- Attenborough.film
- Compare
- QT12 vs Orbital IN0061SL
Acer QT12 vs InFocus Orbital IN0061SL
What QT12 does better (1) and where Orbital IN0061SL wins (5) — every spec side by side.
vs
6.8Picture9.0
Why is QT12 better than Orbital IN0061SL?
- Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)6,500 lm vs 4,000 lm+62%
Why is Orbital IN0061SL better than QT12?
- Resolution (on screen)1280 × 720 (HD) vs 3840 × 2160 (4K UHD)
- Light source life6,500 h vs 15,000 h2.3×
- Native panel resolution1280 × 720 (HD) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
- HDMI inputs1 vs 22×
- Audio outputNo · QT12: Yes
Specifications
Side by side
| Picture | ||
| Resolution (on screen) | 1280 × 720 (HD) | 3840 × 2160 (4K UHD) |
| Native panel resolution | 1280 × 720 (HD) | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) |
| 4K method | — | 4K by pixel shifting |
| Display technology | LCD (single panel) | DLP |
| Light source | LED | Laser |
| Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens) | 6,500 lm | 4,000 lm |
| Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed) | — | 1,000,000:1 |
| HDR support | — | Yes |
| HDR formats | — | HLG |
| 3D playback | — | Yes |
| Lens & placement | ||
| Throw ratio | — | 1.21:1 |
| Throw ratio (zoomed in) | — | 2.59:1 |
| Throw type | — | Standard throw (1.0:1 and longer) |
| Distance for a 100″ 16:9 image | — | 2.68 m |
| Optical zoom | — | 1.3× |
| Lens shift | — | None |
| Autofocus | — | No |
| Keystone correction | — | Yes |
| Automatic keystone correction | — | No |
| Sound | ||
| Built-in speakers (total output) | — | 10 W |
| Smart & streaming | ||
| Wi-Fi | — | Yes |
| Connectivity | ||
| HDMI inputs | 1 | 2 |
| USB port | Yes | Yes |
| Ethernet (LAN) | No | No |
| VGA input | No | Yes |
| Audio output | No | Yes |
| Battery, power & lifetime | ||
| Power consumption | — | 300 W |
| Light source life | 6,500 h | 15,000 h |
| Design & noise | ||
| Fan noise | — | 27 dB |
| Colours | White | White |
