Just curious where is the crossover from a large tv to a projector occurs? Or has it? And, is the picture quality there for everyday use? Meaning are they bright enough to watch in a bright room?
I've been looking to upgrade to an 85" tv. It's almost too big already! I would need to have it delivered as it won't fit in my SUV. They also weigh100+lbs too. I suppose they need this weight for rigidity. I really can't see them getting much larger than this.
Conversely, the ultra short throw 4k projectors are looking interesting.... The screens are the part that seem to be too expensive still.
The crossover, IMO, starts at 100" diagonal, but really I think 120" is the sweet spot. At 100", with an UST projector, and ALR screen, you can get around a $5,000 budget, which puts you in the range of the TCL 98" television.
At the end of the day, a television destroys a projector. Pretty much universally, the image quality of a cheap LCD is better than a high end projector. We are talking image quality, not immersion. They almost all have better black levels, and MUCH better brightness. They hold up in ambient light far better, and just do a better job overall.
I think the jump from a 85" TV to a 100" projection screen is a questionable gap. But, if you are buying a lesser expensive 4K projector and screen, like a Epson 3800 or the BenQ HT3560, you can get really solid performance in a dark room, and 100" is easy for projectors to do a good job with.
I find that if you actually have a proper dark room, then the lower priced fixed frame screens from Silver Ticket or Elite's SableFrame screens are a very good choice. They are well reviewed and do a good job. The acoustically transparent Silver Ticket screen has also gotten high marks, often matching up with screens costing far more money. I've installed both Seymour AT screens and Silver Ticket, and frankly, couldn't see any obvious difference between the two from home to home. Certainly, the customers never complained about image quality for either. When you get into motorized screens and tab-tensioned screens, spending a bit more for more quality can make a difference. I can also see having a high end theater and wanting to use reference screen material towards getting that last 10% of image quality so a Stewart reference screen or a DaLite with their Progressive material.
I wouldn't ever choose to put a projector in a room with ambient light. I've gone into the Samsung showroom near me and their multi-thousand dollar projector on a 100" screen looked okay, but was blown away by the LCD screens that were all around the rest of the store. It was embarrassing to see how poor the projector looked. Perhaps that would make someone happy to have that screen size, but I'd get the TCL instead.
I just don't feel that projectors belong in lit rooms whatsoever. White walls/ceiling is fine. It hurts contrast, but it's acceptable for the screen size. But, in a family room I would put up a flat panel and have a motorized tab-tensioned screen drop in front of it. That's exactly what I did in my last home.
In my current home, I have a 85" Samsung LCD on my wall in the family room. It's nice. I would seriously consider a 100" television (or larger) if they could hit the $3,000 price point. That's kind of my cutoff for a television purchase. I love the Sony 100" display. It looks really nice.
In my basement, which has a couple of windows that I've covered up completely, I have a 161" 1.3 gain Draper motorized tab-tensioned screen and my JVC projector.
I sit about 15'-16' eyes to screen, making it about 10" or so of diagonal for each foot of viewing distance, and it's quite comfortable to watch.
I find that a 85" display, from about a 10' viewing distance is just fine. Once you get beyond 10', then 85" definitely could start to feel small. Almost ALL people are comfortable with 10" of diagonal for each foot of viewing distance.
There is never a perfect answer with projectors. They tend to lag behind flat panel displays, often by a fair margin. It's been that way for years. Getting millions of pixels onto a chip that's less than an inch across is REALLY hard. What's even harder, it turns out, is getting a really high contrast image from those tiny pixels. You stuff more pixels onto that sub-one-inch chip, and it harms contrast. Theaters use larger DLP chips along with better lenses to maintain very good contrast, but even they struggle with it. That's combined with the demand for more and more brightness for HDR content, which projectors are just notoriously bad at.
Yes, some projectors support DV. I'm not sure which ones. Just not something I've memorized. I don't think that's in the 'Find By Feature' section of Projector Central's database. But, I think the AWOL 3500 may support it. Certainly, it is getting more and more support in newer models due to demand. But, the rub... It's a projector. It just isn't nearly as bright or as contrasty as your typical flat panel TV. So, even with DV support on the inputs, it has a hard time displaying it accurately. Then, to really get the most out of it, you have to put it in a room designed for front projection.
Some people love the compromise. Some do not. I am one who does not. If you're okay with an image that isn't as bright or vibrant or contrasty as your flat panel display currently is in a normally lit family room, with lights on, or windows, then you may be quite happy with a UST projector and matching screen. I would go for something bright in such a room. Either the AWOL 3500 or the Epson LS800. I expect the AWOL to be a bit better overall than the Epson, but the Epson is a fair bit less money. Then pair it with a decent UST/ALR screen. Check out
www.youtube.com/thehookup for his recent UST screen shootout.
I don't get to see all these projectors first hand, but I continuously read reviews, and I do go out and look at them whenever the opportunity arises, and have done so for the last 20+ years since I got my first CRT projector.
