AVS Forum banner

TI DLP 4K UHD projectors - street dates?

19K views 178 replies 44 participants last post by  Verge2 
#1 ·
Haven't seen much online. Anyone heard anything about when these TI DLP 4K UHD projectors will be out? I'm hoping they're hit the $1k barrier - I can dream, can't I?
 
#5 ·
#8 ·
Standard industry practice is to release a new technology in upscale models and over time let the technology trickle down to entry level models. So while projector manufacturers technically could introduce the new chip in less expensive models they won't. They will load up the first models with all the bells and whistles to maximize profits. Inexpensive models will follow at a later date.
 
#10 ·
I feel you are correct but I don't think there is any chance of a 4K DLP costing more than 2x the retail or street price of a Sony or JVC pseudo-4K HDR, which can be had for far less than 10k, even less than half that if I remember correctly.

Aside, I went to BestBuy yesterday and saw a 4K OLED with HDR for 4000 dollars, I think it was 55 inches and curved (LG 9200). The image was so phenomenal that by 2017 if I can't pick up a 4K HDR DLP then I will probably get an OLED and be done with it.

The simple truth is that if a 77 inch OLED can be had for under 10k, you won't see hardly people spending that amount on a 4K projector (even one with HDR) since the image quality + size of flat panels is really starting to nip the projector market out of existence. This is why I'm optimistic that projector manufacturers keeping retail prices out of the sub 3K market beyond another year will result in the entire front projection market imploding.

Once rollable wall-sized OLEDs come out, and there is some indication that 2017 might be the year that starts to happen, then front projection is definitely dead.

This is why I think companies like BenQ et al need to get their thumbs out and start selling 4K projectors at an affordable / TV competitive price otherwise they are basically doomed. This market has a limited lifespan and the only question is now, will they go for bulk sales in volume in the low cost segment and actually try to make a profit, or just keep 4K DLPs out of most people's budgets and hasten their own demise.
 
#9 ·
I would hope high end projectors would use the 1.38” 4K chip rather than a 0.67" 4k chip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marc Yu
#14 ·
Hopefully you are joking about 'theater quality', since many sub $3,000 projection setups blow the typical movie theaters away in quality.

DLP pseudo 4K will be under $3,000 and I expect under $2,000 before year's end.

The video processing is already available in bulk, and they likely will be using the same, or similar lens systems they are using now. So, the real hold up has been the chip.
 
#15 ·
As the pixels on a 0.67" 4k chip will be about one quarter the size of the pixels on a 0.65" 1080 chip, will the projectors not need better lenses? I mean some 1080p projectors appear to be incapable of displaying individual pixels sharply and without chromatic aberration, let alone pixels a quarter the size.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lespur and sage11x
#19 ·
This is sort of why I'm not hung up on the move to 4k. What I want to see is higher quality projectors with better contrast and more features for lower prices. My BenQ is plenty sharp and has beautiful color but could really use some help in the contrast / black level department.
 
#17 ·
" Nothing compares to a truly BIG screen experience and the only way to get that currently is to go with projection. "


Count me in.






I throw a 135 inch image and even though my 70 inch 4k display is pure eye candy, at the end of the day, especially when watching 2.35 movies, it's the BIG projected image that completes the cinema experience.


Will the 4k option improve on this? I suspect it will. Along with the resolution, projectors will need the optics and the guts to handle all the additional 'pixel pumping', hence a superior viewing experience.


Anyway, Thanks to TI for not resting. I'm looking forward to an 'affordable' upgrade.
 
#20 ·
I'm willing to bet that TI DLP 4k will have poor contrast anyways. I'll take Contrast / HDR over 4k anyways. Not that 4k isn't nice because it is but I think everyone over rates it when the colors and contrast really is what makes you say wow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sage11x
#22 ·
To call itself HDR does a projector need to meet any minimum MTF standard or simultaneous contrast standard black and white on screen at the same time, or does it just need to meet a sequential contrast standard completely black screen, completely white screen.

Does HDR guarantee something as far as image quality or could in theory a projector capable of producing low contrast very dim images and low contrast very bright images call itself HDR despite not being able to display single images that contain a high dynamic range, high contrast in a single image.
 
#26 ·
Mein gott, contrast ratio and dynamic range have NOTHING to do with one another already. This forum is swimming in FUD lately on this topic. A larger dynamic range is better, period. A larger contrast ratio is better, period. Those two specs are orthogonal and not mutually interdependent.

Saying 1000:1 ratio of the brightest to the darkest is the same in a 0-100 nits range as a 0-1000 nits range is like saying having a five speed gearbox is the same on a Nissan Sentra as it is on a Ferrari.

Ratios != dynamic range. Please, guys, let's stop the FUD here already. This is a science website. If there is scientific evidence that HDR signals don't benefit 2000:1 contrast ratio projectors, let's see the facts otherwise add the words IMO in front of ones' posts. And even better, IMHO. Data or it didn't happen.

No one is saying higher contrast isn't better. But greater dynamic range is also better. And you can get 2000:1 contrast ratio on a dirt cheap DLP so let's drop the 1000:1 talk. My 5 year old w1070 has 2k:1 and would look a ton better with HDR. I've seen HDR in person and it's incredible. SDR is typically way stretched out even on cheap DLPs which can do much greater than rec 709's 100 nits range at typical screen sizes. Therefore that extra brightness is simply expanding the range of SDR content beyond its specifications making it look washed out.

Rec 709 has been obsolete for quite some time, because 100 nits is easily surpassed on cheap projectors in the home. And let alone cheap LCDs which have for the past 10-15 years been expanding 100 nits range well beyond into 250-300 nits and people wonder why it looks so washed out. Because it's not calibrated properly and the extra brightness has no signal values that accurately map to it.

HDR signals should be used when available. The difference between HDR and SDR should be thought of as most like a continuum, because that's what it really is. If your HDR spec goes to 1000 nits but your projector can only do 200 nits, it's better to compress the 1000 nits down to 200 range than expand 100 nits SDR to 200. That's pretty basic. You don't record music from your CDs or whatever source at a low low volume then play it back at a higher volume, that crushes dynamic range and makes it sound awful and muddy. With video it's literally the same thing. You should keep your volume at 0db throughout the signal chain only until the very end. If you attenuate at various steps in between you are losing effective bits and increasing the noise floor for no reason. Same thing with SDR vs HDR signals on cheap projectors. If you could decode an HDR signal on your cheap DLP, you should do that. How do I know? I've done it, personally, and it looks better. Decoding a PQ gamma 2084 EOTF is really simple I can share the equations for you guys if you like. This is not rocket science.
 
#27 · (Edited)
Mein gott, contrast ratio and dynamic range have NOTHING to do with one another already. This forum is swimming in FUD lately on this topic. A larger dynamic range is better, period. A larger contrast ratio is better, period. Those two specs are orthogonal and not mutually interdependent.

Saying 1000:1 ratio of the brightest to the darkest is the same in a 0-100 nits range as a 0-1000 nits range is like saying having a five speed gearbox is the same on a Nissan Sentra as it is on a Ferrari.

Ratios != dynamic range. Please, guys, let's stop the FUD here already.
The term "dynamic range" can be used to mean multiple things, which is why I try to get people to be clear about how they are using it. It can mean the ratio from the highest to the lowest values, it can be the number of discrete steps between the highest and the lowest, it can be the absolute range (although that doesn't work all that well for projectors were we don't know how bright the images are until we include a screen), and probably others.

How are you using it?

SMPTE made it pretty clear in one of their documents that making things brighter, but with the same contrast ratio, does not make them high dynamic range, which goes along with 2000:1 total ratio from the brightest white to the darkest black being an issue if somebody wants to consider their images high dynamic range.

1000:1 in the 0.1 nit to 100 nit range is not the same as the 1 nit to 1000 nit range. The former can go darker and the latter can go brighter.

Thanks,
Darin
 
#34 ·
Just and copy and past from another forum:
I think it will be a fine product. Hope an a affordable price too

"Once PJHC.FR exclusivity, here's a visual comparison between a projector prototype single-dlp equipped with the new 4K DLP chip from Texas Instruments 0.67 against a native 4K projector of this year, it speaks for itself:"



A zoom on the rock bottom right (mono-dlp)


The same projector on a 3 panel native 4K 2016:


A comparison of the same image:


Source: Projection-homecinema.fr forum
 
#36 · (Edited)
Given that focus was optimal on both units that's an impressive amount of sharpness, though to be fair it's not very shocking that single-chip DLP will have the upper hand with regards to pure sharpness over 3-LCD. That said, it's interesting to see that the "wobulation" technique they use for their 4k chip seems to manage painting out a 4k image without seemingly loosing any of the fine details, for instance on the rock in the foreground.

One should have in the back of ones mind, however, that the lens used on this prototype unit is probably of higher quality than what BenQ and Optoma will use in their production models, and thus be sharper and with less chromatic abberations.

Edit: It almost seems like that DLP prototype has some software edge-sharpening effect going on? Looking closely at the contour of the rock, it seems this could be the case.
 
#37 ·
Given that focus was optimal on both units that's an impressive amount of sharpness, though to be fair it's not very shocking that single-chip DLP will have the upper hand with regards to pure sharpness over 3-LCD. That said, it's interesting to see that the "wobulation" technique they use for their 4k chip seems to manage painting out a 4k image without seemingly loosing any of the fine details, for instance on the rock in the foreground.

One should have in the back of ones mind, however, that the lens used on this prototype unit is probably of higher quality than what BenQ and Optoma will use in their production models, and thus be sharper and with less chromatic abberations.

Edit: It almost seems like that DLP prototype has some software edge-sharpening effect going on? Looking closely at the contour of the rock, it seems this could be the case
.
It's hard to see in that photo. There might be edge enhancement visible. I'm interested to see what is shown at Cedia this year. Of course there are many questions - how good are the black levels on these new chips, what's the motion handling look like, can I see rainbows ( I haven't used a single chip DLP projector in almost 7 years now ) ? And of course there may be more new native 4K projectors !
 
#46 ·
Well that's sort of the point. The OP is speculating that the prices of these new 4k DLPs will be in this range. Myself and others are betting they won't. From the electronichouse article: "With the recent announcement by Texas Instruments (TI) of its release of a 4K DLP chip, home theater enthusiasts should have an easier time finding 4K projectors from a wider variety of manufacturers and at more affordable prices."


So the crux there is how you interpret "more affordable". :)


http://www.electronichouse.com/daily/home-theater/more-4k-video-projectors-set-to-hit-the-market/
 
#55 ·
On the content side, 360 stereo VR is exploding right now.

It's not HDR but it is HFR, and that matters. A lot.

Content producers will eventually grow out of 24p thanks to learning how to do 60p or 120p stereo more effectively. This I'm hoping will trickle back into mainstream TV, since TVs can already do 60hz and feeding them only 24p is exploiting less than half of their capabilities (including things like motion resolution which suffers greatly at 24p, not to mention baked in motion blur which makes 4K pointless during moving scenes to begin with).

I'd say both LCD and OLED TVs will keep getting bigger and cheaper and will reincorporate things like automatic SDR-to-HDR conversion for legacy content, glasses-free 3D (including automatic 2D to 3D conversion), and of course high framerates like 120hz (possibly per eye), either natively or through frame interpolation, which is getting better and better.

Just because UHD Bluray gave up on 4K 3D doesn't mean that 3D is dead, 4K+ 3D content is getting its legs thanks to VR and an entire generation will grow up on 60+ frames per second stereo 3D content. Big studios are buying into VR in a massive way and there will be plenty of experience and advocacy for 60p or 120p content even for 2D televisions eventually. Once people become used to 60p+ native content they will start to demand it on their televisions as well, instead of shun it or mock it. There is no rational reason why one would watch or produce content at a much higher frame rate on VR glasses than TV, when TVs can actually benefit from 60p. Right now. Without upgrading.

I.e. don't upgrade your TV, wait for the content to start exploiting HDR and HFR which even 850 dollar 2016 Vizio TVs can display.
 
#57 ·
There is nothing I dream about more than paying $5,000 for a 4K pseudo DLP projector which has weaker contrast than the $4,000 JVC projectors which are 3rd generation (or more) 4K (pseudo) already on the market.

They should really hit a home run if that's their selling strategy.

No, I expect DLP to hit the market at under $3,000 from certainly companies on day one. That may not mean that the first ones on the market are from those companies, but a $5,000 BenQ 4K, that actually sells to us at $3,000 seems very realistic. Count on it to be housed in their best chassis with a good lens - based upon the W7500.

Once you are in JVC or Sony pricing territory, I would stick with a JVC or Sony projector.
 
#58 ·
There is nothing I dream about more than paying $5,000 for a 4K pseudo DLP projector which has weaker contrast than the $4,000 JVC projectors which are 3rd generation (or more) 4K (pseudo) already on the market.

They should really hit a home run if that's their selling strategy.

No, I expect DLP to hit the market at under $3,000 from certainly companies on day one. That may not mean that the first ones on the market are from those companies, but a $5,000 BenQ 4K, that actually sells to us at $3,000 seems very realistic. Count on it to be housed in their best chassis with a good lens - based upon the W7500.

Once you are in JVC or Sony pricing territory, I would stick with a JVC or Sony projector.



This is consistent with my logic. 4k for the masses.
Our local Fry's offers a 65" 4k Panny LED for $849. 1080p FHD DLP projectors start at around $500 ( I should know, mine cost $488)
To compete and win over the mass market, $3k and above is too 'out of reach'. Consumers will just stick with what they have or settle.
Do Optoma, Viewsonic, Dell, Ben Q, Vivitek, and LG really want to compete in a 'niche' market?
Perhaps I'm too optimistic, but I see these companies touting 'affordable' 4k with street prices under $2k and dropping over time. That is if they want to sell 4k projectors in the current market.
 
#61 ·
Why so optimistic?


From Trusted Reviews:
"It’s not just the image quality of TI’s demonstration that induced excitement in me as far as projection is concerned in 2016. TI also assures me that its new chipset has been designed to be affordable. So maybe, just maybe, this will be the year where 4K projection for the masses finally becomes a reality."

Read more at http://www.trustedreviews.com/texas...ction-for-the-home-review#IQLh7uvj6rkx4IbO.99


Front projection really needs a boost right now. This would do it.
 
#64 ·
I'll start picking up UHD Blurays this year as well, as long as the PS4K supports outputting downscaled 10-bit to 1080p TVs and projectors. At least then I can get the benefits of no banding and true 444 chroma on my w1070.

I'm thinking of picking up a white LED array and replacing my w1070s bulb with that, it could work...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top