Originally Posted by dovercat
Going by the reviews between the Benq and the Runco I would choose the Runco for 2D picture quality, but that would be dependent on screen size/gain due to the low lumens. It looks to have better native contrast. Although the review measurements still do not look that great, just not as terrible as the Benq.
Well designed projectors trade off quantiy lumens for picture quality contrast
Benq 240watt lamp, 2,000 Ansi Lumens
Runco 230watt lamp 1,000 Ansi Lumens,
Native on/off contrast 900:1
D65, Brilliant Color off.
Checkerboard contrast about 560: 1
Native on/off contrast 2,700:1
Dynamic on/off contrast 10,000:1
Lumens D65 480 eco 570 high lamp mode
The Runco LS5/Planar8150
For contrast, I'd be inclined towards comparing data from the same source to increase the odds of results not being skewed by differing testing methods/environments.
Sound & Vision Magazine professionally calibrated and measured both projectors (see the first posts of this thread); and the static contrast difference (ie with all dynamic systems - DI/SmartEco - disengaged) was around 2500:1 (Runco) compared to around 2000:1 (BenQ). That's not a massive difference; especially when stepping up to the cheapest LCoS projector available literally doubles those figures...
Calibrated, the W1070 is usually measured at 1400 lumens (normal lamp mode; BrilliantColor off); it's usually reported as calibrating well (though not quite as well as the Runco); with the Runco's light output topping out at half of that. (The more experienced among us might appreciate the Runco's better black-level, though).
So brightness is a serious consideration in this comparison; and as you say, it'll be a limiting factor for screen size and ambient-light tolerance of the image.
I suspect placed side-by-side, many viewers might actually select the the former purely based on its brightness advantage (which comes at little cost to color accuracy). Things like a bit of CA aren't going to evidence themselves in regular use; though personally I wouldn't mind an improved lens on the W1070 at a bit of a price premium (something the W1500 already offers, now that I think about it).
But to the point, as I said above: at higher spend - even the $3k eBay offer for the Runco - I'm not sure it's warranted since that's approaching 'brand-new' pricing for the Sony HW55ES (or some entry-level JVC's if brightness isn't an issue); and the advances in the LCoS-based imaging of those units has significantly surpassed consumer single-chip DLP - and their lenses are excellent to boot.
Originally Posted by airscapes
Do you think the 1070 will still be looked on as a top of the pack machine when it is 6 years old like the Planar/Runco is? Do you think it is built to last 6 years?
It is wonderful that you can get a great image for $700 but it is still a Kia not a Lexus.. and there is nothing wrong with a Kia!
In this analogy, I guess it'd be a Kia with a hidden lumen turbo-charger beneath it's hood and unusually good handling for its class
But no, I doubt they've been built to last 6 years. That's not to say it wouldn't be fondly remembered (they've been a sales hit and a 1080p+3D+HighBrightness price-barrier breaker) - but I doubt they'd all still be trucking along like the Runco is now; 6 years later. Time will tell.
That said, in 6 years - I expect to have replaced my primary AV equipment with 4K-compliant hardware.