P150-Projector

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

Now that my overinflated ego tells me that I am creating vastly superior images w/ my M6, and viewing them on a light box does not do them justice ;>)I am looking for a projector to see how good (or more likely #%@!*&%!) they really are. The Lieca P150 is in my price range but are there better choices in and around that price range (ie. Kinderman, Kodak etc)? Thank you for your thoughts.

-- Brooks (Bvonarx@comcast.net), March 17, 2002

Answers

There are some helpful threads under Projectors in the older threads section. Most people seem to feel the Leica projectors are better, though not necessarily the 150. Myself, I use Kodak Ektagraphic projectors upgraded with lenses from Buhl and Golden Navitar (and one of these days, a Leitz Colorplan which I scored for ten bucks yesterday; as soon as can get an adapter to make it fit the Ektagraphic). I use Ektagraphics because they are compatible with programmable dissolve units from Arion and Entree.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 17, 2002.

I have the P150 with colorplan lens. It works great in my smaller room, but others may prefer the more powerful bulbs in the upper units. The P300 is another one, but not available in the US. I think you could order one from Robert White in the UK, but it's not 120V. Then there are the top of the lines available at say B&H, for quite a bit more $. Depends on your needs I guess, my P150 does me fine. It has a linear tray though (may not be a prob.).

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), March 17, 2002.

Brooks - You saved and saved to get your M6 and to get whatever lenses you have for it. You have the best of the best, so why not save some more to get a top of the line Kodak Extagraphic or Leica and a top of the line projection lens. Oh, and use a matte screen. We made the mistake of buying the el-cheapo Kodak before saving for a better projector - - and we regretted it.

-- George C. Berger (gberger@his.com), March 17, 2002.

Brooks I have the IR version and I wish I got the standard as you can get a rmote with focus control. Whereas the IR just skips to the next slide and backwards. A great machine for the price. But there are better if you want to spend $$$

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 17, 2002.

Brooks, I have also recently had the same thought about getting the basic P150, feeling that if its made by Leica, it must be superior to about any other brand. It's also available at my local camera shop for about $280. However, I think I'll save up for one of the top-of- the line projectors, in the $1200 range, that seems to allow the use of the Kodak-style carousel slide trays - snce I already have an investment in that area. My dealer told me last week that he believes the Leica P150 is actually made by Kinderman in Europe, not Leica, though it has the basic Leica projector lens. He also said the $300 range Kodak projectors will be brighter than the P150. Also, when I look at the B&H catalog, their small photo/drawing of the basic Rollei 35mm slide projector looks exactly like the Leica P150. I'm not sure, but I bet that another firm indeed makes this basic projector, and that Rollei and Leica add their own lenses. I'm sure they nevertheless offer an acceptable product. Good luck.

-- Steve Brantley (superglidesport@mindspring.com), March 17, 2002.


I also own a P150 with a colorpan FF lens. Why on earth would anyone need a brighter projector (for home use). I'll admit it would not be practical to use this projector in an auditorium, but for home use, its great. Anything brighter would show slides as being brighter than the actual scene photographed. For home use, and as long as you can tolerate the straight slide trays, you can't beat it.

I also own two Kodak projectors. The lenses for them are 102mm 2.5 (Kodak) & 102-152mm 3.5-4.5(Kodak). The P150 is far superior in both brightness & image quality.

I just fail to see why anyone would want the image brighter than the P150 with colorpan delivers (in home use). The image would not look natural (ie overexposed).

If I am wrong, please do more than say I am wrong. Please EXPLAIN it to me so I may understand the difference.

Please, please educate me....:-0

-- Ron Snyder (STUDIO1401@AOL.COM), March 18, 2002.


The P150 is a medium quality consumer projector. The high end Leica projectors are made by Kodak. Here is my recommendation. Kodak Carousel 4600 (AF) projector and a Kodak Ektagraphic Select 90mm f2.5 professional lens. Made in Germany, metal barrel, multi-coated. Awesome and afordable.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), March 18, 2002.

Ron, it's a matter of screen size and reflectivity. The 150 watt bulb in the P150 ought to be bright enough for a screen of, say, 40 inches; especially if it has a high gain (silver/aluminum surface). Then again, a screen width of 50 inches, the screen area has increased by more than 150%. In that case a brighter projector might be beneficial. At a width of 56 inches, the area has now doubled, calling for 300 watts. I show most slides at a 72" width, and achieve very good screen brightness with the ELH 300W. bulb in my Ektagraphics. I use a matte white screen. My "wide screen' shots, projected at 96", benefit from a from using the ENG bulb, which gives 30% more output. The catch is that the ENG has a much shorter life.

There is also an ENH lamp, which lasts longer but only puts out about 65% of the ELH. Since you don't find your Kodak projectors to be very bright, I wonder if you are using the ENH lamp in them.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 18, 2002.


Ron

More power is always better. YOu can project the image to a larger size and keep the illumination up. You can expose your slides so they are slightly more saturated, thereby getting better control of highlight and shadow detail. Hence 250w is "better" than 150w. You can also always turn the 250w lamp down to an "economy" setting, whereas you cannot turn a 150w up. I suspect the P150 is better than the Kodaks of any hue in terms of image quality, if not necessarily in terms of ruggedness. Still I would not buy one - I would save up and get any of the older top of line "professional" Leica projectors as these have by far the best quality and they are rugged too. Unfortunately, Leica makes none of its projectors nowadays, unlike a few years ago when they had the P2002 available. I suspect that the P2002 is the last really good Leica projector - I have no experience of the RT series, but these are not made by Leica so I suspect they equate more to good Carousel type performance (fine but nothing to write home about, but with fancy electronics).

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.


I suspect that the Rollei projector is essentially exactly the same as the Leica projector but has Rollei optics and has different cosmetics. I don't really rate these (Rollei, Kindermann, Leica P150s etc. etc.) very highly. I think the Carousels are really quite ordinary - at least the German ones are well made though - they LOOK as though they should be good, but are still not to be compared to the best Leica projectors.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.


I have the top-line Leica projector, the RT-s, with the Super Colorplan Pro lens and it is a great machine...much quieter than my Ektagraphic III...but the AF is still iffy, the slides still pop, you still can't get the corners and center in focus together. My advice is to get a nice Kodak carousel, and a Navitar or Schneider lens.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 18, 2002.

Jay, I think the problems you mention can only be solved by glass- mounting the slides. Slides do pop. Apparently it makes little difference who made the projector. The only other think I can think of is to blow refrigerated air through the gate. I use Wess mounts in 80-slide carousel/Ektagraphic trays.

Ditto on the Navitar lenses. But I tried a couple of Schneider perspective control lenses, and found them very soft. They were markdowns; maybe they were defective.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 18, 2002.


To my mind Jay's experience says it all about most projectors and is my experience with Carousels too. I agree with Bob that glass mounting is the only way out for truly flat projection, but my CA2502 and P2000 are way ahead of anything else in terms of coping with these issues. I have also been impressed with the CA2500, and the earlier Color 250s. I think there is no projector made that is the equal of these -- and this is from a good degree of testing (to the infuriation of salesmen everywhere). I find that if you rest your slide magazines on top of the projector before you put it in the rack then popping is greatly reduced. The slides need to be warmed in advance so they pop before they are in the gate.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.

I bought the Pradovit 150 and put a super colorplan on it. At some point I will upgrade, though for the three years I have had it, I am convinced it was the right way to go -- ie cheap projector and expensive lens. But the flimsy, rackety, 150 does start to annoy. I am now looking at a 300.

-- Martin Davidson (Martin@foxcombe1.demon.co.uk), March 18, 2002.

The P-150 is a good deal at about $240 even with the Hektor lens. There was a noticeable improvement in quality over my old Kodak carousel system. The biggest drawback is the tray system which does not prevent spillage. You have to be pretty careful with the straight trays regardles of the type; i.e.LKM, etc.

-- Joe Barbano (joseph.barbano@symmetron.com), March 18, 2002.


I did almost exactly what Martin has done; I have a P300IR with a Super Colorplan. The image quality is about as good as it gets (can't imagine how it could be) but the projector is a rattly little thing, though reliable and functional enough.

I have an older RT300 from the late 1970s, a Carousel style Leitz, and it is a lot more solidly made and finished. I understand that the expensive ($1000+) RT-s and RT-m are similarly well built.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), March 18, 2002.


I mean, I can't imagine how the picture could be better, of course...

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), March 18, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ