why no reasonably priced 3d DLPs using .95" DMD? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 3 Old 09-05-2012, 11:25 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
dougri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 32
The disappearance of .95" DMDs in the consumer/enthusiast market is confusing to me. Sure, companies like Sim2 and DPI produce some great 3D DLP projectors, but where have the single chip, high-quality DLPs under $10K gone? There are some decent .65" single chip DLPs that are reasonably priced, but why have we not seen any .95" 3D DLPs in the ~$5K range? A 3D follow-on to the Planar 8150 or the Sharp xv20000... sure the xv30000 has been recently released, but why the .65" chip? Is there no longer an advantage to the larger chip? Has TI made process changes that I'm unaware of that have eliminated the advantages of the larger chips? I'm assuming not, as the likes of Sim2 and DPI are not so foolish that they would waste money on the larger chips if that were the case. Is it simply a production decision of TI, limiting .95" chip output to an extent that they are no longer an option in the consumer space (focusing instead on commercial 4K production, perhaps?). Am I that unique in that I prefer the DLP look, would like the best intrascene contrast & best blacks available and will not accept ghosting or flicker when I do finally upgrade to 3D? I want a PD8150 with 3D, or a W7000 with great blacks/contrast. Lacking that, I am just stuck waiting for either LCOS or LCD to eliminate the 3d artifacts. Tradeoffs be damned, I want it all at a reasonable price!

"A wide screen just makes a bad film twice as bad. "
-Samuel Goldwyn

I wonder what he'd think about 3D IMAX?
dougri is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 3 Old 09-06-2012, 04:35 AM
Senior Member
 
Frosteh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I think it is mostly a cost and size issue. One huge advantage for using the .65" chips is that you don't have to have as large of a case to allow for lens shift. To stay competitive in this market, I believe that is why many mainstream under $10k models use the .65". The Epsons and JVC's are practically built for people with placement issues, whereas the Runco/Planars have very limited placement options.

Frosteh is offline  
post #3 of 3 Old 09-06-2012, 07:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 3,750
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Having owned both a Planar PD8150 and a Mitsubishi HC7800D I would like to make a few comments on this. The problem with comparing the .95" DMD versus the .65" DMD is that the two chips are built for two separate parts of the consumer buying market. Considering the larger DMD costs more any manufacturer who builds a projector around that DMD is going to build it in mind of a higher MSRP. Therefore higher quality components such as lenses, lamps and lamp technologies (such as unishape), video processors, and a nice software suite to compliment the whole package will be incorporated. When you look at the under $5000 market there is just SOOOOO much competition. Things need to be compromised to make a profit off of the projector. The lens will always take a turn for the worse as well as video processing and build quality. That is just one thing to take into consideration.

It's unfortunate that the smaller DMD needs a really really good lens to compete with the larger DMD. But, like I was just saying before, the lens is almost always downgraded. It's just something that has to be done meet a certain end cost. So while the smaller DMD has the potential to be as good as the larger DMD you just never get to see that potential. Like I also mentioned many other things need to be compromised as well so the end result as of late has been one lackluster smaller DMD projector after another. Native contrast between the two DMDs is also another high area of concern. In most cases the larger DMD blows the smaller out of the water. A lot of this has to do with light path design. Because of the higher cost in mind the larger DMD projectors will usually things like special optical coatings on the lenses, get an ND filter on the color wheel, use unishape lamp technology ect.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that the .65" DMD has the potential to be great but no company out there wants to build one because of the high cost to make it great. My guess is that you aren't going to see a 3D projector with the larger DMD anytime soon, especially now that 4K is on the horizon. You should place all your bets that most companies are going to be abandoning all 1080p development and switching over all focus towards 4K. Most people, including myself have kept my .95" DMD projector and bought a 3D only .65" DMD projector. For PQ it's your best bet.
Seegs108 is online now  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off