After canceling an order for the Z2000 I made over the weekend, today I ended up purchasing both the Z2000 and the AE2000 (from different places). I know its a bit much but I've been pondering this decision for a couple months now and kept going back and forth between the two (with the Epson entering the equation from time to time). I expect to receive the Sanyo on Thursday and the Panasonic on Friday. Upon receivinIg both units, I will do a side by side comparison that will settle the issue for me once and for all. For those undecided ones in the same boat as me, let me know if there is anything you want me to check out and I will do it for you. I'm by no means a projector guru so I won't be able to take measurements or perform any technical analysis but anything short of that do-able. Also, if anyone has suggestions for actually conducting the comparison, that would be greatly appreciated. Short of that, my review will be limited to placing the two side by side and seeing which picture I like the best under different scenarios, i.e., ambient light, different viewing modes, etc. I only have up to four hours to do the comparison so time will be precious...

I'd be interested in your comparisons of these two. Will you be comparing them with "out-of-the box" colors/settings or will you do some minor calibrating, i.e. AVIA disc or DVE, etc?

FWIW from a few sites I've seen, the Z2000's $600 rebates are extended until the end of September which should make it very interesting in the way of price/performance.

I think doing some minor calibrating is a good idea. However, I've never done any calibrating before - not sure of the learning curve involved; but I guess that would give me a better perspective of which projector truly has the better picture. Maybe I'll try to get my hands on one of the discs and practice on my lcd before the pjs arrive. Regarding the Sanyo rebates, that is the main reason why I'm so torn between the two, i.e., price/performance. I guess what I really want to find out is whether the Panasonic is $1000 better than the Sanyo.

The funny thing is, I've seen both projectors in person but at different times. Initially, I thought the Sanyo displayed a great picture and was totally impressed with it. I then saw the Panasonic some weeks later and thought the picture looked good but not as good as the Sanyo. However, my wife and 13 y.o. son favored the panasonic. That led me to second guess which one I thought really had the better picture, and of course, reading the reviews (all of which favor the panasonic) and hanging out on AVS hasn't helped. The good thing is - I suspect I will know for sure in a few days...

Why don't you nab the Epson for good measure? Save me a month of research :D

Why don't you nab the Epson for good measure? Save me a month of research :D
I had my mind made up on the Epson several times but in the end was very concerned about the quality control issues.

I had my mind made up on the Epson several times but in the end was very concerned about the quality control issues.

I would second the suggestion to check out the Epson as well!

The main quality control issue I am aware of is convergence, but you can have this checked out by the dealer (such as Projector People) before sending to you. BOTH the Epson and Panasonic seem to be vulnerable to dust blobs--perhaps the Panasonic even more, at least based on forum feedback.

Anyway, I will be interested to hear about your comparison. I suspect that even if the Panasonic picture is "better," it is not $1000 better. The Sanyo also has a better warranty and way of dealing with dust blobs.

I would second the suggestion to check out the Epson as well!

The main quality control issue I am aware of is convergence, but you can have this checked out by the dealer (such as Projector People) before sending to you. BOTH the Epson and Panasonic seem to be vulnerable to dust blobs--perhaps the Panasonic even more, at least based on forum feedback.

Anyway, I will be interested to hear about your comparison. I suspect that even if the Panasonic picture is "better," it is not $1000 better. The Sanyo also has a better warranty and way of dealing with dust blobs.
Surprisingly, the salesperson where I bought the Sanyo said exactly that; that the Panasonic is not $1000 better than the Sanyo by any measure. She indicated that if the price difference was $400-$500 she would opt for the Panasonic over the Sanyo just because it is more versatile in terms of light output and some of the other bonus features like waveform. She did not push me toward the 1080UB because she said the quality was not great enough to justify the price difference.

Also, I have a dedicated home theater room with very little ambient light and I just think the Epson might be too bright. In PP's shootout on Youtube you can see that it is much brighter than the Panasonic in certain scenes but I preferred the Panasonic's picture. The color saturation of the Panasonic, from what I could see, was awesome (and you could even hear people in the background stating the same thing...).

Just a note. The Epson and the Panasonic are very similar in brightness, when set to similar modes - per the reviews at www.projectorreviews.com. Anything you see on YouTube is suspect, even if it does come from PP.

The Sanyo is much dimmer than either the Panasonic or the Epson. Also, you will find that the Panasonic has much better colors, OOTB.

In general, you won't be able to find a calibration disc locally. It will take Amazon too long to send you one, if you are getting both PJs this week.

PS -- I'm interested in your results, even if you don't calibrate them. You might want to try the settings that Art came up with for these two:
Panasonic: http://www.projectorreviews.com/panasonic/pt-ae2000u/performance.php#calibration,
Sanyo: http://www.projectorreviews.com/sanyo/plv-z2000/performance.php#calibration.

Just a note. The Epson and the Panasonic are very similar in brightness, when set to similar modes - per the reviews at www.projectorreviews.com. Anything you see on YouTube is suspect, even if it does come from PP.

The Sanyo is much dimmer than either the Panasonic or the Epson. Also, you will find that the Panasonic has much better colors, OOTB.

In general, you won't be able to find a calibration disc locally. It will take Amazon too long to send you one, if you are getting both PJs this week.

PS -- I'm interested in your results, even if you don't calibrate them. You might want to try the settings that Art came up with for these two:
Panasonic: http://www.projectorreviews.com/panasonic/pt-ae2000u/performance.php#calibration,
Sanyo: http://www.projectorreviews.com/sanyo/plv-z2000/performance.php#calibration.
Thanks CT! I definitely will use Art's settings; that will make this process so much easier. I'm expecting that the Panasonic will be better overall but I don't think the difference in quality is going to justify keeping it. But then again, you never know until you actually see them side by side. I'm very anxious to say the least. I've been checking both tracking numbers (one is coming from PP and the other from PP) and one is now about 50 miles from me and the other was 4 hours from me this morning when I checked (but originially came from about 1300 miles away). Both are displaying tomorrow as the expected delivery day.

Also:
Can someone tell me the best way to display both projectors at the same time? Don't you normally have to select a particular input for the video device; so how do you select two inputs at once? Would I need an hdmi switcher (I don't have a receiver with HDMI either). My plan is to purchase a ps3 to do the comparison.

Thanks

Could use a splitter and have them both on at the same time. Perhaps show one on one wall and the other on another one.

I'm also interested in this comparison. I'm in the market for a 1080P projector and these are 2 of the 3 I'm interested in. thanks for doing this.

Just curious, what screen size do you have?

Old

I'm also interested in this comparison. I'm in the market for a 1080P projector and these are 2 of the 3 I'm interested in. thanks for doing this.

Just curious, what screen size do you have?

Old
You're welcome.
Unfortunately, no screen as yet. I'm going to see what size fits best in my theater room before springing for the screen. So for the a/b, I'll be using two white walls 90 degrees to one another and I plan to test out to 120". The house is new so the drywall is in good shape so it should display well. If not, I may get some blackout cloth.

My only concern is for the comparison I plan to table mount but for the theater I will be ceiling mounting so I hope the picture ends up being the same in the end.

With regard to the splitter, would that be an hdmi splitter?

What you will need is something like this if you want to have both displays connected at the same time http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=101&cp_id=10110&cs_id=1011002&p_id=3728&seq=1&format=2 .

Looks like they are currently out of stock however :( .

-- Jason

Here is another one that appears to be available without breaking the bank ;) .

http://www.firefold.com/Products/1X2-HDMI-Splitter__HDMI-2SPLITTER.aspx

-- Jason

Here is another one that appears to be available without breaking the bank ;) .

http://www.firefold.com/Products/1X2-HDMI-Splitter__HDMI-2SPLITTER.aspx

-- Jason
Thanks. I should be able to find one locally - I hope...

Thanks.

Every review I read on the Z2000, is it's not made for screens over 106".
I'm glad to hear you're testing at 120", to see the results.

Old.

You could also put both projectors side-by-side, and use offset on both projectors to recenter to the exact same screen size. Then put a 45 degree piece of metal or some non-translucent object covered in black velvet in front of each lens blocking half the light, and directing the blocked light away from the projector lens and away from the screen.

This way you can have a left-side / right-side direct comparison. The extra work to do it should not be hard at all.

You could also put both projectors side-by-side, and use offset on both projectors to recenter to the exact same screen size. Then put a 45 degree piece of metal or some non-translucent object covered in black velvet in front of each lens blocking half the light, and directing the blocked light away from the projector lens and away from the screen.

This way you can have a left-side / right-side direct comparison. The extra work to do it should not be hard at all.

This is a great idea, if tough to implement...you would need to get both pjs calibrated though and adjusted to put out same lumens, otherwise, the brighter one will almost always look "better."

I guess I should have planned a little better and got the splitter in advance...

Riblet, that is a great suggestion but WAY beyond my current abilities.

Anyway, at 12:28 pm, both projectors arrived! The first thing I noticed is that the AE2000 box is considerably larger than the Z2000 box. In fact, it looks as if the Z2000 box could fit comfortably within the AE2000 box.

What I think I'm going to do is post pictures of everything thing I've wondered about regarding these projectors and post them - but that's another thing I need to learn how to do. Help?

Think I figured out the photo posting question...

just to cover yourself, you should order 4 epsons, one of them is bound to have good convergence, haha

I would second the suggestion to check out the Epson as well!

The main quality control issue I am aware of is convergence, but you can have this checked out by the dealer (such as Projector People) before sending to you. BOTH the Epson and Panasonic seem to be vulnerable to dust blobs--perhaps the Panasonic even more, at least based on forum feedback.

Anyway, I will be interested to hear about your comparison. I suspect that even if the Panasonic picture is "better," it is not $1000 better. The Sanyo also has a better warranty and way of dealing with dust blobs.

The warranty is only as good as the service that comes with it and Sanyo's warranty service is abysmal, FWIW.

just to cover yourself, you should order 4 epsons, one of them is bound to have good convergence, haha

It's past midnight for me, but I actually LOL'd at that one, then got worried because I have a crush on the 1080UB and didn't know QC concerns were so dire.

I'm not disputing, but do you have a link where I can read about this?

That is the reason why I decided not to consider the Epson in my final two. It sounds like it'll beat either projector (Sanyo or Panasonic) in almost every aspect but getting a good one is the problem.

Uther: My first projector was a Sanyo Z2. It went down after about a month (discoloration across the screen because of user error) and I sent it in to Sanyo and had it back working properly within 4 days and Sanyo paid shipping both ways. I had no problem with their QRP in '04 but it sounds like some folks have had problems with it.

Just order the 1080ub from Projectorpeople. They will check the convergence before they send it and have a 4 bulb hour return policy.

Just order the 1080ub from Projectorpeople. They will check the convergence before they send it and have a 4 bulb hour return policy.
I actually got the panasonic from them...

Nightfly13, if your epson is good to you then dont worry about it! Some were complaining about convergence, but if you dont see a problem, i would go scouring for any issue, some people could visibly see some problems, but im sure yours is ok, all you need to do is look at the main epson pages though if your curious.

I calibrated both a Z2000 and an AE2000 in the past 4 months..and I think the AE2000 has slightly better blacks.
I am interested to here your comments on both of these.

Later
RayJr

Nightfly13, if your epson is good to you then dont worry about it! Some were complaining about convergence, but if you dont see a problem, i would go scouring for any issue, some people could visibly see some problems, but im sure yours is ok, all you need to do is look at the main epson pages though if your curious.

I don't own an Epson, I just like to dream about it. I have a Mits HD1000u (which doesn't have convergence issues :P).

Yeah the main Epson thread is super-long, I was hoping for a specific one, or better yet a poll, but it's ok, I'm not so close to upgrading that I need to put in lots of time for due diligence already.

I calibrated both a Z2000 and an AE2000 in the past 4 months..and I think the AE2000 has slightly better blacks.
I am interested to here your comments on both of these.

Later
RayJr
See-you could have saved me about 8 hours of work and close to $4800 if I had known before undertaking this task.... :)

Sorry.....:o

I don't own an Epson, I just like to dream about it. I have a Mits HD1000u (which doesn't have convergence issues :P).

Yeah the main Epson thread is super-long, I was hoping for a specific one, or better yet a poll, but it's ok, I'm not so close to upgrading that I need to put in lots of time for due diligence already.There was a thread started by Andrew Low that was a Poll on the Epson 1080UB convergence issue. It is here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1006707.

Ok, so I've had a chance to review both projectors for about an hour. No calibration - just straight out of the box. The pictures are VERY similar to say the least and both display an awesome picture. In fact, at times I was straining to tell if there was any difference at all between the two-which really surprised me. Now I wasn't able to get the hdmi splitter so I couldn't do a side by side so I watched the AE2000 for an hour and then switched to the Sanyo for an hour. I've only watched blu-ray movies so far. I will give more details on sharpness, black levels, shadow detail, brightness, etc., in short order...

I will tell you, however, that the iris on the panasonic is significantly quieter than the one on the Sanyo (not that it is loud but it is noticable if you are close to the projector (and it is totally quiet) whereas the panasonic's is not). I don't have the capacity for sound in this current setup so its strictly video and because of the total quiet, I could hear the one on the Sanyo but I was only 2-4 feet away from it.

In any event, at this point I'm still undecided. :(

Ok, so I've had a chance to review both projectors for about an hour. No calibration - just straight out of the box. The pictures are VERY similar to say the least and both display an awesome picture. In fact, at times I was straining to tell if there was any difference at all between the two-which really surprised me. Now I wasn't able to get the hdmi splitter so I couldn't do a side by side so I watched the AE2000 for an hour and then switched to the Sanyo for an hour. I've only watched blu-ray movies so far. I will give more details on sharpness, black levels, shadow detail, brightness, etc., in short order...

I will tell you, however, that the iris on the panasonic is significantly quieter than the one on the Sanyo (not that it is loud but it is noticable if you are close to the projector (and it is totally quiet) whereas the panasonic's is not). I don't have the capacity for sound in this current setup so its strictly video and because of the total quiet, I could hear the one on the Sanyo but I was only 2-4 feet away from it.

In any event, at this point I'm still undecided. :(
FANSTASTIC, GREAT STUFF !!!!

How are the blacks?

Do they both have the ability to run at half power? (to save bulb life?)
How do they compare at half power?
I have a dedicated no-window home theatre room, so I currently run my Z2 at half power because I don't have to combat ambient light.

Ok, so I've had a chance to review both projectors for about an hour. No calibration - just straight out of the box. The pictures are VERY similar to say the least and both display an awesome picture. In fact, at times I was straining to tell if there was any difference at all between the two-which really surprised me. Now I wasn't able to get the hdmi splitter so I couldn't do a side by side so I watched the AE2000 for an hour and then switched to the Sanyo for an hour. I've only watched blu-ray movies so far. I will give more details on sharpness, black levels, shadow detail, brightness, etc., in short order...

I will tell you, however, that the iris on the panasonic is significantly quieter than the one on the Sanyo (not that it is loud but it is noticable if you are close to the projector (and it is totally quiet) whereas the panasonic's is not). I don't have the capacity for sound in this current setup so its strictly video and because of the total quiet, I could hear the one on the Sanyo but I was only 2-4 feet away from it.

In any event, at this point I'm still undecided. :(

while you say you are undecided, you make a very convincing case for the Sanyo given the big price difference. It would be a more difficult decision if they were closer in price.

The pictures are VERY similar to say the least (

I have always wondered if Panasonic's SmoothScreen technology makes a difference with 1080p projectors. With 720p it certainly did.

In terms of the SmoothScreen technology, I agree with all the reviews I have read concerning the Panasonic on this issue: you can basically put your nose to the screen and you will not see any pixels, period. With the Sanyo, however, if you get within 2-3 feet of the screen you will see a very very slight pixel structure. It is so insignificant though that it shouldn't factor into your decision unless you plan to stand or sit within a couple feet of the screen and actually watch movies, etc.

Pedro2, my sales rep at PP told me flat-out that the difference in quality between the panasonic and sanyo is definitely closer than their difference in price. She told me that the panasonic was not $1000 better than the sanyo - but if it was $400-$500 difference, she would opt for the panasonic (on versatility). After seeing the projectors with my own eyes, I believe her 100%. For me, the difference in money is narrower.

Waiting for the sun to go down so I can make some further observations -

Nordo, I'll let you know about the blacks and half power modes.

I have also taken some photos of the units in the box before opening (show that the Panasonic's box is much larger than the Sanyo), while opening (so I remember how to re-box the one I send back), and with the units out of the box side by side (for footprint comparison). If anyone is interested in those, I'll post the pictures...

Once properly calibrated (should you do so) the comparison should spread out a little more , the Panasonic should best the Sanyo in most areas (but yes it should not be a night and day difference) .

-- Jason

In terms of the SmoothScreen technology, I agree with all the reviews I have read concerning the Panasonic on this issue: you can basically put your nose to the screen and you will not see any pixels, period. With the Sanyo, however, if you get within 2-3 feet of the screen you will see a very very slight pixel structure. It is so insignificant though that it shouldn't factor into your decision unless you plan to stand or sit within a couple feet of the screen and actually watch movies, etc.


Thank you. I just took a look at the 62" DLP rear-projection unit in my family room, and from a few inches away, I can see a very slight pixel structure as you mentioned above, but any further back it is fine.

Since Panasonic changed their ceiling bracket after the AE900, I am now free to consider all manufacturers. If they hadn't done that I would have just bought the AE2000. I am replacing the AE900 in my current theater and plan on sticking to LCD because I need a wide zoom. I will be building another home theater soon, and for that I am leaning towards DLP.

Before you waste 8 hours on the HDMI splitter; here is a clue. None of them will work. This is because HDCP (copy protection) will not work. There are many on this forum that have tried because the ability to drive two displays at once it pretty useful. None that I have found have been successful in finding a solution to this problem.

In the end it sounds like in your viewing situation if you don't have them side by side you are not going to miss which ever one you don't buy. As a personal victim of the AX-100 product problems I would select based more on service reputation, inputs etc.

Before you waste 8 hours on the HDMI splitter; here is a clue. None of them will work. This is because HDCP (copy protection) will not work. There are many on this forum that have tried because the ability to drive two displays at once it pretty useful. None that I have found have been successful in finding a solution to this problem.

In the end it sounds like in your viewing situation if you don't have them side by side you are not going to miss which ever one you don't buy. As a personal victim of the AX-100 product problems I would select based more on service reputation, inputs etc.

Thats not true. There are many people that split the HDMI signal. I am one of them. I have one HDMI cable going from my AVR to a Monoprice powered matrix HDMI 4x2 switch. From the HDMI switch I have two HDMI cables, one to my TV and another to my projector. The HDMI switch can be set many different ways. I have mine set so that the signal is automatically sent to both displays. In fact the cable going to my projector from the switch is very long. It consists of the following: 35 foot 22 ga. HDMI from switch to HDMI wall outlet. From wall outlet to projector I have a 15 foot 28 ga. HDMI cable.

Sending video only is easier than sending audio and video. If you need to split your HDMI I suggest buying this 4x2 switch: www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=101&cp_id=10110&cs_id=1011002&p_id=3728&seq=1&format=2

Before you waste 8 hours on the HDMI splitter; here is a clue. None of them will work. This is because HDCP (copy protection) will not work. There are many on this forum that have tried because the ability to drive two displays at once it pretty useful. None that I have found have been successful in finding a solution to this problem.

In the end it sounds like in your viewing situation if you don't have them side by side you are not going to miss which ever one you don't buy. As a personal victim of the AX-100 product problems I would select based more on service reputation, inputs etc.
Thanks for the information. I noticed that the folks at projectorpeople used one in their comparison on youtube but I have no idea which one. They actually ran 5 projectors at once.

Thats not true. There are many people that split the HDMI signal. I am one of them. I have one HDMI cable going from my AVR to a Monoprice powered matrix HDMI 4x2 switch. From the HDMI switch I have two HDMI cables, one to my TV and another to my projector. The HDMI switch can be set many different ways. I have mine set so that the signal is automatically sent to both displays. In fact the cable going to my projector from the switch is very long. It consists of the following: 35 foot 22 ga. HDMI from switch to HDMI wall outlet. From wall outlet to projector I have a 15 foot 28 ga. HDMI cable.

Sending video only is easier than sending audio and video. If you need to split your HDMI I suggest buying this 4x2 switch: www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=101&cp_id=10110&cs_id=1011002&p_id=3728&seq=1&format=2
Ok. Thank you. The only problem is now that I've used a little over one hour, I don't know if its worth it to pay for the splitter because I don't plan to go anywhere near my 4hour limit for the preview and I won't be able to use it afterwards. I need to think about it. If I could have bought one locally without having to have it shipped I would have sprung for it.

Do you guys think doing the side by side will be better in the long run?

I was debating between the two until i found the Z2000 for sub $2000 (significantly so). at that point a nearly $1000 difference made the decision easy.

Do you guys think doing the side by side will be better in the long run?
Are you still watching both of them?
The longer you watch, the more chance there is of seeing subtle differences.
Try and keep an open mind with regard to prices when watching them.

Keep us up to date.:)
Thanks for letting us in on your adventure.:D

OK:

So I watched parts of the following movies: Spiderman 3, Planet of the Apes, Casino Royale, and Ratatouille. So as you can imagine, I had a nice variation of movies to observe black levels, shadow detail, sharpness, and what I now think is very important - brightness levels.

In terms of sharpness, these two projectors are very close. I had a hard time determining which I thought was sharper but on Spiderman 3 near the end when the Sandman is talking to Spiderman about his uncle's death (I assume because as I said I had no sound), you can see a bit more details in his face than you can on the Sanyo, i.e., crevices, hairs standing up, etc. You can also see the red blemishes on Spidey's face a tad better on the Panasonic. However, the difference is so minor that it is largely irrelevant. I mean you actually have to pause the projector to try to pick out differences. I think once both are properly calibrated there probably would be no discerable difference.

In terms of black levels, I would have to say that the panasonic is only slightly blacker (and I mean slightly). There is no huge difference between the two and the only reason I think the blacks are a bit more pronounced on the Panasonic is during the darker scenes in Planet of the Apes, the darkness was a little darker and more pronounced, and in Spiderman 3, the gooey stuff was blacker as was the black Spiderman suit. So If on a scale of 1-10 with one being near white and ink black being 10, I would put the Panasonic somewhere around 7.5-8 and the Sanyo around solid 7. I guess the RS1 is the standard most reviewers compare against for black levels so for purposes of this comparison, I'm assuming its a 9-10. I just don't see how you can get very much blacker than what these two projectors produce. Especially when viewing the openinig scene of Casino Royale, the blacks were spectacular on both machines and I saw no difference between the two. Shadow detail is excellent on both machines.

The blacks are great on both machines in brighter scenes but you see the difference a little more when evaluating darker scenes (but this could be attributable to the sanyo being a bit dimmer - see below)

Regarding brightness, the panasonic has to get the nod. I had it set to cinema 1 and 2, which are supposed to be its optimal viewing modes and the screen was plenty bright to drive a 120" screen with no real loss of light (at least to my eyes). This was also with the bulb in eco-mode.

However, with the Sanyo, at 120" in pure cinema, the scenes were sufficiently dimmer than the panasonic to be quite noticable. At times, I clearly wished for more brightness whereas on the Panasonic, once I switched to the best modes, I never thought about wanting it brighter. This was the case when watching Spiderman when they're in the theater and his girlfriend is singing coming down the stairs. On the Sanyo, her face was dimmer as was her dress, the audience seemed a bit dimmer, as did the architecture of the auditorium. Same thing on Planet of the Apes, I wanted more brightness in many scenes while viewing on the Sanyo. The Panasonic performed well in all scenes in its best modes with the bulb in eco mode.

Now, the caveat: If you are willing to display your Sanyo in Brilliant Cinema for darker movies (and you want to go as large as 120") you will be fine in either full or half lamp mode (a subtle difference between these two lamp modes). To me, the Sanyo's brilliant cinema bests the panasonic's best modes in terms of brightness and the color accuracy is great. There were no brightness problems when viewing these same scenes in this mode.

In sum, I think the two projectors are very very close in terms of image quality. They both display an excellent picture and I think most would be happy with either one. There is no way the Panasonic is $1000 better than the Sanyo. However, if the price was equal I think the Panasonic would be the clear choice. If the price difference was $200-$400, I think the panasonic would still get the nod. However, once you cross the $500 threshold there is very little to justify paying the additional money for the panasonic, unless of course your viewing environment requires it.

I have already painted my ceiling in my dedicated theater room black, as is my front wall where the fixed screen will be mounted. I have 8 recessed lights with black trim kits in the ceiling and a black outlet. In terms of aesthetics, the Panasonic is going to be the better choice for me. Unless I decide to just mount the white projector and forget about it, or repaint.

I must admit, I like the brightness advantage of the panasonic. Is it enough to justify the cost difference, when I can just watch the projector in brilliant cinema mode when viewing dark movies? I don't know, that's what I need to decide.

The auto focus/zoom are nice on the panasonic but once you're set-up, no huge benefit...Smoothscreen is nice but inconsequential when more than a couple feet from the screen.

I think I'm a bit closer to deciding - at least pure picture quality is no longer an issue for me because I now know I'll be extremely happy with either...

The auto focus/zoom are nice on the panasonic but once you're set-up, no huge benefit...Smoothscreen is nice but inconsequential when more than a couple feet from the screen.


Thank you for taking the time to post your review. I am glad to find out that for 1080 projectors, Panasonic's SmoothScreen technology makes little practical difference.

If you decide to go with a constant-height approach but don't want to spend a fortune, then the remote zoom/focus/shift feature could be very important. Also, mounting the projector in such a way that the focus and shift remain constant as you zoom is also important.

If you decide to go with constant-height and are willing to spend a bit more to buy the anamorphic lens, then the ability of the projector to properly scale internally between 16x9 and 2.35 is important because it saves you the expense and inconvenience of needing an external scaler.

IMO you are going to the expense of setting up a dedicated theater, then the "wow" factor of having a CIH setup is well worth the effort. It may be worthwhile to rerun the screen-door test by zooming so an 2.35 image fills up the height of your 16x9 screen (and thus the sides spill over). At some point if the image is big enough, the SmoothScreen will make a difference.

Thanks princeton3 and Steve Burke for your thoughts - this thread has been worth sticking with to get this meaty review.

When you say the auto focus/zoom on the Panny are nice - does that mean the Sanyo doesn't have it on the remote or something or... no memory presets? The reason I can even think about leaving my beloved DLP is for the zoom for the poor-man's CIH so insight here is appreciated.

Also princeton3, any reason why one wouldn't want to leave the Sanyo on Brilliant Cinema all the time? Is there noise or artifacting or...?

When you say the auto focus/zoom on the Panny are nice - does that mean the Sanyo doesn't have it on the remote or something or... no memory presets? The reason I can even think about leaving my beloved DLP is for the zoom for the poor-man's CIH so insight here is appreciated.


The AE2000 is remote focus/zoom, manual lens shift. The Z2000 is manual everything. The Mitsubishi HC4900 is remote for all 3 but apparently has lower contrast.

Now, the caveat: If you are willing to display your Sanyo in Brilliant Cinema for darker movies (and you want to go as large as 120") you will be fine in either full or half lamp mode (a subtle difference between these two lamp modes). To me, the Sanyo's brilliant cinema bests the panasonic's best modes in terms of brightness and the color accuracy is great. There were no brightness problems when viewing these same scenes in this mode.




What does this do to the Sanyo's fan noise?

Thats not true. There are many people that split the HDMI signal. I am one of them. I have one HDMI cable going from my AVR to a Monoprice powered matrix HDMI 4x2 switch. From the HDMI switch I have two HDMI cables, one to my TV and another to my projector. The HDMI switch can be set many different ways. I have mine set so that the signal is automatically sent to both displays. In fact the cable going to my projector from the switch is very long. It consists of the following: 35 foot 22 ga. HDMI from switch to HDMI wall outlet. From wall outlet to projector I have a 15 foot 28 ga. HDMI cable.

Sending video only is easier than sending audio and video. If you need to split your HDMI I suggest buying this 4x2 switch: www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=101&cp_id=10110&cs_id=1011002&p_id=3728&seq=1&format=2


They do carry splitters (passive cable adopters) at monoprice. These work fine for splitting a DVI type computer signal with no HDCP but not for splitting BD type output. At the risk of hijacking this thread are you switching BD output?

Having said that, it is great to know that there is a possibility that this switch may work in my situation. Unfortuantely, with HDMI it seems that all components are different. Currently, I would like to send to both my TV and my projector just like you. I may invest in that switch....

PS I run a 75ft HDMI cable now with no problems except that I can;t run both devices.

I've had the Panny for 9 months and use it like a tv. I've put "alot" of hours on it...so far no dust blobs and the projector is still very bright. I like the fact it does vertical stretch and am spoiled with the power zoom and focus...Great product. :) I would choose the Panny over the Sanyo.

OK:

So I watched parts of the following movies: Spiderman 3, Planet of the Apes, Casino Royale, and Ratatouille. So as you can imagine, I had a nice variation of movies to observe black levels, shadow detail, sharpness, and what I now think is very important - brightness levels.

In terms of sharpness, these two projectors are very close. I had a hard time determining which I thought was sharper but on Spiderman 3 near the end when the Sandman is talking to Spiderman about his uncle's death (I assume because as I said I had no sound), you can see a bit more details in his face than you can on the Sanyo, i.e., crevices, hairs standing up, etc. You can also see the red blemishes on Spidey's face a tad better on the Panasonic. However, the difference is so minor that it is largely irrelevant. I mean you actually have to pause the projector to try to pick out differences. I think once both are properly calibrated there probably would be no discerable difference.

In terms of black levels, I would have to say that the panasonic is only slightly blacker (and I mean slightly). There is no huge difference between the two and the only reason I think the blacks are a bit more pronounced on the Panasonic is during the darker scenes in Planet of the Apes, the darkness was a little darker and more pronounced, and in Spiderman 3, the gooey stuff was blacker as was the black Spiderman suit. So If on a scale of 1-10 with one being near white and ink black being 10, I would put the Panasonic somewhere around 7.5-8 and the Sanyo around solid 7. I guess the RS1 is the standard most reviewers compare against for black levels so for purposes of this comparison, I'm assuming its a 9-10. I just don't see how you can get very much blacker than what these two projectors produce. Especially when viewing the openinig scene of Casino Royale, the blacks were spectacular on both machines and I saw no difference between the two. Shadow detail is excellent on both machines.

The blacks are great on both machines in brighter scenes but you see the difference a little more when evaluating darker scenes (but this could be attributable to the sanyo being a bit dimmer - see below)

Regarding brightness, the panasonic has to get the nod. I had it set to cinema 1 and 2, which are supposed to be its optimal viewing modes and the screen was plenty bright to drive a 120" screen with no real loss of light (at least to my eyes). This was also with the bulb in eco-mode.

However, with the Sanyo, at 120" in pure cinema, the scenes were sufficiently dimmer than the panasonic to be quite noticable. At times, I clearly wished for more brightness whereas on the Panasonic, once I switched to the best modes, I never thought about wanting it brighter. This was the case when watching Spiderman when they're in the theater and his girlfriend is singing coming down the stairs. On the Sanyo, her face was dimmer as was her dress, the audience seemed a bit dimmer, as did the architecture of the auditorium. Same thing on Planet of the Apes, I wanted more brightness in many scenes while viewing on the Sanyo. The Panasonic performed well in all scenes in its best modes with the bulb in eco mode.

Now, the caveat: If you are willing to display your Sanyo in Brilliant Cinema for darker movies (and you want to go as large as 120") you will be fine in either full or half lamp mode (a subtle difference between these two lamp modes). To me, the Sanyo's brilliant cinema bests the panasonic's best modes in terms of brightness and the color accuracy is great. There were no brightness problems when viewing these same scenes in this mode.

In sum, I think the two projectors are very very close in terms of image quality. They both display an excellent picture and I think most would be happy with either one. There is no way the Panasonic is $1000 better than the Sanyo. However, if the price was equal I think the Panasonic would be the clear choice. If the price difference was $200-$400, I think the panasonic would still get the nod. However, once you cross the $500 threshold there is very little to justify paying the additional money for the panasonic, unless of course your viewing environment requires it.

I have already painted my ceiling in my dedicated theater room black, as is my front wall where the fixed screen will be mounted. I have 8 recessed lights with black trim kits in the ceiling and a black outlet. In terms of aesthetics, the Panasonic is going to be the better choice for me. Unless I decide to just mount the white projector and forget about it, or repaint.

I must admit, I like the brightness advantage of the panasonic. Is it enough to justify the cost difference, when I can just watch the projector in brilliant cinema mode when viewing dark movies? I don't know, that's what I need to decide.

The auto focus/zoom are nice on the panasonic but once you're set-up, no huge benefit...Smoothscreen is nice but inconsequential when more than a couple feet from the screen.

I think I'm a bit closer to deciding - at least pure picture quality is no longer an issue for me because I now know I'll be extremely happy with either...


sounds like brightness is the only real issue for you. In that case, consider the High Power screen? The Sanyo has a better warranty and dust blob removal system. The Panasonic has a better default calibration in best mode, I believe.

Brilliant cinema mode on Sanyo is perfect for all movies including dark movies. This is perfect mode and much better than pure cinema (pure cinema is traditionally dark preset at Sanyo). I have calibrated mine based on brilliant mode and I am very happy with this. If Brilliant cinema is brighter that Panasonic cinema modes I would go for Sanyo.

I've had the Panny for 9 months and use it like a tv. I've put "alot" of hours on it...so far no dust blobs and the projector is still very bright. I like the fact it does vertical stretch and am spoiled with the power zoom and focus...Great product. :) I would choose the Panny over the Sanyo.
Thanks. It really is a great projector.

Thank you for taking the time to post your review. I am glad to find out that for 1080 projectors, Panasonic's SmoothScreen technology makes little practical difference.

If you decide to go with a constant-height approach but don't want to spend a fortune, then the remote zoom/focus/shift feature could be very important. Also, mounting the projector in such a way that the focus and shift remain constant as you zoom is also important.

If you decide to go with constant-height and are willing to spend a bit more to buy the anamorphic lens, then the ability of the projector to properly scale internally between 16x9 and 2.35 is important because it saves you the expense and inconvenience of needing an external scaler.

IMO you are going to the expense of setting up a dedicated theater, then the "wow" factor of having a CIH setup is well worth the effort. It may be worthwhile to rerun the screen-door test by zooming so an 2.35 image fills up the height of your 16x9 screen (and thus the sides spill over). At some point if the image is big enough, the SmoothScreen will make a difference.
Thanks. Also, I really need to read up on the stretch mode capabilities. I just figured I'd go with the 16x9 and that would be the end of the story. Can you please explain what you mean by constant height a bit more? I don't want to overlook this feature and then wish I had considered it. Thanks

Can you please explain what you mean by constant height a bit more? I don't want to overlook this feature and then wish I had considered it. Thanks

The idea behind CIH is that a 2.35 movie should look bigger than an 1.85 movie. So for example, the Sound of Music should look bigger than CSI Miami. You currently have a constant-width setup, which means 1.85 fills your entire screen, but 2.35 movies appear smaller because the top and bottom are wasted by black bars. In a CIH setup, you would have a 2.35 screen. When you watch CSI Miami, you would mask the left and right sides. When watching 2.35, the side masks open up.

The poor person's way of achieving this is to manually zoom so the entire height of your screen is always fully used. In many cases (depending on how you mount your projector) you may also need to refocus and readjust the horizontal and vertical shifts. That's why remote zoom/focus/shift is nice to have.

This also means that when viewing 2.35 movies, you are blowing up the picture more than in a constant-width approach. That was why I suggested that you should retest for screen-door effect by zooming a 2.35 movie until it fills your entire screen height-wise, with the sides overflowing.

There is also the rich person's approach, which involves putting an expensive anamorphic lens in front of your projector, and digitally rescaling the image. If you want more information, check out the CIH forum.

One of the reasons why I am setting up a dedicated home theater, instead of using the one in my living room, is to have CIH.

The idea behind CIH is that a 2.35 movie should look bigger than an 1.85 movie. So for example, the Sound of Music should look bigger than CSI Miami. You currently have a constant-width setup, which means 1.85 fills your entire screen, but 2.35 movies appear smaller because the top and bottom are wasted by black bars. In a CIH setup, you would have a 2.35 screen. When you watch CSI Miami, you would mask the left and right sides. When watching 2.35, the side masks open up.

The poor person's way of achieving this is to manually zoom so the entire height of your screen is always fully used. In many cases (depending on how you mount your projector) you may also need to refocus and readjust the horizontal and vertical shifts. That's why remote zoom/focus/shift is nice to have.

This also means that when viewing 2.35 movies, you are blowing up the picture more than in a constant-width approach. That was why I suggested that you should retest for screen-door effect by zooming a 2.35 movie until it fills your entire screen height-wise, with the sides overflowing.

There is also the rich person's approach, which involves putting an expensive anamorphic lens in front of your projector, and digitally rescaling the image. If you want more information, check out the CIH forum.

One of the reasons why I am setting up a dedicated home theater, instead of using the one in my living room, is to have CIH.
Thanks for the primer! This could change things a bit. I am definitely going to factor this feature into my decision. I appreciate the information.

So the sanyo doesn't have zoom and focus control on the remote?

Nope. None of the PJs don't put those controls on their remotes, unless they are motorized controls. Sanyo saves you money by using all manual zoom, focus, and lens shift controls. Just read the reviews, they tell you.

I've been going back and forth between the two myself and recently had a chance to see them both in action (though not at the same time and not in an optimal (batcave) environment). CIH is a "nice to have" feature if you go to the trouble of buying a 2.35 screen, put up masking curtains, etc for the sides, and watch a lot of 2.35 movies (and who doesn't). The Panasonic definitely gets the nod there, in fact I'd go so far as to say that if you are considering CIH at all the Z2000 is completely ruled out. There's your difference in price right there.

However, with it's $600+ rebate (extended to September) on top of an already lower price the Z2000 is clearly the winner in almost all other cases. After seeing them both I can't see the brightness difference being much of a deciding factor - the Panny is a little brighter, but not so much brighter as to make any meaningful difference; neither one does that well in any more than a little bit of ambient light, and in low-light/batcave environments I can't see it being any difference at all. Maybe if you are in a large room with white walls and have a 120+ inch screen the Panny would come out ahead.

At the end of the day, considering that they are both mid range 1080p projectors very close in picture quality, and that right now there is a flat out $800-1000 difference between the two (depending on which online vendors you prefer).... it's almost a no brainer unless you are specifically looking for a CIH setup.

Ix:
Your points are well-taken. Thanks for your contribution. For some reason, it hasn't been an easy decision for me (to say the least).

You mention cinema1, and 2, but not color1. Color1 is calibrated right out of the box on the ae2000. It uses an internal optical filter for color accuracy. The black level and contrast is best on that setting. With my previous PJs, I cranked them up to look like plasmas. I actually gave color1 a chance, and after awhile prefer it over the over settings. The depth, and clarity, is breathtaking at times.

Having said all that, if you don't see that much of difference between the two, go for the cheaper one. :)

Art

I am 95% sure that I will be going with the Panasonic...Thanks to everyone for all of your help and information. It is really appreciated.

I am 95% sure that I will be going with the Panasonic...Thanks to everyone for all of your help and information. It is really appreciated.

Tell us why you about to make this choice.

I've been going back and forth between the two myself and recently had a chance to see them both in action (though not at the same time and not in an optimal (batcave) environment). CIH is a "nice to have" feature if you go to the trouble of buying a 2.35 screen, put up masking curtains, etc for the sides, and watch a lot of 2.35 movies (and who doesn't). The Panasonic definitely gets the nod there, in fact I'd go so far as to say that if you are considering CIH at all the Z2000 is completely ruled out. There's your difference in price right there...

Just to throw another monkey-wrench into the equation:

If the difference in price between the 2 is $1000, you could purchase an external processor that allows you to do the stretch that CIH requires and have not only the same properties as the Panasonic, in terms of CIH, but also you could take advantage of the other features that the external processor would include (i.e. Auto Lipsync, CMS controls, etc).

Tell us why you about to make this choice.
I've watched three hours on both projectors and the more I watched the more the panasonic consistently displayed the better picture: the black levels are incrementally better; I think it is also somewhat sharper; it is brighter in the best viewing modes (and with bulb in eco-mode; whereas the Sanyo could only match the brightness of the Panasonic in brilliant cinema mode (of its best modes) but it seems like the projector runs really hot on this option and the iris is noticeable) and is also quieter in those modes; the iris is quieter overall in all modes; and the color saturation is a little better too. I just think if the Sanyo's best modes (Pure and Creative cinema) are already somewhat dim, and once the bulb ages and/or the projector is calibrated that the image will be too dim to drive 120."

It is also black and will fit into my theater better. The waveform feature is nice as is the split screen adjustment. Also, I may end up doing CIH and it would provide that capability more easily and probably for less than if I went with the Sanyo. So I figured I might as well go with it or else I may always wish I had... :)

Throwing in one more monkey-wrench. You may want to verify whether the refresh rate of the projector is high enough to handle 3D. Apparently you can already purchase movies on DVD like Spy Kid 3D that uses special glasses (not the awful red & green ones). However, the frequency of your projector needs to be high enough to support it. If you like more information, there is a 3D thread in the HDM forum.

Just to throw another monkey-wrench into the equation:

If the difference in price between the 2 is $1000, you could purchase an external processor that allows you to do the stretch that CIH requires and have not only the same properties as the Panasonic, in terms of CIH, but also you could take advantage of the other features that the external processor would include (i.e. Auto Lipsync, CMS controls, etc).

Some projector don't need an external scaler, but I am not sure if that applies to the Z2000 or the AE2000. But if you take that approach, you will neeed an anamorphic lens, which I understand the good ones are expensive.

The big difference between the cheap & expensive approach is that the latter can change between 1.85 and 2.35 in a fraction of a second, whereas the zoom approach takes about 5 seconds. Imagine you are showing your friends the Enchanted Blu-Ray, and the first cartoon part is 1.85, but when it goes to live action it expands to 2.35, and in a fraction of a second you make this switch, and your side curtain open to display it. For me, that "wow factor" is worth the price.

Throwing in one more monkey-wrench. You may want to verify whether the refresh rate of the projector is high enough to handle 3D. Apparently you can already purchase movies on DVD like Spy Kid 3D that uses special glasses (not the awful red & green ones). However, the frequency of your projector needs to be high enough to support it. If you like more information, there is a 3D thread in the HDM forum.
Thanks, Steve! You're a wealth of knowledge. I'm going to look into that...

Is that the 120hz I see on the new lcd flat panels?

So you are going for the Ae2000? If I were you, and have the necessary fund, I would definitely get Epson 1080UB. It's just a few hundreds dollar more that AE2000 but produce extremely well Black level and very high bright, exactly 1600 lumen to exact. If the Made in China is your concern, than extra few hundreds dollars for extended warranty would take care of that concern. I personally own z2000. my only two reason for getting z2000 is the $1549.00 price tag (very affordable), and manufactures 3 year warranty. If I had the necessary money, i would have get 1080UB, it so much better, according to one review I readied, the 1080UB is consider to be the best projector in it class.

Thanks, Steve! You're a wealth of knowledge. I'm going to look into that...

So you are going for the Ae2000? If I were you, and have the necessary fund, I would definitely get Epson 1080UB. It's just a few hundreds dollar more that AE2000 but produce extremely well Black level and very high bright, exactly 1600 lumen to exact. If the Made in China is your concern, than extra few hundreds dollars for extended warranty would take care of that concern. I personally own z2000. my only two reason for getting z2000 is the $1549.00 price tag (very affordable), and manufactures 3 year warranty. If I had the necessary money, i would have get 1080UB, it so much better, according to one review I readied, the 1080UB is consider to be the best projector in it class.
Thanks for the suggestion.

I seriously considered the 1080UB but the folks in that forum seem to really be having some serious convergence problems with that projector. Also, I'm not too fond of the noise level it produces in its brighter modes and I've heard the iris is a bit noisy too. While black levels are important to me, I think the Panasonic might be better for me overall.

Thanks

I agree with your decision. After much research on those 3 (Z2000, AE2000, & 1080UB), I'm zeroing on the AE2000 also. I'm glad you had the opportunity to see both the Z2000 & AE2000 at the same time. Your observations have really helped me. I agree, the 1080UB is significantly louder than the AE2000. Since my PJ sits about a foot behind my left ear (in the exhaust path), the 1080UB could be very disturbing.

In my case, I have a 106" Da-Lite High-Power screen (gain = 2.8), so even the relatively dim Z2000 would work in my setup with no problems. I bought my screen when I had a PJ that was about as bright as the dimmest output of the Z2000. My concern is that even the AE2000 might be too bright. However, if that's the case, I can always get another ND2 filter to cut the output, or move the PJ back to the rear wall (which will cut the brightness by 29% vs the 50% of the ND2).

I agree with your decision. After much research on those 3 (Z2000, AE2000, & 1080UB), I'm zeroing on the AE2000 also. I'm glad you had the opportunity to see both the Z2000 & AE2000 at the same time. Your observations have really helped me. I agree, the 1080UB is significantly louder than the AE2000. Since my PJ sits about a foot behind my left ear (in the exhaust path), the 1080UB could be very disturbing.

In my case, I have a 106" Da-Lite High-Power screen (gain = 2.8), so even the relatively dim Z2000 would work in my setup with no problems. I bought my screen when I had a PJ that was about as bright as the dimmest output of the Z2000. My concern is that even the AE2000 might be too bright. However, if that's the case, I can always get another ND2 filter to cut the output, or move the PJ back to the rear wall (which will cut the brightness by 29% vs the 50% of the ND2).
I'm glad I was able to help you with your decision; it is very difficult trying to purchase a projector sight unseen. I think you will be extremely happy with the Panasonic. The Epson sounds like a great machine but the Panasonic is also great. The brightness it puts out is perfect for my application and the machine is very quiet; two major pluses. Of Course, they both have their relative strengths and weaknesses and I don't think either clearly beats the other. My sales rep at Projectorpeople told me the Panasonic is the #1 selling 1080P projector hands-down, followed by the 1080UB, the 4900 and the Z2000.

I agree with your decision. After much research on those 3 (Z2000, AE2000, & 1080UB), I'm zeroing on the AE2000 also. I'm glad you had the opportunity to see both the Z2000 & AE2000 at the same time. Your observations have really helped me. I agree, the 1080UB is significantly louder than the AE2000. Since my PJ sits about a foot behind my left ear (in the exhaust path), the 1080UB could be very disturbing.

In my case, I have a 106" Da-Lite High-Power screen (gain = 2.8), so even the relatively dim Z2000 would work in my setup with no problems. I bought my screen when I had a PJ that was about as bright as the dimmest output of the Z2000. My concern is that even the AE2000 might be too bright. However, if that's the case, I can always get another ND2 filter to cut the output, or move the PJ back to the rear wall (which will cut the brightness by 29% vs the 50% of the ND2).
The Sony VW40 seems like it could fit the bill as well...Your thoughts?

So which one are keeping?




The Sony VW40 seems like it could fit the bill as well...Your thoughts?

So which one are keeping?
I ended up keeping the AE2000. It was a very difficult choice; niether is clearly better than the other in my view.

I ended up keeping the AE2000. It was a very difficult choice; niether is clearly better than the other in my view.

ok, glad you made a decision, but I'm scratching my head a bit: if it was difficult decision because one is not clearly better than the other (as you say above), then why not keep the Sanyo instead of the Panasonic since it is clearly much cheaper, has a better warranty, and a better anti-dust blob system? What am I missing here?

Very cool input. I am at your level of understanding all of the technical options..
I have a few questions about Mounts and Screen Gain if you can help as well..
I am honestly not worried about 1k+-, if the Panny is really the better one to get.

Cost:
But at the same time if you look at:
$1500 for 3 years = $500 a year.
$2500 for 3 years = $833. More than the cost of a bulb every year..
In 3 years, you would already have $1k towards a newer technology projector.. making the next one you buy as low as $500-$1,000. :) Just a thought.

Experience:
I am living through you Princeton3. Up until the thread stating you were choosing the Panny, I really was thinking "This is great! He is choosing the Sanyo, my decision is made as well." Now I am stuck again..

I am coming from a wonderful Sanyo PLC-XP21N (http://www.projectorcentral.com/ht_sanyo21.htm) (Anyone interested in this?) One of the first 1080i projectors on the scene and it's been rocking, but ready for an upgrade. It's been 6? Years, and the MSRP was $7-10k. :eek:

This monster was BRIGHT! So I went with The Grayhawk 100" 4x3 rated at ~0.95 gain.
So based on your reviews, and my (not) understanding of gains.. It sounds like if I get the Panny, I should get a gray screen still? If I get the Sanyo, I should get a white (1.+) gain screen? My wife has concerns about a white screen, because she thinks it will stick out too much on the wall. She is used to the very dark gray screen currently.

Take a look here at some old pics I took of HD 1080i Satallite pictures on this gray screen. Still pictures don't show how good it really looks, but I am excited if these two projectors are that much better than this.
HD-View no light1 (http://www.thewilsonclan.com/Files/HD-View1.JPG)
HD-View no light2 (http://www.thewilsonclan.com/Files/HD-View2.JPG)
HD-View of screen and picture with halogen light on (http://www.thewilsonclan.com/Files/HD-View3.JPG)

Mount:
I can't find what mount I have for the older Sanyo. Does anyone know if the mounting holes are the same? Do I need a new mount? I really hope not, the one I have is great, and looks brand new still ;)

Screen Size/Throw Distance:
Ok, now the real question. What can I do with this baby size wise. Mounted already in my ceiling ~13.1' back from the wall is a big black pole mounted to the ceiling. If my mount works, then I would like to leave the new projector in this location. Can I get 106-120" at this distance? For 100" 4x3, I could get 100" diag. Or am I going to have a lot of drywall work to move the brace mount and run wires back further? Really would like to avoid that..

Pedro2 -- The Sanyo is not as bright, has slightly poorer black levels, and Sanyo has had some problems with their warranty response (it's longer warranty is only part of the equation). Price isn't the only factor. Clearly, princeton3 feels the AE2000 is a better value (and I agree, based on my research).

Guardian1 -- Your cost analysis is a little biased. Unless you use the PJ a lot, a lamp will last around 2 years, or so. There is more to a good PJ than just the actuarial data. And remember, you can't believe the advertised lumen and contrast numbers, they're way higher than you will get after proper calibration, in their best movie modes.

The PLC-XP21N is only a 1024 x 768 (4:3) PJ that happens to accept a 1080i input – it is not a 1080i PJ (those don't exist anyway, for a fixed pixel display). It is also a real light canon, designed for presentation use. The Z2000 is about 5x to 10x dimmer – around 250 – 350 lumens (best mode) vs. around 1800 lumens. None of the current 1080p PJs can even come close to the light output of your XP21N, even in their worst (brightest) picture modes (and the Sanyo PLV-Z2000 is the dimmest of the lot).

The XP21N is a totally different case design. You will need to get a different ceiling mount for any of the new 1080p PJs. You can download the manuals from the manufacturer's web sites. The mounting hole patterns are given in each manual. Your 13.1' mounting distance is great for any of the current 1080p LCD PJs.

According to the Projector Central Projection calculator (http://www.projectorcentral.com/Sanyo-PLV-Z2000-projection-calculator-pro.htm), you can use a 66” to a 132” diagonal, 16:9, screen from 13.1'. Anything over a 106” diagonal will be very dim – it, also, looses about 50% of it's brightness over it's full 2:1 zoom ratio. You will likely have to replace your screen too (and go with a higher gain screen).

IMHO, for your setup, I would recommend that you don't get the Z2000, you will be very disappointed, since it will be just too dim with any screen 80” wide (yours) or wider (my 106”, 16:9, screen is 92” x 52”). The Panasonic PT-AE2000 is a lot brighter and even that would need a gain = 1.4 screen (or higher) to get a watchable (less than half as bright as your current setup) picture with a 106” screen, with one of its brighter modes. BTW, it looks like a 106", 16:9, screen would fit perfectly. You do need to do a lot more research on the newer PJ models, however (see www.projectorreviews.com).

PS – I personally think that you are running your PJ way too bright. I got eyestrain, just looking at your photos. The THX recommendations are for around 18-24 ft-L and you seem (my guess) to be running at around 50-60 ft-L.

Pedro2 -- The Sanyo is not as bright, has slightly poorer black levels, and Sanyo has had some problems with their warranty response (it's longer warranty is only part of the equation). Price isn't the only factor. Clearly, princeton3 feels the AE2000 is a better value (and I agree, based on my research).

Guardian1 -- Your cost analysis is a little biased. Unless you use the PJ a lot, a lamp will last around 2 years, or so. There is more to a good PJ than just the actuarial data. And remember, you can't believe the advertised lumen and contrast numbers, they're way higher than you will get after proper calibration, in their best movie modes.

The PLC-XP21N is only a 1024 x 768 (4:3) PJ that happens to accept a 1080i input – it is not a 1080i PJ (those don't exist anyway, for a fixed pixel display). It is also a real light canon, designed for presentation use. The Z2000 is about 5x to 10x dimmer – around 250 – 350 lumens (best mode) vs. around 1800 lumens. None of the current 1080p PJs can even come close to the light output of your XP21N, even in their worst (brightest) picture modes (and the Sanyo PLV-Z2000 is the dimmest of the lot).

The XP21N is a totally different case design. You will need to get a different ceiling mount for any of the new 1080p PJs. You can download the manuals from the manufacturer's web sites. The mounting hole patterns are given in each manual. Your 13.1' mounting distance is great for any of the current 1080p LCD PJs.

According to the Projector Central Projection calculator (http://www.projectorcentral.com/Sanyo-PLV-Z2000-projection-calculator-pro.htm), you can use a 66” to a 132” diagonal, 16:9, screen from 13.1'. Anything over a 106” diagonal will be very dim – it, also, looses about 50% of it's brightness over it's full 2:1 zoom ratio. You will likely have to replace your screen too (and go with a higher gain screen).

IMHO, for your setup, I would recommend that you don't get the Z2000, you will be very disappointed, since it will be just too dim with any screen 80” wide (yours) or wider (my 106”, 16:9, screen is 92” x 52”). The Panasonic PT-AE2000 is a lot brighter and even that would need a gain = 1.4 screen (or higher) to get a watchable (less than half as bright as your current setup) picture with a 106” screen, with one of its brighter modes. BTW, it looks like a 106", 16:9, screen would fit perfectly. You do need to do a lot more research on the newer PJ models, however (see www.projectorreviews.com).

PS – I personally think that you are running your PJ way too bright. I got eyestrain, just looking at your photos. The THX recommendations are for around 18-24 ft-L and you seem (my guess) to be running at around 50-60 ft-L.

Good post. I agree with everything you said except for the no 1080i fixed pixel displays. Hitachi makes 1080i fixed pixel displays. Look at the Hitachi P50T501 50-Inch HD1080 Plasma HDTV.

-Claus
Thanks for the detailed response! Man I love you guys. :)
A few thoughts on your points:

1. Completely agree on cost biased. What I meant was that you could potentially have 3 bulbs+ free with the Sanyo. OR items/bulbs removed, the 1k savings is a major % of the total cost of either projector. Should have left cost out I suppose.

2. Brightness - I agree my original was a monster, and brighter than it needed to be. I will be selling the screen, as I would not be happy with only a 80" diag. I really want to go 106-120". And mount for sure since you say I need a new mount. May keep the projector and use it outside for party's etc..

3. Throw Distance/Brightness. This is where I fall way behind on understanding. I am sure I am missing something simple. I had been looking at that calculator you linked, but when I slide it to say 110" Vertical it is telling me I need the projector 14' 8" back. You mentioned zoom? This is going to go down another path for me, but may help others as well. I want to get the absolute best picture quality, SO:

a. Zoom - Digital vs. Analog? vs. None? If you zoom even with digital doesn't this create a degrade is quality? The native image will be your best? So you would want to have the projector back from the screen the exact distance to fill the screen size that you buy?

b. Height from ceiling - I understood the only way to get this on my old projector was to drop the projector from the ceiling (9' at my location) down to where I don't have to use "keystone" which created these jagged lines on the sides, and must degrade picture quality. As you can see in my pictures above, top of screen is about 2-3 feet below the ceiling. So I had to add an extension pole so I wouldn't use keystone. I imagine this is the new lens shift? Even 2-3 feet down from ceiling is not IDEAL viewing, as your eyes should be level with the center of the screen. Correct? To do this the projector has to be down pretty far...

3. Screen Gain - You say 1.4 gain. Is this still a gray screen? Or Would I need to go white? Again don't have a full understanding, since it was easy with my old projector I knew I just needed a dark gray screen. .95 is what I had. Buying a new one I can do anything, no limitations, only the wall size. :D
Actually, my wife and I are really liking this look, and hope I can get at least 106" diag scree for this:
Wall Entertainment System: (http://www.audioholics.com/buying-guides/reference-systems/reference-system-2/image/image_view_fullscreen)

A high power screen and keeping the screen at 106" or smaller should solve the brightness limitations with the Sanyo (if such a screen works in one's setup).

One real advantage of the Panasonic that is too often overlooked is that the color1 setting (?) is pretty spot on in terms of calibration, whereas the Sanyo needs substantial tweaking.

-Claus
Thanks for the detailed response! Man I love you guys. :)
A few thoughts on your points:

1. Completely agree on cost biased. What I meant was that you could potentially have 3 bulbs+ free with the Sanyo. OR items/bulbs removed, the 1k savings is a major % of the total cost of either projector. Should have left cost out I suppose.

2. Brightness - I agree my original was a monster, and brighter than it needed to be. I will be selling the screen, as I would not be happy with only a 80" diag. I really want to go 106-120". And mount for sure since you say I need a new mount. May keep the projector and use it outside for party's etc..

3. Throw Distance/Brightness. This is where I fall way behind on understanding. I am sure I am missing something simple. I had been looking at that calculator you linked, but when I slide it to say 110" Vertical it is telling me I need the projector 14' 8" back. You mentioned zoom? This is going to go down another path for me, but may help others as well. I want to get the absolute best picture quality, SO:

a. Zoom - Digital vs. Analog? vs. None? If you zoom even with digital doesn't this create a degrade is quality? The native image will be your best? So you would want to have the projector back from the screen the exact distance to fill the screen size that you buy?

b. Height from ceiling - I understood the only way to get this on my old projector was to drop the projector from the ceiling (9' at my location) down to where I don't have to use "keystone" which created these jagged lines on the sides, and must degrade picture quality. As you can see in my pictures above, top of screen is about 2-3 feet below the ceiling. So I had to add an extension pole so I wouldn't use keystone. I imagine this is the new lens shift? Even 2-3 feet down from ceiling is not IDEAL viewing, as your eyes should be level with the center of the screen. Correct? To do this the projector has to be down pretty far...

3. Screen Gain - You say 1.4 gain. Is this still a gray screen? Or Would I need to go white? Again don't have a full understanding, since it was easy with my old projector I knew I just needed a dark gray screen. .95 is what I had. Buying a new one I can do anything, no limitations, only the wall size. :D
Actually, my wife and I are really liking this look, and hope I can get at least 106" diag scree for this:
Wall Entertainment System: (http://www.audioholics.com/buying-guides/reference-systems/reference-system-2/image/image_view_fullscreen)

To use the Sanyo calculator: www.projectorcentral.com/Sanyo-PLV-Z2000-projection-calculator-pro.htm Set your throw distance at 13'. Then go to the upper left hand corner and click on diagonal range. The numbers in this box show the maximum to minimum size screen that you can use when the projector is mounted at 13 foot throw. If you use a 1.0 gain screen then you will have about 15 FL on a 106" screen. Works well with a new bulb, but not very good once the bulb has dimmed to the point that your FL is 8 FL. You would need to run the projector in standard mode rather than economy, meaning more noise and more wear on the bulb. If you go with the Sanyo and a 106" to 110" screen I would consider a screen with some gain.

I've watched three hours on both projectors and the more I watched the more the panasonic consistently displayed the better picture: the black levels are incrementally better; I think it is also somewhat sharper; it is brighter in the best viewing modes (and with bulb in eco-mode; whereas the Sanyo could only match the brightness of the Panasonic in brilliant cinema mode (of its best modes) but it seems like the projector runs really hot on this option and the iris is noticeable) and is also quieter in those modes; the iris is quieter overall in all modes; and the color saturation is a little better too. I just think if the Sanyo's best modes (Pure and Creative cinema) are already somewhat dim, and once the bulb ages and/or the projector is calibrated that the image will be too dim to drive 120."

It is also black and will fit into my theater better. The waveform feature is nice as is the split screen adjustment. Also, I may end up doing CIH and it would provide that capability more easily and probably for less than if I went with the Sanyo. So I figured I might as well go with it or else I may always wish I had... :)

Here are my reasons again for chosing the Panasonic...

Good post. I agree with everything you said except for the no 1080i fixed pixel displays. Hitachi makes 1080i fixed pixel displays. Look at the Hitachi P50T501 50-Inch HD1080 Plasma HDTV.According to Sound & Vision (http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/hdtvs/2284/hitachi-p50t501-50-inch-plasma-hdtv.html):Hitachi P50T501 50-inch plasma HDTV maxes out at 1,280 x 1,080 pixelsSorry, it is still a fixed pixel display and has to convert all incoming signals to it's native 1280 x 1080 format, before it displays it (the signal is both de-interlaced and scaled, and/or cropped). That is not an "interlaced" display. Only variable pixel displays (= CRT) display interlaced video. As I said, it will accept 1080i video, but it will automatically de-interlace the signal before displaying it.

Guardian1 -- All of the "boxes" in the Projection calculator are variable, as mjg100 said. Saying it another way, you use the "Diagonal" box to set the screen diagonal dimension and the, upper left, distance box to set the distance from the PJ lens to the screen. All of the "boxes' interact with each other. You have to "play with it for a while" to understand how to use it to give you the information you need. Here is the same calculator for your XP51: http://www.projectorcentral.com/Sanyo-PLC-XP51-projection-calculator-pro.htm.

The zoom is optical (like a zoom lens in a camera), not digital. It doesn't effect the picture quality, but does effect the brightness of the picture, since it's f-stop varies with the amount of zoom used.

You don't use any "Keystone". Both the Z2000 and the AE2000 (and most other LCD PJs) have "Lens Shift" (also optical) which can adjust the picture up and down by at least a full screen height (lens placed in line with the top or bottom of the screen). See http://www.projectorreviews.com/sanyo/plv-z2000/performance.php#lens and http://www.projectorreviews.com/panasonic/pt-ae2000u/performance.php#lens for the 2 PJs discussed here.

I have no experience with the Epson, or Panny, but I have owned the Z2000 for almost a year now.

I can tell you a reasonably tweaked/calibrated Z2000 produces an absolutely fantastic picture for about 80-90% of the scenes out there... that is, bright scenes with plenty lighting.

Where the Z2000 falls short, is in some dark scenes of very dark movies. The black leves aren't too bad, but the fact that the PJ is using IRIS tricks to make them dark, also affects the lighter/whiter parts of the picture in those scenes, and does not allow them to stand out clearly enough. (Think a partially lit face on a completely dark room)

It bothers me on very few scenes, of very few movies. I have no clue how the Panny or Epson would handle those scenes. I know my old DLP infocus 4805 did much better in those for sure.

Regardless, the Z2000 has been absolutely fantastic for my viewing needs. Every PJ has shortcomings. It's a matter of you choosing the one that has the shortcomings in the areas that will bother you the least!

gnolivos, has the lens focus drift problem been solved on the Z2000?

Nope. Others have mentioned having the same issue, so it is not my particular PJ, or my imagination!

At any rate, I consider this to be a very minor issue, to the extent that I don't even touch the focus ring anymore. If it is drifting off focus, I am really not noticing it unless Iwalk up to the screen and look for the pixels.


gnolivos, has the lens focus drift problem been solved on the Z2000?

The Sony VW40 seems like it could fit the bill as well...Your thoughts?

After seeing that the Sanyo had no remote zoom (and I also heard about mechanical issues with the auto lens cover, preferring the AE2000 only to find that I couldn't get a reasonable price on it here in Canada, I was enlightened about the Sony VW40.

This is the projector I went for. It seems that the reviewers prefer it over the AE2000, when comparing black level capability, and it's real competition is the Epson 1080UB, the more expensive VW60 and the JVC RS1.

I ordered the VW40 and have been very impressed with the lack of pixel definition (except when up very close - which is a definite advantage when adjusting focus) the ultra quiet fan and the general versatility of the unit. Having a LCoS/SXRD technology over 3LCD was the deciding factor for me. It just feels like a step up when you know the best in class is the JVC RS1 with LCoS.

On the slightly negative side - it's a large unit (however, I don't think the AE2000 is much smaller), and it has less inputs than the Panny (but do you _really_ need 3 HDMIs?), default Sony warranty is only one year, and it needs some calibration out of the box.

After seeing that the Sanyo had no remote zoom (and I also heard about mechanical issues with the auto lens cover, preferring the AE2000 only to find that I couldn't get a reasonable price on it here in Canada, I was enlightened about the Sony VW40.

This is the projector I went for. It seems that the reviewers prefer it over the AE2000, when comparing black level capability, and it's real competition is the Epson 1080UB, the more expensive VW60 and the JVC RS1.

I ordered the VW40 and have been very impressed with the lack of pixel definition (except when up very close - which is a definite advantage when adjusting focus) the ultra quiet fan and the general versatility of the unit. Having a LCoS/SXRD technology over 3LCD was the deciding factor for me. It just feels like a step up when you know the best in class is the JVC RS1 with LCoS.

On the slightly negative side - it's a large unit (however, I don't think the AE2000 is much smaller), and it has less inputs than the Panny (but do you _really_ need 3 HDMIs?), default Sony warranty is only one year, and it needs some calibration out of the box.
The Sony VW40 is a very nice projector. My local Bestbuy has it set-up and while I thought the blacks were slightly better on it, I thought the Panasonic's picture was a bit sharper and looked as film like, or maybe even more film like, especially in close distance where pixelation is a nonissue on the AE2000. The unit I saw was not calibrated so the picture pushed towards green that would require some tweaking or maybe even calibration. In terms of set-up flexibility, the lack of a real and substantial horizontal lens shift (only 6 inches and requires opening the projector) was a negative for me as was the throw distance capabilities. The colors on the panasonic were also more vibrant to me. Also, I did not like the idea of only having a one year warranty or having to spring for an extended warranty.

To many people, black level is the end all be all-but really it is just one aspect of a projector to consider amongst numerous other equally important aspects. To me, overall the panasonic fit my criteria a little better and for less money.

The Sony VW40 is a very nice projector. My local Bestbuy has it set-up and while I thought the blacks were slightly better on it, I thought the Panasonic's picture was a bit sharper and looked as film like, or maybe even more film like, especially in close distance where pixelation is a nonissue on the AE2000. The unit I saw was not calibrated so the picture pushed towards green that would require some tweaking or maybe even calibration. In terms of set-up flexibility, the lack of a real and substantial horizontal lens shift (only 6 inches and requires opening the projector) was a negative for me as was the throw distance capabilities. The colors on the panasonic were also more vibrant to me. Also, I did not like the idea of only having a one year warranty or having to spring for an extended warranty.

To many people, black level is the end all be all-but really it is just one aspect of a projector to consider amongst numerous other equally important aspects. To me, overall the panasonic fit my criteria a little better and for less money.
And speaking of inputs, I don't recall the VW40 supporting hdmi 1.3 deep color (but I could be wrong). Can someone confirm?

Nope. Others have mentioned having the same issue, so it is not my particular PJ, or my imagination!

At any rate, I consider this to be a very minor issue, to the extent that I don't even touch the focus ring anymore. If it is drifting off focus, I am really not noticing it unless Iwalk up to the screen and look for the pixels.

Sounds like this is a defect one can live with. Still trying to decide between this projector and one of the older bargain-priced DLPs (particularly the Sharp DT-510 and Marantz 4001). I need a very short throw for my 92" HP screen, so all of these would work.

Red-3 -- The AE2000 is considerably smaller than the VW40 (they're about the same width, but the Sony is 2" taller and 7" deeper). At 18.6" deep, the Sony won't fit on my 15" deep shelf. The VW40 does have better black levels (but not as good as the JVC RS2). The LCoS PJs (VW40/50/60 & RS1/2), like the AE2000 (LCD w/Smooth Screen) have almost no visible pixels, at any viewing distance over 6".

princeton3 -- You are partially right. The Sony VW40 has HDMI 1.3 compatible inputs, but does not support "Deep Color" (see http://www.projectorreviews.com/sony/vpl-vw40/proscons.php about 2/3 down the page, under "Cons"). It, like the Z2000 does not support CH (constant height) screen use, as the AE2000 does (only important to some prospective owners).

Pedro2 -- You might want to read this article: http://www.projectorreviews.com/advice/1080p_vs_720p_projectors/index.php. It really would depend on what your viewing habits are (SD DVDs, BD DVDs, & SD/HDTV - only the BD DVDs have any real advantage). A good, older model, 720p DLP, like the ones you mentioned, can be an excellent choice. Although they only have 1280 x 720 (768) resolution, they will show a quality picture roughly equal to the newer 1080p LCDs, in every way except for the number of pixels. The Sharp DT-510 looks like it has a negative fixed offset, so be careful, you may not be able to mount it conveniently (I would recommend the Marantz anyway, it's a better PJ, IMHO, and it has vertical lens shift).

I am addicted to this thread!! Every article is so good..
So, I think I have made a decision: The Panasonic AE2000U.

1. What do the experts think about buying the Panasonic AFTER 6-3-0-08 when the rebate for blockbusters goes away? I honestly have no need for this, and will never use one rental most likely.

2. I can't imagine Panasonic will drop their warranty, and to compete with the Sanyo, maybe offer a rebate worth something? If it were a $400+ cash rebate I would buy it today. But to me this is $2600 with a warranty..

3. Removed to not get in trouble by AVS police ;) No talking prices.. Just have to overpay if your not in the know :)

1. So far they have extended that offer twice. I would expect that it will be extended again. It depends on whether Sanyo keeps extending their rebates, or not. Panasonic can't afford to get too far from the Sanyo price (or too close to the Epson Home Cinema 1080UB price either).

2. The competition has been mainly on price (or the customers perception of price). The warranty difference has never bothered them. A lot of other manufacturers in this price class also only have 1 year warranties. I agree on your assessment, although I've never rented DVDs before, if i got the AE2000, then I would start (advantage = not paying for bad BD DVD transfers, and there are a number of those). I will be upgrading to a Blu-Ray DVD player also, when the next models get released.

3. I don't know what they offer, for extended warranties, but my favorites are either direct from AVS sales or from one of the other AVS Forum Alliance Members. They offer a 1 year extended warranty (+ 2 years on the lamp) for a good price (in addition to what Panasonic offers). Another good one (although expensive) is the AVS special (Item #23 for PJs: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/vbclassified.php?do=ad&id=1826). It's a 4 year extended warranty + 2 lamps in 3 years. One Out-of-Factory Warranty service call or 2 lamps will more than pay for it.

PS -- We aren't supposed to discuss street prices on these forums (or dealers either) - it's against the forum rules, since AVS also sells AV products. If you aren't careful, you can get this thread shut down. I would strongly recommend that you edit your last post.

According to Sound & Vision (http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/hdtvs/2284/hitachi-p50t501-50-inch-plasma-hdtv.html):Sorry, it is still a fixed pixel display and has to convert all incoming signals to it's native 1280 x 1080 format, before it displays it (the signal is both de-interlaced and scaled, and/or cropped). That is not an "interlaced" display. Only variable pixel displays (= CRT) display interlaced video. As I said, it will accept 1080i video, but it will automatically de-interlace the signal before displaying it.

Guardian1 -- All of the "boxes" in the Projection calculator are variable, as mjg100 said. Saying it another way, you use the "Diagonal" box to set the screen diagonal dimension and the, upper left, distance box to set the distance from the PJ lens to the screen. All of the "boxes' interact with each other. You have to "play with it for a while" to understand how to use it to give you the information you need. Here is the same calculator for your XP51: http://www.projectorcentral.com/Sanyo-PLC-XP51-projection-calculator-pro.htm.

The zoom is optical (like a zoom lens in a camera), not digital. It doesn't effect the picture quality, but does effect the brightness of the picture, since it's f-stop varies with the amount of zoom used.

You don't use any "Keystone". Both the Z2000 and the AE2000 (and most other LCD PJs) have "Lens Shift" (also optical) which can adjust the picture up and down by at least a full screen height (lens placed in line with the top or bottom of the screen). See http://www.projectorreviews.com/sanyo/plv-z2000/performance.php#lens and http://www.projectorreviews.com/panasonic/pt-ae2000u/performance.php#lens for the 2 PJs discussed here.

Sorry CT. I will try to engage my brain first. Of course it can't be interlaced. I just remembered that the Hitachi was in between 720p and 1080p and for some reason I jumped to the conclusion that it was 1080i. I remembered this because my father-in-law asked me to research 50" plasma's for him last year.

I have no experience with the Epson, or Panny, but I have owned the Z2000 for almost a year now.

I can tell you a reasonably tweaked/calibrated Z2000 produces an absolutely fantastic picture for about 80-90% of the scenes out there... that is, bright scenes with plenty lighting.

Where the Z2000 falls short, is in some dark scenes of very dark movies. The black leves aren't too bad, but the fact that the PJ is using IRIS tricks to make them dark, also affects the lighter/whiter parts of the picture in those scenes, and does not allow them to stand out clearly enough. (Think a partially lit face on a completely dark room)

It bothers me on very few scenes, of very few movies. I have no clue how the Panny or Epson would handle those scenes. I know my old DLP infocus 4805 did much better in those for sure.

Regardless, the Z2000 has been absolutely fantastic for my viewing needs. Every PJ has shortcomings. It's a matter of you choosing the one that has the shortcomings in the areas that will bother you the least!

That was my problem with my Epson HC400. I mostly use my projector for movies and that bugged the crap out of me. To bring out the shadow detail you had make the blacks light gray. Bright images like sports looked very good.

Sounds like this is a defect one can live with. Still trying to decide between this projector and one of the older bargain-priced DLPs (particularly the Sharp DT-510 and Marantz 4001). I need a very short throw for my 92" HP screen, so all of these would work.

The 4001 is not a good projector for a HP screen (coffee table mount can work) due to the fixed offset. While technically it has vertical lens shift. The lens shift has to do with using a 768p projector projecting a 720p image. To give you an idea on how little the vertical shift it has, a 100" image has +/- 1-41/64" of adjustment. The offset (lens center to bottom of image) for a 100" image is 7-1/64".

table mounting between the seating areas would place the Marantz/Sharp projectors about 7 inches below the bottom of the screen and about a foot below eye-level--which seems to be a good fit for a HP screen (right?).

Pedro2 -- Right! That will work for either of those DLPs. However, my concern is that either of them should project a picture that may (or will) be too (or way too) bright with a HP screen (with its gain = 2.8). Projector Central indicates around 47 ft-L with the HP screen (= twice as bright as it should be, 18 to 24 ft-L). Viewing a PJ at 28 ft-L is considered to be very bright, even with ambient light in the room.

You never want to run a projector at a brightness similar to a 50" or smaller LCD or plasma TV set. That is just asking for severe eyestrain, headaches, fatigue, etc. Your relative viewing distances and conditions are grossly different. Don't fall into that trap.

From the Marantz VP4001 AVS thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=885398), it sounds like the users are going with a low gain screen (1.0 to 1.4) in the 100" range (96" to 106") with excellent results. With the 720p DLP PJ that I have, that would be about right.

With my comparable 720p DLP and my HP screen, I had to use a ND2 filter to cut the brightness by 50% in order to just be able to watch it (without getting instant eyestrain & headaches).

The Sharp DT-510 would be similar - I still would recommend the Marantz VP4001, especially if you can get it for close to the same price (better lens and better construction).

Pedro2 -- Right! That will work for either of those DLPs. However, my concern is that either of them should project a picture that may (or will) be too (or way too) bright with a HP screen (with its gain = 2.8). Projector Central indicates around 47 ft-L with the HP screen (= twice as bright as it should be, 18 to 24 ft-L). Viewing a PJ at 28 ft-L is considered to be very bright, even with ambient light in the room.

You never want to run a projector at a brightness similar to a 50" or smaller LCD or plasma TV set. That is just asking for severe eyestrain, headaches, fatigue, etc. Your relative viewing distances and conditions are grossly different. Don't fall into that trap.

From the Marantz VP4001 AVS thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=885398), it sounds like the users are going with a low gain screen (1.0 to 1.4) in the 100" range (96" to 106") with excellent results. With the 720p DLP PJ that I have, that would be about right.

With my comparable 720p DLP and my HP screen, I had to use a ND2 filter to cut the brightness by 50% in order to just be able to watch it (without getting instant eyestrain & headaches).

The Sharp DT-510 would be similar - I still would recommend the Marantz VP4001, especially if you can get it for close to the same price (better lens and better construction).

CT is right. If you are coffee table mounting, the 4001 and the DT-510 both will work well. As CT said you do not need or want a HP screen with a 92" screen and 9-2" throw. With that set up a 1.0 gain screen gives you 23 FL. If you use the HP screen you would have at lest 51 FL. I derated the HP to 2.2 gain.

I assumed that you were trying to rear shelf mount since you were wanting to use a HP screen and neither the Sharp nor Marantz will work well in that situation. The 4001 and DT-510 are not good matches with a HP screen. Rear shelf does not work and it is not needed for coffee table mount unless you have a fairly long throw and larger image. That is why I said it could work with coffee table mount, but not in your situation.

mjg100 and CT--thanks for your advice on this. I realize this is well off topic from the original thread, but I'll just add that the Marantz may make the most sense since it is actually quite dim in its lowest iris setting. Moreover, even with the Sharp (equivalent to the Marantz medium setting) I could use a filter, right? The attraction of the HP sceen is its rejection of ambient light--since it is retroreflective, it seems to do this much better than any other manual pulldown white screen (and I have decided against a gray screen such as the graywolf).

I disagree on the Marantz VP4001/Sharp clones being too bright with a high power. First of all with bulb projectors, you are going to lose light as the bulb ages. Second, the beauty of pairing these with a high power is you can run them with their smallest iris settings for best contrast and be very watchable. As the bulb ages, you can open the iris for more light. Worst case scenario, if it's still too bright, you can use a quality ND filter until the bulb starts to age.

I disagree on the Marantz VP4001/Sharp clones being too bright with a high power. First of all with bulb projectors, you are going to lose light as the bulb ages. Second, the beauty of pairing these with a high power is you can run them with their smallest iris settings for best contrast and be very watchable. As the bulb ages, you can open the iris for more light. Worst case scenario, if it's still too bright, you can use a quality ND filter until the bulb starts to age.

The OP is planning on 9'-2" throw and a 92" image. Using the 4001 calculator the OP would get 23 FL using a 1.0 gain screen and half that when the bulb is worn. Lets say the 4001 only puts out 200 lumens when the bulb is just about dead. Using 2.4 gain the lumens would be 480 divided by screen size in SF (25.78 SF) = 18.62 FL. So even with the bulb worn it is on the high side of the scale and it is too bright when new. That is why CT and I both think the HP has too much gain for his application. I agree that he could use an ND filter, but I am afraid that with his set up he would need two different ND filters. A ND2 when new and a ND4 once the bulb has age on it.

Just to clarify: I believe the Marantz is actually under 300 lumens with a NEW bulb with the lowest iris setting (best contrast). This probably means less than 150 lumens after 500 hours or so on the lamp. So, the HP screen would probably work. The Sharp DT-510, however, is brighter in its lowest iris setting (same as the Marantz medium iris setting) and may indeed be too bright. A Sharp Z3000 (same iris options as the Marantz) would be great, but hard to find a good deal on.

Real world lumen tests:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.cine4home.de/tests/projektoren/SharpZ3000/Z3000Test.htm&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=6&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dsharp%2Bxv-z3000%2Bcine4home%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26hs%3DVwc%26sa%3DG

http://www.hometheatermag.com/frontprojectors/0906sharp/index2.html

http://www.projectorcentral.com/sharp_z3000.htm

http://www.projectorreviews.com/sharp/xv-z3000/performance.php#brightness

And lumen output will continue to drop with aging bulb. Also keep in mind that most film material has a lot of dark scenes that you will appreciate extra lumens when needed.

I owned the Sharp DT-500 at one point and would not hesitate pairing it with the high power.

sisypus, thanks for tracking this stuff down!

Real world lumen tests:

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.cine4home.de/tests/projektoren/SharpZ3000/Z3000Test.htm&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=6&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dsharp%2Bxv-z3000%2Bcine4home%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26hs%3DVwc%26sa%3DG

http://www.hometheatermag.com/frontprojectors/0906sharp/index2.html

http://www.projectorcentral.com/sharp_z3000.htm

http://www.projectorreviews.com/sharp/xv-z3000/performance.php#brightness

And lumen output will continue to drop with aging bulb. Also keep in mind that most film material has a lot of dark scenes that you will appreciate extra lumens when needed.

I owned the Sharp DT-500 at one point and would not hesitate pairing it with the high power.

So the sharp (4001 equivalent) with iris clamped down and brilliant color turned off produces 352 lumens (per your second link). 352 lumens x 2.4 gain = 844.8 lumens/25.78 SF = 32.77 FL. That is too bright and needs an ND filter. Calibrated probably takes it down closer to 300 lumens, but in a proper setup he will get closer to 2.8 gain with the HP so I think that is a wash. If the throw was longer and the image bigger then the HP would be a good choice.

What screen gain and size were you using with the DT-500? Also what was the throw?

Added
I just checked the 3rd link and Art gives only 285 lumens. Big difference.

sisypus, thanks for tracking this stuff down!

I loved my sharp dt-500. I am also very sensitive to rainbows and the 5x speed wheel essentially remedied that. I would still see a rainbow every now and then but it was very, very rare. The Sharp dt-500/510/3000/3100/Marantz vp4001/EIKI EIP-1600T throw a great picture you would be happy with.

Personally I like a brighter image. The best thing to do in your case is to get whatever projector you like, and project it onto a white wall/white bed sheet at whatever size. Watch it for a few days, and if you are happy with it buy a 1.0-1.4 gain screen. If you want a brighter image, then consider a high gain screen such as the high power. Also keep in mind that while high def material may look great on a brighter screen, standard def may have more visible artifacts.

Happy hunting! :)

I would also recommend going with a 106" screen, especially if you are seriously considering a HP screen. The larger picture is a real plus.

BTW, my 106" HP screen is the Da-Lite Model C pull-down model. The larger rollers of the Model C helps reduce the chances of developing "waves", as does the heavier HP screen material. My screen weighs 47lbs (56lbs shipping weight), compared to my old 100",4:3, screen at 25lbs. I got mine through Jason Turk at AVS Sales (see the upper left tab at the very top of each AVS Forum page) - got a very good price too. Da-lite's EZframe (fixed) screens are less expensive, of course.

princeton3 -- I assume you are still happy with your AE2000. Sorry for our hijacking your thread.

I would also recommend going with a 106" screen, especially if you are seriously considering a HP screen. The larger picture is a real plus.
princeton3 -- I assume you are still happy with your AE2000. Sorry for our hijacking your thread.

I only have a 9.2 foot throw distance--as far as I know, none of these projectors can project a 106" image from that distance (indeed, hard to find many projectors that can handle a 92" screen at that short distance). Also, my seating distance is already about 1.35 X screen width--plenty big and immersive. A 106" screen (which I had once at another house) would be overkill at my viewing distance. This is why I "downgraded" to 92" screen.

Princeton--yes, I'm also sorry for hijacking your thread!

CT / Pedro2:

No problemo at all...

The theater room is in the final stages and I expect to have the projector mounted in the next week to two weeks - so I haven't watched it anymore since completing my comparison. However, being that I purchased from "C" I have lots of time...

Looking forward to your update!
Well, I waited, but doesn't look like I am going to have any luck getting the Panny for less. Looks like they just extended the ****** offer they had last month until September:
Free BLOCKBUSTER rental card for up to 52 movie or game rentals (up to $400 value) and a 2-year limited warranty ($250 value). Only valid on purchases made from authorized Panasonic dealers. Click here for rebate claim form. Offer good 7/1/2008 through 9/30/2008.

Was really hoping for a cheaper price to make it closer to the Sanyo. May just try out the sanyo and a high gain screen to see what it looks like in my setup. If only Panny had a better offer.

(Rant: How do they come up with $400 value on that anyway? One movie a day, 52 days, movies are what $5 each? I get $260. Not $400..)

Oh, I was thinking of one other comparison that would be good between these 2 projectors. The bulbs.
Sanyo Bulb: 610-336-5404 ($244.00 cheapest I could find)
Panny Bulb: ET-LAE1000 ($329.00 cheapest I could find)
You can buy some bulbs now without a cage, but seems to be only rear projection bulbs. Unfortunately I haven't seen anywhere to buy just the filiments or bulbs without cage...

@Claus: You were talking about using the calculator on projector central. So I have been playing around with it. Here are the differences I am seeing, please let me know if I am still missing something.
For 106" Screen (52"x92") @ 13.1' away:
Sanyo: Screen Gain between .9 to 1.5 was optimal.
Panasonic: Screen Gain between .8 to 1.2 was optimal.
So reading this, wouldn't I be fine with a 1.0 gain screen on either projector? At this distance, would I really have to take the Sanyo projector out of "economy" mode? I have tried to find someone with this projector locally and haven't had any luck.

Now I see an additional road block of FL (Foot Lumens). Any help here would be appreciated as well. 5 or 60, I am not sure what is appropriate.

(Rant: How do they come up with $400 value on that anyway? One movie a day, 52 days, movies are what $5 each? I get $260. Not $400..)

Well, perhaps it includes game rental. Games are about $7 to rent here. 7x52=$364.

(Rant: How do they come up with $400 value on that anyway? One movie a day, 52 days, movies are what $5 each? I get $260. Not $400..)I think you goofed. $400, @$5/movie, amounts to an average of 1.5 movies per week. If you rent 2 movies a week, then you will use up the $400 in less than a year.

@Claus: You were talking about using the calculator on projector central. So I have been playing around with it. Here are the differences I am seeing, please let me know if I am still missing something.
For 106" Screen (52"x92") @ 13.1' away:
Sanyo: Screen Gain between .9 to 1.5 was optimal.
Panasonic: Screen Gain between .8 to 1.2 was optimal.
So reading this, wouldn't I be fine with a 1.0 gain screen on either projector? At this distance, would I really have to take the Sanyo projector out of "economy" mode? I have tried to find someone with this projector locally and haven't had any luck.

Now I see an additional road block of FL (Foot Lumens). Any help here would be appreciated as well. 5 or 60, I am not sure what is appropriate.First of all, PJC doesn't tell you how it comes up with their fL numbers (and the correct abbreviation is: ft-L).

You mentioned a 106” diagonal screen (92” wide by 52” high). 92 x 52 = 4801 square inches of screen area = 33.341 square feet. This is needed for the foot-Lambert (ft-L) calculation, which is:

Screen Brightness (in ft-L) = PJ output in Lumens x Screen Gain / Screen Area (square feet).

Projector Central’s calculator claims 14 ft-L for the Z2000 at 13’ 1” between the front of the lens and a 106” screen (gain = 1.0). I think this number is way too optimistic.

From Art’s review, in the Pure Cinema, low lamp mode (http://www.projectorreviews.com/sanyo/plv-z2000/performance.php#brightness), he got 248 Lumens and 363 Lumens in the high lamp mode.

Under these conditions, the Z2000 would give 243 x 1 / 33.341 = 7.3 ft-L (low lamp) and 363 x 1 / 33.431 = 11 ft-L (high lamp). This is way too dim. You need 18 – 24 ft-L (the recommended picture brightness) in a dark room, and more if you have a small lamp on (some ambient light). Using a gain = 1.4 screen, these numbers only increase to 10.2 ft-L and 15.2 ft-L, respectively.

I would strongly recommend using a shelf mount for the Z2000, and going with a Da-Lite High Power screen (gain = 2.8). This will give you 243 x 2.8 / 33.341 = 20.4 ft-L (which is just about ideal). -- My opinion, only! -- If you want some room light on you will have plenty of room for using one of the Z2000’s brighter modes. This is what I have in my set-up (PJ at 12.5’ and I sit at 11.5 from my 106” Da-Lite HP screen). My PJ is sitting on a bookshelf, behind my couch, and about 6” above my head, when seated.

NOTE: The High Power screen will not be as effective with a ceiling mount (its gain is cut in half, because it's retro-reflective = reflects light back towards the source).

BTW, I would recommend that you get your screen through AVS Sales (http://www.avscience.com/contact.htm). I got mine through Jason Turk and got a very good price.

You are right about the comparison between the AE2000 and the Z2000 brightness in the dimmest modes. However, going to the next best mode, the Panny is about 50% brighter than the Sanyo. This is why they say the AE2000 is a brighter PJ. In its brightest mode, the AE2000 is about twice as bright as the Z2000.

So much data my head is exploding ;) princeton3 hope you don't mind this on your thread while we are waiting for your updates. :)

So the wife and I really like the 120" paper template we made and put on the wall. The 106" 16x9 wasn't a big enough difference from the 100" 4x3 that we had.

From Claus' post, I have been looking most of the day into 2.8Gain screens. BUT now I understand why he says put it on a shelf, because it is RETRO REFLECTIVE. This is a completely new term to me, because I was using a .8 gain gray screen which absorbed the light, and didn't bounce it back. From reading 2.8 gain has to be directly in front of the projector and can't be ceiling mounted or you loose the effect of the 2.8 gain as the light shines back up (reflects) to the projector (or more likely down to the ground based on the angle, but either way not into the eyes of the viewer..

HOW complicated! I am pulling my hair out now. So I just can't justify going back to the Panasonic for 1k+ price difference, so think I am going to just buy the Sanyo, see how bad it actually looks on my .8 da-lite. Maybe get a good 1.3 gain (non reflective?) 120" and pray it works in my environment. With the HUGE upgrade from Sanyo XP21N (1024x768) to the Z2000 maybe the light issue won't matter with the improvement of clarity?