Hey everyone. I had the chance to look at another 8150 today and I must say I was even more impressed this time around than when I did my review last year. Planar has addressed the issues with clipping and contrast has been improved. I currently have an RS2 in my room that is a cherry of a unit as most people who have seen know but the Planar barely gave up anything to it in overall contrast with mixed and dark material. I am going to play around with it for a few more days but so far I am really impressed with the tweaks.

Sharpness has also improved and the unit I had was more in line with what I've seen from the Marantz units though not quite that tack sharp, but an obvious improvement over my RS2, which is very sharp for a 3-chip design. I must say given this performance level and the way the market is right now for projectors anyone in the market would be remiss not to give this one a look!!

Have you seen a pd8130 by any chance?
And it really puzzles me how projectors like the pd8150 and optoma hd8200 get people reporting JVC-like blacks and on/off when the independant measurements are so lopsided in favor of jvc's.:confused:

I saw PD8150 and JVC RS20 : both have very good blacks. Probably JVC is better at that but we are talking of some millinits !
The On-off contrast is totally pro JVC since both Planar and Optoma are DI based and nativelly can only do about 2.000:1 On-Off while JVC easily reach 10.000:1.

Which one was more impressive to you, and for what reasons?
Here are (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fcine4home.de%2Ftests%2Fprojektoren% 2FPlanar8150%2FPlanar8130-50.htm&sl=de&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8) cine4home.de measurements and comments on pd8150/8130 :
Measurements Planar PD8150

Mode Lamp NativeCR DynamicCR Light output

D65 Eco 2700:1 10,000:1 480
D65bc Eco 3300:1 11700:1 650

Similarly good results of the PD8130, but it is the adaptive aperture not quite so effective, so that the dynamic contrast values lower.

Measurements Planar PD8130

Mode Lamp NativeCR DynamicCR Light output

D65 Eco 2600:1 6800:1 450
D65bc Eco 3200:1 7700:1 630




I wonder how close is pd8130 to pd8150 in contrast and overall..since I have a chance to get it under $5k but not the 8150

If those native contrast measurements are true, would that mean both projectors are most likely using dark chip 3?

And it really puzzles me how projectors like the pd8150 and optoma hd8200 get people reporting JVC-like blacks and on/off when the independant measurements are so lopsided in favor of jvc's.:confused:

I am puzzled by those who place so much emphasis on one specification like..... contrast. To be sure, contrast can be a deal breaker, but there are many other considerations like color, greyscale, light output, etc. which also play a role in the overall picture quality.

As far as I am concerned, if the contrast ratio (black level) is sufficiently low to produce a striking picture, I am satisfied. Color, greyscale and light output become more important to me if the projector can meet this acceptable black level. I don't like some of the cartoonish colors which some of these projectors produce due to the oversaturated color systems and poor calibration capabilities.

Hey everyone. I had the chance to look at another 8150 today and I must say I was even more impressed this time around than when I did my review last year. Planar has addressed the issues with clipping and contrast has been improved. I currently have an RS2 in my room that is a cherry of a unit as most people who have seen know but the Planar barely gave up anything to it in overall contrast with mixed and dark material. I am going to play around with it for a few more days but so far I am really impressed with the tweaks.

Sharpness has also improved and the unit I had was more in line with what I've seen from the Marantz units though not quite that tack sharp, but an obvious improvement over my RS2, which is very sharp for a 3-chip design. I must say given this performance level and the way the market is right now for projectors anyone in the market would be remiss not to give this one a look!!

I saw the 8150 locally about 2 months ago...thought the 'calibrated' unit threw a very compelling image. I am amazed at the capabilities of these projectors, compared to those produced just 3-5 years ago at twice the cost!

I saw the 8150 locally about 2 months ago...thought the 'calibrated' unit threw a very compelling image. I am amazed at the capabilities of these projectors, compared to those produced just 3-5 years ago at twice the cost!

I agree. It really does get into the nitpicking far more than it used to. As I mentioned in my last projector round up most of the units are getting so good lately that it is pretty hard to pick a bad one.

If those native contrast measurements are true, would that mean both projectors are most likely using dark chip 3?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the 8130 uses a a DC2+ chip - but the 8150 definitely uses a DC3.

Hey everyone. I had the chance to look at another 8150 today and I must say I was even more impressed this time around than when I did my review last year. Planar has addressed the issues with clipping and contrast has been improved. I currently have an RS2 in my room that is a cherry of a unit as most people who have seen know but the Planar barely gave up anything to it in overall contrast with mixed and dark material. I am going to play around with it for a few more days but so far I am really impressed with the tweaks.

Sharpness has also improved and the unit I had was more in line with what I've seen from the Marantz units though not quite that tack sharp, but an obvious improvement over my RS2, which is very sharp for a 3-chip design. I must say given this performance level and the way the market is right now for projectors anyone in the market would be remiss not to give this one a look!!
I had a Planar 8150 demonstrated in my local store about 2 months ago together with the latest Da-Lite Joe Kane's Affinity 92" screen. Even under the Standard lamp mode ( as opposed to the Economy mode), the picture was unacceptably dim, and the intra-scene contrast was unimpressive. A Pioneer clone of the previous generation of JVC RS2 looked much brighter with better intra-scene contrast on the same screen running the same Blu-ray disc (Ice-Age). Pioneer may have done something special to the RS2 to make it excel in such an obvious way. Of course, that's just my own opinion.

It sounds like the Planar either had an old bulb or was just set up incorrectly - although I've never seen the 8150 in person, I've read nothing but glowing remarks regarding the projector's brightness.

I got my hands on one of the "cheap" FPJ1's to replace my RS1, but after seeing how great my PD7130 looks (I use it when I deploy to the Middle East) and the almost complete lack of rainbows (my only major complaint about DLP), I'm once again considering a Planar, W20000, or possibly Marantz if the FPJ1 doesn't wow me. There's just something about that DLP "pop" that's very appealing...

krellthiel
that's definetely an old lamp or a defective unit..pd8150 is supposed to lit up much bigger screens than 92", with ease

krellthiel
that's definetely an old lamp or a defective unit..pd8150 is supposed to lit up much bigger screens than 92", with ease
That's always a possibility.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the 8130 uses a a DC2+ chip - but the 8150 definitely uses a DC3.

Then how did cine4home.de measure almost identical native CR between them?

Then how did cine4home.de measure almost identical native CR between them?

As I said, I could be wrong.

But as has been discussed elsewhere, there's a LOT of things - most notably the design and quality of the optical path - that contribute to a projector's native contrast aside from the contrast of the panels themselves.

Got together last night with a few guys and projectors. A new Planar 8150 (Kris's) and a couple RS20's and an RS1.

The new planar looked fabulous for a 1 chipper. The best 1 chipper I've seen to date. I think we measured 17,000:1 on/off and 700:1 ansi.

Wow, I'd expect a projector with those measurements (Planar) to look fantastic.

So...how'd it compare to the JVCs?

Obviously they are all fabulous projectors. And if DLP could get rid of rainbows permanently It would definitely be a difficult decision for me. Sometimes I like extra sharpness. Sometimes I like the easy feel of three chips.

Overall I still liked my RS1 best ;) Even though it was the least sharp...I just can live with the wonderful colors :)

These are impressive numbers! Is there a new breed of 8150´s? Seems the on/off on this one is almost twice as high as has been reported previously (if I recall correctly...).

Here's a couple of 8130 screenshots I found on an italian forum :
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v345/cadobhuk/pd8130dsc0064td1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v345/cadobhuk/pd8130dsc0049zs2.jpg

Got together last night with a few guys and projectors. A new Planar 8150 (Kris's) and a couple RS20's and an RS1.

The new planar looked fabulous for a 1 chipper. The best 1 chipper I've seen to date. I think we measured 17,000:1 on/off and 700:1 ansi.

I wonder how that was obtained compared to the original 8150. Just a firmware revision?

some modifications to the light path

some modifications to the light path

So the 8150's rolling off the assembly line right now are different than the original production 8150's? Or was the unit you saw specially modified to increase the contrast?

I've heard that Planar has done some tweaks to the light path compared to the original unit I reviewed last year. I think the fixed iris in the lens is also slightly tighter, but I am not positive on that.

Compared to the unit I reviewed last year the new unit I have on hand has double the contrast, higher ANSI, and is considerably sharper (Marantz territory). A must see for those in the market for a DLP or anyone considering a projector in this price range.

Got together last night with a few guys and projectors. A new Planar 8150 (Kris's) and a couple RS20's and an RS1.

The new planar looked fabulous for a 1 chipper. The best 1 chipper I've seen to date. I think we measured 17,000:1 on/off and 700:1 ansi.

How much is native contrast? I tested the Epson 7500UB. I measured 4700:1 native and 27000:1 with the Iris engage. But without the cinema filter you can get as much as 60000:1 in contrast. I didn't feel it gave much more. So my thinking is that Iris contrast does help but the impact is limited. It can be good on paper but not obvious on the screen. I would prefer the Planar to have 5000:1 native and 10000:1 on:off over 2000:1 native and 20000:1 on:off.

Bruno

Well considering we were comparing it directly to the RS-20, which has over 20,000:1 native contrast, the impact was just as good on the screen as it was on paper. Black levels were outstanding for a single chip and intrascene contrast was actually better than the JVC with most of the clips. Add that to an obvious increase in MTF and detail and the Planar stood up considerably well and outperformed the JVC in many ways.

Ever since I was amazed by the Sharp Z20000 single chip projector I've wished I could put up with rainbows. Sigh. At least JVC is offering a lot of consolation to us rainbow sensitive viewers.

I lived with one of the original 8150s for a while. I liked it alote.
It had better blacks then my 11S2 and I liked the colors. It was softer then my S2 but I thought it looked more film like. I kept the 11S2 because the throw was to short for my needs on the 8150. I wish they offered a long throw.
Sounds like like they have made some improvements. Id be curious if several 8150s would now measure consistent with the new numbers or if this was a hand picked unit. Very nice numbers though indeed.





.

If I bought a pd8130 from a retailer now, would it be the updated version, or is there a possibility they still have the original ones in stock?

Well considering we were comparing it directly to the RS-20, which has over 20,000:1 native contrast, the impact was just as good on the screen as it was on paper. Black levels were outstanding for a single chip and intrascene contrast was actually better than the JVC with most of the clips. Add that to an obvious increase in MTF and detail and the Planar stood up considerably well and outperformed the JVC in many ways.


Kris:

Specifically, how would a customer know if they were getting a 8150 with the new modifications?

Planar has been shipping the updated versions since last summer to the best of my knowledge so I don't think you have to worry about it unless you literally bought one of the first batch sold.

Can someone measure and review a pd8130 ?
The cine4home.de review must have been of the original version cause pd8150 scored 11k:1 on/off

You can't consider that 11K:1 real on-off since iris can't be opened and closed at same time !
Planar 8150 real on-off is always 2.700:1

it's definetely not "imaginary" .. it's just "dynamic" instead of "native". Just cause its dynamic, doesn't mean its meaningless. By the same logic, native on/off isnt real either, only ANSI is real, cuz thats what you get in a single frame.

Not true. Ansi is what you get from pixel to pixel. In one single frame you can the high on/off contrast. In dynamic iris not.

I see, my bad.

also native will give you an idea of how much punchy low apl scene will be :)

I may be a voice out of the choir.
I find unaccettable that from time to time operators or unrevealed operators start threads in forums like this in order to spread an hype to empty their unselled stock of vprs.
Am I the only one who asks himself why Planar wouldn't published advices of this new series of 8150 if it really existed??????
In a crisis period,considering the high competitive sector,one of the most famous and appreciated vpr productor keep something like this unrevealed??
Admitting this is something true,without any surprise seems there are no chances for the customer to know which version he is going to buy.
Like it's the first time I hear this sort of things.
It's the same thing over and over.
Customers are mainly considerated as brainless chickens ready to be cooked.
Instead of rising hypes it should be a duty for sellers/producers to provide infos to those who are going to spend tons of bucks.They should be able to say:''this is,without any doubt,the new version'' and '' that is the old serie''.
As long as this will be impossible, any word about this new serie is nothing that BS!!!!!!!!!!!! or usual stupid useless (for those customers who use brain) rants.
Happy and ready to apologise if I am wrong about what I said.

Customers are mainly considerated as brainless chickens ready to be cooked.


That's just how I feel sometimes..."considerated (sic) as a brainless chicken...";) OK now.

I may be a voice out of the choir.
I find unaccettable that from time to time operators or unrevealed operators start threads in forums like this in order to spread an hype to empty their unselled stock of vprs.
Am I the only one who asks himself why Planar wouldn't published advices of this new series of 8150 if it really existed??????
In a crisis period,considering the high competitive sector,one of the most famous and appreciated vpr productor keep something like this unrevealed??
Admitting this is something true,without any surprise seems there are no chances for the customer to know which version he is going to buy.
Like it's the first time I hear this sort of things.
It's the same thing over and over.
Customers are mainly considerated as brainless chickens ready to be cooked.
Instead of rising hypes it should be a duty for sellers/producers to provide infos to those who are going to spend tons of bucks.They should be able to say:''this is,without any doubt,the new version'' and '' that is the old serie''.
As long as this will be impossible, any word about this new serie is nothing that BS!!!!!!!!!!!! or usual stupid useless (for those customers who use brain) rants.
Happy and ready to apologise if I am wrong about what I said.

There should be a noted serial number from that point on all machines received the changes.




.

This brainless chicken got to see a projector that looked substantially better than their previous one :)

If I see them I'll tell them to call it the 8150a

There should be a noted serial number from that point on all machines received the changes.




I would agree...but many manufacturers provide the same low level of service. For example, the Integra receivers and processors have had firmware upgrades available for some time. I have never received a notice about them. And what about the Blu-Ray player firmware updates? Many times we get a notice about these updates through these forums instead of the manufacturer.

and who bought them just before the improvements ? guess they must be really happy to hear these news ...

I may be a voice out of the choir.
I find unaccettable that from time to time operators or unrevealed operators start threads in forums like this in order to spread an hype to empty their unselled stock of vprs.
Am I the only one who asks himself why Planar wouldn't published advices of this new series of 8150 if it really existed??????
In a crisis period,considering the high competitive sector,one of the most famous and appreciated vpr productor keep something like this unrevealed??
Admitting this is something true,without any surprise seems there are no chances for the customer to know which version he is going to buy.
Like it's the first time I hear this sort of things.
It's the same thing over and over.
Customers are mainly considerated as brainless chickens ready to be cooked.
Instead of rising hypes it should be a duty for sellers/producers to provide infos to those who are going to spend tons of bucks.They should be able to say:''this is,without any doubt,the new version'' and '' that is the old serie''.
As long as this will be impossible, any word about this new serie is nothing that BS!!!!!!!!!!!! or usual stupid useless (for those customers who use brain) rants.
Happy and ready to apologise if I am wrong about what I said.

If Planar admits that the original models are not as good as the current ones, would they perhaps be obligated to upgrade the original ones? That could be costly.

If Planar admits that the original models are not as good as the current ones, would they perhaps be obligated to upgrade the original ones? That could be costly.

Yeah, maybe if they were asked nicely...they probably get a lot of repeat customers so it might be in their best long term financial interest to swap out old ones with the updated ones.

Sounds good if you say it real fast...

But why dont they just called the new ones 8150A or 8160 or whatever and treat the change as a switch in model, which I guess it is? (like the RS1u, RS1x etc.) Redesign of the lightpath and doubling the contrast isn't a mere firmware update and it can't easily be implemented to upgrade older projectors either.

But why dont they just called the new ones 8150A or 8160 or whatever and treat the change as a switch in model, which I guess it is? (like the RS1u, RS1x etc.) Redesign of the lightpath and doubling the contrast isn't a mere firmware update and it can't easily be implemented to upgrade older projectors either.


Maybe it is an upgrade that can be done fairly easily in the factory? Maybe Planar's supplier of one of the internal light path components started providing a better spec. part. IMHO that does not justify releasing a new model just because some of the internal components were upgraded. (Possibly even out of Planar's control. Their supplier may simply have run out of the original part and started delivering a higher spec part... Or Planar found a better spec part at a lower price. Hardly worth releasing a new model just because components evolved naturally.)

It would be nice to get the facts though...

You can't consider that 11K:1 real on-off since iris can't be opened and closed at same time !
Planar 8150 real on-off is always 2.700:1I don't agree with that, although it is partially semantics. It is much more complicated than that. Just consider scenes where the brightest things in the scene are 50%stim or lower. One is native and one is dynamic, which brings real benefits, but not all the benefits of native or static on/off CR. If the projector as a whole was stuck at 2700:1 on/off CR then images like those with nothing brighter than 50%stim (about 20% of the light power of 100%stim) would look the same whether the DI was on or off, but the Planar provides more intra-image CR for scenes like those (or at least a good portion of them) with the DI enabled. When a movie goes from bright to a blackout or a very dark scene, is the CR done there "real" or not "real"? I think using native (or static) and dynamic helps characterize it better.
Not true. Ansi is what you get from pixel to pixel. In one single frame you can the high on/off contrast. In dynamic iris not.ANSI CR is the CR for a specific pattern (4x4 checkerboard, and actually 2 of them if done to the actual standard as defined), not pixel to pixel CR. Pixel to pixel CR is a much different thing than ANSI CR.

In the case of the Planar it isn't going to provide more than whatever the native CR is with the iris shut down in a single image, but it can provide more intra-image CR for lots of dark scenes than it would without a dynamic system. Dynamic gamma could be used all by itself, but I think that would be likely to bring some bad artifacts if it was aggressive at all. By providing a dynamic iris and a dynamic gamma somewhere in the projector they should be able to keep a 20%stim window on a black background at about the same level whether the iris is open or closed, but reduce the black around it for more intra-image CR there.

--Darin

Does the Planar use dynamic gamma?

If it's implementation is similar to the Optoma 8200, it uses the combination of lamp modulation and iris reduction to achieve contrast benefits all the way up through 100%stim. With the 8200 it can significantly crush whites over about 70% though, but even at 100% stim it's capable of delivering intra-image contrast benefits of about 2x.

Does the Planar use dynamic gamma?Depends on where you measure, but I am confident that it does use dynamic gamma to counter the dynamic iris (like 3/1 * 1/3 = 1). I think Greg Rogers mentioned that it doesn't, but I think he means as the light is going out of the projector. That is, the 1 above. But to get the light coming out of the projector to have all the same levels except for some crushing requires some on the fly changes to the levels internally (what I would call dynamic gamma).

I doubt you would like a DI system with no dynamic gamma. When the iris shut down 50% everything on the screen would get 50% dimmer and the intra-image CR wouldn't change (or at least not much and only then because of higher static on/off CR for projectors actually getting that). From what I know I would consider a projector with a dynamic iris and no compensation in the video signal to be a waste. In that case I probably wouldn't use the DI and so whatever number it achieved with the DI enabled would be pretty much meaningless as far as video quality.

--Darin

Hey guys,

Just wanted to follow up on some stuff that is going on in this thread. When I reviewed the 8150 last year I got a unit before they even streeted. I was aware at that time that Planar was going to adjust the fixed iris in the lens before final production units started shipping which would give a small increase in contrast. I never had the chance to see that final unit.

The other gripe I had was the clipping issue which was resolved by a later firmware that is available to all owners and can be downloaded and installed right from home.

The other tweaks were done with the production models, so if you own a 8150, you already have the tweaks I'm talking about. I just never got to see them in a production model because we were given a pre-production model to try and get the review out as they hit shelves. So don't fret if you think you didn't get an "updated" unit as they are all updated compared to what I saw originally. Planar has been continually trying to refine the projector but this is the case with any manufacturer. They haven't done anything significant enough to call it a new model.

The unit I have on hand has an issue with its iris implementation that results in a very high measured contrast but we've found some issues. With some material there is a subtle flicker that is only noticeable with high APL scenes. So the iris calibration file may be wrong with my unit resulting in a higher mutliplier than typical with the 8150. I am going to look at a different one later this week that should be more in line with the ones you get from a dealer.

I was a huge fan of the 8150 when I reviewed it last year and seeing it again reaffirmed how great of a DLP it is. I was glad to see the issues I had with the PRE-PRODUCTION unit that I reviewed were resolved and just wanted to chime in for DLP fans that are looking for a solid contender to the great D-ILA products that JVC has been shipping.

I'm sorry if I caused a rift here but that was not my intention. I should have tried to follow up with Planar about the differences I was seeing to get some perspective on why and how this relates to the shipped units that went out nearly two months after the unit I reviewed.

As for comments here about upgrades in an existing model line, it happens all the time. A most recent example was Marantz and their lens coating on standard lenses that increased ANSI contrast significantly. They certainly weren't going to trade out units simply because of a refinement. I understand the frustration that it can cause but it is simple economics.

Does the Planar use dynamic gamma?

Yes, but fortunately it can be disabled. It produces a "pulsing" of brightness that can be very obvious in some movies/scenes. Upgrading the software did not help. I have to run with this feature disabled (and not so good black levels) because I can't tolerate this distracting pulsation.

It's a great projector, but fan noise is an issue. Today I would probably go with the JVC RS20 for this reason. I cannot imagine running my 8150 at full light power, because of the loud fan (I came from a JVC G15 with hushbox, so I know loud :D ). Ceiling-mounting made the noise much more obvious/annoying than when I had the projector sitting on a stack of cardboard boxes...

Yes, but fortunately it can be disabled. It produces a "pulsing" of brightness that can be very obvious in some movies/scenes. Upgrading the software did not help. I have to run with this feature disabled (and not so good black levels) because I can't tolerate this distracting pulsation.Are you talking about the auto contrast feature (I can't recall what it is called, but it is separate from DynamicBlack and isn't related to the iris)? If so, while that is a dynamic gamma kind of thing, I think it is different that what Mark meant to ask, which was whether their DI system includes dynamic gamma. If you were referring to the DI overall, then that can be disabled completely, but I don't know of any way to having the iris be dynamic, but not the video adjustments that go along with it. And I probably wouldn't want that either as the DI moving without adjustments to the video could cause distracting pulsation.

The Sharp 20k has an auto contrast feature even though it doesn't have a dynamic iris. I did some measurements and the auto contrast thing will increase a 20%stim window maybe 10% or so. After trying it out, I don't use it.

--Darin

Depends on where you measure, but I am confident that it does use dynamic gamma to counter the dynamic iris (like 3/1 * 1/3 = 1).


(3/1*1/3=1)? Do you mean in this example that white is boosted by 3x to make up for a 3x reduction in light loss due to the iris?


I think Greg Rogers mentioned that it doesn't, but I think he means as the light is going out of the projector. That is, the 1 above. But to get the light coming out of the projector to have all the same levels except for some crushing requires some on the fly changes to the levels internally (what I would call dynamic gamma).


The folks at Optoma also told me that DB does not perform dynamic gamma and instead modulates the lamp intensity long with the iris reduction. I took some dynamic contrast measurements off it and found that it's capable of boosting even 100% white.


I doubt you would like a DI system with no dynamic gamma. When the iris shut down 50% everything on the screen would get 50% dimmer and the intra-image CR wouldn't change (or at least not much and only then because of higher static on/off CR for projectors actually getting that). From what I know I would consider a projector with a dynamic iris and no compensation in the video signal to be a waste. In that case I probably wouldn't use the DI and so whatever number it achieved with the DI enabled would be pretty much meaningless as far as video quality.


A method to boost the white levels is definitely needed, but it looks like there are other ways to accomplish this than dynamic gamma alone.

(3/1*1/3=1)? Do you mean in this example that white is boosted by 3x to make up for a 3x reduction in light loss due to the iris?Yes. If the iris is considered last, then the light before the iris is boosted 3x so that light after the iris ends up at the same level (other than black and levels that get crushed).
The folks at Optoma also told me that DB does not perform dynamic gamma and instead modulates the lamp intensity long with the iris reduction.If they could just boost the lamp to totally make up for it then they wouldn't need the iris to move. Just close the iris down and boost the lamp for the whole movie, which would then have native on/off CR instead. The only real advantage to just using the lamp would be if native or static on/off CR went up as the iris was closed, but then they could just give that as an option instead (as long as they could handle the heat). I don't see any magic here. Boosting the lamp raises the black level as well as the white level. Boosting the gamma doesn't because you don't boost the level for video black (which is one of the fundamentals of good DI design IMO).

Maybe I'm not understanding what they are doing, but I get the impression that some people think that if they boost a lamp as an iris is closed they magically get all this range, but other than native/static on/off CR going up, I don't see it. Boosting a lamp just moves whatever range you have for the light path up (other than things like boosting it for red and not for other colors).
A method to boost the white levels is definitely needed, but it looks like there are other ways to accomplish this than dynamic gamma alone.The best methods shouldn't boost black at the same time IMO. At least not as much as they boost white. It would be interesting to see what happens with some things like a 20%stim window as the DI is turned on and off and same with a small 100%stim area on black.

BTW: I'm not saying lamp modulation can't be a useful part of a DI, but I don't see it as the thing that gets levels back up to counter the iris as all that useful unless it allows higher native/static on/off CR, like allowing the iris to close 5x with a system that only gives 4x dynamic CR total (or something like that).

--Darin

Are you talking about the auto contrast feature (I can't recall what it is called, but it is separate from DynamicBlack and isn't related to the iris)?

No. I have to disable DynamicBlack. If I enable DynamicBlack I see light (brighness) pulsing in certain movie scenes...

FWIW, I come from DLA but I have yet not seen a single rainbow in the 8150. However, the DynamicBlack is completely useless to me. If I turn it on, it will aggrevate me within 1-2 movies!

The effect is very dependent on the source material - I have gotten through select movies without being annoyed at all, but then in some movies the pulsation is so apparent that it almost makes me believe the projector is defective. Turning off DynamicBlack solves the problem.

I do have an early sample of the projector (March 2008), albeit with the latest firmware installed. Maybe my projector needs new hardware updates...?

Interesting Peter. The 8150 has one of the most transparent irises I've seen and during my time with it I only noticed it in hard transitions and even then I had to look for it. Sorry to hear you haven't had the same experience!

Putting those last 2 posts together you would almost wonder if something is maladjusted or wrong with the projector....

I've seen and during my time with it I only noticed it in hard transitions

That's interesting! I'm noticing the problems in scenes with a certain lightning. No hard transitions, no quick action. Just certain lightning/colors and the pulsation is obvious. I don't think I've ever seen it occur in very bright scenes. It's usually medium-bright scenes that bring out the problem. Also, I never noticed any particular problems in hard dark/light transitions.

Putting those last 2 posts together you would almost wonder if something is maladjusted or wrong with the projector....

I agree... looks like there might be something wrong with the control of the dynamic iris in my unit. It looks like a typical regulator problem where oscillation occurs.

"Ansi is what you get from pixel to pixel. In one single frame you can the high on/off contrast. In dynamic iris not."

On/off CR may be approached in a single frame with one white pixel in a corner and the rest black, but I suspect that in the vast majority of dark scenes the number of illuminated pixels would create enough scatter to greatly reduce the intrascene CR.

Darin, didn't you do some experiments to this effect?

This brainless chicken got to see a projector that looked substantially better than their previous one :)

If I see them I'll tell them to call it the 8150a

Brian Carskadon
Director of Product Development
Home Theater Business
Planar and Runco wrote in answer to my question:

''We have made several, and they have been implemented since last year in both models. The latest was a SW update that some people have found to improve the 'below black' level, while others have not seen any difference, so this is a personal preference.''

Forum like this can be very usefull but also very deceptive.
It is easy to mock brainless chickens but you can be poked by those whose brains are working....
Only a kind suggestion: if you see them,please,apologise.

Putting those last 2 posts together you would almost wonder if something is maladjusted or wrong with the projector....

Right on the spot! My unit is defective.

I received a replacement from Planar today, and it does not show any of the annoying problems I had with DynamicBlack on my unit.

I talked to Brian @ Planar, and he told me that the most notable improvement they have made to the projectors is tying down cables and connectors better so that they don't come loose in shipping. (He believes this is what's wrong with my early production unit too).
Kris observation about better image might be related to improved factory calibration procedures, according to Brian. He said the optics and electronics is he same and has not undegone any changes.

Right on the spot! My unit is defective.

I received a replacement from Planar today, and it does not show any of the annoying problems I had with DynamicBlack on my unit.


So , when you have DynamicBlack active you don't see any off the flickering at all anymore?
Do you notice the DI at all , eg brightness changing?

I also have one of the earlier PD8150's and i can can sometimes see flickering even in static scenes when i have DynamicBlack activated.
I have also chosen to deactivate DynamicBlack because of this.

My dealer has told me that this is considered normal and is to be expected from a fast DI. Should i accept that answer?

Out of curiosity, does the short throw lens have any negative effect on the brightness and/or on/off CR?

Out of curiosity, does the short throw lens have any negative effect on the brightness and/or on/off CR?

Does anyone have the numbers on the short throw lens??? I have only seen 1.3:1 which I believe was the standard lens.

Does anyone have the numbers on the short throw lens??? I have only seen 1.3:1 which I believe was the standard lens.

The optional short-throw lens is 1.56 - 1.86:1. There is no difference in brightness or contrast with this lens over the standard lens (1.85 - 2.40:1).

The optional short-throw lens is 1.56 - 1.86:1. There is no difference in brightness or contrast with this lens over the standard lens (1.85 - 2.40:1).

Thank you Brian for that information...... with the short throw lens I can actually make this projector work.

Is the short-throw lens a "normally" shipped unit or is there an upcharge for the short-throw lens?

It is sold as an extra item that you can install, like the ceiling mount.

It is sold as an extra item that you can install, like the ceiling mount.


bummer....

bummer....

Check with your dealer. I heard some dealers are taking care of the lens change for you. There's also an installation manual on the Planar website for this.

Thanks to Brian for answering my brightness/cr related question.

It is sold as an extra item that you can install, like the ceiling mount.

Brian so your short throw lens is a lens converter like a barstow lens

i was interested in the Planar until I saw it had Cedia 2008 and for some reason I was not impressed with the image and looking at it gave me a headache

Theoretically the dynamic iris should increase the contrast ratio and the variable intensity lamp (I do not know if you used a Vidi system or an osram system) should help with the red part of the spectrum and decrease the dither artifacts and should produce a wonderful projector

have you made any significant changes since Cedia 2008?

I had many different pjs here in my dedicated cinema room with a big screen (4.2m wide). I prefer the Planar in terms of pure pq over JVC, Sony, Optoma. It is a very serious machine. And Brian does a super-job in supporting customers, talked with him now two times and just a great guy to deal with.

Check with your dealer. I heard some dealers are taking care of the lens change for you. There's also an installation manual on the Planar website for this.


CHANGING the lens isn't the "bummer", it's the extra cost!! That is the reason I didn't get this projector, the extra ~$1500 for the short throw lens. They were talkng about creating a separate package with the short throw lens with the projector, but that obviously never happened.

CHANGING the lens isn't the "bummer", it's the extra cost!! That is the reason I didn't get this projector, the extra ~$1500 for the short throw lens. They were talkng about creating a separate package with the short throw lens with the projector, but that obviously never happened.

Is the short-throw "option" some type of an "add-on" lens or does it replace the existing lens?

If it is simply a replacement that is substituted for the standard lens then selling it only as an optional item rather than a different squ# would be "regrettable."

I can see that an individuals needs might change over time which having a change option if your theater requirements changed would be very helpful, but to force a customer to buy a long-throw lens when they only need the short-throw is rather tacky.

CHANGING the lens isn't the "bummer", it's the extra cost!! That is the reason I didn't get this projector, the extra ~$1500 for the short throw lens. They were talkng about creating a separate package with the short throw lens with the projector, but that obviously never happened.

Isn't the short-throw lens $799?

CHANGING the lens isn't the "bummer", it's the extra cost!! That is the reason I didn't get this projector, the extra ~$1500 for the short throw lens. They were talkng about creating a separate package with the short throw lens with the projector, but that obviously never happened.

The list price for the short throw lens (1.56 - 1.86:1) is $799 (USD). I would still like a seperate SKU that includes the short throw lens, but for now, I only can offer it as a seperate sale.

The list price for the short throw lens (1.56 - 1.86:1) is $799 (USD). I would still like a seperate SKU that includes the short throw lens, but for now, I only can offer it as a seperate sale.


Brian, is the lens an "add-on" style lens or a replacement?

Brian so your short throw lens is a lens converter like a barstow lens

i was interested in the Planar until I saw it had Cedia 2008 and for some reason I was not impressed with the image and looking at it gave me a headache

Theoretically the dynamic iris should increase the contrast ratio and the variable intensity lamp (I do not know if you used a Vidi system or an osram system) should help with the red part of the spectrum and decrease the dither artifacts and should produce a wonderful projector

have you made any significant changes since Cedia 2008?

The screen was way too big for the room at Cedia. It was a 120" wide woven SR with .95 gain. The front row was ~8' from the screen. It was not optimal and I appologize for this.

We use a UniShape lamp waveform implementation which improves color and bit depth.
• Variable Plateau: The lamp brightness is changed for each segment of the color wheel. Using this method, we can achieve an almost perfect D65 color wheel using a mercury lamp without compromising the color saturation, something which was not possible before.
• Low Pulse: The lamp brightness is dropped to 50% twice during each color wheel revolution. During this time the DMD is processing only that part of the image which is below 50% brightness. The DMD is gained up 200% to take advantage of the full brightness range and processes the image at its full bit depth capabilities. Using this process, 1 additional bit is added to the image, reducing dithering in dark areas by 50%.

Here are some other factoids regarding this platform:

Each projector is individually calibrated on the production line using a six axis color correction for white point and proper color gamut. Manual controls for RGB gains, offsets, and color temperature are also available.

DynamicBlack provides higher contrast and bit depth, improving total image quality.
• This control’s default setting is on.
• When turned on, full field contrast levels are boosted approximately 3x. To do this, 3 steps occur for every frame of content:
1. The image is analyzed for brightness content
2. If the image does not use the full range of brightness, the range will be expanded to fit the range of the DMD. This is similar to an auto leveling function of photo editors like Photoshop.
3. An aperture is closed to one of more than 200 possible positions so that the peak brightness matches the original (pre-expanded) image. This means that even though light is being blocked by the aperture, the apparent brightness of the image does not appear to change.
• Because the entire brightness range of the DMD is used during dark scenes, DynamicBlack can add up to 1.6 additional bits to the image. This reduces dithering artifacts substantially.
• It is important to note that not all implementations of DynamicBlack (or so-called dynamic apertures) operate the same. Unlike others, the DynamicBlack subsystem in the PD8150 and PD8130 uses a very low mass actuator and operates at the incoming frame rate of the signal. It is driven by a process similar to that used for a hard drive head to make sure that the actuator position, speed, and reliability are optimal. Planar has conducted extensive design studies and validation tests to ensure that image artifacts are as few as possible.
• Note that due to the dynamic nature of the optical aperture, some standard test methods for determining projector performance will not work properly. Please turn DynamicBlack off if you want to calibrate the contrast control or measure the projector gamma using individual gray level test images.

High speed color wheel reduces artifacts for some people.
• The color wheel runs at a 6x multiple of the frame rate. This means for 60Hz sources that the actual projector frame rate is 360Hz and for 50Hz sources it is 300Hz. For people who are sensitive to flicker or color sequential breakup (the so-called rainbow artifact), these are greatly reduced at this frame rate. Unishape also helps reduce this effect.

High in-field contrast optical engine makes images more life-like.
• The optical engine produces a typical ANSI checkerboard contrast of over 500:1. This signifies low crosstalk and stray light. A high ANSI contrast is the most important industry-recognized measure for the 3-dimensionality of an image.

Projection Lens filter thread allows for brightness optimization in small rooms.
• The projection lens is equipped with threads for a 72mm standard SLR type filter. We recommend using an ND2 filter here for situations where the on-screen brightness exceeds 40 foot-lamberts at full white. Most content is not designed to be viewed at such high brightness levels, and artifacts in the source such as macroblocking can be easily seen when the image is above this brightness.
Horizontal and Vertical lens shift allow for distortion free image movement.
• The projection lens can be moved vertically and horizontally (the PD8130 has vertical shift only). The range is +120% to -50% vertically, and +/-15% horizontally. This is implemented instead of the more traditional electronic keystone correction since it is purely optical and does not create the scaling artifacts that electronic correction does.

Here is a general list of features for these projectors
• Stunning piano-black ID with metal-flake and multiple layers of clear coat
• Oversized optics for superior image uniformity and clarity
• Super low noise and light pollution cabinet design - limits stray light output to less than 50% of the brightness of projected black - Built-in sound dampeners - Shock mounted components - Angled side vent louvers to direct ventilation away from customers - Oversized fans for lowest noise level possible - Sleeve bearing color wheel for long life and silent operation and zero pure tones
• Sixteen HD video timings; eight for1080p including 1080p 24Hz
• Six position full HD PIP & PBP
• Automatic ceiling mode detection
• NegitivePulse (UniShape) lamp technology for increased color bit depth
• Resize modes for 2.35:1 anamorphic lens use
• Two selectable IR codes built-in, plus ability to disable IR
• I/O panel illumination LED activated via remote
• ISF day and night calibration memory settings
• Ten individual sharpness controls
• NightVision red backlighting on remote control
• Lens shift controls under top mounted trap door
• Threaded focus ring for adding Neutral Density filter
• 12v trigger(s) that can be assigned to six separate functions - lamp on/off, 4 resize modes and RS-232
• Four individual noise reduction controls
• Calibrated to D65 standards out-of-the-box
• Selectable DLP frame rate control – Auto, 48Hz, 50Hz, 60Hz
• DynamicBlack™ for superior frame-by-frame black level adjustment
• Adaptive contrast using electronic contrast enhancement
• BrilliantColor™ for increased color brightness
• Two lamp wattage choices - 4000 hour life and 2000 hour life
• Auto-power on mode when AC is detected - Wall switch compatible
• Five programmable source selection keys
• Three programmable image memory selection keys
• Eleven Built-in test patterns
• Blue-only mode for calibration
• Four level translucent menu
• Lamp can be replace while projector is ceiling mounted
• Field upgradeable software
• Intelligent service menu for advanced troubleshooting
• Serial number visible while ceiling mounted and via OSD
• Sealed optical system and no filters necessary
• Included polishing cloth
• No routine maintenance is required
• Beveled cable cover for easy table-top demonstrations and a super-clean installation
• Centered lens for uniform look and easier installations
• Five position OSD, with 12 supported languages



Hope this helps.

Brian, is the lens an "add-on" style lens or a replacement?

Complete lens replacement. Can be done in less than 10 minutes.

Brian,
How big is the difference between 8130 and 8150? How would you describe their comparative performance?

Brian,
How big is the difference between 8130 and 8150? How would you describe their comparative performance?

The 8150 has V & H lens shift and two sets of component inputs (one RCA and one 75 ohm BNC) and is rated at 15:000:1 CR and the 8130 has just V lens shift, one set of component inputs (RCA) and is rated at 10,000:1 CR. Everything else is identical.

Yeah I know that much, but I was curious how much real world percieved difference does the CR rating difference translate into.

Yeah I know that much, but I was curious how much real world percieved difference does the CR rating difference translate into.

Depends on who you ask. There are people on this forum that will say that it makes a big difference. Asking me is sort of not fair....

Depends on who you ask. There are people on this forum that will say that it makes a big difference. Asking me is sort of not fair....

After seeing your description of the 8150 I wish had demoed it more thoroughly instead of continued to wrangle with Sim2 your competitor over their 380 to deliver a projector which even remotely meets specification. After one year and a half 40 emails and going through 3 projectors I now have a projector that puts out 245 lumens. It has been a real horror story

Its sound like you have done every thing right to optimize the image although I would have loved to see a manual adjustable Iris

Is their a dealer in Colorado?

After seeing your description of the 8150 I wish had demoed it more thoroughly instead of continued to wrangle with Sim2 your competitor over their 380 to deliver a projector which even remotely meets specification. After one year and a half 40 emails and going through 3 projectors I now have a projector that puts out 245 lumens. It has been a real horror story

Its sound like you have done every thing right to optimize the image although I would have loved to see a manual adjustable Iris

Is their a dealer in Colorado?

We have several. Give our local sales guy, Doug, a call at 970-377-2593.

Thanks,

I can only second that: I ordered the Sim2 Lumis, it got measured and failed the specs signifacmtly with the T1 lens a loss of Ansi-CR down to 450 (34000 Euro machine). Than considered the HT3000e because of its Unishade-Lamp technolgy speced at 1200 lumens, measured in reality at 770 Lumen and 2700 CR, no Dynamic Iris (16000 Euro-Machine).

Now I learned from Brian that they use the same Osram-Technolgy (Uni-Shape) as Sim2 did and when you read the cine4home-review, the specs are better than Sim2 and that at a price point of 6500 Euro.

YOu can imagine how much I would love to see a 3chip 1008p Projector from Planar at 13000 Euro. That would be a killer-product and would be a break-through as we had a break-though years ago with the ruby.

I would love to see a 3chip 1008p Projector from Planar at 13000 Euro. That would be a killer-product and would be a break-through as we had a break-though years ago with the ruby.

indeed. With todays economy the timing may make this impractical but it would make for a welcomed product.









.

I can only second that: I ordered the Sim2 Lumis, it got neasured and failed the specs signifacmtly with the T1 lens a loss of Ansi-CR down to 450 (34000 Euro machine). Than considered the HT3000e because of its Unishade-Lamp technolgy speced at 1200 lumens, measured in reality at 770 Lumen and 2700 CR, no Dynamic Iris (16000 Euro-Machine).

Now I learned from Brian that they use the same Osram-Technolgy (Uni-Shape) as Sim2 did and when you read the cine4hom-rview, the specs are better than Sim2 and that at a price point of 6500 Euro.

YOu can imagine how much I would love to see a 3chip 1008p Projector from Planar at 13000 Euro. That would be a killer-product and would be a break-through as we had a break-though years ago with the ruby.

Sorry that our marketing information did not make this clear. We worked very hard on this platform to get the features such as DynamicBlack and UniShape working correctly. The lower cost 3-chip 1080p is waiting for TI to get the 0.65 DMD's working for 3-chip.

Why wouldn't you use the 3 Chip DMDs 0,95” 1080p DC4 like the Lumis ? I can see you guys are capable to produce products which are at least en par with the Sim2 stuff at a much more reasonable price, so why don't you build a "Lumis-Killer" ? Obvioulsy time to market is important in the PJ-Game...

If you wan't to go with 1-chip DLP and are sensitive to CSP , this is the one. I can only see rainbows if I provoke it.

If you wan't to go with 1-chip DLP and are sensitive to CSP , this is the one. I can only see rainbows if I provoke it.

Have a look at the DP dVision or the Avielo Optix, I found those to be the best when it comes to rainbows. However, they're more expensive than the 8150 and I think they target another market (much bigger screens).

The optional short-throw lens is 1.56 - 1.86:1. There is no difference in brightness or contrast with this lens over the standard lens (1.85 - 2.40:1).

Thanks for the info on the dealer. It will be interesting to compare the new improved Planar against the Sim2 HT380 and when I do I will report the results on this forum

So, Mike, did you get your Planar yet?

I have one coming early next week.

I am very thankful for Brian's presence here and the wealth of info he provides.

I would love to hear his answer to the use of a .95 versus the newer smaller chip but I suspect the stringent clamps TI places on all licensees on discussing TI pricing, he simply can't answer the question. Use of the smaller chip as Mlang discusses will significantly make lens manufacture and cost very high if a performance loss is to be avoided through a loss of back plane focus yada yada. Not my area of expertise but Mlang I am sure can comment.

Brian any chance for a long throw lens?

I just asked Laurie to order one today for our showroom and the current lens will
work but we will be at the end of its throw. Im looking forward to seeing the improvements over the previous version which I already thought looked good.

Thanks Brian.

This is great! I will be looking forward to hear what both Alan and Mark have to say about the PD8150. Since I am a DLP fan, the Planar presents an exciting alternative to the RS-20, especially with the recent drop in MSRP and since it is color accurate out of the box.

If I may ask, what is the new retail price?

It dropped from $8K to $7K MSRP.

I expect this machine to be very close to SOTA for a single chip DLP.

I don`t expect Planar to disclose whether it uses a DC3 or a DC3 plus chp which I believe would be essentially a DC4 chip. If it uses a DC3, I would expect a DC3 plus or DC4 would give marginally better performance though I don`t know in what ways or to what extent. perhaps slightly better native on\off and a little higher ANSI but I really don`t know. Fom Chris`s review I would expect a very very good lens but perhaps not quite as good as its more expensive competition. From what I know, the projectors are very very well engineered and well built. Planar has extremely good customer and dealer support. Planar`s business is projectors, pure and simple. Product development, refinements, software improvements do not depend on US representatives of a foreign company getting foreign engineers and management to respond to it North American customer and dealer base. I am not anti non US companies, but Planar has some real advantages in being able to make decisions and respond quickly. The buck stops here. Its too bad the economy is in the pits because in better times I would expect even more from them.

Brian,

Do you have plans to introduce a proper Australian distribution model? The only importer I've found here is price gouging to the extreme (was quoted AUD$17,500 or US$12,600 converted) for an 8150 and when I briefly but politely declined stating price as the reason they sent me the rudest reply I've ever received in regard to a product query. Also full of misinformation. To be honest they could offer me the unit for half price now and I wouldn't buy it from them based on their reply alone.

I would expect you'd want a more reputable company representing your product abroad after all the work that's gone into producing it and would be keen to hear of any plans to distribute it in this country officially.

Brian,

Do you have plans to introduce a proper Australian distribution model? The only importer I've found here is price gouging to the extreme (was quoted AUD$17,500 or US$12,600 converted) for an 8150 and when I briefly but politely declined stating price as the reason they sent me the rudest reply I've ever received in regard to a product query. Also full of misinformation. To be honest they could offer me the unit for half price now and I wouldn't buy it from them based on their reply alone.

I would expect you'd want a more reputable company representing your product abroad after all the work that's gone into producing it and would be keen to hear of any plans to distribute it in this country officially.


Sorry to hear that. Who is the distributor you are referring to here? Will you PM me the response you got?

Brian

No problem, pm sent.

The only importer I've found here is price gouging to the extreme (was quoted AUD$17,500 or US$12,600 converted) for an 8150 and when I briefly but politely declined stating price as the reason they sent me the rudest reply I've ever received in regard to a product query. Also full of misinformation. To be honest they could offer me the unit for half price now and I wouldn't buy it from them based on their reply alone.
I understand your frustration. I have issues with Planar's dealer policy as well, though I won't get into it in this thread. For me it just made my choice a simple one - buy the JVC RS-20 instead.

For me it just made my choice a simple one - buy the JVC RS-20 instead.

Did I just read that right?

Yes, you did Lawguy!

I really wanted to buy the Planar, but I can't buy it through my dealer of choice (right here at AVS :) ), nor could I trust that I would be able to obtain warranty service from an Ebay deal, so I will probably buy an RS-20 (my second choice) just because I can buy it from AVS and I have no fears about service or warranty. The PD8150 seems like a very good choice, though, for those who are willing to adhere to Planar's distribution model (I'm not). Brian is a really nice guy and a very helpful person, so rather than risk misrepresenting his company's policies, I will defer any questions regarding warranty validity, dealer and territorial assignments, and pricing structure to him.

Yes, you did Lawguy!

I really wanted to buy the Planar, but I can't buy it through my dealer of choice (right here at AVS :) ), nor could I trust that I would be able to obtain warranty service from an Ebay deal, so I will probably buy an RS-20 (my second choice) just because I can buy it from AVS and I have no fears about service or warranty. The PD8150 seems like a very good choice, though, for those who are willing to adhere to Planar's distribution model (I'm not). Brian is a really nice guy and a very helpful person, so rather than risk misrepresenting his company's policies, I will defer any questions regarding warranty validity, dealer and territorial assignments, and pricing structure to him.


I hope you enjoy it.

I also considered the Planar (at a time when AVS was selling it). If I remember correctly, Tryg actally raved about it as well.

Good luck!

Yes, you did Lawguy!

I really wanted to buy the Planar, but I can't buy it through my dealer of choice (right here at AVS :) ), nor could I trust that I would be able to obtain warranty service from an Ebay deal, so I will probably buy an RS-20 (my second choice) just because I can buy it from AVS and I have no fears about service or warranty. The PD8150 seems like a very good choice, though, for those who are willing to adhere to Planar's distribution model (I'm not). Brian is a really nice guy and a very helpful person, so rather than risk misrepresenting his company's policies, I will defer any questions regarding warranty validity, dealer and territorial assignments, and pricing structure to him.


Dang, that is a shame. I'm starting to look for a replacement for my BenQ (which apparently I got a POS sample of), and it seemed like the Planars were really the only viable DLP out there, at least for me. InFocus' have too much offset for my 7' ceilings, and I don't think I'd be happy with the CR/black level. Optoma's out due to reliability/support concerns, BenQ's out due to my current/past experience. Sharp (20K) is too dim, the 15k well let's say I don't expect miracles from a DLP at that price. All the other DLPs are way too much $$$.

I may well end up following Bob's lead.

I hope you enjoy it.

I also considered the Planar (at a time when AVS was selling it). If I remember correctly, Tryg actally raved about it as well.

Good luck!

It throws a great picture. BUT rainbows from 1 chip machines makes it a no go for me. I simply cannot overlook this artifact.

Yes, you did Lawguy!

I really wanted to buy the Planar, but I can't buy it through my dealer of choice (right here at AVS :) ), nor could I trust that I would be able to obtain warranty service from an Ebay deal, so I will probably buy an RS-20 (my second choice) just because I can buy it from AVS and I have no fears about service or warranty. The PD8150 seems like a very good choice, though, for those who are willing to adhere to Planar's distribution model (I'm not). Brian is a really nice guy and a very helpful person, so rather than risk misrepresenting his company's policies, I will defer any questions regarding warranty validity, dealer and territorial assignments, and pricing structure to him.


Ok, I feel that I should speak up here and give my view of this situation. Bob, you contacted me regarding two PD8150's someone was selling on eBay (the seller states is due to a divorce) and if they would be covered under warranty. I asked for the S/N of the unit you wished to purchase so I could check to see if was a legal sale (not stolen). It appears that the eBay seller was not willing to give you the S/N and to me, that is a red flag. If he did purchase them, then he should not have any issue giving the S/N. With regards to the warranty, we offer 2 years from the date of delivery to the end user, excluding the lamp, which has a 6 month (or 1000 hour, whichever comes first) from the date of delivery to the end user. I am trying to protect you from buying a 'brand new unit' that per our records may be out of warranty. I have offered to speak to you directly to see if we can resolve this, and I hope you will.

Our dealer policy is very similar to that of JVC, and possibly less threatening... Here is what is on the JVC website states:

"JVC Professional Products Company sells this D-ILA projector only through authorized Distributors, Dealers and Custom Installers that offer quality support before and after the sale.

JVC expressly prohibits its authorized resellers from selling the DLA-RS1U D-ILA projector over the Internet. JVC is actively pursuing legal action against businesses in violation of its policy for copyright infringement, misrepresentation and fraud. For your protection, and to receive authorized support, JVC recommends that its customers not purchase this model through unauthorized Internet channels."

I would like to get you into a Planar, and if the eBay deal is legit, then I will work with you to see what the remaining warranty is and what else can be done. As for why AV Science is not an authorized dealer any more, I don’t know. That is a sales issue, and I am the product guy.

I hope everyone can understand that we have authorized dealers who have a lot invested in us and us in them, and we want to keep them happy and in business. But mostly, we want the end customer, who is spending their hard-earned cash to be happy. If the dealers we have are not satisfying the customer’s needs (service, value, location, knowledge), then we need to find new dealers.

We do our best to spend time on the forum to field questions and provide straightforward answers. From what I have seen, we are one of the few manufacturers who do this, and people seem to value a direct pipeline to the people who designed the product.

Regards,

Brain, you are a class act. It is good to see Planar has such a presence here on the forums.

But, I can understand Bob's frustration. For many of us here, our dealer is AVS and if AVS isn't selling it, I am unlikely to buy it. This is not any kind of internet sale. We all speak with, and have some kind of personal relationship, either with Jason, or with someone else. I have no idea why AVS doesn't sell Planar anymore, but I have to think it is Planar's loss. I think that it's kind of crazy that Bob has to be overcome some Ebay obstacles to get the projector he wants. Help a brother out.

Brain, you are a class act. It is good to see Planar has such a presence here on the forums.

But, I can understand Bob's frustration. For many of us here, our dealer is AVS and if AVS isn't selling it, I am unlikely to buy it. This is not any kind of internet sale. We all speak with, and have some kind of personal relationship, either with Jason, or with someone else. I have no idea why AVS doesn't sell Planar anymore, but I have to think it is Planar's loss. I think that it's kind of crazy that Bob has to be overcome some Ebay obstacles to get the projector he wants. Help a brother out.

I will have our VP of Sales call Jason and see what's up. As for helping a brother out, I am trying to do what I can for Bob - he just needs to call me.:)

I will have our VP of Sales call Jason and see what's up. As for helping a brother out, I am trying to do what I can for Bob - he just needs to call me.:)

I hope it works out.

From everything I can tell, the 8150 is one of the best projectors now available and it seems to get no respect, even though it really is priced right! This doesn't make much sense to me.

Can someone help me understand Planar's distribution/dealer model. I have made inquiries directly with Planar regarding a local dealer for the PD8150 on mulitple occasions with no response.

Thanks.

Mark

My expirience with planar customer service has been outstanding. People that go with jvc will be missing the ansi, the sharpness and the color accuracy.

Ok, I feel that I should speak up here and give my view of this situation.

Brian, just let me start out by saying, like Bob, I in no way wish to disparage Planar, I understand the desire to reduce the "riff raff" trying to sell your product and potentially tarnishing the Planar name as a result. I should have kept my mouth shut as my comment had no place in this thread, so I apologize for that. I had just been operating under the assumption that I'd be able to get one through AVS (nobody around here appears to sell them), and was surprised to hear that isn't possible and would disappointed if a Planar was no longer an option.

I would like to get you into a Planar, and if the eBay deal is legit, then I will work with you to see what the remaining warranty is and what else can be done. As for why AV Science is not an authorized dealer any more, I don’t know. That is a sales issue, and I am the product guy.

I hope everyone can understand that we have authorized dealers who have a lot invested in us and us in them, and we want to keep them happy and in business. But mostly, we want the end customer, who is spending their hard-earned cash to be happy. If the dealers we have are not satisfying the customer’s needs (service, value, location, knowledge), then we need to find new dealers.

We do our best to spend time on the forum to field questions and provide straightforward answers. From what I have seen, we are one of the few manufacturers who do this, and people seem to value a direct pipeline to the people who designed the product.

Regards,

Yes you do, and I appreciate it and I'm sure everyone else does as well. One of the reasons a Planar is/was high on my list. I'm tired of dealing with "corporate" support for my HT purchases. I love my Anthem processor, and while I haven't had any troubles with it, I've contacted their support with inquiries on several occasions and they've been most helpful. I really appreciate that sort of support.

So, I'll shut up now :)

Bob, you contacted me regarding two PD8150's someone was selling on eBay (the seller states is due to a divorce) and if they would be covered under warranty. I asked for the S/N of the unit you wished to purchase so I could check to see if was a legal sale (not stolen).
Before we go on, please let me reiterate that I think you are a class act as well and I have no problems with you at all. Since the Ebay guy has not provided me with a serial number, I have written him off as I too feel pretty confident that there is something fishy going on.

My problem is that I refuse to buy from any of my local dealers. They charge top dollar for everything and have little knowledge of the products that they sell. All I really need is a good price and to know that Planar will honor the warranty, but from our PMs I have come away with the feeling that I can't just buy from someone selling it out of my territory and/or on the Internet at a good price. If my perception is incorrect, please correct me.

I think the real problem here is to know exactly why AVS is no longer selling Planar products. If Planar pulled the plug, then why did they do so? JVC, regardless of what they have written on their web site, most certainly not only authorizes AVS to sell their products, but actually works with them to provide the AVS members with special price deals. I'll bet that AVS alone sells more JVC projectors than the rest of the US dealers combined.

AVS provides more than just "Internet sales". They provide as much or as little service as the customer requires. That is, if you need to have the unit inspected and tested prior to shipping, they will do that. If you want the unit calibrated, they will do that. If you want someone to travel to your home and do a complete install, they will do that. Since I am a competent person, I don't need anything but a good price and a warranty - it's that simple, so they don't even try to sell me what they know I don't need. That's my kind of dealer! :)

I hope that whatever problems exist between Planar and AVS are quickly solved, as I will be sticking with my dealer and buying whatever projector best suits my needs THAT THEY SELL. I only asked about the Ebay guy because he offered to sell one to me at the price of his OLD ad ($1000 less). So if you really want to help me out, Brian (and I am sure that you are sincere in what you say), the best thing that you can do for me is to get AVS back on your approved dealer list. I have to go out tonight, but if you still want me to call you, I will be glad to do so tomorrow.

Once again, thank you for your great customer care and concern in this matter!

Before we go on, please let me reiterate that I think you are a class act as well and I have no problems with you at all. Since the Ebay guy has not provided me with a serial number, I have written him off as I too feel pretty confident that there is something fishy going on.

My problem is that I refuse to buy from any of my local dealers. They charge top dollar for everything and have little knowledge of the products that they sell. All I really need is a good price and to know that Planar will honor the warranty, but from our PMs I have come away with the feeling that I can't just buy from someone selling it out of my territory and/or on the Internet at a good price. If my perception is incorrect, please correct me.

I think the real problem here is to know exactly why AVS is no longer selling Planar products. If Planar pulled the plug, then why did they do so? JVC, regardless of what they have written on their web site, most certainly not only authorizes AVS to sell their products, but actually works with them to provide the AVS members with special price deals. I'll bet that AVS alone sells more JVC projectors than the rest of the US dealers combined.

AVS provides more than just "Internet sales". They provide as much or as little service as the customer requires. That is, if you need to have the unit inspected and tested prior to shipping, they will do that. If you want the unit calibrated, they will do that. If you want someone to travel to your home and do a complete install, they will do that. Since I am a competent person, I don't need anything but a good price and a warranty - it's that simple, so they don't even try to sell me what they know I don't need. That's my kind of dealer! :)

I hope that whatever problems exist between Planar and AVS are quickly solved, as I will be sticking with my dealer and buying whatever projector best suits my needs THAT THEY SELL. I only asked about the Ebay guy because he offered to sell one to me at the price of his OLD ad ($1000 less). So if you really want to help me out, Brian (and I am sure that you are sincere in what you say), the best thing that you can do for me is to get AVS back on your approved dealer list. I have to go out tonight, but if you still want me to call you, I will be glad to do so tomorrow.

Once again, thank you for your great customer care and concern in this matter!

I could not have said it better myself. I too would very interested in the Planar if they were sold by AVS.

Mark

"So if you really want to help me out, Brian (and I am sure that you are sincere in what you say), the best thing that you can do for me is to get AVS back on your approved dealer list."

Same here.

Can someone help me understand Planar's distribution/dealer model. I have made inquiries directly with Planar regarding a local dealer for the PD8150 on mulitple occasions with no response.

Thanks.

Mark
I also have not yet received a reply when recently asking about a local dealer here in the GTA. Is there a phone number I can call directly to Planar to ask for a local dealer list in the Toronto area.

"So if you really want to help me out, Brian (and I am sure that you are sincere in what you say), the best thing that you can do for me is to get AVS back on your approved dealer list."

Same here.

Me too!

Me too!

Me three!

I wanted to also jump in here, hoping not to upset anyone. AVS is now (rather again) a dealer for Planar. Basically we signed on some time ago (nearly 2 years) through the local rep and sold them locally. That was when I did my original review on it if you recall. Shortly there after, that rep was dropped (or dropped, not sure the exact story) Planar from their line. In turn, all dealers associated with that rep were dropped. In truth, due to some of the issues that have been touched upon (for the earlier versions of the PD8150), we never bothered persuing re-signing (signing on requires loads of paperwork and such so they are really a pain). But, after a new found interest on the forum and with Kris's excellent information, we decided to work with them again. In any event, we just ordered our demo projector and are anxiously expecting it.

That being said, we, like all dealers, do have restrictions on Planar (as we do with JVC as Brian mentioned). So, it does NOT mean we can sell to everyone. We follow the rules, always have, always will. Despite what some dealers on the forum say (you know who they are), we are NOT a .com place. No online store. We are a custom installer (I can show you pictures of many high end rooms we have done). We happen to own the AVSForum, and thus are well known on the internet. But, that is not our core business...we are a hybrid if you will. This is why we can sell just about everything on the market.

So when we get our demo unit we will do an updated review and keep everyone posted as to our findings. If you think you qualify for us to sell to you, feel free to contact me...always happy to help. But please do not get upset if I cannot help you with this unit...it isn't personal...just following the rules.

Brian, thanks again for participating on the boards! Hopefully I'll get to see you again at Cedia (Brian and I have known each other for sometime...since his Infocus days).

I like happy endings. :)

Best of luck to Planar and AVS!

So I can come out of my bunker now?? :)

Thanks Jason.

This is great news! Now I can buy a Planar and be happy...:)

Many thanks to Brian, Jason, and anyone else who was involved in getting these 2 companies back together.

No problem Brian. Now I have to go BACK INTO my bunker. :)

No problem Brian. Now I have to go BACK INTO my bunker. :)

Okay.... you guys are way TOO Sensitive!!

We are simple people really....... All we want is:

1. Perfection for every possible theater application.
2. We want it Cheap.
3. And we want it NOW!

or earlier if possible............:D

:)

No problem Brian. Now I have to go BACK INTO my bunker. :)

If I had your bunker, I'd want to go back there too :cool:

Good news for those in the US! Still, good work.

I wanted to also jump in here, hoping not to upset anyone. AVS is now (rather again) a dealer for Planar. Basically we signed on some time ago (nearly 2 years) through the local rep and sold them locally. That was when I did my original review on it if you recall. Shortly there after, that rep was dropped (or dropped, not sure the exact story) Planar from their line. In turn, all dealers associated with that rep were dropped. In truth, due to some of the issues that have been touched upon (for the earlier versions of the PD8150), we never bothered persuing re-signing (signing on requires loads of paperwork and such so they are really a pain). But, after a new found interest on the forum and with Kris's excellent information, we decided to work with them again. In any event, we just ordered our demo projector and are anxiously expecting it.

That being said, we, like all dealers, do have restrictions on Planar (as we do with JVC as Brian mentioned). So, it does NOT mean we can sell to everyone. We follow the rules, always have, always will. Despite what some dealers on the forum say (you know who they are), we are NOT a .com place. No online store. We are a custom installer (I can show you pictures of many high end rooms we have done). We happen to own the AVSForum, and thus are well known on the internet. But, that is not our core business...we are a hybrid if you will. This is why we can sell just about everything on the market.

So when we get our demo unit we will do an updated review and keep everyone posted as to our findings. If you think you qualify for us to sell to you, feel free to contact me...always happy to help. But please do not get upset if I cannot help you with this unit...it isn't personal...just following the rules.

Brian, thanks again for participating on the boards! Hopefully I'll get to see you again at Cedia (Brian and I have known each other for sometime...since his Infocus days).

Could you please give a link to your original review of the 8150 ?

As I understand it from Brian, the 8130 and 8150 have the exact same range of vertical lenshift. There appears to be some misinformation out there that the 8150 had a greater degree of vertical lenshift (in addition to the extra feature of horizontal lenshift).

Hi guys -

Quick question on the Planar 8150 - can it support 48Hz and 72Hz frame rates?

Thanks!

One more question on the 8150 -

If my room will only allow me to have the 8150 15' away from the screen is the max screen size I can do with this projector 115" wide as shown here:

http://thatcher.smugmug.com/photos/514966893_adtKu-L.png
Note: In order to get here, I had to select the short-throw lens.

If this is accurate, this means that with the distance I have to work with I could not go any bigger with my screen size than 115"?

And, if this is indeed the max screen size, would I be losing, or gaining, anything from a picture quality stand point because I would be using the projector under the conditions identified above?

Thanks!

Hi guys -

Quick question on the Planar 8150 - can it support 48Hz and 72Hz frame rates?

Thanks!

It supports 48Hz but not 72Hz.

One more question on the 8150 -

If my room will only allow me to have the 8150 15' away from the screen is the max screen size I can do with this projector 115" wide as shown here:

http://thatcher.smugmug.com/photos/514966893_adtKu-L.png
Note: In order to get here, I had to select the short-throw lens.

If this is accurate, this means that with the distance I have to work with I could not go any bigger with my screen size than 115"?

And, if this is indeed the max screen size, would I be losing, or gaining, anything from a picture quality stand point because I would be using the projector under the conditions identified above?

Thanks!

115" width would be the max width using the short throw lens, and no, you would not lose/gain any picture quality.

Hi guys -

Quick question on the Planar 8150 - can it support 48Hz and 72Hz frame rates?

Thanks!

Yes, perfectly. I use it with 24hz all the time

Also, under the Advanced tab, you can set the output frame rate of the DLP at Auto (will automaticly determine the optimum frame rate based on the input) or force it to run at 48Hz, 50Hz or 60Hz. This is described in more detail on page 49 of the User's Manual.

Thanks,

If anyone can comment on this PJ versus teh JVC HD750....

I am guessing that the HD750 produces a slightly deeper black a 0% IRE and probably with very low APl scenes, but that the Pd8150 has more depth with the majority of mid and high apl content due to its superior ansi CR. I would also imagine that the PD8150 has slightly better motion handling. Am I on the right track? Anything to add. I am very intrigued by this PJ, and I am thinking it may be somewhat "overlooked" due to the rabid HD750 praising due to its unmatched black level....but I know there is much more to PQ than the ability to create a deep black with a 0%IRE stimulus.

If anyone can comment on this PJ versus teh JVC HD750....

I am guessing that the HD750 produces a slightly deeper black a 0% IRE and probably with very low APl scenes, but that the Pd8150 has more depth with the majority of mid and high apl content due to its superior ansi CR. I would also imagine that the PD8150 has slightly better motion handling. Am I on the right track? Anything to add. I am very intrigued by this PJ, and I am thinking it may be somewhat "overlooked" due to the rabid HD750 praising due to its unmatched black level....but I know there is much more to PQ than the ability to create a deep black with a 0%IRE stimulus.

You will find an indepth review here http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1109060

The Planar is looking much more impressive in day to day scene. The 3D-effect of the DLP is nothing which the JVC comes close to. The JVC can have blacker blacks in a perfect light-controlled room...but so what if the picture looks nevertheless much more 2D and the colours are not even close to the PLanar.

So any word on a proper Australian distributor?

Maybe somebody could help me out with this....

I'm trying to figure out if I could shelf mount a Planar 8150 at the back of my HT room. If I have a 120" (horizontal) screen with a height of 59" and the planar lens was about 4" below the top of the screen, could I use the vertical lens shift to dial down the picture to fit on my screen?

So any word on a proper Australian distributor?


I have sent the info to our VP of sales.

Brian,

I've checked the dimensional drawings but they don't identify the depth of the 8150 with the rear panel removed. Do you know this?

Brian,

I've checked the dimensional drawings but they don't identify the depth of the 8150 with the rear panel removed. Do you know this?

The rear cover is about 5" deep, so with the cover removed the projector is about 18" long from the rear to the front of the lens.

Thanks, in that case it will fit on my shelf.

Brian (or Bob Williams),

In an earlier Planar thread, Bob Williams said that if he were mounting the 8150 he would position it so that the lens was in the same plane as the top (for ceiling mount) or bottom (for table mount) edge of the screen. Of course the lens shift option allows more flexibilty - it was just his suggestion.

In my setup I can mount that way but I would prefer to mount dead center to the screen height. What would I be giving up if I went that route?

Thanks,
Mike

Are the 8130/8150 still in production ?

Are the 8130/8150 still in production ?

Yes.

Using lens shift to move the light emitting from the lens from lens center, will move the the light traveling through the lens closer to the black inner barrel wall of the lens. Because light bounces around inside the lens, moving the light path closer to thw barrel wall may somewhat reduce the bounce, thus improving contrast by some small amount. Obviously if one uses lens shift to the max both vertically and horizontally, this increase in contrast would be maximized but at I think significant cost to the optical performace on the lens and resultant picture quality. Once one leaves the center sweet spot of a lens and starts entering into lens curvature areas, optical performace will deteiorate. Using a large diameter high quality lens increases the size of the sweet spot and allows the use of more lens shift without hurting the image. The Planar uses a pretty good lens and it is fairly big in diameter allowing the designer to include some lens shift. Ask any designer what he really thinks about using lens shift. Its provision is necessary if you want your projector to sell in quantities but it isn`t a free lunch, it will lower picture quality somewhat. Bob said its use at least might improve contrast a little. In his opinion the contrast improvement vs the negatives would result in the greatest positive sum with the lens at his recommended point. We are talking theory here and ssmall contrast improvements. I doubt you will notice any deriorating with you intended mounting position and might even result in maximizing PQ. it depends on a lot of things.


Flash, If you think that Bob`s recommendation for maximumization is what you want to do, you can still accomplish the same thing by deliberatly mounting the projector horizontally off center and using horizontal lens shift Your image contrast would have whatever benifit there is to having the internal light beam closer to the black barrel wall. Just work out the degree of shift needed to be the same distance internal distance from the lens barrel wall and mount the projector accordingly. You would likely have the same negatives too but with the result sum maximumization if Bob is right. Of course the chip isn`t square, so the contrast effect along the shorter dimension won1t be the same. BTW Just mount it where you intend and center it horizontally. You would probably hurt the resultant image by using lens shift to gain a little more contrast.

Thanks Mark. Great explanation.

Mike. I took our new demo 8150 home today to play with it. I haven`t finished reading all the manual yet. I had a hockey game and a basket ball game to watch. The manual recommends lens placement at the top or bottom of the screen and centered horizontally. I need to examine if this recommendation corresponds to chip centered vertically in the lens. Need to turn the contrast down and look into the lens.

Colors are near perfect out of the box. Literally plug and play at the factory defaults except I turned the brilliant color off.

I am impressed with how the machine is packed, no need to double box it. The box is hugh compared to the box for the JVC RS10\20. And its well packed inside. Heavier than the JVC I think mostly due to the bigger lens. I like the fit and finish as well as the cable cover which is hinged and secured with two large post screws. The lens shift is controlled by two large adjusters hidden beneath a removable cover. You adjust using the included hefty allen wrench. Focus and zoom are mechanical. That`s it for tonight.

quote:I am impressed with how the machine is packed

I was surprised with the packaging as well Mark. Very nice machine with plenty of features. I am impressed with the saturated colors which is not typical from 1 chip dlp. Very nice guys.
So far I prefer dynamic black "on" adaptive contrast "on" brilliant color "off"
Gamma set to "film 2.2"
More to come.



.

The top screen edge placement is for better ansi contrast, since less light is reflected back from them the lens this way. But how large is the difference? At top edge placement the projector has over 700 ansi cr, but what does it have near the middle of the screen? If the difference is big enough I'll gp through the extra trouble to place it higher.

The top screen edge placement is for better ansi contrast, since less light is reflected back from them the lens this way. But how large is the difference? At top edge placement the projector has over 700 ansi cr, but what does it have near the middle of the screen? If the difference is big enough I'll gp through the extra trouble to place it higher.



I think it is worth mentioning here that both the 8130 and the 8150 have the exact same range of vertical lens shift, despite what some of the specs say even from Planar. I have this from Brian:


"The vertical offset was going to be different between the two models, then we decided to make them the same. So they are the same.

I'm not sure what your screen width is, but I used a 92" wide 16:9 screen. The max offset (from center of the screen to the center of the lens) is 31.1". That would put the center of the lens 5.2" above the top of the image.

It can go lower than the top of the image by quite a bit (-12.9" below the center of the image).

Brian"

If I'm not mistaken, with ceiling mounting, you can't get the lens all the way to the bottom of the screen, only the top. For table top mounting, the converse would be true . And the best contrast presumably therefore is only at one end of the screen not both, as the range of lenshift only encompasses one end of the screen. Correct me if I have this wrong Brian .

When one ceiling mounts, the machine is normally inverted. When one table mounts the machine is usually not inverted. Thus the behavior is the same whether table or ceiling mounted and the recommendation re top or bottom edge placement for center of the lens placement. The magic number here is 60% lens shift. 60% of your screen height. This means using lens shift, inverted mount, one can lower the center of the screen as much as 60% of the screen height below the lens center. Or raise the lens center as much as 10% of screen height above the top of the screen, same thing. If the machine is not inverted say for a table mount, same thing. The machine can be placed no lower than 10% of screen height below the bottom of the screen. Either way, the machine can be placed at screen center (in which case no vertical lens offset would be used). Keeping the same machine orientation one can go the other way (mounting the machine non inverted,, say on a shelf) with the lens center above screen center as much as 25% of screen height above screen center. This is the same thing as saying if you are shelf mounting high, your lens center must be 25% of screen height below the top of the screen. Any higher and the projector must be inverted on that shelf.

Now how does changing the location within these limits affect performance. The manual recommends top or bottom edge lens center mounting and the notes in the manual state that no using no lens shift the center of the lens is aligned with screen center. But the manual recommends that you use lens shift with optimum use using shift to place the lens center at the top or bottom edge depending on machine orientation (inverted top edge, non inverted bottom edge). How much does ANSI fall off with screen center placement instead of edge placement, I haven`t a clue. Maybe Brian and Bob have some measurements. My theater isn`t set up to easily change mounting heights. One would need a clean line of sight and something like a rack with multiple shelves for mounting the projector say non inverted from bottom edge to center.

Alan. Adaptive contrast is included in the Gennum chip and a manufacturer can use it if it wishes. Also all those noise reduction and sharpness functions too. The Lumagen Radiance processor uses the same Gennum chip and has the same functions. Gennum provides lots of control options for those functions. For example, Lumagen employs variable adaptive contrast and the user can select the degree. Planar has chosen only an on\off control for the function. Be interesting to not the setting corresponence. Mild (1) or a higher integer.Whatever. On my Lumagen when watching indoor sports, I usually set it in my Lumagen at 1. The effect is like someone washed the basketball floor. But it really is eye candy. I have never been able to find out a lot about what it does exactly. The Planar manual states it expands the light and dark portions of the output image according to the mean luminance of the input image. Whatever that means. I suspect the setting used by Planar is something minimal like 1 or 2. I suspect 1.

I shut it off for film viewing and for outdoor sports, I don`t use it. I think I see it cause some white clipping but I am not sure. You see I have this problem, I watch the game and forget that I am supposed to only evaluate the projector instead of enjoying the content.

On my 54 x 96 1.3 gain screen, standard lamp was too bright, default is economy anyway. I also prefered film gamma for my sports instead of video but I need to view this more. Dind`t try CRT gamma. Video gamma says similar to the 2.2 film gamma but differs in dark areas of the image. The video gamma standard is very close to 2.2 but not exactly, so maybe the video gamma of the planar exactly conforms to the standard video gamma standard. Here comes the problem with adaptive contrat again, in essence changing the selected gamma curve. Whatever. None of it makes that much difference. Film or video gamma with or without adaptive contrast. Whatever you prefer for video. For film, I would use film gamma and shut adaptive contrast off but if you like it on, fine. Watch the film, enjoy.

Since there are no iris settings, DI must be used to obtain decent blacks. The lens is not as sharp as the Marantz lens, not bad. Sharper than the JVC. Lens measurements in a few days. Personally, I really like sharp. That`s just me and in comparison. If you have only one machine, any of these will look plenty sharp but in comparison I like the sharpest.

That`s about it for this morning. Tom Huffman and I will be measuring this machine and calibrating it in a few days. My guess is it will measure very fine out of the box but of course better when tweaked and one can notice the difference. Its always like that.

Lens measurements in a few days.

Are we getting MTF specs?
From Planar? if not what company?
These numbers would be useful if we can get the other manufactures to give out this info, would be nice some day.









.

MTF numbers from a manufacturer? LOL

NO. I am going to run some resolution test patterns. Lens line pairs yada. CA can be assessed.

MTF numbers from a manufacturer? LOL

NO. I am going to run some resolution test patterns. Lens line pairs yada. CA can be assessed.

Mark I was afraid that's where this was going. Please keep this off the board. Not interested in having this lens debate start all over again. Unless coming direct from an optical company along with per test certification this is subjective and will be seen as bias. Lets leave this to those interested to display their own test patterns to reach their own conclusion.
Lets talk projectors:)

Thank you!

I run the CRT gamma with dynamic black on but adaptive contrast and BC off.

The 8150 is factory calibrated with a Minolta CL-200 so out of the box it is VERY close. I still find that RGB color balance needs some tweaking though.

I am a big fan of the 2.5 gamma that the CRT setting offers. With REALLY dark material it does hurt shadow detail a bit, but it does wonders for 99% of the material I watch. Plus it is easy to shift on the fly anyways.

There are some things I would love to see Planar add though:

1. Ability for the consumer/calibrator to utilize the CCA function for CMS tweaks
2. An info screen that shows input colorspace/bit depth and resolution (i.e. 4:4:4 vs 4:2:2)

Also as an FYI, if you send the projector a 4:4:4 signal and the projector is not doing any de-interlacing and you have the advanced sharpness feature off, it keeps the colorspace intact throughout the video processing chain. No color conversions or loss of bit depth.

I run the CRT gamma with dynamic black on but adaptive contrast and BC off.

Ill give this a try.

An info screen that shows input colorspace/bit depth and resolution (i.e. 4:4:4 vs 4:2:2)

So far the Marantz has been the only projector Ive come across that displays bit depth info. I found it very useful.



Also as an FYI, if you send the projector a 4:4:4 signal and the projector is not doing any de-interlacing and you have the advanced sharpness feature off, it keeps the colorspace intact throughout the video processing chain. No color conversions or loss of bit depth.

Thanks for this tip Kris. Im running a Calibre VP Pro which outputs everything at 4:4:4 10 bit.

All good info, thank you:)

Kris Deering,

Do I infer correctly that you have switched from the JVC RS2 to the Planar for your personal projector?

I would... :)


Off topic question, what is the ansi contrast of the Sony vw70?

Alan. How go you think image sharpness compares to your 11S? I do notice some CA horizontally as you near the edges. manly red vertical but also some red horizontal. This is with the lens shift close to center screen placement.

One need not infer. He stated he has. One can not really refer to some ones random ANSI measurements. Its difficult to do it right. The best is someones comparative to another machine they have measured and even then it depends on a lot of careful test factors. What is the smallest ANSI delta that might rerally make a difference. 50? 100?

Ill give this a try.



So far the Marantz has been the only projector Ive come across that displays bit depth info. I found it very useful.



Thanks for this tip Kris. Im running a Calibre VP Pro which outputs everything at 4:4:4 10 bit.

All good info, thank you:)

I believe the new JVC's display bit depth as well. I am using the Oppo 83 for my primary source and have it outputting 12 bit 4:4:4.

Kris Deering,

Do I infer correctly that you have switched from the JVC RS2 to the Planar for your personal projector?

That is correct. The Planar is delivering better contrast performance for both on/off and ANSI and can be dialed in far better. It is also a bit sharper than my RS2 was.

The RS20 seems to be more in line with the Planar though. Its absolute blacks are a bit better but it still falls short in ANSI. I like Planar's interface and tweakability a tad more than the RS20 but the two are very similar in overall image performance to my eye. Each has its advantages with different material so it would be a personal taste choice in the end I think. Personally, I would lean toward the Planar, but completely understand the praise for the RS20 right now.

I would... :)


Off topic question, what is the ansi contrast of the Sony vw70?

I don't remember if Darin measured his VW80 but for some reason around 300-400:1 comes to mind. He could probably chime in on that.

I don't remember if Darin measured his VW80 but for some reason around 300-400:1 comes to mind. He could probably chime in on that.I don't have my notes right now, but about 400:1 is what I recall. I got around 760:1 with the 8150, but the black level was down at the low end for the meter and so likely a fairly high margin of error.

--Darin

Alan. How go you think image sharpness compares to your 11S? I do notice some CA horizontally as you near the edges. manly red vertical but also some red horizontal. This is with the lens shift close to center screen placement.
I hope Brian or the other heavy hitters here would comment more on this. How much CA is to be expected from PJ's in this class? Does the 8150 compare favorably and how would it be affected by lens shift/throw ratio?

Thanks,
Mike

There is definitely less CA than what I've seen on the 11S1 and 11S2 with the 8150. It isn't quite as sharp overall, but still better than what I've seen from the JVCs. The Samsung 800 was the sharpest DLP I've seen with the S2 and the 8150 coming in just a tad below and the Marantz just edging out the Planar.

In my experience you want to have someone help you to get the best focus possible with the 8150. I typically stand with my nose to the screen and have someone make the finest adjustments possible until it looks right. I try to eliminate any fringing but there is still a tad with green on mine that isn't discernable more than about 2-3 feet away. I can clearly make out the dimple in the center of each pixel though.

That is correct. The Planar is delivering better contrast performance for both on/off and ANSI and can be dialed in far better. It is also a bit sharper than my RS2 was.

The RS20 seems to be more in line with the Planar though. Its absolute blacks are a bit better but it still falls short in ANSI. I like Planar's interface and tweakability a tad more than the RS20 but the two are very similar in overall image performance to my eye. Each has its advantages with different material so it would be a personal taste choice in the end I think. Personally, I would lean toward the Planar, but completely understand the praise for the RS20 right now.

Kris, weren't you a member of the triumvirate (with Tryg and Darin, I believe) that tested hi ANSI CR (the Sharp 20000 I think) with lower but high o/f CR units (one of the JVC's I think), and concluded that high ANSI CR was not nearly so important as o/f?

A single chipper will have no convergence errors because by definition there is nothing to converge. If a grid line (say red) is off from another two grid lines (green and blue), the error would be due to lens chromatic aberrations.and this would also change with degree of lens shift used. On mine there is slight divergence near either side and slight vertical. This is unnoticeable moving back say 2 feet from the screen. Very good performance.


Non of these machines are perfect. I prefer the Planar to the JVC but that's me. If I watched a lot of dark movies, I would prefer the JVC, But I don't and what the Planar beats the JVC in are important to me. Sharper lens, more ANSI pop. Better build quality. There is more but that's for later.

Say Darin, did you ever post about your experience w/the 8150?

I'm really interested what your take on it is compared to the JVC's.

I run the CRT gamma with dynamic black on but adaptive contrast and BC off.

The 8150 is factory calibrated with a Minolta CL-200 so out of the box it is VERY close. I still find that RGB color balance needs some tweaking though.

I am a big fan of the 2.5 gamma that the CRT setting offers. With REALLY dark material it does hurt shadow detail a bit, but it does wonders for 99% of the material I watch. Plus it is easy to shift on the fly anyways.

There are some things I would love to see Planar add though:

1. Ability for the consumer/calibrator to utilize the CCA function for CMS tweaks
2. An info screen that shows input colorspace/bit depth and resolution (i.e. 4:4:4 vs 4:2:2)

Also as an FYI, if you send the projector a 4:4:4 signal and the projector is not doing any de-interlacing and you have the advanced sharpness feature off, it keeps the colorspace intact throughout the video processing chain. No color conversions or loss of bit depth.

I have been interested in the Planar because it has the DI which can really improve the black levels and decrease dithering artifacts in a single chip DLP projector. if I remember it also has an Osram unishape lamp which can improve the color depth

Am I correct in that it does not have an adjustable Iris and the zoom is manual

I noticed some of the early reviews of this projector were luke warm where yours was enthusiastic. Not negative but not overwhelming positive. This surprised me because on paper the Planar looks like a wonderful projector

any explanations.

What were the negative things said about the 8150?

I haven't been following the Planar 8150 recently since I got a RS20, but it sounds like the short throw lens option is now a true replacement lens and not an added attachment as I think it was initially. Is that correct?

Had that been true earlier, I might have considered it more carefully.

Mlang. Zoom, focus, H & V lens shift are all manual. The DI can be switched off and on but there are no user selectable user fixed iris settings. The machine has been refined since its introduction. Its a nice all around balanced machine that outperforms say the RS20 in some areas but not in others. It is not a stop the presses a new level in single chip DLP performance. But on balance it might be the best for the money particularly if your strength priorities match its.

I haven't been following the Planar 8150 recently since I got a RS20, but it sounds like the short throw lens option is now a true replacement lens and not an added attachment as I think it was initially. Is that correct?

The short throw lense has always been a true replacement lense.

Maybe you're confusing this with 21:9 cinemascope anamorphic lenses. Those are still an attachment (and needs to be for practical purposes as you want to be able to slide the lens in/out to switch between 16:9 and 21:9)

Had that been true earlier, I might have considered it more carefully.

It has always been the case. Maybe the fact that you cannot purchase the projector with a short throw lense out-of-the-box is what made you not consider it? The short throw lense needs to be purchased separately at additional cost and you end up paying for a lense that you do not use (the regular lense).

Peter

Maybe the fact that you cannot purchase the projector with a short throw lense out-of-the-box is what made you not consider it? The short throw lense needs to be purchased separately at additional cost and you end up paying for a lense that you do not use (the regular lense). Peter

OK, yes, I think that is it. So one still needs to purchase the ST lens in addition, and cannot just order the pj with it. Weird. (Even the min 1.56 throw ratio, though, this would have been a squeeze for me; the ~1.37 min throw of the JVC's does work better for me anyway.)

Your dealer can handle it all. Its between him/her and you. You never have to see the standard throw lens if you don't want it.

Kris, weren't you a member of the triumvirate (with Tryg and Darin, I believe) that tested hi ANSI CR (the Sharp 20000 I think) with lower but high o/f CR units (one of the JVC's I think), and concluded that high ANSI CR was not nearly so important as o/f?

We got together to see if we could spot some differences with the two projectors. My RS2 kept winning though! With the Planar we definitely noticed improvements with screen comparisons between the 8150 and the RS20 with mixed material that leaned more toward ANSI than on/off. But I wouldn't make a mountain out of a mole hill, both are REALLY strong projectors!

I have been interested in the Planar because it has the DI which can really improve the black levels and decrease dithering artifacts in a single chip DLP projector. if I remember it also has an Osram unishape lamp which can improve the color depth

Am I correct in that it does not have an adjustable Iris and the zoom is manual

I noticed some of the early reviews of this projector were luke warm where yours was enthusiastic. Not negative but not overwhelming positive. This surprised me because on paper the Planar looks like a wonderful projector

any explanations.

In my review I stated that with a few tweaks I would be more than happy to use this projector in my setup. Well Planar delivered. They fixed the clipping issue and tightened up the contrast performance. I had a VERY early unit for the review and Planar was still looking at some performance mods before consumer roll out. One of which was a tighter fixed iris in the lens.

Noah. Darin posted about the 8150 near the end of one of the Marantz threads, He sold his JVC and kept the Planar. He posted reasons of sort. Nothing major in favor of one or the other. Each one does somethings better than the other. You can't have too many projectors lying around. They depreciate quickly. many find one they like, convince themselves its the best for the money, and sell it with 2 years. I think its the new JVC every two years club. Until we get a new source of projector illumination, thinks are unlikely to change very drastically. Projectors are in a evolutionary phase right know with downward price pressures forcing design compromises and keeping us wishing for the next machine which will incorporate the best of the competition. You know what I mean.

That is correct. The Planar is delivering better contrast performance for both on/off and ANSI and can be dialed in far better. It is also a bit sharper than my RS2 was.

The RS20 seems to be more in line with the Planar though. Its absolute blacks are a bit better but it still falls short in ANSI. I like Planar's interface and tweakability a tad more than the RS20 but the two are very similar in overall image performance to my eye. Each has its advantages with different material so it would be a personal taste choice in the end I think. Personally, I would lean toward the Planar, but completely understand the praise for the RS20 right now.

Since you stumbled directly into my own internal debate (but with the advantage of having seen both). I've currently got a W5000 that I'm looking at replacing. On balance I love it. Colors are vivid but not unbelievable. Mid to bright scenes look awesome. It's very sharp.

But (aside from the issues with my lemon) there are a few things that have always bugged me:
Black level is somewhat horrible without clamping the manual iris all the way down and turning Dynamic Black on. And even then it's only passable.
Dynamic Black's gamma changes cause colors to change (making it more obvious)
DB causes brightness compression that on some content (admittedly usually only OSDs and (sub)title type things) that can be somewhat annoying
Dark scenes often seem to be murky rather than falling off into black. I'm not sure if that's crushed shadow detail or just poor black level making black murky

Anyway, I'm looking for a replacement, and RS20 and 8150 seem to be about the only machines that are likely to satisfy me that I have a chance of affording. So I keep running around in circles between them. I wonder if the DB on the 8150 will have similar noticeable artifacts as on my W5000, if the black level be "good enough", or will it be everything I'd hoped my W5000 was going to be.

And the RS20, will the colors bother me, and will I miss the DLP "magic" (high "ANSI").

I know you can't answer for me, but any thoughts on the two units knowing what I know bothers me at the moment? Oh, and can the 8150 do both V-stretch and H-squeeze on HD sources (ie support a fixed anamorphic lens)?

Thanks

Chris. By tighter, you mean, I assume, a smaller opening size for the fixed iris.

Note well kiddies, many lenses have both fixed irises as well as adjustable irises and/or dynamic irises.


Several manufacturers use identical lenses but have the fixed iris set differently than a competitor. The smaller the fixed iris opening the better the blacks and contrast but the less ultimate light output. The manufacturer says OK, I'll give up some lumens to boast the contrast and keep the reviewer happy. Come on, make the iris a smidge smaller and we will beat the 15,000 of the competitor with 17,000 of our own.

stanger89,

Kris Deering states earlier that he's actually getting better On/Off contrast from the Planar (over the JVC RS2 I presume) which amazes me. If you get that type of contrast performance along with the much higher ANSI and sharper image it seems almost a no-brainer to go with the Planar if you like the DLP look.

Noah. Darin posted about the 8150 near the end of one of the Marantz threads, He sold his JVC and kept the Planar. He posted reasons of sort. Nothing major in favor of one or the other. Each one does somethings better than the other. You can't have too many projectors lying around. They depreciate quickly. many find one they like, convince themselves its the best for the money, and sell it with 2 years. I think its the new JVC every two years club. Until we get a new source of projector illumination, thinks are unlikely to change very drastically. Projectors are in a evolutionary phase right know with downward price pressures forcing design compromises and keeping us wishing for the next machine which will incorporate the best of the competition. You know what I mean.

Actually Darin sold his Sharp 20K. He still owns both the Planar and JVC. He likes both but leans a bit toward the JVC. As most of you know already Darin has a thing for contrast ;)

Since you stumbled directly into my own internal debate (but with the advantage of having seen both). I've currently got a W5000 that I'm looking at replacing. On balance I love it. Colors are vivid but not unbelievable. Mid to bright scenes look awesome. It's very sharp.

But (aside from the issues with my lemon) there are a few things that have always bugged me:
Black level is somewhat horrible without clamping the manual iris all the way down and turning Dynamic Black on. And even then it's only passable.
Dynamic Black's gamma changes cause colors to change (making it more obvious)
DB causes brightness compression that on some content (admittedly usually only OSDs and (sub)title type things) that can be somewhat annoying
Dark scenes often seem to be murky rather than falling off into black. I'm not sure if that's crushed shadow detail or just poor black level making black murky

Anyway, I'm looking for a replacement, and RS20 and 8150 seem to be about the only machines that are likely to satisfy me that I have a chance of affording. So I keep running around in circles between them. I wonder if the DB on the 8150 will have similar noticeable artifacts as on my W5000, if the black level be "good enough", or will it be everything I'd hoped my W5000 was going to be.

And the RS20, will the colors bother me, and will I miss the DLP "magic" (high "ANSI").

I know you can't answer for me, but any thoughts on the two units knowing what I know bothers me at the moment? Oh, and can the 8150 do both V-stretch and H-squeeze on HD sources (ie support a fixed anamorphic lens)?

Thanks

BenQ's implementation of DB was IMHO pretty bad. Especially if you didn't take A LOT of time figuring out which setting to use with the manual iris on top of it. The W10K was far better in this regard. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 8150 at all in this regard, one of the best implementations of dynamic contrast that I've seen yet.

The RS20 can provide very good color rendition with the THX mode. Sure it isn't dead nuts accurate, but it doesn't distract by any means. Couple that with a good grayscale/color balance calibration and you should be fine. Certainly not anything to complain much about unless you are going for near perfection.

I believe the Planar supports anamorphic scaling for CIH setups but I am not positive. I don't use it so I forgot if it is there!:D

"And the RS20, will the colors bother me, and will I miss the DLP "magic" (high "ANSI")."
stanger89

If you really like the pop magic of the dlp you'll love ths 8150. I've had the W5000, the RS10 and the 8150 at my home for calibration and for me the 8150 is the projector I would like to have. I have not calibrated the RS20, I don't know how it compares with the 8150.

Federico

In a few more days, JVC will be releasing their user dowmloadable revised CMS (color management system). This will enable the HD750\RS20 to achieve perfect colorimetry.

Assuming setting the manual iris on the JVC for equivalent light out put of the 8150 or close to it, the on\off CR of the two machines will be close. The 8150 however uses a DI to achieve what the RS20 achieves natively.

The 8150 will have a significantly higher ANSI CR than the JVC, will have no misconvergence being a single chip machine, has a better processor, and a somewhat sharper lens.


They are both good machines. No possibility or seeing rainbows with the JVC because no color wheel and no DI artifacts. If your seing a DI artifact on occasion is going to spoil your use of a machine, don`t buy a DI machine. Personally I think all machines should provide the option of switching on a well implemented DI. Occasional artifacts be damned, the benefits of a DI are substantial.


Face it. The on\off of all bulb projectors suck. 30,000 is no great shakes. We have a long long way to go in the on\off CR department.It would be nice to have 30,000 on\off native, increasable to say 75,000 by a DI. And even that would not be high enough.

BenQ's implementation of DB was IMHO pretty bad. Especially if you didn't take A LOT of time figuring out which setting to use with the manual iris on top of it. The W10K was far better in this regard. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 8150 at all in this regard, one of the best implementations of dynamic contrast that I've seen yet.

Kris:

How would you say the BenQ W20000 compares to the 8150 in regards to black level...and for that matter DB?

I appreciate everyone's insight and contribution to this thread...it's been a fun read.

Didn't like the W20000 nearly as much as the 8150. Honestly, two different leagues. BenQ took a step back with the 20K compared to the 10K IMHO when it comes to image quality. Their implementation of DB and their iris setup needs a lot of work.

BenQ's implementation of DB was IMHO pretty bad. Especially if you didn't take A LOT of time figuring out which setting to use with the manual iris on top of it. The W10K was far better in this regard. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the 8150 at all in this regard, one of the best implementations of dynamic contrast that I've seen yet.

Yeah, it's more a question of if I could ever be really satisfied with a DI.

The RS20 can provide very good color rendition with the THX mode. Sure it isn't dead nuts accurate, but it doesn't distract by any means. Couple that with a good grayscale/color balance calibration and you should be fine. Certainly not anything to complain much about unless you are going for near perfection.

I believe the Planar supports anamorphic scaling for CIH setups but I am not positive. I don't use it so I forgot if it is there!:D

"And the RS20, will the colors bother me, and will I miss the DLP "magic" (high "ANSI")."
stanger89

If you really like the pop magic of the dlp you'll love ths 8150. I've had the W5000, the RS10 and the 8150 at my home for calibration and for me the 8150 is the projector I would like to have. I have not calibrated the RS20, I don't know how it compares with the 8150.

Federico

Oh, I'm sure I'd like it, only question is if I'd still find myself wanting (something that could be had on another machine).

Didn't like the W20000 nearly as much as the 8150. Honestly, two different leagues. BenQ took a step back with the 20K compared to the 10K IMHO when it comes to image quality. Their implementation of DB and their iris setup needs a lot of work.

So, just in terms of raw On/Off contrast, how would they compare? Just trying to get a feel where the 8150 would be relative. The W5000 was somewhat of a disappointment in that regard. My IN76 was OK, I remember going in that I was hoping a 1080p DMD + DB would be far better. Unfortunately I drew the same conclusion you did, that BenQ took a rather significant step back when they added DB.

Actually Darin sold his Sharp 20K. He still owns both the Planar and JVC. He likes both but leans a bit toward the JVC. As most of you know already Darin has a thing for contrast ;)

If my theory is correct, Planars are tricky in terms of contrast because it depends on the software version. According to what I've read at cine4home.de pd8130 has ~7k on/off and pd8150 ~10k on/off with the original software - which is what my pd8130 has even though obtained quite recently. The italian projector forum thread has a few posts suggesting that installing the latest software improves the contrast and black level, and they measured pd8130 at around 11k - also said it has similar contrast and blacks to jvc rs10. That would explain how Tryg got 17k on pd8150 and Darin's preference for jvc if he has the old software.

Can anyone suggest an online source for the PD8150. I am in Vancouver Canada but will buy in the US and import myself if necessary. Thanks in advance for any tips.

AVS is going to start selling them again if it hasn't already. Other than that I don't know of any - you might have to get an american friend to ship you one.

Originally Posted by Stranger89
Oh, I'm sure I'd like it, only question is if I'd still find myself wanting (something that could be had on another machine).

Yes, you will want adjustable CMS like in the W5000, and I would like to have a better on off contrast without using DI or BC like the contrast (5000:1) in another model from Planar, PD7150.
I would like to ask to Bob Williams from Planar if it would be better to have a model like the 7150 with a 1080P dlp chip and them add the DI and de BC with the option to turn them off or on.
But back to the question of what projector to buy. I would say the PD8150 at this moment.

Federico

I have sent the info to our VP of sales.

It'll likely be too late for me if it's eventually sorted, but just to give you an idea the RRP of the JVC RS20 (HD750) in Australia is $9,499 seen here (http://www.jvc-australia.com/JVC/client/c_products_group.jsp?id=5)

As mentioned by NetworkAV the 8150 in Aus is apparently $17,500.

Conversely in the US the RRP of the RS20 is $7,499 (from memory) and the 8150 is $7000. Hence my point.

This head in the sand mentality might have cut it pre financial crisis, but it's surely not the best business model right now. Don't these guys watch the news??

If my theory is correct, Planars are tricky in terms of contrast because it depends on the software version. According to what I've read at cine4home.de pd8130 has ~7k on/off and pd8150 ~10k on/off with the original software - which is what my pd8130 has even though obtained quite recently. The italian projector forum thread has a few posts suggesting that installing the latest software improves the contrast and black level, and they measured pd8130 at around 11k - also said it has similar contrast and blacks to jvc rs10. That would explain how Tryg got 17k on pd8150 and Darin's preference for jvc if he has the old software.

Tryg was looking at mine. Darin's 8150 has the latest firmware as well. He got his a week after I got mine.

Yes, you will want adjustable CMS like in the W5000, and I would like to have a better on off contrast without using DI or BC like the contrast (5000:1) in another model from Planar, PD7150.
I would like to ask to Bob Williams from Planar if it would be better to have a model like the 7150 with a 1080P dlp chip and them add the DI and de BC with the option to turn them off or on.
But back to the question of what projector to buy. I would say the PD8150 at this moment.

Federico

The 8150 has a full CMS system that is the same CCA system that BenQ and Samsung use. Right now it is not available for consumer use but I've heard considerations are being made as to whether to open it up at some point to consumers.

The 8150's BC and DI can both be turned on or off in the normal menus.

Another thing on the CMS, the 8150 is calibrated before shipment and it is EXTREMELLY close out of the box if not dead on. So unless one wants to custom gamut, you shouldn't need to mess with the CMS much if at all. The 8150 allows you to pick your color gamut and color decoding to taste (709, 601, SMPTE C, Native).

And I assume the full CMS is not available to dealers either? In the playing I have done so far, the colors look very accurateto my trained eye. Setting the contrat and brightness from the factory presets using the sSpears disc with DI turned off dimned things down a bit. Even with DI on, the black level appears fairly high. Hand puppets are dramatically darker than a 0 ire screen. But no bulb projector fairs very well with a hand puppet comparison but the planar is bested on this test by the JVC. I still prefer the planar. In normal viewing, the blacks are just fine.

I don't know of a single digital projector that holds up well to a puppet test. I agree that the absolute blacks on the JVC are better though, but not by the amount I would suspect given their contrast ratio differences. But I would be more than happy to see improvements in contrast from ALL manufacturers.

The CMS is not available to dealers yet either. The only way to use it without a CL-200 right now is a tedius manual input method that is not very user friendly. I imagine if Planar decides to release the CMS to consumer/calibrator use they will probably try and refine their interface.

I agree that the absolute blacks on the JVC are better though, but not by the amount I would suspect given their contrast ratio differences.

We are at a point where both technologies are visually very close.
The higher ANSI from DLP though it has lower on/off broadens the perceived overall contrast and helps to bring out shadow detail at the lower end.
Curious how LED will compare once it arrives and enters its prime.






.

OK, it's probably been beaten to death, but is the DMD the only difference between the 8130 and the 8150? Apparently the 8150 is individually calibrated coming out of the factory, does the 8130 get the same treatment?

Anyone compared the 30 and the 50, could you tell them apart without looking at the label? I'm getting rather determined to get a new machine, but depending on circumstances the 50 may or may not be possible but I think the 30 definitely is.

See post 81 this thread by Brian. The higher on/off is nice is you have a light controlled dark walled room. The present price different at MSRP is only $1000, The 8150 list for $7000 while the 8130 lists for $6000. To me, the difference in on/off CR is worth it.

To me, the difference in on/off CR is worth it.

Speaking of black level:

Mark coming from CRT do you miss it ( CRT ) or do you feel digital is getting close enough and their benefits make up for what you left behind with CRT.

8130 is no slouch though, if it has rs10-like contrast and should still be a big upgrade over w5000 or w20000.

Another thing on the CMS, the 8150 is calibrated before shipment and it is EXTREMELLY close out of the box if not dead on. So unless one wants to custom gamut, you shouldn't need to mess with the CMS much if at all. The 8150 allows you to pick your color gamut and color decoding to taste (709, 601, SMPTE C, Native).
But with usage and bulb aging the color balance changes, doesnt it? So wouldn't it still require a re-calibration after a certain period?

The black ref level and on/off of the best digitals is not even close to my CRT FP. Its laughable. But I don't miss it at all. The digitals are sharper, the ANSI is higher, the machines are brighter. A lot less hassels and I don't have to continually reconverge it yada yada. My wife has to press one button. I could say morebut you get the idea. Besides I watch mostly sports.

See post 81 this thread by Brian.

Thanks, guess I did read that earlier.

The higher on/off is nice is you have a light controlled dark walled room.

Which I do have :D

The present price different at MSRP is only $1000, The 8150 list for $7000 while the 8130 lists for $6000. To me, the difference in on/off CR is worth it.

Yeah, I was thinking it was $2k when I asked, I pretty much agree that a $1k difference isn't enough to make it worth stepping down. Not in this price range.

You are a sensible man Stanger. :)

Ha! Another one fooled!!!! :eek:

Maybe this question has been already asked, but I couldn'r find the answer: Does the 8150 accept ND filters, and is so, what is the size? I just know that this thing is going to be way too bright for my setup...:)

Maybe this question has been already asked, but I couldn'r find the answer: Does the 8150 accept ND filters, and is so, what is the size? I just know that this thing is going to be way too bright for my setup...:)

Yes they do. 72mm, and we recomend the multi-coated AR filters. We use 2ND from Hoya. It will cut the brightness by 50% without messing with the colors. http://www.hoyafilter.com/products/hoya/oef-05.html

8130 is no slouch though, if it has rs10-like contrast and should still be a big upgrade over w5000 or w20000.

Not asking for numbers, but is the 8130 attainable at RS10 street pricing ballpark?

Maybe this question has been already asked, but I couldn'r find the answer: Does the 8150 accept ND filters, and is so, what is the size? I just know that this thing is going to be way too bright for my setup...:)

Sounds like you need this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKYKyIObXyM

:D

Does anyone know of a dealer in the GTA (Toronto) that carries these units. I would love to see one to ensure I dont see rainbows and to ensure they would be bright enough for my setup (21' throw onto a 120 wide AT screen).

Yes they do. 72mm, and we recomend the multi-coated AR filters. We use 2ND from Hoya. It will cut the brightness by 50% without messing with the colors. http://www.hoyafilter.com/products/hoya/oef-05.html
Thanks, Brian...It just so happens that I have that exact filter here already. I believe it also fit my old InFocus 7210. I'm all set! :)
Sounds like you need this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKYKyIObXyM
LOL...:D

I had a Planar 8150 demonstrated in my local store about 2 months ago together with the latest Da-Lite Joe Kane's Affinity 92" screen. Even under the Standard lamp mode ( as opposed to the Economy mode), the picture was unacceptably dim, and the intra-scene contrast was unimpressive. A Pioneer clone of the previous generation of JVC RS2 looked much brighter with better intra-scene contrast on the same screen running the same Blu-ray disc (Ice-Age). Pioneer may have done something special to the RS2 to make it excel in such an obvious way. Of course, that's just my own opinion.

I think the screen is the issue, too low of gain hence only 92" diagonal.

Hi guys -

I need some help figuring out how far from the ceiling I should mount the PD8150 (or how close to the ceiling I can get it, rather). I'm going to build a hush box to house the projector.

My screen size will be a 1.78 125" wide screen. The projector will be 16' 6" from the screen (projector lens to screen) (I'll be using the short throw lens).

My screen edge if 14" from my ceiling and my screen height will be 70".

I can't make heads or tails of this vertical offset mumbo jumbo though. I have a spreadsheet that says my max recommended offset is 42.2". Can anyone help me convert this to "You need to make sure that your projector lens is at least XX" from your ceiling".

Thank guys!

easy, at least 14 - (42.2 - 70/2) or at least 6.8 inches from the ceiling. That is a pretty big screen, please post a screen shot.

The planar worksheet shows offset as the distance from the center of the screen.

Lens shift going down using a ceiling mount is aq maximum of .6 times the screen height. in your case 42 inches. From this subtract .5 the screen height or 35 inches. So this means lens center can be no more than 7 inches above the top of the screen. Since you have 14 inches, ta da 7 inches from the ceiling or 7 inches above the screen top. 7 plus 7 equals 14. that said, you will maximize picture quality according to the Planar manual by mounting the lens center at the screen top. What`s 7 more inches down among friends. Mount it, lens center 14 inches from your ceiling. you never want to be at any extreme with respect to throw distances or lens shift. The more lens shift one uses the more chromatic aberrations you will see. If you can`t drop it 14, go at least 9 or 10 inches down from the ceiling.

Tom Huffman and I measured the machine tonight. Tom has all the numbers but needs to run some calcs before they all can be posted. The colors were spot on. amazing out of the box. On\off was about 15,000 with DI. Without DI, that is native, about 4000. Ft lamberts on my 110 inch D 1.3 gain were about 14 ft\lamberts in economy. We didn`t measure in normal mode, way to high for my screen. economy is the factory default. ANSI around 500. Tom`s review and his numbers to follow.

Please tell me my math is wrong - 14 ftl on your (16x9) 110" D 1.3 gain would mean it's putting out about 386 lumens in economy. Seems just a tad low to me...

I finally got a chance to test the Planar 8150. This is perhaps the best measuring out-of-the-box display I have ever run across. I have gotten better performance out of other displays, but only after considerable tweaking. This is one unit I can honestly say does NOT need calibration, unless you really just want the last nth of performance.

The Planar includes the same CCA CMS in the service menu as the Samsung and the BenQ 20000. However, it isn't really necessary. SMPTE has set 4 CIELAB dE units as the tolerance for color error for both grayscale and pri/sec chromaticities. The Planar 8150 meets or exceeds that standard with some minor exceptions. Blue is a little undersaturated and red is somewhat too bright. The grayscale tends a little blue towards the low end. Otherwise, no adjustments are really necessary.

Here's the grayscale

% Stim x y CIELAB CCT
20% 0.312 0.32 6.0 6607
30% 0.309 0.322 3.8 6803
40% 0.312 0.323 3.9 6589
50% 0.31 0.323 3.2 6679
60% 0.312 0.323 3.6 6598
70% 0.312 0.325 2.2 6599
80% 0.312 0.325 2.7 6579
90% 0.312 0.325 2.4 6598
100% 0.312 0.325 2.1 6585
Ave. 3.3 +298
-0


http://home.comcast.net/%7Etlhuffman/planar/rgb.jpg

Here is the color performance. Again, this is with no adjustments.

http://home.comcast.net/%7Etlhuffman/planar/cie.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/%7Etlhuffman/planar/luma.jpg

x y Y CIELAB
R 0.639 0.331 0.233 3.7
G 0.299 0.599 0.69 2.3
B 0.154 0.069 0.087 6.9
Y 0.42 0.502 0.889 3.4
C 0.225 0.324 0.767 3
M 0.323 0.158 0.31 2.3
3.6 Ave.


In the Film mode, the gamma is quite flat and very close to 2.2.

%Stim Lux Gamma
0% 0.01
10% 0.26 2.16
20% 1.13 2.18
30% 2.69 2.18
40% 5.11 2.17
50% 8.27 2.18
60% 12.05 2.21
70% 17.11 2.19
80% 22.88 2.2
90% 29.65 2.19
100% 37.34 2.18 Ave.


For contrast and light output, I measured the following.

On/Off Native: 3,890:1
On/Off Dynamic: 15,560:1
ANSI: 469:1
Lumens, Econ mode: 392, which was just over 14 fL on a 110" StudioTek. I didn't get a measurement in the Standard mode, but it was a lot brighter--too bright for that screen.

Subjective Impressions
We watched Chapter 7 of MI:III. The image looked about what you would expect: excellent color, great black level and very good depth and sharpness. In fact, I thought that the image looked remarkably similar to what I had seen on the RS20 in THX mode. The image was, I thought, slightly superior to my Sharp XV-Z20000. I attributed this to the Planar's higher dynamic contrast.

The optics seemed good, if not exceptional. I could see some chromatic aberration on vertical lines I (none on horizontal lines), but it was no more than 1 pixel and was invisible from anything more than a few feet away. Sharpness, was thus quite good. Certainly as good as, and probably slightly better than the RS20.

The dynamic iris did exactly what it is supposed to: substantially raise contrast without adding artifacts. I saw none. Perhaps with more viewing I might have noticed something.

If I were to pick nits, I would like to see a somewhat higher gamma, which I think would have improved the depth of the image even more. Also, a lens in the league of the Marantz S2 or Samsung A900 would be nice. This would provide higher ANSI contrast and give the image a little added sharpness, but this would also substantially add to the cost of the unit.

One thing that stuck me as I was watching MI:III. I am increasingly beginning to believe that arguments about display technology--LCoS vs. DLP--are becoming less and less meaningful. As DLPs' contrast gets better, JVC's sharpness gets better, and both improve substantially in the area of color accuracy, the differences between the two technologies seems less and less important. The only remaining issue would be color separation artifacts, which seem to remain a problem for a small percentage of people who apparently continue to see them despite great improvements in this area. I saw none, but I am not sensitive to this.

I guess for selfish reasons I prefer displays that have a lot of calibration controls, but are adjusted poorly out-of-the-box (Samsung flat panels come to mind). But it is hard to argue with Planar's approach--engineer it correctly in the first place and adjust the color at the factory. This gives calibrators very little to do, but it's great for consumers. If all displays performed like the Planar 8150, ISF would quickly lose its raison 'd etre.

Thanks to Mark Haflich of Soundworks of Kensington, MD for letting me spend some time with this projector.

If I were to pick nits, I would like to see a somewhat higher gamma, which I think would have improved the depth of the image even more.You may already know this, but you can get about 2.5 gamma with the CRT setting that is right next to the FILM setting.

I think that Goldfinger is a good example of a movie that shows some advantage from the higher gamma number because the backgrounds tend to be a little raised.

--Darin

Tom,
Were you using the standard lens or the optional short throw? And were you at the short or long end of the throw ratio?

Thanks,
Mike

In my review I stated that with a few tweaks I would be more than happy to use this projector in my setup. Well Planar delivered. They fixed the clipping issue and tightened up the contrast performance. I had a VERY early unit for the review and Planar was still looking at some performance mods before consumer roll out. One of which was a tighter fixed iris in the lens.

I own a 8150 since July 2008. The on-off contrast is 11-12000/1 as measured by a professional calibrator. The numbers you are talking about ( 15000/1 or 17000/1) seem extraordinary. The only different between my model (July 2008) and the one you are talking about is the new firmware? No hardware changes since July 2008? And to be specific do i have to buy a new 8150, or a firmware update is enough?

The lens was the standard one and measurements were at the shortest throw (1.85). Machine was table mounted and lens center was a little above screen center. Tom did a lot of measurements and I think he just forgot about the CRT gamma mode. We decided to measure the film mode. I am sure he and I will view it again at 2.5.

Thanks again Tom for the comprehensive assessment of another projector.

It seems like you really can't go wrong with the Planar if what you want is a very well rounded projector. It seems like another projector may be better in a given area, like sharpness, but the Planar excels because it has no real weakness.

In my mind, this is the DLP projector to beat (keep in mind I have not ever seen one).

I have my Planar 8150 since November 2008 and with the upgrade to the new firmware I can see some improvment in contrast.

I compared against the Pioneer Kuro (RS2 clone) and I liked more the Planar.

I have the same opinion that a higher gamma curve (about 2.3/2.4) will improve the picture (gamma CRT is too high for me...lost shadow detail)...maybe Planar will put another gamma curve in the next firmware?!

I have a 110" Screen Research 1.0 and use the lamp in standard mode...only use Brilliant Color with sports.

If any number is suspect, I would suspect the ANSI CR we measured. We did it quickly and certainly didn`t follow anything like the full methodology. I suspect actual ANSI is higher by several hundred.

I think a lot of measured number comparisons between various machines doesn`t really tell the story. 40 more ANSI, 2000 more on\off yada yada. What does it really mean?

You don`t need to calibrate the machine. It has decent on\off but about half that of the RS20. Noticeably higher ANSI than the RS20. Plenty bright, at least in standard mode. Fine for my screen and throw in economy. There are so many factors to evaluate.

One thing that doesn`t come through is build quality and attention to detail. Little things like the Planar`s well designed and engineered wire cover. The preciseness of the lens shifts. The mother is solid and heavy. I am not that impressed with the build quality of the JVCs.

Tom had the CMS software already loaded in his computer. evidently it is available from Planar to qualified calibrators. Using it would be very labor intensive however with a lot of manual data entry. Nothing excessive but it could be simpler and quicker. Dooable? Yes and not that hard.

Projectors in general are in the evolutionary stage now with price determining design and construction trade offs. Things will continually be changing. In a certain price class we will all continually be wishing for a hybrid, the on\off of this, the black level of that, the DI of that, the CMS of that, the lens of yada yada yada. It all becomes a a question of trade offs and balances. What do you watch and what matters to you the most. Stay away from anything with a glaring deficiency.

The Planar MSRP is less than the MSRP of the JVC. But a Planar will likely cost you more.
They are both good machines. Me? I prefer the Planar.

No need for a new lens for higher ANSI contrast. Marantz applied special coatings originally only to their long throw to achieve high ANSI. Later these coatings were also applied to the standard lens. Yes this comes at a price.

Tom nice work:)

I noticed that the 8150 has a 3.5 mm mini jack described as "IR input for Niles/Xantech compatible IR repeater systems". Where can I buy a low cost IR receiver to connect to that jack? My problem is that I have a very massive anamorphic lens (Isco III) mounted in front of my projector, so with some units the mounted sensor is hard to reach either directly or bounced off of the screen, so I would like to mount a sensor where it would be easy to "see" incoming IR signals.
But a Planar will likely cost you more.
I sure hope you are wrong, Mark.

Nice work, as usual, Tom!

I'm glad to see that the Planar measures as well as it was reported to be. The only spec which surprised me was this one:
Lumens, Econ mode: 392, which was just over 14 fL on a 110" StudioTek.
I was expecting closer to double that number. I wonder what is going on here, or could this have something to do with the light modulation technology throwing off the lumens readings?

Use of the DB (DI and other things included within) should have little impact at lumens at 100IRE. It was supprising actually that the lumens went up very slightly with DB on. It was plenty bright on my screen. Regular lamp mode was way too bright. We will measure it however. Remember my theater is only so deep and a table mount is not possible much farther than closest throw (1.85). Ceiling mount I could go a little further back, maybe two more feet.

Bob Im currently projecting on a 8 foot wide gray screen and have plenty of brightness in low lamp mode. My room is completely light controlled. Ive yet to officially measure anything. Darin may be visiting this weekend and if we have time I do have a spectraradiometer that could use a good warm up but i am not sure we will have enough time.

Almost everything could be better in almost any projector if money is not an object.

I do suspect the ANSI we measured is low and the real ANSI is higher. My front row chairs are leather and white and this will throw ANSi off because a lot of white light is hitting the screen during a black square measurement using the checkerboard measurement. You can see the difference if the chairs are covered up with black cloth, but we didn`t do that last night.

I don`t think Tom was implying that a better physical lens was needed to improve ANSI. but if the coatings on any lens were improved, the the lens would be a better lens but would be somewhat more expensive. Likewise sharpness is at least partially dependent on degree of CA and that is a function of the type of glass used, design, elements, groups and coatings. However, there is more to sharpness than just coatings and to work in that area the costs go up dramatically. Also the bigger the diameter the glass, the bigger the sweat spot allowing for more lens shift without degrading the image. We both as you do look at a lot of projectors. Since I watch a lot of sports, lens sharpness and very low CA is important to me. In single chip projectors in this price range, things in these regards could always be better. Its not that it was bad at all, it just could be better but that would cost. Once again its our wish for something to incorporate the best of everything but be cheap. Not going to happen. Stay tuned for our Samsung A900B review next month. A more expensive machine.

Spectrometers are notoriously slow for low level measurements. Best to use it to calibrate a colorimeter and then measure with the colorimeter. Saves a lot of time.

I agree with Bob's surprise at the relatively low lumens (392), even for Economy lamp mode, when the spec is 1000 (calibrated). And the screens mentioned above are relatively small. Does the lamp have a lot of hrs on it?

I was expecting closer to double that number. I wonder what is going on here, or could this have something to do with the light modulation technology throwing off the lumens readings?Bob: I don't know. The fL number was a direct reading off the screen with my reference instrument, so I am pretty confident of it. Greg R, got 446 lumens in the Econ mode, which is just a little more than my reading of 392.

Econ seemed just about right for the 110" StudioTek.

No. Very few hours. Less than 10. It was almost spot on re colors and gray scale. Remember its economy mode. I don`t care about bulb costs and I immediately switched from the economy default to standard. but at my close throw and screen size and gain, it was way too bright. 14 ft lamberts is just fine for me. 12 would be too. For larger screens, lower gain, anamorphic streches, go to standard mode lamp. That`s a light canon. We just forgot to measure the lumens in that mode. I believe the colors measured fine, Tom can comment more if he wishes.

Spectrometers are notoriously slow for low level measurements. Best to use it to calibrate a colorimeter and then measure with the colorimeter. Saves a lot of time.

I use my Minolta for brightness and contrast readings, very accurate. The Spectras measures down lower then any probe which is why the guys who make a living at this use them.






.

The high quality spectrometer you have does very low light measurements but it is slow. Time is money. A spectrometter can be used to accuratelty calibrate a colorimeter which will work much faster. Tom can comment on this if he wishes. Your comment was related to not having enough time with Darin. Rarely for example will a calibrator use a spectrometer for calibrating a flat panel. but, it depends on time and money the client is spending.

No. Very few hours. Less than 10. It was almost spot on re colors and gray scale. Remember its economy mode. I don`t care about bulb costs and I immediately switched from the economy default to standard. but at my close throw and screen size and gain, it was way too bright. 14 ft lamberts is just fine for me. 12 would be too. For larger screens, lower gain, anamorphic streches, go to standard mode lamp. That`s a light canon. We just forgot to measure the lumens in that mode. I believe the colors measured fine, Tom can comment more if he wishes.

So you think you get a factor of 2 or so when going to Standard lamp mode? (Just looked back at GregR's review; he reported 612 lumens in Std lamp mode.)

My GUESS would be something like that. We have no data on bulb dimming. But bulbs for this machine are relatively inexpensive. And i suspect many will be using the standard lens at close throw since it starts at 1.85 and with a screen bigger than 110 D, the throw distances would be approaching the length of most HTs. I don`t think anyone will be complaining unless thae put this machine in a non light controlled room with a large non high powered screen.

Glad to hear all went well with the measurements. Now you know what I was talking about in terms of accuracy!

Darin did a cursory measure of ANSI sometime ago and measured closer to 700:1 ANSI if I remember. He could probably chime in on that.

What colorimeter was Tom using by the way? The CCA is setup perfectly for a CL200, but I don't know many people using those.

Glad to hear all went well with the measurements. Now you know what I was talking about in terms of accuracy!

Darin did a cursory measure of ANSI sometime ago and measured closer to 700:1 ANSI if I remember. He could probably chime in on that.

What colorimeter was Tom using by the way? The CCA is setup perfectly for a CL200, but I don't know many people using those.Kris: I took reference measurements with an Orb Optronics spectro and then used those to correct a Chroma 5 colorimeter. For gamma and contrast I used the AEMC CA813 illuminance meter.

I agree with Mark that the one measurement I think we could have done better was ANSI. I would have preferred to take a reading without the screen flooding light back into the room and experimented a little more with placement. On the other hand, Greg R. got 440:1, which suggests that my readng of 469:1 wasn't too far from the norm.

You may already know this, but you can get about 2.5 gamma with the CRT setting that is right next to the FILM setting.

I think that Goldfinger is a good example of a movie that shows some advantage from the higher gamma number because the backgrounds tend to be a little raised.2.5 is a little high for my tastes. I would have preferred something in the 2.25-2.3 range.