Hey I chimed in before when you asked and I’ll chime in again... since you asked
Refresher: I’m in similar spot with my 160” 1.0 gain screen and had the Epson 4000, BenQ 2550, and TK800. The Epson’s HDR wasn’t bad, but I prefer the HDR implementation on the BenQ’s.
HDR in any projector is going to throw color space standards out the window. The implementation of balancing color space and brightness is manufacture specific and I feel BenQ did a really good job finding this balance and avoiding oversaturated red hotspots which I found in the Epson.
So color space/HDR implementation, Epson 4000<TK800<HT2550
Brightness. With the HDR implementation scoring towards the BenQ on both the HT2550 and TK800, the brightness story is slightly different for people with these 150”+ screens (who 4K was made for!). HDR brightness was slightly better on the Epson compared to the HT2550. But what you trade for brightness with the HT2550, you make up with accurate color and great HDR implementation. The TK800 is where big, bright, HDR shines. The TK800 bests the Epson in HDR brightness, implementation, and is only marginally less color accurate compared to the HT2550.
So HDR brightness for 150”+ screens, HT2550<Epson 4000<TK800
For HDR Brightness:
If I had a 100-120” screen in a light controlled room I go for the HT2550
If I had a 120”+ screen in light controlled room I go for the TK800
If I had a 100”+ screen in ambient lit room I go for TK800
This next gen of projectors may change the above. While I am super excited for the HT3550, I also have my eye on the successor to the TK800.
Between these 3 projectors I just don’t see a scenario where the Epson made sense... for me. It’s too gimped to have the placement flexibility make it work it. Perhaps if I had an anamorphic screen?
We will get a lot more info this next week though! Hooray for competition