Projector comparison - Please help!

Yucca

Yucca

Yucca

Associate
Joined
20 Nov 2004
Posts
2,209
Location
Nock/Leicester
Hi all

After a projector to use with a 90 inch screen. Will be used for day time tv during daylight as well as movies in the evening in a dark room. I have Netflix, Amazon Prime and Sky Q so a decent amount of 4k content.

Id really appreciate it if someone who knows about projectors could advise me:

Acer V7850 £1650 (Budget TRUE 4k projector with good reviews)

vs

Optima UHD51 £1329 (Great upscaling of 4k but not 'real 4k'. Added bonus of 3D and cheaper!)

Both say 'poor blacks' in reviews. Question is will I notice the Acer at £300 more to have better picture quality and better blacks than the cheaper Optima. Will the 'real 4k' look better than the really good 'upscaled 4k' of the Optima......?
 
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Acer V7850 isn't a True 4K projector, nor is it a true UHD resolution projector. It's just another "not real 4K" projector.

TTBOMK, there are no true native res UHD projectors under £4000-£4500. Everything below the Sony VW VPL270ES (£4,500) - and that includes the £4000 Benq W11000 - use some version of pixel-shifting technology to make a lower-resolution display panel throw some overlapping images on screen to create the illusion on screen of a UHD 3840x2160 UHD resolution image. They're doing a version of this: https://youtu.be/U32Sv99cDOs?t=23
https://youtu.be/U32Sv99cDOs?t=23
So many people seem to be fixating on the resolution of an image as if that's the be-all and end-all of the benefits of UHD. In reality, the resolution is a minor point. The benefits of UHD sources that are far more noticeable are High Dynamic Range (HDR) and Wide Colour Gamut (WCG). Neither of your listed projectors can do justice to these. They don't have colour wheels capable of rendering the extra colours, and the poor black level / limited brightness means that they can't render all the extra brightness shades required for proper HDR.
 
Thank you for your very detailed reply Lucid. Ok so I acknowledge that even the Acer is not a true 4k.

But my question remains please..... Do you think there will be a noticeable picture quality difference between the two. Would you pay the extra £300 for the Acer over the Optima??
 
I would buy Optoma over Acer every time personally - Optoma's fake 4K is generally better than the other systems used as it is normally uses a higher res to pixel shift versus many of the other implementations which use a 1080p base.
 
I'd echo @Rroff's sentiment of favouring Optoma.

Under the skin a lot of the core components are the same because all the manufacturers buy the same bag of bits from Texts Instruments. It's collectively known as the light engine; so that's the DLP chip, the driver, the light tunnel and IIRC the colourwheel assembly too.

What distinguishes the different models is what each manufacturer does with video processing and light management around those core bits. It's why the old Ben W1080 @ £700 was a country mile away from the performance of the Optoma HD30 and HD50 models. Good lenses, good colour wheels, decent video processing, managing the light scatter internally, all these things and more have a big impact on the image.

Next, there's claimed specifications and real world performance. Just because a manufacturer says their machine is X ANSI lumens, it doesn't follow that it's that bright when throwing a good image. A common trick is to measure peak light output with the contrast control maxed out and the colour balance set as blue/green as it can go because that's where a lamp projector makes most light. The picture is often unwatchable in quality. Setting the controls to more use able and realistic levels also knocks the stuffing out of the brightness. Bottom line: beware the claimed specs.

If I had to chose one it would be the Optoma, but TBH I'd give both projectors a miss. As much as I like Optoma products, I see this and the similar model from Acer plus other entry-level clones as too compromised to be worthwhile. All the money has been sunk in to making them 4K UHD res, but neither make a great picture.

The Optoma UHD60 is more money but a much better projector. The JVC X500 is better again. They both offer the same resolution as the two lower models, but they have broader compatibility with HDR formats, and they can make a decent stab at WCG, plus they each paint a far more attractive, natural, dynamic image on screen.

I know these are double and triple your intended budget, but honestly, 4K UHD without the colour pallet and the HDR capabilities is just a waste of time IMO. In fact, if you could get HDR and WCG on all regular BDs then 4K would have been a still birth. It's the colour range and ability to render extra shadow and highlight detail that are really noticeable rather than the resolution.
 
I dunno how true it is these days - partly because newer models haven't been out long enough to know but Optoma projectors seem to stand the test of time better in my experience than many of the other general consumer brands - my near 15 year old HD70 is still going strong whereas many Acer, etc. projectors of that era wouldn't have made it much past 5 years of good use.
 
lucid said:
I'd echo @Rroff's sentiment of favouring Optoma.

Under the skin a lot of the core components are the same because all the manufacturers buy the same bag of bits from Texts Instruments. It's collectively known as the light engine; so that's the DLP chip, the driver, the light tunnel and IIRC the colourwheel assembly too.

What distinguishes the different models is what each manufacturer does with video processing and light management around those core bits. It's why the old Ben W1080 @ £700 was a country mile away from the performance of the Optoma HD30 and HD50 models. Good lenses, good colour wheels, decent video processing, managing the light scatter internally, all these things and more have a big impact on the image.

Next, there's claimed specifications and real world performance. Just because a manufacturer says their machine is X ANSI lumens, it doesn't follow that it's that bright when throwing a good image. A common trick is to measure peak light output with the contrast control maxed out and the colour balance set as blue/green as it can go because that's where a lamp projector makes most light. The picture is often unwatchable in quality. Setting the controls to more use able and realistic levels also knocks the stuffing out of the brightness. Bottom line: beware the claimed specs.

If I had to chose one it would be the Optoma, but TBH I'd give both projectors a miss. As much as I like Optoma products, I see this and the similar model from Acer plus other entry-level clones as too compromised to be worthwhile. All the money has been sunk in to making them 4K UHD res, but neither make a great picture.

The Optoma UHD60 is more money but a much better projector. The JVC X500 is better again. They both offer the same resolution as the two lower models, but they have broader compatibility with HDR formats, and they can make a decent stab at WCG, plus they each paint a far more attractive, natural, dynamic image on screen.

I know these are double and triple your intended budget, but honestly, 4K UHD without the colour pallet and the HDR capabilities is just a waste of time IMO. In fact, if you could get HDR and WCG on all regular BDs then 4K would have been a still birth. It's the colour range and ability to render extra shadow and highlight detail that are really noticeable rather than the resolution.
Click to expand...

If I was to stretch to the Optima 60 at around £2000 do you think there would be a noticeable difference in picture quality (especially when watching 4k content and HDR content) compared to the £1300 Optima? Will it be more 'future proof you think'? If not il save the £700, go for the Optima and look to upgrade in 3-4 years when good 4k projectors are more affordable.
 
If I was in your shoes, and presuming that this was my first projector purchase, and knowing that you want to use it in a mix of lighting conditions, but the budget is limited, then here's what I would do...

Buy a good used 1080p projector... Or more specifically, don't buy an entry-level UHD projector in the belief that you are getting the full benefit of the format.

That's it, but here's why...

1) 4K projection is years behind TV; so we aren't seeing the same sort of Titanic price erosion that has lead to 4K UHD TVs replacing all-but the cheapest and smaller budget TV. Projects with a native UHD or native 4K panel are still at the £4500+ price point. It could still take 5 years for this to change.

2) Sending UHD 4K signals over long HDMI is horribly expensive and flaky. You can buy a 10 mtr HDMI cable for 1080p for £30 and be reasonably confident it will work. The same is not true for UHD signals.

You can spend anything from £50 to £200+ (and way more) on a 10m lead with absolutely no guarantee it will work. The makers blurb will say it works, but they're often full of s(h)lit.

Getting 4K UHD signals from A to B when all is on a neat rack or TV stand is easy. The signal distances are short. Many UHD 4K device will cope just fine with 1-2mtrs of cable behind a telly, but sending over longer distances is often a problem or expensive. For installs where they put in conduit in-ceiling this is less of a concern; new cables can be pulled. But that's not the case in a lot of installs, so having an issue with the cable after the plaster and paint has dried can be an expensive problem.
 
Last edited:
Thank you so much for your advice.

Could you recommend me a good 1080p projector please. Ideally 2 or 3 so I can shop around for best price.

Ideally id rather buy new with warranty and no headache looking for second hand.
 
Yucca said:
Great thank you I will have a look. Is this considered a really good 1080p projector?

Any other I should consider please?
Click to expand...

Define "really good".

If JVC still made the £3500-£4000 X30 / X35 / X5500 / X5900, they'd all be a huge step up from the Optoma. The current JVC DLA-X500 @ £4000 is too. The Sim2 C3X 1080 @ £12,000 was utterly sublime, but even that could be bettered by their high-end models. Each one moves the performance level up. Sim2 projectors have some of the best lenses you'll encounter in any projector the low side of £50,000, and the result that even slightly out of focus, they're a crisper image at 1080p than high-end Sony and JVC true 4K projectors.

Is the Optoma HD39 the last word in 1080p projector performance? Answer: No, of course not. But that's really the wrong question. You should be asking "Can I buy anything significantly better for around £1000? " In my opinion, as an all round projector, the answer is no. If you were to say to me "I'm only interested in 3D and will never watch anything 2D " then the answer would be different. Something like the £1,000 Epson EH-TW6700 would be a better choice; but are you really going to watch nothing but 3D movies. Do you see?
 
Thank you once again for your very detailed reply, really appreciate you taking the time mate. Ok so final question :) ....

Optima vs the Epson 6700

Could you kindly give me your thoughts on the difference between the two. Ie a more detailed comparison of the pros and cons of the two. I know you have already touched on the 3d aspect. Anything else you know of the two models would be greatly appreciated.

I can read the reviews online of each product but you seem to know your stuff so a direct comparison would be greatly appreciated.

I see the Epson has wifi, what would I use that for?! And comes with a remote but the Optima does not?

My AV engineer says he has installed loads of the Epson so the one bonus going for that would be quicker for him to install and set up and therefore saving me labour.

If this helps, it will be used during daylight as well as in the evenings and for the following:

Sky Q - news, TV shows and movies.
Netflix and Amazon via a Firestick - Movies and Tv Shows
 
My dad had originally wanted to buy the Epson 7300 which he said is better than the 6700 (not sure if he's right?!) but it cant be found anywhere any more.... Maybe discontinued!
 
Each model up in Epson's range should offer something extra; so the 7300 being higher contrast and offering pseudo 4K are the obvious steps up compared to the 6700. But to achieve the extra contrast they had to knock the brightness down in order to make the blacks blacker. Their machines also rely very heavily on a dynamic iris control. That means it's possible to measure a much larger contrast ratio with test patterns than can be achieved with real picture content.

Epson is LCD display tech'. This means the step in to entry-level 4K from 1080p doesn't have as much of a performance-sapping hit as the cheaper DLP alternative. But you pay for that in the price. It's a bigger jump in cost to move to pseudo-4K in Epson LCD than it is for DLP. However, by the time you're looking at the equivalent price point from DLP then you've skipped the cheapest pseudo-4K models and stepped up to the better performing models such as the Optoma UHD60.

The current model from Epson that replaced the 7300 is the EH-TW7400. The price has fallen from £2,200 to £1,800. It's marginally brighter (2,400 ANSI versus 2,300) and claims an improvement in contrast ratio too. Comments from owner say its lens makes a slightly sharper image. There are some complaints though that there's excessive fan noise in HDR mode, maybe 3D too, but not every owner seems affected. Does this point to a quality control issue?

Bringing this back to the OptOma (correct spelling) HD39 versus the Epson TW6700, IMO the HD39 is the more focussed home cinema projector whereas the 6700 is better as a bright-room general TV and game play machine. There are two versions of the 6700. One with- and one without Wi-Fi. The prices are different too. The non-wireless version can be had for around £900. The wireless one is closer to £1400. The £500 or so in extra cost gets you a wireless transmitter box in to which your sources connect. The 1080p signal is then transmitted to the projector so that no HDMI connection cable is needed. You still need power to the projector of course, but no need to hide a connection cable from the source devices to the projector itself.

Regarding installation time, other than your chap being a bit more familiar with the Epson products, I wouldn't really expect there to be such a significant difference in how long it takes to fit either that it makes a huge difference to the install cost.

Given your preference for bright room viewing, maybe the extra brightness of the Epson is what you need. I've done projector installs for people who wanted this; and I've done it with projectors that were far lower powered. The trick is to keep as much ambient light away from falling directly on the screen as is possible, and choose to watch stuff that doesn't involve lots of night scenes in dark locations. Football on a big screen with some room light.... game on. Call of Duty Black Ops running around the inside of a dark old building... nah-uh. Anything projected with bits of the picture that are darker than the ambient light level falling on a flat screen is going to get obliterated. It doesn't matter how bright the projector is, this is just physics.
 
Ok so as iv decided not to go for a fake 4K rather a half decent 1080p projector the Epson 7400 is out. Plus it’s a lot of money.

Still can’t decide between the Optoma vs 6700....

Could you elaborate on your sentence - IMO the HD39 is the more focussed home cinema projector whereas the 6700 is better as a bright-room general TV and game play machine. please

I will use it during daylight but also plenty during the evenings in a dark room. During the day it’s mostly Sky News and crappy daytime tv so not much dark scenes.
 
Am I right in saying you’d probably take the better at night Optoma over the better during day 6700 if you were in my boat?

If you had the two side by side do you think there will be a noticeable difference during daylight use or are we talking about very minor differences?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom