[foldedpath]

The Seleco HT200DM is a native 16:9 (848 x 480) projector.


There will probably be more of these lower-res, "DVD-optimized" 16:9 projectors coming out soon. It might be a good idea to mention the specific chip resolutions in that list... unless you're only trying to focus on the higher-resolution models.

 

[David Wallis]

I am not so sure I would call the HT200DM a native 16/9. As far as the DMD chip is concerned it is a 4/3 (800/848x600) but it can use the extra 48 pixels wide to get a non scaled 16/9 image onto the DMD. It is definitely is not a 1:78 rectangle DMD.

Sony really is the only true 1:78 show in town (or the Sanyo varient of that panel). The new Sharp Dlp is not yet real so its bare bones at this stage.

I would say that by this time next year almost all brands will have a version of the new 1280x720 DMD and some may even be as early as feb or march.


Jvc may also have some true 1:78 DILA's by this time next year as well ? So I guess if we wait till CES 02 we should see some strong shipping dates and maybe some hazy shipping dates will come out at CEDIA next month.

Honestly it depends on how long you wait as I am sure at CES 03 we will see something much better.


DavidW


[This message has been edited by David Wallis (edited 08-04-2001).]

 

[Mark Hunter]

16:9?


We could also include all 4:3 with an Isco or Panamorph optical addition. Some have found that to be a very cost effective solution.

 

[video joe]

Toshiba also has a 16/9 unit (1280 x 720). I don't know the model#.

 

[atari.fr]

i'm trying to list all the 16/9e projectors


i found:

Sony 10HT

Sony 11HT

Sanyo PLV 60

Sharp XVZ9000U (DLP)


any others ?


What is the specs of the DLP chip: D1 ? 16/9e one ?

 

[foldedpath]

DavidW,


When the HT200DM is running in 848 x 480 mode, the refresh rate is higher, and it's not lighting up the rest of the 800 x 600 panel. It's only lighting up the 848 x 480 segment. That makes it a 16:9 projector in my book.


I can see that others might think it's just a cobbled-together mode on a 4:3 800 x 600 chip, but the projector sure acts like a 16:9 projector when it's running. For example, it doesn't benefit from a Panamorph.


If it walks like a duck...

 

[btmoore]

Quote:

Originally posted by milori: 16:9? We could also include all 4:3 with an Isco or Panamorph optical addition. Some have found that to be a very cost effective solution.

I don't know if I would consider that quite the same thing. The real advantage of the native 16:9 projectors is you do not have to deal with add-on lenses and scaler with external processors or htpcs. With native 16:9 projectors you just hook in your HD stb or DVD player and boom native full resolution wide screen. If you end up switching to watch 4:3 material there is no zooming or scale readjustments, you just change channels. For those of us who like to tinker around with stuff a 4:3 system with all the add-ons may be fun but I love the ease of use of my native 16:9 projector. while you may be able to use a 4:3 projector and lense to produce a 16:9 image, IMO it is not the same thing.


Brian

 

[Robert Whitehead]

Zenith has one that sounds like the Sharp.

 

[mhamel]

There is also the Studio Experience 13HD (based on the PLV-60)


-Mike

 

[steve5097]

I believe the Toshiba is called MT7. There is also a Runco which may be like the Sanyo.



------------------

Steve

 

[mflaster]

Quote:

Originally posted by steve5097: I believe the Toshiba is called MT7.

Yup, there's an AVS banner ad that pops up about it for about $5k. Here's the Projector Central link . I'm surprised no one here has seemed to talk about it at all.


Mike



------------------

Join the NYC-area HT club! Send me e-mail!

 

[David Wallis]

foldedpath

I understand that. This is not a bash on the HT200DM so I am not flaming owners as it looks very good on Dvd, but DLP is a reflective technology and you are reflecting onto a 1:33:1 panel full of mirrors (In truth 848x600 with some on, some off).


Turning them on and off in a 1:33:1 panel is simple enough, but the angle of them off would still have an impact on the so called 1:78:1 native area used on the panel.

You can not take away the unused mirrors fully.


I believe the advantage to this unit is the non scaling of Dvd,so you should see less artifacts and the other benefit is the use of the RGBRGB color wheel.


If you truely think about this you will see TI calling this DMD a native 1:78:1 is more about hype and marketing than truth. I also think it is a little deceptive to be honest.


Make no mistake none of this matters because the picture from a HT200DM is better than the picture from a HT200, but IMHO I believe it is is because of the access to the 48 pixels (no scaling) and the use of the new color wheel. Seleco could not do this as an upgrade on the HT200 because the DMD is too slow to use the double color wheel. The only DMD's that can handle the double color wheel are the new 0.7"DM , 0.8"WXGA, 0.9"XGA, and the 1.1"SXGA .


Its a little like a television being labeled as HD when the input is downconverted to suit the display device. It may take it but it sure is not a true HD in the output department.

If the DMD had "only 848x480 mirrors" then as far as I am concerned it is a true 1:78 device but despite the hype in reality its actually a 1:41 ratio of pixels on the panel. (I just call it a 1:33:1 to keep it simple)

Absolutely nothing wrong with any of this in my view, except the native 1:78 tag they give it.


DavidW



[This message has been edited by David Wallis (edited 08-05-2001).]

 

[DanHouck]

Add the new Seleco HT 300 which is supposed to be shown at Cedia. It is supposedly based on the same chip as the Sharp uses.


Dan


P.S. Aside from the internals, the HT200DM is specifically set up to project 16:9. IMO that qualifies it for the list.

 

[foldedpath]

Quote:

foldedpath I understand that. This is not a bash on the HT200DM so I am not flaming owners as it looks very good on Dvd, but DLP is a reflective technology and you are reflecting onto a 1:33:1 panel full of mirrors (In truth 848x600 with some on, some off). Turning them on and off in a 1:33:1 panel is simple enough, but the angle of them off would still have an impact on the so called 1:78:1 native area used on the panel. You can not take away the unused mirrors fully.

David,


How does a mirror set to off (i.e. black) have any effect on the image? If the manufacturer didn't know what they were doing with optics and internal baffling, you might get some scattering of stray light into the image path from the unused mirrors. But the Seleco engineers obviously know what they're doing. If there was any internal scattering, you'd see the effects on black level and contrast range. This projector has the best black levels of any DLP or LCD projector I’ve seen, including higher resolution projectors. The only better image I’ve seen is from a big CRT projector. There is nothing in the image indicating that part of the DLP chip isn’t turned on.


A 4:3 DLP chip with mirrors turned off to create a 16:9 matrix, is effectively the same as a "native" 16:9 DLP chip of the same resolution. Even the mirror refresh rates are the same. If you can’t point to an artifact in the image that tells you whether you’re looking at an electronically masked 4:3 chip, or a true 16:9 ratio chip... then what’s the difference? Any way you look at it, the image is being formed on a 16:9 pixel matrix.


We should describe these projectors according to how the source image is formed. It puts the HT200DM in the same class as other projectors that form the 16:9 ratio image directly on the DLP chip, as opposed to other approaches like the Panamorph, which modifies an original 4:3 image with an outboard lens.

 

[car_rod]

Hmmm... don't agree completely.


OK, it seems this HT200DM makes a "intelligent letterboxing", but this is still letterboxing: the image height is bigger for 4/3 sources than for 16/9 sources, bright output is higher for 4/3 sources than for 16/9, that's why the HT200DM can't be considered as a "true" 16/9. It does just a nice step ahead to be a good "16/9 compatible" projector.


This 848x600 TI chip, an ucommon resolution, is a strange tech solution to me. Why didn't TI simply used the more common 1024x768 resolution? Making it a "16/9 compatible" chip is much more easy -which is 1024x576 resolution, so no added "48" pixels- and more compliant with PAL media which has 576 lines (in fact, a perfect match). Or, why didn't TI proposed a true 848x480 chip (or more exactly 854x480?), allowing thus -hopefully- a cheaper solution for HT enthousiast?

 

[Edmonton]

I'm new to HT and I have to disagree some what.


I just got and tested a NEC-LT155 and watch several DVD's in 16:9 and had a very faint light still hitting the screen.

Although I could hardly see it, it was a little distracting.


Just My Opinion.



------------------

-

Marantz SR-19

Marantz DV-3100

Energy EncoreII

32PIP JVC (looking for FP)

Digital Cable Box


Eddy

 

[bossmonkey]

...and let's not forget the grand daddy of them all:


Sony VPL-W400Q


still great quality & an amazing value for money if you can get your hands on an used one...

 

[David Wallis]

Quote:

" A 4:3 DLP chip with mirrors turned off to create a 16:9 matrix, is effectively the same as a "native" 16:9 DLP chip of the same resolution. "

foldedpath

No flames but any way you look at this with a logical outlook the HT200DM can never be considered a native 16/9 projector.


If it is then "why" do they not call the HT250 (1024x768) a native 16/9 ?? It too has a native 1024x576 16/9 mode where it turns off the mirrors outside of the picture.

So I fail to see this "DM DMD" being a native 16/9 unless they have two interchangeable light paths with two DMDs ( 1 x 800x600 and 1 x 848x480) inside this unit ?


Honestly I can not see the logic in the marketing of this as a true native 16/9 unit because it is no different than any projector that turns off the unused mirrors when in 16/9 mode. Its marketing nothing more nothing less.


As I said it is not a slur on this Seleco or the Plus Piano as the benefit is non scaling the image and RGBRGB color wheel.

But I can assure you it aint no native 16/9, no matter which way you look at it because it physically has 848x600 mirrors in the DMD.



DavidW



[This message has been edited by David Wallis (edited 08-06-2001).]

 

[foldedpath]

Quote:

car_rod wrote: OK, it seems this HT200DM makes a "intelligent letterboxing", but this is still letterboxing: the image height is bigger for 4/3 sources than for 16/9 sources, bright output is higher for 4/3 sources than for 16/9, that's why the HT200DM can't be considered as a "true" 16/9. It does just a nice step ahead to be a good "16/9 compatible" projector.

I hate to keep beating this horse, but we should at least understand how the HT200DM works, if we're going to discuss it. The image height is not bigger for 4:3 sources. Most HT200DM owners will keep the projector in 16:9 (848 x 480) mode all the time. There is no reason to use the 800 x 600 mode, especially since the overall performance is worse (lower mirror refresh rate). In 16:9 mode, 4:3 video is shown in the center of the 16:9 panel with black bars on the sides. And of course the image is not brighter for 4:3 in this mode. In this mode, the projector acts exactly like any other true 16:9 projector.

Quote:

car_rod wrote: This 848x600 TI chip, an ucommon resolution, is a strange tech solution to me. Why didn't TI simply used the more common 1024x768 resolution? Making it a "16/9 compatible" chip is much more easy -which is 1024x576 resolution, so no added "48" pixels- and more compliant with PAL media which has 576 lines (in fact, a perfect match). Or, why didn't TI proposed a true 848x480 chip (or more exactly 854x480?), allowing thus -hopefully- a cheaper solution for HT enthousiast?

Seleco's 848 x 480 mod of the TI 800 x 600 chip is aimed at showing DVD's with optimum results and no scaling artifacts. It may seem like a strange tech solution to you, but to me it makes perfect sense. Aside from aspect ratio, refresh rates are another reason for the 848 x 480 chip modification. TI's DLP chips sometimes show image artifacts when they're pushed hard at full resolution, which lowers the refresh rate of the mirrors. The Seleco HT250 is known to have this problem:
http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/Forum10/HTML/007076.html


The HT200DM's new 848 x 480 mode isn't just about getting 16:9 aspect ratio, it's about bumping up the refresh rate for better performance.


If you want to watch HDTV, you get a high res projector and work around the problems with refresh rates and DVD scaling. If you mainly want to watch DVD's, then I think there is an argument for the lower-res, direct wire approach. There is room in the market for both approaches.


Sure, it might be better to have a chip with only 848 x 480 pixels, and TI probably has a new "DVD DLP" chip like this in the pipeline. We're still in the early days of digital displays, and we're stuck with chips originally developed for computer and NTSC aspect ratios, while we wait for the home theater 16:9 display chips to arrive.

Quote:

DavidW wrote: No flames but any way you look at this with a logical outlook the HT200DM can never be considered a native 16/9 projector.

Okay, I agree we probably shouldn't call this a "native 16:9 projector", and I'll retract my statement in the first post above. But we'll have to agree to disagree about calling it a "16:9 projector". http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

Quote:

DavidW wrote: If it is then "why" do they not call the HT250 (1024x768) a native 16/9 ?? It too has a native 1024x576 16/9 mode where it turns off the mirrors outside of the picture.

Seleco doesn't call any of their projectors "native 16:9". They say the HT200DM has a "16:9 resolution mode", which is accurate. We're getting hung up on the word "native" here.


Okay, I've taken up enough bandwidth and I'll drop the subject. Everyone can make up their own minds about what this projector is. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif



[This message has been edited by foldedpath (edited 08-07-2001).]