Best projector for around £4k

[jcshutts]

I'm struggling to get some clarity around which projectors i should be looking at around this price mark. Any views please??? I would like 3d if I can but will predominately watch 2d

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

With £4k to spend the Sony VPL-HW50 and a Lumagen Mini with calibration would be my recommendation. The combination produces an astounding picture for the money.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I would agree - the HW50 is a stunner for the price.

 

[jcshutts]

This is helpful. I realise the jvc DLA-x55 hasn't really been tested but is the Sony likely to be better if partnered With the video processor such as the lumagen

 

[Frank Harvey]

It's all down to what you want to spend with 4K round the corner, and whether you're likely to take that route. If not, get the best PJ you can, but if you like the idea of watching (more recent) films in the same resolution they have been filmed in, then whatever you buy now may only be a stopgap.

 

[jcshutts]

4k passthrough bla bla bla. what does that actually mean. I am thinking over my dilemma. If I spend too much on a projector now and in 18 months time, the standard quality for viewing is Ultra HD or 4K, then my projector is not only outdated, it is missing out on a significant development in home viewing since the introduction of High Definition.

So what does 4 K passthrough mean? Is it possible that source products such as blue rays will be able to play 4k discs and send the signal in Ultra HD through the processor which has a 4k passthrough certification, into the projector which has a similar certification and then display a 4 k image? does that mean that the projector also has to have the 4k passthrough (I am not aware of any yet), in order to carry the signal through the the screen? Is it a case that provided one of the items in the loop has true 4k capability and the others allow the signal to 'passthrough' then the image will remain Ultra HD?

 

[Son_of_SJ]

4k passthrough bla bla bla.

Wow. I'm pretty sure that David @ Frank Harvey was only trying to help you, which I suspect that he will now be less inclined to do.

 

[richardw42]

I didn't read it as a snipe at Davif.

Some people's turn of phrase can be a little sharp.

 

[Frank Harvey]

4k passthrough bla bla bla. what does that actually mean. I am thinking over my dilemma. If I spend too much on a projector now and in 18 months time, the standard quality for viewing is Ultra HD or 4K, then my projector is not only outdated, it is missing out on a significant development in home viewing since the introduction of High Definition.

This is my point. People who are thinking of buying a projector this year need to work out if they're likely to move over to a 4K PJ in the very near future. If so, it is pointless sending a lot of money on the current (albeit excellent PJ's that can be had between £2-3k. You have to take into account that whatever the carrier is for 4K video, it won't yet be streaming due to slow broadband speeds, and probably not download for similar reasons and due to vast amounts of storage needed for larger collections. Personally I think it'll initially be a disc based format, which will more than likely be a new player that is needed - and probably like DVD and Bluray before it, start around the £1k mark and drop over a period of 12-24 months. I'm guessing discs will initially be more expensive too, maybe £25-30 at a guess. Of course, this sort of format will start out as something for your very favourite movies, and only become the norm when disc prices get down to current Bluray prices. Having said that, the first "RedRay" player is available and is download based - storing films on a 1TB drive, which I'm guessing won't hold many without compression. Personally, I don't see the point in 4K if they're going to compress the hell out of it, so we'll have to wait and see what happens on the source front.

So what does 4 K passthrough mean? Is it possible that source products such as blue rays will be able to play 4k discs and send the signal in Ultra HD through the processor which has a 4k passthrough certification, into the projector which has a similar certification and then display a 4 k image? does that mean that the projector also has to have the 4k passthrough (I am not aware of any yet), in order to carry the signal through the the screen? Is it a case that provided one of the items in the loop has true 4k capability and the others allow the signal to 'passthrough' then the image will remain Ultra HD?

4K pass through means that the AV receiver can pass through a 4K signal to your screen - of course, there is no 4K currently to do that with, so it is marketed as a "future proof" thing. Currently, it is a pointless feature, as chances are 4K players will have dual HDMI2 outputs, so one can be used for the receiver, and one directly to the screen, so not a great loss if current AV receivers didn't have it.

As above, current Bluray players can't play 4K material, not without heavy compression anyway. The projector will need to have be of native 4K resolution to be able to show a genuine 4K picture. The only 4K PJ on the market at the moment is the Sony VW1000ES at just under £17k. All products from source to screen (TV or PJ) will need to be 4K capable.

The exciting thing about 4K is that you will be able to see a movie in exactly the same resolution that it has been shot in. Here's a list of movies so far that have been shot on the "Red One", which is the nickname for the camera: http://www.red.com/shot-on-red

Many classic movies have been or are being specially digitised and remastered to 4K to produce higher quality Bluray releases. But with RedRay, you'll be able to see them exactly as they're shot. That's pretty special for any film fan.

 

[abacus]

The new H.265 format (Replacing the current.264 format) will help to get more info onto existing hardware to allow 4G playback, and theoretical should be backwards compatible, however we will have to wait and see.

Bill

 

[jcshutts]

If my comment offended anyone, particularly David, I apologise - never intended. The flippant statement was to capture the fact then when new technology starts to emerge, the industry (by that I mean the manufacturers) tend to use a lot of different language that can be confusing to the uneducated - like me. Which is why I am always incredibly grateful to people like David who help me to understand. We saw different formats of blu ray and HD discs in the early days , we saw HD compatible and then HD and now we see language like 4k pass through, 4k e-shift and so on. It's difficult to trudge through this stuff sometimes, even more stressful when you're about to spend thousands of pounds.

David, I am seriously leaning towards your advice of the JVC HW50, not because I think I will be able to justify spending another few thousand upgrading my projector again in three years (when things are clearer around 4k - although I believe your future insight is likely to materialise), but at least I won't feel too bad for having spent too much for a good projector at the outset - a little similar to spending £3000 on a Sony hx903 with 3d that was very quickly improved upon and available much cheaper and something that I haven't had my monies worth due to poor content across the market - although I am currently really enjoying watching Avatar 3d for the first time.

Thanks as always to all who pass comment on this website

 

[Frank Harvey]

The HW50 is a Sony 🙂

We were impressed by the VW95 when that appeared (£5k), but doubly impressed by the HW50 because of its price point. The HW30 started out around £3k and slowly dropped to about £2.2k currently, so we expected the HW50 to sit between the two at about £3.5k. With a price point nearer the HW30 and a performance nearer the VW95, we were extremely impressed.

The reason why we don't really want to keep expensive PJ's at the moment is similar to yours - we might lose some sales, but at least none of our customers will be complaining to us when they buy a £7k 1080 PJ which is suddenly replaced by a 4K one...

 

[jcshutts]

So have the HW50 or go for the 95? Some say it isn't greatly improved on the 50?

wrong thread but have you tested the marantz pre pro yet?? 😛

 

[Frank Harvey]

Not yet - hopefully set it up tomorrow if it isn't too busy.

The VW95 is better, but as I say, I wouldn't be spending too much on a PJ right now. The HW50 is more than good enough, and as far as I would personally go if I was replacing mine as a stop gap to 4K.

 

[Son_of_SJ]

Peace and love to David @ Frank Harvey, who apart from being much less pernickety and thin-skinned than I am, is very knowledgeable!

Even more peace and love to jcshutts for starting this thread, because you have prompted David to tell us all details about 4K passthrough and how 4K might develop over the next 2-3 years, all of which I certainly was not fully aware of. My apologies to jcshutts for taking offence when clearly none was intended

.

 

[jcshutts]

should I chose an anamorphic sized screen or a 16:9. Its a little confusing?

 

[DandyCobalt]

I'm in a similar situation but more in the £2-£3k bracket. Looking to buy a projector for the in-laws who are building a house somewhere sunny.

It won't be ready until July, and I'm charged with fitting the home cinema room in the basement (shame I'll only be there for two weeks a year :-(

Screen is a 106" fixed screen that I got from SSAV in their clearance sale (£150 for one that cost £1,300 new) and I'm passing on my LX53 receiver to them.

I have a Sony HW15 at home and it is great, but the HW30 apparently has 300 extra lumens, and the HW50 is the dog's "little bits" according to all the reviews. A real bargain at about £3k now.

But should I also wait until 4k passes down to the HW50 price level?

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

I think it will be a while until 4k is available sub £3000 and the key with this is how the 4k is implemented at the lower price points. The HW50 is a safe bet right now and several steps ahead of the HW15. The HW50 should hold its value over the coming years as well so not all is lost if you upgrade now.

 

[Frank Harvey]

should I chose an anamorphic sized screen or a 16:9. Its a little confusing?

I went for a 2.35:1 screen a while ago, but changed back to a 16:9 because I was sick of full screen films looking small (width wise) in comparison. With a normal screen, everything I know watch is 7ft wide.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I'm in a similar situation but more in the £2-£3k bracket. Looking to buy a projector for the in-laws who are building a house somewhere sunny.

It won't be ready until July, and I'm charged with fitting the home cinema room in the basement (shame I'll only be there for two weeks a year :-(

Screen is a 106" fixed screen that I got from SSAV in their clearance sale (£150 for one that cost £1,300 new) and I'm passing on my LX53 receiver to them.

I have a Sony HW15 at home and it is great, but the HW30 apparently has 300 extra lumens, and the HW50 is the dog's "little bits" according to all the reviews. A real bargain at about £3k now.

But should I also wait until 4k passes down to the HW50 price level?

As mentioned, it'll be a while until 4K reaches that price point. I think you'll probably be looking at three years minimum, but it could also be five years away, who knows. Plus you'll need the necessary source for 4K, and until there is a source available, prices of movies won't be known. We could be talking £25-30 per film. My guess is it'll be a niche market, with only the real film enthusiasts going for it. Unless of course, the hardware and software is pitched cheap enough for it to become mass market.

The HW50 is well worth the extra over the HW30, and this will see you through until 4K becomes 'affordable'. It is as much as I'd spend on a 1080p PJ right now (having seen what upscaled 1080p looks like on a 4K PJ).

I think we're at one of those points where you can genuinely say "you've never had it so good". There's some cracking AV products out there for relatively low prices compared to what you could buy 5-10 years ago, and that's taking into account features and quality. Only 7/8 years ago we had £12k Runco projectors on demo (pre-HDMI) that were only capable of 720p, not that anything could do 720 back then, only 576p at best. Admittedly, these PJ's looked stunning, but with HD nowadays, £3k PJ's are in another world as far as quality is concerned. Plus, you needed the best DVD player you could get, which meant another few thousand on top. All you need now for a good picture is a £100 Bluray player! (No, I'm not saying a £100 Bluray player is the be all and end all!)

 

[jcshutts]

the Panasonic PT AT6000 hasnt had much of a mention so far on the thread. Why is that? WHF liked it a lot in fact it gor the 2012 award

http://www.whathifi.com/review/panasonic-pt-at6000e

any views?

 

[SolarGlider]

JVC should not be forgotten as well.

The DLA-X35 has received a very high status on AVforums.

The Sony was reviewed as well but I imagine they didn't use an external video processor.

It seems the JVC has the upperhand with blacks and it has lens memory functions.

Just something to compare as well.

 

[jcshutts]

thanks SG. I am off to the Bristol AV show to see if I can try and compare a couple. the two that keep coming up at the moment is the Sony HW50 which seems favourite with most, the JVC and the Panasonic. All I have to do is choose!

 

[jcshutts]

Trying to get a general idea of ongoing costs for owning a projector. I know lamps will go after a period of time. What are replacement lamps likely to cost. Do projectors also require an annual service and where are these done? By several service outlets or are there very few? What are the standard costs for a service?

thanks