I've seen a single RS1 in my room with a brand new bulb put 8 foot lamberts on my 10ft wide SMX. I'm intrigued about getting two of these and mounting them under my G90's in a stack configuration.

Has anyone tried it? I'm really curious as to how well the two projectors would line up. I wouldn't have to have "perfect" convergence, but if it was really close, that would be sweet.

16 foot lamberts would look really pretty at 10ft wide and for the most part, negate any lack of black issues due to the ANSI contrast improvement..........

Cliff

I've seen a single RS1 in my room with a brand new bulb put 8 foot lamberts on my 10ft wide SMX. I'm intrigued about getting two of these and mounting them under my G90's in a stack configuration.

Has anyone tried it? I'm really curious as to how well the two projectors would line up. I wouldn't have to have "perfect" convergence, but if it was really close, that would be sweet.

16 foot lamberts would look really pretty at 10ft wide and for the most part, negate any lack of black issues due to the ANSI contrast improvement..........
I tried it, but couldn't get them to line up well enough for my taste. Could be that with more patience I could have done it though.

As far as the blacks, with your gamma adjustment down low with the G90s I think you would probably miss what you get in many darker scenes. My gut feeling is that it wouldn't be worth the extra money since you have the G90 stack, but if you wanted to see what 16 ft-lamberts from an RS1 would look like on that screen without spending too much money, you could mask off half the area of your screen (half the area of 10' wide is 7.1' wide from 10*10=100, half of 100 is 50, and 50^.5=7.1), use 1 RS1 (maybe get somebody to bring one over) and sit at the same ratio to the screen width as you would with the bigger screen. You would also need to mask the screen on all 4 sides at the 7.1' wide size in order to make it a realistic test though, but that could just be with black sheets or something like that and if you pushed the image toward one corner instead of centering it, you would only have to mask 2 sides.

--Darin

Darin, how many pixels off was the convergence? Were you able to get it spot on in the middle?

I'm already painfully aware of the lack of black but for a lot of content, I think I would be fine.

Just fire up the stack for the dark movies. :^)

Cliffy

Darin, how many pixels off was the convergence? Were you able to get it spot on in the middle?This was almost a year ago and I'm going by memory. However, I recall getting it good in the center of the screen, but the worst corner was at least 2-3 pixels off. It was too much to be worth it for me and I got tired of trying to make it better. I wouldn't have had a permanent setup with 2 though, so if somebody knew what they were doing and spent enough time they might be able to get it converged well all over and then just leave things like that.

--Darin

Once again the problem boils down to cheaplenses and lens mountings with play in the lens shift yada yada. Also each machine has misconvergence or what appears to be misconvergence different from the other.

If you had two one chip machines the task would be much simpler. just mount the second machine on a vernia caliper platform. Rather easy to build, rack and pinion.

You could do this with two three chippers like the VPL-vw200 by doing basic alignment with just the green grids and then use the tricks inthe Sony to get the 4 other grids lined up.

You are fixated on good looking p :) and the RS1 because of the on/off CR and because its so cheap (the projector,not the good looking p). Its just not a candidate for stacking (the projector isn't, the good looking pmight ne) UNLESS you want a really big screen and are willing to sit far away from it as in a stadium scoreboard/screen, which has great misconvergence (using bulbs side by side) but sit far enough away and misconvergence has no effect on picture sharpness and one can't see edge color. effects.

Mark I dont understand your cheap lens coments with the JVC. Last night I was watching the RS2 and could see pixels 3 feet from the screen. It kind of bothered me.
The lens shift on the RS I think could use some work but the resolving power is up to par no complaints comparing it to other Lcos manufactures.

Alan. One element is CA. One with a cheap lens just can't get get good stacking results.

Alan. One element is CA. One with a cheap lens one just cab't get get good stacking results.

Im just not seeing it on the one Im viewing but I have not screened other JVC units so I cannot say there are no quality variances. I guess this can be the case with any projector make. I still feel the lens on the JVC exceeds its needs.
The one lens I am impressed with is on the Marantz.

I'm not convinced the RS can really benefit from a better lens. There's many other areas of the projector that could really benefit from improvement and yield a better picture.

The RS wasn't designed to stack. A different lens isn't gonna solve this.

I've heard so much nonsense about lenses over the years. A big one used to be you couldn't even resolve 1920 x 1080 without a real expensive lens. This absurd statement was from veterans in the industry. Even when there were cheap digital cameras out with 4 times the resolution available. :rolleyes:

I would think stacking would be easier if both projectors were perfectly perpendicular to the screen. What about using the feet and bolting the two projectors together? You could mount them on either side of a shelf. That should get them perfect with each other, then you could use the lens shift to line up the image.

Boy I wish I had a couple so that I could try it!!!!!! :D

Cliff

No where as simple. One could line up the projectors toget perfect [physical alignment,body tobody. Relax Cliff,not those kins of bodies.

As Cliff wel lknows being an expert in CRT stacks, one in essence with a three chipdigital, two projector stack, has to align six grids, one on top of each other.

With CRTs, and only with the better ones of these, because one can bend electron beams bioth electrostatically and magnetically, plus have some lend swing adjustment, yada yad it is possiblt to obtain a reasonably good grid pattern overlay. IT TAKES LOTS OF WORK BUT REASONABLY SHARP 1080P IS POSSIBLE.

It really isn't possible with any consumer grade 3 chip machines but i think you could get it close with a Sim2 HT5000. Ijust wouldn't call a stack of these consumer grade, MSRP for over $120, for the stack, without the stacking brackets.

Lets go back to a single three chip projector and its optical block. Generally, each chip is adjusted by the block manufacturer in one or two directions, x, or x and y. That's it. three axisadjustment is not possible. Only one or two. And then things are in essence glued down. Sealed. No longer adjustable. On the HT5000 mechanical adjustment at the Sim2 factory is possible after opticalblock delivery to them. They dial it in. the lenses used are extremently wide diameter tosay compared tothe lens on the RS1 or RS2. This means there is less curvature to the lens. Only a small part of the lens has the chip overlay image in it. The sweet sopt is the center. But as you use some say vertical lens shift todo a stacksay, because the lens is so large, one stays in a flat rather than curved area.

take a small lens like that used in the RS!. Let there be some lens coating err error as pointed out by Greg. R. in his review. Let there diverging error as you go away from the center. See Darin's comments. The HT5000 as 1/4 pixel error at the edges.

Lookat the convergence on the RS1 Alan. You just can't align two of them to give a reasonably overlay. Not possible. not even considering the looseness in the lens shift feature.

You could do it with a sony 2000 because of the zone convergence features even though it would be a bitch toget the lens shifts to line up using the remote. But the convergence features are designed to stop complaints, not to make things better. One loses resolution and sharpness. Just what you are going to lose even more of in a stack.


There is a lot lot more to a lens than merely having the ability to resolve a 1080p grid.


alan.i suggest you PMmlang46. he is an expert in many many things optical and could explain the many factures of how lens quality is measured and its effects.

Cliffy. Go to the range, shoot a few clips. Trying this with two RS1 would be a complete waste of time given the standard of success you would demand.

alan.i suggest you PMmlang46. he is an expert in many many things optical and could explain the many factures of how lens quality is measured and its effects.

Mark plenty of lens experts on board, just the other evening I had a nice discussion with someone on this board who knows quit a bit about lens. We talked about some of comments made on the board on this very topic. I wish I could get him to chime in but I dont want to put him on the spot and he can post if he wants.
I think each manufactures tech could put up a good argument their lens exceeds the criteria. Even projectors in the 2k category have very good lens.
We are at a point were

Does the Sony have a better lens then Benq. Does the Benq have a better lens then Sim. Does the Sim beat out the RS. Were splitting hairs at this point.
While I think there are differences between each manufactures lens Im confident none are using a lens not capable of delivering a clean 1080p signal with minimal or no CA to the screen.

Sorry. I just don't agree. Your opinion will make the masses happy. Let's just leave it at that. I'll suggest to Sony and Marantz and Sim2 that it is a waste of money to put better lenses on their machines. 1080p is 1080p and cheap lenses such as used on the RS1 and VPL-vw60 are more than adequate for more expensive machines. Same for my cameras. I am going to sell my better lens off and just use the cheap ones. Hell. Who even needs a lens. A pinhole will dojust fine. :)

Cliff have you looked into Sim2 single panel DLP? That could be a viable option. One single unit that also offers the 2.35 option with much simpler set up.

Cliffy wants the on/off cr of an rs2 but tha ansi lumens of a c3x 1080. for the price of 2 rs1 without the hassels of a crt stack.

There were discussions awhile back of using something like Realta's e-warp adjustment to improve the convergence of a digital stack. This should provide convergence better than 1 pixel everywhere but I don't know if anyone has tried it.

Last night I was watching the RS2 and could see pixels 3 feet from the screen. It kind of bothered me.


Alan, you must really be looking for that "movie theater" feel. :eek:




Local cineplex worker: "Sir, Mr. Googer is here and a few people in the front row are complaining."

Cineplex manager: "Oh no, is Mr. Googer sitting in his folding chair in front of the them?"

Local cineplex worker: "Yes. But at least he is not standing up and measuring the light this time."

:D

Cliff have you looked into Sim2 single panel DLP? That could be a viable option. One single unit that also offers the 2.35 option with much simpler set up.

Single chip DLP just isn't gonna cut it for me. Matter of fact, if I'm not mistaken, there is not one single chip DLP that will even come close to 15 foot lamberts on my screen.

Also, no digital at my home has been able to put out more light output than the stack other than 3 chip DLP to which I haven't personally viewed in my room but did in Arts. :)

That HT5000 is a LIGHT CANNON.

Cliff

Cliffy wants the on/off cr of an rs2 but tha ansi lumens of a c3x 1080. for the price of 2 rs1 without the hassels of a crt stack.

Don't get me wrong Mark, I love my stack. In my opinion, nothing can touch it. It might not be as sharp as digital, but it's close enough and to the point that the other positives that the stack provide HUGELY out weigh the slight softening of 1080P.

Maintenance for me has been a breeze as well. When they drift, it takes a whole 10 to 15 minutes to touch them up. Not trying to stir up the pot, but two G90's firing on the same screen is a sight to behold. The on/off CR is through the roof!!!!!!

You know, you've seen it. ;)

I'm just looking to divulge into both technologies, and having something light up my screen at a lower cost albeit some compromise would be really fun for me...........

Anyone got a couple of RS1's I can borrow for a couple of days????? :)

Cliffy

Mark I dont understand your cheap lens coments with the JVC. Last night I was watching the RS2 and could see pixels 3 feet from the screen. It kind of bothered me.
The lens shift on the RS I think could use some work but the resolving power is up to par no complaints comparing it to other Lcos manufactures.

He would have you believe that its true simply because he says its true.

Notice how he never actually explains what a better lens would do? He has no idea and always defers to Mlang, who apparently doesn't endorse anything Mark has posted on the subject as far as I can tell.

I can't figure him out.

Don't get me wrong Mark, I love my stack. In my opinion, nothing can touch it. It might not be as sharp as digital, but it's close enough and to the point that the other positives that the stack provide HUGELY out weigh the slight softening of 1080P.

Maintenance for me has been a breeze as well. When they drift, it takes a whole 10 to 15 minutes to touch them up. Not trying to stir up the pot, but two G90's firing on the same screen is a sight to behold. The on/off CR is through the roof!!!!!!

You know, you've seen it. ;)

I'm just looking to divulge into both technologies, and having something light up my screen at a lower cost albeit some compromise would be really fun for me...........

Anyone got a couple of RS1's I can borrow for a couple of days????? :)

Cliffy

You already know this but stacked SR1 have twice higher black level than one.
C3x lite is a good one giving you nearly 900 lumen but more money.
You already have said you like silver screen which should work for your stack as well as a single Rs1.

You already know this but stacked SR1 have twice higher black level than one.
C3x lite is a good one giving you nearly 900 lumen but more money.
You already have said you like silver screen which should work for your stack as well as a single Rs1.

Yeah, I do like the Silver Star a whole bunch but that's at 8ft wide. Bigger than that I think even in the viewing cone would really pronounce the light fall off at the edges.

Ken and I have argued about that screen quite a bit over the years. :)

Cliff

I did not know 8' is the limit.

For some it might not be, but for me, 8ft was pushing it to the edge for CRT. For digital, that might be a different story. I've never seen a digital on a Silver Star.

Cliff

I am not an optical expert. But I have studied Mlamg46 posts very carefully and I thinkmy comments are consistent with his explanations. I know what i see.My experiences with projectors with good lenses, the Sony VPL-vw200, the Marantz 11S2, the Sim2 HT2000E,C3x 1080, and the HT5000 to my observations compared to the sony VPL-vw50 and JVC RS2 most recently to my mind are consistent with my statements. Read some of greg R's reviews. Ask him about the adequacy of the lenses in the cheaper units. For the price point, one can't get better but don't kid your self for an instance how much better would be the performance of an RS2 with a lens of the 200's or 11s2 caliber, let alone with a lens of the caliber of the ones used by the HT5000. i am off on a several day road trip to install an HT5000.

Cliffy. If I had em, I'd lend you them of course. But I don't.

I still have my 9500LC ultra hanging and in some ways it beats the digitals but in most ways it doesn't.

I really like the 11s2 I've been playing with. On my110"D 1.3 gain, it is very bright compared to my CRT. One button, the power switch, and I hust watch and watch.No fussing, no maybe its a little off.
Yes, Ilove your stack nd can hrdly wait until your next meet when I can enjoy it for hours. Looking forward to seeing Kossman's blend. Its really cooking from what he tells me.

Take care all, I'll be back in a few days.

i am not an optical expert. But I have studied Mlamg46 posts very carefully and I thinkmy comments are consistent with his explanations. I know what i see.My experiences with projectors with good lenses, the Sony VPL-vw200, the Marantz 11S2, the Sim2 HT2000E,C3x 1080, and the HT5000 to my observations compared to the sony VPL-vw50 and JVC RS2 most recently to my mind are consistent with my statements. Read some of greg R's reviews. Ask him about the adequacy of the lenses in the cheaper units. For the price point, one can't get better but don't kid your self for an instance how much better would be the performance of an RS2 with a lens of the 200's or 11s2 caliber, let alone with a lens of the caliber of the ones used by the HT5000. i am off on a several day road trip to install an HT5000.

It may not be fair to post this because you are going away, but you can respond when you return. Please understand that what I have written is not personal. I am just trying to understand why you think what you think but you have been unable to state why you think it. Instead, you refer to the opinions of other people. It is not possible to have reviewers weigh in on SIM2 projectors' lens performance (they apparently don't let anyone review them for some reason) and I have not found any reviews of the vw-200 (perhaps too early). However, for the remaining sources that you cite, I have found some opinions. Here is what they have had to say:

Greg Rogers on the RS1's lens:

The RS1 provided significantly sharper images than other sub-$10,000 LCoS projectors that I have reviewed. Images were only slightly less sharp than the best single-chip 1080p DLP projectors. If the RS1 projection lens had better color correction, it may have rivaled those DLP projectors in sharpness.

Greg Rogers on the Marantz 15S1:

The Konica-Minolta lens is excellent. There was only a fraction of a
pixel (perhaps a quarter of a pixel) of chromatic aberration (color fringing)
on vertical lines near the edge of the screen.

Greg Rogers on Sony vw-60:

Since the panels were exceptionally well aligned in the review projector, I only had to apply 0.2 pixels of vertical correction to the red panel. That was perceived as a slight reduction in sharpness standing close to the screen, but it was nearly insignificant from my normal viewing position.


Mlang46 on the RS1/RS2:

Still it is amazing to me that they can stick a 16 element lens in the system and charge as little as they do and make any money.

The next 3 panel 1080P projector near its performance has a street price 5 times its cost and even that projector does not have the its dynamic range.

I am far from an expert on any of these issues. I can only read and digest what others have written to the best of my ability. I may be reading what others have written out of context or am perhaps drawing the wrong conclusions. Certainly, the RS1/RS2 can be improved with a better lens. But, apparently the same can be said of almost any projector, including some of the expensive ones that you refer to.

No projector is designed with a "cost is no object" philosophy, in spite of what many companies' marketing materials may imply. Each projector has its own cost/benefit compromises. Some of those are obvious on the RS1/RS2 (cheap lens shift mechanism, lack of CMS, lack of tweakability, etc.).

I don't expect that you will change your opinion or retract anything that you have written. But, please try to develop your opinion a bit more so that others can understand what you mean, because something is getting lost in what you write. Otherwise it just seems like someone ranting about something that can't be proven or disproven.

lawguy. In a question and answer thread by greg on the RS1, hemade some comments that one had to read between the lines. there are indeed politics to be followed.mi commented if only it had a better lens. his comment was "bingo'. Go research it if you want. I'm off.

lawguy. In a question and answer thread by greg on the RS1, hemade some comments that one had to read between the lines. there are indeed politics to be followed.mi commented if only it had a better lens. his comment was "bingo'. Go research it if you want. I'm off.


Context is everything. Greg explained that "Bingo" comment to mean:


I think the OP was asking about an RS-2. I'd like an RS-2 around $10K, which should be enough for a few hardware upgrades (including CMS and lens, with user adjustable iris aperture to reduce brightness).

So, it seems that when Greg said "Bingo" in response to your wish for a better lens, he was looking for a new lens with a user adjustable iris.

I agree that that would be a great feature and I would pay more for it.

Are you sure that you didn't get this even a little bit wrong?

My comment was not OPs. Go back and read the thread and his review. Discussion concerned CA and the inability to focus the red as sharply as the blue and grean. Yep. A great lens. Only thing wrong, doesn't focus all the colors the same. Good enough. Just put an iris on it, take great to tremendous eh? Why don't you just PM Greg and ask him in private.

It is possible that both Mark and those arguing with him are both right.

A single 3 chip projector can be sharp and well converged with itself. That doesn't mean it will be sharp and well converged when overlaid on another. Being sharp and well converged with itself is not the same thing as being sharp and well converged on an absolute sense.

Hypothetically lets say RS1 A has a slight imperfection that causes a slight pincushion distortion in the output image. RS1 B has a slight imperfection that causes a slight barrel distortion. They may both have perfect convergence, and both be sharp, but their images are not perfect in a pure geometry sense, yet probably no one would notice. However, try to combine RS1 A and RS1B on top of each other and you will have a disaster because their imperfections do not match.

In my hypothetical example, no matter how sharp each projector is by itself and how well converged they are by themselves, they will not match when a "stack" is attempted.

My comment was not OPs. Go back and read the thread and his review. Discussion concerned CA and the inability to focus the red as sharply as the blue and grean. Yep. A great lens. Only thing wrong, doesn't focus all the colors the same. Good enough. Just put an iris on it, take great to tremendous eh? Why don't you just PM Greg and ask him in private.

I think that what Greg posted was clear. He is, of course, free to chime in if he wants. The thread concerned the things people wanted to see in an RS2, not, as you describe, any inability to focus red. I quoted from his review where he stated that the RS1 is only slightly less sharp than the best single chip dlps.

My take (and I could be wrong) is that while Greg noted CA on the RS1, he has noted it on other projectors as well. The RS1/RS2 lens is not a deal breaker for him. If it were it would be hard to understand how he could be using the RS2 as his personal projector at the moment.

I am going to stop addressing this because you just keep saying the same things over and over and frankly, you seem to be basing most of this on your memory, which appears not to be too great on these points.

My comment was not OPs. Go back and read the thread and his review. Discussion concerned CA and the inability to focus the red as sharply as the blue and grean. Yep. A great lens. Only thing wrong, doesn't focus all the colors the same. Good enough. Just put an iris on it, take great to tremendous eh? Why don't you just PM Greg and ask him in private.

It's true that red on the RS-1 doesn't focus as tight as blue, so I think this is a valid point. I think that it's a overreaction to say that the lens is cheap though. It's a great lens for the price and the equal of other lenses in the same price range. The overall image is still very sharp even though it could be improved even more. It's kind of like saying that a sportscar with a V-8 that pumps out 450 horsepower is cheap because it doesn't pump out 550 hp.

The RS1 has been by far the best digital I have seen on my screen in the last year.

It's not the stack, but it's good.

Maybe I should be asking JVC this question.

How can you get 15 foot lamberts out of it on SMX at 10ft wide with at least 20K to one measured contrast?

That would be one pretty picture (please speed up the panels a bit as well). :)

Oh, and include built in color decoding options that let you do D6500.

Cliff

It's kind of like saying that a sportscar with a V-8 that pumps out 450 horsepower is cheap because it doesn't pump out 550 hp.


I think he is referring to the tires.:D

The RS1 has been by far the best digital I have seen on my screen in the last year.

It's not the stack, but it's good.

Maybe I should be asking JVC this question.

How can you get 15 foot lamberts out of it on SMX at 10ft wide with at least 20K to one measured contrast?

That would be one pretty picture (please speed up the panels a bit as well). :)

Oh, and include built in color decoding options that let you do D6500.

Cliff

Cliff

If you find the ideal digital stack you will have to change your sig " two gunz a blazin"

Cliff

If you find the ideal digital stack you will have to change your sig " two gunz a blazin"

Actually big dog, since the stack isn't coming down anytime soon, how about 8 guns a blazin'. :D;):cool:

Cliffy