[jcebedo1]

First off here are the manufacturer specs of the DT-200:


800 x 600 4:3 DLP projector

5x speed 6 segment color wheel

600 Ansi Lumens

1200:1 Contrast

DVI, Component, S-Video, RGB, Video

Lens Shift

Short Throw Lens

2500 hour lamp life




as you can see the specs aren't all that great. this is probably why this projector isn't so popular.

but image is all what matters most. And i was blown away by the picture quality this thing produces, especially colors.





Setup


Projector: Sharp DT-200

DVD player: JVC XV-S500, 480p component connection

Screen: Da Lite 70" x 32.5" 2.15:1 screen Matte White 1 gain

Panamorph P752 Anamorphic Lens



Projector Settings:


Contrast: 7

Brightness: 0

Color: 1

Tint: -1

Sharp: 0

Red: 0

Blue: 0

Color Temp: 6500K

Gamma: Standard

White Emphasis: Off




DVD player settings:


all default



THE REVIEW:


The ratings on an absolute scale. not on the scale of value.

A Brightness of 10 would be the brightness of a Sanyo PLV-70

A Contrast of a 10 would be the contrast of a Sony G-90

A Color rating of a 10 would be the colors of a JVC SX-21



Brightness (7):


certainly not the brightest projector but not the dimmest either.

I would say average.

you can safely go up to 8 feet wide.

although you might be better with screens around 6-7 feet wide.



Contrast [Full ON/Off (8.5), Ansi (8.5)]:


contrast is high enough for the black to look convincingly "black".

It handles dark scenes very well.

For comparison, its blacks are like an HT1000 without the IRIS engaged.


Shadow Detail (8):


Looks pretty smooth! I don't think I am seeing any posturization effects with this pj on dark scenes.


Color (8.5):


This is where this projector excels.

This is probably one of the best in colors of any dlp projectors i have seen.

The colors are practically like a Sharp 10k. You can fine tune it also with the Service Menu.



16:9 Resolution (with lens):


Enough for DVDs. More res isn't necessary with the anamorphic lens on.



Screendoor/Fill Factor:


Fill factor is actually quite good. well, maybe because i am using an anamorphic lens.

I now have a new screen setup. it is 70 x 32.5, 2.15:1 screen. I just zoom it when viewing scope movies and zoom down when viewing 16:9.

I like the effect of the wider screen (it is much more theatrical). I am actually sitting at 1.45 x the screen's width when viewing scope movies.

screendoor/pixel structure is minor. it is not bothersome at all. For comparison, screendoor is quite close to a Matterhorn 1024 x 576 DLP projector.


Rainbows?:


rainbows occur very rarely. if it does happen, it is very quick and the rainbows are smaller than 2x speed color wheel projectors.


Lens Shift and Short Throw


these are a real help in my situation. I needed a short throw because of the weird room. the projector's lens has to be around 9 feet from the screen. with the x1, i could only get 5 feet wide at this distance at max zoom. Now with the DT-200, my dream screen setup actually is finally possible. It is now 70" x 32.5" 2.15:1 screen (quasi constant height). The lens shift helps align the image precisely when zooming in and out depends on aspect. now scope movies like LOTR are bigger and looks more theatrical. I cannot imagine going back to a 16:9 screen.




Conclusion:


So is this projector worth it? Pair it with an anamorphic lens and it is amazing! I just love the colors of this projector and it does contrast very well too! It has a very smooth pleasing image. not digital looking at all! Nevermind the specs on the projector (sharp is actually quite accurate on their specs), you have to see how well this projector performs (with the lens of course). For viewing DVDs, I would take this projector (with the lens) over an LT240k (with no lens), seriously. It has better blacks/contrast and better color saturation, and much much less rainbows. I even feel that the colors of this thing is better than an HT1000. These can now be had for $1500 or less if you look hard. Pair it up with an anamorphic lens and you should not be that much over $2k. its got dvi so i even have room for improvement for my dvds!

 

[guitarman]

Do you have a Bravo D1 to hook up to it? You got the projector pretty fast. I guess you know how to open the service menu with all the past info on this PJ?


You can rig up an easy ceiling mount by leaving the stand on and just attaching a strip to the bottom of the stand so you can bolt it to a ceiling stud. I used the back metal piece of a smal track light. The metal strip is recessed so you can bolt to the stand and the screws will be out of the way when you nail it to the ceiling.

 

[jcebedo1]

tom,


have you adjusted the colors on the service menu? If so, can you give me some pointers?


oh about the mounting. mine is just on a cart. no need for a ceiling mount. thanks for the tip though.


I don't have a dvi dvd player yet. will most likely get one in the near future. How much better are dvds are with dvi? does it really look better with 1080i or 720p upscaled?

 

[Anthony Cler]

jcebedo1,


Great review for a great little projector! With regard to the specs, I truely believe that Sharp was extra conservative with the numbers. Aside from resolution, it looks VERY close to the 10k which has a MEASURED contrast ratio of around 1800:1. I'm very satisfied with the contrast performance of my DT-200 and like you said, the colors are fantastic as well.


What kind of Anamorphic lens are you using? About how much would one cost for this projector? Does it work for HDTV as well as DVD? Aside from cost, are there any downsides to using an Anamorphic lens with the DT-200?


Thanks,

Anthony

 

[guitarman]

The colors look so good at stock that I didn't need to do any white balance adjustments. With the Bravo pushing the bright level hard I found that minus 15 on all the RGB/brightness and plus 22 on all he RGB/contrast put the whites and black level back to where it s/b.


The Bravo D1 produced a super clean and more precise picture. I also have the JVC XV-S500 which has Top Notch video quality but an a/b of the two units shows a great improvment with the DVI-player.


That projector seemed higher than 600ansi, either that or the conrast is way higher.

 

[jcebedo1]

anthony,


the lens is the panamorph p752. it is discontinued so it is harder to find new. I got a really good price on it since it was used.

 

[edwardr132]

I am guessing the Sharp PGA10X went back???? So I take it you like the picture on the Sharp D200 much better than the X1.... What do you think about the picture without the Panamorph lens? Would XGA be a better choice for those who don't want to pop for the lens?

 

[velvetpoet]

Xga would look better but it would probably be cheaper or around the same price to get the dt200 with lense. Plus if you look at the low priced xga machines they dont use the 6 segment wheels.

 

[Steve James]

you guys are killing me. The wife worked out a deal with her bro-in-law to get an X1 for cost, then I see the H30 shots, now thoughts of the DT-200 are back in my head!


Good thing my basement is still drywall-less...


Steve

 

[jcebedo1]

yes, the pg a10x went back. the sharp dt200 is definately better than an x1 (unmodified). even though it is the same physical resolution, fill factor seems to be a tad better, colors are better, contrast also is better, peak light output are probably the same (maybe the x1 is a bit brighter). the modified x1 seemed to have a bit deeper blacks though.


xga dlp like lt240k (no lens) will have a lot more res in 4:3 (786,432) slightly more in 16:9 (589,824), sharper image, much slower color wheel, and less contrast (due to the rgbw wheel), and light spill when viewing 16:9 material.


dt200 with the lens will have the same res on 16:9 and 4:3 (480,000) (you can take out the lens if you want to view 4:3). superior colors and contrast and almost rainbow free due to the 6 segment color wheel. no light spill if you have an anamorphic lens. the dt-200 was designed for HT use and this is probably why it looks so good!

 

[Mit07]

jcebedo1 - thanks for the review. Out of curiosity, why did you buy the DT-200 (and the lens) with 800x600 resolution, over the Z2 with 1280x720 resolution? Both are in the $2K range.


Was it simply that you prefer DLP? Better black level, lack of SDE or VB?


I'm curious because I'm torn between a higher resolution LCD, or a lower resolution DLP for the above reasons.

 

[jcebedo1]

oh, without the panamorph, you probably have to sit back 2 - 2.5x the screens width away. Just like the x1. I personally like to sit 1.5x - 2x the screen's width and not be bothered by the pixel structure, that is why i use the panamorph.

 

[jcebedo1]

the lens that i got was less than $200. so i am actually just at around $1600 something total. I didn't want to get the z2 because:


1) it costs a bit more (well.. $400 more)

2) the extra resolution don't really help dvds that much

3) i don't like the reliability of lcds (i've had problems with a previous sony w400q, and a recent sharp pg a10x)

4) i and anyone else who sees my setup prefer the deeper blacks of a dlp

5) I think that the 1200:1 contrast of the z2 is BS (marketing hype). but maybe not. who knows?

5) dlps have a much more filmlike look to the image.

6) I already have an anamorphic lens


If you are going to view strictly DVDs in a light controlled room (no ambient light as much as possible), then i recommend the dt-200 w/ the anamorphic lens. I view dvds 99.99% of the time.


If you are going to watch DVDs and HDTV, don't want all lights off, then you will probably be better off with a Sanyo Z2.



With DVDs as the source, From what I am seeing right now, the image quality of the Sharp DT-200 w/ lens can be compared to a Sharp XV-Z10000u. Yes, the color and contrast quality are at that level!

 

[Fabbas]

Did you get the lens used?


I was thinking of doing the same thing, except that if you look at used movie camera or projection equipment you can find anamorphic lenses for 16mm for $50 or less. Usually they are a 2x squeeze, so you'd have to use Zoomplayer to do a custom aspect ratio (2x1.33=2.66 not 2.35) to yield 2.35:1 or 1.78:1. Buying a Panamorph is much easier, but isn't the MSRP $750?

 

[jcebedo1]

no. don't get those 16mm anamorphic lens. those are designed for movie theater film projectors, not home projectors. if you want to use those you actually have to open up your projector, take out the lens and put in those lens (well, if it fits, haha).


anamorphic lens made for home theater use are TOTALLY different. they go in front of the projector's lens (not replace it like the movie theater lens). Panamorph used to have a clearance sale on their p752 lenses for $500.


Man, $750 is ALOT of money for an anamorphic lens. Look for used ones. If you can spend a little bit more than that, then just get a used or refurb Sharp 9000 for $2500 - $2800.

 

[DJPtron]

I have to agree, dt-200 is very impressive for the money


I was in a toss up between this and the x-1. The x-1 I saw at one installers house looked dark and drab. I was ver unimpressed with it based on everything I've read about how awsome it is. I then saw the dt-200 and it was ten times better. No comparison. I was wondering why it gets so little attention from the forums. I was very impressed with it. Too bad it is 4:3, I ended up with a z2 that I'm still learning to love.


Don

 

[scoby]

I don't think I would compare the image on my DT-200 to a Sharp 10K. I would say, though, that it does compare to a 9K in terms of color and contrast, though obviously a big step down in resolution. I don't have an anamorphic lens and couldn't use one in my current setup. At the price that I paid for my Sharp, I'm extremely happy with it. It's small enough to bring to friends' houses and to set up at parties. It looks smooth enough at about 1.8x back with a smidge of defocus. It also has a great looking case for WAF.

 

[Fabbas]

When I saw Finding Nemo demo'ed on a DT 200, I was just plain shocked at how good the color looked--very saturated, but also very film like. But the real question is what's the better value, an H30, DT200, or 4805? With an anamorphic lens, the H30 and DT 200 have a resolution advantage over the 4805.


Also, where in the world do you get an anamorphic lens for $200? I've been looking for a few hours now, and I've had no luck.

 

[jcebedo1]

well,


about the anamorphic lens. i got it in videogon classifieds. it was a few months back. the lens i got actually had a leak and that is why I got it at a great price. I took a risk since I knew that something like this can be easily fixed. after all, the lens is all physical (no electronic parts). nothing really wrong can happen if you open it up, you just learn from it.


So when i got the lens, I figured how to open it up. examined it and pretty much knew how the thing works. I found the leak, added some baby oil, sealed it with aquarium sealant, and no more problems! It performs perfectly now, no leaks at all.

 

[rudee]

Well as far as value goes- the dt-200 has all inputs needed, 5x wheel and has a vertical lens shift- Given that- I say the dt-200 is the value.


just my .2 cents,


rudee