Use of DLP for HDTV has 2 minor drawbacks

[Gregg Lengling]

BILL HUSTED, 08.30.04, 11:10 AM ET

ATLANTA _

Q: Thanks for writing such a great column. Your article, "Hold off on buying plasma TV; wait for LCDs," was very timely and interesting. What about DLPs? Would love to read any comments you might have on that TI technology.

_ Al Bennett

A: For those who aren't familiar with the DLP technology for high-definition televisions, those initials stand for digital light processing. TI refers to the company that developed it, Texas Instruments. It's a relatively new way of providing a high-definition picture. It uses tiny (and I do mean tiny) mirrors that magnify each point of light. The image is then projected on a screen, most often in rear-projection television sets. There have been rave reports on the quality of the picture, and many experts think DLP represents the future of high-definition television.

Everything I know about DLP is good, with two minor exceptions. And these exceptions do truly seem minor to me. But I haven't written much about DLP, because I don't know much about DLP.

I'm the sort of a guy who learns best when he uses the technology. At various times I've had demo units for both LCD and plasma. Those experiences, along with talking to experts, lead me to feel easy when expressing an opinion about them.

But my knowledge of DLP is totally based on what people have told me and what I have read. So I still feel inadequate about offering advice. I'll stick with what I do know.

Amid the many pros, there are two minor cons. One, you need to replace the projection bulb on DLP units (it costs around $250 now) about every two years, some say. Others say that you can go for five to six years before needing the replacement. The wide spread between those two opinions is caused by the fact that there is some amount of dumb luck involved when you talk about any time frame for replacement, and it's also based on how much you use the set. I do hear that the $250 price tag for a replacement will drop as DLP becomes more common.

The other fault being reported is the fact that the cooling fan on these sets can get very loud. Again, from the little I know, neither fault is a deal breaker. I think I'll feel more comfortable recommending DLP when it's been on the market longer.

[Bebop]

He forgot about rainbows.

Is there actually a technology out there that is flawless?

[gparris]

Next time I'll try LCoS as its seems to have more contrast and better imaging, even on a 82" screen like the Mitsubishi I saw in a store in Chicagoland. Of course, there are now other sets lower in price than $19K, but the images were fantastic.
I wanted to gather a bunch of our members next time I find that set out on display and do a field trip (can't remember the store since I was with a group of power shoppers asking me advice and almost everything).
JVC has a 61", closer to what I would buy, for about $4500 and I have yet to find one to visit.
LCoS is not very common, yet, can be very expensive, yet cheaper than plasma and as slender in comparison as a LCD RPTV and has the potential, like the Mits set I saw, to display images at full HDTV resolution of over two million pixels.
With its (perceived to me) darker contrast, wide angle viewing, and no rainbow effect, as some DLPs have had, I will put my stamp of approval on LCoS for now.
Good old CRTs and their cousin, CRT RPTVs are still great for contrast, but if I never hear word "convergence" again, it will be too soon.

[Bebop]

3 chip DLP (no more color wheel), but will be expensive for now.

[StarvingForHDTV]

Originally posted by gparris
but if I never hear word "convergence" again, it will be too soon.

Amen.

You might try Sears to see a 720p 65" LCoS set.  Or wait until LG comes out with their 1080p displays.

If/when Intel gets their act together, the war with Texas Instruments should make consumers the winner.

I'm waiting for 1080p at relatively reasonable prices.  I don't think I will have to wait too long.