UST vs Long Throw Projectors: Choices and Experiences (1 Viewer)

[Jonathan]

I recently had a chance to review an UST projector, and it got me thinking about how diverse and varied our preferences and setups can be. I'm genuinely curious about your experiences and eager to learn from the collective wisdom of this community.

The choice between Ultra Short Throw and Long Throw Projectors often reflects more than just hardware; it’s an interplay of values, spaces, and the experiences we seek.

For anyone with a UST, what has driven the choice beyond just physical space? Is it the aesthetics, the convenience, or something else that resonates with your lifestyle?

And for those who swear by Long Throw Projectors, I wonder how often people use them in a general living space? Is it a dedicated home theater room scenario or have you found creative ways to integrate them into day-to-day living areas?

Moreover, have there been any trade-offs or unexpected benefits in choosing one over the other?

I also wonder how the installation process played a part in your decision. Was it a decisive factor, or more of an afterthought once you were set on a particular type?

Interested to absorb your insights.

 

[John Dirk]

Great topic, Jonathan, and I also enjoyed your excellent review. I've owned projectors since the days of the Sanyo PLV-Z5, circa 2006. Since I've always had a dedicated space I never considered UST models. They seem to offer a great option for those with space limitations or aesthetic concerns. I'm happy about any line of product that gives more people the ability to enjoy a true big screen experience.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

And for those who swear by Long Throw Projectors, I wonder how often people use them in a general living space? Is it a dedicated home theater room scenario or have you found creative ways to integrate them into day-to-day living areas?

At the time I first got into home projection, the Ultra Short Throw hadn't really come into being yet. The choice was between a long throw projector which needed to be basically on the opposite side of a long room, or a short through projector meant to be hung closer to the middle or front of the room. I shared an apartment with a couple friends, my bedroom was small, but flat panel TVs were just becoming popular and were still very expensive relative to their size. My room didn't really have the space to add a larger sized, bulky CRT, but I wanted something bigger than a 20" TV, on a budget. After a lot of research, I discovered that a lot of Epson projectors had very generous zooms and lens shifts, offering a tremendous amount of placement flexibility within a space - they could basically function as both long throw and short throw machines. As someone who was just a renter, having a piece of equipment with that kind of flexibility was ideal, because it meant that regardless of what my next apartment looked like, there would be a way to make the projector work within the space.

About a decade and several living situations later, I found myself renting again, this time in a different city, but rather than setting up a projector in a bedroom to replace a TV, I was looking for HD quality, 3D capable projection on a large screen in an oversized living room in an apartment. Ultra short throw still wasn't really a thing at that time. I once again wound up choosing an Epson projector, for mostly the same reason - the amount of zoom it offered and its generous lens shift capability meant that the machine would work not only in that space, but any future space it might operate in. I'm now using that same projector in an entirely different living room, in a house this time, and the projector's flexibility meant that even though the room sizes and shapes of both places weren't really comparable, the projector worked equally well in both locations.

The projector currently resides on a shelf I've installed on the back wall of the room, and it projects onto a pull-down screen that comes down in front of a flat panel TV that is wall mounted. By setting up the room like this, it allows me to share one surround sound system and set of components between two display devices. Daytime viewing and casual viewing is done on the television set with the screen rolled up. Nighttime movie watching and the occasional prestige television program are done on the projector. When the screen is rolled up, unless you're looking for it, you wouldn't really notice the room is set up for projection.

It's not perfect in comparison to homes with dedicated, single-purpose, light controlled rooms that are nearly indistinguishable from commercial-grade theaters and screening rooms, but when it comes to watching a movie at night, I'll take this over any living room television set.

As a parent of young children with all of this set up in an open living room, a benefit to this type of setup is that all of the expensive components are out of the reach of my children. They can't reach the projector or press any buttons on it, and they can't even come close to being able to lower the screen. (I'm not sure an ultra short throw projector, with a lower placement, would be as safe in their presence.) Having young children means there's never a time when I'm free to watch a movie in the daytime anyway, so not having a light controlled room isn't a minus for my uses.

Moreover, have there been any trade-offs or unexpected benefits in choosing one over the other?

The benefit to my choice of the Epson model I went with is the tremendous placement flexibility it has. As someone who doesn't yet own a home, that's huge. You don't want to spend money on any sort of equipment that only works well in a space you have no long-term claim over. If Ultra Short Throw projectors had been in existence at the time I was shopping, I would have definitely considered one. In a family room, though, depending on who else is sharing the space, for people in similar situations there may be a benefit to having something that's wall or ceiling mounted, where young people and visitors can't accidentally bump into it, and where it doesn't eat up any floor space near the front of the room.

I also wonder how the installation process played a part in your decision.

I think I touched on this before but to reiterate: placement flexibility was of paramount importance to me. There are many fine projector models that have very specific requirements for where they must be placed in relation to the screen, and that's great if you know you're not going anywhere for the lifespan of the projector. But if you're someone who's used to having to move every couple of years, that flexibility can be tremendously valuable. I see Ultra Short Throw projectors as having similar usefulness because the depth of the room is irrelevant to their correct placement. For people who don't own their own spaces, have deep rooms, or who just don't want to deal with physically hanging a projector on a shelf or ceiling, the Ultra Short Throw machines are basically now the official way of doing what I first started trying to do years ago.

 

[Mysto]

For me it was simple. I have a very small room that is used for my theater. I also like VERY big screens ( 140") . Currently, I have a short throw - Optima 1080p darbee. It sits in a stand on the floor not too far in front of our seating and can be moved when required. The system is not perfect but gives a pretty good theatrical experience in a small space for a reasonable price. My next projector will be a UST three laser 4K.
Cheers

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Currently, I have a short throw ... My next projector will be a UST three laser 4K.

I'll be very curious to hear what your experience is in terms of ease of setup and use comparing a regular short throw to an ultra short throw whenever the time comes for you to upgrade.

 

[Mark McSherry]

Several weeks ago I jumped when AWOL dropped their UST LTV-2500 down to $2400. 4K, 24 fps, 3D, HDR+ and 2500 lumens. I've been quite pleased while experimenting with its features on my 120" screen. I've had an HD projector since 2014 mounted on the ceiling ~13 feet from the screen and I can still use it too. And my center speaker sits on the floor (slightly raised and tilted) between the AWOL LTV-2500 and the screen.

Just this week I have been able to get Dolby Vision to work with the LTV-2500 through both my AppleTV 4K and Panasonic UB-820. Just by purchasing a $30 HDMI switcher. And that may only be a temporary fix--- AWOL has an update coming which is said to support Dolby Vision on their projectors.

 

[John Dirk]

A very good point @Josh Steinberg touches on is the learning curve required for long throw options. My first projector was placed on a shelf behind the seating and could easily be moved if I made mistakes in distance, positioning, etc. Ceiling mounting a projector is not as forgiving so you need to be sure you understand the throw and lens shift characteristics of the projector you buy before permanently mounting it. Unless you're hiring a professional, you also need to be comfortable cutting into a ceiling and securing your brand new [expensive] piece of hardware. My current projector weighs over 50 pounds and installation was a difficult, tedious task. Completely worth it though!

 

[Sam Posten]

I’ve been spoiled by OLED in my gaming office and in my living room and have found myself frustrated by the HDR capabilities of all modern projectors. I still love the filmic look of my 2017 era lamp based pj but I feel we are looking at 5 years MORE for truly acceptable and enjoyable HDR to hit any projectors afforded by mortals.

Given that, my recommendation is all enthusiasts to by a midrange today and wait it out instead of buying their “one true pj to get me to the endgame.” One of two things will happen first: OLED at 120” or true mind blowing hdr on a pj. I don’t know which

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I think one thing worth considering for projector buyers in terms of HDR is just what kind of content you’re planning to watch. HDR was never part of the presentation of film-originated content, and wasn’t really part of digital-originated content until less than ten years ago. If the majority of what you watch is brand new material, by all means, prioritize the equipment that can best handle HDR. On the other hand, if you’re someone who spends most of their time watching content made in the 20th century, HDR isn’t really relevant to the vast majority of that material.

I don’t mean to come across as an old fuddy duddy but for a significant number of viewers, HDR just isn’t a vital part of what they watch.

I keep waiting to be blown away by HDR and it’s just not happening for me, and that’s one of the reasons I’m not in an overwhelming rush to upgrade to an HDR capable projector (my TV can do it, so I’m not totally without it).

Don’t mean to contradict my friend Sam in any way, but always good to consider exactly what you plan on watching when deciding which features to prioritize.

 

[DaveF]

I’ve been spoiled by OLED in my gaming office and in my living room and have found myself frustrated by the HDR capabilities of all modern projectors. I still love the filmic look of my 2017 era lamp based pj but I feel we are looking at 5 years MORE for truly acceptable and enjoyable HDR to hit any projectors afforded by mortals.

Given that, my recommendation is all enthusiasts to by a midrange today and wait it out instead of buying their “one true pj to get me to the endgame.” One of two things will happen first: OLED at 120” or true mind blowing hdr on a pj. I don’t know which

Heard, Chef.


(Everyone’s watching The Bear, right? )

 

[Mysto]

I don’t mean to come across as an old fuddy duddy but for a significant number of viewers, HDR just isn’t a vital part of what they watch.

About half of all my watching (perhaps a bit more) is Academy ratio B/W Mono sound. (I like old movies from the 30's and 40's and am thrilled when I can get them in 1080p - It is as close as I can get to the feeling they had sitting in those lovely old shadow palaces)
But as Josh said - it depends on the viewer and their needs. This Forum is "like a box of chocolates"
Cheers

 

[John Dirk]

I still love the filmic look of my 2017 era lamp based pj but I feel we are looking at 5 years MORE for truly acceptable and enjoyable HDR to hit any projectors afforded by mortals.

Affordability is obviously a relative consideration but have you seen the JVC NZ line? While I'm not suggesting it's comparable to OLED's, I have no complaints concerning HDR.

 

[DaveF]

Here in 2023, I see the appeal of UST, but they don’t work for me. My living room has space for maybe an 80” max, and I’ve got a 65” LCD in that space. And this is HGTV background noise and Abbott Elementary dinner viewing: I don’t want a 100” cinematic display here.

My theater room is designed and built for ceiling-mounted conventional projector.

That’s if UST offered any image or performance benefit to a long-through projector. I understand some of them actually support Dolby Vision, which is important to some. But otherwise, I understand them as being DLP devices with low contrast, poor black floors, and inferior in all ways to even an Epson LS12000, let alone a Sony or JVC.

I see UST as targeting the person that wants the living-room “home theater”: a 100” screen in a non-dedicated family room, and likes the price/performance value of 100” image vs HDR quality compared to 83” to 100” LCD or OLED.

 

[DaveF]

And also we’re seemingly on the precipice of 100”+ direct views becoming affordable. UST’s with their compact size will still have appeal to a niche. I’d guess these are evolutionary dead end. But maybe they can bring prices down for 100” to 120” image faster than direct view. Maybe they move to 130” to 150” images to outpace giant TVs.

 

[Mysto]

And also we’re seemingly on the precipice of 100”+ direct views becoming affordable. UST’s with their compact size will still have appeal to a niche. I’d guess these are evolutionary dead end. But maybe they can bring prices down for 100” to 120” image faster than direct view. Maybe they move to 130” to 150” images to outpace giant TVs.

Dave - the Foremovie, for example, has a maximum size of 150" now. (I would bite but no 3D darn it)
Foremovie
Cheers

 

[Worth]

I keep waiting to be blown away by HDR and it’s just not happening for me, and that’s one of the reasons I’m not in an overwhelming rush to upgrade to an HDR capable projector (my TV can do it, so I’m not totally without it).

I have a good - just below top-of the-line - 75” Sony that can get plenty bright, but I have to say I haven’t been blown away by 4K/HDR. My main interest is in older (pre-1990) movies shot on film, and I’ve found that more often than not, I prefer the SDR version. It just looks more film-like to me.

 

[GeorgeHolland]

I have never considered or researched UST projectors and can’t confirm my assumptions but I considered UST projectors as a compromised choice only made if a room or situation demanded one. Another assumption is the top options from manufacturers like JVC and Sony are much better performers in dedicated theaters with light control.

I also always thought of the Sony, JVC and even Epson projectors as standard throw, not long throw. I have thought of higher end commercial projectors with exchangeable lenses that enabled longer throw distances while maintaining brightness as long throw.

I’m one that is completely blown away with my front projector set up. 4K/UHD/HDR in my theater is OLED like and I own a calibrated LG 77CX. I’ve evolved over time to my current JVC DLA RS3100 with a DCR-J1 installed on it and a Lumagen Radiance Pro video processor. Lumagen just released a new firmware update and the improvement in DTM and auto aspect control makes me feel like I have a new projector and it was amazing before the update.

I’ve been able to get to this point after decades of incremental upgrades so the cash outlay at each point was offset by purchasing new at a low pre-sale price and selling at going market prices that were not much lower than I paid. In 1999 I built my theater and ceiling mounted the massive NEC XG85 CRT projector at a distance probably close to what a UST projector requires today. The NEC had precise height and distance installation requirements. Next I bought my first JVC, the DLA- RS20 followed by the RS50, RS55, RS56, RS500, RS2000, up to my current RS3100. My Lumagen journey started with the NEC XG85 with incremental trade-ins and sales to purchase upgrades over the years up to my current Radiance Pro.

I started with a Studiotec 130 with a custom 47 ¼ x 84 screen size and wall mount frame purchased in late 1999. I eventually went scope and currently have Stewart StudioTek 130 G4, 115” x 49” (125”).

The room is relatively small at 18' 6 long and 12' 6 wide. The center front row seat has a 9' 6" viewing distance before reclining. The room has complete light control with black carpet, black front wall, black side walls and ceiling extending 3 feet from the front wall, and finally dark brown side walls and dark gray ceiling everywhere else.

I can’t imagine how the picture could look any better but I know technology will keep advancing and there are even better options at even higher prices today.

 

[Bryan^H]

For me it was simple. I have a very small room that is used for my theater. I also like VERY big screens ( 140") . Currently, I have a short throw - Optima 1080p darbee. It sits in a stand on the floor not too far in front of our seating and can be moved when required. The system is not perfect but gives a pretty good theatrical experience in a small space for a reasonable price. My next projector will be a UST three laser 4K.
Cheers

Darbee processing is the one feature I think I will miss the most when I upgrade (?) to a new projector as it is pretty fantastic for many different applications such as gaming, theater, etc.
I'm going to be sad to see it go.

 

[Sam Posten]

Affordability is obviously a relative consideration but have you seen the JVC NZ line? While I'm not suggesting it's comparable to OLED's, I have no complaints concerning HDR.

I had a N7 on preorder and was going to be first on my block with one. Then they delayed my order 6 months due to either incompetence or corona delays. And pro reviews kept coming in that it was a solid upgrade over the lamps but laser wouldn’t be a magic bullet for HDR. So I live with what I have and dream of the day I get my 5x12 dream!

 

[DaveF]

I think one thing worth considering for projector buyers in terms of HDR is just what kind of content you’re planning to watch. HDR was never part of the presentation of film-originated content, and wasn’t really part of digital-originated content until less than ten years ago. If the majority of what you watch is brand new material, by all means, prioritize the equipment that can best handle HDR. On the other hand, if you’re someone who spends most of their time watching content made in the 20th century, HDR isn’t really relevant to the vast majority of that material.

I don’t mean to come across as an old fuddy duddy but for a significant number of viewers, HDR just isn’t a vital part of what they watch.

I keep waiting to be blown away by HDR and it’s just not happening for me, and that’s one of the reasons I’m not in an overwhelming rush to upgrade to an HDR capable projector (my TV can do it, so I’m not totally without it).

Don’t mean to contradict my friend Sam in any way, but always good to consider exactly what you plan on watching when deciding which features to prioritize.

Upgrading from HD to 4K projector, colors noticeably improved. Saturation, particularly. Color banding I saw in HD material for some smooth color gradients (e.g. large blue sky) is eliminated. And the improved black floor and contrast of a newer, 4K projector is very nice.

HDR per se might not be a big deal — though even with projector limits I enjoy it on modern scifi. But benefits from UHD and a newer projector I found obvious once I had it in my home.