[Droogne]

As the prices for 4K projectors are still extremely high, I was wondering if it's worth the money at this moment. Ofcourse they are going to be better than 1080p projectors, but is it worth the extra money if you're on a reasonably tight budget and the 2k for the lowest priced 4K projectors is really stretching it.. Another reason why I'm having this dilemma is because there seem to be a lot of second hand 1080p projectors for sale, and almost no 4K projectors.

I have a few options, but I'm primarily asking myself the question how much I would compromising by going for a second hand 1080p projector (at least younger than 2 years old).

Some extra info: I already have a 65" 4K HDR OLED so I'm compromising in quality either way. The upgrade I'd like is screen size (I'm keeping the OLED so I would still have supreme quality). The couch is around 2-2,5m (7-8 feet) away from the screen. I know I like sitting pretty close (even 45+° I find enjoyable, and sometimes even 50°), so that would make a screen size of more than 100". I could place the projector on a stand behind the couch (so 8 feet from the screen). You can assume the room is pitch black (I would only use the projector when it's dark outside, by day I would just watch on the OLED).

Maarten

 

[jbnpaul]

How is your room reflections?

I am in the same boat as you, trying to choose between low end uhd vs great hd.

Most of my watching also will happen while it is dark. So we can rule out most of the day light. But my walls are very light.

Since I also would like to have 3D support looks like my only uhd option is benq.
But I am torn between the large number of HD option.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Droogne]

How is your room reflections?

Pretty ignorant about the whole projector side of AV.. what do you mean by that? My room is 8ft (height) x 14 feet (wide) x 13 feet (deep). The screen would be in the middle of the "wide" wall. All walls
are painted in "muddy white" if that makes sense.

I am in the same boat as you, trying to choose between low end uhd vs great hd.

Most of my watching also will happen while it is dark. So we can rule out most of the day light. But my walls are very light.

Since I also would like to have 3D support looks like my only uhd option is benq.


Luckily for me I'm not a fan of 3D (wont spend a single euro to get it. If I have it, great).

But I am torn between the large number of HD option.


Same here.. And as I have no clue about the necessary specs I have no way what to look for.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

answers in bold.

 

[AV_Integrated]

As the prices for 4K projectors are still extremely high, I was wondering if it's worth the money at this moment. Ofcourse they are going to be better than 1080p projectors, but is it worth the extra money if you're on a reasonably tight budget and the 2k for the lowest priced 4K projectors is really stretching it.. Another reason why I'm having this dilemma is because there seem to be a lot of second hand 1080p projectors for sale, and almost no 4K projectors.

I have a few options, but I'm primarily asking myself the question how much I would compromising by going for a second hand 1080p projector (at least younger than 2 years old).

Some extra info: I already have a 65" 4K HDR OLED so I'm compromising in quality either way. The upgrade I'd like is screen size (I'm keeping the OLED so I would still have supreme quality). The couch is around 2-2,5m (7-8 feet) away from the screen. I know I like sitting pretty close (even 45+° I find enjoyable, and sometimes even 50°), so that would make a screen size of more than 100". I could place the projector on a stand behind the couch (so 8 feet from the screen). You can assume the room is pitch black (I would only use the projector when it's dark outside, by day I would just watch on the OLED).

Maarten

Don't confuse 'resolution' and 'higher quality'. Resolution is one part of image quality, but it simply isn't the most important factor. As an oled owner, you already know the most important factor and that is CONTRAST. If you want the best image that compares with your current TV, that comes from a JVC projector. A used JVC RS46 would likely be better looking than about any other projector that you can get on the market. From there, I would go to the newer JVC models, then to the Sony HW45ES, then the Epson 5040.

I would not touch one of the DLP 4K models on the market which start at about $1,300 from Viewsonic. The reality is that these CHEAP models are what will be improved upon and sell for $800 and less in upcoming years. DLP has really been a fan of dredging the bottom most rung of home theater for the better part of a decade now. They do a great job on that rung, but they aren't mid-quality models, they are pretty low. Sony with the HW45ES is mid-quality. Epson with their 4000 and 5040 is there as well. Then the JVC and better Sony models hit top quality.

If you don't own a projector, and have OLED, I would first ask about what your main viewing will be, and how willing you are to trade contrast for resolution. At 7' from a 100" screen, it may be a trade you are willing to make, but then it is on you to ensure you are always feeding it the highest quality 4K material, as 1080p upconverted, or crappy 4K streams just won't really cut it.

Up to you, but I would get a decent JVC for best quality currently available.

 

[thunderbird1100]

Projectorcentral is not a bad place to look at a lot of factors, here's their recently updated 4k list:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/4K-Projector-Reviews.htm

It's tough call right now with all these 4k and 4k enhancement projectors hitting the market, but common wisdom says a top of the line 1080p projector around the same price will give you better contrast. In fact those ~$1500 4k projectors on that list simply cant compete with the higher contrast 1080p projectors you could get around that pricepoint.

If you jump up to the UHD60/65 or Epson 5040ub especially you'll se ebetter blacks and higher contrast.

The beng HT2550 was intriguing to me since I own a HT2050 and want to keep 3d (and the same 3d glasses I currently have), but I read the contrast/blacks on it just isn't particularly good, so it's probably not worth my upgrade, especially spending almost triple what I paid for my HT2050. I'm really pleased with the HT2050 so I will probably keep it until laser 4K projectors come down to more real-world pricing ($2k or less).

 

[Radio81]

so that would make a screen size of more than 100". I could place the projector on a stand behind the couch (so 8 feet from the screen). You can assume the room is pitch black (I would only use the projector when it's dark outside, by day I would just watch on the OLED).

Maarten

How much throw distance do you have? If 8’ is all you have then none of the current 4K projectors are going to be able to project 100” with that short of throw. Your 1080p choices are also extremely limited.

 

[jbnpaul]

what do you mean by that?

By reflections, I meant the light that reflects back to the screen from the wall/floor and celling etc. I don't have projector yet, so take all my opinions with lots of salt.
My understanding is these reflected light will affect the black level and contrast.

From Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast_ratio
An ideal room would absorb all the light reflecting from a projection screen, and the only light seen in the room would come from the display device. With such a room, the contrast ratio of the image would be the same as the contrast ratio of the device. Real rooms reflect some of the light back to the displayed image, lowering the contrast ratio seen in the image.

Since I have no plans to make my current room an ideal light absorbing room, I see there is no point in chasing the unicorn here. In fact, my room will continue to have white ceiling and bright walls, so yes there will be some ambient light due to room reflections. But most of the viewing(80%) will be at night with all lights off. Can use a TV in another room during daylight conditions, mainly for any live events like news/sports/or some random stuff.

Due to these room constraints I am not even considering any projectors that are more than 1500$, since in my room I won't be able to achieve their full potential.
I haven't made a decision yet, but looks like I might end up with BenQ 2050A with an ALR screen.( Or another competing model in that price range )

To make sense something in the range of JVC has to be a lifetime ( at least 5 years+ ) investment for me. But with all the 4K/HDR/DV developments, I am not willing to throw that much money. Whereas a decent HD projector would allow me to do a future upgrade. Lets us hope 4K laser projectors become available at the same price range as the current entry level UHD in 2-3 years.

 

[thunderbird1100]

How much throw distance do you have? If 8’ is all you have then none of the current 4K projectors are going to be able to project 100” with that short of throw. Your 1080p choices are also extremely limited.

UHD50 can do 100" at just 8'10", sounds like he said his couch is 7-8 feet away, so I would assume he could manage about 9 feet on the projector.

I know my HT2050 can do 100" at just 8'4", but that's a lower end 1080p (A good one, but probably he's wanting to spend a little more).

 

[Radio81]

UHD50 can do 100" at just 8'10", sounds like he said his couch is 7-8 feet away, so I would assume he could manage about 9 feet on the projector.

I know my HT2050 can do 100" at just 8'4", but that's a lower end 1080p (A good one, but probably he's wanting to spend a little more).

I know what it sounds like and I'd rather not assume, which is why I quoted the OP for an answer.

I'm still not wrong in saying it won't do 100" at 8'. 9' is a different story.

 

[Archaea]

I understand the caution against the new 4K projectors that came out for $1200-$1700 range (it seems to cheap!!!), but projectorcentral seems to think highly of them, and I've always found their reviews/and experience to be spot on with the models I've seen. They surely have eyes on a BUNCH of different projectors with all the models they review, and so have a broad ground to draw opinions from.


DLP is a tried and true, refined tech at this point, and I feel there is a LOT of markup in the home theater projector universe. Given projectorcentral's positive reviews - those new 4k projectors might be worth a second thought if they fit your use case and budget. I personally don't have any experience with them, and their price is counter-intuitive - but I'm just advising not to dismiss them too easily.

 

[sage11x]

Don't confuse 'resolution' and 'higher quality'. Resolution is one part of image quality, but it simply isn't the most important factor. As an oled owner, you already know the most important factor and that is CONTRAST. If you want the best image that compares with your current TV, that comes from a JVC projector. A used JVC RS46 would likely be better looking than about any other projector that you can get on the market. From there, I would go to the newer JVC models, then to the Sony HW45ES, then the Epson 5040.



I would not touch one of the DLP 4K models on the market which start at about $1,300 from Viewsonic. The reality is that these CHEAP models are what will be improved upon and sell for $800 and less in upcoming years. DLP has really been a fan of dredging the bottom most rung of home theater for the better part of a decade now. They do a great job on that rung, but they aren't mid-quality models, they are pretty low. Sony with the HW45ES is mid-quality. Epson with their 4000 and 5040 is there as well. Then the JVC and better Sony models hit top quality.



If you don't own a projector, and have OLED, I would first ask about what your main viewing will be, and how willing you are to trade contrast for resolution. At 7' from a 100" screen, it may be a trade you are willing to make, but then it is on you to ensure you are always feeding it the highest quality 4K material, as 1080p upconverted, or crappy 4K streams just won't really cut it.



Up to you, but I would get a decent JVC for best quality currently available.

I’m not a big fan of this post. Only because I think the idea of discouraging someone from getting into projection unless they have upwards of 2 to 4 thousand dollars to burn is silly.

I tend to think of projectors and TVs as two distinctly different animals. The truth is, even those mighty JVCs can’t hope to compete with an OLED or FALD LCD TV set. Hell, a JVC can’t hope to compete with a 5/6 year old plasma. I bought into the myth and the legend a little bit myself and while a JVC in a proper room is something to behold it’s not like you haven’t seen deeper blacks or brighter highlights— everyone who owns a semi decent TV already has. It’s best to keep expectations in check. The primary advantage of projection is SIZE. I have a VT60 plasma and there isn’t a projector on the planet that can come close to it. Does that mean my DLP looks terrible? No, it’s just different. The advantage of my DLP is size and resolution/detail— the advantage of my plasma is contrast.

If you have the money to spring for an LCoS or high contrast 3LCD (5040ub or higher— people around here seem to forget that the Epson 4000 has the same native contrast as an Epson 3100 which has roughly the same native contrast as a $500 DLP) absolutely, you should go for it. But if you don’t, DLP can give you a remarkably sharp image with beautiful color and excellent 3D for less than what an equivalent high contrast projector would run you. And the good news is you already have one of the highest contrast displays available when you want to watch that.

I would actually go the other way than AV here as I feel like, after having a 4K 65” OLED, any 1080p only projector is going to be remarkably soft looking. I would actually encourage you to look at one of the 4K or 4Ke projectors as I feel the increase in screen resolution is a pretty big deal for front projection— my personal opinion of course. And it seems JVC themselves thinks so too as their latest projector is a 4K DLP using the same core chip that the current crop of affordable BenQ, Optoma and Viewsonic projectors use.

 

[Luminated67]

Was in the same dilemma as you and after sampling both I ended up with the high end 1080p. In my opinion the high end 1080p offers more for the same money but someone else might well see things differently.

 

[DunMunro]

As the prices for 4K projectors are still extremely high, I was wondering if it's worth the money at this moment. Ofcourse they are going to be better than 1080p projectors, but is it worth the extra money if you're on a reasonably tight budget and the 2k for the lowest priced 4K projectors is really stretching it.. Another reason why I'm having this dilemma is because there seem to be a lot of second hand 1080p projectors for sale, and almost no 4K projectors.

I have a few options, but I'm primarily asking myself the question how much I would compromising by going for a second hand 1080p projector (at least younger than 2 years old).

Some extra info: I already have a 65" 4K HDR OLED so I'm compromising in quality either way. The upgrade I'd like is screen size (I'm keeping the OLED so I would still have supreme quality). The couch is around 2-2,5m (7-8 feet) away from the screen. I know I like sitting pretty close (even 45+° I find enjoyable, and sometimes even 50°), so that would make a screen size of more than 100". I could place the projector on a stand behind the couch (so 8 feet from the screen). You can assume the room is pitch black (I would only use the projector when it's dark outside, by day I would just watch on the OLED).

Maarten

Given your seating distance you are really in the zone for 4K and I'd go for an even larger image if possible, however, placing the PJ on a stand behind the seating is restrictive in terms of suitable PJs. How high is the ceiling?

 

[Droogne]

Given your seating distance you are really in the zone for 4K and I'd go for an even larger image if possible, however, placing the PJ on a stand behind the seating is restrictive in terms of suitable PJs. How high is the ceiling?

Was in the same dilemma as you and after sampling both I ended up with the high end 1080p. In my opinion the high end 1080p offers more for the same money but someone else might well see things differently.

I know what it sounds like and I'd rather not assume, which is why I quoted the OP for an answer.

I'm still not wrong in saying it won't do 100" at 8'. 9' is a different story.

UHD50 can do 100" at just 8'10", sounds like he said his couch is 7-8 feet away, so I would assume he could manage about 9 feet on the projector.

I know my HT2050 can do 100" at just 8'4", but that's a lower end 1080p (A good one, but probably he's wanting to spend a little more).

How much throw distance do you have? If 8’ is all you have then none of the current 4K projectors are going to be able to project 100” with that short of throw. Your 1080p choices are also extremely limited.

Ok, lots of info to consume wow! Will read through it tomorrow and try to answer/understand everything. Info I can readily give you:

ceiling height is 8 feet, and I could place the projector up to 10 feet from the screen. My couch is not against the wall. There is a "walking path" and a LaScala behind it.

 

[jeahrens]

I’m not a big fan of this post. Only because I think the idea of discouraging someone from getting into projection unless they have upwards of 2 to 4 thousand dollars to burn is silly.

I tend to think of projectors and TVs as two distinctly different animals. The truth is, even those mighty JVCs can’t hope to compete with an OLED or FALD LCD TV set. Hell, a JVC can’t hope to compete with a 5/6 year old plasma. I bought into the myth and the legend a little bit myself and while a JVC in a proper room is something to behold it’s not like you haven’t seen deeper blacks or brighter highlights— everyone who owns a semi decent TV already has. It’s best to keep expectations in check. The primary advantage of projection is SIZE. I have a VT60 plasma and there isn’t a projector on the planet that can come close to it. Does that mean my DLP looks terrible? No, it’s just different. The advantage of my DLP is size and resolution/detail— the advantage of my plasma is contrast.

If you have the money to spring for an LCoS or high contrast 3LCD (5040ub or higher— people around here seem to forget that the Epson 4000 has the same native contrast as an Epson 3100 which has roughly the same native contrast as a $500 DLP) absolutely, you should go for it. But if you don’t, DLP can give you a remarkably sharp image with beautiful color and excellent 3D for less than what an equivalent high contrast projector would run you. And the good news is you already have one of the highest contrast displays available when you want to watch that.

I would actually go the other way than AV here as I feel like, after having a 4K 65” OLED, any 1080p only projector is going to be remarkably soft looking. I would actually encourage you to look at one of the 4K or 4Ke projectors as I feel the increase in screen resolution is a pretty big deal for front projection— my personal opinion of course. And it seems JVC themselves thinks so too as their latest projector is a 4K DLP using the same core chip that the current crop of affordable BenQ, Optoma and Viewsonic projectors use.

JVC is dipping it's toes into the DLP market to try to court entry level buyers. It will be interesting to see what happens with it.

Having seen a UHD60 recently AV_Integrated is spot on. As someone who started out with DLP projectors I was really hoping the product would exceed it's specs. It doesn't. Except for the sharpness and detail, it fell far behind it's competition in every other aspect. I'm not sure how the Epson 4000 stacks up. The entry level DLPs or the Sony 45ES are solid choices.

 

[sage11x]

JVC is dipping it's toes into the DLP market to try to court entry level buyers. It will be interesting to see what happens with it.



Having seen a UHD60 recently AV_Integrated is spot on. As someone who started out with DLP projectors I was really hoping the product would exceed it's specs. It doesn't. Except for the sharpness and detail, it fell far behind it's competition in every other aspect. I'm not sure how the Epson 4000 stacks up. The entry level DLPs or the Sony 45ES are solid choices.

Epson 4000 has many more features like FI, an auto iris and that awesome powered lens along with a lot more placement flexibility.

The UHD60 has a sharper image with higher contrast.

There have been quite a few comparisons between these two as well:

https://www.cnet.com/products/epson-home-cinema-4000/review/

https://www.cnet.com/products/optoma-uhd60/review/

http://www.projectorcentral.com/epson-4000-optoma-uhd60-review.htm

 

[Droogne]

Just so you guys now the prices over here (Belgium): included 4K, 25000:1 contrast 1080p, 3000+ lumen 1080p and last all the 1080p projectors. Not sure if these values are good cutoffs, but I based them on some of the suggestions you made above.

 

[jeahrens]

Epson 4000 has many more features like FI, an auto iris and that awesome powered lens along with a lot more placement flexibility.

The UHD60 has a sharper image with higher contrast.

There have been quite a few comparisons between these two as well:

https://www.cnet.com/products/epson-home-cinema-4000/review/

https://www.cnet.com/products/optoma-uhd60/review/

http://www.projectorcentral.com/epson-4000-optoma-uhd60-review.htm

I don't doubt that it's sharper. I do question the contrast though. Looking at Sound and Visions reviews of the UHD65 (which should be better than the UHD60) and the Epson 4000, the Epson had about 3 times the measured contrast (900 vs 2700). Please don't misunderstand. I would love for these DLPs to open up 4K to a more budget friendly price point, but I have to be honest that the picture witnessed just isn't something I can endorse. Even slightly crushing blacks the picture had a very washed out look. I haven't seen an Epson 4000 so I'm tentatively thinking it may offer a better experience based on the S&V numbers and the performance of the 5040. The PC review you linked is interesting as I haven't seen anyone referring to the 4K DLPs as having deep solid blacks. I certainly didn't see that (neither did S&V). The 2K DLPs I've seen have better blacks and contrast.

One has to wonder if JVC is planning on playing tricks with an iris system on their DLP implementation. I'm really not sure how much they can do since the limitations seemed to be baked into the light engine.

 

[BeMurda]

I don't doubt that it's sharper. I do question the contrast though. Looking at Sound and Visions reviews of the UHD65 (which should be better than the UHD60) and the Epson 4000, the Epson had about 3 times the measured contrast (900 vs 2700). Please don't misunderstand. I would love for these DLPs to open up 4K to a more budget friendly price point, but I have to be honest that the picture witnessed just isn't something I can endorse. Even slightly crushing blacks the picture had a very washed out look. I haven't seen an Epson 4000 so I'm tentatively thinking it may offer a better experience based on the S&V numbers and the performance of the 5040. The PC review you linked is interesting as I haven't seen anyone referring to the 4K DLPs as having deep solid blacks. I certainly didn't see that (neither did S&V). The 2K DLPs I've seen have better blacks and contrast.

One has to wonder if JVC is planning on playing tricks with an iris system on their DLP implementation. I'm really not sure how much they can do since the limitations seemed to be baked into the light engine.

This was my experience when I viewed the UHD65 as well. The contrast on the entry level Epson 2100 actually looked better to me in a less light-controlled room, probably because of the auto iris.

 

[Luminated67]

I don't doubt that it's sharper. I do question the contrast though. Looking at Sound and Visions reviews of the UHD65 (which should be better than the UHD60) and the Epson 4000, the Epson had about 3 times the measured contrast (900 vs 2700). Please don't misunderstand. I would love for these DLPs to open up 4K to a more budget friendly price point, but I have to be honest that the picture witnessed just isn't something I can endorse. Even slightly crushing blacks the picture had a very washed out look. I haven't seen an Epson 4000 so I'm tentatively thinking it may offer a better experience based on the S&V numbers and the performance of the 5040. The PC review you linked is interesting as I haven't seen anyone referring to the 4K DLPs as having deep solid blacks. I certainly didn't see that (neither did S&V). The 2K DLPs I've seen have better blacks and contrast.

One has to wonder if JVC is planning on playing tricks with an iris system on their DLP implementation. I'm really not sure how much they can do since the limitations seemed to be baked into the light engine.

This was the very projector I was lucky enough to compare side by side and in real time on the same Blu-ray against the Sony HW45ES and in my honest opinion the Sony destroyed it. I so wanted to jump on the 4K train but unless you can afford £5k for a real 4K projector these half price models are a compromise at best, I reckon you would be better to wait until the tech either improves or real 4K becomes affordable.