Runcam Thumb Pro Wide vs Old Version Review Budget GoPro Alternative? X-View Mode FPV Action Cam

Review and Comparison: Runcam Thumb Pro 4K Wide vs. Previous Versions

Today, we’ll be diving into a detailed review of the Runcam Thumb Pro 4K Wide version. The "Wide Field of View" (FOV) version aims to address some of the limitations of its predecessor, the Runcam Thumb Pro 4K. However, they decided to name it differently and discontinued the older version, which didn’t really have that wide of an angle, especially after processing through Gyroflow for stabilization. This often led to footage being either too focused on the ground or the sky, making the narrower FOV version harder to work with.

Today, we’ll be comparing the new wide version against the not-so-wide predecessor and see how they stack up in terms of performance.

Runcam Thumb Pro Wide vs gopro

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8hYxrfHOwY

Unboxing the Runcam Thumb Pro 4K Wide

At first glance, the new wide version looks very similar to its predecessor. However, if you take a closer look, the new version is slightly shorter—about one or two millimeters. The back connector remains identical, but the motherboard design has been altered slightly, with some components and screws moved to new locations. So while the general look and feel are similar, this is not just a simple rehash of the old model.

Another key difference lies in the lens. The newer wide version has a bigger front element, making the protective lens cover different. Unfortunately, you can't just swap out the protective lens cover from the older version as they won’t fit. That said, the ND filter might still work between both versions, as the mount remains the same.

Firmware and Image Quality Test

Both cameras, the new wide version and the older version, were updated to the latest firmware before testing. During setup, I noticed a new feature in the app—a mysterious 4K X-View mode. We’ll test that out later, but for now, we’re focusing on stock, out-of-the-box image quality.

Field of View and Stabilization

Looking at the footage, even without image stabilization, it’s clear that the new wide version offers a noticeably wider field of view. When you stabilize both versions in post, the difference becomes even more pronounced, making the new wide version much more usable for most shots.

Additionally, while shooting side-by-side, I noticed that the minimum focusing distance on the new version is longer. If you’re holding the camera close to your face (say 20 cm), the old version focuses better. However, the new wide version performs best when the subject is about 1 meter away. Another key observation is the noise patterns—the old version has more color noise (reds and blues), while the new version produces more monochrome noise, likely due to a higher ISO.

What’s X-View?

Let’s talk about the X-View mode. This setting records the video in a 4:3 aspect ratio and squeezes it into 16:9, providing extra room at the top and bottom of the frame. It’s similar to GoPro’s SuperView, allowing for more flexibility in post-production stabilization and framing. So if you’re familiar with GoPro’s Real Steady workflow, this feature will feel familiar.

Color and Image Quality Comparison

When it comes to color, the new wide version delivers more natural-looking footage. However, it’s not perfect—the shadow areas sometimes show a magenta tint, while the old version struggled to reproduce the same dynamic range, particularly in low-light conditions. In terms of sharpness, the wide version applies a bit more processing, making the footage look more digital even with sharpness set to the lowest level.

While GoPro footage tends to be smoother and softer, giving you more room to sharpen in post, the Runcam Thumb Pro wide version outputs footage that’s a bit over-sharpened straight out of the camera. You might need to do some additional post-processing to soften things up.

Lens Flare, Exposure, and Noise Performance

Lens flare is a weak point on both Runcam models, but the wide version fares slightly better than the old one. However, neither can compete with GoPro, which manages flare much more gracefully. Exposure transitions are another area where GoPro excels—the GoPro’s exposure adjustments are much smoother and more gradual, while the Runcam changes exposure too quickly, often resulting in abrupt shifts.

At higher ISOs, noise becomes more noticeable. The wide version tends to show blocky noise, likely due to aggressive sharpness processing, whereas the old version has smoother, more tolerable noise.

Final Thoughts on Dynamic Range and Pricing

When it comes to dynamic range, both Runcam models are decent but don’t offer the same flexibility as a GoPro. The Runcam Thumb Pro cameras struggle with highlights and shadows, meaning there’s less room to pull back lost details in post. GoPro, on the other hand, offers significantly more range, making it easier to recover highlights and boost shadows.

However, the Runcam Thumb Pro 4K Wide version is still impressive, especially considering its incredibly low price point of just $99. For such a low-cost action camera, it comes remarkably close to the GoPro's performance, which is priced at $300. If you’re in the market for a budget-friendly crash cam, the Runcam Thumb Pro Wide offers an exceptional field of view and usable footage, but if you prioritize image quality and build, the GoPro is still the top choice.

Runcam Thumb Pro Wide vs gopro