Key Factors
Significant differences in image quality and shooting features
The HERO (2018) is limited to Full HD, with much lower performance.
Major differences in body features
HERO13 Black has significant advancements such as a magnetic mount, charging port, and front display.
Size and weight
The HERO (2018) is smaller and lighter.
Significant Differences in Shooting Quality and Features
The HERO13 Black and the HERO (2018) are fundamentally different in terms of shooting performance and features.
In shooting performance, the HERO13 Black supports up to 5.3K/60fps, whereas the HERO (2018) is limited to Full HD/60fps, making it significantly inferior. This is not just a difference in frame rate; the HERO (2018) simply does not support resolutions beyond Full HD.
Regarding shooting features, the HERO (2018) offers only basic stabilization, while the HERO13 Black comes with HyperSmooth 6.0, providing a vastly superior stabilization experience.
Additionally, the HERO13 Black includes:
- 10-bit Color (GP-log)
- Live Streaming
- Loop Recording
These features are absent in the HERO (2018).
Major Differences in Body Features
The GoPro HERO13 Black introduced a substantial redesign since the HERO9 series, including:
- Replaceable Lenses
- Magnetic Charging Ports and Mounts
On the other hand, the HERO (2018) features:
- A Monochrome Front Display
- No Built-in Mount on the Body
HERO (2018) Is Smaller and Lighter, But...
The HERO (2018) is smaller and lighter than the HERO13 Black, making it more portable. However, this comes at the cost of significantly reduced performance and features. The HERO13 Black is larger and heavier because it packs advanced shooting capabilities.
If you’re looking for a compact and lightweight GoPro, consider the modern HERO (2024). It supports 4K recording, includes a built-in mount, and offers significant upgrades over the HERO (2018).
While the HERO13 Black outperforms both models in every aspect, the HERO (2024) represents a balanced option for those upgrading from the HERO (2018) on a budget. It reflects a “6-year gap” in performance improvements while being more affordable.
