Connect with us

Technology

The best iPad to buy

Published

on

The best iPad to buy

There are no bad iPads. That’s the best news about Apple’s tablet lineup: 15 years after Steve Jobs first debuted the device, the iPad is the best tablet on the market, and it’s not particularly close. Apple’s App Store is enormous and filled with great apps, Apple’s performance and battery life are consistently excellent, and the iPad is still the company’s most versatile device. That’s one easy answer to your question: yes, if you want a tablet you should buy an iPad. Even last year’s iPad, or heck, last-last year’s iPad is still a solid device. Buying an older but better device — last year’s Pro instead of this year’s Air, for instance — is a tried and true iPad formula.

But which of all those good iPads should you buy? That’s never been more complicated. Apple sells six different iPads — the Pro in two sizes, the Air in two sizes, the Mini, and the regular ol’ iPad — all of which come with different specs and accessory options. It’s all too much.

I’ve tested every iPad currently on the market and have been an iPad user and reviewer since the very first model. (I’m pretty sure I got a job in 2010 because I had a brand-new iPad with me at the interview, but that’s another story.) After using all these tablets and accessories, I think I can help you make the choice.

The simplest way to pick an iPad is by process of elimination. First, there’s your budget: you can spend $350 on an iPad, you can spend $2,728 on an iPad, or you can spend just about anything in between. You should also decide whether you need an Apple Pencil and which one has the features you need, because not every iPad supports every model. The same goes for the keyboard attachments. Between price and accessories, your choice might be instantly obvious.

More broadly, though, your iPad-buying journey starts with two crucial questions. The first is: what kind of iPad user are you? There are roughly two types. The first and most common iPad user mostly uses it like a larger iPhone: it’s a bigger screen on which to send emails, do the crossword, watch Netflix, and other fairly casual activities. The second type of iPad user, on the other hand, uses it like a touchscreen Mac: it’s for video editing, 3D modeling, creating presentations, crushing spreadsheets, and generally Doing Work of all sorts. You’ll also email and Netflix, of course, but you want your iPad to be a primary computing device.

Advertisement

I think most people fall into the first category. (Honestly, I also think a lot of people who believe they fall into the second category… mostly don’t.)

What to consider when buying an iPad:

iPads are incredibly versatile gadgets, so we test them in as many real-world ways as possible. We use them for video chats, we play high-end games and casual ones, we edit complex video, we fall asleep on the couch watching Netflix. We pay close attention to performance, battery life, durability, and compatibility with important apps and accessories. We’ve reviewed every iPad on the market, along with their most important competitors, and track software updates closely as they change the devices’ appeal.

Advertisement

Yes, this is obvious, but it’s good to know how much you want to spend before shopping — otherwise, you risk succumbing to Apple’s incredible ability to always get you spending just a little more. You can get a new iPad for as little as $350, or you can spend well over $1,000 for a top model. Knowing how much you want to pay will guide you to the right models. It might even guide you to older models; sometimes the last-gen iPad, at a steep discount, can be the one to buy.

The most common iPad size these days has a roughly 11-inch screen. This is probably the right size for most people: 11 inches is ideal for a wide variety of things and is flexible for both holding in your hands and using with a keyboard. If you primarily plan to use your iPad for reading, you might want to go with something smaller; if you intend to replace a laptop with an iPad, you might want a bigger model. Be warned, though: a 13-inch iPad is a truly humongous thing.

Apple’s accessory compatibility is somewhat fragmented across its iPad lineup. It has several different Pencil stylus models, a number of different keyboard attachments, and a wide variety of case options. While some iPad models share accessories with others, not all of them do, so if you want to use a specific accessory with your iPad, it’s important to make sure both are compatible before you buy them.

The second question is more complicated to answer, and it’s what makes the iPad-buying process so tricky right now: how long do you expect to keep your iPad? If you’re looking for a device for the kids to beat up or something that will be your travel companion until you inevitably leave it somewhere, you’re going to end up with a very different device than if you’re shopping for your main computer for the next decade. In general, if you take care of your iPad, I think you can reasonably expect it to last at least five years — so that’s the timeline I have in mind as we go through this guide.

I used to say that almost everyone should just get the base iPad. Now, I think there are two options worth seriously considering.

An 11th-generation iPad on a couch.

$278

The Good

  • The cheapest iPad by far
  • Comes in lots of fun colors
  • Plenty capable for casual use

The Bad

  • The worst screen in the lineup
  • Much older chip
  • No Pencil Pro support

Screen: 11-inch, 2360 x 1640 resolution / Processor: Apple A16 / Storage: 128GB to 512GB Port: USB-C / Cellular: 5G (optional) / Speakers: stereo / Compatible accessories: Apple Magic Keyboard Folio, Apple Pencil (USB-C)

Apple’s base model is still a really good tablet and a pretty good deal: you could buy the $349 tablet and the (wildly overpriced but still very nice) $250 Magic Keyboard Folio for the price of the iPad Air. Now that it comes with at least 128GB of storage, I have few complaints with this device.

Advertisement

The 11-inch screen is the right size for most iPad things, the camera is good and is located in the right place, it supports the Apple Pencil — though not the newer Pencil Pro — and even its A16 chip is plenty for most casual iPad uses. All the other iPads have slightly nicer screens, particularly the antireflective coating that helps mitigate glare, but that’s almost certainly not worth the additional price for most buyers.

Here’s my reservation: the base model iPad is further behind the Air than ever before, and I worry about how that’ll play out over the next few years. If you decide to start using your iPad for more creative tasks, then you might regret not getting the Air’s M3 chip. If, by some miracle, Apple Intelligence becomes awesome in the next few years, you won’t be able to use it.

If you only wanted an iPad to last a couple years, for everyday iPad tasks, I’d tell you to buy this one without a second’s hesitation. But there’s a chance this one will feel old and outdated long before the Air does.

Read our full iPad (11th-gen) review.
A photo of an iPad Air on a table.A photo of an iPad Air on a table.

$499

The Good

  • M3 chip is fast and new
  • Excellent accessory support
  • Better display than the base model

The Bad

  • Has Touch ID, not Face ID
  • Much more expensive than the base model
  • AI is not an upgrade so far

Screen: 11-inch, 2360 x 1640 resolution; 13-inch, 2732 x 2048 resolution / Processor: Apple M3 / Storage: 128GB to 1TB / Ports: USB-C / Cellular: 5G (optional) / Speakers: stereo / Compatible accessories: Apple Magic Keyboard for iPad Air, Apple Pencil Pro, Pencil USB-C

The iPad Air is supposed to be the perfect middle ground of the iPad lineup, and this year’s model gets pretty close. The new M3 chip is only a tiny upgrade over the M2 — I don’t even notice it in day-to-day use — but I’ll never complain about having newer chips. The biggest upgrade to the Air this year is actually the new Magic Keyboard, which adds a row of function keys and makes the setup a much more credible laptop replacement. (The new keyboard also works with the M2 Air, and if you can find that device on sale somewhere, it’s still a great tablet.)

The base iPad to iPad Air upgrade is straightforward enough. You get better accessories, a somewhat better screen, and a noticeably better processor for $250. (You also get the option of a 13-inch device for another $200, but I think an 11-inch iPad is the right size for most people — the 13-inch models start to feel more like laptops than tablets.) If you’re playing Netflix and browsing the web, that $250 won’t get you much, but as soon as you start noodling around in Final Cut or even GarageBand, you’ll notice the difference. There’s a lot of room to grow into the Air, whereas the base iPad may hit its ceiling much sooner.

Advertisement

The other thing the Air offers that the base iPad doesn’t is Apple Intelligence. Right now, this is not a problem: there is exactly nothing in Apple Intelligence worth spending $250 on. But if you’re an AI believer, you should know that the base iPad won’t get whatever’s coming.

Read our full iPad Air M3 review.
A photo of a person pinching the screen on an iPad Pro.A photo of a person pinching the screen on an iPad Pro.

$1053

The Good

  • Outrageously powerful
  • Gorgeous screen and design
  • Full accessory support

The Bad

  • Outrageously expensive
  • Like, MacBook Pro-level expensive

Screen: 11-inch, 2420 x 1668 resolution 120Hz OLED; 13-inch, 2752 x 2064 resolution 120Hz OLED; nano-texture glass optional / Processor: Apple M4 / Storage: 256GB–2TB / Ports: USB-C / Cellular: 5G (optional) / Speakers: four / Compatible accessories: Apple Magic Keyboard, Apple Pencil Pro, Pencil USB-C

If you’re not worried about price tags, this is easy: the latest iPad Pro is my favorite tablet of all time. The Tandem OLED screen is bright and crisp, the tablet is barely thicker than its USB-C port, it’s light, it’s thin, and it’s about as well made as you could expect a tablet to be. The M4 chip is plenty fast even for high-end games and ultra-complex creativity apps. It supports the new, lighter, better Magic Keyboard case and the Pencil Pro. I have plenty of qualms about how powerful an operating system iPadOS is, and the limits it places on just how powerfully you can use an iPad, but the M4 Pro is everything you’d want in a tablet.

But oh boy, the price. The Pro starts at $999 for the 11-inch model, and if you want a keyboard, a Pencil, and even a single storage upgrade, you’re quickly looking at a $2,000 purchase. If we’re just talking about a Netflix and email machine, we’re long past the point of diminishing returns. But if you don’t care, and you just want the best thing money can buy? Here it is. You won’t be disappointed.

Read our full iPad Pro review.
A photo of the iPad Mini, in portrait mode, on a table.A photo of the iPad Mini, in portrait mode, on a table.

$399

The Good

  • Ideal for one-handed use
  • Works with the Pencil Pro

The Bad

  • Missing some accessory support
  • Camera’s in the wrong spot

Screen: 8.3-inch, 2266 x 1488 resolution 60Hz Mini LED / Processor: Apple A17 Pro / Storage: up to 2TB / Port: USB-C / Cellular: 5G (optional) / Speakers: quad / Compatible accessories: Apple Pencil Pro, Pencil USB-C, Smart Folio

You’re either an iPad Mini person or you’re not. I very much am: I’ve used a Mini for years as my device for reading in bed, watching movies on airplanes, and playing games on the go. The latest Mini is a bit of a disappointment, with a slightly underpowered processor and an old design that could have used smaller bezels and a relocated camera. But it’s still the iPad Mini, and it’s still good enough for most tablet things. If you want an iPad Mini, this is it.

Read our full iPad Mini review.

An aside on specs and extras

Advertisement

Once you’ve picked an iPad model, you still have a bunch of decisions to make. And many of them are about specs and features that will cost you hundreds of dollars. Here are my recommendations for some of the things you’ll encounter:

  • Cellular coverage: You probably don’t need this. Unless you live in a really remote place, Wi-Fi is available in most places. That said, I’ve found that I use cell-equipped iPads far more often when I can just pull them out and know they’re connected — there’s something about busting it out in the park or on the subway that just feels great. Plus, it’s a really useful hotspot for other devices. This isn’t the first place I’d spend my money, though.
  • Storage: This is the first place I’d spend my money. All the iPads now come with at least 128GB of storage, which is a big upgrade — 64GB was just never enough. Even now, though, I recommend springing for 256GB if you can afford it; you’d be surprised at how quickly your photos, videos, and Netflix downloads add up.
  • Engraving: Don’t do this. It screws up returns and makes selling or giving it away harder. Just don’t do it.
  • Apple Pencil: As much as I’d love for this to be an all-purpose accessory, it’s really not. Buy it (either the USB-C or the Pro) if you plan to handwrite or draw a lot. Otherwise, skip it.
  • Magic Keyboard: This is the first accessory I’d recommend to most people — many people type a lot on their iPads, and it’s also a handy stand and dock for the tablet. You can find cheaper keyboard docks than Apple’s, but I haven’t found one I like better. It’s expensive no matter which model you buy, though.

My gadget shopping advice is always to buy the best thing you can afford and hold it for as long as possible, and that’s more doable with an iPad than almost any other device category. If you have the extra $100 to spend on storage, do it. If you want to upgrade because you think AI will get more powerful in the next few years, go for it! Just make sure you know which kind of iPad user you really are, and get the best one you’ll actually make use of. Hopefully for a long time to come.

For the first time in a while, the iPad lineup feels fairly up to date. The Air, Mini, and base model have all been updated in the last several months. The Pro is actually the oldest device in the lineup, and Bloomberg has reported that an M5-powered Pro could be coming as soon as this year.

Apple does appear to be updating its devices more often than before, sometimes on an iPhone-style annual schedule. Obviously, your iPad doesn’t need to be upgraded that often, and the year-to-year upgrades tend to be small. So our advice still holds: if you need a new one, now’s a good time. If you don’t, there seems to always be an upgrade just around the corner.

Update, May 9th: Adjusted prices and availability.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Technology

Parents call for New York governor to sign landmark AI safety bill

Published

on

Parents call for New York governor to sign landmark AI safety bill

A group of more than 150 parents sent a letter on Friday to New York governor Kathy Hochul, urging her to sign the Responsible AI Safety and Education (RAISE) Act without changes. The RAISE Act is a buzzy bill that would require developers of large AI models — like Meta, OpenAI, Deepseek, and Google — to create safety plans and follow transparency rules about reporting safety incidents.

The bill passed in both the New York State Senate and the Assembly in June. But this week, Hochul reportedly proposed a near-total rewrite of the RAISE Act that would make it more favorable to tech companies, akin to some of the changes made to California’s SB 53 after large AI companies weighed in on it.

Many AI companies, unsurprisingly, are squarely against the legislation. The AI Alliance, which counts
Meta, IBM, Intel, Oracle, Snowflake, Uber, AMD, Databricks, and Hugging Face among its members, sent a letter in June to New York lawmakers detailing their “deep concern” about the RAISE Act, calling it “unworkable.” And Leading the Future, the pro-AI super PAC backed by Perplexity AI, Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), OpenAI president Greg Brockman, and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, has been targeting New York State Assemblymember Alex Bores, who co-sponsored the RAISE Act, with recent ads.

Two organizations, ParentsTogether Action and the Tech Oversight Project, put together Friday’s letter to Hochul, which states that some of the signees had “lost children to the harms of AI chatbots and social media.” The signatories called the RAISE Act as it stands now “minimalist guardrails” that should be made law.

They also highlighted that the bill, as passed by the New York State Legislature, “does not regulate all AI developers – only the very largest companies, the ones spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year.” They would be required to disclose large-scale safety incidents to the attorney general and publish safety plans. The developers would also be prohibited from releasing a frontier model “if doing so would create an unreasonable risk of critical harm,” which is defined as the death or serious injury of 100 people or more, or $1 billion or more in damages to rights in money or property stemming from the creation of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon; or an AI model that “acts with no meaningful human intervention” and “would, if committed by a human,” fall under certain crimes.

Advertisement

“Big Tech’s deep-pocketed opposition to these basic protections looks familiar because we have
seen this pattern of avoidance and evasion before,” the letter states. “Widespread damage to young people —
including to their mental health, emotional stability, and ability to function in school — has been
widely documented ever since the biggest technology companies decided to push algorithmic
social media platforms without transparency, oversight, or responsibility.”

Continue Reading

Technology

How future food domes could change the way you eat

Published

on

How future food domes could change the way you eat

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A futuristic food dome at Expo 2025 Osaka-Kansai offered a surprising look at how cities may grow fresh food close to home.

Inspired by a classic greenhouse, the Inochi no Izumi or Source of Life dome showed how a compact closed-loop ecosystem could sit on rooftops or in small urban spaces. It looked like a tiny house full of produce powered by nature.

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide — free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

LIVING IN GIANT MOON GLASS SPHERES COULD BE OUR FUTURE

Advertisement

This dome creates a full food ecosystem by recycling water and nutrients in a closed loop. (VikingDome)

Inside the Source of Life dome

The 21-foot structure sits on a base with four water zones that support marine fish, brackish species and freshwater species. Their waste creates the nutrients that feed the plant layers above. Microbes convert ammonia into nitrates that plants love.

Above the tanks are four hydroponic tiers. Salt-tolerant greens grow over the seawater tank. Tomatoes and semi-salt-tolerant veggies thrive in the brackish zone. Herbs and lettuce sit above freshwater species like sturgeon. Edible flowers fill the top layer where sunlight hits strongest. The layout functions like an ecological slice from ocean to land instead of floors.

Transparent ETFE panels pull in light and help the dome keep a stable climate. Water pumps send nutrients upward and then return clean water to each tank. The loop creates almost no waste and keeps cycling with little input.

BEEF INDUSTRY SLAMS LAB-GROWN HYBRID MEAT AS SCIENTISTS PROMISE GREENER STEAKS

Advertisement

Plants grow in stacked hydroponic layers that match the salinity zones of the aquatic life below. (VikingDome)

How cities may use systems like this

If these domes scale, cities could spread food production across many rooftops instead of one large farm. That shift boosts resilience and reduces shipping. It also lets people see where their food comes from because it grows within reach.

Why this Dome matters

The dome shows how biodiversity can improve food production. With more plant and aquatic species working together, the system stays stable and feeds itself. It does not rely on soil, open land or predictable weather. Cities with tight spaces can use this kind of setup to grow food right where people live.

Researchers from Osaka Metropolitan University and the Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology designed the system to copy nature. It follows the same recycling found in healthy wetlands. By letting biology do the work, the system reduces strain on land and water.

The system shows how cities may produce fresh food on rooftops and small urban spaces. (VikingDome)

Advertisement

What this means for you

This model hints at a future where fresh food sits closer to your kitchen. A dome like this could sit on an apartment building or a school and provide herbs, produce and edible flowers. It cuts travel time from farm to table and gives communities more control over their food supply.

If a storm or disaster blocks access to farms, a closed-loop dome can keep growing. For people with tiny yards or no soil, it offers a realistic way to produce clean food in small spaces.

Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?

Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my Quiz here: Cyberguy.com.

Kurt’s key takeaways

The Source of Life dome may be a prototype, but it delivers a vivid preview of urban food production. It combines architecture, ecology and aquaculture in a compact package that uses every drop of water. If future cities adopt systems like this, access to fresh food could improve for millions.

Advertisement

Would you trust a rooftop food dome to supply part of your meals each week? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report 

Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide — free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter. 

Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com.  All rights reserved.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Technology

The best instant cameras you can buy right now

Published

on

The best instant cameras you can buy right now

Even with the ability to take excellent photos with our phones and instantly share them across the world, there’s something magical about the old-school instant camera. With just a click of a button, you can capture a moment in a photo that you can see and touch almost immediately. Images captured by an instant camera aren’t as pristine or perfect as those produced by modern digital cameras, but their soft images and imperfections are often a big part of the allure.

Yet not all instant cameras are the same, and some of them are better suited for different needs and budgets. That’s why we tested some of the most popular instant cameras on the market from brands like Fujifilm, Polaroid, Leica, Canon, Kodak, and others.

All the models featured in our instant camera buying guide are enjoyable to use, but each offers a distinct set of features at a different price point. As a result, some are more appropriate for a child or budding photographer, while others are more advanced and provide added creative control (for a price). When it comes down to it, though, we consider print quality, ease of use, and affordability to be the hallmarks of a quality shooter. That’s why we picked Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12 as the best instant camera for most people, as it ticks all three boxes wonderfully.

What I’m looking for

Typically, I try to spend at least a couple of weeks, if not months, testing each camera to get a sense of what it would be like to actually own one. I’ll use them to capture photos of loved ones while hanging out, or subjects and scenes I stumble across as I’m exploring Los Angeles and its many beaches. I shoot indoors and outside, with and without the flash, allowing me to compare how each camera performs in both bright and low-light environments.I also ask friends and family — both young and old — for their input on image quality, and I have them take photos with the instant camera to get their thoughts on usability. If the camera comes with extra features, such as filters or support for a companion app, I’ll make sure to put them to the test in real-life situations. I note how easy it is to pull up and navigate the app, apply the effects, and, of course, how the results look.

Advertisement

Instant cameras aren’t known for producing high-quality, sharp photos, and most of them struggle with low-light conditions. However, the photos should at least be clear and bright enough that the subject is discernible and the picture looks relatively true to life.

How easy is it to set the instant camera up and take photos with it? Ease of use is a big part of what makes instant cameras fun and accessible to people of all ages. You shouldn’t need a professional photography background just to enjoy an instant camera.

Advertisement

Instant cameras come with different features at various price points. Generally, the more feature-rich cameras tend to be pricier, but do the extra capabilities justify the added cost? Some cameras, for example, pair with a companion app or feature a built-in selfie mirror, while others include the ability to print images from your phone. None of these are essential, though the added niceties may be worth it for some people.

Some instant cameras aren’t as well-suited for certain situations and / or people as others. For example, there are instant cameras that print old-fashioned Polaroid photos that aren’t very clear. They frustrate me, but retro lovers might find them charming. Other cameras come with advanced creative modes that allow you to edit photos and even print smartphone pictures, but a young child might find them difficult to use.

Each instant camera requires a different kind of film, which means that the sticker price of the camera isn’t the true price. This is something you should take into account before making a purchase, as the cost of film can quickly add up. Depending on the brand, you may have to pay anywhere between 50 cents and $2 a shot.It’s also important to take into account that some film is easier to find. The Instax Mini 12, for example, uses credit card-size Instax Mini film that’s sold at most major retailers. Other types of film, including the film needed for Kodak’s Mini Shot 3 Square Retro, are available on Amazon but aren’t sold by as many retailers.Finally, most instant camera brands sell films of varying quality in a range of styles. Some are decorated with colorful frames and patterns, while others are black and white. They also vary in shape and size, from small rectangular prints you can stick in your wallet to square-shaped ones. You can also buy wider prints, and some brands even sell film with an adhesive backing that allows you to use the resulting images as stickers.

If you’re looking for more creative control or features like filters, however, the Instax Mini Evo is our choice, one that boasts great image quality and allows you to choose which photos you’d like to print. Other instant cameras, like Kodak’s Mini Retro 3, also offer a variety of advanced creative modes for those who desire more.

Take a look at this list of our instant camera recommendations to find the best fit for you.

The best instant camera for most people

Advertisement
A hand holding up the white Fujifilm Instax Mini 12 against a green slide.

$88

The Good

  • Produces relatively true-to-life photos
  • Terrific ease of use
  • Very affordable

The Bad

  • Instax film can get pricey
  • Minimal creative control
  • Flash can be overpowering

Film type: Fujifilm Instax Mini film (sold separately) / Film size: 2 x 3-inches / Weight: 306 grams / Charging method: AA batteries / Companion app: None / Other features: Built-in selfie mirror, film counter

If all you’re looking to do is just click a button and get a decent print for a reasonable price, we recommend Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12. It’s a basic instant camera that’s similar to our former pick, the Instax Mini 11, but with some minor updates. It still takes less than five minutes to start shooting, but the setup process is easier since all you need to do is twist the lens to either “on” or “off.” Such ease of use, combined with the camera’s thinner build, makes it particularly well suited for those new to photography and kids.

Fujifilm Instax Mini 12 photos of animals, nature, art, and drinks.

For an instant camera, Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12 produces vivid, relatively true-to-life photos.
Image: Sheena Vasani / The Verge

For an instant camera, image quality is also better than most of the other cameras I tested, producing relatively true-to-life photos. Most of the cameras I tested struggled to capture low-light conditions well, and this one is no exception, but the built-in flash does help. Fujifilm claims the Mini 12 optimizes image quality in both dark and bright environments better than its predecessor, but I didn’t notice much of a difference. The flash — which you can’t disable — is also still overpowering in some instances, resulting in a few overexposed images. If anything, the photos actually seemed a little darker and less vivid than before.

However, at least the Instax Mini 12 captured my features and skin color more accurately when I used the included selfie feature — which is really just a small mirror mounted on the front of the camera.

A closeup of Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12 camera and its lens structure surrounded by photos it printed in the background.

Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12 features a new lens structure that’s fun and more intuitive to play with.
Image: Sheena Vasani / The Verge

You can also now zoom in a little easier thanks to a new lens structure, which you can twist to enter the Close-Up Mode in lieu of pressing a button. When in this mode, you can take advantage of the camera’s new “Parallax Correction” feature, which is supposed to result in a more aligned photo. The lens was fun to play with and reminded me of a traditional point-and-shoot, but actually using it to take quality photos takes some time to figure out. As with the Mini 11, it’s still somewhat tricky to center your subject in the frame using this mode, even with the updated lens. Thankfully, it became easier to properly align photos after a couple of attempts (as well as some composition guidance from the manual).

The Mini 12 also offers a number of other niceties. I appreciated the larger-than-average viewfinder and the fact that the camera comes with a small counter that displays the remaining number of shots, which is a feature many of the other instant cameras I tested lacked. It’s easy to lose track of how many photos you’ve taken, especially when out for drinks or while sightseeing on vacation. Yet given each print costs about $1, it’s important to be mindful of how many shots you’ve got left.

Advertisement

All in all, the Instax Mini 12 is a basic camera that caters to all ages and experience levels and gets the job done — and done relatively well. It doesn’t feature Bluetooth or pair with a companion app that allows you to edit photos (only scan them), and it also doesn’t offer advanced features like filters, lens options, or portrait modes. But if you’re looking for an instant camera that offers a great traditional analog experience, this is it.

Best premium instant camera

The Instax Mini Evo being held up with a hand against a dark background with cameras that are out of focus.The Instax Mini Evo being held up with a hand against a dark background with cameras that are out of focus.

$234

The Good

  • Great use of dials and buttons
  • Lots of printing flexibility
  • Good battery life

The Bad

  • Internal storage is limited
  • Micro USB port is annoying
  • No viewfinder

Film type: Fujifilm Instax Mini film (sold separately) / Film size: 2 x 3-inches / Weight: 285 grams / Charging method: USB-C (on newer models) / Companion app: Yes / Other features: LCD screen, smartphone printing

One of Fujifilm’s newest instant cameras, the Instax Mini Evo, was a favorite of my former colleague Becca Farcase — and it’s mine as well. A hybrid camera that bears a resemblance to Fujifilm’s more expensive Fujifilm X100 line of cameras, it looks good and boasts vintage dials and buttons so stylish that they even caught the attention of passersby as I walked around Los Angeles taking photos. I tested the black camera, but Fujifilm also sells a brown version and limited edition models in silver and gold.

It’s easy to balk at its $216.95 price tag, but this camera offers a level of flexibility that could save you money in the long run if you use it a lot. That’s because the Instax Mini Evo includes a full-color three-inch LCD screen that lets you preview and select which images you want to print, which can help you avoid wasting film on unwanted shots. The added flexibility gave me more room for creative experimentation, too, as I wasn’t worried about running out of film. I also loved using the Instax Mini Evo app to print photos from my smartphone. Plus, unlike the Instax Mini 12, the Evo now uses a USB-C port (though older black models still use the Micro USB port) for charging, so you don’t need to keep buying new batteries.

The Instax Mini Evo resting on a table sideways with the large LCD screen and back mostly in view.

The Instax Mini Evo comes with a large LCD screen that doubles as a viewfinder and allows you to choose which photos to print.
Image: Becca Farsace / The Verge

Unlike Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 12, the Mini Evo comes with a few extra features that can help you capture better photos. For example, you can actually turn off the flash on the Mini Evo and use the three-inch LCD screen as a viewfinder. You can also use the menu to adjust how bright you want the film to look when it’s printed out, which was helpful given neither the Evo nor the Mini 12 are particularly great at capturing dark environments.

Advertisement

Additionally, there are dials you can use to apply various lens options and filters, ranging from retro to monochrome shades, as well as a mirror lens, vignette, soft focus, and more. You can take app-based remote shots, too, which adds an extra element of photographic control that can help you take better selfie shots than the selfie mirror in the front.

The Instax Mini Evo resting on a table surrounded by photos it’s produced.

Being able to adjust the brightness of the prints helped me capture night photos and a low-light immersive exhibit a little more clearly and realistically, which is a feature the Instax Mini 12 doesn’t offer.
Image: Sheena Vasani / The Verge

Of course, it’s not a perfect device, and there are some downsides to consider outside the price. For instance, although you can add some filters and make a few edits using Fujifilm’s companion app, it just isn’t as feature-rich as some of the apps available for the other digital and hybrid instant cameras I tested. The Evo’s extensive menu system isn’t particularly easy to navigate, either, and it took me some time to figure out how to turn the flash on and off. Plus, if you rely on internal storage solely, you can only take 45 images before the device is full. Still, all of these are minor issues, and I was very happy overall with how portable the stylish camera is, as well as how easy it is to take good photos quickly.

Read our Fujifilm Instax Mini Evo review.

The best instant camera for social occasions

$132

The Good

  • Lets you print photos from your phone
  • Entertaining companion app
  • Comes with film

The Bad

  • So-so image quality
  • Unable to store images
  • Not as stylish as the Instax Mini Evo

Film type: Kodak Instant Print 3 x 3-inch cartridge (included) / Film size: 3 x 3-inch square prints / Weight: 467 grams / Charging method: Micro USB / Companion app: Yes / Other features: LCD screen, smartphone printing

Whereas the Instax Mini Evo’s companion app is more functional, Kodak’s hybrid Mini Shot 3 Retro is all about fun. The camera’s accompanying mobile app allows you to apply frames, stickers, filters, and a plethora of customization options to photos, making the camera great for scrapbooking. There’s even a beauty feature within the app to conceal blemishes, as well as a set of Snapchat-like filters you can use to add, say, dog ears, making this a fun instant camera to use as a mini photo booth of sorts at parties.

The yellow and black Kodak Mini Shot 3 Retro being held up sideways with a hand and a bush as the background.

With its feature-rich app, Kodak’s Mini Shot 3 Retro is more modern than retro. It’s also a ton of fun.
Image: Sheena Vasani / The Verge

Like the Instax Mini Evo, Kodak’s Mini Shot 3 Retro comes with an LCD screen (albeit a much smaller one) you can use to decide whether or not you want to print a shot. It also supports Bluetooth, and you can use the Kodak Photo Printer app to upload photos to social media or print decent, relatively crisp photos from your smartphone. Unlike the Mini Evo, however, Kodak’s Mini Shot 3 Retro retails for around $170 and includes a pack of a film (it’s also often on sale for a lot less). It also uses cheaper film; you can currently pick up a 60-sheet cartridge for about $17.99, which equates to roughly $0.33 a shot. The fact that the film is cheaper arguably encourages play and creative experimentation, even if the large 3 x 3-inch square prints feel lower in quality and more flimsy than both Fujifilm’s and Polaroid’s.

Advertisement
Two photos produced by the Kodak Mini Shot 3 that are relatively true-to-life but too oversaturated with a pink tint.

Photos taken with the Kodak Mini Shot 3 aren’t particularly sharp and can have an excessive pink tint.
Image: Sheena Vasani / The Verge

However, there are notable drawbacks to the Kodak Mini Shot 3. My biggest issue is that the resulting prints of photos taken with the camera aren’t nearly as crisp or clear as those taken with a smartphone. Photo quality wasn’t consistently as good as the Mini Evo’s or Mini 12’s nor, for the most part, as clear and sharp. The photos also sometimes had an excessive pink tint that can interfere with quality. It doesn’t store images the way the Mini Evo does, either, which means you can’t decide whether you’d like to print them later. It’s also noticeably heavier than the Mini Evo and, frankly, nowhere near as stylish.

Nonetheless, if you don’t mind compromising on photo quality and want a relatively affordable hybrid camera with fun app features, the Kodak Mini Shot 3 Retro is a good choice.

The best instant camera for retro fans

$185

The Good

  • Attractive, retro design
  • Prints dreamy, vintage-style photos that are relatively sharp for a Polaroid photo
  • Several creative modes
  • USB-C

The Bad

  • Struggles in low light
  • Film takes up to 15 minutes to develop
  • Bulky and relatively heavy

Film type: Polaroid i-Type Color Film (sold separately) / Film size: 4.2 x 3.5-inch prints / Weight: 648 grams / Charging method: USB-C / Companion app: Yes / Other features: Flip-up lid, scene analysis feature

If you’re looking for an instant camera that offers the most old-fashioned, instant-film experience, the Polaroid Flip is the camera for you. It resembles vintage instant cameras like the Polaroid 600 more than any other camera on our list, thanks to its classic, retro-inspired design and flip-up lid. Its square I-Type film prints and iconic white frame give photos an authentically vintage look, while modern touches like Bluetooth, USB-C charging, and a beginner-friendly companion app add greater convenience and creative control.

Compared to the third-gen Polaroid Now Plus, my former retro pick, the Flip delivers clearer shots with fewer wasted photos, making the extra $50 worthwhile given that eight I-Type sheets are a spendy $16.99. The increased clarity can be attributed to several factors, including the Flip’s sonar autofocus and a four-lens hyperfocal system — which result in sharper, more focused images — along with its excellent flash. It’s the most powerful of any Polaroid camera, and while it can sometimes overexpose images, you can adjust exposure directly from the camera or app. The Scene Analysis feature also helps by warning if a shot is likely to be over- or underexposed, or if you’re too close to your subject. In my experience, the warnings didn’t always prevent overexposure, but they did leave me with shots that looked less blown than those from the Now Plus.

Advertisement

If there’s one thing the Polaroid Flip isn’t known for, it’s portability. Given it’s relatively heavy and awkwardly sized, it’s not the kind of instant camera you can easily slip into your purse or carry around. Additionally, it takes up to 15 minutes for prints to develop, and you must ensure they’re not exposed to light during this process. That’s quite an inconvenience if you’re out with friends, say, at the beach on a sunny day.

A few outdoor examples I captured with the Polaroid Flip.

A few outdoor examples I captured with the Polaroid Flip.
Image: Sheena Vasani / The Verge

Low-light performance is another weak spot. Although it does a better job than the Now Plus, I still struggled to capture crisp indoor shots. Even in daylight, both contrast and color saturation levels are lower in comparison to Instax film. Admittedly, this gave my pictures a more dreamy, vintage look that felt artistic, and you can use the Polaroid Lab to slightly adjust the saturation and exposure settings. However, doing so is time-consuming.

Truth be told, however, you could argue that many of these shortcomings are typical of a retro Polaroid-inspired instant camera and, thus, part of the experience. If that’s what you’re looking for, the Polaroid Flip is the perfect camera for you.

Despite its flip-up design, the Polaroid Flip is relatively bulky and not the easiest model to tote around.

Despite its flip-up design, the Polaroid Flip is relatively bulky and not the easiest model to tote around.

The best instant camera for portability

$76

The Good

  • Tiny and lightweight
  • Prints vintage-like photos just like the Polaroid Flip
  • USB-C charging

The Bad

  • Struggles in low light
  • Film takes up to 15 minutes to develop
  • No Bluetooth support or companion app

Film type: Polaroid i-Type Color Film (sold separately) / Film size: 2.6 x 2.1-inch prints / Weight: 239 grams / Charging method: USB-C / Companion app: No / Other features: Self-timer, selfie mirror, film counter

Whereas the Polaroid Flip is huge, the second-gen Polaroid Go is tiny. It easily fits into the palm of my hand — which is saying a lot, given I’m petite and a little over five feet tall — making it easily the most portable instant camera on our list. It also produces the smallest prints of all the instant cameras I tested, which could be nice if you’re trying to save some space and want something more compact than Instax Mini prints.

Advertisement

Weighing just over a pound, the latest Polaroid Go is also the lightest instant camera I’ve ever held, and you can easily use it with one hand. That’s actually pretty convenient, given I sometimes struggled to take pictures with the heavier Polaroid Flip and, to a lesser extent, some of the other instant cameras I tested. In fact, if the images produced looked more true-to-life and didn’t require you to hide them from light for about 15 minutes while developing, I’d be tempted to call this the best instant camera for travel or small children.

At $89.99, the latest Polaroid Go is the most affordable Polaroid camera on the market, even with its recent $10 price increase. Its film also costs just a little more than Fujifilm’s Instax Mini shots (or about $19.99 for a 16-sheet pack). The camera also sports a small number of upgrades over the last-gen model despite retailing for less. The most significant is USB-C support, which allows for faster charging and prevents you from having to spend money on AA batteries.

Polaroid also claims the camera produces clearer stills than its predecessor, but truthfully, I didn’t see a significant difference from one generation to the next. The photos are a little brighter, but if anything, the original Polaroid Go produced warmer pictures that I thought were truer to life. Still, the photos are charming in the way only a Polaroid photo can be. Contrast and color saturation levels are still low but in a way that exudes the vintage, almost dreamy look of the photos taken with the Flip.

The second-gen Polaroid Go produces charming photos but with a cooler tone.

The second-gen Polaroid Go produces charming photos but with a cooler tone.
Photo by Sheena Vasani / The Verge

Unlike the Flip, however, the Go lacks creative modes and more advanced features, although it does offer a helpful self-timer and a larger selfie mirror. There’s also no Bluetooth support and, thus, no fancy app that will allow you to add extra effects. Instead, it’s just a simple point-and-shoot camera, just like the Instax Mini 12, which makes it a little easier to use. In addition, as mentioned, the prints are smaller than those of the Instax Mini, which could be a drawback for those who prefer larger, more traditional Polaroid photos. While it produces similar vintage-style shots, design-wise, it doesn’t look anything like old-school Polaroid cameras, which could also take away from the retro experience some desire.

The Polaroid Go is easy to hold with one hand.

The Polaroid Go is easy to hold with one hand.
Photo by Sheena Vasani / The Verge

That said, none of the older Polaroid cameras came with an app, either. All in all, the Go’s simplicity makes it a suitable candidate for those seeking an easy-to-use camera that provides a more traditional instant film experience — one they can take advantage of just about anywhere for less than half the price of the Polaroid Flip.

Advertisement

Other instant cameras to consider

In April, Fujifilm announced the $116.95 Instax Mini 41, the long-awaited follow-up to the Mini 40. The updated model retains the retro design found on the prior model but introduces parallax correction, a feature borrowed from the Instax Mini 12 to help users avoid off-center shots when taking close-ups.

It didn’t take long testing the Mini 41 for me to realize it’s simply the Mini 12 for adults. With its black-and-silver body and flatter, squarer edges, the Mini 41 looks sleeker and more stylish. The two cameras are nearly identical, aside from the design, with the same solid photo quality and feature set. Both battery-powered options turn on with a simple twist of the lens, and each comes equipped with a selfie mirror, a close-up mode, and a flash (which cannot be disabled).

There are a few subtle upgrades to the Mini 41, however. A textured grip in the front makes it easier to hold, and its shape makes shooting in landscape mode more comfortable. But those are small differences, and at their core, the cameras offer the same experience. Since the Instax Mini 12 retails for less, I ultimately believe it’s the better value; however, if a fashionable, mature look appeals to you, the Mini 41 is a great alternative, especially if you can find it on sale.

If you’re looking for an advanced analog instant camera, Fujifilm’s Instax Mini 99 is one to consider. At $234.95, Fujifilm’s latest instant camera is not as affordable as the Instax Mini 12 or the Mini 41, but it’s certainly a step up from the one-button point-and-click cameras given it has multiple brightness settings, focus zones, color effects, and even two shutter buttons for greater creative control. The camera even comes with a tripod socket and an aluminum extension column, as well as a Sports Mode designed to further reduce blur while capturing fast-moving subjects.

Advertisement

Thanks to the added level of customization, I was able to capture higher-quality photos that looked truer to life than those from the Instax Mini 12, Mini 41, and Mini Evo. Granted, the Mini 99 is an analog camera and not a hybrid like the Evo, meaning you shouldn’t buy it if you also want to print smartphone photos. The newer model is also less user-friendly than the Mini 12 and Mini 41, so I wouldn’t recommend it for young children. Still, for an advanced analog instant camera, it’s relatively easy to set up and use, rendering it as much fun for budding photographers as more experienced shooters.

The Kodak Smile Plus is another hybrid instant camera that allows you to print smartphone photos. It’s smaller and less expensive than Kodak’s Mini Shot 3 Retro 3 at $129.99, and it’s available in a variety of vibrant colors that should appeal to children. It also comes with a physical filter-changing lens and prints on Zinc paper, allowing you to use your photos as stickers.

However, it lacks a built-in display, so you can’t choose which images you want to print directly on the camera itself. This often results in more wasted shots, especially since image quality is so-so at best, even when compared to those of the Retro 3. Photos are nowhere near as clear as the Instax Mini 12’s, either, especially in areas that are either too bright or too dark.

That being said, the Smile Plus does offer a microSD card slot, so you can store and view photos elsewhere. It pairs with an app that’s similar to the Retro 3’s as well, and although the software is not as snappy or feature-rich, it still allows you to add a variety of filters and frames. Ultimately, I’d recommend the Retro 3 since it can often be found for less than $120, but the Smile Plus is a good, budget-friendly alternative.

From photo quality to the lever you pull to print photos, Leica’s Sofort 2 is a terrific camera that’s remarkably similar to the Instax Mini Evo. In all of my tests, the photos I took with both looked identical. The two hybrid cameras also print smartphone photos via Instax Mini film and offer 10 film and lens effects, along with a macro mode for those who want more creative control. The Sofort 2’s minimalistic look is stylish, too, even if it’s not as charming as the retro-inspired Evo.

Advertisement

The drawback to the Sofort 2 is that it’s twice the price of the Evo. It’s challenging to recommend at $399, as most people would likely consider the differences between the two cameras relatively minor. The user interface is easier to navigate on the Leica, though, and I appreciate the included lens cap and extended two-year warranty. I also appreciate that it allows you to print photos taken with other Leica cameras via the companion app — a nice perk for Leica fans. Nonetheless, I don’t think those perks are enough to justify spending nearly $200 more.

While it didn’t make the cut, the Instax Square SQ1 is also worth a brief mention. Like the Mini 12, the Square SQ1 produces good-quality shots, is easy to set up and use, and features a built-in selfie mirror. The reason we didn’t include it above, however, is that it costs nearly twice as much as the Mini 12 at $159.95, though we do sometimes see it on sale for $100.

That said, it might be worth a look if you prefer large 2.4 x 2.4-inch square prints and relatively true-to-life photos over vintage-looking stills. After all, the SQ1 is still cheaper than the Polaroid Flip and produces higher-quality images than the Kodak Mini Shot 3 Square Retro, which also prints similarly sized square shots.

Fujifilm also sells the newer Instax Square SQ40. It’s similar to the Instax Square SQ1 but with a vintage look that’s more visually striking, yet it’s also more expensive at $199.95. Given it produces similarly good-quality photos, I’d recommend the Instax Square SQ1 or the more capable Instax Mini Evo for $50 more.

Fujifilm’s Instax Wide Evo Hybrid is nearly identical to the Instax Mini Evo. You can use it to print photos directly from your smartphone, though the $409.95 camera also comes with a 15.67mm lens — the widest used on any Instax camera — for taking wide-format pictures.

Advertisement

Ultimately, I preferred the smaller, more travel-friendly Mini Evo, but if you’re into wide prints (and don’t mind spending twice as much), the Wide Evo Hybrid is rather fun. The photo quality is solid and on par with both the Instax Mini Evo and Instax Mini 12. The main difference is that the Wide Evo’s lens captures a broader field of view. It also offers a few additional lenses and film effects, giving users a bit more creative control. I especially liked the Degree Control feature, which lets you fine-tune the intensity of each lens effect applied to your image.

Plus, unlike the Wide 400, the Wide Evo Hybrid is a hybrid camera equipped with an LCD screen — a helpful feature that can reduce wasted shots. However, at $409.95, it costs significantly more than both the Mini Evo and the Wide 400. My other main complaint is that there’s a slight delay between pressing the shutter and the photo being taken — something I didn’t notice with the Mini Evo. It’s not a dealbreaker, but it can be frustrating when trying to capture fast-moving subjects, such as a dog or hyperactive toddler.

If you’re into wide-format instant cameras but don’t want to spend $409.95 — or prefer a more traditional analog experience — the $175.95 Instax Wide 400 is a solid pick. The basic point-and-shoot produces similar photos to the Wide Evo, and in some ways, it’s easier to use, thanks to its stripped-down feature set. That simplicity, however, comes at the cost of customization, making it harder to capture the perfect shot. It also swaps an LCD display for a large viewfinder and is noticeably heavier than the Instax Mini Evo. Nonetheless, if you’re after wide prints at a more affordable price, it’s a worthwhile option.

I’m currently having a lot of fun testing Fujifilm’s new Instax Mini LiPlay Plus. Like most of Fujifilm’s instant cameras, it’s extremely easy to use and produces relatively true-to-life photos. The $234.99 hybrid camera also features a 3-inch LCD screen on the back, along with a second, rear-facing wide-angle lens designed specifically for selfies. This dedicated selfie camera, combined with the LCD screen, results in some of the best — and most precise — selfies I’ve captured with an instant camera to date.

It has a few other standout features as well. The new layered photo mode lets you combine images from both cameras into a single shot. I’m still testing it, but so far it feels a bit gimmicky, essentially placing a selfie in front of a background image with no way to reposition or resize it, which limits its appeal. The camera can also record short audio clips, with a dedicated button near the screen that makes it easy to use. I haven’t yet had a chance to use that feature meaningfully, but I’ll share more thoughts once I’ve spent some more time with it.

Advertisement

Update, December 12th: Updated to reflect current pricing / availability and mentioned my thoughts regarding the new Instax Mini LiPlus.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

Continue Reading

Trending