Leaderboard Extra
DLP or LCD Projectors. Which would you choose/have and why?

Forums - Discs & Movies - DLP or LCD Projectors. Which would you choose/have and why? 

4th April 2005 0:00  #1

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
DLP or LCD Projectors. Which would you choose/have and why?
Just wondering what people think of the different types of projectors as I will be getting one soon. So far, I believe that DLP is the way to go for the higher contrast (for the price) and no real flyscreen affect (like on the LCD projectors). On most of the mid-price DLP projectors, I also don't notice the rainbow effects either any more.
Thanks in advance for your comments.

4th April 2005 0:45  #2

Stefano Agostini Member Join Date: June 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 116
Well personaly I purchased the Sony LCD Rear Projection because of the Low reapir costs compaired to the DLP. The Chip in the DLP is more expensive to repair than the bulb in the LCD. I'm not sure how much the DLP chip costs but I know that the LCD bulb is only $400-$500 CND (check ur country's Sony Website for prices). Also the Bulb on the sony can be isntalled buy yourself. As for how the Tv looks, I love my Sony LCD. When I was watching The Lord of the Rings yesterday and it looked great. Even some lower quailty movies look good. Thats my Two-cents.

4th April 2005 19:12  #3

Gabe Powers Editor Join Date: September 2004 Location: United States Posts: 4,475 Send a message via ICQ to Gabe Powers
I got my replacement lamp for only $200. I also have a Sony LCD.

5th April 2005 3:24  #4

Mark Lim Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 1,211
I have the Infocus DLP Projetor. I think the picture is sharper than a LCD, although I'm told LCD produces better colours than DLP. So there is no win win situation. But I guess the DLP will be the norm in the future.

6th April 2005 16:30  #5

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
Thanks for the comments guys... Happy

6th April 2005 20:51  #6

Stefano Agostini Member Join Date: June 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 116
Just wondering which one will you pick now, or are you still deciding.

6th April 2005 21:01  #7

Gabe Powers Editor Join Date: September 2004 Location: United States Posts: 4,475 Send a message via ICQ to Gabe Powers
I just replaced the lamp on my LCD and it only took about 15 minutes, AND i'm a clod when it comes to any sort of electronic hardware work.

The color is beter on an LCD, but the black levels are better on the DLP.

Also, the non-reflective film on the screen has started to bubble up in a few spots, which is super annoying when watching TV with the lights on.

AND I've had the set for about a year and allready cound one dead pixel. I've heard I got away easy with that, some people have ten or more dead pixels within a year's time.

7th April 2005 14:18  #8

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
Quote: Originally posted by stefano agostini
Just wondering which one will you pick now, or are you still deciding.
I think DLP is the way to go - I hate the flyscreen effect on LCD (I know it is almost non-existant now) and the black levels (as Gabriel as pointed out) is alot better. I have also found it is alot cheaper for me to import it from the US as here in Australia they are very expensive. Now all I have to do is choose the right brand - most have international warranties now a days....

7th April 2005 18:58  #9

Gabe Powers Editor Join Date: September 2004 Location: United States Posts: 4,475 Send a message via ICQ to Gabe Powers
It's amazing how importing something as large a TV can actually be cheaper than walking down to the corner store to buy it. I saved about 900$ by having my TV shipped from Nevada I think. Do you Ozzies use NTSC or PAL?

8th April 2005 10:20  #10

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
Gabriel, we use PAL down under. Just about all audio visual equipment sold here is compatible with both formats any way.
I have a good friend living in the US on the east coast and it costs me about 3 times the price to send an item to her compared to her sending the same package to me! Go figure....

8th April 2005 14:47  #11

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
I think North America and Japan are the only regions of the world that use NTSC. That suits me just fine too. PAL looks weird. The framerate is too low.

8th April 2005 17:23  #12

Mark Lim Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 1,211
Hey guys, you forgot to mention one vital piece of information. Pal picture is the only thing that is better than ntsc because it has more resolution (lines) than Ntsc. Still, NTSC has better dvd's than Australian PAL in terms of the whole package picture, sound (there has been lots of complaints about the sound not quite right on dvd's in Australia )

12th April 2005 6:34  #13

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
Quote: Originally posted by Mark Lim
Hey guys, you forgot to mention one vital piece of information. Pal picture is the only thing that is better than ntsc because it has more resolution (lines) than Ntsc. Still, NTSC has better dvd's than Australian PAL in terms of the whole package picture, sound (there has been lots of complaints about the sound not quite right on dvd's in Australia )
The best example of the sound problem was The Lord of the Rings - The Fellowship of the Ring - there was distinct sound 'pops' due to the speed up...

12th April 2005 13:09  #14

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
The sound problem is due to the cadence issue in transferring a 24 fps movie into 25 fps PAL isnt it? NTSC converts the 24 fps much better I think.

18th April 2005 16:20  #15

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
Quote: Originally posted by Me You
The sound problem is due to the cadence issue in transferring a 24 fps movie into 25 fps PAL isnt it? NTSC converts the 24 fps much better I think.
Yes Me You, you are spot on. PAL may be better in picture quality but we usually lose out due to the speed up (audio wise)

19th April 2005 9:31  #16

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
Quote: Originally posted by Worst Nightmare
Yes Me You, you are spot on. PAL may be better in picture quality but we usually lose out due to the speed up (audio wise)


Thought so.

Just to clarify my above comments about PAL looking weird. Movie's and stuff actually shot in 24 fps, which is closer to PAL's 25 fps looks ok to me, but what I hate is the live stuff. News, sports, etc... It all looks artifical and over inflated. Nothing moves fast enough. It especially looks bad when the occasional UK import of whatever show gets converted to NTSC and shown over here. Ick.

Hopefully it won't matter as much in the future as HDTV starts to take over.

Quick Reply 

Message Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.
Not Registered?
Forgotten Details?