Quantcast

BenQ TK850 4K DLP Projector Review & Comments

Welsh Whirlwind

Well-known Member
Thanks for the review, Phil.

I don't know about everyone else, but every time I read the words 'pixel shift technology' I just switch off. Maybe it's just me, but personally I'm just not interested in projector technology until true 4k resolution becomes more affordable. Whilst I really want to invest in a projector, until that point comes around, I'll just stick with OLED.
 

xxGBHxx

Well-known Member
Thanks for the review, Phil.

I don't know about everyone else, but every time I read the words 'pixel shift technology' I just switch off. Maybe it's just me, but personally I'm just not interested in projector technology until true 4k resolution becomes more affordable. Whilst I really want to invest in a projector, until that point comes around, I'll just stick with OLED.
They have (at the moment at least) completely different use cases so I don't see your point. At a "sensible" price point
  • Projectors do big and cinematic.
  • OLED does true 4k, HDR and proper black
You CAN do big and cinematic on OLED and you CAN do HDR, 4K and black on projector but you pay a massive premium on each.

In the mean time though you're HUGELY missing out. Pixel shift or not, 4k is pretty much irrelevant on a projector screen as you simply don't sit close enough for it to make all that much difference. From all the testing that's been done, in practice you also can't tell the difference between faux 4k and "real" 4k either, so there is that.

G
 

daveb975

Well-known Member
They have (at the moment at least) completely different use cases so I don't see your point. At a "sensible" price point
  • Projectors do big and cinematic.
  • OLED does true 4k, HDR and proper black
You CAN do big and cinematic on OLED and you CAN do HDR, 4K and black on projector but you pay a massive premium on each.

In the mean time though you're HUGELY missing out. Pixel shift or not, 4k is pretty much irrelevant on a projector screen as you simply don't sit close enough for it to make all that much difference. From all the testing that's been done, in practice you also can't tell the difference between faux 4k and "real" 4k either, so there is that.

G
I totally agree.

I’ve got a Benq W2700 and a 100” screen with a 65” LG C9 OLED behind it.

Both combined cost me less than the 77” C9 would have done, and there is still a big difference in immersion levels between 77” and 100” anyway.

If I had more space, I’d probably have gone for a 120” screen.

I wouldn’t want to be without either, although the LG is a bit wasted as 90% of the viewing in that room is done on the projector.
 

The_Wierd

Well-known Member
Thanks for the review, Phil.

I don't know about everyone else, but every time I read the words 'pixel shift technology' I just switch off. Maybe it's just me, but personally I'm just not interested in projector technology until true 4k resolution becomes more affordable. Whilst I really want to invest in a projector, until that point comes around, I'll just stick with OLED.
There are various types of pixel shifting though. I believe some models only shift once, so doubling the pixels shown on screen, but the XPR DLP such as in the Benqs actually display all of the pixels in a 4K image - they just don't do it all at once. Any loss of sharpness is more likely due to the optics than the display chip. The DLP devices also don't show all the colours at once, but you still see them all. At least once every 1/60 or 1/24 of a second all the pixels and all the colours are projected onto the screen.It works because the human eye is what it is and unless you have superhuman eyes you won't see the difference. I can say from personal experience of my W2700 that a well mastered 4K image shows clearly more detail than the equivalent 1080p source.
 

SOUNDVISION

Active Member
HDR is wasted on pixel shifting projectors better to just have, pixel shifting and leave out HDR all together
 

chn

Standard Member
After reading your full review, I think it should get an overall 6 instead of 7. Because
  • You guys have given 8 to Epson TW9400 for Contrast/Dynamic Range/Black levels and TK850 gets a 7? Are blacks and contrast or Dynamic Rangethat good although you mentioned with
    • Dark grey black levels
    • Crushed blacks
  • Or how could it have 8 for Picture Quality Calibrated same as the W2700 which is HDR capable unlike this TK850?
I can understand that this projector's scope is something else other than home theatre/cinema but still thinking that you are overrating it right now.

BTW I think HDR is wasted on small oled screens ... It is a preference to have best picture quality on a small screen or have a nice picture which is 3 times bigger (lg c9 77" vs 135" screen PJ => 75% larger diagonal, 207% larger area) and I don't mention affordability yet.
 

Phil Hinton

Editor
Staff member
After reading your full review, I think it should get an overall 6 instead of 7. Because
  • You guys have given 8 to Epson TW9400 for Contrast/Dynamic Range/Black levels and TK850 gets a 7? Are blacks and contrast or Dynamic Rangethat good although you mentioned with
    • Dark grey black levels
    • Crushed blacks
  • Or how could it have 8 for Picture Quality Calibrated same as the W2700 which is HDR capable unlike this TK850?
I can understand that this projector's scope is something else other than home theatre/cinema but still thinking that you are overrating it right now.
As I try to make very clear in the review, the TK850 is scored against what it is supposed to do and if it fulfils its core requirements. It is not a home cinema projector, which is clearly mentioned a number of times, so as a reader you know what we are talking about.

I would prefer not to have the scores in reviews, as you really should read what it is like. If after reading you feel it's a 6 then I don't have an issue with that, as you have read the review and hopefully drawn your conclusions from the information presented.

As for blacks, the scoring is when presented with other models at the price point, which are all lacking in some way. The TK850 is slightly better here than the TK810 and is scored as such. It would be silly to judge it against a D-ILA for example at eight times the cost for example, which I think most readers, including yourself, understand.

The W2700 is not HDR capable either, it is compatible. No projectors at these prices points have the steps of dynamic range required for true HDR playback.
 

SIMO

Active Member
As I try to make very clear in the review, the TK850 is scored against what it is supposed to do and if it fulfils its core requirements. It is not a home cinema projector, which is clearly mentioned a number of times, so as a reader you know what we are talking about.

I would prefer not to have the scores in reviews, as you really should read what it is like. If after reading you feel it's a 6 then I don't have an issue with that, as you have read the review and hopefully drawn your conclusions from the information presented.

As for blacks, the scoring is when presented with other models at the price point, which are all lacking in some way. The TK850 is slightly better here than the TK810 and is scored as such. It would be silly to judge it against a D-ILA for example at eight times the cost for example, which I think most readers, including yourself, understand.

The W2700 is not HDR capable either, it is compatible. No projectors at these prices points have the steps of dynamic range required for true HDR playback.
Thanks for the review Phil.

So what would be your choice then Phil the W2700 or the TK850?
 

Similar threads

Top Bottom