For me it's the simple fact the projector and screen can hide away easily in my room. A hundred inch TV would totally dominate the room and can't be tucked away to use the room for other purposes. Plus I have total dark room when needed for projector, so contrast remains excellent
@@BeefIngot 100' of glossy black screen dominates any medium sized room. My projector and screen recess away completely leaving the room free to use socially without a giant black hole on the wall. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can put this very simple interior decor/lifestyle point.
I bought blackout curtains, and to be fair i really enjoy the feeling of projection but i can agree that the tv just looks better. I tend to sleep better after watching on a projector compared to the tv as well
Same. With fully framed blackout blinds I am getting 99%+ darkness and the feeling of watching a projected image feels more authentic to me and easier to watch over long periods. I won’t rule out a screen given how amazing my LGC2 looks in the living room but for dedicated cinema viewing I cannot see my LG projector being usurped any time soon.
I noticed the sleep improvement as well. Interesting someone else experienced that. Another thing I noticed is I can binge watch WAY more stuff on a projector. On a TV, the glare and reflections start making my eyes hurt and I get headaches...also the smaller image makes my eyes work harder to see what's on screen.
@@TriMuXx Always buy a TV that have the option of reducing the backlight / brightness... I do not know how O-LED is with that but my LED backlit TV I usually watch with 80% reduced backlight because at full brightness it is so bright that it is painful for your eyes. (at that setting it also uses 80% less power).
Got both and I agree, they are just different and made for different use case. For general TV watching I usually use TV but for movie night I prefer projector as somehow reflected light is more pleasing to the eye and creates different atmosphere.
@The Doppler Effect so you like to bounce your video off of a surface before it gets to your eyes? Do you place your front stage speakers behind you and bounce the audio off the front wall as well? If not, you're really missing out :)
The gap gone for people looking 100 inches so I agree with Vincent here, however for those still looking 120inch+ screens, projectors are still the way forward for now in terms of cost. I myself have a 140inch alr screen (ali express for £700) and the optoma p2 (£1800) would hate to think of what a tv would cost at that size.
TCL has 115inch and Hisense 110inch mini led with 20k-40k dimming zones, I mean I have a U8K 100" and the 1600 dimming zone is near Oled black with the right video source. Plus you would have to live in a big mansion or basement with 12-14ft feet for optimal viewing distance for 120-140", I think projectors are now obsolete with very video content pushing HDR technology, the only mishap of TV is real estate and glare issue which are getting fix with insane brightness coming out every year. No offense just my opinion.
Do you also have the problem with the Optoma P2 that certain darker rich blue tones render purple-ish? Its absolutely annoying for me. Saw it a lot when watching the bear!
@@Z05HYI have a older Sony vpl HW55 and have the same hint of purple hue in total darkness. I think it's the aging optical block has a bit of a problem colors as it gets older and the silicon in it not 100% factory. I contemplated buying a calibration tool used but I don't mind the hue in movies.
That’s why a tv for daytime and a projector with roll down screen at night is the best of both worlds. I agree with Vincent that a laser projector can’t compete with a nice OLED tv, but on the other hand tv’s can’t compete with projectors for obvious reasons. Apples and oranges. They are not to be compared but rather appreciated for their strengths. Don’t get me wrong, Vincent is only doing this very obvious demonstration because the new UST laser projectors are marketing themselves as laser tv’s. I completely understand.
You should use the Formovie Theatre or better be AWOL LTV-3500 for this test. The UST projector you used will lose in every single form in the UST projector tests. You also used standard ALR screen that is directly dedicated to blocking out light from upward direction (i.e living room lamp at 45-degrees) while your test consisted of far away windows that basically created a direct angle light source. Besides. If anyone buys it today, he/she sould buy a fresnel screen that blocks out liht from all angles except the middle. In conclusion. Do not buy the Samsung
I have a 150" screen with a VAVA chroma UST, and it is FANTASTIC!. I converted a huge chunk of my 2,000-square-foot basement into a theatre room with a 9' ceiling. It has to be seen to be appreciated.
True True...I owned an Epson 5040UB and now use a Samsung QN900B. As good as the picture is on the Samsung, there was something magical about seeing a projector in a totally dark room on a 120" or bigger screen. The aesthetic of reflected light vs transmissive light is just so pleasing to the eye.
@@L1ft0ff Have you even seen the image reflected from the ALR screen? The same kind of bull... as winyl vs. CD, or different loudspeakers - some people perceive the nuances and difference, some not. Poor you.
@@tecnogadgethd The first towards getting other people to understand is that they must be open-minded to trying something new instead of quickly dismissing a projector because it's not OLED. I'm sure I myself could convince plenty of people to switch to a projector if they let me sell them on the idea while honestly explaining the pros and cons of different types of projectors vs OLED TV's vs Mini LED LCD TV's.
Try to connect one neuron with the other instead of being so ignorant. A TV emits light (photons) directly from its panel towards your eyes, besides having a special arrangement of its pixels (VA, IPS, ADS) and several layers of filters that make the light scatter towards you but at various angles. A projector instead emits light from its lamp, usually located above or behind your head, making those photons bounce on a screen and then reach your eyes. The angle at which the light bounces and scatters can vary depending on the texture and material of the substrate used as a projection screen. Both methods produce an image inside your brain, but they do it in very different ways. There is no name or metric for this, but the perception and how this light is captured by the cones of your retina is very different, and it also affects eye strain differently.
I’ve used a projector as a daily TV for over a decade now. What is presented here is very accurate, but some small details can make a massive difference to your experience. First, grading against a videophile level TV is a good thing for a reviewer to do, but I suspect many people, myself included, are not shopping in this price bracket and are not aiming for videophile. There ARE compromises when using a projector instead of a TV, but comparing a $1,200 projector to a $1,200 TV is a much more typical consumer comparison I would suspect. And at that level, even the TV will struggle with full window sunlight like that. One can simply swap to can lights in the ceiling pointing down and have a perfectly bright room, while keeping glare and too much extra wash out light from hitting either screen. Personally, I have 8 Hue bulbs in cans in my living room and hate having the curtains open except on rare occasions. So for me, a 4000 lumen projector (not even laser) provides a fine viewing experience even with the lights fully on. That being said, we’re talking about TV shows, not “get into the zone” movies like Blade Runner mentioned here. I have never wanted to watch movies like that in the middle of the day with the room at full brightness, I’ve always wanted to watch movies in a theater setting. There just isn’t any leg to stand on when trying to say that any projector can equal any TV in the harshest light. That’s not usually the use case though. Can you use a projector as a daily TV though? That answer is absolutely yes both at home and in a conference room. And you don’t have to spend 20 grand either. You just have to plan for it and match your use case. With the proper lights, blinds, and position of the screen, you can get great results from either. If you want to throw the full sun on your screen though, if that’s truly your use case, then a TV is the only option, but even that will be full of glare without care given to screen and viewing angles.
@@The_Greg_5000 Wasn't trying to say the two things in this video were not comparable, just that the $4000 range of both items may be far above what the typical consumer today may be spending on either choice. Every "best selling" or "top sellers" list of TVs is dominated by $500-$1000 choices that I would bet represent maybe 80% of all purchases. For the other 20%, I would bet half of those are buying options between 1,000 and 2,000. Leaving only 10% or fewer of consumers that might be buying hardware that this review could apply to. Obviously I'm estimating and could be FAR off with all of that, but that was the point I was trying to make. Comparing two pretty high-end devices to prove the point that TVs are superior to projectors was a swing and a miss in my opinion. Do the same test with a $500 set of options and a $1500 set of options and see what that does. At those levels the TVs will blow the projectors away without any chance of competing without compensating with controlled lighting (so the same outcome in one sense, but with much less middle ground for adjusting brightness and things because it's just a clear win/loss). Which is the more valuable approach to TV versus projector in my opinion. Projectors have the advantage of portability if you need that (it was FAR easier for me to move between houses with a roll up screen for example, and less fear of breakage), greater size for the same or less cost (usually, at least in my price range - example is my $1,200 120-inch projection setup versus a $3,500 TV), and more flexible mounting options (you can hang screens from a drop ceiling in the middle of a room if your use case needs that in an office setting for example). Projectors have the disadvantage of needing more controlled lighting and usually needing to get a video signal from a video source to the projector over a much longer distance, possibly requiring expensive active cables. TVs under a certain size can be very cheap, so you might put 3 55" TVs around the room instead of one large projector screen up front for example. All TVs are leaps and bounds brighter than projectors, so you can deal with harsher lighting conditions. TVs are more friendly to non-technical users as they operate just like home TV setups versus a projector that has to warm up and may also require a second remote to be operated. Plenty of nuance I left out here as well, but that's where the value is for me in a discussion of TV versus projector, exploring the caveats and use cases that benefit from each solution.
@@swilson42yeah these days I feel like the 2-4k bracket is just for people who want to feel good about spending more..panels have gotten insane for cheap..compared to just over 10 years ago, a 300$ TV now will destroy a $10,000 TV from then
If you can fit the TV into your house and you only plan on going up to 100 inches, then this makes much more sense over a projector. Especially in a dedicated room with no reflections. Can't wait to see how the new QM8's do against this current generation. 5000 local dimming zones vs a few hundred could make a significant difference.
I agree with Vincent, but I also prefer to watch movies with a projector. This has to do with the fact that a projector provides reflected light. I think that gives a more cinematic look than a television with direct radiating light, as others have mentioned here.
I have both a Sony 83A90J OLED TV and a UST Formovie Theater paired with a 120 inches screens and here is the thing : both products are complementary. During the day the TV is unbeatable but in the evening the UST is. 98/100 inches is small for a projector. 150 inches is the top spot and brands like vividstorm are now selling tensionned floor UST screen up to 200 inches ! Blacks levels on my UST are only 0.024 nits. Maybe not as good as an OLED but quite good compared to other panel technology. And UST are also getting better and better. Now that I have an UST I won’t never go back to a TV for evening/night viewing. I love watching movies on a 120 inches screen. True cinema experience at home. My next screen will be 150 inches or even 200 inches.
Whilst a projector can't compare to a TV when it comes to features like local dimming for HDR, what are your thoughts on the benefits of reflected light, and less blue light exposure, when using a projector instead of a TV?
@@CarsonHoy Same. I feel way less fatigued after long gaming sessions on a projector. Initially after making the switch I would find myself accidentally staying up too late because I was so used to the fatigue from eye strain cuing me to go to bed lol.
I can't see how blue light exposure would be any different, despite TVs maybe having bluer backlights it's ultimately what's visible that matters. The same image/brightness on both should give identical blue light exposure.
I bought an ultra short throw projector for a designated room for watching movies 120 inches of viewing. The 16:9 ratio screen can also accommodate sports. A TV has a limit on size because you wouldn’t be able to get it home if it gets any bigger. A ten foot diagonal screen 120 inches is like taking four 60 inch tv’s and staking them together as one. If you can control the light in the room you can have amazing clarity and a giant picture in a small space.
@@sumitchaudhary343 it’s amazing but it’s sorta like getting a larger tv. Once you get it , you get use to the bigger screen and eventually want an even bigger screen lol. I only have 8 foot tall ceiling height….. so I guess I’m at my viewable limit. But when I look at the tvs in the house they look like postage stamps compared to the 120 inch screen. This projector was well worth the money 👍🏻
The cost of my Optoma Cinemax P2 with 100 inch motorized (rising) ALR screen was about 3400 British pounds. You don't need the most expensive UST projector. My room decor is not destroyed by huge black TV rectangle. There are no reflections on the ALR screen (most TVs have dramatically reflective screens). Whenever I plan to enjoy a movie or a concert, I bring down my curtains a bit or completely, for a cinematic experience. And there is some cinematic quality of the reflected picture vs. direct TV emisive light.
I have the D2, and I just love the huge picture, it's very sharp too which surprised me. I love flat panels but for the majority of the big movie watching i'm going to be using my D2. I have OLEDS and they're gorgeous but so is a 120-inch screen.
I purchased an Epson projector over 8 years ago for about 1700 bucks and built a 120" silver screen for it. It's still going strong and produces a beautiful picture. Granted, it does not perform great in high light scenarios but the projector lives in my theater room where lighting is controlled. I purchased the projector when TV's were absolutely insane prices, but I have yet to find a "cheap" 120" TV screen to replace the projector. The beauty is because my room lighting is controlled, I can easily make the project screen at last 140" before it's becomes a noticeable issue. I'm going to toss this in the win category for projectors.
TCL C735 is an amazing TV. I briefly had a 55" and 65" model and in the end, I settled for an 85" variant that I managed to buy for a very good price on sale. However, TCL's marketing regarding its 144Hz functionality is pure BS/lie. They advertise the TV as a 144Hz TV, but there is NO OPTION to use the TV at 144Hz. I tried it with all three TVs using my RTX 3090 and an HDMI 2.1 cable. The max is 120Hz. This is straight up deceiving the customers.
@@mat_j My friend who lives next to me had an LG C2 OLED TV so we had the chance to compare them. The TCL C735 is so good that my friend actually switched to my 55C735 I previously had and he sold his 42C2. Yeah, you can get a little bit better blacks with the LG, but the fact that the TCL can maintain a very bright image in full screen and doesn't dim the image like the LG because you don't have to worry about burn-in makes the user-experience a lot better. The HDR is amazing on it, in fact, it has such an incredible auto-HDR function that it makes games look like they run using their built-in HDR. Everspace 2 for example looked incredible with it with no added input lag, while its built-in HDR was broken. It's a fantastic TV and after seeing both QLED and OLED in action, I would never buy an OLED because I can get a very similar image quality (or perhaps better if I buy a more expensive model) for way less price and without the annoying dimming that OLEDs constantly do.
@@konczdavid there's new TCL C645 quantum dot it's cheaper and has higher peak brightness ... almost sounds to good to be true. 65' almost the price of 55' C735
QLED was always intended for this purpose. They are excellent for advertising inside a shopping center and especially city information panel being bright and colorful without noticeable degradation or intended purpose, inside a bright living room. Designed to battle the sun with extreme brightness, they'd make a good handheld device, here is to hoping to see more of these around in the future, as it hit high nit threshold long before QD-OLED and now we have Mini-Led it's a reality it could in fact be desirable
There is still something special about reflected light from a projector when watching a movie. The OLED picture is so much better, but a projector and a good screen feels so cinematic to me.
Based almost entirely on your reviews and info I purchased an LG OLED77G1 a few years ago. It was the largest screen available at the time. I considered a laser projector but I’m still very happy with my decision. I’ll check back in a few years, when I’ve outgrown my 77” OLED… 👍😎
I helped a friend with his 100” ust screen… I’m in the market for a new tv or ust. I’m going ust. His 100” screen was like 20lbs and easy to take off the wall. Also super easy to adjust its height. You get a better image at all times with an oled but the ust beats that tv everywhere else. I can’t imagine moving a 100” inch oled tv.
@@Dreadpirateflappy It's one of those "first world problems". I loved my 70" tv and thought it was huge, but once I got a projector and a 106" screen, I don't think I'd want to go back to a TV that size anymore, at least in a movie room.
Nice thing about the influx of all these projectors, especially the UST ones, is that it seems to be affecting the large TV pricing. Lot more folks who were looking for a very large screen but didn't have the dedicated space for a standard projector can now get a huge screen. Even the TLC folks here put this on the market at $8,500 in the States and amazon is now selling it for $4,000, indicating that the market isn't there for such pricy screen when you can get a UST projector with a good image for 1/4 the price.
@@curtisbme Aw man, now that you fixed it I look like the silly one You make a very good point too, throughout the 2010's the price of 55-65" screens went from exhorbitant to manageable to even including budget options, while the 85+ range remained ridiculously high. The introduction of UST projectors coincided with that segment beginning it's rapid drop in price - but are they the cause? or is it just the right time for large displays to come down in price?
Forgot who it was that told me, but I was speaking to someone in the flat panel TV industry and he said apparently USTs have really taken hold in China and people don't get flat panel TVs for the home without considering a UST setup FIRST. It's crazy
@@TriMuXx Makes sense when you think about their space constraints. It's also why there's so many more variations of tiny ITX PC cases over there than full size, space is a premium for anyone that lives in or around the big cities
I recently purchased a Samsung LSP9T and I agree with the points made in this video. I shopped projectors and compared a 100" projector setup to an 85"-98" television and ultimately I concluded that a 100" projector isn't enough of a size advantage to warrant the pitfalls of a projector. That's why I went to 120". :-) I ended up spending about $2600 on the projector and $700 on thr ALR screen so $3300 total for a nice 120" experience. In my opinion it is at the 120" size that projectors have enough advantage to warrant the pitfalls of projectors. But if I were only looking for a 100" screen I think a television is still the way to go.
Another thing to keep in mind is that projectors are specifically designed for theaters, not for bedrooms or living rooms with a lot of light. The technology in projectors keeps getting better though, and as competition increases between companies we are going to get better projectors at lower costs, that will rival televisions.
No it hasn't. Projector tech has only seen modest incremental improvements in recent years. A used high end projector from 5 - 10 years ago still looks way better than your latest entry-level $5k models. Almost no progress has been made in lowering the cost of precision glass lenses. And they are still using those awful LCD / LCOS chips. We really need a new tech than takes light directly from the phosphor (like CRT projectors did). That would be a meaningful improvement. I.e. oled chip projectors.
@HDTVTest some projectors do almost perfect upscaling 240p-720p content to 1080p (on my used Benq w1070 $100) 150 inches to the wall. also not fair comparing high value TV to arguably over priced UST. my friend imported a 4k xiaomi UST 2500 lumens for $1700 almost 3 years ago.
This is consistent with my experience with owning a projector and trying to use it in a multi-purpose room with windows. We eventually bought a smaller, regular TV because waiting until the sun went down to watch TV was annoying. A projector really needs a completely dark room to perform well. Blinds and "light rejecting" screens help, but it is almost impossible to get a room with a bunch of windows in it dark enough during the day to keep the black levels from being noticeably washed out. Projectors still create that sense of an "event", but they are really for situations where you can have a dedicated home theater room and 150" screen. Otherwise, regular TVs have gotten large enough and cheap enough that they are the better choice for most people.
@@Gubers If you have $5k to spend on a projector, $2k to spend on a 200 inch screen, etc. then a TV still can't compete. But if you are thinking about sticking something in your normal living room and hooking it up to a sound bar, there is no reason to get a projector. Projectors are becoming a niche product for videophiles who can afford a dedicated, high-end home theater. Anybody who wants an image under 100 inches is going to be better off with a TV.
@@Gubers In my modest UK home, I have a 7-2-6 rig, Denon X6700H, plus Emotiva Basx A3 and A4 to power the floor lever speakers leaving to Denon to power the 6 heights. I have 2 SVS powered subs, now sadly I can't go above 85 inches. As my front left and right speakers would block some of the screen, and there would be no space for my front heights. But this is more than enough immersion for me. Obviously if I had a larger space everything would be scaled up accordingly. So huge projector set ups are not practical for many, or even possible to accommodate.
100% disagree. All that light in the room causes TONS of glare and reflections on a Flat Panel TV during your inky black dark scenes and ruins the immersion. With a modern projector setup, you can do really well with ambient light despite not having super deep blacks with reflections and glare in them like OLED TV fans really enjoy.
I was the first in my circle of friends and family to switch to HDTV all those years ago. Now I’m preaching the benefits of projectors to anybody who will listen. The pros and cons between TV’s and projectors are pretty obvious to anybody who bothers to think at all about both. Once you do, I think this becomes kind of an apples to oranges comparison. I’m never buying another tv. I don’t see how one would after watching the NFL on sundays at 150 inches or better. And you can easily get a great experience on a plain white wall and a projector that doesn’t cost thousands.
I'm with you there. I've converted to projector setup 15 years ago and never went back. We never watch TV, our projector is hooked up to a small computer (streaming and local files) and Playstation (optical media + games). Gaming is crazy immersive on 120" screen (of course, no competitive gaming). Kids love it as well. Actually, when renovating the house, we prepared the open-concept space for the projector screen, installed circa 100 meters of audio and video cables in the walls and ceiling, installed in-ceiling speakers, etc. For now, I am projecting to a pure white wall, but plan to install a nice screen when I upgrade the projector later down the line. One of the best thing is that when the projector is off, the whole space is super clean. Personally, I prefer the reflected light of a projector to TV. And of course, I am at peace with natural shortcomings of projectors (watching during the day, etc), but we don't really consume that much media, so it fits the lifestyle of my family.
@@theGURUman I think to an informed consumer the pros of projectors outweigh the cons many times over. The setup you’ve gone with sounds great! I have bought projectors for two out of my three siblings. My sister is the only holdout because her husband paid a ton of money for a giant screen DLP set and he won’t be happy about not getting very much of that money back lol
I think this is more a rebuttal to people thinking that the laser TV/UST are marketed as being 1:1 TV replacements in all scenarios for all content. If you look at just HDR performance, TVs win with no real competition, regardless of screen type and projector type whether you’re looking at QNLED or OLED and only 1 UST has Dolby vision certification atm. This has been an issue for projectors since HDR was a thing. For size alone, and for convenience (particularly with a motorised screen) I agree that projectors have a wow factor at 120” and up in a darkened room but the image is still worse overall technically.
I really like my PX1-Pro Hisense projector, I have it running at 130 inches against my white wall...not ideal, but honestly i'm so happy i bought it in comparison to a QD-OLED 65" TV (same price point). Yea the picture quality of an OLED may be better, but a massive screen is really takes the experience to the next level. You quickly forget the downsides of poor black levels. In a dark room it's like holy crap this is awesome! Also, it's going to be much easier to move when it comes time to move to a different home.
@@Mauro0 my 600 ft apartment is all white walls and roof, so it's far from perfect due to all the light bouncing, but you forget that when your entire wall is filled with the movie.
In the US that 98" TV is $6k so a couple thousand more than a decent 4k projector that could be much larger than 98". I agree a TV panel will likely have better picture but if you want something huge then TVs are way too expensive for most.
Why pay MORE for a larger image that is dimmer, less sharp, has a smaller color gamut (range of displayable colors), and is useless for HDR content (cannot make HDR look like HDR should look)? There are no "decent" 4K projectors at ANY price if you expect them to display HDR content. I had a $60,000 laser phosphor projector here for 4 months used with a $7000 reference-grade projection screen in a blacked-out room (zero light and black floors, walls, ceilings, LEDs covered with black tape, the whole shebang. And a $2000 flat screen TV was MASSIVELY better when viewed from 7 feet away. I have an $11,000 meter I use to calibrate displays to insure they are as accurate as they can be before I do my evaluations. Projection devices I evaluate have the best possible conditions here to be successful, yet a $2000 TV makes projection look stupid and stupid-expensive. You only need to sit 2 feet closer to a 98-inch TV to have the same viewing experience you have with a 120 inch projection screen. The size of the screen is meaningless. Viewing angle is EVERYTHING.
The many disadvantages of projectors-not just UST, but more conventional projectors as well, including JVC's super-high-end ones-compared to TVs keep me from truly desiring one. The one obvious advantage of projectors is that you can get monstrous screen sizes with them that you just can't get with emissive displays without spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. But I personally value image accuracy, brightness, and versatility over outright screen size. Honestly, even if I did have both the space and the budget for one of the amazing JVC projectors, I would still probably save money for a few months and get something like a Micro LED or a giant OLED.
I have a Sony A95K TV. No Sony OLED TV and no Panasonic OLED TV in the world despite their amazing picture quality can ever compete with the immersion of watching Top Gun Maverick on a TRUE 1570 IMAX screen. The unforgettable immersion I got from watching Dune, Interstellar, Batman v Superman, The Dark Knight, etc in IMAX will NEVER EVER be replicated by my Sony A95K QD-OLED TV.
Vava Chroma with its 100% bt2020 4k HDR color has such a good image quality, I've never seen that on a TV. Also many people forget that the canvas is just as important as the projector itself(!) So dont make the mistake and save money on the canvas...
I work in entertainment, and ... yes, there are amazing laser projectors that absolutely can out perform your tv... they also cost as much or more than your house and are used on stages or in movie theaters, not in homes, because their power draw is more than a typical household circuit can handle. That said, there is something you can do to make the projector perform much better... but it has nothing to do with the projector, it has to do with the screen. You did a good job by using a silver screen instead of a white or grey screen, but you can go a huge step farther. You see, a white screen gives a contrast ratio of about .87:1, or you lose about 13%. A grey screen can take this past 1:1 and even get to 1.3:1, or a 30% increase in contrast. A good silver screen can get the contrast ratio all the way to 1.8:1, which is great, and goes a long way to maintaining color and fighting washout. Why does this matter, because projectors don't project black... simple problem, simple solution... a black projector screen. I have seen real world uses of these in outdoor bars and the image is clear. They get a contrast ratio of about 2.35:1... or the image is literally more than double the contrast of what the projector is outputting. And they work.
Okay, so who makes this "black projector screen". My present screen was made by Hurley, who are no longer in business. They typically made screens for big venues like Disney would use. I like my Hurley screen but I'd like to know more about this black screen. Second thought, are you talking about the ALR screen material, like what Screen Innovations make?
@@wally6193 I originally saw the black screens showcased by Black Diamond. But At the time their price was prohibitive, however they had instructions on how to make them yourself using a special paint... I think they sell the paint.
Awesome comparison Vincent. Please keep that friendship with TCL, I can’t wait to see that C845 tested. I come from a fully dedicated PJ HT in 2011, now to TV HT. Back in that time HDR wasn’t a thing and black levels was the ultimate choice…now its NITS war also jaja. Im sure lots of people can’t decide if going 98” with TV or PJ nowadays that tech and prices have changed.
All I saw in this review was reflections on that TV. How do you get rid of those reflections? Completely block out those windows. If you're going to block out those windows, you might as well get a projector.
Well it’s a compromise you’ll have to make - choose size, or choose image quality. For me, a 4k projector with a 130 inch screen that costs less than half of a 100 inch tv is an easy choice, plus i only got time to use it at night - if i have money to burn off course I’ll buy a massive tv wall.
As TVs get bigger, you get into the problem of placing those front speakers. A projector's strongest selling point for me honestly is that you can have a wall to wall acoustically transparent screen and have massive LCR speakers behind them (and all at the same height, not center somewhere down way under). It's cool that options are there for every tastes, a 98" screen cheap is good. But there's all sorts of configurations where different type of builds make more sense, not just nits data.
According to your logic, you either mount the projector screen *way* in front of your wall, or you place your speakers inside your wall - which are both huge compromises. Furthermore, that "problem" doesn't make sense. If your TV is so big you can't properly put stereo speakers beneath them, your viewing distance is too low anyway.
@@BVZTIII No, many home theaters are setup like this. Often the rooms can be setup for 2x (good number for sound too) deep than wide and that's when wall to wall screen with acoustic transparent screen is often a solution. LCR in-walls in an infinite baffle design, it's even what THX does for home theaters. Some of the best yearly competitions for home theater sound setups are in-wall. The LCR being behind the screen, you want to have the same speaker for center as the right and left, matching the timber. Our ears are more sensitive to acoustic interference by horizontal lobing than vertical so the an horizontal center channel that is also lower than the center of the screen is always a sacrifice of performance for convenience (for peoples without a screen). Also THX ideal viewing distance for a 120" would be 12', max being 17'. Really easy to achieve in a room.
@@alexb115 first of all, where the hell did you dig out THX? THX certificates became to home theaters what Xzibit became to car tuning 😂 Don't know what home theater "competitions" you're talking about, because sound above a certain quality level becomes purely subjective to the individual, so contests don't make sense. But placing a speaker behind your projector screen is *always* a compromise, without exception, because the screen always distorts the intended sound, such a thing as 100% acoustic transparency doesn't exist. Which is also why the best speakers don't even have coverage in front of the membranes. Furthermore, you contradicted yourself. You said that our ear is more sensitive to horizontal lobing than vertical - which is correct - but then call the vertical position of the center a sacrifice - _"below the screen"_ is the vertical alignment, not horizontal 😐 As for the center, it basically doesn't play a role until a ~10° angle. A 120" screen at 12' would be an 11.5° angle, anything above 4 meters would be under 10°. And in case of the front stereos, you'd still have the space left and right to place the front stereos beneath the screen instead of behind them and still fulfill the Dolby Atmos and DTS criteria of the front stereos being placed in a 20-30° angle to the line between your seating position and the middle of the screen. End of the day, you can do what you want. But I wouldn't sacrifice sound *and* picture quality just for the sake of a theoretically perfect speaker alignment that I won't notice, since it only affects the center speaker at all 🤷♂️
@@BVZTIII Those require special screens which cost even more than UST screens and don't work with you UST projectors like the one in this video. They have to be accousticqlly transparent and to my knowledge no UST projector screen exists that does this so you need room behind the screen for a regular throw projector. Possibly short throw but not UST so you need a good 5 to 10 feet behind the screen to accomplish this so you need a crazy big room and ideally it should be pitch black behind the screen outside the projector so this is what rich people use with their 20K masked screens so they don't get black bars for 2:35: movies yet can also watch 1:85 (I think that's the ratio, almost 16:9 with minor black bars above and below the screen) Honestly at that point there are better options if you're going to drop 50K plus on a home theater room, at least in my personal opinion. Just Google accoustactlly transparent projector screens" and see if you can find a price because I'm pretty sure they have to be purchased from authorized dealers and when you can't find the price of something online it means it's crazy expensive. I mean, while we are at it I'll take Sony's 780" modular 16K crystal LED TV instead. It's only 5.8 million dollars so let me go check my sofa real quick. To put that into perspective that would be the size of almost 8 of those 96" TCL TV's and it's 16K (resolution wise, not price wise obviously). At that point I don't think it would matter where the speakers go if you had a room to fit that in. EDIT: just googled it and on crutchfield they are selling a 120" acoustically transparent screen for 4.5K for just the screen alone, no projector, no speakers, just the screen.Only 8K for the 160" version and they are made by SI (screen innovations) which are overpriced, from the description below. This would require a regular throw projector so you're at 30K plus if not more by that point with the screen, projector, and theater setup. Nobody buys an 8K screen without paying at least double than that on the projector, at least not a smart person if they could even afford something like that. They exist, but not for your average person unless you got 30 to 50K to spend on a home theater room. This screen's perforated fabric means you can place speakers behind the screen with virtually no loss in sound - or picture - quality. Install in-wall speakers behind the screen and enjoy clean sound and a clean look. A perforated screen is a great option if creating a very realistic soundstage is one of your top priorities. Screen Innovations' acoustic perforated materials have over 28,000 tiny .55mm diameter holes per square foot. During the development of their perforation technology, SI sent their materials to third-party acoustics labs for testing. Typical impact on frequency response is well within the -3dB range, with maximum attenuation of -6dB at 20,000 Hz. The main reason you don't see more projectors in homes is that conventional projection screens require a dark room to produce a vivid, colorful picture. Screen Innovations' Slate AT material lets you enjoy a brilliant, colorful picture even in a room with some lights on. Slate's special optical coatings reject 65% of a room's ambient light, compared to less than 10% rejection using a standard white or gray screen.
Agreed. That’s why I got an 120” screen for my UST. TV’s are not price-competitive at that size, and now I would have trouble going smaller except perhaps for an 100”+ self-emissive pixel tv one day…
wow that blooming on the tcl screen with subtitles was horrible and a deal breaker imho, im going with the projector, thanks for making it clear for me, subscribed
Very nice video, as always. Would love to see you pull in a 120" UST setup and give your feelings of it to a more traditional 65" or so television. The immersiveness of a huge screen, and a decent projector (maybe use a standard throw model?) is quite significant. There are obvious needs, like a dark 'theater-like' room to get the best performance from a projector, but you don't get 120" or 150" of diagonal from a OLED TV. Yet. Your videos are awesome, and it is nice you put in this semi-shootout between the UST projector and the TCL. I use a 85" Samsung in my family room, but have a 161" projection setup in the basement. The projector is far more of a experience for my family than the TV. But, the TV is nice for just watching regular stuff.
Personally I think the best combo is projector for movies + more manageable OLED for gaming. Large TVs are just too unwieldly if you expect to move ever or upgrade.
@@spaceghostcqc2137, maybe. I've moved several times (locally) and I pull down my TVs, throw them in the back of my van, and take them to the new home. It's actually a pretty easy process. My projection screen stayed at my last house with the projector. I could've pulled the projector, but that would have sucked for the new owners. Projectors aren't 'easy' to setup properly. UST projection screens are also not easy to work with. As shown in the video where it wasn't even setup properly.
Viewing angle is what determines your viewing experience. 4K content can handle about a 50-degree viewing angle. Sitting 15 feet from a 120 inch screen produces about the same viewing angle as sitting 8 feet from a 65-inch TV. Assuming you don't do something stupid with the speakers and you place the left speaker to the left of the screen, the center speaker in the middle of the screen above or below the screen, and the right speaker to the right of the projection screen... that puts the main speakers 15 feet from the main seat. That is TERRIBLE for sound quality. At 15 feet, multiple-reflected and chaotic sound fills the room because the reflected sound overwhelms the direct sound. Sitting 8 feet from the 3 main front speakers mean you will hear MORE direct sound from the speakers and less reflected sound (because the main speakers will be closer and can reach the listener before being reflected by walls or objects in the room. Having the main speakers 8 to 9 feet from the listeners ALWAYS sounds better than having the speakers 15 feet from the listeners unless the room is HUGE, much larger than rooms in "normal" homes. So by going to a larger screen, you also make the images DIMMER at the same time. The projector already can't produce more than 20 fL (under $1200 and calibrated for ACCURACY, not for max brightness with hideous looking images) to 60 fL ($60,000 laser-phosphor projector). 4K HDR TVs are widely available that produce 300 to 900 fL making HDR images actually look like HDR and expanding the range of displayable colors far beyond what the dimmer projector can do (the extra light is not used to make 100% white brighter, it is used to expand the range of colors the display can produce and to be able to make accurate specular highlights (sun reflecting off of chrome, or water, or chandelier crystals, etc.). The brighter you make projectors trying to get anything that looks vaguely like HDR, the worse the black levels get because the reflected light inevitably bounces back at the screen contaminating blacks and making them look milky. There are zero reasons to prefer projection.
Thanks for this video. It would be nice to have a larger screen, say 120 inches but while that would be doable for SDR Blu-ray, HDR just doesn't play nice with projectors due to the massive tone mapping needed to make it work. Furthermore, even the high end projectors that I have looked at don't support Dolby Vision either. That is also not considering the difference in contrast, blacks, saturation etc of say an OLED vs projector. I love the idea of a home projector but I think for now that will have to stay in the realm of 35mm slides and my occasional 16mm prints.
I was sold on projection for home theaters because the large screen, but with these huge flat panel displays I now favor flat panels. Ambient lighting destroys High Dynamic range and black level … even in a room with no windows (unless you paint everything in the room black). This is due to the screen illuminating the room). You will be lucky to get 100 to 1 contrast for most imagery (fireworks in the dark night sky is the exception). Also, 100 to one contrast affects the non HDR range. And contrast is as critical as resolution. A 1080P resolution image looks much better than a washed out 4K resolution image. Poor contrast makes subtle image content disappear; and testing revealed a significant measured increase in time to notice image content that remained visible. Ambient light hitting the projection screen impacts contrast, black levels and color saturation. The only advantages left for projectors are cost, auditorium size screens, and no reflections. TCL quality, features, reliability and price make them my favorite. This is not a complete list of why contrast and black levels are intrinsically worse for projectors than flat panel displays. Flat panel displays have a neutral density filter overlay the light source panel reflects only about 20% of the ambient light that makes it through the neutral density filter. Ambient light must pass through the neutral density filter twice so it is attenuated by .5*.5.*.2 or by 95%. Plus the panel displays are brighter than projector displays improving the contrast even more.
Finally the god of TV reviews does something with "Laser TV's" = projectors. Please more! The Samsung projector is not a real good competitor, it's the old DLP chip generation from 2020. (And you compare it vs a new TV, not fair) Please Please, do that comparison with the current LG model LG Vivo Max Laser TV (HU915QE), then you have a real fight going on! Samsung vs LG DLP Chip: Old generation vs. new generation Lumen: 2800 vs 3700 Contrast: 1.500:1 vs 2.000.000:1 Rec.2020 vs Rec.709
I have a 85 inch and 75 inch samsung and a 65 inch hisense. I bought the xgimi horizon 4k pro as soon as it was released. The HDTVs are amazing but the xgimi gives that theater feel and experience especially on older 1080p movies and it's easy to put in my travel bag to take on the road or hook up to my laptop and do slide shows for work. I have a dedicated room and 135 inch screen but i can hook it up and point it just about anywhere and get a bright picture as long as its dark outside or inside. They both have their pros and cons and i like them equally for different reasons. I should have a video or 2 oon my channel of the projector
@HDTVTest I disagree. The glare and viewing angle components are enough to knock down all the bonus points for "super blind your eyes brightness" and "deeper blacks than a black hole in space" argument. The MOST annoying thing is watching a movie with ambient light on a super reflective flat panel TV only to see the kitchen or backyard come up during one of those "inky black" dark scenes. It COMPLETELY ruins the immersion. Sure, you can close the blinds, but why not get a projector setup if you're going to close the blinds ANYWAY? I'm not sure the reflection filled inky black and blindingly bright HDR features of a flat panel TV are enough of a selling point against a super wide viewing angle and slightly faded image during the daytime. Not only that, but this Ultra Short Throw projector is already outdated by Epson, AWOL Vision, and SEVERAL others. Things have changed since that model was released by Samsung and a whole world of better quality Ultra Short Throw projection with more affordable, really good quality, ALR screens have come out. There's no way I'm putting a 250lb 98" Flat Panel TV in the livingroom, much less wall mounting it, when I can get up to 150" Ultra Short Throw projector image on my wall for WAY less than a 150" Flat Panel TV AND it's so much easier to lift/move without having to yell at your friends helping you carry the thing out the door so they don't scratch or damage your heavy flat panel TV. Until that rollable TV comes out at over 120" at a reasonable price, and hopefully NONE of the glare and reflections, Flat Panel TVs just won't cut it. Glare is a DEALBREAKER and so is such a small viewing angle. Friends can't come over and watch the game because in order to see the Flat Panel TV image you have to sit perfectly centered with it or else you miss out on the entire game. Most cases that means you have to stand behind the homeowner who has claimed the perfectly centered spot for the entire game. Just to reiterate, if I'm closing the blinds ANYWAY for a Flat Panel TV to work it's best, then I am just going to go with Ultra Short Throw anyway.
The new model has been upgraded massively and will be released at the end of this year or possibly the start of next year. The price is predicted to have increased substantially tho
TV for the living room. Projector for a dedicated home theater. I assure you watching a 98" television in a completely darkened room from 10 feet away is not going to make a pleasurable experience.
I watch TV at night in 100% dark room. Am considering projection. (I started with Advent VideoBeam 7' in the 70s and then 11.5' HTSC GE front projector on white wall in the 80s - even SD at 11' is impressive. Size is the most important parameter. Have to replace 55" 4k w/damaged screen. Can't decide between panel or projector. But I definitely do not want short throw.
Being well aware of the significant difference between television and projector, I'm still a projector afficiniado. The form factor, light handling, size options are delightful. I like a good tv as a computer monitor, but find for the largest screen I prefer projected light over massive displays.
I use my projector as a computer monitor. I was in a store and the guy was trying to interest me in a 60 inch computer monitor. He said it's big. I replied that i use a projector; 150 inches. So much for his sales pitch lol
I wish you would compare different Ultra Short Throw projectors and portable projectors to each other for different lifestyle uses such as living room, camping/traveling, etc. The Hook Up makes great projector comparison videos but I would also like to see Vincent Teoh do the same kind of videos too. I'm buying the Sony A95L but I also have my eye on the AWOL Vision LTV-3500 UST projector.
Thank you. A great video. I have had projectors in my 2nd lounge for years. But now with big 98, 100 inch, tvs. TVs are great in all light conditions. Thank you.
Really would like to see some large 21:9 TVs (especially in OLED). Projectors corner the market in movie widescreen and it would be amazing to get the refresh rate and picture quality of a TV in that aspect ratio!
@@B0BBYGAMER Lately many movies are 16:9 but even if all new movies were made that way, people still want to be able to watch all the older movies without huge black bars. Also, for many home theaters (including mine) a 21:9 screen is a better fit.
I fully agree. I'm quite satisfied with the height of my current TV. But it would be nice to use all of that height, all of the time. Especially with big CinemaScope films.
I have had too many bad experiences with TCL TV's in the past... as good as they may appear for the price, I would never buy one again. I would take the projector just to ensure I have a decent working product. I have personally had issues with two TCL 75" TV's having 4K issues when hooked up to a PC or bluray, scaling issues, framerate issues in gaming (PC and console) and on. TCL said they would do nothing to help, just take it back to the store for a refund. And two of my friends had issues with their TV's dying early. Won't risk it again.
I personally just went through 3 S95B tv's. Cheaper tv's that seem like a great deal compared to the competition price usually have poor quality control.. I found out the very hard way
Projectors are multi-purpose. I have a gt1080 which I have taken camping, hotel rooms and backyard parties...because it's so portable and gives a great image up to 150 inches and I have a fixed Epson protector in my bedroom which gives me 90inches. The great thing about my bedroom is that no one knows that I have a screen that big in there since everything is well hidden and out of sight but if I need it...its just as simple as pulling the screen down and pressing on the projector remote. No way I could have a TV in here that big. Another plus is that projectors are much easier on the eyes due to the lower brightness levels. You get the same feeling as when you're watching a movie in the cinemas. My advice to everyone is just to buy a TV for the living room, nothing to fancy since 4k Tvs are dirt cheap these days and also get yourself a short throw 1080p gaming projector.
You video does have a point if considering a normal tv experience, you're 100% right. But i'd buy the projector to have a cinema experience in completely dark room or with completely covered windows, thus for me it's irrelevant.
Two different use-cases for me, really. I have an LG CX in my living room, where I have the space for it, and it's great. I have an Xgimi Horizon Pro in my bedroom as there's literally nowhere to put a TV where it would fit and not be in the way or easily damaged, and it's perfect for that. Both have their pros and cons. The TV's image quality is better, HDR is better, it's an OLED and so the blacks are wonderful. Also has 120Hz for gaming, which is lovely. However, the reflectiveness of the screen is a nightmare for watching anything with dark scenes, even in the dimmest of light. The projector has flexibility and portability, which are both really handy (I move it between my bedroom and my study), and reflections aren't an issue at all. However, it does lack the deep black contrast from the TV, and of course doesn't truly show its full potential unless you're in a pitch-black room (although even with that, I sometimes prefer this to the reflectiveness of the tv). Love them both, delighted with both, and would never say one is an adequate replacement for the other due to the specific use cases. That said, I think one of the big bulky short-throw laser projectors would fall into a sort of limbo between both, so I'm not too keen on one of those unless I can one day have a place big enough to have a bespoke cinema room.
I look at this a bit differently. For about $800 to $1500 you can get a projector that will give you a good if not perfect 80-100" HD image. As long as you control the room light you can get a very satisfactory solution at an affordable price. To get a TV with a 80 or 100" image it is to going cost a LOT more.
@@silvk1000 Depends on how you define proper. It's basically getting a BIG, good image on a budget. It will not be suitable for current gaming and you must be able to limit ambient light. If you want 80" or more with excellent HDR on a TV get ready to pay at least $3,500.
Vincent, this video looks more like a promo talk for TCL. Why do you use a, almost, 3 year old UST model that have some trouble with spickles? And what for a ALR screen did you use? Black Diamond from Screen Innovations, Elite screens? And last, what is the power consumption between the Samsung LSTP9 and the TCL tv?
@Walter Verbeeck: Regardless of what UST projector you use, and however expensive an ALR screen you use, there's no way for the light output to even come close to 700 nits with deep blacks, let alone maintain contrast in a room with some ambient light. Stop deluding yourself.
Most of those ambient light rejection is made for light abòve. Not the sides. I suggest that you contact a professional live event company to get used screen for a lesser cost. Yes,it may have a slight scratch here or there..but generally the tech is very careful with how they are handled as they do go from venue to venue. Same with buying high price monitors, or professional projectors. Do buy new laser or lamps before they get discontinued..like 10 yrs after manufacture date. You may not install them for months or years,but better to have then not. Do pay attention to power needed to run at home. Some are not 110v like most usa home theatre projector. But a barco will beat a benq or awol every time..im not saying spen 60k usa ..that's for theatres that use them 6 x a day and earn cash each showing
I had a cheap ultra short throw projector that broke (JMGO). I was debating between an "85 TV and another projector. I ended up going with another UST (XGMI Aura). I just didn't want to deal with the hassle of a giant TV in my apartment. I have the luxury of having smooth white walls and the image looks great on it. So there's a trade-off for sure, but I'm glad this video is breaking down the differences.
Turn the light up all you want on the T.V... the glare is a no go for me... If T.V.'s ever figure out how to eliminate the glare then I'll be onboard... Until then... nope...
More it was disingenuinly presented at debunking projectors vs tv claims but it was one projector, set up by TCL, vs one TV. So it was TCL TV review (leaning heavily towards TLC marketing) the whole time, we just didn't know it at first.
@@curtisbme He should of done the Test with Formovie projecter thats the best one out there so far out of all projectors & its £3000 so cheaper then Tcl tv..
@@curtisbme i was expecting at least a comparison of those generic laser projectors he is debunking (let alone a super-high-end one he did), against any entry level TV, be it at smaller sizes ... as with projectors, the bigger they project, the less sharper and desaturated the colors are. yes, the thumbnail and the 1st few seconds are obvious clickbait for TLC.
I agree that 100” tv makes a lot more sense for most situations. That said, most people who go with a laser tv go for a 120” screen. At this size it’s well worth the trade offs imo. A few other points. Screen reflections, screen uniformity, and refresh rate. This is subjective, but screen reflections and poor backlight uniformity completely kill immersion for me. When watching a movie, grayish black bars don’t bother me nearly as much as splotchy glowing backlight. As far as a 4k@120hz, it is a limitation of “laser tv’s”. However, most Laser tv’s can do 1080p@120hz.
black levels arent a problem on a proper contrast canvas like elitescreens CLR combined with a good projector like the vava chroma which can do 100% bt.2020 4k HDR color
If you need a TV get a TV. Having said that my projector setup cost me less than 1/4 of the price (including my screen) of this Samsung, and I bought it more than 10 years ago. I get a 120" image which is considerably larger and enjoy every moment of using it. Making these VS videos is pointless, you might as well make a "A parrot vs a pitbull as a guard dog THE BRUTAL TRUTH"
There is something else to consider, something I learned the hard way! You measured the Beamer contrast in a large room only considering the light from the windows. But as the room the beamer sits in becomes smaller, the Beamers own light is reflected off the walls back to the beamer wall, thereby washing out the picture. The interesting bit about this effect is, that it is dependent on the scene you are watching: high contrast for dark scenes and washed out for bright scenes. Really annoying. First and last time I bought a beamer.
The real answer is that as the room gets darker, for any reason, the TV brightness should be turned down to compensate. Nobody ever does this with a TV or even talks about it, but they complain about percent of ambient vs the output on screen when talking about projectors.
For about 10 years, I have a 150 inches screen that absorb lights and I have never complain of watching TV shows during day time. And watching movies in HDR is amazingly beautiful.
The benefits of a UST with ALR screen totally outweigh the lower contrast / brightness for me. What I found most irritating about a big screen tv are the reflections from windows and other light sources that are really hard on the eyes. Watching this video brutally reminded me of that :)
Projectors are cool, but they still have some length to go. For example, their refresh rate is not yet good for gaming. However, the moment they solve that issue (and manage to keep the price below 3K) I believe we will see noticeable intake in their sales
I'm pretty sure there are at least a few projector models that support 120Hz for gaming. HDMI 2.1 isn't really needed on a projector at the moment because consoles can't run 4K 120fps games. It's either 4K60 or 1080p120. JVC LX-NZ30 projector is aimed at 1080p 120fps gaming. It has HDMI 2.0 and it costs around $3,000 or $3,500 I think.
Epson has had a 60hz laser projectorl on the market for years with virtually no input lag and was highly regarded for gaming in the community.. I want to say they've had a 120hz model too (but I can't remember exactly) That was 6 years ago. There would be models now that far surpass that.
Refresh rates of gaming projectors are below 8ms these days. Mine is 16ms and That's more than enough for a wide range of games and if you want serious shooter games you are better off playing on a PC anyway.
Most of those you tubers are just interested in the sponsorship cash and viewing figures. You get to recognise them pretty quickly though, and your channel shines through
hmm not so sure about that. Why he didnt mention the Vava Chroma projector? It has 100% bt.2020 color and 4k HDR, and its HDR is absolutely MINDBLOWING Also daylight usage is possible on vava chroma or the highend LG models.
I will say why the TLC is almost certainly better in probably almost every category except the ones you pointed out. A fairer test would have been turning on the overhead lights instead of the windows. The way most UST lectangular based ALR screens work is they form little "zig zags" for lack of a better term with the light coming from below being projected back at the user while overhead light is being blocked. They aren't good for blocking light from the sides or windows which is why it's stupid to hang a UST projector upside down. Even if you mount the screen upside down all the light would need to be coming from the bottom of the room to block it and any overhead light would wash the picture out almost completely. So I think a better comparison would have been turning on the overhead lights instead of the windows because that's what lectangular ALR screens do. As you pointed out there is no glare and a better viewing angles but most ALR screens tend to have between a 0.4 to 0.6 gain to achieve this effect. They have never been good at blocking out light from the sides like a window in this demonstration so I would have liked to see a comparison with the windows closed and only over head lights being used and not windows. The TCL would have still won but it would have been a more fair comparison to the strengths of lectangular based ALR screens which are pretty much the norm for UST projectors. Fresnel screens do a much better job at blocking light from all angles but they also have their downsides. While they typically have a 1.0 or slightly higher gain, they are hard screen so the screen itself is just as difficult to get in the room and position as the TCL would be. Also, while brighter they have a glare, are prone to hotspottong, and have weaker viewer angles then lectencgular based screens so pretty much all the downsides of the TCL you pointed out. Lastly, they cost WAY more than lectangular lens screens so you typically only see them paired with 10K+;UST projectors so cost wise, the TCL wins regardless of which screen you use. Also, DLP UST projectors are terrible for gaming. Not just because they can't do 120hz but because they have to intellectually warp the image since they are so close to make the picture look normal. This adds a ton of lag, due to image processing to accomplish this, typically 30ms to 50ms+ if not more. The only exception would be Epson who uses LCD but they also have a higher offset meaning the projector has to be lower to the ground to achieve the same picture placement as DLP but tend to get sub 10ms lag for games so unless you are super hardcore they work for gaming but still don't do 120hz. UST projectors were a great idea but now that affordable 100" TV's are being introduced, primarily by TCL, not so much. With that said don't be looking for an affordable OLED 100" TV anytime soon. I think they still cost 20K plus if not more from LG and Samsung so QLED (or whatever the manufacturer calls their particular flavor of the same technology) are going to be the only option for quite some time. I do wish TCL had launched the same 100" TV that was released in China only which may be this one based on the price as it worked out to be just over 3K US. The one currently being sold in the US has more backlit zones but is 5K or somewhere around there but pretty much the same in every other way as this model but still better than a 100" UST projector with an ALR screen. UST projectors also tend to start having major warping issues at 150" so that's as big as you are going to get without having to go back to a traditional projector. That is unless things have changed in the last few years. Now, I'm going to go watch my 5.8 million dollar 780" Sony modular crystal LED TV while I park my boat into my yacht. Honestly I don't even have a wall that big and they are mostly being used for non commercial use like Disney who uses them in their Stat Wars shows on Disney+ instead of green screens so the actors can see what's going on around them, maybe Marvel too but they literally make actors get sick to their stomachs because they are so realistic (from interviews I've heard at least). So, it's essentially close to 8 of those 96" TCL's combined for perspective which is crazy but obviously way out of the price range of us mere mortals.
This is testing real world use, people aren't going to leave the curtains closed. It would've been good to test night use/overhead lights as well, but I don't see anything unfair about this test.
@@DoubleMonoLR This is not real world use. No one sets up a projection or TV directly in front of 6 bay windows like that at home. In fact both of those displays would be unviewable once sun light comes directly in. A more real world test would be the screens adjacent to the windows. People set up their seating to be able to see out windows not have their back to them.
If you are ok with watching movies in dark room & daytime/game on tv/monitor (personally prefer oled), a JVC projector for 120"+ is still a better movie experience. And the black level & color accuracy is superior to the UST. Yes, its dimmer than UST but most movies look much better (tried both).
That actually happens to me a lot: When I watch a talk show on my projector, someone keeps progressively opening blinds closer and closer to my screen. Black colors become greyr and greyr. Nits keep agressively getting lower and lower.
use an actual good projector like a vava chroma and a good canvas like a elitescreens CLR and your black levels will magically turn to be good the vava chroma even has 100% bt2020 4k HDR color and its actual very good HDR too.
It is correct that with projectors the image deteriorates the more extraneous light is present. In the same way, however, the reflections of TV sets increase the more extraneous light is present, as can be seen clearly several times in the video. With projectors, depending on the model, attention must also be paid to the operating volume (of the fan). On the other hand, projectors can produce a much larger image than can be achieved or paid for with a TV set. Both systems have their own peculiarities. From an aesthetic point of view, projectors have an additional advantage of a motorized screen.
I use a mix of projector and TVs in my house.. im not a cinema purist by any means.. but I can say that having a nice clean wall (I dont use a screen).. when the projector is off is really nice.. the aesthetics and lack of having to cut holes in walls to mount a TV on the wall.. or hav an ugly TV on a stand.. a big one to get the 132" image I project.. I find for most people the high lumen projector is fine.. I chose an ST vs UST because I could get a 5000 lumen 4K unit and my room is such that putting a projector at the back of the room was perfect for 132".. and my seating position doesnt block it.. a few friends of mine that live in apartments all have projectors because well.. apartments dont allow cutting into the walls to run wires and mount TV's.. TV's on a stand are butt ugly.. and they find, like ,e no need to even turn on the HDR.. one of them does have a 3600 Lumen UST 4K unit and its plenty bright on the gray wall...
I used to feel the same way but my Sony A95K QD-OLED TV can't compete with the immersion that a true 1570 IMAX screen provides or a 150-inch projector provides.
A detailed comparison in a dark room was missing. Color range comparison was missing. Besides, for such a fight, he would choose Avol LTV-3500 with a very high light output. I don't think anyone buys a projector for 100 inches. Effect starts at 135 inches.
I don't know who watches movies on TV in a well lit room, or with blinds open - it's just ruins the experience, and there is GLARE 😢 (there is horrible glare in this video) . So the biggest reason against projectors isn't valid . Also ultra short throw projectors aren't needed - they are just more expensive. Better to get a ultrabrite gaming BenQ projector with 4k, HDR, and up to 240hz with ultra low lag, that can easily do 120-150" and cost just 2000-2500$
I'm not sure what the objective of this video is Vincent. People who buy projectors want the size they don't want a comparable performance with a top end TV. It's a shame that your last couple of videos have been so blatantly sponsored by TCL.
@R H: As stated in the UA-cam description, the "Includes Paid Promotion" message in this video refers to the sponsorship by Surfshark VPN, not TCL. The objective of this video is to debunk the notion that a projector can replace/ beat a TV, which has been perpetuated by other UA-cam videos, as shown in the intro of this video.
The TV is the same price and size as this projector and smokes it in just about every possible way. Unless you can't fit the tv through he door, i dont see a reason to go with the projector. Of course, unless you want a 120inch or larger image, then you don't have a choice.
@@hdtvtest some projectors do almost perfect upscaling 240p-720p content to 1080p (on my used Benq w1070 $100) 150 inches to the wall also not fair comparing high value TV to arguably over priced UST. my friend imported a 4k xiaomi UST 2500 lumens for $1700 almost 3 years ago.
For me it's the simple fact the projector and screen can hide away easily in my room. A hundred inch TV would totally dominate the room and can't be tucked away to use the room for other purposes. Plus I have total dark room when needed for projector, so contrast remains excellent
Its flat on the wall.... What in the universe are you talking about.
Even if you were worried about it getting hit, protectors and covers exist.
@@BeefIngot 100' of glossy black screen dominates any medium sized room. My projector and screen recess away completely leaving the room free to use socially without a giant black hole on the wall. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can put this very simple interior decor/lifestyle point.
@@tsavin White covers exist and so do in wall mounts
Same here hiding it would be a lot of work. Rollable OLED TVs are still way out of reach and too niche.
I can't stand that ugly black hole either
The beauty of 90” OLED TV can be used to play paintings 🖼️ when not used for watching movies!
I bought blackout curtains, and to be fair i really enjoy the feeling of projection but i can agree that the tv just looks better.
I tend to sleep better after watching on a projector compared to the tv as well
Same. With fully framed blackout blinds I am getting 99%+ darkness and the feeling of watching a projected image feels more authentic to me and easier to watch over long periods.
I won’t rule out a screen given how amazing my LGC2 looks in the living room but for dedicated cinema viewing I cannot see my LG projector being usurped any time soon.
Vava Chroma on a elitescreen looks better than TV. Why he did pick Samsung??
I noticed the sleep improvement as well. Interesting someone else experienced that. Another thing I noticed is I can binge watch WAY more stuff on a projector. On a TV, the glare and reflections start making my eyes hurt and I get headaches...also the smaller image makes my eyes work harder to see what's on screen.
@@TriMuXx Always buy a TV that have the option of reducing the backlight / brightness... I do not know how O-LED is with that but my LED backlit TV I usually watch with 80% reduced backlight because at full brightness it is so bright that it is painful for your eyes. (at that setting it also uses 80% less power).
Projector causes less strain on eyes
One of the very few TV review channels worth watching.
Got both and I agree, they are just different and made for different use case. For general TV watching I usually use TV but for movie night I prefer projector as somehow reflected light is more pleasing to the eye and creates different atmosphere.
I'd love to hear Vincent's thoughts on this.
Больше и добавить нечего ✊👍
Do you run the audio through a record player simulator as well? :)
@The Doppler Effect so you like to bounce your video off of a surface before it gets to your eyes? Do you place your front stage speakers behind you and bounce the audio off the front wall as well? If not, you're really missing out :)
Well put, sir.
Vincent, you are the voice of reason in a maddening world. Thank you yet once again sir! Keep up the great work!
The gap gone for people looking 100 inches so I agree with Vincent here, however for those still looking 120inch+ screens, projectors are still the way forward for now in terms of cost. I myself have a 140inch alr screen (ali express for £700) and the optoma p2 (£1800) would hate to think of what a tv would cost at that size.
Great find with that screen. Mine cost quite a bit more for 120". I don't have space for 140!
18ish thousand lol i also use a projector in my living room instead of a tv. i would not change it even if you paid for it
TCL has 115inch and Hisense 110inch mini led with 20k-40k dimming zones, I mean I have a U8K 100" and the 1600 dimming zone is near Oled black with the right video source. Plus you would have to live in a big mansion or basement with 12-14ft feet for optimal viewing distance for 120-140", I think projectors are now obsolete with very video content pushing HDR technology, the only mishap of TV is real estate and glare issue which are getting fix with insane brightness coming out every year. No offense just my opinion.
Do you also have the problem with the Optoma P2 that certain darker rich blue tones render purple-ish? Its absolutely annoying for me. Saw it a lot when watching the bear!
@@Z05HYI have a older Sony vpl HW55 and have the same hint of purple hue in total darkness. I think it's the aging optical block has a bit of a problem colors as it gets older and the silicon in it not 100% factory. I contemplated buying a calibration tool used but I don't mind the hue in movies.
Vincent destroys laser projectors using hard truth and science
And healthy dose of propaganda
That’s why a tv for daytime and a projector with roll down screen at night is the best of both worlds. I agree with Vincent that a laser projector can’t compete with a nice OLED tv, but on the other hand tv’s can’t compete with projectors for obvious reasons. Apples and oranges. They are not to be compared but rather appreciated for their strengths. Don’t get me wrong, Vincent is only doing this very obvious demonstration because the new UST laser projectors are marketing themselves as laser tv’s. I completely understand.
@@jzilla1234 Propaganda?
Vincent is the Shapiro of Visual entertainment hardware
@@lllULTIMATEMASTERlll he went from comparing the projector and an TV in a moderately dark room to advertising the TV.
You should use the Formovie Theatre or better be AWOL LTV-3500 for this test. The UST projector you used will lose in every single form in the UST projector tests. You also used standard ALR screen that is directly dedicated to blocking out light from upward direction (i.e living room lamp at 45-degrees) while your test consisted of far away windows that basically created a direct angle light source. Besides. If anyone buys it today, he/she sould buy a fresnel screen that blocks out liht from all angles except the middle. In conclusion. Do not buy the Samsung
I have a 150" screen with a VAVA chroma UST, and it is FANTASTIC!. I converted a huge chunk of my 2,000-square-foot basement into a theatre room with a 9' ceiling. It has to be seen to be appreciated.
well i guess it could be shared on, er... 'UA-cam'🤔
True True...I owned an Epson 5040UB and now use a Samsung QN900B. As good as the picture is on the Samsung, there was something magical about seeing a projector in a totally dark room on a 120" or bigger screen. The aesthetic of reflected light vs transmissive light is just so pleasing to the eye.
You got the point. I don’t understand why that’s so hard for others to understand.
You are saying that you can tell the difference between reflected and transmissive light? 😅😅😅😅😅😅
That's bullshit
@@L1ft0ff Have you even seen the image reflected from the ALR screen? The same kind of bull... as winyl vs. CD, or different loudspeakers - some people perceive the nuances and difference, some not. Poor you.
@@tecnogadgethd The first towards getting other people to understand is that they must be open-minded to trying something new instead of quickly dismissing a projector because it's not OLED.
I'm sure I myself could convince plenty of people to switch to a projector if they let me sell them on the idea while honestly explaining the pros and cons of different types of projectors vs OLED TV's vs Mini LED LCD TV's.
Try to connect one neuron with the other instead of being so ignorant. A TV emits light (photons) directly from its panel towards your eyes, besides having a special arrangement of its pixels (VA, IPS, ADS) and several layers of filters that make the light scatter towards you but at various angles.
A projector instead emits light from its lamp, usually located above or behind your head, making those photons bounce on a screen and then reach your eyes. The angle at which the light bounces and scatters can vary depending on the texture and material of the substrate used as a projection screen.
Both methods produce an image inside your brain, but they do it in very different ways. There is no name or metric for this, but the perception and how this light is captured by the cones of your retina is very different, and it also affects eye strain differently.
I’ve used a projector as a daily TV for over a decade now. What is presented here is very accurate, but some small details can make a massive difference to your experience.
First, grading against a videophile level TV is a good thing for a reviewer to do, but I suspect many people, myself included, are not shopping in this price bracket and are not aiming for videophile.
There ARE compromises when using a projector instead of a TV, but comparing a $1,200 projector to a $1,200 TV is a much more typical consumer comparison I would suspect. And at that level, even the TV will struggle with full window sunlight like that. One can simply swap to can lights in the ceiling pointing down and have a perfectly bright room, while keeping glare and too much extra wash out light from hitting either screen.
Personally, I have 8 Hue bulbs in cans in my living room and hate having the curtains open except on rare occasions. So for me, a 4000 lumen projector (not even laser) provides a fine viewing experience even with the lights fully on. That being said, we’re talking about TV shows, not “get into the zone” movies like Blade Runner mentioned here. I have never wanted to watch movies like that in the middle of the day with the room at full brightness, I’ve always wanted to watch movies in a theater setting.
There just isn’t any leg to stand on when trying to say that any projector can equal any TV in the harshest light. That’s not usually the use case though. Can you use a projector as a daily TV though? That answer is absolutely yes both at home and in a conference room. And you don’t have to spend 20 grand either. You just have to plan for it and match your use case.
With the proper lights, blinds, and position of the screen, you can get great results from either. If you want to throw the full sun on your screen though, if that’s truly your use case, then a TV is the only option, but even that will be full of glare without care given to screen and viewing angles.
Yeah I've never seen anyone want to watch a movie on a TV or projector who didn't first close the blinds/curtains.
He compared a 4000$ projector to a 3500$ TV , I think that was pretty fair.
@@The_Greg_5000 Wasn't trying to say the two things in this video were not comparable, just that the $4000 range of both items may be far above what the typical consumer today may be spending on either choice. Every "best selling" or "top sellers" list of TVs is dominated by $500-$1000 choices that I would bet represent maybe 80% of all purchases. For the other 20%, I would bet half of those are buying options between 1,000 and 2,000. Leaving only 10% or fewer of consumers that might be buying hardware that this review could apply to. Obviously I'm estimating and could be FAR off with all of that, but that was the point I was trying to make. Comparing two pretty high-end devices to prove the point that TVs are superior to projectors was a swing and a miss in my opinion. Do the same test with a $500 set of options and a $1500 set of options and see what that does. At those levels the TVs will blow the projectors away without any chance of competing without compensating with controlled lighting (so the same outcome in one sense, but with much less middle ground for adjusting brightness and things because it's just a clear win/loss). Which is the more valuable approach to TV versus projector in my opinion. Projectors have the advantage of portability if you need that (it was FAR easier for me to move between houses with a roll up screen for example, and less fear of breakage), greater size for the same or less cost (usually, at least in my price range - example is my $1,200 120-inch projection setup versus a $3,500 TV), and more flexible mounting options (you can hang screens from a drop ceiling in the middle of a room if your use case needs that in an office setting for example). Projectors have the disadvantage of needing more controlled lighting and usually needing to get a video signal from a video source to the projector over a much longer distance, possibly requiring expensive active cables. TVs under a certain size can be very cheap, so you might put 3 55" TVs around the room instead of one large projector screen up front for example. All TVs are leaps and bounds brighter than projectors, so you can deal with harsher lighting conditions. TVs are more friendly to non-technical users as they operate just like home TV setups versus a projector that has to warm up and may also require a second remote to be operated. Plenty of nuance I left out here as well, but that's where the value is for me in a discussion of TV versus projector, exploring the caveats and use cases that benefit from each solution.
Yeah who opens up all their blinds/curtains at 2pm and is like Imma watch me some moobies
@@swilson42yeah these days I feel like the 2-4k bracket is just for people who want to feel good about spending more..panels have gotten insane for cheap..compared to just over 10 years ago, a 300$ TV now will destroy a $10,000 TV from then
If you can fit the TV into your house and you only plan on going up to 100 inches, then this makes much more sense over a projector. Especially in a dedicated room with no reflections. Can't wait to see how the new QM8's do against this current generation. 5000 local dimming zones vs a few hundred could make a significant difference.
It would look even worse (dimmer) at a larger size.
@@djayjp I have a 150 inch screen. Tv's just cannot compete in the immersive department. Bigger is just plain better.
@@TheMeefive Yep there's the Wall tv if you've the $$$
@@TheMeefivereminds me of people who used a 40" 720p TV as a monitor back in the day, saying _"bigguh is bedduh"_ 😐
@@djayjp Lol 150 inches covers the entire width of my "wall" for 1000x less than Samsung's Wall.
I agree with Vincent, but I also prefer to watch movies with a projector. This has to do with the fact that a projector provides reflected light. I think that gives a more cinematic look than a television with direct radiating light, as others have mentioned here.
More cinematic because cinemas use projectors, so you make the association :)
@@RennieAsh Perhaps, but in real life we also mainly see reflected light.
perfect answer
perfect answer
For me the reflected light is better, not because it gives a more cinematic look, but becasue it will cause less eyes strain.
I have both a Sony 83A90J OLED TV and a UST Formovie Theater paired with a 120 inches screens and here is the thing : both products are complementary.
During the day the TV is unbeatable but in the evening the UST is.
98/100 inches is small for a projector. 150 inches is the top spot and brands like vividstorm are now selling tensionned floor UST screen up to 200 inches !
Blacks levels on my UST are only 0.024 nits. Maybe not as good as an OLED but quite good compared to other panel technology.
And UST are also getting better and better.
Now that I have an UST I won’t never go back to a TV for evening/night viewing.
I love watching movies on a 120 inches screen. True cinema experience at home. My next screen will be 150 inches or even 200 inches.
That UST black level seems incredibly low, whats the price of the projector?
There is a huge difference in price. OLED one love
OLED is not QLED, OLED colour accuracy and dynamic contrast is pure garbage when compared to both QLED or projector.
@@madigorfkgoogle9349 😂 LOL. Just go to store check the difference.
Whilst a projector can't compare to a TV when it comes to features like local dimming for HDR, what are your thoughts on the benefits of reflected light, and less blue light exposure, when using a projector instead of a TV?
Using a projector for long viewing sessions hurts your eyes far less than a tv in my experience
@@CarsonHoy Same. I feel way less fatigued after long gaming sessions on a projector. Initially after making the switch I would find myself accidentally staying up too late because I was so used to the fatigue from eye strain cuing me to go to bed lol.
I can't see how blue light exposure would be any different, despite TVs maybe having bluer backlights it's ultimately what's visible that matters. The same image/brightness on both should give identical blue light exposure.
I bought an ultra short throw projector for a designated room for watching movies 120 inches of viewing. The 16:9 ratio screen can also accommodate sports. A TV has a limit on size because you wouldn’t be able to get it home if it gets any bigger. A ten foot diagonal screen 120 inches is like taking four 60 inch tv’s and staking them together as one. If you can control the light in the room you can have amazing clarity and a giant picture in a small space.
R u liking your setup
@@sumitchaudhary343 it’s amazing but it’s sorta like getting a larger tv. Once you get it , you get use to the bigger screen and eventually want an even bigger screen lol. I only have 8 foot tall ceiling height….. so I guess I’m at my viewable limit. But when I look at the tvs in the house they look like postage stamps compared to the 120 inch screen. This projector was well worth the money 👍🏻
@@jamesvincent414 thank you. May i know which projector you have and screen model ?
@@sumitchaudhary343 Epson Epiqvision Ultra LS300….screen is white with 16:9 ratio 120 inch diagonal screen. I think the company was Vevor
@@sumitchaudhary343 No, because it ruins HDR and you can't have any lights on without destroying projected images.
The cost of my Optoma Cinemax P2 with 100 inch motorized (rising) ALR screen was about 3400 British pounds. You don't need the most expensive UST projector. My room decor is not destroyed by huge black TV rectangle. There are no reflections on the ALR screen (most TVs have dramatically reflective screens). Whenever I plan to enjoy a movie or a concert, I bring down my curtains a bit or completely, for a cinematic experience. And there is some cinematic quality of the reflected picture vs. direct TV emisive light.
I have the D2, and I just love the huge picture, it's very sharp too which surprised me. I love flat panels but for the majority of the big movie watching i'm going to be using my D2. I have OLEDS and they're gorgeous but so is a 120-inch screen.
I purchased an Epson projector over 8 years ago for about 1700 bucks and built a 120" silver screen for it. It's still going strong and produces a beautiful picture. Granted, it does not perform great in high light scenarios but the projector lives in my theater room where lighting is controlled. I purchased the projector when TV's were absolutely insane prices, but I have yet to find a "cheap" 120" TV screen to replace the projector. The beauty is because my room lighting is controlled, I can easily make the project screen at last 140" before it's becomes a noticeable issue. I'm going to toss this in the win category for projectors.
TCL C735 is an amazing TV. I briefly had a 55" and 65" model and in the end, I settled for an 85" variant that I managed to buy for a very good price on sale. However, TCL's marketing regarding its 144Hz functionality is pure BS/lie. They advertise the TV as a 144Hz TV, but there is NO OPTION to use the TV at 144Hz. I tried it with all three TVs using my RTX 3090 and an HDMI 2.1 cable. The max is 120Hz. This is straight up deceiving the customers.
i was wondering about that tv but the peak brightness is kinda low. What about HDR on this tv? Didi you had a chance to check it?
@@MagDag_ The RTX 3090 has one HDMI 2.1 port. The 3000 series is the first generation to support it.
@@mat_j My friend who lives next to me had an LG C2 OLED TV so we had the chance to compare them. The TCL C735 is so good that my friend actually switched to my 55C735 I previously had and he sold his 42C2. Yeah, you can get a little bit better blacks with the LG, but the fact that the TCL can maintain a very bright image in full screen and doesn't dim the image like the LG because you don't have to worry about burn-in makes the user-experience a lot better. The HDR is amazing on it, in fact, it has such an incredible auto-HDR function that it makes games look like they run using their built-in HDR. Everspace 2 for example looked incredible with it with no added input lag, while its built-in HDR was broken. It's a fantastic TV and after seeing both QLED and OLED in action, I would never buy an OLED because I can get a very similar image quality (or perhaps better if I buy a more expensive model) for way less price and without the annoying dimming that OLEDs constantly do.
@@konczdavid there's new TCL C645 quantum dot it's cheaper and has higher peak brightness ... almost sounds to good to be true. 65' almost the price of 55' C735
@@mat_j Don't buy that if you are interested in gaming. That's only a 60Hz panel.
QLED was always intended for this purpose. They are excellent for advertising inside a shopping center and especially city information panel being bright and colorful without noticeable degradation or intended purpose, inside a bright living room. Designed to battle the sun with extreme brightness, they'd make a good handheld device, here is to hoping to see more of these around in the future, as it hit high nit threshold long before QD-OLED and now we have Mini-Led it's a reality it could in fact be desirable
There is still something special about reflected light from a projector when watching a movie. The OLED picture is so much better, but a projector and a good screen feels so cinematic to me.
I see the video equivalent of snake oil audiophiles exists as well.
Based almost entirely on your reviews and info I purchased an LG OLED77G1 a few years ago. It was the largest screen available at the time. I considered a laser projector but I’m still very happy with my decision. I’ll check back in a few years, when I’ve outgrown my 77” OLED… 👍😎
how far do you sit back from your TV? I really don't understand how 77 inches can be too small for anyone in a house.
I optioned for 100 " screen and UST optoma p2.
I helped a friend with his 100” ust screen… I’m in the market for a new tv or ust. I’m going ust. His 100” screen was like 20lbs and easy to take off the wall. Also super easy to adjust its height. You get a better image at all times with an oled but the ust beats that tv everywhere else. I can’t imagine moving a 100” inch oled tv.
@@Dreadpirateflappy We have 120" and its perfect size.
@@Dreadpirateflappy It's one of those "first world problems". I loved my 70" tv and thought it was huge, but once I got a projector and a 106" screen, I don't think I'd want to go back to a TV that size anymore, at least in a movie room.
Nice thing about the influx of all these projectors, especially the UST ones, is that it seems to be affecting the large TV pricing. Lot more folks who were looking for a very large screen but didn't have the dedicated space for a standard projector can now get a huge screen. Even the TLC folks here put this on the market at $8,500 in the States and amazon is now selling it for $4,000, indicating that the market isn't there for such pricy screen when you can get a UST projector with a good image for 1/4 the price.
My brain while reading your comment: "Ultra thort throw"
@@MotoCat91 Well my brain was obviously on something when I typed that.
@@curtisbme Aw man, now that you fixed it I look like the silly one
You make a very good point too, throughout the 2010's the price of 55-65" screens went from exhorbitant to manageable to even including budget options, while the 85+ range remained ridiculously high.
The introduction of UST projectors coincided with that segment beginning it's rapid drop in price - but are they the cause? or is it just the right time for large displays to come down in price?
Forgot who it was that told me, but I was speaking to someone in the flat panel TV industry and he said apparently USTs have really taken hold in China and people don't get flat panel TVs for the home without considering a UST setup FIRST. It's crazy
@@TriMuXx Makes sense when you think about their space constraints.
It's also why there's so many more variations of tiny ITX PC cases over there than full size, space is a premium for anyone that lives in or around the big cities
I recently purchased a Samsung LSP9T and I agree with the points made in this video. I shopped projectors and compared a 100" projector setup to an 85"-98" television and ultimately I concluded that a 100" projector isn't enough of a size advantage to warrant the pitfalls of a projector.
That's why I went to 120". :-)
I ended up spending about $2600 on the projector and $700 on thr ALR screen so $3300 total for a nice 120" experience. In my opinion it is at the 120" size that projectors have enough advantage to warrant the pitfalls of projectors. But if I were only looking for a 100" screen I think a television is still the way to go.
Another thing to keep in mind is that projectors are specifically designed for theaters, not for bedrooms or living rooms with a lot of light. The technology in projectors keeps getting better though, and as competition increases between companies we are going to get better projectors at lower costs, that will rival televisions.
No it hasn't. Projector tech has only seen modest incremental improvements in recent years.
A used high end projector from 5 - 10 years ago still looks way better than your latest entry-level $5k models.
Almost no progress has been made in lowering the cost of precision glass lenses. And they are still using those awful LCD / LCOS chips.
We really need a new tech than takes light directly from the phosphor (like CRT projectors did). That would be a meaningful improvement.
I.e. oled chip projectors.
Like YOU said, projectors have been and has gotten BETTER! I especially like the quality of short throw projectors.
Nothing like that. U can use projector anywhere
@HDTVTest some projectors do almost perfect upscaling 240p-720p content to 1080p (on my used Benq w1070 $100) 150 inches to the wall.
also not fair comparing high value TV to arguably over priced UST. my friend imported a 4k xiaomi UST 2500 lumens for $1700 almost 3 years ago.
This is consistent with my experience with owning a projector and trying to use it in a multi-purpose room with windows. We eventually bought a smaller, regular TV because waiting until the sun went down to watch TV was annoying. A projector really needs a completely dark room to perform well. Blinds and "light rejecting" screens help, but it is almost impossible to get a room with a bunch of windows in it dark enough during the day to keep the black levels from being noticeably washed out. Projectors still create that sense of an "event", but they are really for situations where you can have a dedicated home theater room and 150" screen. Otherwise, regular TVs have gotten large enough and cheap enough that they are the better choice for most people.
Blackout curtains😊
@@Gubers If you have $5k to spend on a projector, $2k to spend on a 200 inch screen, etc. then a TV still can't compete. But if you are thinking about sticking something in your normal living room and hooking it up to a sound bar, there is no reason to get a projector. Projectors are becoming a niche product for videophiles who can afford a dedicated, high-end home theater. Anybody who wants an image under 100 inches is going to be better off with a TV.
@@Gubers In my modest UK home, I have a 7-2-6 rig, Denon X6700H, plus Emotiva Basx A3 and A4 to power the floor lever speakers leaving to Denon to power the 6 heights. I have 2 SVS powered subs, now sadly I can't go above 85 inches. As my front left and right speakers would block some of the screen, and there would be no space for my front heights. But this is more than enough immersion for me. Obviously if I had a larger space everything would be scaled up accordingly. So huge projector set ups are not practical for many, or even possible to accommodate.
@@Gubers😅
100% disagree. All that light in the room causes TONS of glare and reflections on a Flat Panel TV during your inky black dark scenes and ruins the immersion.
With a modern projector setup, you can do really well with ambient light despite not having super deep blacks with reflections and glare in them like OLED TV fans really enjoy.
You're the best TV and Monitor channel in the world! Thanks for saving everyone from fault advertising.
I was the first in my circle of friends and family to switch to HDTV all those years ago. Now I’m preaching the benefits of projectors to anybody who will listen. The pros and cons between TV’s and projectors are pretty obvious to anybody who bothers to think at all about both. Once you do, I think this becomes kind of an apples to oranges comparison. I’m never buying another tv. I don’t see how one would after watching the NFL on sundays at 150 inches or better. And you can easily get a great experience on a plain white wall and a projector that doesn’t cost thousands.
Definitely 💯 and I don't know any sane person who watches movies, in daylight. Why is no one talking about the horrible glare on modern TV's?
I'm with you there. I've converted to projector setup 15 years ago and never went back. We never watch TV, our projector is hooked up to a small computer (streaming and local files) and Playstation (optical media + games). Gaming is crazy immersive on 120" screen (of course, no competitive gaming). Kids love it as well.
Actually, when renovating the house, we prepared the open-concept space for the projector screen, installed circa 100 meters of audio and video cables in the walls and ceiling, installed in-ceiling speakers, etc. For now, I am projecting to a pure white wall, but plan to install a nice screen when I upgrade the projector later down the line.
One of the best thing is that when the projector is off, the whole space is super clean. Personally, I prefer the reflected light of a projector to TV. And of course, I am at peace with natural shortcomings of projectors (watching during the day, etc), but we don't really consume that much media, so it fits the lifestyle of my family.
@@theGURUman I think to an informed consumer the pros of projectors outweigh the cons many times over. The setup you’ve gone with sounds great! I have bought projectors for two out of my three siblings. My sister is the only holdout because her husband paid a ton of money for a giant screen DLP set and he won’t be happy about not getting very much of that money back lol
I think this is more a rebuttal to people thinking that the laser TV/UST are marketed as being 1:1 TV replacements in all scenarios for all content. If you look at just HDR performance, TVs win with no real competition, regardless of screen type and projector type whether you’re looking at QNLED or OLED and only 1 UST has Dolby vision certification atm. This has been an issue for projectors since HDR was a thing. For size alone, and for convenience (particularly with a motorised screen) I agree that projectors have a wow factor at 120” and up in a darkened room but the image is still worse overall technically.
@@hhkk6155nah the lg g3 has good glare protection
Already with Oled ,we buy a Projector now we ❤
Do u like oled or projector?
I really like my PX1-Pro Hisense projector, I have it running at 130 inches against my white wall...not ideal, but honestly i'm so happy i bought it in comparison to a QD-OLED 65" TV (same price point). Yea the picture quality of an OLED may be better, but a massive screen is really takes the experience to the next level. You quickly forget the downsides of poor black levels. In a dark room it's like holy crap this is awesome! Also, it's going to be much easier to move when it comes time to move to a different home.
Do you have dark walls as well?
@@Mauro0 my 600 ft apartment is all white walls and roof, so it's far from perfect due to all the light bouncing, but you forget that when your entire wall is filled with the movie.
@@jamesstringerphoto Why not paint the wall a grey at least? Will cost you less than £20!
@@jamesstringerphoto my walls are also white , but I'm thinking of painting them dark matte. I think it will improve the experience massively.
@@RH-nk7eo I rent, like most people my age. I'm not allowed to make modifications to the apartment sadly.
In the US that 98" TV is $6k so a couple thousand more than a decent 4k projector that could be much larger than 98". I agree a TV panel will likely have better picture but if you want something huge then TVs are way too expensive for most.
Why pay MORE for a larger image that is dimmer, less sharp, has a smaller color gamut (range of displayable colors), and is useless for HDR content (cannot make HDR look like HDR should look)? There are no "decent" 4K projectors at ANY price if you expect them to display HDR content. I had a $60,000 laser phosphor projector here for 4 months used with a $7000 reference-grade projection screen in a blacked-out room (zero light and black floors, walls, ceilings, LEDs covered with black tape, the whole shebang. And a $2000 flat screen TV was MASSIVELY better when viewed from 7 feet away. I have an $11,000 meter I use to calibrate displays to insure they are as accurate as they can be before I do my evaluations. Projection devices I evaluate have the best possible conditions here to be successful, yet a $2000 TV makes projection look stupid and stupid-expensive. You only need to sit 2 feet closer to a 98-inch TV to have the same viewing experience you have with a 120 inch projection screen. The size of the screen is meaningless. Viewing angle is EVERYTHING.
The many disadvantages of projectors-not just UST, but more conventional projectors as well, including JVC's super-high-end ones-compared to TVs keep me from truly desiring one. The one obvious advantage of projectors is that you can get monstrous screen sizes with them that you just can't get with emissive displays without spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. But I personally value image accuracy, brightness, and versatility over outright screen size. Honestly, even if I did have both the space and the budget for one of the amazing JVC projectors, I would still probably save money for a few months and get something like a Micro LED or a giant OLED.
I have a Sony A95K TV.
No Sony OLED TV and no Panasonic OLED TV in the world despite their amazing picture quality can ever compete with the immersion of watching Top Gun Maverick on a TRUE 1570 IMAX screen.
The unforgettable immersion I got from watching Dune, Interstellar, Batman v Superman, The Dark Knight, etc in IMAX will NEVER EVER be replicated by my Sony A95K QD-OLED TV.
Vava Chroma with its 100% bt2020 4k HDR color has such a good image quality, I've never seen that on a TV. Also many people forget that the canvas is just as important as the projector itself(!) So dont make the mistake and save money on the canvas...
@@De-M-oNnot dolby vision doe
@@eleh1337 The LG G3 OLED 65" did beat it now. But strong point is still the huge 120" of the vava
I work in entertainment, and ... yes, there are amazing laser projectors that absolutely can out perform your tv... they also cost as much or more than your house and are used on stages or in movie theaters, not in homes, because their power draw is more than a typical household circuit can handle.
That said, there is something you can do to make the projector perform much better... but it has nothing to do with the projector, it has to do with the screen. You did a good job by using a silver screen instead of a white or grey screen, but you can go a huge step farther.
You see, a white screen gives a contrast ratio of about .87:1, or you lose about 13%. A grey screen can take this past 1:1 and even get to 1.3:1, or a 30% increase in contrast. A good silver screen can get the contrast ratio all the way to 1.8:1, which is great, and goes a long way to maintaining color and fighting washout.
Why does this matter, because projectors don't project black... simple problem, simple solution... a black projector screen. I have seen real world uses of these in outdoor bars and the image is clear. They get a contrast ratio of about 2.35:1... or the image is literally more than double the contrast of what the projector is outputting. And they work.
Okay, so who makes this "black projector screen". My present screen was made by Hurley, who are no longer in business. They typically made screens for big venues like Disney would use. I like my Hurley screen but I'd like to know more about this black screen. Second thought, are you talking about the ALR screen material, like what Screen Innovations make?
@@wally6193 I originally saw the black screens showcased by Black Diamond. But At the time their price was prohibitive, however they had instructions on how to make them yourself using a special paint... I think they sell the paint.
Awesome comparison Vincent. Please keep that friendship with TCL, I can’t wait to see that C845 tested.
I come from a fully dedicated PJ HT in 2011, now to TV HT. Back in that time HDR wasn’t a thing and black levels was the ultimate choice…now its NITS war also jaja.
Im sure lots of people can’t decide if going 98” with TV or PJ nowadays that tech and prices have changed.
I don’t like being friendly with today china lion myself
I have the 55 inch C845 and it is not the best TV out there, but for that price and a little bit of tweaking they can make it better.
That doesn't apply to all countries. In Australia a UST + ALR costs around 3.5-4k while a 98 inch tv (decent Brand) costs $6k.
All I saw in this review was reflections on that TV. How do you get rid of those reflections? Completely block out those windows. If you're going to block out those windows, you might as well get a projector.
To me projectors especially the 4K ones bring back that film movie quality i remember from when I was a kid going to the movies.
Could you clarify whether the "ALR" screen is Fresnel, lenticular, or just the dark but reflective type?
Well it’s a compromise you’ll have to make - choose size, or choose image quality. For me, a 4k projector with a 130 inch screen that costs less than half of a 100 inch tv is an easy choice, plus i only got time to use it at night - if i have money to burn off course I’ll buy a massive tv wall.
As TVs get bigger, you get into the problem of placing those front speakers. A projector's strongest selling point for me honestly is that you can have a wall to wall acoustically transparent screen and have massive LCR speakers behind them (and all at the same height, not center somewhere down way under). It's cool that options are there for every tastes, a 98" screen cheap is good. But there's all sorts of configurations where different type of builds make more sense, not just nits data.
According to your logic, you either mount the projector screen *way* in front of your wall, or you place your speakers inside your wall - which are both huge compromises. Furthermore, that "problem" doesn't make sense. If your TV is so big you can't properly put stereo speakers beneath them, your viewing distance is too low anyway.
@@BVZTIII No, many home theaters are setup like this. Often the rooms can be setup for 2x (good number for sound too) deep than wide and that's when wall to wall screen with acoustic transparent screen is often a solution. LCR in-walls in an infinite baffle design, it's even what THX does for home theaters. Some of the best yearly competitions for home theater sound setups are in-wall. The LCR being behind the screen, you want to have the same speaker for center as the right and left, matching the timber. Our ears are more sensitive to acoustic interference by horizontal lobing than vertical so the an horizontal center channel that is also lower than the center of the screen is always a sacrifice of performance for convenience (for peoples without a screen). Also THX ideal viewing distance for a 120" would be 12', max being 17'. Really easy to achieve in a room.
@@alexb115 first of all, where the hell did you dig out THX? THX certificates became to home theaters what Xzibit became to car tuning 😂
Don't know what home theater "competitions" you're talking about, because sound above a certain quality level becomes purely subjective to the individual, so contests don't make sense. But placing a speaker behind your projector screen is *always* a compromise, without exception, because the screen always distorts the intended sound, such a thing as 100% acoustic transparency doesn't exist. Which is also why the best speakers don't even have coverage in front of the membranes.
Furthermore, you contradicted yourself. You said that our ear is more sensitive to horizontal lobing than vertical - which is correct - but then call the vertical position of the center a sacrifice - _"below the screen"_ is the vertical alignment, not horizontal 😐
As for the center, it basically doesn't play a role until a ~10° angle. A 120" screen at 12' would be an 11.5° angle, anything above 4 meters would be under 10°. And in case of the front stereos, you'd still have the space left and right to place the front stereos beneath the screen instead of behind them and still fulfill the Dolby Atmos and DTS criteria of the front stereos being placed in a 20-30° angle to the line between your seating position and the middle of the screen.
End of the day, you can do what you want. But I wouldn't sacrifice sound *and* picture quality just for the sake of a theoretically perfect speaker alignment that I won't notice, since it only affects the center speaker at all 🤷♂️
@@BVZTIII Those require special screens which cost even more than UST screens and don't work with you UST projectors like the one in this video. They have to be accousticqlly transparent and to my knowledge no UST projector screen exists that does this so you need room behind the screen for a regular throw projector. Possibly short throw but not UST so you need a good 5 to 10 feet behind the screen to accomplish this so you need a crazy big room and ideally it should be pitch black behind the screen outside the projector so this is what rich people use with their 20K masked screens so they don't get black bars for 2:35: movies yet can also watch 1:85 (I think that's the ratio, almost 16:9 with minor black bars above and below the screen)
Honestly at that point there are better options if you're going to drop 50K plus on a home theater room, at least in my personal opinion. Just Google accoustactlly transparent projector screens" and see if you can find a price because I'm pretty sure they have to be purchased from authorized dealers and when you can't find the price of something online it means it's crazy expensive.
I mean, while we are at it I'll take Sony's 780" modular 16K crystal LED TV instead. It's only 5.8 million dollars so let me go check my sofa real quick. To put that into perspective that would be the size of almost 8 of those 96" TCL TV's and it's 16K (resolution wise, not price wise obviously). At that point I don't think it would matter where the speakers go if you had a room to fit that in.
EDIT: just googled it and on crutchfield they are selling a 120" acoustically transparent screen for 4.5K for just the screen alone, no projector, no speakers, just the screen.Only 8K for the 160" version and they are made by SI (screen innovations) which are overpriced, from the description below. This would require a regular throw projector so you're at 30K plus if not more by that point with the screen, projector, and theater setup. Nobody buys an 8K screen without paying at least double than that on the projector, at least not a smart person if they could even afford something like that. They exist, but not for your average person unless you got 30 to 50K to spend on a home theater room.
This screen's perforated fabric means you can place speakers behind the screen with virtually no loss in sound - or picture - quality. Install in-wall speakers behind the screen and enjoy clean sound and a clean look. A perforated screen is a great option if creating a very realistic soundstage is one of your top priorities.
Screen Innovations' acoustic perforated materials have over 28,000 tiny .55mm diameter holes per square foot. During the development of their perforation technology, SI sent their materials to third-party acoustics labs for testing. Typical impact on frequency response is well within the -3dB range, with maximum attenuation of -6dB at 20,000 Hz.
The main reason you don't see more projectors in homes is that conventional projection screens require a dark room to produce a vivid, colorful picture. Screen Innovations' Slate AT material lets you enjoy a brilliant, colorful picture even in a room with some lights on. Slate's special optical coatings reject 65% of a room's ambient light, compared to less than 10% rejection using a standard white or gray screen.
@@JoshFisher567 I'm completely with your comment, but was your comment really supposed to tag me instead of @alexb115? 😅
Thank you for reviewing this TCL TV! Very interesting. I hope to see more from you concerning TCL screens!
Agreed. That’s why I got an 120” screen for my UST. TV’s are not price-competitive at that size, and now I would have trouble going smaller except perhaps for an 100”+ self-emissive pixel tv one day…
What UST projector do you have and what screen do you use with it?
I'm looking at buying the AWOL Vision LTV-3500.
Do you have a dedicated media room or do you keep your house as dark as a bat cave?
@@cup_and_cone Dedicated theater room. Only one window so gets very dark.
@@cup_and_cone Really doesn't even have to be that dark with a good projector and screen.
@@Motinhoxmaybe some microled for you.
wow that blooming on the tcl screen with subtitles was horrible and a deal breaker imho, im going with the projector, thanks for making it clear for me, subscribed
Very nice video, as always. Would love to see you pull in a 120" UST setup and give your feelings of it to a more traditional 65" or so television. The immersiveness of a huge screen, and a decent projector (maybe use a standard throw model?) is quite significant. There are obvious needs, like a dark 'theater-like' room to get the best performance from a projector, but you don't get 120" or 150" of diagonal from a OLED TV. Yet.
Your videos are awesome, and it is nice you put in this semi-shootout between the UST projector and the TCL. I use a 85" Samsung in my family room, but have a 161" projection setup in the basement. The projector is far more of a experience for my family than the TV. But, the TV is nice for just watching regular stuff.
Personally I think the best combo is projector for movies + more manageable OLED for gaming. Large TVs are just too unwieldly if you expect to move ever or upgrade.
@@spaceghostcqc2137, maybe. I've moved several times (locally) and I pull down my TVs, throw them in the back of my van, and take them to the new home. It's actually a pretty easy process. My projection screen stayed at my last house with the projector. I could've pulled the projector, but that would have sucked for the new owners. Projectors aren't 'easy' to setup properly. UST projection screens are also not easy to work with. As shown in the video where it wasn't even setup properly.
Viewing angle is what determines your viewing experience. 4K content can handle about a 50-degree viewing angle. Sitting 15 feet from a 120 inch screen produces about the same viewing angle as sitting 8 feet from a 65-inch TV. Assuming you don't do something stupid with the speakers and you place the left speaker to the left of the screen, the center speaker in the middle of the screen above or below the screen, and the right speaker to the right of the projection screen... that puts the main speakers 15 feet from the main seat. That is TERRIBLE for sound quality. At 15 feet, multiple-reflected and chaotic sound fills the room because the reflected sound overwhelms the direct sound. Sitting 8 feet from the 3 main front speakers mean you will hear MORE direct sound from the speakers and less reflected sound (because the main speakers will be closer and can reach the listener before being reflected by walls or objects in the room. Having the main speakers 8 to 9 feet from the listeners ALWAYS sounds better than having the speakers 15 feet from the listeners unless the room is HUGE, much larger than rooms in "normal" homes. So by going to a larger screen, you also make the images DIMMER at the same time. The projector already can't produce more than 20 fL (under $1200 and calibrated for ACCURACY, not for max brightness with hideous looking images) to 60 fL ($60,000 laser-phosphor projector). 4K HDR TVs are widely available that produce 300 to 900 fL making HDR images actually look like HDR and expanding the range of displayable colors far beyond what the dimmer projector can do (the extra light is not used to make 100% white brighter, it is used to expand the range of colors the display can produce and to be able to make accurate specular highlights (sun reflecting off of chrome, or water, or chandelier crystals, etc.). The brighter you make projectors trying to get anything that looks vaguely like HDR, the worse the black levels get because the reflected light inevitably bounces back at the screen contaminating blacks and making them look milky. There are zero reasons to prefer projection.
Thanks for this video. It would be nice to have a larger screen, say 120 inches but while that would be doable for SDR Blu-ray, HDR just doesn't play nice with projectors due to the massive tone mapping needed to make it work. Furthermore, even the high end projectors that I have looked at don't support Dolby Vision either.
That is also not considering the difference in contrast, blacks, saturation etc of say an OLED vs projector. I love the idea of a home projector but I think for now that will have to stay in the realm of 35mm slides and my occasional 16mm prints.
I was sold on projection for home theaters because the large screen, but with these huge flat panel displays I now favor flat panels. Ambient lighting destroys High Dynamic range and black level … even in a room with no windows (unless you paint everything in the room black). This is due to the screen illuminating the room). You will be lucky to get 100 to 1 contrast for most imagery (fireworks in the dark night sky is the exception).
Also, 100 to one contrast affects the non HDR range. And contrast is as critical as resolution. A 1080P resolution image looks much better than a washed out 4K resolution image. Poor contrast makes subtle image content disappear; and testing revealed a significant measured increase in time to notice image content that remained visible.
Ambient light hitting the projection screen impacts contrast, black levels and color saturation. The only advantages left for projectors are cost, auditorium size screens, and no reflections. TCL quality, features, reliability and price make them my favorite. This is not a complete list of why contrast and black levels are intrinsically worse for projectors than flat panel displays.
Flat panel displays have a neutral density filter overlay the light source panel reflects only about 20% of the ambient light that makes it through the neutral density filter. Ambient light must pass through the neutral density filter twice so it is attenuated by .5*.5.*.2 or by 95%. Plus the panel displays are brighter than projector displays improving the contrast even more.
I got the xiaomi ust laser projector based off your review 4 years ago or more, works great with very minimal dark treatment
Finally the god of TV reviews does something with "Laser TV's" = projectors. Please more!
The Samsung projector is not a real good competitor, it's the old DLP chip generation from 2020. (And you compare it vs a new TV, not fair)
Please Please, do that comparison with the current LG model LG Vivo Max Laser TV (HU915QE), then you have a real fight going on!
Samsung vs LG
DLP Chip: Old generation vs. new generation
Lumen: 2800 vs 3700
Contrast: 1.500:1 vs 2.000.000:1
Rec.2020 vs Rec.709
The 2,000,000:1 contrast ratio is marketing bullshit.
@@PSYCHOV3N0M that’s possible, I’m not the pro. I just want to buy the right thing on that high price.
I have a 85 inch and 75 inch samsung and a 65 inch hisense. I bought the xgimi horizon 4k pro as soon as it was released. The HDTVs are amazing but the xgimi gives that theater feel and experience especially on older 1080p movies and it's easy to put in my travel bag to take on the road or hook up to my laptop and do slide shows for work. I have a dedicated room and 135 inch screen but i can hook it up and point it just about anywhere and get a bright picture as long as its dark outside or inside. They both have their pros and cons and i like them equally for different reasons. I should have a video or 2 oon my channel of the projector
I like how people say projectors are for dedicated theatre rooms, like 100inch tv can easily be moved around 😂
@HDTVTest I disagree. The glare and viewing angle components are enough to knock down all the bonus points for "super blind your eyes brightness" and "deeper blacks than a black hole in space" argument.
The MOST annoying thing is watching a movie with ambient light on a super reflective flat panel TV only to see the kitchen or backyard come up during one of those "inky black" dark scenes. It COMPLETELY ruins the immersion. Sure, you can close the blinds, but why not get a projector setup if you're going to close the blinds ANYWAY?
I'm not sure the reflection filled inky black and blindingly bright HDR features of a flat panel TV are enough of a selling point against a super wide viewing angle and slightly faded image during the daytime. Not only that, but this Ultra Short Throw projector is already outdated by Epson, AWOL Vision, and SEVERAL others. Things have changed since that model was released by Samsung and a whole world of better quality Ultra Short Throw projection with more affordable, really good quality, ALR screens have come out.
There's no way I'm putting a 250lb 98" Flat Panel TV in the livingroom, much less wall mounting it, when I can get up to 150" Ultra Short Throw projector image on my wall for WAY less than a 150" Flat Panel TV AND it's so much easier to lift/move without having to yell at your friends helping you carry the thing out the door so they don't scratch or damage your heavy flat panel TV.
Until that rollable TV comes out at over 120" at a reasonable price, and hopefully NONE of the glare and reflections, Flat Panel TVs just won't cut it.
Glare is a DEALBREAKER and so is such a small viewing angle. Friends can't come over and watch the game because in order to see the Flat Panel TV image you have to sit perfectly centered with it or else you miss out on the entire game. Most cases that means you have to stand behind the homeowner who has claimed the perfectly centered spot for the entire game.
Just to reiterate, if I'm closing the blinds ANYWAY for a Flat Panel TV to work it's best, then I am just going to go with Ultra Short Throw anyway.
what happened to the 98" C935 that TCL showed at IFA 2022? They apparently replaced it with this model or will there be a flagship 98" this year?
The new model has been upgraded massively and will be released at the end of this year or possibly the start of next year. The price is predicted to have increased substantially tho
TV for the living room.
Projector for a dedicated home theater.
I assure you watching a 98" television in a completely darkened room from 10 feet away is not going to make a pleasurable experience.
I sit 15 feet away from mine and wouldn't want to be closer than that
This video feels like a very long TCL commercial.
And there is another one commercial in the commercial))))
I watch TV at night in 100% dark room. Am considering projection. (I started with Advent VideoBeam 7' in the 70s and then 11.5' HTSC GE front projector on white wall in the 80s - even SD at 11' is impressive. Size is the most important parameter. Have to replace 55" 4k w/damaged screen. Can't decide between panel or projector. But I definitely do not want short throw.
Being well aware of the significant difference between television and projector, I'm still a projector afficiniado.
The form factor, light handling, size options are delightful. I like a good tv as a computer monitor, but find for the largest screen I prefer projected light over massive displays.
I use my projector as a computer monitor. I was in a store and the guy was trying to interest me in a 60 inch computer monitor. He said it's big. I replied that i use a projector; 150 inches. So much for his sales pitch lol
I wish you would compare different Ultra Short Throw projectors and portable projectors to each other for different lifestyle uses such as living room, camping/traveling, etc.
The Hook Up makes great projector comparison videos but I would also like to see Vincent Teoh do the same kind of videos too.
I'm buying the Sony A95L but I also have my eye on the AWOL Vision LTV-3500 UST projector.
The AWOL does 3D, which for me is such a no-brainer. Anyone who has seen 3D on the AWOL knows it's mind-blowing!
@@kelownatechkid Exactly. I absolutely LOVE watching 3D movies.
I replaced my tv with a projector and what a game changer for me! I highly recommend.
Thank you. A great video. I have had projectors in my 2nd lounge for years. But now with big 98, 100 inch, tvs. TVs are great in all light conditions. Thank you.
Really would like to see some large 21:9 TVs (especially in OLED). Projectors corner the market in movie widescreen and it would be amazing to get the refresh rate and picture quality of a TV in that aspect ratio!
It is a bit funny that these wide aspect screens are popular as pc monitors but not tvs I say make all movies 16x9 lol
@@B0BBYGAMER Lately many movies are 16:9 but even if all new movies were made that way, people still want to be able to watch all the older movies without huge black bars. Also, for many home theaters (including mine) a 21:9 screen is a better fit.
I fully agree.
I'm quite satisfied with the height of my current TV. But it would be nice to use all of that height, all of the time. Especially with big CinemaScope films.
that's true. that's why very few buy
I have had too many bad experiences with TCL TV's in the past... as good as they may appear for the price, I would never buy one again. I would take the projector just to ensure I have a decent working product. I have personally had issues with two TCL 75" TV's having 4K issues when hooked up to a PC or bluray, scaling issues, framerate issues in gaming (PC and console) and on. TCL said they would do nothing to help, just take it back to the store for a refund. And two of my friends had issues with their TV's dying early. Won't risk it again.
Mine 65" TCL was buggy as hell, and died in 3 years 😮 small kitchen TCL 32" died in 2.5" years 😮 no way am I buying an expensive (over a 1k$) TCL tv
I personally just went through 3 S95B tv's. Cheaper tv's that seem like a great deal compared to the competition price usually have poor quality control.. I found out the very hard way
Projectors are multi-purpose. I have a gt1080 which I have taken camping, hotel rooms and backyard parties...because it's so portable and gives a great image up to 150 inches and I have a fixed Epson protector in my bedroom which gives me 90inches. The great thing about my bedroom is that no one knows that I have a screen that big in there since everything is well hidden and out of sight but if I need it...its just as simple as pulling the screen down and pressing on the projector remote. No way I could have a TV in here that big. Another plus is that projectors are much easier on the eyes due to the lower brightness levels. You get the same feeling as when you're watching a movie in the cinemas.
My advice to everyone is just to buy a TV for the living room, nothing to fancy since 4k Tvs are dirt cheap these days and also get yourself a short throw 1080p gaming projector.
You video does have a point if considering a normal tv experience, you're 100% right. But i'd buy the projector to have a cinema experience in completely dark room or with completely covered windows, thus for me it's irrelevant.
Two different use-cases for me, really. I have an LG CX in my living room, where I have the space for it, and it's great. I have an Xgimi Horizon Pro in my bedroom as there's literally nowhere to put a TV where it would fit and not be in the way or easily damaged, and it's perfect for that.
Both have their pros and cons. The TV's image quality is better, HDR is better, it's an OLED and so the blacks are wonderful. Also has 120Hz for gaming, which is lovely. However, the reflectiveness of the screen is a nightmare for watching anything with dark scenes, even in the dimmest of light.
The projector has flexibility and portability, which are both really handy (I move it between my bedroom and my study), and reflections aren't an issue at all. However, it does lack the deep black contrast from the TV, and of course doesn't truly show its full potential unless you're in a pitch-black room (although even with that, I sometimes prefer this to the reflectiveness of the tv).
Love them both, delighted with both, and would never say one is an adequate replacement for the other due to the specific use cases.
That said, I think one of the big bulky short-throw laser projectors would fall into a sort of limbo between both, so I'm not too keen on one of those unless I can one day have a place big enough to have a bespoke cinema room.
I look at this a bit differently. For about $800 to $1500 you can get a projector that will give you a good if not perfect 80-100" HD image. As long as you control the room light you can get a very satisfactory solution at an affordable price. To get a TV with a 80 or 100" image it is to going cost a LOT more.
will you get a proper HDR with that?
@@silvk1000 Depends on how you define proper. It's basically getting a BIG, good image on a budget. It will not be suitable for current gaming and you must be able to limit ambient light. If you want 80" or more with excellent HDR on a TV get ready to pay at least $3,500.
Yah I'm looking at the awol 3500 or the model under it. I'm moving and unsure how bright my new living room will get in the day..
@@EbNorth Ambient light is the enemy. I use mine in a finished basement and I can block all light and I get a true theater feel,.
@@DR-xm9ck I'm looking at the awol vision or benq 4550i.
When doing the local dimming test, why does it appear to do better with horizonal moving rectangles compared to the verticle moving ones?
Vincent, this video looks more like a promo talk for TCL. Why do you use a, almost, 3 year old UST model that have some trouble with spickles? And what for a ALR screen did you use? Black Diamond from Screen Innovations, Elite screens? And last, what is the power consumption between the Samsung LSTP9 and the TCL tv?
@Walter Verbeeck: Regardless of what UST projector you use, and however expensive an ALR screen you use, there's no way for the light output to even come close to 700 nits with deep blacks, let alone maintain contrast in a room with some ambient light. Stop deluding yourself.
And what's the price difference 😂
Most of those ambient light rejection is made for light abòve. Not the sides. I suggest that you contact a professional live event company to get used screen for a lesser cost. Yes,it may have a slight scratch here or there..but generally the tech is very careful with how they are handled as they do go from venue to venue. Same with buying high price monitors, or professional projectors. Do buy new laser or lamps before they get discontinued..like 10 yrs after manufacture date. You may not install them for months or years,but better to have then not. Do pay attention to power needed to run at home. Some are not 110v like most usa home theatre projector. But a barco will beat a benq or awol every time..im not saying spen 60k usa ..that's for theatres that use them 6 x a day and earn cash each showing
I had a cheap ultra short throw projector that broke (JMGO). I was debating between an "85 TV and another projector.
I ended up going with another UST (XGMI Aura). I just didn't want to deal with the hassle of a giant TV in my apartment.
I have the luxury of having smooth white walls and the image looks great on it. So there's a trade-off for sure, but I'm glad this video is breaking down the differences.
Turn the light up all you want on the T.V... the glare is a no go for me... If T.V.'s ever figure out how to eliminate the glare then I'll be onboard... Until then... nope...
it started about debunking projectors for replacing tvs... then ended up a TCL TV review lol or hopefully not TCL marketing
More it was disingenuinly presented at debunking projectors vs tv claims but it was one projector, set up by TCL, vs one TV. So it was TCL TV review (leaning heavily towards TLC marketing) the whole time, we just didn't know it at first.
@@curtisbme He should of done the Test with Formovie projecter thats the best one out there so far out of all projectors & its £3000 so cheaper then Tcl tv..
@@curtisbme i was expecting at least a comparison of those generic laser projectors he is debunking (let alone a super-high-end one he did), against any entry level TV, be it at smaller sizes ... as with projectors, the bigger they project, the less sharper and desaturated the colors are. yes, the thumbnail and the 1st few seconds are obvious clickbait for TLC.
i have a relular projector that shoots 1080p up to 200 inches. it was 200 bucks. looks good and has decent speakers
and?
@@pcghgs2260 at best for 200 you get a 40 in TV.
I agree that 100” tv makes a lot more sense for most situations. That said, most people who go with a laser tv go for a 120” screen. At this size it’s well worth the trade offs imo. A few other points. Screen reflections, screen uniformity, and refresh rate. This is subjective, but screen reflections and poor backlight uniformity completely kill immersion for me. When watching a movie, grayish black bars don’t bother me nearly as much as splotchy glowing backlight. As far as a 4k@120hz, it is a limitation of “laser tv’s”. However, most Laser tv’s can do 1080p@120hz.
He should of done the Test with Formovie projecter thats the best one out there so far out of all projectors & its £3000 so cheaper then Tcl tv..
black levels arent a problem on a proper contrast canvas like elitescreens CLR combined with a good projector like the vava chroma which can do 100% bt.2020 4k HDR color
If you need a TV get a TV.
Having said that my projector setup cost me less than 1/4 of the price (including my screen) of this Samsung, and I bought it more than 10 years ago. I get a 120" image which is considerably larger and enjoy every moment of using it.
Making these VS videos is pointless, you might as well make a "A parrot vs a pitbull as a guard dog THE BRUTAL TRUTH"
There is something else to consider, something I learned the hard way! You measured the Beamer contrast in a large room only considering the light from the windows. But as the room the beamer sits in becomes smaller, the Beamers own light is reflected off the walls back to the beamer wall, thereby washing out the picture. The interesting bit about this effect is, that it is dependent on the scene you are watching: high contrast for dark scenes and washed out for bright scenes. Really annoying. First and last time I bought a beamer.
This is part of the reason why home theatre rooms have dark walls, or dark curtains that can be pulled across the walls.
The real answer is that as the room gets darker, for any reason, the TV brightness should be turned down to compensate. Nobody ever does this with a TV or even talks about it, but they complain about percent of ambient vs the output on screen when talking about projectors.
As much as I have wanted bigger TVs, I always go back to better quality TVs (color and contrast) at the end even if the cost or size was smaller.
Sneaky advert for TCL
For about 10 years, I have a 150 inches screen that absorb lights and I have never complain of watching TV shows during day time. And watching movies in HDR is amazingly beautiful.
The benefits of a UST with ALR screen totally outweigh the lower contrast / brightness for me. What I found most irritating about a big screen tv are the reflections from windows and other light sources that are really hard on the eyes. Watching this video brutally reminded me of that :)
I have watched mostly your great reviews of projectors. It is intereesting to see you talking about TVs.
Projectors are cool, but they still have some length to go. For example, their refresh rate is not yet good for gaming. However, the moment they solve that issue (and manage to keep the price below 3K) I believe we will see noticeable intake in their sales
I'm pretty sure there are at least a few projector models that support 120Hz for gaming.
HDMI 2.1 isn't really needed on a projector at the moment because consoles can't run 4K 120fps games. It's either 4K60 or 1080p120.
JVC LX-NZ30 projector is aimed at 1080p 120fps gaming. It has HDMI 2.0 and it costs around $3,000 or $3,500 I think.
Epson has had a 60hz laser projectorl on the market for years with virtually no input lag and was highly regarded for gaming in the community.. I want to say they've had a 120hz model too (but I can't remember exactly)
That was 6 years ago. There would be models now that far surpass that.
ViewSonic just launched 2 projectors called X1 and X2 meant for gaming, they are aimed at the xbox, but not sure if that makes a difference.
Refresh rates of gaming projectors are below 8ms these days. Mine is 16ms and That's more than enough for a wide range of games and if you want serious shooter games you are better off playing on a PC anyway.
BenQ has one that does 240hz with 4ms input lag and plenty are 120hz
Most of those you tubers are just interested in the sponsorship cash and viewing figures. You get to recognise them pretty quickly though, and your channel shines through
hmm not so sure about that.
Why he didnt mention the Vava Chroma projector? It has 100% bt.2020 color and 4k HDR, and its HDR is absolutely MINDBLOWING
Also daylight usage is possible on vava chroma or the highend LG models.
I will say why the TLC is almost certainly better in probably almost every category except the ones you pointed out. A fairer test would have been turning on the overhead lights instead of the windows. The way most UST lectangular based ALR screens work is they form little "zig zags" for lack of a better term with the light coming from below being projected back at the user while overhead light is being blocked. They aren't good for blocking light from the sides or windows which is why it's stupid to hang a UST projector upside down. Even if you mount the screen upside down all the light would need to be coming from the bottom of the room to block it and any overhead light would wash the picture out almost completely.
So I think a better comparison would have been turning on the overhead lights instead of the windows because that's what lectangular ALR screens do. As you pointed out there is no glare and a better viewing angles but most ALR screens tend to have between a 0.4 to 0.6 gain to achieve this effect. They have never been good at blocking out light from the sides like a window in this demonstration so I would have liked to see a comparison with the windows closed and only over head lights being used and not windows. The TCL would have still won but it would have been a more fair comparison to the strengths of lectangular based ALR screens which are pretty much the norm for UST projectors.
Fresnel screens do a much better job at blocking light from all angles but they also have their downsides. While they typically have a 1.0 or slightly higher gain, they are hard screen so the screen itself is just as difficult to get in the room and position as the TCL would be. Also, while brighter they have a glare, are prone to hotspottong, and have weaker viewer angles then lectencgular based screens so pretty much all the downsides of the TCL you pointed out. Lastly, they cost WAY more than lectangular lens screens so you typically only see them paired with 10K+;UST projectors so cost wise, the TCL wins regardless of which screen you use.
Also, DLP UST projectors are terrible for gaming. Not just because they can't do 120hz but because they have to intellectually warp the image since they are so close to make the picture look normal. This adds a ton of lag, due to image processing to accomplish this, typically 30ms to 50ms+ if not more. The only exception would be Epson who uses LCD but they also have a higher offset meaning the projector has to be lower to the ground to achieve the same picture placement as DLP but tend to get sub 10ms lag for games so unless you are super hardcore they work for gaming but still don't do 120hz.
UST projectors were a great idea but now that affordable 100" TV's are being introduced, primarily by TCL, not so much. With that said don't be looking for an affordable OLED 100" TV anytime soon. I think they still cost 20K plus if not more from LG and Samsung so QLED (or whatever the manufacturer calls their particular flavor of the same technology) are going to be the only option for quite some time. I do wish TCL had launched the same 100" TV that was released in China only which may be this one based on the price as it worked out to be just over 3K US. The one currently being sold in the US has more backlit zones but is 5K or somewhere around there but pretty much the same in every other way as this model but still better than a 100" UST projector with an ALR screen.
UST projectors also tend to start having major warping issues at 150" so that's as big as you are going to get without having to go back to a traditional projector. That is unless things have changed in the last few years.
Now, I'm going to go watch my 5.8 million dollar 780" Sony modular crystal LED TV while I park my boat into my yacht. Honestly I don't even have a wall that big and they are mostly being used for non commercial use like Disney who uses them in their Stat Wars shows on Disney+ instead of green screens so the actors can see what's going on around them, maybe Marvel too but they literally make actors get sick to their stomachs because they are so realistic (from interviews I've heard at least). So, it's essentially close to 8 of those 96" TCL's combined for perspective which is crazy but obviously way out of the price range of us mere mortals.
This is testing real world use, people aren't going to leave the curtains closed.
It would've been good to test night use/overhead lights as well, but I don't see anything unfair about this test.
@@DoubleMonoLR This is not real world use. No one sets up a projection or TV directly in front of 6 bay windows like that at home. In fact both of those displays would be unviewable once sun light comes directly in. A more real world test would be the screens adjacent to the windows. People set up their seating to be able to see out windows not have their back to them.
If you are ok with watching movies in dark room & daytime/game on tv/monitor (personally prefer oled), a JVC projector for 120"+ is still a better movie experience. And the black level & color accuracy is superior to the UST. Yes, its dimmer than UST but most movies look much better (tried both).
That actually happens to me a lot:
When I watch a talk show on my projector, someone keeps progressively opening blinds closer and closer to my screen.
Black colors become greyr and greyr.
Nits keep agressively getting lower and lower.
😂 👌
use an actual good projector like a vava chroma and a good canvas like a elitescreens CLR and your black levels will magically turn to be good
the vava chroma even has 100% bt2020 4k HDR color and its actual very good HDR too.
only good for 3D blu Rays
Only because there's no 3D tv now. Else tvs with active 3D gave the best output
It is correct that with projectors the image deteriorates the more extraneous light is present. In the same way, however, the reflections of TV sets increase the more extraneous light is present, as can be seen clearly several times in the video.
With projectors, depending on the model, attention must also be paid to the operating volume (of the fan). On the other hand, projectors can produce a much larger image than can be achieved or paid for with a TV set.
Both systems have their own peculiarities. From an aesthetic point of view, projectors have an additional advantage of a motorized screen.
Well done TCL
I use a mix of projector and TVs in my house.. im not a cinema purist by any means.. but I can say that having a nice clean wall (I dont use a screen).. when the projector is off is really nice.. the aesthetics and lack of having to cut holes in walls to mount a TV on the wall.. or hav an ugly TV on a stand.. a big one to get the 132" image I project.. I find for most people the high lumen projector is fine.. I chose an ST vs UST because I could get a 5000 lumen 4K unit and my room is such that putting a projector at the back of the room was perfect for 132".. and my seating position doesnt block it.. a few friends of mine that live in apartments all have projectors because well.. apartments dont allow cutting into the walls to run wires and mount TV's.. TV's on a stand are butt ugly.. and they find, like ,e no need to even turn on the HDR.. one of them does have a 3600 Lumen UST 4K unit and its plenty bright on the gray wall...
A projected image in a dark environment is just more cinematic than any tv
I don't like the glare and reflection more than I don't like the washout.
Personally I find projectors absolute trash. TV’s are so much better
Not trash butt not worth it.
I used to feel the same way but my Sony A95K QD-OLED TV can't compete with the immersion that a true 1570 IMAX screen provides or a 150-inch projector provides.
How about comparing budget projectors to budget tvs? I'd like to see more projector content, thanks!
A detailed comparison in a dark room was missing. Color range comparison was missing. Besides, for such a fight, he would choose Avol LTV-3500 with a very high light output. I don't think anyone buys a projector for 100 inches.
Effect starts at 135 inches.
THIS!!! ☝️☝️☝️
What a timely video. Thank you
For those tight for time, Laser projectors are s**t.
I just saved you 18mins ;)
I don't know who watches movies on TV in a well lit room, or with blinds open - it's just ruins the experience, and there is GLARE 😢 (there is horrible glare in this video) . So the biggest reason against projectors isn't valid .
Also ultra short throw projectors aren't needed - they are just more expensive.
Better to get a ultrabrite gaming BenQ projector with 4k, HDR, and up to 240hz with ultra low lag, that can easily do 120-150" and cost just 2000-2500$
And I have an 65" TCL tv, it was buggy as hell, and died in just 3 years 😢 picture quality was very good, and price was very competitive though
I'm not sure what the objective of this video is Vincent. People who buy projectors want the size they don't want a comparable performance with a top end TV. It's a shame that your last couple of videos have been so blatantly sponsored by TCL.
@R H: As stated in the UA-cam description, the "Includes Paid Promotion" message in this video refers to the sponsorship by Surfshark VPN, not TCL.
The objective of this video is to debunk the notion that a projector can replace/ beat a TV, which has been perpetuated by other UA-cam videos, as shown in the intro of this video.
The TV is the same price and size as this projector and smokes it in just about every possible way. Unless you can't fit the tv through he door, i dont see a reason to go with the projector. Of course, unless you want a 120inch or larger image, then you don't have a choice.
@@hdtvtest some projectors do almost perfect upscaling 240p-720p content to 1080p (on my used Benq w1070 $100) 150 inches to the wall
also not fair comparing high value TV to arguably over priced UST. my friend imported a 4k xiaomi UST 2500 lumens for $1700 almost 3 years ago.