DJI Avata 360 loses FPV shootout to Avata 2 in back-to-back flight test

YouTuber Jeven Dovey flew the DJI Avata 360 and DJI Avata 2 back to back on the same flight paths and came away with a blunt verdict: the newer, more expensive drone flies worse as an FPV platform. His side-by-side comparison video tested both drones in single lens mode at 4K/60fps, running multiple passes with matched color profiles and exposure settings to isolate the differences in flight handling and image quality. For pilots trying to decide between DJI’s two Avata drones, the results challenge the assumption that newer automatically means better.

Dovey, a Los Angeles-based adventure filmmaker with over one million YouTube subscribers, locked white balance on both drones and flew the same trail and baseball field paths with each one using the motion controller and FPV goggles. His first comparison used different color profiles (D-Log M on the Avata 360, standard color on the Avata 2), but he then reshot both in D-Log M with identical color grading to make the comparison fair.

Avata 360 obstacle avoidance created stuttering footage

The Avata 360’s omnidirectional obstacle avoidance system, which combines LiDAR and infrared sensors, caused repeated problems during FPV flight. Dovey reported that the drone would stop or stutter when approaching trees and other objects, even when nothing was directly in its path. The resulting footage showed visible speed fluctuations that RockSteady stabilization could smooth but not eliminate.

After multiple runs, Dovey turned off obstacle avoidance entirely. The stuttering stopped, but a new problem appeared: he crashed into a tree. When he recovered and continued flying without the safety system, the Avata 360 still felt less responsive than the Avata 2. He described the controls as sluggish, with a noticeable delay between stick input and drone response.

This is worth paying attention to. The Avata 360’s obstacle avoidance is one of its headline features over the Avata 2, which has no obstacle avoidance at all. If pilots have to disable it to get usable FPV footage, that advantage disappears.

The Avata 2 felt sharper and more confident in the air

Dovey’s most striking observation was the difference in handling between the two drones. After flying the Avata 360, he switched to the Avata 2 and immediately noticed what he called a “night and day difference” in responsiveness. He described feeling more confident, pulling off dives, altitude changes, and close passes through trees without hesitation.

The numbers help explain why. The Avata 360 weighs 455 grams (16 oz), while the Avata 2 comes in at 377 grams (13.3 oz). That 78-gram difference, roughly 20% heavier, translates directly into how the drone responds to the motion controller. Dovey said the Avata 360 felt heavier in flight, with movements that were less sharp and harder to control precisely. The Avata 2, by contrast, responded immediately to wrist movements.

He crashed the Avata 360 twice during the session. Both times, the propeller guards protected the camera lenses, and the drone kept flying with only cosmetic scratches on the underside. That durability held up, though the crashes themselves pointed to the handling gap between the two drones.

Camera quality comparison in single lens mode

Both drones were flown at 4K/60fps in D-Log M with matched white balance and auto exposure. In this configuration, the Avata 360 uses its 1/1.1-inch sensor in single lens mode, where one camera rotates forward to shoot traditional FPV-style footage. The Avata 2 uses its 1/1.3-inch sensor with a 155-degree field of view.

Dovey left the image quality judgment to his viewers rather than declaring a winner, noting that both drones shot at the widest field of view setting. The Avata 360’s larger sensor should produce better dynamic range and low-light performance on paper, but the comparison was limited to well-lit outdoor conditions where the difference is harder to see. He also tested both drones with HorizonSteady mode, which locks the horizon by cropping into the footage, and showed the results side by side.

Battery life gap matters more during aggressive FPV flying

Both drones are rated at 23 minutes of flight time on paper. In practice, Dovey found the Avata 360’s battery drained faster during FPV-style flying, giving him roughly 15 minutes per charge. The Avata 2 lasted closer to 20 minutes under similar conditions. He pointed to this as a real frustration, noting that DJI went backwards on effective flight time compared to the previous generation when flown aggressively.

The Avata 360 uses a 38.67 Wh battery to power its heavier airframe and dual-sensor camera system. The Avata 2 runs on a 30.67 Wh pack that has less total capacity but serves a lighter, less power-hungry drone.

The 360-degree mode remains the Avata 360’s real advantage

Dovey acknowledged that his entire test was focused on single lens FPV flying, which is only half of what the Avata 360 can do. The drone’s 360-degree mode, where both 1/1.1-inch sensors capture an 8K spherical image for reframing in post-production, is the feature that separates it from every other drone in DJI’s lineup. He directed viewers to his other videos covering the 360 capabilities, including a comparison with the DJI Mini 5 Pro.

The Avata 360 can also be flown with the standard RC 2 controller and supports ActiveTrack 360° for automated subject tracking. The Avata 2 has neither of these features. For creators who want both 360 reframing and traditional FPV in one drone, the Avata 360 remains the only DJI option.

DroneXL’s Take

Dovey’s findings line up with what I’ve been hearing from other testers since the Avata 360 launched on March 26. When we published our firmware update coverage last week, the obstacle avoidance behavior in FPV mode was already a recurring complaint. The April firmware improved several things, but it did not fix the stuttering that Dovey documents here.

I think DJI built the Avata 360 as a 360-degree content creation tool first and an FPV drone second. That ordering of priorities shows in the weight, the power draw, and the way the obstacle avoidance system fights against the kind of close-proximity, fast-reaction flying that made the Avata line popular. The Avata 2 was designed from the ground up as an FPV drone, and it handles like one.

The question for buyers is straightforward. If you want FPV flying as your primary use case, the Avata 2 is the better drone today. If you want 360 reframing with FPV as a secondary option, the Avata 360 earns its price. Expecting the Avata 360 to replace the Avata 2 for pure FPV work will lead to the same frustration Dovey shows on camera. I expect DJI will continue refining the obstacle avoidance behavior through firmware updates over the next two to three months, but the weight and responsiveness gap is hardware, and firmware cannot fix physics.

DroneXL uses automated tools to support research and source retrieval. All reporting and editorial perspectives are by Haye Kesteloo.