I agree...a projector like this has no place on EngadgetHD.
If it can't display an HD resolution (ie: 720p) then it does not belong here. This projector is designed for a 4:3 aspect ratio...so while it has more than 720 pixels on the vertical axis, letterboxing 16:9 content takes you down to a real resolution of 1024x576. That's not HD.
Man...this is a projector -- the whole point is to make a big screen with it if you're using it in a home theater. There's already enough discussion about needing 1080p vs. 720p for screens around 50" or larger. How big of a screen do you think 576p will support before the pixels are ugly-visible during a movie?
This might be a decent home theater projector for some folks with limited needs/wants...but the HD enthusiast will balk at a blown-up 576p image. A projector that can't do at least 720p widescreen has no place on EngadgetHD.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
EQC @ Feb 20th 2008 6:32PM
I agree...a projector like this has no place on EngadgetHD.
If it can't display an HD resolution (ie: 720p) then it does not belong here. This projector is designed for a 4:3 aspect ratio...so while it has more than 720 pixels on the vertical axis, letterboxing 16:9 content takes you down to a real resolution of 1024x576. That's not HD.
Man...this is a projector -- the whole point is to make a big screen with it if you're using it in a home theater. There's already enough discussion about needing 1080p vs. 720p for screens around 50" or larger. How big of a screen do you think 576p will support before the pixels are ugly-visible during a movie?
This might be a decent home theater projector for some folks with limited needs/wants...but the HD enthusiast will balk at a blown-up 576p image. A projector that can't do at least 720p widescreen has no place on EngadgetHD.