Philip Bloom Compares Antigravity A1, DJI Avata 360, and Mini 5 Pro in Drone Test

Philip Bloom Compares 360-Degree Drones: Antigravity A1 vs. DJI Avata 360 vs. Mini 5 Pro

British filmmaker Philip Bloom has conducted a comparison of two 360-degree drones, the Antigravity A1 and the DJI Avata 360, against DJI’s Mini 5 Pro. Bloom’s analysis, shared on his YouTube channel, reveals that while the Avata 360 excels in image quality, neither drone serves as a complete substitute for traditional camera drones used in cinematic work. This review follows the launch of the A1 in December 2025 and the release of the Avata 360 on March 26, 2026.

Bloom, who has been reviewing 360 cameras since the original Insta360 in 2016, aimed to determine whether a 360 drone could replace a conventional drone or if it serves as a supplementary tool for specific shots. His conclusion favors the latter.

Image Quality Comparison

The DJI Avata 360 features dual 1/1.1-inch sensors, which it shares with the Osmo 360 and Osmo Action 6, while the Antigravity A1 is equipped with smaller 1/1.28-inch sensors. Bloom highlighted the Avata 360’s 10-bit D-Log M picture profile as a significant advantage over the A1, which records in 8-bit without a log profile, resulting in footage that is heavily contrasty with limited grading options.

In terms of dynamic range, the Avata 360 again takes the lead, recording at 8K/60p compared to the A1’s 8K/30p. Both drones stitch two circular 3840 by 3840 images into a final spherical output, but due to the cropping required for 360 reframing, the effective resolution is lower than the advertised 8K. The differences in sensor size and bit depth are more impactful than the specifications suggest.

Control and Usability Issues with the A1

One of Bloom’s primary criticisms of the A1 is its lack of a standard controller option. Users must rely on Antigravity goggles and a motion controller for operation, with no screen-based alternative available. In contrast, the Avata 360 can be operated using the DJI RC 2, a twin-stick screen controller, or with DJI Goggles N3 and the RC Motion 3.

This flexibility is significant in practical use. With the RC 2, Bloom was able to adjust the field of view on the controller screen to align with his planned post-crop settings, enhancing his in-air framing. The A1 lacks a similar capability due to the absence of a screen.

Weight, Regulation, and Noise Considerations

Weighing in at 249 grams, the A1 falls below the sub-250g threshold, exempting recreational pilots from registration in many regions. The Avata 360, however, weighs approximately 455 grams, placing it in the registration and Remote ID category for U.S. pilots. Additionally, the A1 is quieter; Bloom described the Avata 360’s motor noise as a “horrible screech,” significantly louder than that of the A1.

Flight time also favors the A1, with Bloom reporting around 17 minutes per battery on the Avata 360, which is below DJI’s rated 23 minutes. The A1’s integrated propeller guards and smaller props enhance safety in tight spaces but may reduce drag efficiency. Both drones feature user-replaceable lenses.

Limitations of 360 Drones for Traditional Cinematic Work

Bloom tested all three drones using the same cinematic sequences. He found that the DJI Mini 5 Pro, equipped with a 1-inch sensor and dedicated 24mm lens, produces superior footage for traditional cinematic applications compared to the 360 drones. When forced to choose between the Avata 360 and the Mini 5 Pro, Bloom favored the Mini 5 Pro, reaffirming his earlier assessments of its imaging capabilities.

However, the 360 drones provide unique advantages in shot density, allowing for simultaneous capture of multiple angles in a single flight. Bloom noted the Avata 360’s active tracking feature as particularly useful in wooded areas, where it can navigate through foliage. The Single Lens mode allows for 4K forward-facing capture but sacrifices gimbal stabilization outside of FPV mode.

Conclusion

Bloom’s findings align with earlier observations regarding the Avata 360’s imaging flexibility, while the A1 maintains its appeal due to its lightweight design. The distinction between 10-bit and 8-bit recording is crucial, as it affects the ability to color-grade footage for commercial use. For traditional cinematic work, a gimbal-stabilized 1-inch sensor remains superior to a 360-degree capture. The 360 drones serve as distinct tools for specific scenarios rather than replacements for conventional drones.

Looking ahead, Antigravity is expected to announce a standard controller by the end of Q2 2026. The A1’s goggles-only design was effective when it was the only 360 drone available, but with DJI offering a more versatile control scheme and superior image quality, Insta360 may need to adapt to remain competitive in this category.

All reporting and editorial perspectives are provided by Haye Kesteloo.