- Attenborough.film
- Compare
- Luma 350 vs NeoPix Ultra 2
Kodak Luma 350 vs Philips NeoPix Ultra 2
What Luma 350 does better (2) and where NeoPix Ultra 2 wins (5) — every spec side by side.
vs
Why is Luma 350 better than NeoPix Ultra 2?
- Largest image size200″ vs 120″+67%
- Weight0.73 kg vs 1.2 kg+64%
Why is NeoPix Ultra 2 better than Luma 350?
- Resolution (on screen)854 × 480 (480p) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
- Native panel resolution854 × 480 (480p) vs 1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
- Internal storage8 GB vs 16 GB2×
- HDMI inputs1 vs 22×
- Audio outputNo · Luma 350: Yes
Specifications
Side by side
| Picture | ||
| Resolution (on screen) | 854 × 480 (480p) | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) |
| Native panel resolution | 854 × 480 (480p) | 1920 × 1080 (Full HD) |
| Light source | — | LED |
| Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens) | 350 lm | — |
| Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed) | — | 3,000:1 |
| 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 size | 200″ | 120″ |
| Lens shift | — | None |
| Autofocus | — | No |
| Keystone correction | — | Yes |
| Automatic keystone correction | — | No |
| Sound | ||
| Built-in speakers (total output) | — | 10 W |
| Smart & streaming | ||
| Smart platform | Android (not TV-certified) | — |
| Built-in smart platform | Yes | Yes |
| Netflix (officially licensed) | — | Yes |
| Wi-Fi | Yes | Yes |
| Bluetooth | Yes | Yes |
| Internal storage | 8 GB | 16 GB |
| 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 | — | 100 W |
| Light source life | — | 30,000 h |
| Design & noise | ||
| Weight | 0.73 kg | 1.2 kg |
| Width | — | 220 mm |
| Height | — | 90 mm |
| Depth | — | 170 mm |
| Colours | White | Silver, Black |
