PLV-60 vs LT-150
-
LIVE: Tech Talk Podcast with Scott Wilkinson, Episode 8 Click here for details.
- Status
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Joined
·
733 Posts
I think it's more of a contest between screendoor and rainbow. Image quality? Completely subjective! Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Screendoor drives me nuts. Rainbow isn't a problem for me! If rainbow is a problem for you then look at the Sanyos. You need to see for yourself in an environment similar to your home theatre. Absolutely have a look at the Sanyo 21 - Check your unit for dead pixels and dust blobs and make sure your warranty or the vendor will cover you!
Once you get your projector quit reading this forum until you're ready for another purchase and enjoy your life and projector. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
Cheers,
Grant
Once you get your projector quit reading this forum until you're ready for another purchase and enjoy your life and projector. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
Cheers,
Grant
The screen door effect is really a factor of viewing distance. From my 96" Grayhawk and the PLV-60, I sit 15' away and the screen door is impossible to see. But, if I move up to 9'-10' feet it is somewhat noticeable.
There are solutions if you need or want to sit that close. You can de-focus slighty or buy the IMX depixelizer lense (more money though).
I bought this projector sight unseen and was expecting to see some screen door from my viewing position, but was pleasantly suprised to see a very smooth, fluid, and vivid picture. I was wondering what all the "concerns" were over screen door because it was not even visible.
Robert
There are solutions if you need or want to sit that close. You can de-focus slighty or buy the IMX depixelizer lense (more money though).
I bought this projector sight unseen and was expecting to see some screen door from my viewing position, but was pleasantly suprised to see a very smooth, fluid, and vivid picture. I was wondering what all the "concerns" were over screen door because it was not even visible.
Robert
The XP21N, soon to be discontinued (so the price will fall) is far brighter than PLV60 and has MLA, which really decreases the perception of pixellation. My seating distance is exactly two times screen width and that appears to be right on as far as minimizing the perception of pixels.
To some degree this is an apples to oranges comparison. The LT150 is dirt cheap to buy but suffers from liabilities like fixed lens and (for many viewers) rainbow artifact. Bulb life is relatively short and replacement costly. It is fairly low light output and should only be applied in a totally light controlled situation.
On the other hand, the body of knowledge about how to tweak it for maximum performance, thanks to Grant among others, is large. The image quality, particularly black level and contrast level is superior to any LCD. At the current price point it is an amazing value if you and your viewers are not rainbow sensitive.
Both projectors require an outboard video processor. I am having increasing luck with the Quadscan Elite, a relatively cheap but quirky and hard to use decent-level solution. I do understand, however, people are having good luck combining a quality progressive scan DVD player directly with the Boxlight Cinema 13HT (The Boxlight clone of the PLV60) possibly because it is a later version of the PLV60 and has more up to date firmware.
Suggest you contact Hank at Studio Experience if you are interested in the Boxlight. Like AVS, their support is truly excellent.
Hope this helps.
Dan
To some degree this is an apples to oranges comparison. The LT150 is dirt cheap to buy but suffers from liabilities like fixed lens and (for many viewers) rainbow artifact. Bulb life is relatively short and replacement costly. It is fairly low light output and should only be applied in a totally light controlled situation.
On the other hand, the body of knowledge about how to tweak it for maximum performance, thanks to Grant among others, is large. The image quality, particularly black level and contrast level is superior to any LCD. At the current price point it is an amazing value if you and your viewers are not rainbow sensitive.
Both projectors require an outboard video processor. I am having increasing luck with the Quadscan Elite, a relatively cheap but quirky and hard to use decent-level solution. I do understand, however, people are having good luck combining a quality progressive scan DVD player directly with the Boxlight Cinema 13HT (The Boxlight clone of the PLV60) possibly because it is a later version of the PLV60 and has more up to date firmware.
Suggest you contact Hank at Studio Experience if you are interested in the Boxlight. Like AVS, their support is truly excellent.
Hope this helps.
Dan
I have my screen setup with a four way split with a Sanyo XP21N and LT150 with a Greyhawk and a High Power. Running a DVD player through a quadscan and have an active VGA splitter distributing the XGA output. Screen door is only slightly more noticeable on the Sanyo. Yes DLP have some screen door. Colors are much better on the Sanyo, although I do not have Grant's optimization skills. LT150 tends to get washed out in any significant ambient light. Sanyo still looks very good with modest light, but is washed out in daylight. No dead pixels or dust blobs, which were more an issue with the early PLV-60. Just got it set up and won't be able to completely control the ambient light til this evening. Hopefully I will have some spare time.
Joined
·
4,525 Posts
I thought that the PLV-60 was one of the best projectors in the Infocomm projector shoot-out this year.
Yes, screen door was a bit of an issue since it is an LCD projector, but otherwise, it was a really beautiful unit. Is it the better value? I suppose that would be an individual decision, but I believe that it is certainly the better projector.
[disclaimer: I own an LT150 and feel that it is definitely a good value on the price/performance continuum.]
Yes, screen door was a bit of an issue since it is an LCD projector, but otherwise, it was a really beautiful unit. Is it the better value? I suppose that would be an individual decision, but I believe that it is certainly the better projector.
[disclaimer: I own an LT150 and feel that it is definitely a good value on the price/performance continuum.]
Jon:
Sounds like you have some fun toys there! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
Yes, I was a little surprised that even the pretty powerful XP21N is less than optimal with not a lot of light in the room, even with a Grayhawk. But, man, in the evening the picture just jumps out at you it is so detailed and three dimensional.
Although I don't have the experience of others here, I have seen a number of fairly optimized DLP setups and have concluded the difference in contrast and black level between them and the XP21N/Grayhawk combo is more than offset by the vastly superior brightness, depth and color level. And, of course, there's absolutely no rainbow artifact regardless of source.
I'd expect the price of the soon-to-be-discontinued XP21N to fall to around $4000 by year-end. If it does, that will be a heckuva bargain IMO. I don't expect a lot of huge improvements in contrast/black level with LCD from this level for a while. What you will see is better internal scaling and other electronics. What would really be a great idea would be for the projector mfg. to skip the inferior de-interlacer and put a better internal scaler in, specifying the projector to be used only with progressive scan for best results.
Dan
Dan
Sounds like you have some fun toys there! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
Yes, I was a little surprised that even the pretty powerful XP21N is less than optimal with not a lot of light in the room, even with a Grayhawk. But, man, in the evening the picture just jumps out at you it is so detailed and three dimensional.
Although I don't have the experience of others here, I have seen a number of fairly optimized DLP setups and have concluded the difference in contrast and black level between them and the XP21N/Grayhawk combo is more than offset by the vastly superior brightness, depth and color level. And, of course, there's absolutely no rainbow artifact regardless of source.
I'd expect the price of the soon-to-be-discontinued XP21N to fall to around $4000 by year-end. If it does, that will be a heckuva bargain IMO. I don't expect a lot of huge improvements in contrast/black level with LCD from this level for a while. What you will see is better internal scaling and other electronics. What would really be a great idea would be for the projector mfg. to skip the inferior de-interlacer and put a better internal scaler in, specifying the projector to be used only with progressive scan for best results.
Dan
Dan
Quote:
Yes, I got the XP21N about two weeks before the Dell deal, which I couldn't pass up. The Sanyo will go in my dedicated room in the basement of my new house, and the LT150 will be my fun mobile toy/business tool. It is actually pretty cool to be able to take a laptop, a boombox, and the LT150 and be able to setup an instant theater in less than 2 minutes where ever you want it. The LT150 looks great, but I haven't been able to get it to match the vibriant colors of XP21N yet. Maybe if I thumperized it, it would be closer. Of course I am an ameteur of about 3 months in the home theater stuff.
| Originally posted by DanHouck: Jon: Sounds like you have some fun toys there! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif |
Joined
·
7,268 Posts
Quote:
With the fantastically effective Sage deinterlacer chip showing up in < $300 DVD players it can't be that expensive to had good 3/2 pulldown in the projector.
Remember...there's more to watch than DVD software. It would be nice to have good 3/2 pulldown and decent interpolation for native 480I images from LD, DSS, and (gasp) even VHS http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
-dave
| I'd expect the price of the soon-to-be-discontinued XP21N to fall to around $4000 by year-end. If it does, that will be a heckuva bargain IMO. I don't expect a lot of huge improvements in contrast/black level with LCD from this level for a while. What you will see is better internal scaling and other electronics. What would really be a great idea would be for the projector mfg. to skip the inferior de-interlacer and put a better internal scaler in, specifying the projector to be used only with progressive scan for best results. |
Remember...there's more to watch than DVD software. It would be nice to have good 3/2 pulldown and decent interpolation for native 480I images from LD, DSS, and (gasp) even VHS http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
-dave
Here are some screen shots of the LT150 and the XP21N side by side on a high power screen taken with some ambient light present:
http://www.mohneyhomes.com/nec_lt150_vs_sanyo_xp21n.htm
http://www.mohneyhomes.com/nec_lt150_vs_sanyo_xp21n.htm
Joined
·
855 Posts
Jonmx - nice pictures. The two look pretty close but it's clear that ambient light affects the 150 more. The XP21 has the better colours but the 150 has the better blacks and contrast.
------------------
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.
[This message has been edited by Lou Sytsma (edited 08-29-2001).]
------------------
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.
[This message has been edited by Lou Sytsma (edited 08-29-2001).]
Quote:
XP21N not a PLV-60, but your assessment is close to mine. I hope I can do some more testing at night (no ambient light) and also on the Greyhawk. The surprising thing is the XP21N doesn't look 300% brighter as spec'ed, but maybe 50% brighter.
[This message has been edited by Jonmx (edited 08-29-2001).]
| Originally posted by Lou Sytsma: Jonmx - nice pictures. The two look pretty close but it's clear that ambient light affects the 150 more. The PLV-60 has the better colours but the 150 has the better blacks and contrast. |
[This message has been edited by Jonmx (edited 08-29-2001).]
How have you got both projectors calibrated? I ask because it looks like the XP21 has the contrast set too high, because the white seems to be blooming a bit.
As for perceived brightness - the eye does not respond linearly to brightness. For instance, indoor lighting is often in the neighborhood of 150-300 lux, while outdoors under the sun the brightness is more like 20,000 lux, and can be as high as 100,000 lux. On the other hand, the brightness of the full moon is only about .2 lux, yet a full-moon night can look pretty bright. ( A lumen is measured as the amount of light energy being emitted in a specific period of time - a Lux is a measure of the brightness at any given time). Does daylight look 100 times brighter to you than a brightly lit interior room at nighttime?
Anyway, the bottom line is that the eye perceives brightness on a logarithmic scale, and not linearly. So for one projector to look twice as bright as another, it would have to have something like 10 times the light output.
It gets even trickier than that, because the brain can be fooled into thinking that things are lighter or darker depending on how light or dark the background is, because the brain attempts to average the two values.
I think that the brightness of a projector is almost irrelevant if A) you have total ambient light control, and B) you can at least project the minimum recommended requirement of 15 ft. Lamberts (which I think all of our DLP and LCD projectors do when projecting onto a medium-sized screen).
It's when there is ambient light that the lumen output of two different projectors becomes really important.
As for perceived brightness - the eye does not respond linearly to brightness. For instance, indoor lighting is often in the neighborhood of 150-300 lux, while outdoors under the sun the brightness is more like 20,000 lux, and can be as high as 100,000 lux. On the other hand, the brightness of the full moon is only about .2 lux, yet a full-moon night can look pretty bright. ( A lumen is measured as the amount of light energy being emitted in a specific period of time - a Lux is a measure of the brightness at any given time). Does daylight look 100 times brighter to you than a brightly lit interior room at nighttime?
Anyway, the bottom line is that the eye perceives brightness on a logarithmic scale, and not linearly. So for one projector to look twice as bright as another, it would have to have something like 10 times the light output.
It gets even trickier than that, because the brain can be fooled into thinking that things are lighter or darker depending on how light or dark the background is, because the brain attempts to average the two values.
I think that the brightness of a projector is almost irrelevant if A) you have total ambient light control, and B) you can at least project the minimum recommended requirement of 15 ft. Lamberts (which I think all of our DLP and LCD projectors do when projecting onto a medium-sized screen).
It's when there is ambient light that the lumen output of two different projectors becomes really important.
Both projectors are great choices and of course the LT 150 is much much cheaper. But if you ignore price, anyone who has seen both these units side by side must admit that the PLV60 has much better colours and is much brighter. I really wanted to buy the LT150 to save the money but almost any ambient light washes out the picture. The PLV60 also is alot more user friendly, memories etc. and has alot more inputs.
Quote:
They are not really calibrated, but just adjusted the best I could. The whites do bloom but that is somewhat expected with a 2500 lumen projector on a high power screen.
| Originally posted by dhanson: How have you got both projectors calibrated? I ask because it looks like the XP21 has the contrast set too high, because the white seems to be blooming a bit. |
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
