# Sticky  10 Things to Consider When Shopping for a Projector



## Orbitron

I would add #11, find a good dealer, they have the training and expertise to produce a wonderful result. Having watched Scott's HTG, i became familiar with John Schuermann of The Screening Room. Thank you Scott and thank you John.


----------



## GregoryV

What a great article! Thank you. This article could have saved me hundreds of reading hours on AVS. Projector lag spec is worthy of mentioning for anyone online gaming via projector.


----------



## darthray

Thanks for this great piece of writing.


Very informative and still easy to follow


Ray


----------



## MarvinTheMartian

Beware the ultra zooms : far away dim, close in a bit brighter.

Glass optics are expensive, coming from the DSLR Nikon Cannon world.
You can buy an inexpensive 70-200mm lens for $300 or a semi-pro for $2000.
The semi-pro beats the consumer version in brightness, edge to edge clarity and detail.

A single purpose 200mm only prime lens absolutely smokes the either of the zooms.
Bright and sharp corner to corner, but it's going to cost you $5000 !

The latest Benq HT5060 DLP is setting a trend and offering multiple lens options at a reasonable price.
Shawn


----------



## MDJAK

Excellent and well written article. As I consider moving to a projector, perfect timing also. I look forward to an article on screens.


----------



## imagic

MarvinTheMartian said:


> Beware the ultra zooms : far away dim, close in a bit brighter.
> 
> Glass optics are expensive, coming from the DSLR Nikon Cannon world.
> You can buy an inexpensive 70-200mm lens for $300 or a semi-pro for $2000.
> The semi-pro beats the consumer version in brightness, edge to edge clarity and detail.
> 
> A single purpose 200mm only prime lens absolutely smokes the either of the zooms.
> Bright and sharp corner to corner, but it's going to cost you $5000 !
> 
> The latest *Benq HT5060 DLP* is setting a trend and offering multiple lens options at a reasonable price.
> Shawn


It's the Benq HT6050 DLP, and I have one in for review with two of the lenses (short-throw and standard zoom), so far it's been phenomenal to watch movies on.


----------



## imagic

johnvnross said:


> Hi Scott. Love your weekly podcasts, I've watched _everyone_ in fact.
> 
> I'm interested in why you think HDR10 is a 'standard'?; particularly given your Stacey Spears conversations in episode 316.
> 
> I thought 'HDR10' is a non official nomenclature used to describe a disparate set of, per manufacture,algorithms attempting to replicate actual standards: st2084 etc, rather than paying Dolby a royality?
> 
> What have I missed?
> 
> Best wishes


Lemme jump in for a second... what you missed is an opportunity to not quote the entire OP. Please don't do that.

As for HDR10 vs. Dolby Vision... DV is no more a standard than HDR10 is. Indeed, it could be viewed as less of a standard because HDR10 is required for Ultra HD Blu-ray, and is offered by all the streaming services. So far, Dolby Vision has not appeared on UHD-BD. Then there's the small issue of two top TV makers (including the world's #1 TV maker) not supporting Dolby Vision—it'll be interesting to see if that changes at CES 2017.

Scott likely has a better answer than I, but at the end of the day what matters to me (in terms of whether or not to consider it a standard) is that HDR10 works on all HDR TVs (now that Vizio supports it) and is required on Ultra HD Blu-ray. That's enough to make it an actual standard, IMO.


----------



## Cal68

Has 3-D completely disappeared from projectors or do some manufacturers still offer it?

Great article Scott. Very valuable reading for anyone thinking of buying a projector.


----------



## imagic

Cal68 said:


> Has 3-D completely disappeared from projectors or do some manufacturers still offer it?
> 
> Great article Scott. Very valuable reading for anyone thinking of buying a projector.


3D is still available on many projectors, even inexpensive models offer it. I recently watched Pacific Rim on a BenQ 1085ST and it looked great. Sin City 2 on the BenQ HT6050 looked unbelievable.


----------



## jholzbauer

GregoryV said:


> What a great article! Thank you. This article could have saved me hundreds of reading hours on AVS. Projector lag spec is worthy of mentioning for anyone online gaming via projector.




Nice summary! Definitely agree with this statement as input lag is a big factor for many of us who also use our projectors for gaming.


----------



## johnvnross

imagic said:


> Lemme jump in for a second... what you missed is an opportunity to not quote the entire OP. Please don't do that. [oops]
> 
> As for HDR10 vs. Dolby Vision... DV is no more a standard than HDR10 is. Other than it's adherence to ST.2084 - and it's 10 years of tone mapping research equalling per frame dynamic meta data, which means it's proscriptive - and thus more of a known quantity for the purchaser - and NOT per manufacture baked in - and thus inconsistent for the purchaser.
> 
> (Indeed, it could be viewed as less of a standard because HDR10 is required for Ultra HD Blu-ray,
> 
> and is offered by all the streaming services. There's a good reason that dolby vision is being used in cinemas and not 'HDR 10'.
> 
> 
> So far, Dolby Vision has not appeared on UHD-BD. [as manufactures are not interested in dolby vision disks that are baked in at 10000 nits and can adjust down to fit your TV's dynamic range, which means as you buy brighter TV's the disks would actually improve! - They are much more interested in a consumer buying a 1000 nit HDR disk and then a 2000 nit HDR disk, and then a 3000 nit etc of the same film. Disappointing blatant doubling/treble dipping there Mark.]
> 
> Then there's the small issue of two top TV makers (including the world's #1 TV maker) not supporting Dolby Vision—it'll be interesting to see if that changes at CES 2017. [When purchasers refuse to buy into HDR10 and demand DV they'll change their tune.]
> 
> Scott likely has a better answer than I, but at the end of the day what matters to me (in terms of whether or not to consider it a standard) is that HDR10 works on all HDR TVs [it works variably across these sets - again episode 216 for the limitations of HDR10] (now that Vizio supports it) and is required on Ultra HD Blu-ray. That's enough to make it an actual standard, IMO.


I can certainly see that it is in the interest of manufacturers to support a consumers view, that they are buying a quality product for their premium dollar; rather than it's cowboy country out there with each manufacturer / film company making it up as they go along. (Again the variability in the construction of HDR10 disks (in episode 216) is striking. Consumers are being hood winked here.

On a different note - nice cr100/cr250 in your picture - envious!


----------



## sage11x

BenQ 4050 is def not $2000. I know projector central says the MSRP is $2k but it never sold anywhere near that price and even BenQ has it listed at $1400.




I might have added a category for sub $1k projectors. I know a lot of enthusiasts scoff at that price point but projectors like the BenQ 2050 and Epson 2040 have really solid picture quality and are fantastic alternatives to a flat screen television that virtually anyone can afford. I employ a BenQ 2050 myself and came to that decision even after 'auditioning' several more expensive alternatives.


----------



## imagic

sage11x said:


> BenQ 4050 is def not $2000. I know projector central says the MSRP is $2k but it never sold anywhere near that price and even BenQ has it listed at $1400.
> 
> I might have added a category for sub $1k projectors. I know a lot of enthusiasts scoff at that price point but projectors like the BenQ 2050 and Epson 2040 have really solid picture quality and are fantastic alternatives to a flat screen television that virtually anyone can afford. I employ a BenQ 2050 myself and came to that decision even after 'auditioning' several more expensive alternatives.


Totally, I own the 1085ST and use it all the time. Image quality is shockingly good for the money.


----------



## Cal68

imagic said:


> 3D is still available on many projectors, even inexpensive models offer it. I recently watched Pacific Rim on a BenQ 1085ST and it looked great. Sin City 2 on the BenQ HT6050 looked unbelievably great.


Great, thanks Mark. I'm glad to hear that 3D is not yet dead when it comes to projectors. When the time comes to replace my trusty old JVC RS20, I'd really like to get a replacement that does both "true" 4K and 3D so that I can watch the ten or so 3D movies that I have in my collection.


----------



## Scott Wilkinson

sage11x said:


> BenQ 4050 is def not $2000. I know projector central says the MSRP is $2k but it never sold anywhere near that price and even BenQ has it listed at $1400.
> 
> I might have added a category for sub $1k projectors. I know a lot of enthusiasts scoff at that price point but projectors like the BenQ 2050 and Epson 2040 have really solid picture quality and are fantastic alternatives to a flat screen television that virtually anyone can afford. I employ a BenQ 2050 myself and came to that decision even after 'auditioning' several more expensive alternatives.


I certainly understand that many projectors (and other AV products) sell for much less than their list price/MSRP, which is why I stated that caveat in the OP. Regarding sub-$1000 projectors, in my experience, few if any provide horizontal and vertical lens-shift controls, which is why I didn't include them. IMO, these are very important for most installations. Of course, that doesn't mean they don't produce a good image, but if many/most buyers can't place them in exactly the right spot, their picture quality is moot. The Epson 2040 has no lens shift, while the BenQ 2050 has vertical lens shift only, and it's only +/-2.5%, which isn't much.


----------



## sage11x

Scott Wilkinson said:


> I certainly understand that many projectors (and other AV products) sell for much less than their list price/MSRP, which is why I stated that caveat in the OP. Regarding sub-$1000 projectors, in my experience, few if any provide horizontal and vertical lens-shift controls, which is why I didn't include them. IMO, these are very important for most installations. Of course, that doesn't mean they don't produce a good image, but if many/most buyers can't place them in exactly the right spot, their picture quality is moot. The Epson 2040 has no lens shift, while the BenQ 2050 has vertical lens shift only, and it's only +/-2.5%, which isn't much.


Oh-- the mention about the price of the BenQ 4050 wasn't meant as a critique. I know it was originally listed at $1999 but I have no idea why as BenQ clearly never intended to sell it for that price. Most MSRP are at least accurate for a period of time no matter how short that period might be.


As for my suggestion: fair enough. Although I will say that I was a complete projector noob less than a year ago and managed to research, buy, mount and square my BenQ 2050 without any trouble. Prior to the holidays I was eye balling 70" LCDs and wondering how to afford such a beast and, perhaps more importantly, how I would put up with the myriad of issues I have with LCD picture quality (I've long been a plasma fan). Purchasing a projector had never really occurred to me as cost and setup seemed insurmountable obstacles in my mind. After all, I wasn't building a dedicated theater. Then I read a rather old article at CNET that talked about projectors as a TV replacement and suddenly: inception.


The reason I mention this is: I consider myself a movie/video-game/HT nerd and I STILL never considered a projector. I've spent my hard earned money on the best plasmas and fancy surround sound systems to enhance my movie experience and I STILL never considered a projector. I've been a member on this forum for years and I STILL never considered a projector... and I'm 100% positive I'm not the only one.


As I said before, there is a stigma around projectors that they are expensive and difficult. That they're only suited for a dedicated theater and the truly dedicated HT aficionado. What I discovered is that this couldn't be farther from the truth. Projectors have reached a price and performance threshold that now anyone can enjoy a big screen experience at home. My BenQ projector cost less than HALF what my 55" plasma cost just a few years ago. My projector plus screen and surround sound system cost less than a comparable quality flatscreen would cost today. 


I guess what I'm trying to say is that I see value in not just preaching to the converted but also in reaching out to those that have only a passing interest in this stuff. So many people that have been over to my place to watch a movie or a game remark afterwards that they would love to have something similar. When I tell them that the cost and setup is well within their reach I see the wheels start to turn. This is a hobby for the dedicated, yes, but I also see it as a hobby that more people could and should be a part of if they weren't scared off by all the presumed obstacles we the converted inadvertently toss up-- whether it be high dollar displays or complex multichannel surround setups. 


Anyways. Off my soapbox now. Lol!


----------



## GalvatronType_R

One more thing to add: if you are a big video gamer, consider input lag. Even if you are not a gamer, high input lag can also produce lip sync issues on TV and movies.

Generally JVC's projectors have horrifically high input lag (in the range of 120ms or higher; I can testify to this in that I've played games on a few JVC projectors and the input lag is atrocious, vis a vis, Mario does not jump immediately after pressing the jump button). 

Generally, Sony projectors have low input lag (considering that the majority of their overall business relies on selling Playstaton consoles, this is not surprising).


----------



## Turbonetix

Thanks for the write up. I used this article for a lot of my decision making for my theater design.


----------



## sddp

Scott Wilkinson said:


> *9. Pay for Calibration?*
> 
> - A professional calibration can cost several hundred dollars, so if your projector cost less than $1000, it's not worth it. Simply adjust the basic user controls using something like Disney's WOW disc, and the projector will look as good as it can without a pro calibration—which is often pretty darned good. For more on how to do this, click here.
> 
> - If the projector is over $1000, a pro calibration is more worthwhile, because it occupies less of the total budget.
> 
> - I'm a big advocate of viewing content as the creator intended, so a full calibration is important to me.




I just bought the Epson 5040UBE and wanted to know for calibration, which disc would be better:


1) Disney World of Wonder (WOW) 
2) Spears & Munsil’s HD Benchmark
3) Joe Kane’s Digital Video Essentials


----------



## Dave in Green

Scott Wilkinson said:


> ... Regarding sub-$1000 projectors, in my experience, few if any provide horizontal and vertical lens-shift controls, which is why I didn't include them. IMO, these are very important for most installations. Of course, that doesn't mean they don't produce a good image, but if many/most buyers can't place them in exactly the right spot, their picture quality is moot. ...


Scott, thank you! This thread will save me a lot of typing when I try to help those new to front projection seeking advice. But a large percentage of those seeking recommendations in the Under $3,000 forum are asking for sub-$1,000 options, which eliminates all models with substantial lens shift. I think it's important not to ignore their needs and that adding a few of the best sub-$1,000 models to the first post would make AVS Forum appear more friendly to those who lack the budgets for higher-priced models with lens shift.

Whenever I'm suggesting projectors without lens shift to those seeking advice, I always point out that they can compensate for lack of lens shift by getting a fully adjustable mount that allows the projector to be shifted in all directions.


----------



## imagic

Dave in Green said:


> Scott, thank you! This thread will save me a lot of typing when I try to help those new to front projection seeking advice. But a large percentage of those seeking recommendations in the Under $3,000 forum are asking for sub-$1,000 options, which eliminates all models with substantial lens shift. I think it's important not to ignore their needs and that adding a few of the best sub-$1,000 models to the first post would make AVS Forum appear more friendly to those who lack the budgets for higher-priced models with lens shift.
> 
> Whenever I'm suggesting projectors without lens shift to those seeking advice, *I always point out that they can compensate for lack of lens shift by getting a fully adjustable mount that allows the projector to be shifted in all directions*.


Agreed, if you can account for the lack of lens shift when installing it's basically a non-issue since you can get an adjustable mount. With single-chip DLP there are lots of great options that require some foresight to match up with the screen, I've done it many times at this point. I also gotta give a shout out to BenQ here, the company makes excellent image quality very affordable.


----------



## Superjo

*Heat*

11. Heat - assuming the shopper knows nothing. These put out a lot of heat, like a hairdryer. In a small room on a hot day a projector is unusable for long periods - free heating in the winter though! I don't suppose they give heat output stats, or that they can do much about it, anyway.
I was hoping the super-hot bulb lamps would've been replaced by cool CoB LED lamps by now - why not!? They last years too.

Also, my Panasonic PTAX200 is only 720p but still gives a great image that real people are in awe of. It has the lens adjusting joystick too (although I don't need to use it - don't these slightly affect the image's perspective though, if you want to be an excessive 'visualphile' about imperceivable things?). It is 10 years old and was probably under $1k then, so to not list everyday people's


----------



## Dave in Green

Superjo said:


> 11. Heat - assuming the shopper knows nothing. These put out a lot of heat, like a hairdryer. ...


The amount of heat a device produces is related to the number of watts it consumes. Hairdryers typically draw a maximum 1,500W-2,000W while projectors typically draw a maximum 250W-350W.

For more perspective, I also currently have a Panasonic PT-AX200U, which is rated at a maximum 290W, and my 60" plasma is rated at a maximum 296W. Both exhaust a relatively small amount of warm air and neither causes any heat problem for me. Even the new supposedly energy efficient OLED TVs have been measured at more than 200W. Most of the watts consumed by all of these devices are converted into heat.

But this is probably a discussion best addressed in its own thread.


----------



## Superjo

Dave in Green said:


> The amount of heat a device produces is related to the number of watts it consumes. Hairdryers typically draw a maximum 1,500W-2,000W while projectors typically draw a maximum 250W-350W.
> 
> For more perspective, I also currently have a Panasonic PT-AX200U, which is rated at a maximum 290W, and my 60" plasma is rated at a maximum 296W. Both exhaust a relatively small amount of warm air and neither causes any heat problem for me. Even the new supposedly energy efficient OLED TVs have been measured at more than 200W. Most of the watts consumed by all of these devices are converted into heat.
> 
> But this is probably a discussion best addressed in its own thread.


I'm not convinced your fan is working, or you're not using it for very long. A flat panel TV is self-cooling by the nature of its shape. A projector is a box with a boiling hot lamp inside - hence a loud fan.
If I hold my hand in front of the vent it will eventually cook my hand (not quite as hot as a hairdryer on full, but still nasty, and a hairdryer blows '10x' faster than a projector fan, which accounts for 10x the wattage?). Trust me, I'm sweating my balls off.
But then, I often use it for 10 hours plus, in a 10' x 10' room, without ventilation - I would open a window, but then the spiders get in, and no one wants that. //\;;/\\


----------



## imagic

MarvinTheMartian said:


> Beware the ultra zooms : far away dim, close in a bit brighter.
> 
> Glass optics are expensive, coming from the DSLR Nikon Cannon world.
> You can buy an inexpensive 70-200mm lens for $300 or a semi-pro for $2000.
> The semi-pro beats the consumer version in brightness, edge to edge clarity and detail.
> 
> A single purpose 200mm only prime lens absolutely smokes the either of the zooms.
> Bright and sharp corner to corner, but it's going to cost you $5000 !
> 
> The latest Benq HT5060 DLP is setting a trend and offering multiple lens options at a reasonable price.
> Shawn


It's the HT6050, and yes the lenses help it render a sharp, uniform image.


----------



## secretsimple

Great article, now I have a better idea of what to look for next time I am at Frys


----------



## wse

Why does Sony 4K projectors use plastic lens for the last component for $15,000 one would expect glass not plastic!


----------



## AV_Integrated

Really a very good writeup. I would add a couple of items if you get the chance. But, only a bit.



Scott Wilkinson said:


> - This consideration applies only to 2.39:1 screens; if you get a 16:9 screen, you will have to live with black letterbox bars when watching movies.


There are black pillarbox bars with all other content if you have 2.39 screens they will have to live with...
But, masking (using black coverings) on a 2.39 or a 1.78 screen is possible depending on the screen purchased and can help hide any black bars.



Scott Wilkinson said:


> - Some high-end projectors use lasers as the light source. They are typically rated to last 20,000 hours or more with very little change in brightness or spectral profile, but the laser light engine typically can't be replaced.


There are some cheaper models (Viewsonic LS820) for just a few thousand dollars now. This is a category to watch as laser systems are very new and should be growing as a category. Most notably, lasers will tend to offer more brightness than UHD or LED models and at the highest end really deliver the most lumens.



Scott Wilkinson said:


> - A few expensive projectors use red, green, and blue LEDs as the light source; like lasers, they are rated to last 20,000 hours or more with very little change in brightness or spectral profile, but the LED light engine typically can't be replaced.


Expensive? Entry level LED models with less than 1080p are around $500 for a acceptable model. Full 1080p models are under $1,000. The biggest factor is that they just aren't as bright as their UHP or laser counterparts. But, there are a number of manufacturers getting on the 1080p LED bandwagon. Most notably LG with their PF1500U. Several other big players are in there as well including Vivitek and Acer. More are likely to follow, such as AAXA who have been pushing LED projectors for years.
These $700-$1,000 1080p LED models aren't terribly bright, but can handle a 120" screen in a dark room, and with some light 80" to 100" is perfectly reasonable.



Scott Wilkinson said:


> *10. Budget & Recommendations*
> 
> - As mentioned earlier, I strongly recommend getting a projector with horizontal and vertical lens shift, which gives you flexibility in placement. The least-expensive projectors often don't provide lens shift, so in general, I recommend spending at least $1500.


I agree with lens shift, but there are a ton, and I mean a ton, that demand models right at $1,000 or less, and those people really are the ones who want the 'best in category' recommendations, or they will end up with a 2x color wheel Optoma (or worse)

Under/Near $1,000: The BenQ 2050 is the third generation of a proven quality series from BenQ. It improves upon a tested design and is about $800. It's the GO TO entry level model. Their 2150 is a short throw model of the same, perfect if someone needs to stay in front of some duct work. The Epson 2040/2045 is solid. It lacks the contrast of the BenQ, but offers very inexpensive replacement lamps and solid brightness. It's a great all around performer, and because of the LCD tech, no chance of rainbow issues. Recommended as a family room television replacement option for high use due to the cheap lamps. The Epson 3500 is a bit more ($1,300), but has great lens shift and placement flexibility, which some may need in a good LCD model. Finally, the LG PF1500U is a LED/DLP model which delivers 20,000 hours of use with no lamp replacements and 1080p quality. There is plenty of reviews and threads to read about it, and while it's not perfect, it is one of the few with smart applications built in, a small size for easy portability, and enough light for a 100" screen quite nicely.


----------



## m0nster

The whole thread is a great read, thanks a lot!

I am fearly new here, so those may be stupid inputs. But wouldn't it make sense to include noise and size? Especially for starters that might want to include a projector into a living room it could matter a lot. Heat has been added, definitively na important mention too in my book.


----------



## Willsmith7

quality


----------



## NewtownTheater

This a great post. I bookmarked it so when my friends say do you know anything about projectors... (Which they know good and well I do) I can just send them this link! I find it interesting however that the PT-AE8000u isn't on this list. Especially if the viewer has a lot of action movies and wants a 2.35:1 screen. I haven't played with BenQ HT4050 or the Sony VPL-HW45ES how do they handle 2.35:1 formats? Does the viewer have to manually zoom it up every time? I don't see Lens Memory listed in their capabilities. So if you're gonna spend $2k on a projector and love action movies the PT-AE8000U ($1799 with rebates) should at least make the list above right?


----------



## sddp

NewtownTheater said:


> This a great post. I bookmarked it so when my friends say do you know anything about projectors... (Which they know good and well I do) I can just send them this link! I find it interesting however that the PT-AE8000u isn't on this list. Especially if the viewer has a lot of action movies and wants a 2.35:1 screen. I haven't played with BenQ HT4050 or the Sony VPL-HW45ES how do they handle 2.35:1 formats? Does the viewer have to manually zoom it up every time? I don't see Lens Memory listed in their capabilities. So if you're gonna spend $2k on a projector and love action movies the PT-AE8000U ($1799 with rebates) should at least make the list above right?




I would first check out the Epson 5040UB. It's on sale right now for 2.5K and offers A LOT more than the PT-AE8000U


----------



## NewtownTheater

sddp said:


> I would first check out the Epson 5040UB. It's on sale right now for 2.5K and offers A LOT more than the PT-AE8000U


That one is on the list already. It seems like a nice projector. It's considerably more expensive. I'm just asking Scott's opinion as to why the AE8000u didn't make his list. I mean he named a few. So he was looking for a bit of a range and I feel like the AE8000u should be in there. I have the 4000u and I'm currently saving money for an AE8000U but does he have an opinion that might change my mind? 5040UB finally brought on lens memory. So it does have my attention now.


----------



## Pointdexter5

Thanks for the write-up. Many things to consider indeed.

I'm new to this world and site, and working on planning an entertainment room, that is somewhat small 10-11 feet by 14. The idea is to have a screen recessed in the ceiling, to hide the TV when we want to watch a movie or sporting event. With only 7' of room to the where the ceiling will be (older homes were not as big as today), I have narrowed down the screen choices to either 110" or 120". the latter may be covered the entire back wall, which would block speakers, while the 110" would provide more flexibility there, and may be plenty with a 12' viewing distance.

For the projectors, I have been looking primarily at BenQ, due to the good reviews and options, so with needing about 10' for either 110" or 120", I have been thinking about building a shelf into the back wall (2-3 feet wide), about a foot from the ceiling, and above the seats, which would allow me to move the projector freely to address any horizontal shifting needed. I understand I would need to place the projector upside down regardless, is if it were ceiling-mounted, so have to figure out some way to keep it stable while upside down. I could create something simple, or use some rubber stoppers for it to rest on stable. The advantage of using a shelf is the flexibility to move it around, and then the vertical lens shift could be used to make sure the right area of the screen is hit. A possible disadvantage would be that once the shelf is built, there is no adjustment up or down, as with a possible mount. Just entertaining this idea, as finding an appropriate mount, close to the ceiling is not always evident.

I saw you mention that the BenQ HT2050 only had 2.5% shift while their site claims 10%. Same for the HT3050. The HT4050 has 2.5% horizontal and 12.5% vertical. The latter is about twice the cost however of the 2050, so when considering budget, that would cover more than a good set of 5.1 speakers. The HT3050 may be the sweet spot in the middle depending on the improvements it may have over the HT2050. Still doing homework there.


----------



## BrightBlade

I am very new to this, so excuse the question if it appears somewhat naive. Are there any sub-$3000 projectors that do not use a bulb?


----------



## rocklee

Firstly thanks Scott for a nice "cheatsheet" on shopping for a projector.

Some things that I would like to add as someone who has been shopping for a projector for a while:




> *10. Budget & Recommendations*


- I would suggest splitting the price category for projectors to one that is up to $1500, and one between $1500-$3000. The range of projectors is too vast to put them under one category and not everyone has the budget to look at projectors that are towards the latter end of the suggested "budget" price range. Also while lens shift is a nice option to have, many past projectors have been developed and have sold successfully without it. 

- I would also add the XGIMI H1 as a recommended option for those who are considering a completely digital experience from a 1080p multimedia LED projector at a certain price point. It is an exception projector that warrants attention not only for its performance (exceeding past LED options from LG), but also for the technology that it introduces which I believe is key for things to come.

- While shopping for a projector, consider the costs of converting the target room for a projector including the projector screen, blackout curtains, a mount or shelf for the projector etc. It is a lot more costly than most people think.

- Portability may be an option to some shoppers due to the environment that they work/play in.



> *8. Lamp, Laser, or LED Illumination?*


I have to add that while laser is picking up interests among enthusiasts, it is an incredibly expensive option. Replacements are available under the event of a malfunction, however the cost is extremely high for both lens and lamp replacements. It is a long way away from being considered a viable option for most people right now.


----------



## NewtownTheater

BrightBlade said:


> I am very new to this, so excuse the question if it appears somewhat naive. Are there any sub-$3000 projectors that do not use a bulb?


I think there are several Laser LED projectors sub-$3000 not sure how many of those are 1080p and higher.


----------



## darkangelism

BrightBlade said:


> I am very new to this, so excuse the question if it appears somewhat naive. Are there any sub-$3000 projectors that do not use a bulb?


Is there a reason you don't want a bulb? Bulbs can be replaced, the LED/laser projectors once the light source fails you have to replace the entire projector.


----------



## BrightBlade

darkangelism said:


> Is there a reason you don't want a bulb? Bulbs can be replaced, the LED/laser projectors once the light source fails you have to replace the entire projector.


Let us say I watch about 4 hours of TV a day, 7 days a week, on average (I watch less, but it also assumes the occasional movie marathon day). 4 X 365 = 1460 hours a year. 20,000 / 1460 = 13.6 years.

From what I have read, the laser lasts for about 20,000 hours. A bulb around 2000 and the bulb costs 2-3 hundred dollars. Bulbs also lose a lot of their brightness as they age, but lasers do not. If the bulb costs $200 and lasts for 2000 hours, that means I will change 10 bulbs in the same time frame as one laser - and it will cost me $2000 to change the bulbs.

If I get a 4k laser projector, I will be good for a long time. When the laser does finally go, lets say after 13 years (round down my use), technology will have improved enough for me to justify buying something new anyway. So I will have the same brilliance of picture from day one to year 13 without having to do anything like changing a bulb. 

At least that is my reasoning. As I said, I am pretty new to all this, so my logic could be completely flawed. If it is, I am more than willing to learn!


----------



## darkangelism

BrightBlade said:


> Let us say I watch about 4 hours of TV a day, 7 days a week, on average (I watch less, but it also assumes the occasional movie marathon day). 4 X 365 = 1460 hours a year. 20,000 / 1460 = 13.6 years.
> 
> From what I have read, the laser lasts for about 20,000 hours. A bulb around 2000 and the bulb costs 2-3 hundred dollars. Bulbs also lose a lot of their brightness as they age, but lasers do not. If the bulb costs $200 and lasts for 2000 hours, that means I will change 10 bulbs in the same time frame as one laser - and it will cost me $2000 to change the bulbs.
> 
> If I get a 4k laser projector, I will be good for a long time. When the laser does finally go, lets say after 13 years (round down my use), technology will have improved enough for me to justify buying something new anyway. So I will have the same brilliance of picture from day one to year 13 without having to do anything like changing a bulb.
> 
> At least that is my reasoning. As I said, I am pretty new to all this, so my logic could be completely flawed. If it is, I am more than willing to learn!


Let's look at Epson since they have laser and bulb projectors with similar features. 
6040UB $3999 2500 lumens LS10500 1500 lumens $7999. So even if the 2500 bulb loses 50% brightness it is only slightly less bright than the laser is. $4000 difference, it comes with a spare bulb. Bulbs are $300 so that is 13 bulbs, plus the two it comes with. Normal mode is 3500 hours, medium is 4000, eco is 5000 hours. 15 times 3500 is 52,500 hours. Even if you replaced bulbs at half their lifespan it would be 26,250 hours, and more than the lifespan of the laser projector. Plus you could continue to feed it bulbs forever, after the 20k hours on the laser you have to spend another 8k on a new projector.

Sony 4k projectors, bulb version is 15k and the laser version is 60k, four times the cost.

If you bought a 3k laser or LED projector you would be giving up a lot of features versus a similarly priced bulb projector.

At your watching rate, which is similar to mine, you would probably realistically only buy 2 or 3 bulbs and then be buying a new projector. $600-900 over it's life is not that much compared to paying for laser upfront.


----------



## BrightBlade

darkangelism said:


> At your watching rate, which is similar to mine, you would probably realistically only buy 2 or 3 bulbs and then be buying a new projector. $600-900 over it's life is not that much compared to paying for laser upfront.


Well most excellent then! Thanks!!


----------



## NewtownTheater

BrightBlade said:


> Let us say I watch about 4 hours of TV a day, 7 days a week, on average (I watch less, but it also assumes the occasional movie marathon day). 4 X 365 = 1460 hours a year. 20,000 / 1460 = 13.6 years.
> 
> From what I have read, the laser lasts for about 20,000 hours. A bulb around 2000 and the bulb costs 2-3 hundred dollars. Bulbs also lose a lot of their brightness as they age, but lasers do not. If the bulb costs $200 and lasts for 2000 hours, that means I will change 10 bulbs in the same time frame as one laser - and it will cost me $2000 to change the bulbs.
> 
> If I get a 4k laser projector, I will be good for a long time. When the laser does finally go, lets say after 13 years (round down my use), technology will have improved enough for me to justify buying something new anyway. So I will have the same brilliance of picture from day one to year 13 without having to do anything like changing a bulb.
> 
> At least that is my reasoning. As I said, I am pretty new to all this, so my logic could be completely flawed. If it is, I am more than willing to learn!


My buddy has an ae8000u that got 5500 hours on his first bulb and so far 2800 on his second bulb. Just sayin. Also I haven't personally seen laser in home, but it sounds nice. I know there's a lot of substandard ones coming to the market though so be careful. Heck that's with any projector really.


----------



## BrightBlade

NewtownTheater said:


> My buddy has an ae8000u that got 5500 hours on his first bulb and so far 2800 on his second bulb. Just sayin. Also I haven't personally seen laser in home, but it sounds nice. I know there's a lot of substandard ones coming to the market though so be careful. Heck that's with any projector really.


Thanks! That seals the deal then. I will be eventually getting a 4K bulb based projector. 

Thank you everyone!


----------



## cbailey24

Thank you for this, although there is a huge need for sub 1k projectors. I would say this is the target audience more likely to ready this thread. People spending $3-5k on a projector are more than likely going and getting professional help on selection and install.


----------



## rocklee

cbailey24 said:


> Thank you for this, although there is a huge need for sub 1k projectors. I would say this is the target audience more likely to ready this thread. People spending $3-5k on a projector are more than likely going and getting professional help on selection and install.


With regular TVs dropping rapidly in prices, and technology continuing to improve, we may well see more "wall-unit" TVs (ultra thin wallpaper-like TVs). This may inevitably replace the 60-100" projector segment. High end, expensive projectors may still be around but that depends on whether most people will have more free time to spend indoors in their homes than out and whether they want to dedicate an entire room as a mini-theater.


----------



## rocklee

BrightBlade said:


> Let us say I watch about 4 hours of TV a day, 7 days a week, on average (I watch less, but it also assumes the occasional movie marathon day). 4 X 365 = 1460 hours a year. 20,000 / 1460 = 13.6 years.
> 
> From what I have read, the laser lasts for about 20,000 hours. A bulb around 2000 and the bulb costs 2-3 hundred dollars. Bulbs also lose a lot of their brightness as they age, but lasers do not. If the bulb costs $200 and lasts for 2000 hours, that means I will change 10 bulbs in the same time frame as one laser - and it will cost me $2000 to change the bulbs.
> 
> If I get a 4k laser projector, I will be good for a long time. When the laser does finally go, lets say after 13 years (round down my use), technology will have improved enough for me to justify buying something new anyway. So I will have the same brilliance of picture from day one to year 13 without having to do anything like changing a bulb.
> 
> At least that is my reasoning. As I said, I am pretty new to all this, so my logic could be completely flawed. If it is, I am more than willing to learn!


It's too early to predict what laser can do and price-wise they're still a long way away from being affordable. LEDs is what we should be looking at right now, their technology is always improving and they also have the same kind of lifetime expectancy as laser. By the time you reach the end of their life it will be about 10-13 years into the future. Who knows what we'll be watching then? I think the advantages of LED over traditional bulbs is the peace of mind of not worrying about bulbs dying early or exploding and dealing with replacements. You don't have to worry so much about maintenance and the costs involved, so you can just go ahead and use them for 10 hours a day and everyday. I will bet that in 3-5 years (or even earlier) there will be a new video standard that will blow everyone away and then we all need to start upgrading again. That's why I keep my budget lower when it comes to buying electronics because I know I will want to upgrade later anyway due to better technologies.


----------



## bruce3404

NewtownTheater said:


> My buddy has an ae8000u that got 5500 hours on his first bulb and so far 2800 on his second bulb. Just sayin. Also I haven't personally seen laser in home, but it sounds nice. I know there's a lot of substandard ones coming to the market though so be careful. Heck that's with any projector really.


Yes, you can milk those bulbs for a long time BUT there is a substantial difference in quality in a new bulb versus one that's got 2000 hours on it, as I'm sure your friend noticed when he replaced the first bulb. But hey, if he's happy who am I to complain? Just sayin'.


----------



## wheelee

BrightBlade said:


> I am very new to this, so excuse the question if it appears somewhat naive. Are there any sub-$3000 projectors that do not use a bulb?


check this out 

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-di...ers-thread-h1-review-h1-cc-z4-aurora-etc.html

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-di...srp/2949080-2018-new-projectors-lampless.html


----------



## BrightBlade

wheelee said:


> check this out
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-di...ers-thread-h1-review-h1-cc-z4-aurora-etc.html


Awesome! Too bad it is only 1080p.


----------



## harmonpa

ya i agree with input lag my brothers frame rate on his tv is much higher than mine makes gaming a lot nicer


----------



## mrreeftank

Awesome post. This helped me greatly as a newbie. 

Thank you!


----------



## Mrntlagnt

GregoryV said:


> What a great article! Thank you. This article could have saved me hundreds of reading hours on AVS. Projector lag spec is worthy of mentioning for anyone online gaming via projector.


Is there any article on projector lag times? I'm highly interested in that information.


----------



## sizzler

*Dolby Vision question*

Great post, if all of my components support Dolby Vision except my new projector (supports HDR10) will the projector take a Dolby Vision movie (Blue Ray or streaming) and play it with HDR10 or does it really go down to SDR?


----------



## jjsaustin

Good write up. 

The one major item I would ask is what is the primary use for the projector. In my case it is sports, so I am willing to trade off shadow detail and inky blacks for bright whites. Also, unlike a movie, watching sports means people constantly getting up during commercials, grabbing drinks, etc.. so even though I have a dedicated room, ambient light is there because the doors stay open. 

With these two considerations in mind, having a dlp projector that makes smart use of a small, clear segment on the color wheel to boost white brightness and have super bright whites provides a night and day difference (no pun intended). These projectors are often referred to as entertainment projectors and have a "sports" mode. An excellent example is the BenQ TK800. There are also similar 1080p entertainment projectors that also do a good job and really make watching sports much better and the picture really pops due to the bright whites. Think about it, in sports, the home team wears white, the field is marked in white, and in the case of hockey, the ice is white. On top of it, there is very little skin tones as well. 

So if you watch mostly movies, stick with an RGBRGB color wheel if you go with DLP, but for sports consider a RGBW or RGBCYW color wheel. The bottom line is different projectors have different sweet spots. You need to figure out what you care about most.


----------



## lesliesierra00

Thank's a lot. A great guide for selecting perfect projector.

Thank's again.


----------



## bud16415

jjsaustin said:


> Good write up.
> 
> The one major item I would ask is what is the primary use for the projector. In my case it is sports, so I am willing to trade off shadow detail and inky blacks for bright whites. Also, unlike a movie, watching sports means people constantly getting up during commercials, grabbing drinks, etc.. so even though I have a dedicated room, ambient light is there because the doors stay open.
> 
> With these two considerations in mind, having a dlp projector that makes smart use of a small, clear segment on the color wheel to boost white brightness and have super bright whites provides a night and day difference (no pun intended). These projectors are often referred to as entertainment projectors and have a "sports" mode. An excellent example is the BenQ TK800. There are also similar 1080p entertainment projectors that also do a good job and really make watching sports much better and the picture really pops due to the bright whites. Think about it, in sports, the home team wears white, the field is marked in white, and in the case of hockey, the ice is white. On top of it, there is very little skin tones as well.
> 
> So if you watch mostly movies, stick with an RGBRGB color wheel if you go with DLP, but for sports consider a RGBW or RGBCYW color wheel. The bottom line is different projectors have different sweet spots. You need to figure out what you care about most.



Spot on.


----------



## dnyewoods12

jjsaustin said:


> Good write up.
> 
> The one major item I would ask is what is the primary use for the projector. In my case it is sports, so I am willing to trade off shadow detail and inky blacks for bright whites. Also, unlike a movie, watching sports means people constantly getting up during commercials, grabbing drinks, etc.. so even though I have a dedicated room, ambient light is there because the doors stay open.
> 
> With these two considerations in mind, having a dlp projector that makes smart use of a small, clear segment on the color wheel to boost white brightness and have super bright whites provides a night and day difference (no pun intended). These projectors are often referred to as entertainment projectors and have a "sports" mode. An excellent example is the BenQ TK800. There are also similar 1080p entertainment projectors that also do a good job and really make watching sports much better and the picture really pops due to the bright whites. Think about it, in sports, the home team wears white, the field is marked in white, and in the case of hockey, the ice is white. On top of it, there is very little skin tones as well.
> 
> So if you watch mostly movies, stick with an RGBRGB color wheel if you go with DLP, but for sports consider a RGBW or RGBCYW color wheel. The bottom line is different projectors have different sweet spots. You need to figure out what you care about most.


For under a 1,000 dollars and looking at purchasing a projector for watching sports, what projector would you purchase?


----------



## Vankyo

Great post for helping to choose a projector. Thanks very much.


----------



## Diya Clinton

I found 3 short throw projectors for your space. It's the Optoma GT1080DARBEE, BenQ 2150ST and the BenQ TH671ST.

You should go to projectorcentral.com and use their calculator so you know which one would be the best for your projection distance.

I believe the GT1080DARBEE has the shortest distance to have a 100-inch screen. It's around 4 feet. So it really depends on you.


----------



## Felix_ro

Even if this thread has started so long time ago, it is still *SO GOOD *and *USEFUL *for anyone that is starting to get into projectors. So *MANY THANKS* for it!

I for one, I'm not at the beginning, already changed one lamp on one HD projector and got also a second one that does 4K (although by e-shifting) from the same brand (Epson), also with lamp.

But now I was thinking "mingling" here to ask a question:

*Why does the producers of those lamp based projectors did not (yet) started to do just a small change, by replacing the bulbs/lamps with LED's?*

And until the producers start doing so, *can't we do some DIY to get the bulb/lamp replaced with LED's?*

I am asking this because I have seen A LOT of LED sources now are available with A LOT of lumens power, and they are even getting smaller and powerful day-by-day almost.
The heat from an LED light source I believe would produce similar or less heat than the bulb/lamp does, and there's already the fan for cooling it down. The power requirements for a LED would be surely less than for the bulb/lamp, so this should not be a problem either (I saw some super bright flashlights which works with batteries, not with mains, so...).

Are there any other reasons than the "business/income" that comes from the bulbs/lams already produced and the factories for them, so ultimately just a "money problem", not an technical one?

So, @Scott Wilkinson and ANYONE else, what's your input on this idea?


----------



## Osamede

Felix_ro said:


> Even if this thread has started so long time ago, it is still *SO GOOD *and *USEFUL *for anyone that is starting to get into projectors. So *MANY THANKS* for it!
> 
> I for one, I'm not at the beginning, already changed one lamp on one HD projector and got also a second one that does 4K (although by e-shifting) from the same brand (Epson), also with lamp.
> 
> But now I was thinking "mingling" here to ask a question:
> 
> *Why does the producers of those lamp based projectors did not (yet) started to do just a small change, by replacing the bulbs/lamps with LED's?*
> 
> And until the producers start doing so, *can't we do some DIY to get the bulb/lamp replaced with LED's?*
> ?


For motion picture projection is it actually possible to simply swap bulbs as one might do with home lighting? Even At for home lighting I dont find the quality of light to be the same even when corrected for the colour temperature: incandescent bulbs are producing steady light, while LED bulbs are actually flickering on/off at high frequency. So I'd imagine that it's not that simple, as the underlying method of generating lighting is actually different.


----------



## Felix_ro

Osamede said:


> For motion picture projection is it actually possible to simply swap bulbs as one might do with home lighting? Even At for home lighting I dont find the quality of light to be the same even when corrected for the colour temperature: incandescent bulbs are producing steady light, while LED bulbs are actually flickering on/off at high frequency. So I'd imagine that it's not that simple, as the underlying method of generating lighting is actually different.


Thanks for your input!

Yet, remember please that there are PLENTY of projectors that already have LED light or even LED Laser light.
And, for sure, I was not reffering to something as simple as changing a bulb for the illumination of the house.
Was thinking of some specific and quality LED lights that are already "out there" which step-by-step, start to replace everything else.

Also, I believe that, if a LED light bulb for home illumination is "flickering", then for sure this one is a cheap one, not done correctly, since as far as I know, no LED light bulb contains ONLY the LED and the power "adapter" for voltage, but also some other electronics that do EXACTLY THAT: adapt the *alternating current* that we have and use in our houses for illuminating and powering various appliances, to the *direct current* that is used by LED's. And for sure, any projector has already inside several such adapters, and for sure more performant than the ones in LED bulbs.

Just my thoughts...


----------



## Dave Moritz

I keep playing with the idea of going projection even though over a year ago I purchased a beautiful Sony XBR55A9F 55"OLED 4K display. Getting that really pushed my finances and I had to save like a maniac to get it but I made it happen. I seriously do not know if I should aim between $2K - $3K for an Epson or Optima with it have to have both horizontal and vertical keystone adjustment. Or should I just go for the more expensive Sony which is above the $3K price point? I am just thinking right now and have not decided for sure but would love to hear some feedback and get some ideas. Said projector would also have to be able to deal with a acoustically transparent screen if possible but I guess it depends on the screen size because I do not want my center channel really low to the ground if I can help it.


----------



## escksu

Osamede said:


> For motion picture projection is it actually possible to simply swap bulbs as one might do with home lighting? Even At for home lighting I dont find the quality of light to be the same even when corrected for the colour temperature: incandescent bulbs are producing steady light, while LED bulbs are actually flickering on/off at high frequency. So I'd imagine that it's not that simple, as the underlying method of generating lighting is actually different.



LED actually dont flicker. The flickering is caused by the 50/60Hz AC power instead. If you could maintain a steady DC voltage, the brightness will be constant. Not difficult. Colour of led different from metal halide bulb can be resolved via filters/calibration.



But I think size of led + cooling is the main problem. LEDs must be cooled or it will burnt out. There may not be enough space in the area for lamp module for heatsink and fan.


----------



## escksu

Felix_ro said:


> Thanks for your input!
> 
> Yet, remember please that there are PLENTY of projectors that already have LED light or even LED Laser light.
> And, for sure, I was not reffering to something as simple as changing a bulb for the illumination of the house.
> Was thinking of some specific and quality LED lights that are already "out there" which step-by-step, start to replace everything else.
> 
> Also, I believe that, if a LED light bulb for home illumination is "flickering", then for sure this one is a cheap one, not done correctly, since as far as I know, no LED light bulb contains ONLY the LED and the power "adapter" for voltage, but also some other electronics that do EXACTLY THAT: adapt the *alternating current* that we have and use in our houses for illuminating and powering various appliances, to the *direct current* that is used by LED's. And for sure, any projector has already inside several such adapters, and for sure more performant than the ones in LED bulbs.
> 
> Just my thoughts...



Yes, fully agreed. Almost all of our LCD TVs and computer monitors uses LED as the backlit. So LED is never the issue.


The reason for LED flickering isnt the LED itself, its the power source. Household AC power is 50/60Hz. So, if the electronics merely convert the AC to DC at 50Hz, you will see flickering. Need a proper voltage regulator to supply constant DC power to the LED. Very common, not a problem. 



Btw, it is entirely possible to make LED flicker at such a rate that you cant notice it. 50 times a second is definitely noticeable. But how about 1,000,000 times a second?? No one can notice that. So it looks as if its constantly on.


----------



## Technology3456

I will make a thread about this at some point but I already asked in the OLED forum about this for OLEDs, so I dont want to make topics asking the same question about different display types in each display forum. This question really would be best in a "general displays forum" for all displays because I want to ask about _any _displays that can do this, projectors or TVs, although a projector would be better.

Here is the question. Are there any projectors that can take a movie like a bluray disc, and triple flash each frame with a black frame between each flash?

For every 1 frame of the movie, the projector flashes six times: three flashes of the frame, and three flashes of black. So if the movie is 24fps, the projector works at 144hz, 72 of the movie frame interpersed with 72 black frames. If the movie is 23.976fps, then it would work at 143.856fps, 71.928 of the movie and 71.928 black frames. Which models have come out the last 15 years that can do this? 1080p works not just 4K.


----------



## Unwrittenlaw

Anyone know if LEDs for Ultra Short Throw projectors are being developed next? Was taking a look at the QLED Samsung TVs today and was stunned by the drastic PQ difference between that and the USTs.


----------



## robertovolpe001

Thanks for the information, I am looking for a day video projector, I am not very experienced and the budget is limited. I found on this site several video projectors: Risultati di ricerca per: 'videoproiettore', although some are sold out, I would like to know which is in your opinion more suitable. Mainly I need it at work, we have to project during conferences, and the previous one broke. So you don't need an ultra-performing projector here.


----------



## PsiPr0

Unwrittenlaw said:


> Anyone know if LEDs for Ultra Short Throw projectors are being developed next? Was taking a look at the QLED Samsung TVs today and was stunned by the drastic PQ difference between that and the USTs.


JMGO O1 & JMGO O1 Pro


----------



## KennyDol

It's helpful, thank you. It's hard to choose one best projector.


----------



## Sonisame

Just my silly thoughts 2 cents, if new version or so of Oculus Rift or similar goes HDR with Atmos support, Will you guys consider moving away from front projection? I been using front projection in dedicated media room for last 18 yrs.
Sam


----------



## skrubol

Felix_ro said:


> *Why does the producers of those lamp based projectors did not (yet) started to do just a small change, by replacing the bulbs/lamps with LED's?*
> 
> And until the producers start doing so, *can't we do some DIY to get the bulb/lamp replaced with LED's?*


Haven't seen a good, comprehensive answer to this yet, so I'll have a crack at it.
The main issue is light intensity vs area or volume. The lamps used in projectors are generally considered 'short arc' high intensity discharge (arc) lamps. These are typically in the range of 10,000-50,000 lumens. 1 ANSI lumen typically requires about 10 lamp lumens (in a single chip DLP.) That short arc is somewhere around 1mm long, and at most about 1mm in diameter. Much smaller than the densest LED's of that output are.
Second issue is directionality. HID lamps emit light in a sphere more or less (there are some shadowed areas, but it's fairly close.) Power LED's only emit in one direction. HID optics are not expecting this, so light uniformity would be terrible. There are advantages to LED's only projecting in one direction, optics wise, but an optics system built for an HID lamp won't employ them.

It might be possible these days to have a drop in laser replacement for a HID bulb, say a laser focused on a chunk of phosphor sitting where the arc should be, but it probably doesn't make financial sense. Current technology would still struggle to hit the same light intensity, and you're giving up many of the advantages that an optics system designed around LED or laser has.

LED DLP projectors don't need color wheels. They just use 3 or 4 LED's of the appropriate colors and pass them through dichroic mirrors to get them all to the imaging chip. LED's can be pulsed just as fast or faster as a color wheel can reliably be turned and you've got one less moving part in your projector.

Laser DLP projectors still typically use a color wheel, but it works very differently than a lamp color wheel. The color wheel for a lamp is just red, green, blue (and sometimes a clear 'white' section) filters, so they reduce the optical efficiency significantly, as they're just blocking all the light that's not their color. With an inexpensive single laser projector, the laser is blue and shines at a wheel with red and green phosphors (phosphors that emit red or green, not necessarily the color of the material itself,) and a 'clear' section for blue (which probably has some sort of diffuser and maybe reflector to match the optics of the red and green.) The phosphors can be much more efficient than a color filter, and of course when it's in the blue phase it's nearly perfectly efficient.

Ok, I guess I got a bit carried away there, ended up writing about 10x as much as I was intending. Lemme know if I got anything wrong or if anything is confusing.


----------



## DE Theater Room

Can anyone share with me the pros and cons of an UST vs a ST or traditional projector?


----------



## Felix_ro

DE Theater Room said:


> Can anyone share with me the pros and cons of an UST vs a ST or traditional projector?


The pros and cons for each of the mentioned types of projectors lies in their own acronyms themselves:

- „traditional” (aka long throw) = the projector mounted far away from the screen (projected image) => LARGEST images possible; biggest power on the light emitted is required to fill the bigger screen, the further from the screen and larger the projected image, the lower the perceived light will arrive on the screen; usually Lamp or Laser light emitting sourced; highest price in all of the projectors

- ST = Short Throw = have a shorter throw span, hence must be installed much closer to the screen than the one above („traditional”/long throw), and the same considerations apply (not so many projectors of this kind exist, I believe (or at least I did not saw)

- UST = Ultra Short Throw = those need only centimeters/inches from the screen to project the image; usually (and currently) limited to a maximum 110-120 inch diagonal projected image, and also usually those are just DLP and LED or Laser light emitting sourced, hence all the issues and flaws of the DLP could be find in those; usually, because of the Laser light source and paired with an ALR (Ambient Light Rejecting) screen, those are used as a TV replacement, for viewing even in during daylight time


Hope this helps! (at least a little )


----------



## Maaks

hi i am the new one and excited for the future car updates


----------

