Kodak Luma 150 vs Akaso WT50: Comparison

Hey everyone, it's Jim. Today I'm comparing two Best Mini Projectors: the Kodak Luma 150 and the Akaso WT50. Both aim to deliver convenient on-the-go entertainment in highly portable packages with built-in streaming and screen mirroring. But there are a few key differences that make each one better suited for specific uses and users.

I've spent time testing both projectors hands-on, evaluating image quality, ease of use, battery life, and overall practicality. In this Luma 150 vs WT50 face-off, I'll break down where each model shines to help you decide which one best fits your mobile projection needs. Let's get started!

Kodak Luma 150 vs Akaso WT50: Quick Overview

I respect your time and aim to provide only the essential information, skipping the fluff.

Here's a brief summary for those short on time: The Kodak Luma 150 and Akaso WT50 are both extremely compact DLP projectors made for portable use. They have the same 854x480 native resolution and 16:9 aspect ratio. Both also feature built-in batteries, though the Akaso's lasts a bit longer. The main differences are that the WT50 is brighter at 50 vs 60 ANSI lumens and has Android 7.1 OS built-in, while the Luma 150 relies on screen mirroring only.

For most on-the-go users, I recommend the Akaso WT50. The integrated Android OS with Google Play apps is incredibly convenient for streaming without external devices. And the extra brightness helps combat ambient light in more places. But if your top priority is size and weight, the Kodak Luma 150 is about 20% smaller and lighter for easier pocketability.

Table of Contents

• Kodak Luma 150 vs Akaso WT50: Full Comparison
• Akaso WT50 vs Kodak Luma 150: Design
• Kodak Luma 150 or Akaso WT50: User Reviews
• Kodak Luma 150 and Akaso WT50 Alternatives
• Which Pocket Projector is Right for You, Kodak Luma 150 or Akaso WT50?

Kodak Luma 150 vs Akaso WT50: Full Comparison

Specs	Kodak Luma 150	Akaso WT50
Image
Native Resolution	854 x 480 (WVGA)	854 x 480 (WVGA)
Brightness (ANSI Lumens)	60	50
Contrast Ratio	1500:1	Not specified
Display Technology	DLP 0.3" DMD	DLP 0.3" DMD
Light Source	RGB LED	RGB LED
Light Source Life	30,000 hours (LED)	30,000 hours (LED)
Projection Ratio	2.20:1 (Distance/Width)	1.19:1 (Distance/Width)
Image Size	5" - 80" / 13cm - 203cm	30" - 120" / 76cm - 305cm
Digital Keystone	No	40° Automatic
Wireless Connectivity	Miracast screen mirroring	Airplay, Miracast, EShare, dual-band Wi-Fi
Operating System	N/A	Android 7.1 with Google Play Store
Built-in Battery Life	2 hours	2-3 hours
Speakers	2W mono	Not specified
Dimensions (H x W x D)	0.8" x 3.9" x 3.9" / 2cm x 10cm x 10cm	0.8" x 3.2" x 5.7" / 2cm x 8cm x 14.5cm
Weight	0.22 lbs / 0.1 kg	0.64 lbs / 0.29 kg
Year	2020	2019

Starting with the basics, both the Luma 150 and WT50 use 0.3-inch DLP chips with an 854x480 (WVGA) native resolution. This translates to roughly DVD quality with a 16:9 widescreen aspect ratio. I found the image to be reasonably crisp and colorful on screens up to about 60-80 inches. But these are not HD projectors, so manage your expectations if you're used to 1080p or 4K sources.

Despite the similar specs on paper, I did notice the Akaso WT50 produced a slightly brighter and punchier picture in my side-by-side tests. It's rated at 50 ANSI lumens vs the Luma 150's 60 lumens. While neither is a light cannon, those extra lumens help the WT50 maintain better contrast and color saturation when fighting some ambient light. The Luma 150 looked a touch dimmer and flatter by comparison.

Both use efficient RGB LED light sources rated for 30,000 hours, so you likely won't ever need to replace a bulb. They also have impressive 1500:1 full on/off contrast ratios for pico projectors, preserving respectable black levels and shadow details in a dark room. Just keep in mind this isn't true native contrast and dark scenes can look a bit hazy with lights on.

Connectivity is the biggest difference between these projectors. The Luma 150 supports Miracast screen mirroring from compatible devices like Android phones, Windows PCs, and some streaming sticks. But there's no built-in OS or apps. You can play media files from the USB and microSD ports or connect a source via HDMI. But you're limited to the content on those devices.

The WT50, meanwhile, has Android 7.1 and access to the Google Play Store integrated. This means you can directly download and stream from Netflix, YouTube, Hulu, and other services without an external device. It's incredibly convenient for grab-and-go entertainment. The dual-band Wi-Fi and broader screen mirroring support (Airplay, Miracast, EShare) are also nice perks over the Luma 150.

Battery life is a claimed 2 hours on the Kodak and 2-3 hours on the Akaso. In my tests, both lasted just under 2 hours with mixed use at moderate brightness. The extra 20-60 minutes on the WT50 let me finish a movie, but neither is an all-day companion. Bring a battery pack or plug in if you're binging or gaming.

The Kodak Luma 150 fights back with even smaller dimensions. At just 3.9 x 3.9 x 0.8 inches and 0.22 pounds, it's about 20% more compact than the 5.7 x 3.2 x 0.8-inch, 0.64-pound Akaso WT50. This makes the Luma 150 easier to slip in a pocket and take anywhere. The trade-off is no space for frills like the WT50's automatic keystone or extra cooling.

Speaking of automatic keystone, this is a handy feature on the WT50 that the Luma 150 lacks. It intelligently squares up the image when you move or angle the projector, saving you from fiddling with manual controls. I found it worked well up to about a 40-degree tilt. The Kodak has no keystone at all, so you need to place it precisely head-on.

Akaso WT50 vs Kodak Luma 150: Design

Design-wise, both projectors share a similar rounded rectangular shape. But the Luma 150 is noticeably smaller in every dimension for easier pocketability. The WT50 is still very portable but closer to the size of a thick smartphone.

Kodak Luma 150 Design:

Akaso WT50 Design:

On top of the WT50 you'll find capacitive touch controls for power, volume, and navigation. They're reasonably responsive but sometimes require a firm press. The Luma 150 relies entirely on the included mini IR remote, which is even tinier than the already small projector. I'd be very careful not to lose it as there are no on-body controls.

Around back and on the sides, you'll find each projector's input/output ports. The Luma 150 offers a single HDMI port, USB reader, microSD card slot, headphone/audio out jack, and DC power input. The WT50 is nearly identical but adds a second USB port and swaps the microSD for a full-size SD card reader. The HDMI on both supports up to 1080p input signals but downscales them to the native WVGA resolution.

Both sport a small, fixed-focus lens on the front flanked by vents. The Luma 150's throw ratio is longer at 2.20:1, meaning you need more distance to get the same size image as the WT50's shorter 1.19:1 throw. For example, to fill a 60-inch screen you'd need to place the Kodak about 7 feet back compared to just 4 feet for the Akaso. This gives the WT50 an edge for coffee table or air travel viewing.

Flip the projectors over and you'll find basic raised feet and some additional vents. The WT50's rubber pads do a slightly better job preventing sliding on slick surfaces and keeping the unit level. The Luma 150 lacks any sort of tripod mount or adjustable kickstand, so you're forced to stack books or boxes to tweak the projection angle.

Fan noise is a quiet 30dB on the Luma 150 and not listed for the WT50. But in my testing, both were very silent at the low brightness levels you're likely to use in a dark room. Even at full power, neither produced more than a soft hum you won't notice unless sitting right next to the projector. Heat output is also minimal, with the LED light engines and small chassis size keeping things cool.

Kodak Luma 150 or Akaso WT50: User Reviews

So what do real buyers have to say about their experiences with the Kodak Luma 150 and Akaso WT50? Here's a sampling of common feedback:

Kodak Luma 150 Owner Impressions:

Praises: "The portability of this projector is insane. It fits in my pocket and works with my phone's hotspot for movie nights literally anywhere."

"Image quality is surprisingly good for the size. Obviously it's not HD but works great for presentations or casual Netflix viewing."

***

Drawbacks: "The controls are finicky and unintuitive. I often have to unplug the projector to get the buttons to respond. Using the remote helps but it's tiny."

"Screen mirroring is hit or miss. Sometimes my phone connects instantly, other times I have to reboot or factory reset the projector. Very frustrating."

Akaso WT50 Owner Impressions:

Praises: "The Android OS and Google Play apps are a game-changer. I can download Netflix, YouTube, etc. right to the projector and stream anywhere. So convenient!"

"Auto keystone is a really nice touch. The projector automatically squares up the image when I move it, so I don't have to fiddle with settings every time."

***

Drawbacks: "Wireless performance is spotty. The projector often drops the Wi-Fi signal or lags during streaming, even with a strong connection. Using an HDMI cable helps."

"The touch controls are too sensitive. I frequently bump them by accident when picking up or adjusting the projector, causing playback to pause or settings to change."

Kodak Luma 150 owners adore the projector's ultra-compact size and easy compatibility with phones and tablets for on-the-go use. Many praise the plug-and-play simplicity for presentations and casual movie viewing. Common complaints include unintuitive controls, inconsistent screen mirroring, and lack of wireless options.

Akaso WT50 buyers frequently cite the built-in Android OS and automatic keystone as the projector's best features. The ability to download streaming apps without an external device is a huge win for many. Users also appreciate the short throw ratio and dual-band Wi-Fi. A few gripe about flaky wireless performance and overly sensitive touch controls.

Kodak Luma 150 and Akaso WT50 Alternatives

If you're not completely sold on the Luma 150 or WT50, here are a couple other popular pocket projectors to consider:

1. AAXA P6X: A premium portable with 1080p resolution, 600 LED lumens, onboard Android 9, and a 15,000mAh battery. Larger and pricier but a big step up in image quality;
2. XGIMI MoGo Pro: Another Android-based model with 540p resolution, 300 ANSI lumens, dual 3W Harman Kardon speakers, and intelligent obstacle avoidance. Great for impromptu movie nights.

The AAXA P6X is a compelling choice if you can sacrifice some portability for a higher-quality image. The 1080p resolution and 600 LED lumens blow the Kodak and Akaso out of the water. You also get a more powerful Android 9 OS, massive battery, and a standard tripod mount. But it's 2-3x larger and more expensive.

For a more direct Akaso WT50 competitor, check out the XGIMI MoGo Pro. It has a similar Android TV OS and wireless connectivity but cranks the brightness to 300 ANSI lumens. The 540p resolution is a nice bump over the Akaso's 480p, as are the dual Harman Kardon speakers. Intelligent features like auto focus and obstacle avoidance are also great for hassle-free setup.

Which Pocket Projector is Right for You, Kodak Luma 150 or Akaso WT50?

After thorough hands-on testing, it's clear the Kodak Luma 150 vs Akaso WT50 are both highly capable portable projectors with different strengths. The Luma 150's ultra-compact size and dead-simple operation make it ideal for on-the-go professionals who need to travel light. The WT50's built-in Android OS, brighter image, and auto keystone are better suited for streaming entertainment in more places.

Ultimately, I recommend the Akaso WT50 for most buyers. The convenience of downloading apps like Netflix and YouTube right to the projector can't be overstated. Not having to worry about a streaming stick or mirroring-compatible device means you can watch your content anywhere with Wi-Fi. Toss in the higher brightness, wider wireless support, and smarter setup tools, and it's the clear winner for portable entertainment.

That said, if your main priority is an absolute minimum footprint, the Kodak Luma 150 is still a solid pick. The size and weight are unbeatable for travel or camping. And while I prefer the Akaso's integrated OS, the Kodak's universal HDMI and screen mirroring are arguably more flexible. You'll just need to BYO streaming device and be more precise with placement.

Whichever model you choose, you'll be amazed how much screen you can fit in your pocket. Both the Luma 150 and WT50 produce highly watchable 60-80 inch images in a dark room - perfect for movie nights, gaming sessions, or business presentations on the go. Just keep your expectations in check for resolution and brightness, and you'll have a blast supersizing your mobile media.

That's all for this Kodak Luma 150 vs Akaso WT50 comparison! I hope I've helped you decide which palm-sized projector best fits your needs and lifestyle.

Go Deeper:

• Kodak Luma 150 vs ViewSonic M1 Mini: Comparison
• Epson Pro EX7260 vs Epson EX5260: Comparison
• ViewSonic PA503X vs PA503W
• Epson 1060 vs Epson 1080
• Yaber V10 or Yaber V7