Can a projector replace a TV?

[Danzilla31]

I'm a big fan of projectors period

Once you go big you never go back when your viewing content

As you can see I have one both in the bedroom and theater room. The one in the bedroom is an older 1080p epson model which was very good and I got it for a great price. I didn't care about 4k because at those distances and because I only use it for occasional viewing I didn't need 4k

Having a pull down screen in the living room when it's dark in the evening to watch content on a bigger screen is not a bad way to go. I have friends that have done that and they get the best of both worlds TV in the day big screen at night

 

[Danzilla31]

Also most standalone streamers like a roku, apple 4k tv, or a Nvidia TV shield pro will work way better then they're counterpart that are built into the TV

 

[Gypsophila]

I typically don't suggest without more specific information about the budget, the expectations, and the environment it is going into.

Projectors are not a one-size-fits-all scenario.

Ultra-short-throw projectors are notoriously difficult to setup accurately for a screen and typically only support specific screen sizes. Their quality is often quite good, but there are potentially better looking models for similar money that are easier to maintain. But, I would typically recommend a solid state light source, if budget allows for it, in a standard home setup. Standard throw models, like the BenQ X3000i are excellent.

Still, there are many who want to do this for less money, and Epson has great models with a fair bit of brightness and LONG lamp run time. This means that for $1,500 or so, you may see 30,000 hours of use from a LAMP-based projector, while it would run $3,000+ to get a ultra-short-throw model to do the same.

Yes, budget is a problem that needs to be considered. The selection and setting of the projector or the screen itself is an extra expense spent on entertainment. If there is enough budget, it is not necessary to choose an ultra-short-throw projector with a laser light source. The problem, if the budget is not enough, an ordinary home scene projector is enough

Just like the Dangbei Mars Pro telephoto projector, the price around $1600 is acceptable to most people

 

[CRMS]

>The problem that with a projector you loose the SMART functions of a TV.
Yes. I don't know why TVs don't have an HDMI Out socket, just like the Audio out. And picture dim just like audio mute.
It would cost cts/pence to build in on the production line.
I use a Roku 4K into an HD Fury Vertex switcher which splits 4K to Sony proj and Audio to AVR.

 

[BMXTRIX]

>The problem that with a projector you loose the SMART functions of a TV.
Yes. I don't know why TVs don't have an HDMI Out socket, just like the Audio out. And picture dim just like audio mute.
It would cost cts/pence to build in on the production line.
I use a Roku 4K into an HD Fury Vertex switcher which splits 4K to Sony proj and Audio to AVR.

Because it's pointless and wasteful for 99.9% of buyers.

Most people use a projector as a stand alone device in a room.

Most people use a TV as a stand alone device in a room.

The original statement that you 'loose' (lose?) smart functionality is missing the reality that 'smart' functionality in TVs is generally garbage and a $30 Roku Stick is far superior.

Why would you use HDMI out of a TV? To get the sub-$30 'smart' functionality out of it to send to ANOTHER display? REALLY pointless for the vast majority.

Most TVs have ARC, and now eARC, along with optical audio output to connect to audio components easily.
Any modern AVR has a 4K compliant (or better) set of HDMI inputs on it that passes video on to the display without problem.

The headache of dealing with older AV gear and modern sources is certainly problematic, but it is a niche issue and there are solutions. Certainly buying something like the Vertex is one of them, but so is buying a 4K compliant AV receiver.