10 is something like a netbook—a small, cheap, capable, go-anywhere device with some potentially deal-breaking caveats.

## What's New in Fire 10 HD

The new Fire HD 10 features uniform bezels on all sides, but otherwise isn't much different on the outside. It still sports a 1080p, 10.1-inch display, although Amazon claims it's 10 percent brighter than the 2019 model. I wasn't able to compare them side-by-side, but I didn't have any trouble using the Fire 10 HD in bright light. The screen isn't crazy good, but it's fine for browsing the web, watching videos, and other things you're likely to do with it.

The extra RAM though is immediately noticeable. There's no longer any jittering when scrolling and opening apps was fast and smooth, not pausing, hanging, or noticeable delays that have always been pretty obvious in low-end Android tablets. Like last year's 8-inch model, this update finally makes the Fire 10 HD fast enough to no longer even realize you're using a low-end device.

Battery life remains at about 12 hours. Obviously this depends on what you're doing, streaming back to back movies will eat up battery faster than just browsing the web. Still, it's within the range of much more expensive competitors.

The build quality of Fire tablets has always been pretty good. Yes, they're plastic and bulkier than more expensive options, but they're surprisingly durable anyway. I've cracked the screen on two iPads, I've never had the same happen with a Fire, plastic or no.

If you opt for the Plus model ($30 more) you're get an extra gigabyte of RAM, the option to charge it wirelessly (see our guide the [wireless chargers](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-wireless-chargers/)), and some extra colors to choose from. Amazon sent both the regular and the Plus models for testing. Most of the time I did not notice a big difference, but for only $30 more the Plus's extra RAM will make for a more future-proof purchase. 

The most interesting option is the Productivity Bundle with the bluetooth keyboard and Microsoft Office 365 subscription. That latter makes up for the fact that Google software is noticeably absent from the Fire 10 HD. That means no Google Docs, Sheets, Drive or any of the rest of Google's offerings. Worse, even the web versions won't load in the include Silk web browser and there aren't any popular alternative browsers available in the Amazon App Store. 

I have no idea if this is shortcoming on Amazon or Google's end, but it makes the Fire HD 10 a complete no-go if your workflow depends on Google Apps, as mine does unfortunately. Microsoft Office 365 is capable of doing everything Google's online office suite can do, the problem is if all your colleagues are using Google, and you need to be able to edit shared documents in Google, then that's a moot point. Curiously, after playing with Office 365 for a week I actually came to prefer it to Google's offerings, but that still doesn't help me get work done on the Fire.

If your work isn't married to Google's office suite I suspect the Fire 10 HD would be a perfectly workable device. I researched, wrote, and published this review entirely from the Fire HD 10 and it worked great. The keyboard is definitely small, if you have large hands you may find it difficult to use. The closest competitor here is probably the equally cramped Lenovo Duet, which has a trackpad, something Amazon does not offer. I didn't miss it that much, but it would be nice to have some times. The keyboard has quite a few special keys to handle commmon tasks, and those trasks are customizable so you can set up whatever works best for your workflow, which is nice.

There's also a new split screen mode in Fire OS which is handy for multitasking.


It's a start though. Apple's original iPad keyboards also lacked a trackpad so there's hope that Amazon will improve on its current offering (or you can get a 3rd-party keyboard with trackpad). 

Still, at the moment I wouldn't say get the Fire 10 HD for work. If you’re interested in an Amazon tablet, you’re probably an Amazon Prime member and this is where the Fire 10 HD excels. Prime gives you access to thousands of movies, original TV shows, music, books, and games. The [list of Amazon Prime perks](https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-prime-perks/) might surprise you, but either way the point, and best use of, an Amazon Fire

# Fire 10 HD Kids

I have not tested the Fire 10 HD Kids version, but it's worth noting that Amazon has changed its Kids lineup as well. There are now two kids versions. The difference here isn't RAM, it's padding and functionality. For kids under six the padded case remains unchanged and the specs match the adult version, the same locked-down kid-friendly content is available. 

Then there's the new kid's "Pro" aimed at older children (6-12). It has sleeker, less padded case, a new app store, a web browser, and the ability to make voice and video calls. The app store is locked down and limited in selection, but you can also expand things to include other apps like Minecraft. The kid-friendly web browser comes with built-in parental controls which can be used to filter out sites, only allow certain site, or disable the browser entirely.

## The Best Tablet at This Price

If you can afford the entry level iPad, it's a more powerful tablet with a nicer screen and much better selection of apps. It's also $325 to the Fire 10 HD's $150. Neither device includes a keyboard at those prices, but there's almost nothing else as nice as the Fire HD at it's price point.

Here's the deal though: don't buy the Fire HD 10 at full price. Every year it's been available it's been on sale for roughly 50 percent off several times, including Prime Day, Black Friday, and other holiday sales. Score a Fire HD 10 for around $80 and you have yourself an unmatched deal.














# Asus ASUS ZenBook 13 UM325S 

The Asus ZenBook 13 with its AMD Ryzen 5000 series chips is one of the best value laptops I've tested in a long time. The ZenBook series has long packed in the features at surprisingly competitive prices, but this model stands out for two reasons: the gorgeous OLED display and the Ryzen chips.

What's remarkable about AMD's new Ryzen 5000U series processors is that you get performance that that often bests Intel's latest 11th generation ("Tiger Lake") processors for significantly less money. The ZenBook 13 AMD version starts at $800 for the Ryzen 5 model, which is plenty for most people. The slightly more expensive Ryzen 7 series I tested gets close to the performance of Apple's M1 chip, but again with a lower price tag.

The ZenBook 13 is a lot of laptop for not a lot of money.

## Design

While the ZenBook 13 is a great value, there is one quirk you'll have to put up with, which is the keyboard. Some might call it cramped, which it is a little bit, though that wasn't my primary issue. What bothered me was the extra row of keys on the right side of the keyboard, which ends up making the QWERTY portion of the keyboard slightly off-center with the trackpad. This meant that every time I put my hands down on either side of the trackpad, I wasn't touching the keys I thought I was touching. 

The good news is that after about a week, my brain adjusted and this no longer happened. The bad news is that that the closer than usual key spacing does lead to an usually high amount of typos. I even foisted the ZenBook on my wife for a couple of days to see if it was just me, but no, she had the same experience. The solution here is obvious: ditch the extra row of keys and space out the rest of the keyboard accordingly, but alas, it is what it is.

To me, it's not a deal breaker, and I say that as a writer who is constantly typing. But I do strongly recommend trying this thing in person if possible to see if it will bother you. 

Assuming the keyboard is not an issue, there's much to love about the rest of the ZenBook design. Asus ZenBook's have always been featherweight, svelte machines and this latest model is no exception. It weighs in 2.51 pounds, and it's just a hair over half an inch thick. 

When you open the ZenBook the lid hinge lifts the rear of the body off the surface, which gives the keyboard a comfortable roughly 3 degree slope and helps get a bit of air flowing under the chassis to keep things cool. Whether or not it's a result of this design I'm not sure, but only once in all of my testing did I hear the fans come on (to be fair, an hour long meeting running through Microsoft Teams will make any laptop sound like a jet engine).

## The Ryzen 5000 Series

Most of my initial interest in the ZenBook 13 was the AMD Ryzen 5000 series chip, and it does not disappoint. I ran some benchmarks against both the previous AMD (Ryzen 7 4000 series) and an Intel i7 Lenovo I'm testing as well. This is a little Apples to Oranges so I won't go too deep into it, except to say that the 5000 series outperformed both in almost every multi-threaded test, which is about what you'd expect. Where the Intel model is likely to win is in gaming.

More interesting to me was the real world experience of rendering video, which was blazing fast, even next to the Ryzen 4000 series machine, and watching HD video, which looks great on the OLED display. This is one of the first OLED display laptops we've seen for under a $1000. It's only 1080p, unlike the 4K OLED in some Dell machines, but it still looks fantastic, with deep rich blacks and highly saturated colors.

I was worried that the OLED screen would hurt battery life, but battery life on the Zenbook was decent. I managed 9 hours 43 minutes in our standard test, which consists of putting the brightness at 75% and looping a local 1080p video. In more real world situations, browsing the web, writing, listening to music, and editing the occasional spreadsheet I got close to 11 hours. That's not going to win awards, but suffice to say it's plenty of battery life for a full day of work and then some. The ZenBook also recharges incredibly quickly.

The port selection on the ZenBook is generally pretty good. You get a microSD card reader, one USB Type-A, and two USB-C ports (though no Thunderbolt 4 support in the AMD model). There’s also nan HDMI out, but unfortunately no headphone jack. Asus does include a USB-C to headphone adapter, but I'd gladly trade the HDMI out for a headphone jack.

I'd also love to swap the built-in camera for, well, something better. It's not the worst I've used (cheap Chromebooks take the prize there), but it's not great either. Colors are washed out, and overall the image looks mushy. Unfortunately that's true of almost every laptop I've tested this year. 

One thing you won't get in the AMD version of the ZenBook 13 is WiFi 6. For that you'll have to go Intel. The other quirky thing worth mentioning is the trackpad, which can be configured to be a number pad, yay! Asus is quite fond of these trackpad gimmicks, personally they're the only thing I've found that's less useful than Apple's touchbar, but I know some people love the extra features. I tested to make sure it actually worked as a number pad and then I turned it off and never thought of it again.

There are a bewildering array of configurations [available for the new ZenBook 13](https://store.asus.com/us/search?q=zenbook%2013%20oled) rel=nofollow}. That hardest part about buying it is figuring out what you want, and then actually finding it on the Asus website. The model I tested featured a Ryzen 7 5000 series chip, with 16-gigabytes of memory, and a 512-gigabyte SSD, a configuration I can't currently locate on the Asus website. That's okay though because for most people with average workloads, the [Ryzen 5 5000 series model](https://store.asus.com/us/item/202103AM260000009/ASUS-ZenBook-13-OLED-Ultra-Slim-Laptop) rel=nofollow} with 8 gigabytes of RAM is going to plenty fast enough and it's only $800. If you want an ultraportable machine that's capable of some light gaming as well, there's the [Intel i7 model](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08XBF1269/ref=twister_B093VKNQCP) rel=nofollow} ($1,100) as well.

If you need help figuring out which configuration fits your needs the best, be sure to read through our [laptop buying guide](https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-buy-the-right-laptop-for-you/). In the case of the Asus ZenBook 13 though, you really can't go wrong. This is great, budget-friendly machine with plenty of power for most people and an excellent display. The performance is very nearly as good as Apple's M1 and it's $400 cheaper. 



ASUS ZenBook 13 OLED Ultra-Slim Laptop, 13.3” OLED FHD NanoEdge Bezel Display, AMD Ryzen 5 5500U, 8GB LPDDR4X RAM, 512GB PCIe SSD, NumberPad, Wi-Fi 5, Windows 10 Home, Pine Grey, UM325UA-DS51
Latest AMD Ryzen™ 5 5500U Processor (Up to 4.0GHz, 6 cores,8M Cache) with AMD Radeon™
Windows 10 Home
Fast storage and memory featuring 512GB PCIe NVMe M.2 SSD with 8GB LPDDR4X RAM
Built-in IR camera for facial recognition sign in with Windows Hello
ErgoLift hinge and backlit keyboard and NumberPad
HDMI 2.0b, USB 3.2 Type-C, USB 3.2 Type-A, Wi-Fi 5(802.11ac), Bluetooth 5.0*


# Weber Smokefire EX4/EX6

I won't lie, I almost shoved the Weber SmokeFire down the hill and into the woods behind my house the I first time I turned it on. I was ready to cook, to dive into elemental things like fire and fat, the building blocks of human life if you will. The SmokeFire? It wanted to do a firmware update. 

This is world we have created people. Never mind though, the firmware update didn't take too long and I was able to do the initial burn off and get to cooking within the hour. Even better, the first thing I cooked on this pellet "smoker" wasn't smoked, or even slow cooked. It seared some steaks for the family and even smoked them for just a minute to give them a little extra mesquite flavor.

One of the great things about cooking with wood or charcoal is that it's easy to use the same cooker as both a grill, that is for searing and other high-heat cooking, and then turn around and set it up to cook over indirect heat, for smoking or other slow cooking. 

It's much harder to do the same with a propane grill. Technically you can smoke on a propane grill, and it's not too bad if you have a dual burner grill, but in my experience the results aren't that great. Likewise most pellet cookers are good at smoking, but not much good at searing. 

That's what the SmokeFire was hoping to change when Weber launched it last year. Unfortunately, that initial release had some problems, which promoted Weber to push out an update this year. The result is a great smoker, not terrible different in that regard from the Traeger Ironwood 650 ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/traeger-ironwood-650/)), and a pretty good searing grill as well. 

The basic principle of a pellet grill is that compressed sawdust pellets are burn by igniting them was a small heating element and blowing on them with fan. Picture yourself blowing on a small pile of twigs to get a campfire started and you have the basic idea. A small auger feeds more pellets from the storage hoper as they burn. Temperature is regulated by a combination of how fast pellets feed in and how much the fan blows, which is controlled by the smart phone app.

The result is precision controlled cooking with very little effort on your part.

I made ribs yesterday, on a work day, and it took me less than 30 minutes to cook them. MOst of that time was making the rub and getting them on the grill. After that all I had to do was set up the temperature probes—one to monitor the ambient temp around the ribs, another in the rack to monitor the temp of the meat—and set the temp of the grill. The rest of the day I went about my work and come 6 o'clock, the ribs were ready. I'd never attempt week night ribs over charcoal. Or at least not until my Dogecoin hits the moon and I retire. In the mean time, there's pellet smokers to simplify life.

But what about when you don't want to smoke ribs? What about when you just want to grill some burgers? The SmokeFire does quite well there too. The SmokeFire shares much of its grilling internals with Weber’s gas grills. It uses the same inverted V shaped flame spreaders, which Weber calls "flavorizer bars". These spread the flames and help get more direct flame across the cooking surface, providing a better sear. Where it gets really interesting is that you can sear your burgers, cook them about half way, then dial back the temp, turn on the tk feature and get a bit of a smoky flavor into your burgers, the best of both worlds if you will.

That's not to say that the SmokeFire is grilling perfection. I have main two gripes about the SmokeFire. The first is that there's considerable ash. None of it got on the food, but it was in the air around the cooker whenever I used it at high temps. The fan just seems overly agrressive sometime. Not a deal breaker, but something to be aware of and a good reason to keep the lid closed.

My other problem with the SmokeFire is that the tempature varies considerably across the cooking surface. This can be used to your advantage of course. The center is the best place to get a good sear, and you can do that while keeping other things off to the sides so they cook slower, and don't dry out. For example, you can sear steaks in the center while keeping your shrimp off to the side of a surf and turf that's all done at once. The downfall is you're limited on the number of things you can sear at once because the sides didn't provide nearly as high of a searing temp in my testing.

Those are relatively minor gripes though. My biggest problem with pellet smokers is the requirement to use the brand's pellets. In this regard the SmokeFire is no different than any other pellet cooker, for best results you'll need to stick with Weber pellets.

If you search the web for the Weber SmokeFire reviews, you'll run across quite a few very negative reviews based on the 1st generation models Weber put out last year. I have not used that model, but I was very careful to test this new model to see if the problems people mentioned had been solved. In my experience the answer is both yes and no. 

Weber's apps got off to rough start, which I have covered elsewhere, but the current version, which not quite as slick as Traeger's, allows you to control every aspect of the grill and features some built-in recipe templates. That problem, along with the firmware updates for SmokeFire solves those problems. Weber has also added a panel to the hopper to make it steeper, so the pellets slide down the Augur easier. And there's a new Augur. That address all the issues except one: grease build up remains a potential problem. 

In my testing I did not have a problem with grease build up, nor did I experience any significant flaring. That said, it's easy to see how you could have problems, especially if you're cooking a lot of brisket or other fatty cuts. As with any grill, you'll want to clean up regularly. If you get a pellet smoker, get a shop vac as well. Trust me. That said, I'd say you should clean the Weber more than you'd need to clean the Traeger. The design just makes it easier for grease and ash to combine to clog up the drain holes. It's a problem that hasn't changed with the updated version. For many people this will be a deal breaker. However, I still think this is a great cooker, just realize you're going to have to clean it more frequently than many others on the market.

It's also worth noting that The SmokeFire EX6 is a massive grill. The 1,008 square inches of cooking space can hold six racks of ribs with no problem, more if you use the upper shelf too (an extra 360 square inches of indirect cooking space). The slightly smaller EX4 (672 square inches of cooking space) might be better suited to those who aren't regularly grilling for a crowd. The EX4 is also a bit cheaper at $1000, versus the EX6's $1200.

In the end I really enjoyed the SmokeFire. The food that can off it was absolutely fantastic, never dried out. Against the Traeger it's really hard to pick a winner. They both produce great results. The Traeger doesn't suffer from the potential grease clogging issue, but it's also considerably more expensive. So long as you're will the clean it, the SmokeFire makes a great all-in-one backyard cooker.

# Asus ZenBook 13

13.9 mm thin 
2.45lb
ultralight

# Microsoft Surface Laptop 4

Microsoft's Surface Laptop 4 is everything I'd hoped the previous version would be, which is to say an excellent all-around, well-made AMD laptop. It isn't the most powerful laptop around, nor is it the cheapest, but it's powerful enough for most people and wraps Windows in a package that competes well with Apple's design smarts.

## Outside

The Surface Laptop 4 looks like the previous model. Technically it is slightly thinner, but unless they're side by side, you won't notice it. At just over half an inch thick (0.58 inches) and weighing only 3.4 pounds this is a remarkable portable 15-inch machine. For comparison that's half a pound lighter than the lightest configuration Dell XPS 15 ([9/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/dell-xps-15-2020/)).

Among the noticeable changes in this release is a new "Ice Blue" option, but most of what was good about the Surface 3 remains unchanged here. The build quality is still excellent, the all-metal construction doesn't flex or bend when carried with one hand, and while it's not the easiest laptop to open with one hand, you can manage it.

The 3:2 screen ratio also remains, as does the power connector, and the ports (yes, USB-A and headphone jack are still there, thank you Microsoft).

What's different in this update is that you can now get both the 13-inch and 15-inch models with either Intel or AMD chips. If you opt for Intel you'll get 11th-generation Core i5 or i7 chips. If you prefer AMD, you'll get Ryzen 4000 series processors. If you're not sure which is best for your use case, check out our [laptop buying guide](https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-buy-the-right-laptop-for-you/).

While chip updates are pretty standard for a new laptop release, Microsoft is claiming these changes, along with some other tweaks, will provide not just better performance, but also improved battery life compared to the previous Surface Laptop.

Performance-wise the Laptop 4 is a huge step up from its predecessor. It runs circles around the Laptop 3 in every CineBench benchmark I ran. More impressive to me, the new version doesn't get nearly as hot even when pushing it with benchmark tests.

I tested the 15-inch AMD Ryzen 7 4000 series configuration with 16 gigabytes of RAM and a 512-gigabyte SSD. As configured this Surface Laptop 4 is $1,700. That's roughly comparable to a similarly specced Dell 15-inch XPS and 16-inch MacBook Pro. The Ryzen 7 Surface fared well against the i9 Dell in benchmarks, though of course the latter was faster, much faster in some cases. I have never tested the 16-inch MacBook, but the Surface Laptop 4's results beat many of the MacBook benchmarks available online. It's worth noting though that, if you're in the market for a larger laptop, Apple is expected to release an M1-based MacBook Pro later this year.

Compared to other top end laptops on the market now, the Surface is a pretty middle of the road machine in terms of performance. Using the older Ryzen 4000 series chips is a strike against it now that the Ryzen 5000 series is out. I have several laptops in testing right now with the Ryzen 5000 series chips and they are faster across the board and get better battery life.

Where the Surface wins most of the time is in design, build quality, and the screen. I love the 3:2 ratio. It gives you more veritcal screen real estate which means less scrolling, which means you can focus more on what you're reading. The native resolution of 2,496 by 1,664 pixels isn't 4K sharp like the Dell XPS 15, but it's considerably better than "full HD" 1080p screens found in many 15-inch laptops. In terms of pixel density it's very close to what gets calls "quad HD" (2,560 by 1,440 pixels but on 16:9 display).

I found the Surface display to be plenty sharp, with nice crisp text and excellent colors. The Ryzen-powered 15-inch version also uses AMD's FreeSync technology, which allows for on-the-fly refresh rate adjustments, resulting in very smooth animation, with almost no jerky movements. This is a feature you regularly find on gaming machines, but it's relatively rare on more consumer-oriented devices. And it might sound like a small thing, but after using the Surface Laptop 4 for a week, it was painful to go back to displays without it.

Another big win for the Surface Laptop 4 is battery life. Previous models would struggle to get through a full day's work, but this one had no trouble. In our standard battery drain test (looping a locally stored 1080p video at 75 percent brightness) I managed 9.25 hours, which is one of the best battery times out there for a 15-inch machine. In real world use I managed even better times, just under 11 hours in most cases.

As I mentioned earlier the ports are the same as the previous model, which means Microsoft's proprietary charging port remains, along with one USB-C, one USB-A, and a headphone jack. While I like the USB-A and headphone jack, it's disappointing that neither the Intel or AMD Surface Laptops support Thunderbolt on the USB-C port. 

I mention this mainly because both the Dell XPS 15 and Apple laptops support Thunderbolt, which means better connections to external monitors and data transfers speeds at far faster rates than USB-C offers. Depending on your situation though the USB-A port on the Surface Laptop 4 might be more of a win than the lack of Thunderbolt is a loss. I should mention that the USB-C port can charge the Surface Laptop 4, which is useful if you carry an [external battery capable of charging laptops](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-portable-chargers-power-banks/).

The other weak point of the Surface Laptop in my opinion is the keyboard. It feels strangely spread out, the keys feel spongy and seem to lack the fast rebound of similar keyboards, like the Dell XPS 15. My other gripe is the lack of a right control key. Although I hardly ever see this complaint mentioned anywhere, so possibly I am the only person using the right Control key (also, it is possible to map the little menu key to control using third-party software, so this isn't a deal breaker by any means. The trackpad, as with previous Surface Laptops, is the best non-Apple trackpad I've ever used.

If you want a 15-inch laptop for the extra screen real estate it affords, and don't have big plans—in other words, you're not editing video or gaming—the Surface Laptop 4 is a solid choice. It's got plenty of power for watching Netflix, editing documents, and browsing the web. What really sets it apart from similarly priced, and certainly cheaper, laptops is the build quality. However, if you're looking for a portable video editing workstation, gaming rig, or other performance-intensive tasks, there are better options available, like the Dell XPS 15.



# DJI Air 2S


DJI's new Air 2S is one of the best drones I've ever flown. It's fast, agile, packs in a new high-resolution 1-inch sensor with up to 5K video, and brings some new AI-powered flying smarts to help you capture that perfect shot with the press of a button.

## Same Body, New Insides

\|\|\|\|\|secondary image\|\|\|\|

The Air 2S is externally nearly identical to last year's Mavic Air 2 ([9/10 WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/dji-mavic-air-2/)). The new Air 2S even uses the same batteries, which makes upgrading a little cheaper. 

While they're *nearly* identical, there are some improvements. The Air 2S adds an object detection camera to the top of the drone, which improves the collision avoidance system. The Air 2S is also technically heavier at 595 grams to the Mavic Air 2's 570 grams. That might not sound like an improvement, but I found the Air 2S a performed better in windy conditions, and more weight likely helps with that (a new drone arriving inevitably cues up a windy day).

The similarities don't mean the Air 2S is just a repackaged Mavic Air 2 though. The big difference is the new 1-inch CMOS camera sensor. That's double the size of the Mavic Air 2, which used a half-inch sensor. It also jumps from 12 megapixels to 20 megapixels for stills, but the biggest difference, putting RAW images side by side in a photo editor, is sharpness. The new sensor has more detail and more definition in those details. 

The new sensor also means you can 5.4K video at 30fps. That's a good choice if you might want to crop, though the 4K at 60fps option will result in smoother video in most cases.

On paper the new sensor matches what you'd get in the more expensive Mavic 2 Pro, although the Pro has a variable aperture and can stop down to f/11, which is a huge help shooting in bright daylight. Still, for the size and price, the Air 2S's sensor can't be beat.

The new sensor alone is well worth the upgrade from the previous version, but there's some other nice updates as well.

DJI has added a new collision sensor to the top of the Air 2S, which really helps when you're flying toward something at high speed, since the drone pitches forward, rendering the front sensor less effective. Try as might I could not get the Air 2S to fly into things in Normal or Cine modes going forward, backward, up, down. 

The Air 2S does lack the side to side sensors found on the more expensive Mavic 2 Pro, but it's a huge step up from previous drones of this size, at this price. As per usual, Sport mode turns off all obstacle detection, use at your own risk.

The Advanced Pilot Assistance System (APAS) has seen an update as well, so that it now uses a wider field-of-view to detect obstacles. This means you can do more automated flying and worry less about what's around you. That said, perhaps I am old fashioned, but I still have a hard time trusting automation in tight flying situations.

The Air 2S inherits DJI's O3 flight system (previously called OcuSync) from the company's recent FPV drone. While I haven't had time to review that one yet, I've flown it enough to say that the 12 kilometer range claim is accurate, and also applies here. DJI is claiming 31 minutes of flight time for the Air 2S. I never quite got there, but it was close: 30 minutes was my max, but to be fair I was flying in some windy conditions.

## Automatic Video

\|\|\|\|\|secondary image\|\|\|\|

While the new sensor and collision detection are both welcome upgrades, my favorite part of the Air 2S is what DJI calls MasterShots. Open the MasterShots menu item, select an object and the app will automatically calculate flight paths for various types of shots. Send you drone off on its way, it records everything, and then combines it all into a single chunk of footage. It's a dead simple way to get a ton of b-roll without needing to do much of anything on your end.

That said, it won't always work. For example, I tried to use it on my car sitting in front of my house. And while the app had no trouble detecting what I wanted and plotting a course, it couldn't actually fly that path because there was a large tree in the way of some of the shots it planned. My solution was to go up a bit higher and get what I could with MasterShots, and then do some careful flying by hand to fill in what else I needed. 

Luckily MasterShots isn't take it or leave it. All video that's shot in MasterShots is available separately from the final, app-produced edit. That means if you don't like the edited results you can still take the raw footage and edit it yourself in the software of your choice.

The Air 2S is available today for $999 (includes the drone, remote controller, and one battery). There's also the Fly More combo for $1,299 which gets you two more batteries, ND filters (useful on bright days), a charging hub, and a shoulder bag. 

 

the first drone of its size to capture 20-megapixel still images or video in 5.4K with a new
one-inch sensor that was previously available only on larger, less agile drones. DJI continues to enable the effortless creation of imaginative content with the new MasterShots feature. This advanced feature uses automatic flight path planning to set the drone’s course while recording video. Upon completion of the flight, DJI Air 2S automatically merges the footage under one theme to create an eye-catching video. DJI Air 2S’s 31 minutes of maximum flight time and four-way directional obstacle sensors let the pilot focus on the shot while the drone’s safety systems warn when obstacles are getting close. APAS 4.0 is the most advanced autopilot system on any DJI drone and when turned on, seamlessly maneuvers around objects autonomously. O3, DJI’s third iteration of OcuSync, brings the most reliable transmission
technology in the drone market to this portable, foldable drone so users know their connection is stable.
The upgraded FocusTrack mode includes a suite of programmed modes like Spotlight 2.0, ActiveTrack
4.0 and Point of Interest 3.0 that easily mimic the focus, control and movement of a professional video
operator.
An All-In-One Tool for All Your Content Capturing Needs
Expand your creative vision and capture high-grade footage using a new one-inch sensor capable of
recording 20-megapixel still images, 5.4K video at 30fps or 4K at 60fps and 150Mbps. The one-inch
sensor is larger than the sensor on the original Mavic Air 2 and offers a larger pixel size of 2.4μm,
capturing more information and detail for better photos and videos. Get closer to the subject without
moving the drone using a new digital zoom that supports 4X zoom at 4K 30fps, 6X at 2.7K 30fps, 4X at
2.7K 60fps, 6X at 1080P 60fps and 8X at 1080P 30fps. DJI’s renowned three-axis mechanical gimbal
smooths out footage for professional-level quality and 8 GB of internal storage have been added. Users
can choose to record in H264 or H265, depending on their preferences for image detail and storage
capacity and can also choose from three video color profiles, Normal (8 bit), D-Log (10 bit) or HLG (10
bit) to match their video needs.

In addition to standard photo options like Timed Photo, AEB and Panoramas, DJI Air 2S’s SmartPhoto
mode records 20-megapixel photos using advanced scene analysis and deep learning to automatically
choose the best of three options that will create the most visually appealing image for you, including
HDR, Hyperlight and Scene Recognition. HDR modes merge several images together for a vibrant scene
while Hyperlight is designed for low-light scenarios and Scene Recognition can identify several common
settings and apply camera adjustments to capture photos that pop.
Pre-Programmed Modes for Pro-Level Footage
The DJI Air 2S has the most programmed flight modes and image capture modes of any DJI drone of its
size. These creative options include:
▪ MasterShots: Professional-level aerial footage has never been easier. After activating
MasterShots, the drone will autonomously plan a flight path, choose from three different image
capture modes, including Proximity, Portrait or Landscape, and start recording classic aerial
footage. Pilots can choose different themes and the DJI Fly app will generate a unique video
that’s ready to be shared with the world.
▪ FocusTrack: Focus on the scene and let DJI Air 2S do the hard work for you. Select your subject
by drawing a square around it on your mobile device, then choose from Point of Interest 3.0, an
autonomous flight path around the subject; ActiveTrack 4.0, a tool that seamlessly tracks the
subject and keeps it in the frame; or Spotlight 2.0, where the drone movement is controlled by
the pilot while it locks the subject into the frame.
▪ QuickShots: A staple DJI feature, QuickShot modes include Rocket, Circle, Dronie, Helix,
Boomerang and Asteroid.
▪ Hyperlapse: See the world sped up from the air and in motion with the Hyperlapse option in
resolution up to 4K. Content captured in 4K resolution and lower can apply digital stabilization
for an added layer of smoothness.
Safe and Intuitive Flight Operation in an Ultra-Portable Drone
DJI Air 2S uses four high-grade antennas and the latest version of DJI’s proprietary OcuSync transmission
tech, O3, to deliver a stable feed at a maximum distance of 12km 1 , even in areas with a high number of
signals. A maximum 31 minutes in the air gives pilots more time to capture visually appealing footage
while four-way sensors help reduce the risk of collision. The newly upgraded front, rear, bottom and top
obstacle sensors incorporate binocular zooming technology to recognize incoming objects from further
away at faster speeds.
DJI Air 2S uses the latest and most advanced version of Advanced Pilot Assistance System (APAS) 4.0,
which allows the drone to autonomously and seamlessly maneuver around, under and over obstacles.
While flying at normal speeds, the newly improved APAS 4.0 offers a wider field-of-view to detect
obstacles compared to previous versions. If pilots are flying at higher speeds, the as the angle of the
drone pitches forward more and the newly added upward obstacle sensor plays a critical part in
assisting obstacle detection. As with DJI’s latest drone models, the DJI Air 2S’s AirSense system warns
drone pilots of nearby airplanes and helicopters transmitting ADS-B signals, so they the drone can be
quickly fly moved to a safer location. Other standard DJI safety features of DJI Air 2S include an
improved Return-To-Home (RTH) feature, which can bring a drone back to its launch point if it loses

# Lenovo X1 Nano

If you like the size and weight of the MacBook Air, but prefer the keyboard and features of a ThinkPad the X1 Nano is for you. It's thin and light (1.99 pounds to be precise), but has the ThinkPad pedigree—great keyboard, red nub, and buttons at the top of the trackpad. 

Unfortunately it adopts some of the Air's bad habits as well, ports are limited to two USB-C ports and a headphone jack. The screen is an unsual 2,160 by 1,350 pixels, making it sharper than the XPS 13 base model, but not as sharp as the 4K option. I found it to be plenty sharp and bright enough to start at all day without eye strain. The battery life is great, I managed 17.5 hours in a battery drain test, that's five hours more than the XPS 13 managed. 

*Specs to look for: Intel Core i7, 16 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD*

# DJI April 15 embargo



# Lenovo C13 Yoga Chromebook

If you love ThinkPads and Chrome OS, Lenovo has a new laptop for you.

The ThinkPad C13 Yoga Chromebook is everything ThinkPad fans love—great keyboard, sturdy, no-nonsense design, and yes, the little red TrackPoint—but instead of Window or [Linux](https://www.wired.com/review/lenovo-thinkpad-x1-carbon-linux-edition/), it runs Google's ChromeOS.

It's not the cheapest, and it won't win design awards, but this is the nicest Chromebook I've used. The 2-in-1 design comes with a built-in stylus, the trackpad has buttons at the top, and there's plenty of ports. If you love Thinkpads and ChromeOS, this is the laptop for you.

## Thinkpad Hardware
The C13 Yoga is Lenovo's first time bringing the ThinkPad name to a Chromebook so it's interesting to see what Lenovo sees as the defining characteristics of ThinkPad. Everything I love about my x270 is here in the C13 Yoga—the keyboard is physically nearly identical to every other ThinkPad of recent memory (the layout follows the Chromebook style), the TrackPoint is present, and the trackpad buttons are at the top. There's also a fingerprint reader and a slew of ports, including two USB-C ports, two USB-A ports, a MicroSD Card reader, and HDMI out, and, curiously, a phone style volume control rocker.

Under the hood this is one of the first Chromebooks on the scene using AMD's new 3000C-series processors. The ThinkPad C13 Yoga comes in a few configurations, starting with the entry level model that uses the Athlon Gold chip, with 4 gigabytes of RAM. Then there's the Ryzen 3 model, also with 4 gigabytes of RAM, followed by the model I tested which has a Ryzen 5 chip with 8 gigabytes of RAM. Hard drive options range from a paltry 32 gigabytes to 256 gigabytes on the model I tested. All the SSDs use PCIe NVMe connections.

The Ryzen 5 chip in my test unit was plenty fast. ChromeOS doesn't ask too much of processor, so that's not surprising. But even editing photos in an Android app, opening dozens of tabs in Chrome, and typing this is in Vim using the Linux features didn't slow it down at all. It's every bit as fast as premium Chromebooks like Samsung's Galaxy Chromebook or the Pixelbook.

The 1080p screen is bright and sharp, a nice change from less expensive Lenovo Chromebooks which tend to have washed out, muddy screens. There's also an option to get a 4K OLED screen with the C13 Yoga, although given that battery life is good, but not great, I would hesitate to add a power hungry screen like that.

As with most ThinkPads, Lenovo calls this an enterprise notebook. In this case that means some extra security features, including Google's H1 security chip and the fingerprint reader. It also features a physical webcam cover to block the camera.

The weakest link in the C13 Yoga is the battery. I managed nine hours five minutes in our standard battery drain test (looping a local 1080p video). That's good enough, but not great compared to some similar Chromebooks in this price range. The Pixelbook Go managed nearly two hours more. That said, I never had the C13 Yoga run out of power in the course of day's work.

Using the C13 Yoga in tablet mode is fine on a table or in your lap, but trying to hold it while standing up is difficult. At 3.3 pounds, the C13 Yoga isn't what I'd call lightweight. Still, including the Lenovo USI Pen in the higher priced models is a nice touch. Pop the pen out of the little garage housing on the front the C13 will automatically open Google Keep. The Pen has decent pressure sensitivity, and I had no problem using it with Android apps as well, like Adobe Illustrator.

As a 2-in-1 it functions quite well and recent updates to ChromeOS have made it even more useful as a tablet, though, to be honest, I used it much more in "tent" mode watching YouTube or Netflix. The screen does pick us some glare if you're watching a video in a brightly lit room, but otherwise it looks quite good with strong blacks and still a good range of detail in shadowy scenes.

Overall this is my favorite Chromebook that I've tested this year. The AMD chips are really impressive. All the lagginess and slowing down you think of when opening dozens of tabs on a Chromebooks are gone with these chips. Nothing I've managed to do has produced any slow down at all. The catch is of course that you're paying a bit more.

I also like to point out that while ChromeOS is quite capable, the best experience comes from really investing in Google's ecosystem of services and apps, which is not for everyone. Still, if you're okay with the premium price and you want a Chromebook that's going to give you great performance now, and down the road this would be my pick.






# Lenovo Tab P11 Pro Tablet
Android tablets are a rare breed. *Good* Android tablets are even rarer. 

Samsung pretty much has the high-end Android tablet market cornered with its Galaxy Tab S7+ ([6/10 WIRED Review](https://www.wired.com/review/samsung-galaxy-tab-s7-plus/)), and at the other end of the market there's the ultra-cheap, under-powered Amazon Fire tablets. 

In between is something of a gap, and that's what Lenovo is hoping to fill with the Lenovo Tab P11 Pro. It's leaps and bounds beyond a Fire device, but doesn't quite have the power of the S7+. 

What it does have a magnificent screen and a much more budget-friendly price tag that make it great for watching movies on the go. That's the primarily use case here because Android on a tablet isn't good for much else.

## The Right Hardware

The screen is one of the highlights of P11 Pro. It's an ll.5-inch 2K OLED (2560 x 1600 pixels) that's every bit as nice and sharp as what's in my iPad Pro. It's got deep rich blacks and plenty of brightness, making the P11 a great way to watch movies. The JBL speakers are similarly impressive, with good bass output—better than any laptops I've tested lately. 

Unfortunately there is no headphone jack. There's a single USB-C port, and a Micro SD card slot. Lenovo does throw in a USB-C-to-headphone adapter, but if you want to charge your tablet while listening to headphones you'll need wireless headphones.

The design and look of the Tab P11 Pro is somewhere between the iPad Pro and Lenovo's Duet Chromebook. There are a few different models, the plain tablet model looks more like an iPad, while the model I tested includes a soft cloth back with a kickstand, and detachable keyboard like the Duet. The kickstand design means it's a bit awkward and wobbly in your lap, but is fine when you use it on a flat surface. Strip away the case and the P11 Pro is surprisingly light, weighing in at just barely over a pound.

The keyboard is cramped, but usable. The trackpad on the other hand is the one hardware weak spot. The button range is very small, toward the bottom of the trackpad and not especially responsive. It's not a deal breaker, but it definitely detracts from the usefulness of the trackpad. The folio model also includes a Lenovo Precision Pen 2, which I found great for sketching, pretty much just as good as the Apple Pencil in fact. It comes with carrying holster that can be magnetically attached to the back of the P11 Pro or stored separately. Regrettably it doesn't charge off the Tab itself you'll have to charge it in via a USB-C cable.

The P11 Pro is plenty speedy for most tasks. The Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G processor coupled with 6 gigabytes of RAM in the model I tested handled everything I threw at it, including photo editing, video streaming, and a ton of open browser tabs. The base model only offers 4 gigabytes of RAM, and may be a little less snappy. If you can afford it I suggest spending the extra $50 for the 6 gigabyte version.

Battery life is similarly impressive. It lasted 12 hours, 52 minutes in our battery drain test (looping a local 1080p video). In real world use I had no trouble getting through about a day and half of work. 

## The Wrong Software

In many ways the P11 Pro is a slightly higher end version of last year's Duet Chromebook (8/10 WIRED Recommends), but it runs Android instead of Chrome OS and that's the real problem with the P11 Pro—Android just isn't great on a tablet.

Few apps available have many features that take advantage of the tablet form factor. Over half of the apps I use on a regular basis were just phone size UIs blown up to fit a larger screen. Many didn't work at all in landscape mode. 

Like Samsung before it, Lenovo has tried to create a UI to work around Android's limitations on a tablet. Productivity Mode is Lenovo's name for it's customized multi-tasking UI. It's automatically activated whenever you attach the keyboard, or you can manually toggle it on and off in the pull down menu. 

Productivity Mode was clearly inspired by Samsung's DeX mode for the Galaxy Tabs. It laid out almost exactly the same way with a Chrome OS-style taskbar along the bottom of the screen. On the left there's the three Android buttons, back, home, and app list. Then there's a shortcut to open the app drawer, and then a Windows-style button list of your running applications. When Productivity Mode does what you want, it's great and you'll feel like you're using a real OS. 

Unfortunately Productivity Mode feels like a good idea that's only half-baked. It lack the polished workflow of what you'd get with an iPad Pro for example. The P11 Pro is $250 cheaper, but if you're really planning to use your tablet for work, I would suggest the extra money for an iPad Pro is worth it.

The Tab P11 Pro is a good Android tablet though if you really want Android. If you're into mobile gaming, the 120 Hz screen refresh rate and faster processor of Samsung's S7 Tabs are a better choice. However, if don't plan to game, the Lenovo it has a visually nicer screen and makes a great way to watch movies on the go. And in pinch you can use it to get some work done too.



# Samsung Galaxy Chromebook 2

Don't let the "2" fool you, the Samsung Galaxy Chromebook 2 does not replace last year's Samsung Galaxy Chromebook ([8/10, WIRED Recommends](https://www.wired.com/review/samsung-galaxy-chromebook/)). Think of this as the stripped down, leaner, tk version, rather than a sequel.

The original Samsung Galaxy Chromebook was a high end, premium machine with one of the nicest screens I've ever used, on any laptop. Unfortunately it arrived just as the pandemic took off and buying Chromebook that was the same price as a MacBook felt like maybe not the best choice. I can't say for sure that this influenced the design decisions Samsung made in creating the Galaxy Chromebook 2, but it certainly feels that way.

The Samsung Galaxy Chromebook 2 is still very much a premium machine, just a little less svelte, a little less power, and more importantly, a much nicer price.

## Little Red Rocket
Like its predecessor (which will remain available), the new Galaxy Chromebook 2 comes in either Red or Gray, but really, you should get the red. The world needs more red laptops.

Before I dive into what makes this machine a better value than the more expensive version, let's tackle what you don't get in this version. The big loss is the 4K OLED panel, which has been replaced by a 1080p QLED panel. It's not a bad screen by any means, and it's still nicer than what you'll find in most Chromebooks, but it's definitely a step down from the OLED. On the upside, battery life is better.

Also missing in this release are the stylus and the fingerprint sensor.

The Galaxy Chromebook 2 is 2.71 pounds, which is marginally heavier than the original, but where you'll really notice the difference is the thickness. This model is just over half an inch to the previous model's crazy-thin one-third inch height. It's lighter than most Chromebooks, but it's definitely more noticeable in your bag and harder to hold in tablet mode than the original, which was almost half a point lighter.

There are two models available, the $700 version I tested features a 10th-generation Intel i3 processor, 8 gigabytes of RAM, and a 128-gigabyte SSD. There’s also a slightly less powerful model that uses a 10th-generation Intel Celeron processor, has only 4 gigabytes of RAM and a 64GB SSD. The cheaper model is $550.

I find Intel i3 chips to be the sweet spot for Chromebooks. They offer enough power that you don't have to think about how many tabs or apps you have open, and they keep the price down compared to models with i5 or even i7 chips. The Celeron model will likely be fine as well, though less snappy. More worrying is the 4 gigabytes of RAM in that model, I would suggest going for the 8 gigabyte model if you can afford it. It will give you a more future-proof investment. It's not like websites are going to be gobbling up any less RAM tomorrow.

For ports you get two USB-C, a Micro SD card slot, and a headphone jack.

And now the million dollar question: how's the battery life? The previous model managed a paltry six and half hours in our standard battery drain test (playing a looped 1080p video at 75 percent brightness). I am happy to report that version 2 nearly doubles the battery life. It managed 12 hours 24 minutes, but more important than the test, I never worried about battery life in the course of using it all day. I did make sure to charge it every night, but it had no trouble lasting through a day of work and some YouTube in the evening.

My least favorite part of the Galaxy Chromebook 2 is the keyboard. It's the same keyboard as the previous model, but for some reason it bothered me more. I will confess that I am fan of big blocky, Lenovo-style keys, for most people this keyboard will likely be fine. Worryingly though, I had some problems with keys repeating, reminiscent of the problems that plagued Apple's similarly thin butterfly keyboards. I still can't tell though if it's an actual problem or just me.

Either way it's not enough to stop me from saying you should buy this Chromebook. Chromebooks still make the most sense for hardcore Google product users. If you live in Chrome, sync everything through Google Drive, post your photos to Google Photos, and email from Gmail, then the Galaxy Chromebook 2 is one of the best values on the market right now. 


# Spark Grill

Charcoal grilling is probably the oldest method of cooking on earth, old enough that its use predates recorded history. This is worth bearing in mind when a company says its innovating on charcoal grilling. Are you *really sure* no one has tried this at some point in the last 20,000 years?

That's not exactly what Spark Grills claims, but it's close. Spark's mission is to bring together the flavor of charcoal with the ease of propane grills. 

Like any propane grill you've ever used, the Spark can be started by turning a knob. Like any charcoal grill you've ever used, Spark cooks your food with charcoal. On paper at least, the Spark Grill delivers a solution to exactly the problem it set out to solve. The real question is, is it a problem anyone needs solved?

## Charcoal Flavor, Gas Simplicity

Food cooked over charcoal has a distinctive taste. This is Spark's appeal: that great charcoal flavor, but with the convenience of a gas grill.

Before I dive into how the Spark delivers on this claim it's important to understand that exactly *how* food acquires that distinctive charcoal flavor is influenced by everything from smoke (the specific aromas given off by burning wood that end up in the food), to how, when, and where any Maillard Reaction occurs. There are many variables at play when grilling over wood or charcoal: the kind of wood, the smoke, the heat, and more.

Combining these variables is as much art as science, and is part of the fun of cooking over burning wood or charcoal. At least to some of us.

Plenty of other people—understandably—just want to get a tasty grilled dinner on the table.

If you fall in the later category, the Spark is aimed at you.

This is a no-fuss, flip a switch and go, charcoal grill that imparts, in my testing anyway, about 80 percent of the flavor you'd get from a traditional charcoal grill. If you love the Pareto principle, the Spark is worth considering because it really does give you 80 percent of the results with 20 percent of the effort. Really, probably less than 20 percent of the effort.

The mid-century modern inspired design of the Spark looks great. The clean lines and rounded corners make other grills look bulky and awkward. The bamboo cutting board and working area provide ample food prepping space, more than most grills I've tested.

The Spark plugs in to an ordinary three-prong socket. It uses the electricity to automatically light your "Briq", as Spark calls its proprietary charcoal, and to operate fans which control the temperature of the grill. It's an ingenious system and it worked almost flawlessly in my testing.

If you can turn on an oven, you can grill with the Spark. Turn it on, wait for it to heat up to your desired temp, and cook. It doesn't get much simpler than that. The Spark also has an app which connects via Bluetooth. You can use the app to adjust and monite temperature via your iOS or Android device.

There were some hot spots, the left rear side of the grill was consistently hotter in temperature gun readings, and cooked noticeably faster. That's not unusual though, every grill I've ever tried has hot spots. What's unusual about the Spark is how you set up the two-zone system.

Two-zone cooking refers to cooking with both direct and indirect heat. It's a cornerstone of great grilling, and simple to do with most charcoal grills: move the charcoal to one side. That side will be much hotter and becomes your direct cooking zone, and the other side is your indirect cooking zone.

With the Spark it's a little more complicated. You have to remove the heat diffuser from the center. Then directly above the Briq is the direct heat, while all around it is the indirect cooking areas. It works, but it's awkward to move things around since they aren't just moved from one side to other, but arrayed in a circle. Still I would not call it deal breaker, it just takes some getting used to.

The only real problem with the Spark Grill is the proprietary charcoal. It's not cheap, about $5 a Briq and one Briq is one cook. The more significant problem is the Briq options. Right now you're limited to high heat cooking. The Spark really excels from about 450 degrees up to 850 degrees, with 500 being the sweet spot in my testing.

If you want to cook low and slow, say smoke some ribs or tackle the challenge of brisket, well, you're out of luck, at least for now. Spark's website says that it's working on a slow-burning Briq that will cook for up to 8 hours, but it's not available yet. And that gets to the heart of the problem with proprietary charcoal—availability.

You can order Briqs online from Spark, but if the company goes out of business down the road you've got a $900, oversize paper weight. Actually, that's not strictly true. You can technically cook with regular charcoal, but everything great about the Spark stops being great. The precision temperature control is gone, it's a pain to light, and in the end cooks no better a $20 grill from a big box store. You want the Briqs.

And therein lies the rub: expensive Briqs with limited cooking options. If you can live with that, the rest of the Spark is great and it really does deliver on its promise of charcoal grilling made simple.






# GoPro Hero 10 Review

The most remarkable thing about GoPro's new Hero 10 might be that it exists at all. Somehow, in the midst of a chip shortage that has trucks piling up in lots and supply chains breaking down across the industry, GoPro has managed to release a new camera in which the principle upgrade is a new processor.

What GoPro has managed to squeeze out of its existing design and sensor with the processor upgrade is impressive. The Hero 10 offers faster video—4K foot can now be shot at 120 frames per second, and 5.3K footage at 60 frames per second. The user interface is also snappier, start up time is shorter and menus are more responsive. The new processor is also capable of pulling higher resolution still images out of your videos.

## Video Star

The Hero 10 Black is outwardly indistinguishable from its predecessor other than the new blue logo. The form factor, screens, lens, and image sensor are unchanged. It is marginally lighter (3 percent), which is nice. On paper though the Hero 10 might look a little disappointing, but GoPro's new processor, dubbed the GP2, brings some impressive tricks to the Hero 10 Black that make it well worth the upgrade. 

The GP2 is the first upgrade to the GoPro's processor since the Hero 6 launched over four years ago. GoPro has put the extra processing power to work, making the Hero 10 do more with the same sensor as the Hero 9. In Hero 10 you can shoot 5.3K video at 60 fps, 4K video at 120 fps, or 1080 video at 270 fps, all of which produce very impressive slow motion video. 

The new processor is also driving the latest version of GoPro's software stabilization, Hypersmooth 4. The video stabilization of Hypersmooth is one of the key things that sets GoPro apart from its competitors, and it's a big part of why the Hero series has long been our [favorite action camera](https://www.wired.com/gallery/best-action-cameras/).

Due to the way it crops, Hypersmooth was not previously available when shooting 5.3K footage, but in Hero 10 it makes its way to 5.3K 30 fps video. That means you can shoot smooth, high resolution video in 5.3K and crop it to 4K output. This reason alone is enough to make the Hero 10 worth the upgrade for pro photographers who shoot action. Hypersmooth also now works on 4K 60 fps footage and 1080p 120 fps footage. 

The other headlining improvement to Hypersmooth is horizon leveling. The Hero 10 can level horizons from a full 45 degree tilt (up from 27 degree tilt in the Hero 9). Unfortunately this one is not available when shooting 5.3K, but does work with 4K 60 fps footage.

Nice as the Hypersmooth 4 improvements are, what I found far more useful is the new local tone mapping algorithm, which is now available in video as well as photos. Local tone mapping enhances the contrast in areas of low detail, which improves the impression of detail. The classic examples here are hair and grass, both of which tend to wash out and look muddy. Shooting the Hero 10 with local tone mapping alongside the Hero 9 without it revealed a significantly more "texture" to video of grass shot with the updated processor. 

Another place the Hero 10 gets a boost is the 3D noise reduction, which gets a new algorithm thanks to the new chip. The results are most noticeable in low-light videos, sunsets, night in the city and so on, but I also found that when combining this with the HDR tone mapping even footage walking though a sun dappled forest was noticeably better than what I got from the Hero 9 in the same situation.

The last standout new feature in my view is the new lens cover, which is "hydrophobic", meaning it sheds water. I was skeptical of this until I used it and it really does work. In fact, if you use your GoPro around water, this might be the best features of all, since nothing ruins footage like water droplets on your lens.

## Still Image Improvements

While GoPros are probably best known as video cameras, they make pretty good still cameras as well. The image sensor in the Hero 10 is the same 23.6 megapixel sensor found in the Hero 9. But the output on the Hero 9 topped out at 20 megapixels. The faster processor in Hero 10 has enabled GoPro to bump the megapixel output to the full 23 megapixels. Side by side in a RAW editor the change wasn't hugely noticeable, but it does mean you can crop at bit tighter and still end up with the same pixel dimensions. Which is another way of saying, if you're printing posters from your GoPro images, your results with the Hero 10 will look better than the Hero 9.

I should also note that this megapixel upgrade applies to all photo modes, Burst, Super Photo, and Night Photo, not just RAW images.

Much more exciting in my view is the ability to pull 19.6 megapixel JPG stills from your 5.3K video. For most of us—possibly even pro photographers—this is large enough to easily print 8 x 10 images and will certainly look great on the 'gram, if that's your thing. This ends up being the main way I use the GoPro: shoot video of a scene and then pull out still images later. While I don't get a RAW file this way, I do end up more often than not, getting the actual image I want.

There are a handful of other improvements in this release that are nice to have, including a higher frame rate on the front screen, which is particularly helpful for selfie crowd as the preview doesn't lag like it did in the Hero 9. Another nice feature is automatic cloud backup for those with a GoPro subscription. When you plugin the Hero 10 to charge it will automatically connect to your network and start uploading. Wireless transfers from GoPro to your phone are also faster. New in this release is ability to dump images and video to your phone via a wired connection.

## Should You Upgrade?

That depends on what you're doing with your GoPro. The Hero 10 is the fastest and most powerful Hero camera I've tested, but if you already have the Hero 9... that's still a very capable camera. If you've got an older Hero and are looking to upgrade, the Hero 10 is definitely worth it. 

All the accessories that work with the Hero 9 will also work here (so there's no waiting for your favorite third-party accessory makers to catch up) and the jump from Hero 8 to Hero 10 is a significant upgrade.