# Mitsubishi Adds 92-Inch 3D DLP Rear Projection



## spartanstew

LAS VEGAS - Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America (MDEA) revealed at International CES here Tuesday that it will add a massive 92-inch screen size to its 2011 DLP 3D 1080p rear projection TV line in addition to new models in the 60, 65, 73 and 82 inch screen sizes.

Mitsubishi is demonstrating the 92-inch set in Central Hall booth 9021 during the show this week.

More HERE


----------



## Stuart Sweet

Moved to the HD Displays forum.


----------



## Hutchinshouse

DLP? Wow, I thought that technology was toast. That TV must weigh 300 lbs.

Does it come with a wall mount? :lol:


----------



## RAD

Hutchinshouse said:


> DLP? Wow, I thought that technology was toast. That TV must weigh 300 lbs.


Nope, still alive and well and even had been doing 3D for a few years

DLP sets also don't weigh much at all since most of it is just air. My 3 yr old Mits 73" is still going strong and loving it.


----------



## Hutchinshouse

RAD said:


> Nope, still alive and well and even had been doing 3D for a few years
> 
> DLP sets also don't weigh much at all since most of it is just air. My 3 yr old Mits 73" is still going strong and loving it.


My first tv was a Mits 55" It was a workhorse. I think it was around 175 lbs.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA

Ill take 2


----------



## RAD

Hutchinshouse said:


> My first tv was a Mits 55" It was a workhorse. I think it was around 175 lbs.


The 82" Mits DLP is 140 lbs.


----------



## Hutchinshouse

RAD said:


> The 82" Mits DLP is 140 lbs.


Not too bad.


----------



## Nick

All well and good but does the remote have a Netflix button.


----------



## BattleZone

I loathe rear-projection TVs, especially Mitsubishis, as more than half the time I encounter one in the field, it is at least partially broken. Plus, Mitsus have some of the worst setup and menu systems ever made. Blech.


----------



## fluffybear

So much for that article I read this morning which said 3-D was dead and manufacturers were not going to pushing it as much.



> 3D Is Dead
> CES is still first and foremost about television. Last year, the buzz was about 3D TVs, but so far they've failed to catch the public's attention. The main reason is that the 3D movie experience doesn't translate well from the theater to the living room. Compounding the problem, those darn goggles are awkward and expensive and there's hardly any 3D programming to watch. So it's easy to understand why it's been a failure.
> Most of the television makers have given up the 3D talk (or at least relegated it to the bottom of their features lists). There will be some demonstrations of sets that work with so-called passive 3D technology -- which means the disposable glasses will do, rather than expensive active ones. Also on tap, smaller sets that don't require glasses. However, neither tech is as good as the expensive goggles, so I don't expect it to garner much interest.


Full Article


----------



## RAD

An interesting read on 3D and internet connected TV's and why the push at http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=19771374&postcount=63399.


> After a period of strong growth, sales of televisions are slowing. To counter this, TV makers are trying to persuade consumers to buy new sets by promoting new technologies. At this week's Consumer Electronics Show, which opens Thursday, every TV maker will be crowing about things like 3-D and Internet connections - features that have not generated much excitement so far.
> 
> Unit sales of liquid-crystal and plasma displays were up 2.9 percent in 2010 from the previous year, according to figures from the market researcher DisplaySearch. That is tiny compared with the gains of more than 20 percent in each of the prior three years.


So while 3D and internet aren't taking off as some have expected guess the CE manufactures are looking to to them to drive new sales growth.


----------



## Davenlr

They want sales growth, come out with an affordable LED tv. REAL LED's. Can you imagine the contrast ratio? Wonder what the holdup is. They cant make them small enough, or package them close enough together to make a panel?


----------



## BattleZone

Davenlr said:


> They want sales growth, come out with an affordable LED tv. REAL LED's. Can you imagine the contrast ratio? Wonder what the holdup is. They cant make them small enough, or package them close enough together to make a panel?


"Real LEDs" are huge, way to big to have 3 of them make up a pixel.

What you want, and what TVs in 5-10 years will all be made from, is OLEDs (organic LEDs). Many SMALL screens, such as in cell phones*, are already using OLED screens, but much like LCD screens 15 years ago, they are very expensive to make in LARGE sizes because a couple of flaws will make a large screen unsellable. But as yield improves and production rises, prices will fall to the point where other technologies will be left behind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_light-emitting_diode

Many Android phones use AMOLED (active-matrix OLED) screens, for example.


----------



## Tom Robertson

Unfortunately, after their "Promise", I won't buy Mitsubishi. Screw me once, shame on Mits. I won't let them shame on me.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Rob

Tom Robertson said:


> Unfortunately, after their "Promise", I won't buy Mitsubishi. Screw me once, shame on Mits. I won't let them shame on me.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


I got burn on MITS as their bulbs kept burning out. And then some major part went out (I forget, some light gun thingy). Luckily I had an extended warranty from Frys and they gave me a Samsung Plasma, I am real happy with to replace it.


----------



## Davenlr

BattleZone said:


> "Real LEDs" are huge, way to big to have 3 of them make up a pixel.
> 
> What you want, and what TVs in 5-10 years will all be made from, is OLEDs (organic LEDs).
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_light-emitting_diode
> 
> Many Android phones use AMOLED (active-matrix OLED) screens, for example.


After reading that link, I defiantly do NOT want OLED. Damaged by UV light? Damaged by moisture. Blue fades much faster than green which fades much faster than red, subject to burn in... Its like we are going back to the cathode ray tube and all its problems. If we can put what used to take up an entire floor of an office building into a single chip, I cant believe we cannot make a tri colored led small enough to make up a panel for a TV.

Add to that, I heard, and cannot find the link, that Sony, which actually was producing a very expensive ~12" Oled monitor scrapped the program. If true, that isnt a very good sign.


----------



## Davenlr

Back in the day, I paid like $1200 for a Mitsubishi SVHS deck, and its power supply burned out, and the heads started scratching the tapes... after a year and a half, and NO ONE had any parts to repair it, Mitsubishi said it couldnt be repaired, and the local shop told me it would cost more to fix it than buy a new one. Ill never buy another Mitsubishi product.


----------



## RAD

Tom Robertson said:


> Unfortunately, after their "Promise", I won't buy Mitsubishi. Screw me once, shame on Mits. I won't let them shame on me.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


Yea, got burned on that also (I did cancel the install once I came to my senses).

This time though I think they went over and beyond, they didn't ever promise they come out with hardware to allow for BD and cable/DBS receivers to connect to their 3D DLP's and priced it reasonably. I've got 3972 hours on the original buld, my BIL has the same set and last summer when I looked he had over 9000 hours on his and when time to replace it's only $100.

When it comes time to replace/upgrade my WD-73735 I have no problem with going with Mits again.


----------



## B Newt

Rob said:


> I got burn on MITS as their bulbs kept burning out. And then some major part went out (I forget, some light gun thingy). Luckily I had an extended warranty from Frys and they gave me a Samsung Plasma, I am real happy with to replace it.


 I thought they come with laser projectors now?


----------



## BattleZone

Davenlr said:


> After reading that link, I defiantly do NOT want OLED. Damaged by UV light? Damaged by moisture. Blue fades much faster than green which fades much faster than red, subject to burn in... Its like we are going back to the cathode ray tube and all its problems. If we can put what used to take up an entire floor of an office building into a single chip, I cant believe we cannot make a tri colored led small enough to make up a panel for a TV.
> 
> Add to that, I heard, and cannot find the link, that Sony, which actually was producing a very expensive ~12" Oled monitor scrapped the program. If true, that isnt a very good sign.


20 years ago, a very similar list of problems were true of "large" LCD and plasma displays. OLED is still a very new technology, and is certainly not ready for prime-time for TVs. Sony's 11" TV was a technology demonstrator, not something expected to compete in the normal market.

Eventually, you won't even buy a TV. Instead, you'll have OLED film "rolled" on to the wall, and the whole wall will be a display, which will be able to be made into "sub-displays" as needed. You won't need to paint or buy artwork either, as that can all be electronic...


----------



## BobaBird

This photo shows just how big it is. The picture actually looked quite good, guess my camera caught it in mid frame-change.


----------



## RAD

The had trouble getting my 73" up the staircase so I won't be able to get one of those babies, dang


----------



## bobukcat

B Newt said:


> I thought they come with laser projectors now?


They make a line of Laser powered DLPs but those are quite expensive (for DLP) and aren't what you'll see in the big-box retailers, I'm not sure where you would actually find one. I believe the base line is still powered by HID bulbs that you need to replace but they may have all switched to LED light sources by now, I'm not sure.

After all the problems I've had with my Mits DLP I'd never consider buying another one - unless maybe the extended warranty was thrown in, and even then probably not.


----------



## olguy

My Mits experience has been very good. In '88 we paid more for the Mits 36" than we paid last year for the 82". The 36" was the main TV until 1998. It then was the bedroom TV for 5 or 6 more years before it got set out by the curb. I do agree that the Mits menus leave a bit to be desired. But at least I don't have to get into it very often.

Now, let's see... We have about 4' on either side of the 82" so, yep. Have room to replace it with a 92". If she'll get rid of the dresser in the bedroom the 82" will fit in there.


----------



## kstevens

I have one of the 75" Laservues and the picture is simply fantastic. It only draws around 100 watts. I can't complain about it at all.

Ken


----------



## BobaBird

Sorry, the picture I posted was actually of a much larger display at the front of the Mitsubishi booth. I don't have a replacement shot of the 92".


----------

