AI video models compared
Wan 2.2 (image to video) vs Kling 2.5 — Image to Video
Both animate a still image, and the split is speed against control. Kling 2.5 is faster and handles broad cinematic motion well. Wan 2.2 is slower — around two minutes for five seconds — but is an open model that stays closer to the frame you supply, which matters when the source image is the point.
Use Wan when the still is something you made deliberately and the video must not reinterpret it. Use Kling when you want motion that feels directed and you are willing to let the model take more liberties with the scene. Wan is also restricted to 5 or 8 second clips, while Kling takes 5 or 10.
Choose Wan 2.2 (image to video) if
- The supplied frame must be preserved closely
- You want an open model rather than a closed one
- Five or eight seconds is enough
Choose Kling 2.5 — Image to Video if
- You want the render finished quickly
- Broad cinematic motion matters more than frame fidelity
- You need a ten second clip
Side by side
| Wan 2.2 (image to video) | Kling 2.5 — Image to Video | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | 586 credits per second | 586 credits per second |
| Roughly | about 54c per second | about 54c per second |
| Provider | fal | fal |
| Aspect ratios | 3 — 16:9, 9:16, 1:1 | 3 — 16:9, 9:16, 1:1 |
| Durations | 5s, 8s | 5s, 10s |
| LoRA support | No | No |
| Modes | generate | generate |
Specifications are measured against each endpoint, not copied from a vendor page. Cash figures are approximate at starter-pack rates — see pricing. Highlighted rows are where the two models differ.
Try either one
Open Wan 2.2 (image to video)Open Kling 2.5 — Image to Video
New accounts start with free credits, and credits never expire. Read more about Wan 2.2 (image to video) or Kling 2.5 — Image to Video, or see every model on comfyarts.