How we score Blog Advertise
  1. Attenborough.film
  2. Compare
  3. Luma 150 vs NeoPix Ace

Kodak Luma 150 vs Philips NeoPix Ace

What Luma 150 does better (1) and where NeoPix Ace wins (4) — every spec side by side.

Kodak Luma 150
Kodak · 2019Luma 150
1 advantage≈ US$290
vs
Philips NeoPix Ace
Philips · 2020NeoPix Ace
4 advantages≈ US$280

Why is Luma 150 better than NeoPix Ace?

  1. Largest image size150″ vs 120″+25%

Why is NeoPix Ace better than Luma 150?

  1. Resolution (on screen)854 × 480 (480p) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
  2. Native panel resolution854 × 480 (480p) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
  3. Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed)1,500:1 vs 3,000:12×
  4. HDMI inputs1 vs 22×
Specifications

Side by side

Kodak Luma 150Kodak Luma 150≈ US$290
Picture
Resolution (on screen)854 × 480 (480p)1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
Native panel resolution854 × 480 (480p)1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
Display technologyDLP—
Light source—LED
Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)150 lm—
Claimed brightness (LED / light-source lumens)—4,200 lm
Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed)1,500:13,000:1
Lens & placement
Throw ratio—1.4:1
Throw type—Standard throw (1.0:1 and longer)
Distance for a 100″ 16:9 image—3.1 m
Smallest image size—20″
Largest image size150″120″
Lens shift—None
Autofocus—No
Keystone correction—Yes
Automatic keystone correction—No
Smart & streaming
Wi-FiYesYes
Bluetooth—Yes
Connectivity
HDMI inputs12
USB portYesNo
Ethernet (LAN)NoNo
VGA inputNoYes
Audio outputNoNo
Battery, power & lifetime
Light source life—30,000 h
Design & noise
Colours—Silver, Black
To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare