To detect any visible differences, the detail must exist in the source to begin with, so we need to use a 4K source. Ive seen no such projector that is 1080p look like a 4K image. But also the level of digital noise, the image enhancement video processing, the color balance and saturation, and the optical precision of the projector's lens, all contribute to making a 4K projector's picture great or less than great. This occurs in the first scene, where detail in the straw hat and the subtle texture of the leather jacket are more successfully resolved by the VW285ES. My gut says when 8k or 7680 pixel displays and content arrive that the human eye will not be able to notice a difference in appearance to 4k at a normal viewing distance 1.0 or greater vs screen diagonal size. I honestly found it such a distraction in dark scenes that I've gone back to a 1080p projector. In this case digital noise is a factor - the lower the noise the cleaner and sharper the picture looks. Thanks for the article. A screen of reasonable size with a standard black felt frame will usually hide it, but if you project on a wall or maybe have a screen with a fine bezel it's just there. However, at the same time, the hair detail in the Scarlett Johannson close-ups appears to be better defined on the UHZ65. The display panel, therefore, can be native 1080p (as seen in 3LCD and some entry level DLP models), Some DLP models might use a chipset using 2176x1528 micromirrors, the device projects the same pixels twice, thus creating twice as many pixels on the screen resulting in a crisper image.
If youre watching a BluRay in 4K quality, the difference between the quality of resolution of the image produced by a native 4K projector and a pixel-shifting 4K UHD resolution projector is arguably negligible apart from when it comes to small intricate details/text in the image then native 4K wins hands down. My last projector was Epson Pro Cinema 9350 and have no clue on that lag time. I reckon it should be a spec of the projectors so when we use your site's screen calculator ( been using for years! Contrast is king. Weve brought this guide together to help you do just that.
Unfortunately, all of these vital factors tend to get sidetracked when the consumer becomes preoccupied with the almost irrelevant issue of device level resolution. If I couldn't afford a native 4K projector--and I can't--I'd be absolutely delighted to spend my days being full of horse malarkey and enjoy the benefits of 4K HDR content on a pixel-shifting projectorwhich I do. So put me in the Pixel-Shifting convert category. In this case the UHD60 is higher in contrast than the UHD50, and in many scenes this contributes to the perception of it being the sharper of the two projectors. But to call it a "con game"or a "game" at allis uninformed and arrogant. Why is this? Talk To Our Experts. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser.
Move up close, however, and you can see pixel structure.A picture generated by either the 4K DLP chip or by the 3LCD 4K-enhanced models will certainly appear higher in resolution than a standard HD 1080p picture from a distance of 1.3x the screen width. Pixel shifting was and probably still is used as a con game to convince people to buy a projector they thought they were getting instead of what they were actually getting. You know JVC and Epson will finally release a native 4k chip only in a year or so to add their next E-shift technology to take them to 8k when they already have this developed now. Dont forget that your entire setup needs to be 4K compliant to allow your projector to display the striking 4K images you expect. Though as previously noted, theyre less subtle with high-resolution graphics and text. Take for instance cheap plastic lense used in expensive 4K Sony projectors. True 4K, provided color and contrast are of similar high quality is still a different and better beast. Each pixel is extremely small of course, but you can see clearly distinct pixels in rows and columns when you examine the image close up. 
If the scaling electronics are good, you'll get a good result with your 1080p content. The minimum HDMI cable size you need to deliver basic 4K, therefore, is a 10.2Gbps cable. Meanwhile, the Epson HC 4000 uses 3LCD chips with the same 1920 x 1080 pixel matrix, but it has only a two-phase pixel shift. When you take the steep price difference between these models and the native 4K alternatives, into account, its really worth giving them their dues.
Just wondering, I recently had a Optoma uhd51 which uses the 1080p chip of which the picture was really nice but could not get over seeing the black ( grey light) spillage from around the picture. 
Good active HDR+ along with 10bit or 12bit color with a powerful bulb or laser source will give a better WOW factory than any increases to resolution.
So when we back up from the screen to a viewing distance of 1.5x the screen width and put on some 4K HDR material, the Epson 4000 actually appears to be a bit sharper than the PX727-4K. True 4K sneaks into quite a few product descriptions, while the list below outlines some of the brand-specific terms:BenQ: XPR TechnologyOptoma: XPR TechnologyEpson: 4K enhancementJVC: eShift5While the marketing terminology is contentious, the technology and price point behind pixel-shifting 4K resolution projectors deserve recognition.:strip_exif()/i/2001220971.gif?f=imagemedium)
Now, before you go dropping me a flaming email, I am NOT arguing that native 4K imaging devices are irrelevant, or that native 4K devices cannot be a critical feature in a projector. It is the resolution and resolving power of micro-contrast that is a direct byproduct of fine detail retrieval. JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. I appreciate the thoroughness and the acknowledgement that not everything involving picture quality is about the number of pixels. Both projectors are upscaling a 1920 x 1080 signal to a 4K-like image. Though many folks use the term faux-K as simply synonymous with pixel-shifting technology without implying anything derisive, many use it precisely because it insinuates inferiority. Thanks again. The upshot is that there seems to be a narrower spread between the low end and high end in the 4K realm, at least in terms of resolution. 
But let's not be so eager to jump on the 'megapixels/resolution doesn't really matter' train that we forget that micro-contrast and fine detail are what more pixels and higher resolving power make possible. When you consider you can get a 4K enhanced projector such as theBenQ W2700 for as little as 1360 compared to the native 4K UHD starting point of 5,000, you can see why this option has gained so much attention. 
What does 4K on the panel mean? The Sony VW285ES ($4999) uses three native 4K resolution SXRD panels. 
The two-phase shift in this implementation tends to blur any hint of a discrete pixel matrix. 
And this is a huge however - the Epson HC 4000 is much higher in contrast with much more solid black levels than the PX727-4K. HDR in particular does have the potential to alter the viewing experience for the better, though more so with high-light-output flatpanel TVs than with projectors, which do indeed struggle with hitting the highlights in an impactful way. 
This is a fantastic article. Depending on the individual model, some projectors pixel shift twice, some do so four times with the former having a more convincing 4K effect in areas of the image where their is finite detail such as small text. Let me be more specific, would all the 1080P videos that I am used to watching on my epson 1060 appear to be more crisp and be automatically enhanced? Viewing distance is a huge factor in perceived resolution. Both? On the UHD50, when you are at the same distance of 12 inches from a 5-foot wide screen, you can detect an extremely subtle hint of pixel structure, but it is nowhere near as distinct as on the UHD60. 
Jim, After studying the operation of the XPR module with its pixel shift to achieve an apparent resolution of 4K, I think that the micromirrors cycle of the DMD chip is the same as in FHD. Great editorial. Only Pixel shift 4k projectors? The Optoma UHZ65 ($4495) is a laser-based 4K projector using a single 0.66" UHD DLP chip with two-phase pixel shifting. It is not surprising that the PX727-4K can deliver more 4K detail from a 4K signal, but it is surprising (to me anyway) that it can even upscale HD 1080p with a higher apparent level of precision. In addition, one of the biggest factors influencing what you see as image detail and sharpess is contrast. That holds for all 4K compliant projectors that rely on pixel shifting -- whether we are talking about a 1080p projector that doubles the pixel count for something in between 1080p and 4K resolution (like the Epsons), or a full 4K projector that puts all the pixels in a UHD signal on the screen using pixel shifting (ie, all the single-chip 4K DLP models). Let's now consider the display of an HD 1080p picture rather than 4K HDR. The answer is clearly no -- in practical terms you see exactly the same amount of image detail on both models. The 5' images in this test were used simply for comparative evaluation of the projectors when they are both projecting the same size image. For those of us pushing 21ft wide screens, yes, we want and need 4K. This time we will stand 5 feet from our 5-foot wide screen (1.0x the screen width). Both have discernable discrete pixel structure, but the pixels on the UHZ65 are (by comparison) larger and more well-defined. Visible pixelation (the screendoor effect) on lower resolution projectors was supremely annoying and desperately to be avoided. 
A 30 inch computer monitor that you look at from 3 ft away - sure. This does not mean the pictures look identical. In our new reality of 4K resolution and pixel shifting technologies, there is ZERO correlation between native resolution (the number of physical pixels on the chip) and the actual resolution of the picture you see on the screen. The first point is to consider the content. The term "4K projector" is open to any of several interpretations, and there is no chance of a consensus--it is an emotional subject for a lot of folks. To be honest I use just a pull down screen as it's in my living room. And rest assured, those features are the ones responsible for the better contrast noticed in the article. Hmmm. This is due to a combination of factors - as you move back from the screen the advantage the PX727-4K has in rendering fine detail becomes less visible so contrast becomes a more dominant factor in your overall perception of the picture's sharpness. Think too about the projector in the context of your unique setup. It might be fine with static images but movement causes visual problems. Once you move to a viewing distance beyond 1.0x the screen width, the eye's ability to resolve the subtle differences in detail between these two projectors evaporates. Different manufacturers implement this technology in slightly different ways, but for a very rudimentary explanation of the tech it essentially overlays two HD images on top of each other (depending on the projectors panel / chip), shifted by a half a pixel up, down, left or right quickly so the naked eye cant detect the shifting.The display panel, therefore, can be native 1080p (as seen in 3LCD and some entry level DLP models), Some DLP models might use a chipset using 2176x1528 micromirrors, the device projects the same pixels twice, thus creating twice as many pixels on the screen resulting in a crisper image. This is now. And as we know, high contrast makes a picture look sharper. While I prefer the latter definition myself, what I care more about is that buyers come to realize that the differences in detail resolution between all of these various 4K implementations are extremely trivial compared to the major issues of contrast, brightness, color balance and saturation, and image stability and clarity that ultimately define the greatness of a home theater picture. Its all down to your individual perception of value and how much 4K content youre watching. What is this? At the opposite end of the spectrum are the tech liberals who believe that if the projector takes a 4K signal and does something to make it look like an exciting, high resolution 4K picture on the screen, that is really what it's all about. I think may people will agree that resolution was the first but not necessarily the most impactful feature of the UHD format. Total waste of money, earth resources and will result in huge electronics waste over the coming years. You get the same results if you compare them at any size when maintaining the same ratio of viewing distance. Since we are not relying on native 4k resolution, I am asking will the pixel shifting technology manipulate my 1080 youtube video into looking like 4K? 
So as your move back your perception flips and the Epson 4000 looks like the sharper of the two projectors. The chip's physical resolution, at least in the home theater world, has become irrelevant. Its also judgement as to what you deem as acceptable in terms of the price gap between the native and non-native 4K projectors. The lens on Sony projectors has been well known as a limiting factor in transmitting true 4K resolution in the lower models. I've never had a 1080p projector with this problem why do the uhd dlp's have this, makes me wonder if we are getting a uhd picture made from less than the chip can produce. True 4K sneaks into quite a few product descriptions, while the list below outlines some of the brand-specific terms: While the marketing terminology is contentious, the technology and price point behind pixel-shifting 4K resolution projectors deserve recognition. Since "4K" is all about resolution, it is not surprising that so many folks have been preoccupied with native 4K vs. pixel shifting 4K, and debating the merits of each. 
There is source resolution and there is pixel resolution. But 110" screen from 10-12 ft away and you can barely make the difference. But since we are reaching the limits of the human eye to resolve fine detail at this distance, the perceived differences between native 4K and the 3LCD 4K-enhanced projectors are subtle when viewing video. Hey Evan, Great write up, really getting the discussion going. With true 4K source material, a true 4K projector that is displaying simultaneously the entire array of pixels will have an advantage in actual information visible. As with any new development in technology, theres a whole load of jargon associated with 4K projection which, unless youre a tech expert, can often be quite difficult to understand.Whats the difference between 4K DCI and UHD? Likewise, we've seen something similar in a few single-chip 4K/UHD DLP models that use the 0.47-inch 1080p DMD before applying XPR pixel shifting for 4K; there's a mode where you can turn off the 4-phase pixel shifting and just view the output of the DMD prior to the shifting. The VW285ES's pixel structure is so small as to be almost invisible, but on very close examination you can detect the pixel pattern. Epson followed using pixel shifting on 1920 x 1080 3LCD chips. And it always looks better than native 1080p would.
Notice how there is no debate on what a 1080p projector is. 1999-2022ProjectorCentral.com | 7/29/2022 9:57 PMPST. In other words, in this case we have a projector that many will dismiss as "faux-K" actually beating a "true native 4K" projector in perceived image sharpness. But hey ho I don't think it would be something the manufacturers would reveal. Any conclusions reached based upon the number of discrete elements in the panels are erroneous, For the person talking about 110" screens, you're right, 4K is not for you. On a 120 screen sitting 9-10ft away, the resolution increase of my Epson 5040UB compared to my older Panny PT-AE8000U was very noticable, and worth the upgrade. And even in home theater, if you have a much larger than typical screen and you like to sit in the front row of a movie theater, the incremental picture resolution from a native 4K projector may be visible and relevant to you. Obviously Im not upgrading often but Ive been happy with my epson. As with any new development in technology, theres a whole load of jargon associated with 4K projection which, unless youre a tech expert, can often be quite difficult to understand. So as per the next review/comparison, will the Viewsonic PX747 have a higher contrast ratio than PX727 b/c of higher lumens or is that not related? We can do this by setting up the Optoma UHD60 with its 0.66" chip sporting 2716 x 1528 mirrors, and the Optoma UHD50 with its 0.47" chip, having just 1920 x 1080 mirrors.
720p to 4K conversion (as you might experience coming from a cable box on certain channels) is more complex and not always quite as clean, though most set-top boxes will perform a conversion from 720p to 1080i or 1080p before sending it to the display -- probably with worse results than if you let the display do it. Only native 4k projectors?
Thats over 8 million separate pixels, giving four times the detail of Full HD.While some other brands of projectors are advertised as being 4K capable or True 4K, they actually use lower-resolution 1080p or 2K panels. That said, resolution is indeed a very critical aspect of the front projection experience given the larger screen size.
Once you back up to a viewing distance of two feet from a 5-foot wide screen (that is, 0.4x the screen width and a lot closer to the screen than anyone would want to be when watching a movie), all hint of visible pixel structure disappears on both projectors.
Time and time again weve been surprised by new models and the seriously impressive images they can achieve. The bottom line is if you're happy with the large home theater image you have regardless of tech, who cares. So the bottom line is that there are many important factors that contribute to a 4K projector's success. Can we see any difference in image sharpness and detail? Yet if you're looking at such images on anything other than an actual print, you are looking at a finite number of pixels equal only to what any given display can reproduce. Manufacturers are therefore able to apply the 4K UHD resolution label to devices that dont have this pixel count on their display panel but do have it on the screen. 4K, or 4K DCI, is a resolution of 4096x2160px. 
The ViewSonic PX727-4K has the 0.47" DLP chip with a 1920 x 1080 mirror matrix, generating a 4K picture (8.3 million pixels) via four-phase pixel shift. Fortunately, the 1080-line to 2160-line conversion on most TVs and projectors today is excellent, aided by the fact that it's a simple doubling.
If youre watching a BluRay in 4K quality, the difference between the quality of resolution of the image produced by a native 4K projector and a pixel-shifting 4K UHD resolution projector is arguably negligible apart from when it comes to small intricate details/text in the image then native 4K wins hands down. My last projector was Epson Pro Cinema 9350 and have no clue on that lag time. I reckon it should be a spec of the projectors so when we use your site's screen calculator ( been using for years! Contrast is king. Weve brought this guide together to help you do just that.
Unfortunately, all of these vital factors tend to get sidetracked when the consumer becomes preoccupied with the almost irrelevant issue of device level resolution. If I couldn't afford a native 4K projector--and I can't--I'd be absolutely delighted to spend my days being full of horse malarkey and enjoy the benefits of 4K HDR content on a pixel-shifting projectorwhich I do. So put me in the Pixel-Shifting convert category. In this case the UHD60 is higher in contrast than the UHD50, and in many scenes this contributes to the perception of it being the sharper of the two projectors. But to call it a "con game"or a "game" at allis uninformed and arrogant. Why is this? Talk To Our Experts. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser.
Move up close, however, and you can see pixel structure.A picture generated by either the 4K DLP chip or by the 3LCD 4K-enhanced models will certainly appear higher in resolution than a standard HD 1080p picture from a distance of 1.3x the screen width. Pixel shifting was and probably still is used as a con game to convince people to buy a projector they thought they were getting instead of what they were actually getting. You know JVC and Epson will finally release a native 4k chip only in a year or so to add their next E-shift technology to take them to 8k when they already have this developed now. Dont forget that your entire setup needs to be 4K compliant to allow your projector to display the striking 4K images you expect. Though as previously noted, theyre less subtle with high-resolution graphics and text. Take for instance cheap plastic lense used in expensive 4K Sony projectors. True 4K, provided color and contrast are of similar high quality is still a different and better beast. Each pixel is extremely small of course, but you can see clearly distinct pixels in rows and columns when you examine the image close up. If the scaling electronics are good, you'll get a good result with your 1080p content. The minimum HDMI cable size you need to deliver basic 4K, therefore, is a 10.2Gbps cable. Meanwhile, the Epson HC 4000 uses 3LCD chips with the same 1920 x 1080 pixel matrix, but it has only a two-phase pixel shift. When you take the steep price difference between these models and the native 4K alternatives, into account, its really worth giving them their dues. Just wondering, I recently had a Optoma uhd51 which uses the 1080p chip of which the picture was really nice but could not get over seeing the black ( grey light) spillage from around the picture. Good active HDR+ along with 10bit or 12bit color with a powerful bulb or laser source will give a better WOW factory than any increases to resolution. So when we back up from the screen to a viewing distance of 1.5x the screen width and put on some 4K HDR material, the Epson 4000 actually appears to be a bit sharper than the PX727-4K. True 4K sneaks into quite a few product descriptions, while the list below outlines some of the brand-specific terms:BenQ: XPR TechnologyOptoma: XPR TechnologyEpson: 4K enhancementJVC: eShift5While the marketing terminology is contentious, the technology and price point behind pixel-shifting 4K resolution projectors deserve recognition.
Now, before you go dropping me a flaming email, I am NOT arguing that native 4K imaging devices are irrelevant, or that native 4K devices cannot be a critical feature in a projector. It is the resolution and resolving power of micro-contrast that is a direct byproduct of fine detail retrieval. JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. I appreciate the thoroughness and the acknowledgement that not everything involving picture quality is about the number of pixels. Both projectors are upscaling a 1920 x 1080 signal to a 4K-like image. Though many folks use the term faux-K as simply synonymous with pixel-shifting technology without implying anything derisive, many use it precisely because it insinuates inferiority. Thanks again. The upshot is that there seems to be a narrower spread between the low end and high end in the 4K realm, at least in terms of resolution. But let's not be so eager to jump on the 'megapixels/resolution doesn't really matter' train that we forget that micro-contrast and fine detail are what more pixels and higher resolving power make possible. When you consider you can get a 4K enhanced projector such as theBenQ W2700 for as little as 1360 compared to the native 4K UHD starting point of 5,000, you can see why this option has gained so much attention. What does 4K on the panel mean? The Sony VW285ES ($4999) uses three native 4K resolution SXRD panels. The two-phase shift in this implementation tends to blur any hint of a discrete pixel matrix. And this is a huge however - the Epson HC 4000 is much higher in contrast with much more solid black levels than the PX727-4K. HDR in particular does have the potential to alter the viewing experience for the better, though more so with high-light-output flatpanel TVs than with projectors, which do indeed struggle with hitting the highlights in an impactful way. This is a fantastic article. Depending on the individual model, some projectors pixel shift twice, some do so four times with the former having a more convincing 4K effect in areas of the image where their is finite detail such as small text. Let me be more specific, would all the 1080P videos that I am used to watching on my epson 1060 appear to be more crisp and be automatically enhanced? Viewing distance is a huge factor in perceived resolution. Both? On the UHD50, when you are at the same distance of 12 inches from a 5-foot wide screen, you can detect an extremely subtle hint of pixel structure, but it is nowhere near as distinct as on the UHD60. Jim, After studying the operation of the XPR module with its pixel shift to achieve an apparent resolution of 4K, I think that the micromirrors cycle of the DMD chip is the same as in FHD. Great editorial. Only Pixel shift 4k projectors? The Optoma UHZ65 ($4495) is a laser-based 4K projector using a single 0.66" UHD DLP chip with two-phase pixel shifting. It is not surprising that the PX727-4K can deliver more 4K detail from a 4K signal, but it is surprising (to me anyway) that it can even upscale HD 1080p with a higher apparent level of precision. In addition, one of the biggest factors influencing what you see as image detail and sharpess is contrast. That holds for all 4K compliant projectors that rely on pixel shifting -- whether we are talking about a 1080p projector that doubles the pixel count for something in between 1080p and 4K resolution (like the Epsons), or a full 4K projector that puts all the pixels in a UHD signal on the screen using pixel shifting (ie, all the single-chip 4K DLP models). Let's now consider the display of an HD 1080p picture rather than 4K HDR. The answer is clearly no -- in practical terms you see exactly the same amount of image detail on both models. The 5' images in this test were used simply for comparative evaluation of the projectors when they are both projecting the same size image. For those of us pushing 21ft wide screens, yes, we want and need 4K. This time we will stand 5 feet from our 5-foot wide screen (1.0x the screen width). Both have discernable discrete pixel structure, but the pixels on the UHZ65 are (by comparison) larger and more well-defined. Visible pixelation (the screendoor effect) on lower resolution projectors was supremely annoying and desperately to be avoided. A 30 inch computer monitor that you look at from 3 ft away - sure. This does not mean the pictures look identical. In our new reality of 4K resolution and pixel shifting technologies, there is ZERO correlation between native resolution (the number of physical pixels on the chip) and the actual resolution of the picture you see on the screen. The first point is to consider the content. The term "4K projector" is open to any of several interpretations, and there is no chance of a consensus--it is an emotional subject for a lot of folks. To be honest I use just a pull down screen as it's in my living room. And rest assured, those features are the ones responsible for the better contrast noticed in the article. Hmmm. This is due to a combination of factors - as you move back from the screen the advantage the PX727-4K has in rendering fine detail becomes less visible so contrast becomes a more dominant factor in your overall perception of the picture's sharpness. Think too about the projector in the context of your unique setup. It might be fine with static images but movement causes visual problems. Once you move to a viewing distance beyond 1.0x the screen width, the eye's ability to resolve the subtle differences in detail between these two projectors evaporates. Different manufacturers implement this technology in slightly different ways, but for a very rudimentary explanation of the tech it essentially overlays two HD images on top of each other (depending on the projectors panel / chip), shifted by a half a pixel up, down, left or right quickly so the naked eye cant detect the shifting.The display panel, therefore, can be native 1080p (as seen in 3LCD and some entry level DLP models), Some DLP models might use a chipset using 2176x1528 micromirrors, the device projects the same pixels twice, thus creating twice as many pixels on the screen resulting in a crisper image. This is now. And as we know, high contrast makes a picture look sharper. While I prefer the latter definition myself, what I care more about is that buyers come to realize that the differences in detail resolution between all of these various 4K implementations are extremely trivial compared to the major issues of contrast, brightness, color balance and saturation, and image stability and clarity that ultimately define the greatness of a home theater picture. Its all down to your individual perception of value and how much 4K content youre watching. What is this? At the opposite end of the spectrum are the tech liberals who believe that if the projector takes a 4K signal and does something to make it look like an exciting, high resolution 4K picture on the screen, that is really what it's all about. I think may people will agree that resolution was the first but not necessarily the most impactful feature of the UHD format. Total waste of money, earth resources and will result in huge electronics waste over the coming years. You get the same results if you compare them at any size when maintaining the same ratio of viewing distance. Since we are not relying on native 4k resolution, I am asking will the pixel shifting technology manipulate my 1080 youtube video into looking like 4K? So as your move back your perception flips and the Epson 4000 looks like the sharper of the two projectors. The chip's physical resolution, at least in the home theater world, has become irrelevant. Its also judgement as to what you deem as acceptable in terms of the price gap between the native and non-native 4K projectors. The lens on Sony projectors has been well known as a limiting factor in transmitting true 4K resolution in the lower models. I've never had a 1080p projector with this problem why do the uhd dlp's have this, makes me wonder if we are getting a uhd picture made from less than the chip can produce. True 4K sneaks into quite a few product descriptions, while the list below outlines some of the brand-specific terms: While the marketing terminology is contentious, the technology and price point behind pixel-shifting 4K resolution projectors deserve recognition. Since "4K" is all about resolution, it is not surprising that so many folks have been preoccupied with native 4K vs. pixel shifting 4K, and debating the merits of each. There is source resolution and there is pixel resolution. But 110" screen from 10-12 ft away and you can barely make the difference. But since we are reaching the limits of the human eye to resolve fine detail at this distance, the perceived differences between native 4K and the 3LCD 4K-enhanced projectors are subtle when viewing video. Hey Evan, Great write up, really getting the discussion going. With true 4K source material, a true 4K projector that is displaying simultaneously the entire array of pixels will have an advantage in actual information visible. As with any new development in technology, theres a whole load of jargon associated with 4K projection which, unless youre a tech expert, can often be quite difficult to understand.Whats the difference between 4K DCI and UHD? Likewise, we've seen something similar in a few single-chip 4K/UHD DLP models that use the 0.47-inch 1080p DMD before applying XPR pixel shifting for 4K; there's a mode where you can turn off the 4-phase pixel shifting and just view the output of the DMD prior to the shifting. The VW285ES's pixel structure is so small as to be almost invisible, but on very close examination you can detect the pixel pattern. Epson followed using pixel shifting on 1920 x 1080 3LCD chips. And it always looks better than native 1080p would. Notice how there is no debate on what a 1080p projector is. 1999-2022ProjectorCentral.com | 7/29/2022 9:57 PMPST. In other words, in this case we have a projector that many will dismiss as "faux-K" actually beating a "true native 4K" projector in perceived image sharpness. But hey ho I don't think it would be something the manufacturers would reveal. Any conclusions reached based upon the number of discrete elements in the panels are erroneous, For the person talking about 110" screens, you're right, 4K is not for you. On a 120 screen sitting 9-10ft away, the resolution increase of my Epson 5040UB compared to my older Panny PT-AE8000U was very noticable, and worth the upgrade. And even in home theater, if you have a much larger than typical screen and you like to sit in the front row of a movie theater, the incremental picture resolution from a native 4K projector may be visible and relevant to you. Obviously Im not upgrading often but Ive been happy with my epson. As with any new development in technology, theres a whole load of jargon associated with 4K projection which, unless youre a tech expert, can often be quite difficult to understand. So as per the next review/comparison, will the Viewsonic PX747 have a higher contrast ratio than PX727 b/c of higher lumens or is that not related? We can do this by setting up the Optoma UHD60 with its 0.66" chip sporting 2716 x 1528 mirrors, and the Optoma UHD50 with its 0.47" chip, having just 1920 x 1080 mirrors.
720p to 4K conversion (as you might experience coming from a cable box on certain channels) is more complex and not always quite as clean, though most set-top boxes will perform a conversion from 720p to 1080i or 1080p before sending it to the display -- probably with worse results than if you let the display do it. Only native 4k projectors?
Thats over 8 million separate pixels, giving four times the detail of Full HD.While some other brands of projectors are advertised as being 4K capable or True 4K, they actually use lower-resolution 1080p or 2K panels. That said, resolution is indeed a very critical aspect of the front projection experience given the larger screen size. Once you back up to a viewing distance of two feet from a 5-foot wide screen (that is, 0.4x the screen width and a lot closer to the screen than anyone would want to be when watching a movie), all hint of visible pixel structure disappears on both projectors.
Time and time again weve been surprised by new models and the seriously impressive images they can achieve. The bottom line is if you're happy with the large home theater image you have regardless of tech, who cares. So the bottom line is that there are many important factors that contribute to a 4K projector's success. Can we see any difference in image sharpness and detail? Yet if you're looking at such images on anything other than an actual print, you are looking at a finite number of pixels equal only to what any given display can reproduce. Manufacturers are therefore able to apply the 4K UHD resolution label to devices that dont have this pixel count on their display panel but do have it on the screen. 4K, or 4K DCI, is a resolution of 4096x2160px. The ViewSonic PX727-4K has the 0.47" DLP chip with a 1920 x 1080 mirror matrix, generating a 4K picture (8.3 million pixels) via four-phase pixel shift. Fortunately, the 1080-line to 2160-line conversion on most TVs and projectors today is excellent, aided by the fact that it's a simple doubling.