Originally Posted by russelsheim
I would like an explanation about this
WhatHifi magazine, a highly respected magazine had given a very underwhelm review (3 stars) on Benq W1070 while they give an overwhelm 5 stars review on Benq W1070+
Now, many (even in this forum) sustain there no major differences between the two projectros
Please help to understand why this different behavior.
Doesn't makes much sense to me either. The WhatHiFi
review of the W1070+ (known in the US as the HT1075) seems to imply there's a big difference:
The BenQ W1070+ is a big improvement upon its predecessor the W1070. Its subtle and punchy picture quality - complete with satisfyingly deep black levels and smooth motion - is utterly engrossing.
On the other hand, ProjectorCentral
actually referred to their W1070 review for their PQ analyses of the HT1075:
You've heard the phrase "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Given the W1070's popularity almost two years after its release, we can safely say that it ain't broke. It's not surprising, then, how similar the HT1075 is to its predecessor.
The actual performance and image quality of the HT1075 is nearly identical to that of the W1070. If you want to read more about performance and shared features, you should click over to our BenQ W1070 review.
found the same, saying that their only gripe with the replacement model was its similarity to its predecessor:
I’ll say right now, I had hoped for more improvements, but considering that the older projector was an excellent value, and a top award winner, we’ll just have to live with "a little bit better."
Probably the most helpful PQ-related analyses came from Geoff at The Wirecutter
in his 'best-$1k projector' article:
The contrast ratio improved a bit: 2,314:1 from the W1070’s 1,953:1. Looking at the two, the HT1075 does look a little bit better, with a little more depth and punch to the image. It’s a small improvement, though.
As we mentioned, the HT1075 is so close in performance to the previous pick (W1070) that we don’t recommend anyone upgrade from one to the other. If you're curious, though, the HT1075 is a little bit better in every way. It’s a touch brighter, has a little bit better contrast, the color is a little more accurate, and there’s a little less noise. Watching them side-by-side (ok, technically stacked above and below), the HT1075 looks subjectively about 10-15 percent better while watching actual video.
At the moment, you can still pick up the W1070 for $730. This presents an interesting choice. The HT1075 looks better enough that most people should consider the extra $270 to be worth spending in order to go for our (new) main pick. But if $1,000 is already a stretch and every single dollar counts, the W1070 is still a great projector.
If the price of the W1070 rises above $850, definitely save and get the HT1075 instead.
Interestingly, they imply that if the price difference between the two is less than $150 (which it now is), they'd advise in favor of the HT1075.
They also mention this about input lag:
With high input lag, you’ll miss more than you hit, regardless of your reflexes. The W1070 had a low input lag of 33 milliseconds. The HT1075 has a more average input lag of 49.7 ms. Is this a big deal? No. If you’re a hardcore gamer, should you seek out a projector that has the lowest possible input lag? I don’t think so, especially since you’d be getting a projector that overall looks worse than the HT1075.
For most gamers, 49.7 ms is probably lower than the TV you’re using now and still on the low side of average for current displays.
So really, it's a tough call. I'm considering a second projection setup (to run in parallel to my current W1070, in another room) and could see myself going for the bit of extra brightness from the newer model if its price stays in close proximity to its predecessor; even if actual PQ is roughly the same. Might just want a little more throw distance for that setup, though