Originally Posted by Perfectionist2
Just to be clear, the LED is not "instant on." There is a "warm up" period that seems shorter than a regular lamp (never timed it) but is by no means "instant." My flat panel LEDs take some time to turn on and the LED projector is no different. And even when the light is on the screen, there is a period of HDMI negotiation, etc.
I haven't actually timed it, but I think my Planar is somewhere between 30-60 seconds, while my Samsung LED LCD is <10, that is quite a difference.
There is, however, instant off with no fan running when off but i'm not sure anyone cares about this.
It's nice, but like the "instant" on, it's not worth much to me in terms of cost differential.
For me the advantage is I can leave it on for hours without worrying about the lamp or significant lumen deterioration. I can't believe your not losing significant lumens with a lamp. Colors and contrast are excellent. Picture is better than my previous Qualia 004. And for some reasons, LED projectors look brighter than they actually are. THis has been discussed numerous times on AVS - not sure there's a good answer.
Oh, I know I lose brightness, that's why I end up replacing my lamp about every 1000 hours or so. Somewhere around maybe 750ish I usually flip to high lamp, and "shortly" thereafter I replace it. My point is not that I don't lose brighness, or anything like that, it's just that there's really very little benefit to the lamp life for me from LED since I don't worry about lamp usage at all with my current machine. I don't avoid using it just to keep hours off the lamp. I wouldn't use an LED machine any/significantly more than I use my current projector.
As far as brightness, the "extra" perceived brightness is meaningless. What I mean is there's no reason to choose LED because it "looks" brighter, it's just nice to know when buying one that you can expect a bit more brightness than the measurements say, but I don't think it would be a differentiating/deciding factor vs UHP.
One final note of personal opinion based on no facts: I think 4K is an interim step to the next standard of 8K which is already under discussion in Japan. For most people to get anything out of 4K they will need a huge screen or need to sit very close. I don't think many consumers have huge screens or will pay for huge screens until they are much, much cheaper and don't require light control, and I don't think they are able to sit any closer than they do today.
Who are we talking about when we say "many customers", in the mass market? No, most of the mass market will get nothing from 4K. But if you're talking about this forum, I'd guess most people in this subforum have screens large enough/sit close enough to get benefit from 4k.
Perhaps OLED is the answer.
Until you can get roll-upable OLEDs in greater than 100" (and scope), it's not the answer for home theater.
So IMO 8K may be necessary to see a difference on the size screens affordable by the average guy.
If you can't see the difference between 1080p and 2160p, you're not going to see it between 1080p and 8k, 8k will be an even more subtle difference and you'll have to sit incredibly close to see the benefits of 8k.
Without a huge consumer market (not the people on this board), there will be little demand for 4K and little available reasonably priced content.
Don't underestimate the industry's desire/ability to generate demand. Nobody really needs 4k, but they'll sell it and the mass market will buy it just like they buy any other feature (whether they utilize it or not). They need another reason to sell everyone another copy of .
Let's revisit this in 2 years and see if you're still interested in 4K. Until there is a huge consumer market with high speed internet (most have very slow connections today), a markedly visible image improvement on screen sizes used by the average consumer, and reasonable pricing of hardware, there will be little demand for 4K content. I hope the 4K enthusiasts don't beat me up (I doubt they're hanging around this forum) but let's face it they've been waiting nearly 2 years and there's still essentially no content.
1) There are other (potential) benefits to 4k than just resolution, ITU-R BT2020 specifies 10 and 12 bit encoding (smoother gradients) and a much wider gamut, so 4k, resolution aside could bring quality much closer to what we get at the theater than we do today.
2) I'm less interested in 4k content (resolution wise) than I am a 4k display. I can see the limits of 1080p right now where I sit, I look forward to 4k displays (even scaled content) to mitigate that. Combine that with potentially 10+ bit encoding and wider gamut, and I'm excited for 4k.
3) Maybe the biggest thing that has me excited for 4K is: New DMDs
. TI has new consumer DMDs in the works for 4K. Will these bring contrast improvements? Other improvements? I hope so.