Have you searched the Internet for projectors recently. If so, it’s a certainty that you’ve come across a slew of LED projectors priced at around $200, touting HD compatibility, 50,000 hour LED light source, and list brightness in “lux” instead of “lumens” but often “mistakenly” list the lux rating as a lumen rating.
Out of curiosity, I ordered a couple of these projectors—the Apeman LC650 and the Gzunelic M8s—to see what they offer the ultra-budget-conscious projector shopper. If a full hands-on review is TL;DR, here’s the scoop: These are toys.
UPDATE: Check out comment number 29 for a mini review of the Apeman LC650, which is the better of these two projectors.
Anyone looking for a quality home theater projection solution should take a hard pass on these projectors. By AVS Forum standards, the crux of it is this: For the money, you get a relatively dim 1080p projector with a plastic lens that won’t focus evenly (if one side is perfect, the other side is just a little blurred) and where the only adjustment provided to make the image fit on screen is electronic keystone correction and electronic zoom.
Anyone concerned with picture quality but shopping projectors should save a few extra bucks, and at the very minimum, take a look at an entry-level BenQ or Optoma instead.
The most important thing to understand is that a 6000 lux (Apeman) or 7000 lux (Gzunelic) projector is actually really dim projector. We’re talking perhaps 300-lumen class, if compared to name-brand projector specs. Unfortunately, tons of these projectors inaccurately swap lux for lumens in the product descriptions, which is highly deceptive. Furthermore, I’ve seen online reviews where the reviewer breathlessly states how bright a projector with that many lumens gets. Presumably, these are reviews from people who have never used a projector from a respected brand, have no clue about coloimetry, and quite possibly have never used the projector they are reviewing.
Whatever it is that causes the use of inaccurate specs, the point remains that you get what you pay for, and something’s gotta give when you go cheap. With these units, it’s brightness as well as the ability to focus that are compromised, which are two of the most important things.
Having said all that, I can still see use cases for these sort of projectors. Factoring in the price, at least the Apeman is “OK” as long as you understand its limitations. Let’s say you want to do a backyard movie night, or have kids and want to set them up with a way to play video games in the basement, or need a projector to use with an exercise bike, and your budget is around $200. As long as you keep the projected image size on the small side (let’s say around 60-80 inches), you do in fact get a projector that does a “good enough” job, runs fairly cool, and has a LED light source that will last a long time.
The one area where both projectors are “not half bad” is the surprisingly accurate color and decent motion rendering.
While both are “cheap” in the “you get what you pay for” sense, there were some very notable differences between the Apeman LC650 and Gzunelic M8s. Overall, the Apeman is the better projector and could be considered for select applications, while IMO the Gzunelic M8s should simply be avoided. Considering that I paid 30% less for the Apeman (with a coupon it cost $170 versus $235 for the Gzunelic), choosing between them is a no-brainer. The M8s is said to be a bit brighter, although I would argue you can’t really see the difference.
The Gzunelic M8s is rated as the brighter projector, but it was inferior to the Apeman due to its lens.
While both projectors have poorly performing lenses, the Apeman LC650 has the better lens of the two—by far, with relatively better focus uniformity across the screen. The Gzunelic I checked out has an utterly terrible lens and is impossible to focus properly.
The Apeman is also noticeably quieter and has a sealed design that’s dust resistant. By comparison, the Gzunelic’s lens started collecting dust on its inside surface within minutes of my turning it on, so it’s only a matter of time before blobs appear in the projected image.
Both projectors performed poorly when it comes to the lens, but the Apeman's was better.
Both projectors have basic menu systems that include some calibration controls, which wind up doing very little to improve things. The color you get out of the box is basically what you get, take it or leave it. I doubt anyone buys these projectors with the notion that they will calibrate them.
After my hands-on with each of them, I can’t say I recommend either of these projectors. But I also understand that this is what you get at this price point. The thing is, you can purchase a 43” 4K TV for a bit over $200 these days, which IMO is money better spent, especially if that’s all the budget you have for a display.
Anyone with home theater aspirations should take a hard pass on these projectors. Personally, I found them to be offputting, especially with the deceptive lumens ratings, but also how badly suited they are to any reasonable installation. Because beyond focusing issues, the projected image is not at all offset. In my living room, that means the optimal place for the projector is right on top of my head. Obviously, that's not going to happen.
Unfortunately, if you put one of these projectors on a table, or ceiling mount it, because of the lack of offset (which is what vertical lens shift adjusts), you’ll be using a ton of digital keystone correction, which reduces resolution and exacerbates the lens focus issue. So, unless you are a kid playing video games while sitting on the floor, finding a suitable spot to put this unit is a challenge.
Of course, I do wish that these two projectors were better performers, but reality is what it is. These are poorly-performing projectors with simplistic designs that make them only a good fit for select, casual usage scenarios, like the backyard movies I mentioned. It's a projector for a family that has kids and want to let the kids "have" the projector to play with.
These projectors are little more that plastic toys, and should be treated as such. But between the two, the Apeman is considerably better overall. Now, if I was a 13 year old kid again, I'd be super-duper thrilled to get one of these as a gift, be it for a birthday or Christmas. So there's that.
---------
We are committed to finding, researching, and recommending the best products. We earn commissions from purchases you make using the retail links in our product reviews. Please help support AVS Forum by using these links. Learn more about how this works here.
I'm an avid AV enthusiast, photographer, video producer, and drone pilot who spends his spare time exploring cities, listening to music, watching movies, and playing video games.
I'm an avid AV enthusiast, photographer, video producer, and drone pilot who spends his spare time exploring cities, listening to music, watching movies, and playing video games.
The Vivibright manual keystone adjustment looks like a good feature to have on this sort of PJ. But one review of the Vivibright F30 rightly notes that "the F30 only has an ANSI lumen rating of 360 lumens" so I'd expect it to be just about as dim as these other two.
The lumen ratings on these projectors are like those PMPO watt ratings on boomboxes. "1000 watts" lol.
I had the opportunity to review about a dozen of these cheap projectors on Amazon at no cost, the most expensive being $250. I sent back all but two. For my theater I have an Epson 5050ub, so that was my comparison.
Of the two I kept, one is actually 1080p and has decent edge clarity with a glass lens and the other is 720p with a glass lens and ok edge clarity. Most claim to be "HD" but that just means they will accept an HD signal and are really 480p. I kept those two good ones for a couple reasons. Outdoor projection and retro games don't need the best video quality but doing it on a big screen is fun. I also had some fun cowitnessing two projectors, projecting one over the other for better quality, which I wouldn't try with heavier, more expensive PJs without lens shift.
Most of the cheap projectors were garbage and a couple of the more expensive ones had major issues like a cracked lens or debris in the lens. The sellers never tried to replace them, they offered a refund (which I didn't take after explaining they were sent for free), and some didn't even want the return. They can be a fun toy, but multiple people have said they would never consider a home theater projector because of experiences with cheap projectors. That's like saying they would never consider an OLED because they had a bad experience with a 21" no-name monitor, but it sticks with people. I won't talk about performance because we all know it's pretty bad and there's no point talking brands because they change names like we change socks (or just sell the same thing with 15 different names).
People generally don't know enough about image quality to make educated decisions about TVs, let alone PJs. They just know the more expensive the better and the bigger the better.
Not trying to sound like a smart aleck here, but shouldn’t this thread be in the “Deals Forum” as pricing is not supposed to be discussed for some reason in the general <3000 forum.
That being said my Nephew recently bought one of these projectors and has it in a fairly nice theater room in fact audio wise it is very much upper end as he is much more an audiophile. The PQ in a very good light controlled room is not that bad. I personally want a little more than these provide.
There are also a host of “real” projectors that don’t get talked about that fall in the <500 number. I have been running a Viewsonic Pro7827HD it is a .65” DLP with a RGBRGB color wheel and 2000 real world lumens and some nice black level and it sold new with a full 3 year warranty for a couple years for $499 I have 4 years usage at about 6 hours a day now. So I have a running cost now of about 5 cents per hour of use.
For me that’s an amazing number based on watching a 110” bright colorful HD image
So my opinion is these are ok but there are other low cost options even going down to WXGA resolution in a real projector the loss in resolution isn’t that much compared to the improvement in PQ.
Not trying to sound like a smart aleck here, but shouldn’t this thread be in the “Deals Forum” as pricing is not supposed to be discussed for some reason in the general <3000 forum.
That being said my Nephew recently bought one of these projectors and has it in a fairly nice theater room in fact audio wise it is very much upper end as he is much more an audiophile. The PQ in a very good light controlled room is not that bad. I personally want a little more than these provide.
There are also a host of “real” projectors that don’t get talked about that fall in the <500 number. I have been running a Viewsonic Pro7827HD it is a .65” DLP with a RGBRGB color wheel and 2000 real world lumens and some nice black level and it sold new with a full 3 year warranty for a couple years for $499 I have 4 years usage at about 6 hours a day now. So I have a running cost now of about 5 cents per hour of use.
For me that’s an amazing number based on watching a 110” bright colorful HD image
So my opinion is these are ok but there are other low cost options even going down to WXGA resolution in a real projector the loss in resolution isn’t that much compared to the improvement in PQ.
Editorial content (which this is) often includes product pricing and also affiliate links to buy products. Reviews, etc. have it.
Price discussion is a matter of context. The intent is to avoid threads become dominated by price comparison shopping, let's say an owner's thread for a particular model.
No, it does not belong in great found deals, that section is for stuff that's specifically on sale.
Yes, that last point is exactly right, if the lens is the weak link then the native resolution is irrelevant.
The best I tested and kept was from CI Best, model M18. The other one was only called "LED Projector" with no brand or model number. The CI Best M18 is surprisingly still on Amazon with a decent number of (uneducated) reviews. Again, this one is barely passable, but at least it has edge to edge clarity and a glass lens.
I would guess QC is extremely low in these so what you get might not perform as well. A few I tested looked identical with different badges and had varied performance with color, focus, and brightness.
So many of these come down to "You get what you pay for." as a mantra. It does seem that focus and brightness are definitely the weak spots, but when you look at reviews on Amazon (for example) it is quite clear that colors seem to be well saturated.
These are not home theater projectors. But, not everyone does home theater. A lot of people are just looking for that outdoor experience with some friends. Or a little 'fun' setup for their kids on the wall. In which case, even a refurb HT1070A from BenQ may be more than they are looking to spend, and more than they should spend. It has to be a number that people won't feel overly bad about when they product takes a dump. Which, they all will eventually because electronics do things like that. Even the pricey stuff.
I wish I had more first-hand experience with a lot of these cheap models. Places like Gear Best which focus on this cheap Chinese stuff is just insane with their reviews and the lack of seriousness, so I wish we could get more reviews, and frankly more in-depth and serious reviews of 'cheap'. The problem is that there is no money in it for reviewers who constantly trash cheap imports, and there is no incentive to set the record straight across the board. Saying a BenQ HT2050A has a 7 out of 10 lens quality and then a cheap import has a 2 or 3 over and over may help people understand the difference than a few hundred bucks can buy you.
But, I think it is fair to say that while these are toys.... toys are still fun. My biggest headache is those that want to 'try out' home theater and think that buying a $200 projector will give them the appropriate understanding of what a entry level BenQ, Optoma, or Epson will deliver. Or what a XGimi with a serious LED engine in it will put on screen. There seems to be such a major dividing line between these cheap Chinese imports and base level 3LCD/DLP models. It's like if BenQ just put out a $300 1080p DLP it might change the game completely for those who are truly just shopping for base line entry level. Not that I expect that to happen, or necessarily want it.
As a kid in the early 60’s my dad bought a home film 8mm movie camera as well as a projector and screen. Every other family in town seemed to have one. He spent the equivalency of what one would spend today for a nice enough HT projector and most likely quite a bit more. All we could watch was 15-20 minutes of me riding my bike or someone opening Christmas gifts or blowing out birthday candles. Even so it was great fun and the anticipation of setting it up and turning out the lights and the enormous 60” ground glass screen was a special treat.
These projectors are a bit like that IMO. Only now the movies are taken on a smart phone or streaming off netflix. They survive because of their low price. Most families are careful about a $500 expense not to mention a $1,500 one to just get to the minimal of what most here would even watch. 200 bucks or better yet 125 like I see some of these at Wal-Mart going for is worth a try and hook them up to an old DVD player and play $3.85 DVDs on for the kids sleepovers. When you think about it Wal-Mart still sells a majority of their media as DVD. Red Box rents mostly DVD because it cost $1 for DVD and $2 for BD.
The manufactures took the cheapest route to mass-produce a projector and could do it because they know they will sell in high volume.
My hopes are some of the mainstream companies follow along as the technology matures and just like AV mentioned build that $300 real projector not just the discounted end of the manufacturing run clear out the inventory deal. I think there is a huge market out there and instead of making 500 on a 2000 machine they make 50 on a 300 machine and sell 10 times as many. Quality FP for many years was a pretty elite market. Over the last 10 years more regular folks have given it a try. In a time where you can buy a 50-60” TV for cheap who would want a projector that does a 50-60” image?
Big is about the last thing FP has going for it. Big needs to be at least bright.
I think 300 would be great but I see the crossover hurdle to be the 500 point, do that and tell people they don’t have to buy a $200 lamp every couple years and they get true HD and they will sell off the shelves.
The so called $300 decent-quality new PJ (eg by BenQ) has zero incentive to be made IMO. There are decent new PJs with warranties for $600 (benq, viewsonic, etc), which then sell on Ebay refurbished or used for $150 - 250 excluding shipping TODAY (HT1070A, PRO8200, etc).
The Chinese toys come in at or below the latter refurbished market since they basically are warranty-less and some are good enough for some things.
I doubt anyone spending $200 on a projector expect anything beyond a large image on a wall or screen. People who buy these likely can't tell the difference between HD and SD.
I have 6 tvs with 3 of these being 4K, with full surround and streaming devices, so I have been around the block a few times. I just spent a month trying to settle on my first projector and 120"screen for outdoor viewing. I started with the Chinese 300.00 units from Amazon but invested a little more (450.00) on a used Epson 2150 that had less than a 100 hours on the unit.. It's a 1080P with 2500 lumens with HDMI. Works great as long as it's being used in anything other than full daylight or a well lit room. Good luck hunting!
Really depends on your expectations. A person looking for something to compete with much more expensive options for use in a dedicated home theater should rightly be ridiculed for being daft. A person getting something like this for a specific use case (sleepovers, kid's backyard camputs, etc.) might find a very effective solution.
Personally, I have a little, lazer powered picoprojector that I take on business trips (not all Hotel TVs are created equal) and when my son and I go backpacking. It is no where close to my 5050ub in PQ. But it is awesome for what it is used for.
For the money, you get a relatively dim 1080p projector with a plastic lens that won’t focus evenly (if one side is perfect, the other side is just a little blurred)
May I ask a really dumb question? If you don't project straight at the wall or screen, but project at a slight diagonal, does that bring both sides and the center into focus? If so, by about what fraction is one side larger than the other?
If that does work, I could imagine this being an upgrade over my 1080p 39" diagonal TV/computer monitor - though I'm worried that 300 lumens might not be bright enough to use in a lighted room, at any reasonable size. At 300 lumens, I might need a lighted keyboard, so I could use it in the dark.
Though - last Black Friday, there was a $200 nominally 50" 4K TV available - if that is repeated this Black Friday, that might be better, since I sit at the desk that my TV is mounted on, and also use it as a computer monitor. It might be hard to do that my projection shadow got in the way.
BTW, does the better one do 1080p at about 60 Hz? I don't much like flickering displays.
May I ask a really dumb question? If you don't project straight at the wall or screen, but project at a slight diagonal, does that bring both sides and the center into focus? If so, by about what fraction is one side larger than the other?
If that does work, I could imagine this being an upgrade over my 1080p 39" diagonal TV/computer monitor - though I'm worried that 300 lumens might not be bright enough to use in a lighted room, at any reasonable size. At 300 lumens, I might need a lighted keyboard, so I could use it in the dark.
Though - last Black Friday, there was a $200 nominally 50" 4K TV available - if that is repeated this Black Friday, that might be better, since I sit at the desk that my TV is mounted on, and also use it as a computer monitor. It might be hard to do that my projection shadow got in the way.
BTW, does the better one do 1080p at about 60 Hz? I don't much like flickering displays.
Projecting off-center will cause the image to be stretched. One side will be too long and the other too short. It is pretty noticeable to me but the actual distance is in inches or less, depending on image size. The corners will be at a slightly different distance from the lens and therefore each corner and the center can never be in focus at the same time. The focus difference is pretty egregious on the cheap PJs.
Cheap projectors do not have any horizontal keystone correction. Most will have vertical keystone correction so you can mount it higher than the screen or projection surface with the body of the PJ at an angle and the image will be a flat square. Only pricier ($2000 and up) PJs have horizontal and vertical lens shift, which inches the image over without using any keystone correction. This is incredibly important if you need flexibility in the install because using keystone correction has two big flaws: 1. On high quality PJs especially, keystone correction will decrease the brightness because it changes the way light passes through the lens. It actually distorts the picture in a way that squares the image. 2. On low quality PJs, it will either change the focus or make it impossible to focus. Because it is a distortion of the image, low quality lenses will never be able to focus when the image is shifted. In addition, most cheap PJs use a physical wheel to move the lens around so if you have to change the zoom you are also changing the size of the displayed image.
Cheaper PJs are very inflexible for install. Because their focus changes the size of the displayed image as well (the focus and keystone physically move the lens to "distort" the image until it looks like it is in focus) and there is only vertical keystone adjustment you have to be very precise, but on most the keystone adjustment made it impossible to focus the image. That means you have to install them in the exact perfect spot at a direct straight angle facing the screen. Typically, a PJ should be mounted with the lens at the top of the screen and the PJ should be level. With some of the cheaper ones I tested they were very sensitive to height, so they actually only performed well when the lens was physically centered on the screen, otherwise vertical keystone correction had to be used and it destroyed the focus. The better ones were able to perform with the lens at the top of the screen, as it should be. The best setup for the cheap PJs is a fixed mount (if you have the patience, distance, and the PJ lets you mount it at the top of the screen) a table top, or a tripod. For a tripod you may need an adapter for the screw-in mount as some PJs have a recessed screw hole. I usually use a tripod because I use the cheap PJs outside my home (and I am not happy with how the last two mounting attempts turned out).
Business class and pricier PJs may have horizontal and vertical keystone correction and pricier PJs may have vertical and horizontal lens shift. Business class PJs also focus on brightness and text legibility at the cost of color space coverage. Keystone correction takes away brightness and may distort the image in other ways while lens shift does not have these issues. Cheap projectors must be placed perfectly to be able to focus and their keystone correction is particularly punishing to the image quality.
Edit: I had some issues in the past with a 4k TV but after testing again it was really just Ubisoft's launcher and game code that was causing the problems. Now those problems are resolved.
Cheap TVs usually make for poor computer monitors as well, especially 4k TVs. In many instances they can't run native resolutions other than 4k and can have upscaling and switching issues.
That wasn't my experience with a relatively early generation1080p TV. I bought it after seeing it in the store, with a beautiful, well resolved, high contrast, intense color picture, with no obvious artifacts. I did have other problems with it though - truly awful tech support, lousy sound quality, micro-cracks slowly spreading on the screen, which after 10 years I found unacceptable, so I replaced it. I will never buy that brand again. I should have known something was wrong - the big box store had it on clearance. (I knew the sound was bad, but I had a HiFi, which fixed that. It seems like a lot of TVs now have lousy sound). If I had read the reviews, I would have realized other people had problems with tech support - i.e., AFAIK, no one but me figured out how to get HD channels. But it had VGA inputs, as well as separate and composite video, and HDMI. And it accepted all he resolutions available at that time, including from the non-HDMI inputs, unlike later models, which only did 1080p on HDMI.
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
