How we score Blog Advertise
  1. Attenborough.film
  2. Compare
  3. Luma 75 vs NeoPix Ace

Kodak Luma 75 vs Philips NeoPix Ace

What Luma 75 does better (1) and where NeoPix Ace wins (3) — every spec side by side.

Kodak Luma 75
Kodak · 2019Luma 75
1 advantage≈ US$240
vs
Philips NeoPix Ace
Philips · 2020NeoPix Ace
3 advantages≈ US$280

Why is Luma 75 better than NeoPix Ace?

  1. Audio outputYes · NeoPix Ace: No

Why is NeoPix Ace better than Luma 75?

  1. Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed)1,300:1 vs 3,000:12.3×
  2. HDMI inputs1 vs 22×
  3. Largest image size80″ vs 120″+50%
Specifications

Side by side

Kodak Luma 75Kodak Luma 75≈ US$240
Picture
Resolution (on screen)—1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
Native panel resolution—1920 × 1080 (Full HD)
Display technologyDLP—
Light source—LED
Brightness (ANSI / ISO lumens)75 lm—
Claimed brightness (LED / light-source lumens)—4,200 lm
Contrast ratio (dynamic / claimed)1,300:13,000:1
Gaming
Maximum refresh rate60 Hz—
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 size80″120″
Lens shift—None
Autofocus—No
Keystone correction—Yes
Automatic keystone correction—No
Smart & streaming
Wi-Fi—Yes
Bluetooth—Yes
Connectivity
HDMI inputs12
USB portYesNo
Ethernet (LAN)NoNo
VGA inputNoYes
Audio outputYesNo
Battery, power & lifetime
Power consumption4 W—
Light source life30,000 h30,000 h
Design & noise
Fan noise30 dB—
Fan noise (eco mode)16 dB—
Weight0.14 kg—
Width80 mm—
Height20 mm—
Depth80 mm—
ColoursWhite, SilverSilver, Black
To compare: 0up to 4 models
Compare