- Attenborough.film
- Compare
- QF12 vs Luma 75
AOpen QF12 vs Kodak Luma 75
What QF12 does better (3) and where Luma 75 wins (4) — every spec side by side.
Dimensions
Size comparison
QF12Luma 75
| QF12 | Luma 75 | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height | 92 mm | 20 mm | +72 mm |
| Width | 232 mm | 80 mm | +152 mm |
| Depth | 168 mm | 80 mm | +88 mm |
| Weight | 1.3 kg | 0.1 kg | +1.2 kg |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is QF12 better than Luma 75?
- Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)100 lm vs 75 lm+33%
- Light source life50,000 h vs 30,000 h+67%
- Largest image size150″ vs 80″+88%
Why is Luma 75 better than QF12?
- Power consumption65 W vs 4 W16.2×
- Weight1.3 kg vs 0.14 kg9.3×
- Fan noise33 dB vs 30 dB+10%
- Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed)1,000:1 vs 1,300:1+30%
Specifications
Side by side
| Picture | ||
| Resolution (on screen) | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) | — |
| Native panel resolution | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) | — |
| Display technology | — | DLP |
| Light source | LED | — |
| Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens) | 100 lm | 75 lm |
| Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed) | 1,000:1 | 1,300:1 |
| Gaming | ||
| Maximum refresh rate | — | 60 Hz |
| Lens & placement | ||
| Throw ratio | 1.3:1 | — |
| Throw type | Standard throw (1.0:1 and longer) | — |
| Distance for a 100″ 16:9 image | 2.88 m | — |
| Largest image size | 150″ | 80″ |
| Lens shift | None | — |
| Sound | ||
| Built-in speakers (total output) | 5 W | — |
| Smart & streaming | ||
| Wi-Fi | Yes | — |
| Bluetooth | Yes | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| HDMI inputs | 1 | 1 |
| USB port | Yes | Yes |
| Ethernet (LAN) | No | No |
| VGA input | No | No |
| Audio output | Yes | Yes |
| Battery, power & lifetime | ||
| Power consumption | 65 W | 4 W |
| Light source life | 50,000 h | 30,000 h |
| Design & noise | ||
| Fan noise | 33 dB | 30 dB |
| Fan noise (eco mode) | — | 16 dB |
| Weight | 1.3 kg | 0.14 kg |
| Width | 232 mm | 80 mm |
| Height | 92 mm | 20 mm |
| Depth | 168 mm | 80 mm |
| Colours | White, Gold | White, Silver |
