UST laser TV~$2,399

Formovie

Formovie Theater Premium

Name: Formovie Theater Premium
Brand: Formovie
Price: 2399 USD
Availability: InStock

A tri-laser UST tuned for a dark room rather than a bright one: 2,200 ISO lumens, Dolby Vision, and a Bowers & Wilkins audio system. It is the laser TV that film-first buyers tend to shortlist, at the cost of daytime punch.

Check price on Amazon

We may earn a commission. Price and availability on Amazon’s site may differ.

Approx. price

~$2,399

snapshot, not a live price

Brightness

2,200

ISO 21118

100-inch screen at

18 in

lens to screen, estimated from the throw ratio

Light source

Tri-laser

25,000 h rated

Best for: A film-first laser TV in a room that can be dimmed

Specifications

Type: UST laser TV
Imaging tech: DLP
Native resolution: 4K pixel-shift
Max signal: 4K60
Max refresh: 60 Hz
Light source: Tri-laser
Light source life: 25,000 hours
Throw ratio: 0.21:1
Zoom: Fixed lens
Native contrast: 3,000:1
HDR formats: Dolby Vision, HDR10+, HLG
3D: Full HD 3D
Built-in streaming: Google TV
Speakers: 30 W total
HDMI: 3 × HDMI 2.1
Fan noise: 28 dB
Weight: 21.6 lb
Released: 2024

Features

RGB tri-laser with Dolby Vision
Bowers & Wilkins 2x15 W audio
Google TV built in
Three HDMI 2.1 inputs
28 dB operation
25,000-hour laser

What it does well

Tri-laser color with both Dolby Vision and HDR10+ at well under $3,000
Bowers & Wilkins tuning on the built-in audio rather than a generic driver pair
28 dB is the second-quietest laser TV here, behind AWOL's LTV-3000 Pro
Three HDMI 2.1 inputs and licensed Google TV
Measured to ISO 21118 rather than the looser ANSI method

What it gives up

2,200 ISO lumens is modest for a laser TV — a bright room will defeat it
3,000:1 native contrast, so an ALR screen is still required
60 Hz, with no published input lag
Formovie's US service network is thinner than Hisense's or Samsung's

The two lists above are read off manufacturer specifications and published measurements, not from owner reports. Where owner discussion has been collected it appears separately below, so the two are never mistaken for each other.

Throw calculator

Worked from this projector’s published throw ratio of 0.21:1. Estimates: a real install loses a little to lens offset, and zoom ranges are quoted at the extremes of the lens.

Lens to screen

feet

16:9 diagonal

656 in

Throw at a glance

Screen at 8 ft: 524 in
Screen at 10 ft: 656 in
Screen at 14 ft: 918 in
100-inch screen at: 18 in
120-inch screen at: 22 in

16:9 diagonals, estimated from the published throw ratio: image width = distance ÷ throw ratio, diagonal = width ÷ 0.8716. The maths.

Compare the Formovie Theater Premium

Where these specs come from

https://www.projectorcentral.com/formovie-theater_premium.htm

The brightness figure is measured to a nine-point screen standard and is comparable with the rest of the catalog.

What owners say

This projector appears in owner discussion mostly as a candidate rather than a possession, which is itself the story: it went on sale with very little independent testing behind it, and owners repeatedly ask why nobody has reviewed it. The brand's previous model is the reason they are interested — it is widely described as having set the price-to-picture benchmark for tri-laser ultra-short-throws.

When owners shortlist for a dark room, this lands in the top three every time alongside the other two tri-laser models at the price. What they cite is contrast and a cinematic image rather than brightness, and several who are sensitive to the rainbow artifact note the tri-laser engine has no colour wheel to produce it.

Two practical points come up before purchase. Input lag is disputed — the maker quotes 18 to 20 ms at 4K/60 while some owners report an automatic low-latency handshake problem leaving it nearer 35 ms. And warranty terms differ sharply by market: owners in several countries face two years with owner-paid return shipping here against five years with shipping covered from the largest rival, which has decided the purchase for more than one of them.

What owners like

Owners shortlisting ultra-short-throws for a dark room put this in the top three every time, alongside the two other tri-laser models at this price
Contrast and a cinematic image are what owners cite, and the brand's previous model is widely described as having set the value benchmark in this category
Owners report it is notably quiet, which matters in a living room where the cabinet sits at ear level
It is available through ordinary retail rather than direct import only, which owners weigh against the smaller crowdfunded rivals
Owners prone to the rainbow artifact note that the tri-laser engine has no colour wheel, which is part of why it appears on their shortlists

Common complaints

Owners repeatedly note the shortage of independent testing — the model was on sale for months with almost no review coverage, which several call the main reason to hesitate
Input lag is disputed: the manufacturer quotes 18 to 20 ms at 4K/60 and some owners report an automatic low-latency handshake problem that leaves it nearer 35 ms
Warranty comes up as a decisive disadvantage against Hisense in some markets — two years with owner-paid return shipping against five years with shipping covered
Owners comparing brightness figures have to convert between standards, and note this one is quoted in ISO lumens where its closest rival quotes ANSI

Questions owners ask about the Formovie Theater Premium

How does it compare with the other tri-laser laser TVs at this price?

Owners shortlist the same three models and describe the picture as close. This one is positioned on contrast and a cinematic image rather than brightness; the largest rival is brighter and better supported; the third is the dark-room specialist. Owners in bright rooms go elsewhere.

What is its actual input lag?

Disputed. The manufacturer quotes 18 to 20 ms at 4K/60 and some measurements agree; other owners report an automatic low-latency mode handshake problem that leaves it nearer 35 ms. Owners who game should treat the lower number as unconfirmed until they have tested their own signal chain.

Why is there so little review coverage?

Owners noticed the same thing and raised it directly: the model was on sale for months with almost no independent testing. Coverage has since appeared from European outlets. Owners treat the thin review record as the main reason to hesitate rather than as evidence of a problem.

How do its lumens compare with rivals quoting a different standard?

Carefully. This is quoted in ISO lumens and its closest rival in ANSI lumens, and owners doing the comparison apply a rough conversion because ANSI figures run higher than ISO for the same hardware. Comparing the two numbers directly overstates the rival's advantage.

What about warranty?

It varies by market and owners treat it as a real differentiator. In several countries the coverage here is two years with return shipping at the owner's expense, against five years with shipping covered from the largest rival — a difference that has decided the purchase for owners who otherwise preferred this picture.