I've been researching for some time before buying my first projector. Like many others, for me it's down to the 6500UB or the AE3000U. The 6500 would've been a slam dunk, but the nagging issues with the unit have kept me from pulling the trigger. Similarly, I'm hesitant to get the seemingly more polished AE3000U because I read over and over again that the 6500 (when working) outperforms it by just a tad.

As for the 6500, it seems that most of the issues have been worked through or are currently being addressed by Epson, so if I ordered today, it would probably be my choice.

Having said all that.... now I'm thinking that since we're 5 months into the year, what's on tap with next year's models? When do manufacturer's typically start issuing (or leaking) info on the new goodies? I know there's always going to be something better on the horizon, but if we're just talking about another month or two, I may just wait. If I can't expect any info until November or so, I'll probably get the Epson now. Opinions, advice, news?

Due to the economy I wouldn't expect much revolutionary performance wise.....just some incremental functional stuff....I would love to see more PJ's do the memory save mode of the Panny 3000.

I have considerable info but not for your price point. Much of it can not be fully devulged. At the MSRP price point of $8K we will see something very very good and challenging the competition at that price point from Sony. There will be a new JVC also above the RS20 in price point and at a higher quality. No idea what will be in there. The price? Don't know but I would guess maybe $12K. See at Cedia in early September. Delivery December.

the problem with waiting is that there will always be something six months from now that will be better than what you have. I would wait between 720p and a 1080p projector, but waiting between the Gen 3 and Gen 4 of a projector may not make much sense in the long run

I have considerable info but not for your price point. Much of it can not be fully devulged. At the MSRP price point of $8K we will see something very very good and challenging the competition at that price point from Sony.

Not much to divulge are we not getting revamped left overs.

Something brand new. Sony is undergoing such change with massive restructuring, retirements, and layoffs there is really nothinmg to report right now. We shall see at Cedia. I do think we will see a brand new $8K model with new engine, maybe same case and lens, but new chips, paths, programing etc.

Something brand new. Sony is undergoing such change with massive restructuring, retirements, and layoffs there is really nothinmg to report right now. We shall see at Cedia. I do think we will see a brand new $8K model with new engine, maybe same case and lens, but new chips, paths, programing etc.

Can you please tell me that the JVC or sony will have the panny 3000 lens mode save feature.....please, please, please.:D:p

massive restructuring, retirements, and layoffs there is really nothinmg to report right now. .

Hearing the same. Not good news.



maybe same case and lens, but new chips, paths, programing etc.

This will be a rework to a current model. I hope we see a 200 replacement. The 70/80 do not have the same circuitry as the 200 and the model you are talking will not as well. If the 200 is replaced that will be a good sign but as you said we will have to wait and see. Way to early at this point.

Can you please tell me that the JVC or sony will have the panny 3000 lens mode save feature.....please, please, please.:D:p

I know of another projector getting this this year but they are at a much higher price. Will be interesting to see who else adds this.

i keep telling the guys at Panasonic that they need to make some type of 2.35 projector. For some reason, Panasonic Japan loves me and supposedly listens to my suggestions. Hopefully Panny 4000 or 5000 will have a built in anamorphic lens. It would sell like hotcakes-

i keep telling the guys at Panasonic that they need to make some type of 2.35 projector. For some reason, Panasonic Japan loves me and supposedly listens to my suggestions. Hopefully Panny 4000 or 5000 will have a built in anamorphic lens. It would sell like hotcakes-

Or add a 4th panel resulting in ultra contrast.

Or add a 4th panel resulting in ultra contrast.

Absolutely!

I have from very reliable sources no replacement for the 200 is coming. Sony doesn't think the $15K price point is viable anymore. They will focus on $8K and $3 to 3.5K. Don't look to see any lens rework and a new lens would be needed for lens zoom memory. I expect the new coming $8K model to surpass the 200 in most performance parameters, However it won't have a Xenon bulb.


We really have no info from JVC but an upscale projector is coming. For people who want better quality than the RS20 and are willing to pay for it. Not that the RS20 is bad quality. No clue as to what to expect. We will see at Cedia. A wish list? No point.

Could be anything. Interchangeable lens. A head unit with the operating stuff in a separate box. Better processing. More light. Who knows? Nobody in the US. That's for sure.

The 80/90? will have higher market contrast but it will still lack the additional circuitry the 200 has. The 200 will have the cleaner richer black/color even if the 80/90 has the higher contrast market spec. The 200 remains their elite projector and will not let a cheaper machine in their line up surpass it.

I dunno. What circuitry are we talking about? What specifically does it do?

Alan Gouger
Some would say that the Qualia was beaten by cheaper Sony projectors. However the Qualia retained some advantages such as xenon, light output and optics. If vw200 has any special processing it could be had cheaper externally.

Is it not finally time for laser this Cedia, a laser projector from JVC?

I guess many projectors will be upgraded with 120Hz or even 240Hz technology.

I just recently did a tour of PJs and I will say that even though they were not bad they still did not compete in overall color and motion (mainly panning)withthe 200. I could see Sony releasing an 8K PJ that beats it in most categories but still will most likely come up short in a few. I know some have said the VW80 does that now but I have also been told side by side the 200 is still next level. The 200 has their Bravia Pro whatever they call it processing which is excellent. I am also sure (as Mark as pointed out) that it has one of the best Lens available as well. I will still pay close attention to a new VW90? this Fall. I won't make the same mistake again though. I will keep my newer 200 and judge them side by side. I still think my best bet is to wait until the day comes for a 300 model... :)

Is it not finally time for laser this Cedia, a laser projector from JVC?

Hi Mathias

I wish your dream would come true. This could be the best technology of all. We could draw a native 235:1 image without a special lens.

I guess many projectors will be upgraded with 120Hz or even 240Hz technology.

I think upgrade is a good word for where I was going.
Mark has a good track record each year with his predictions as well. With the economy it will be an interesting Cedia. Fingers crossed.

My list of major new features we may see over the next couple of years are:

LED or Laser light engine
3D support (probably requiring >120 Hz input from a next gen., profile 3, BD player)
Direct 2.35 AR support with panels that have a 1:2.35 aspect ratio using 1080 x 2538 pixels with video processing to scale (33% zoom) the 2.35 images on BDs to this display resolution while providing full 1080 x 1920 resolution when displaying normal 1.78 HD material. This will maintain square pixels and eliminate any image degradation (reduced ANSI contrast ratio, degraded MTF, increased chromatic aberrations, etc.) that can result from the use of an anamorphic lens

I intentionally left 4K and 8K projectors off of my list in this time frame since they will be super expensive if they do appear and out of the price range of 99% of the AVS members could afford.

Yea. I am getting a spot on ESPN. The sport of product predictions.


The lenses in the 70/80 and the 200 are the same. The big advantaged of the 200 over the 80 is the xenon lamp. But this has very little market sell. Replacement is expensive and the average high end video guy doesn't appreciate its benefits. Hell Joe Kane is pitching the Samsung to all those production rooms and it has a UHP lamp.


Sure. I'd like to see the 90 with a Xenon lamp. But Sony is not going to do it. They will not spend a dime on a new $15K projector. Times are tight. I do believe that everything in the 200 could show up in a new $8K except for the xenon plus lots more that doesn't exist now for Sony. Remember Sony sees the JVC RS20 and all its sales at a MSRP of $7500. So they think they can take JVC on at that price point and win. They think consumers are spending at the $7.5K level for the JVC. Sony is not going forward with a new $5K machine either. $3K and $8K is where they perceive market quantity is at. They are so wrong because of MSRP vs street.

I think unfortunately that until the economy turns around many companies are going to shelf projects, and ramp up production on the cheaper models. Look what happened to Pioneer...the best TV just wasn't appealing to Joe blow for the $.

Ah, well. I guess placeholder Pj it probably will be for me, because 3D, lasers, led, whatever is still a few years away from being viable and under $10,000.:(

At least we have something to look forward to!:)

I think they could take on a RS20 with many of the 200's features and win. Especially since it would be 10 bit panels. JVC needs to remove their panning motion judder in their next model. If not then Sony will definitely have one up on them already (like they do now)...

They have to up the native on/off to win this. Not a spec war but look at em blacks war. Its happening. That's why a new light engine.

They have to up the native on/off to win this. Not a spec war but look at em blacks war. Its happening. That's why a new light engine.

Good point. Either way if Sony and JVC each release one good PJ it should still make for an interesting Fall...

Even if Bret doesn't end up playing for Minn?

I think they could take on a RS20 with many of the 200's features and win. Especially since it would be 10 bit panels. JVC needs to remove their panning motion judder in their next model. If not then Sony will definitely have one up on them already (like they do now)...

JVC uses 10 bit panels. See here. (http://pro.jvc.com/pro/pr/2007/ehexpo/dila_wpaper.pdf)

The lenses in the 70/80 and the 200 are the same. The big advantaged of the 200 over the 80 is the xenon lamp.

Same lens would sure explain why the 80 is so sharp. Xenon lamp of the 200 is nice, until you need to replace it. Colour on the 80 is very good though and their best UHP effort to date. us$8k for the 80 replacement is still pretty steep as that's currently aud$10.5k (direct conversion but we'll probably pay more) and nearly twice what the 80 was selling for here before Sony Australia discovered their "mistake". Any heads up on native and ANSI contrast for the new model Mark?

JVC uses 10 bit panels. See here. (http://pro.jvc.com/pro/pr/2007/ehexpo/dila_wpaper.pdf)

I know they use 10 bit vid processing but I was told in the owner's thread (probably about 15 pages back) that it does have 8 bit panels by the most knowledgeable members. I also know I read it somewhere in their literature. If they were 10 bit panels then they would have that on their main spec page like Sony does. Even if they were 10 bit that would not help explain why they don't handle motion (panning) and do produce some strange artifact from time to time. Case in point, we watched Amusement with the RS20 about 2 weeks ago. Tonite, with guests I put it to the best scene (about 30 minutes in). It is night and starting to thunderstorm with lightning. On the RS20 you get the weird artifact (there was a thread dedicated to it and it was mentioned in a couple reviews like Home Theater Magazine) when the lightning hits on the house around the hanging lamps. Sorta looked like the same noise on the girls arm from that thread. Hard to explain unless you see it. And I know those artifacts are very few and very far between. But tonite with the VW200 it played it perfectly without a trace of it. And the fast motion... Another comparison, my family watched Mamma Mia (I did not) on the RS20. Now my Wife never notices anything or at least she never says anything. In the beginning they are driving on the island. My Wife pointed out that it seemed much smoother tonite. I pointed out that's because we are back using the old VW200. She said the last time they watched it, it had more of an "earthquake" effect. I liked that expression. :D Anyway, again the RS20 is good with contrast and blacks but it does have room for improvement in those two areas. I would have easily been content and kept it if it weren't for them or the fact that I got used to being spoiled with the VW200...

My main point here is if JVC can "fix" this in their next gen then they will have the PJ to beat. Oh and add Dark Frame Insertion with some MotionFlow for sports while they're at it. :)

Even if Bret doesn't end up playing for Minn?

I have a crazy feeling he will. ;)

No numbers yet Ken. My insight is from talking to a number of Sony people in the know, none of whom could really say anything officially but who did slip bits and pieces. I am not going to go into it. Its about 120 days or so until Cedia. We shall all see then. Sony will be much different then too. Many of us dealers will be getting Sony from a distributor though Sony maintains things won`t change. We still will have Sony people to talk to and get support from. I think the changes will be drastic and many of my friends at Sony will be gone. I don`t have any idea of whether the projector people are know will be there in July. I don`t expect to learn any more until Cedia.

Mark, if Sony starts releasing people here and there I hope that doesn't mean the quality of their PJs will start going down... :eek:

the problem is that nothing is perfect but the art is advancing and most things are getting better. Once something is addressed we tend to find some other fault which most could care less about being for the most part oblivious of it.

Most people LOVE their RS20 and think any criticism of it is inane. On the other hand some of the JVC people in the states know its strengths and weaknesses and do relay certain observations to japan. Do they get listened to? Yes but its a slow process. Most if not all will be surprised when somebody flies over from japan just before cedia and says here is the new higher end model. I doubt it will deal with the motion thing and I doubt it will have a DI. But wouldn`t that be killer if it did. plus interchangeable lens with shorter zoom ranges and maybe . . . . And let`s see what Sony delivers, and Planar, and Sim2. Its bad times for drastic new things. i think Sony will have the most significant new projector and alas as Alan says it might only be evolutional from the present 80. Buts that`s pretty good and upping the on\off CR and improving light engine efficiency through a new engine and upping the refresh rate would present a very interesting option.

Great points Mark. I would love to see what 240hz (and Dark Frame Insertion) would do with sports. It would be an eye-candy extremist's dream! :)

To bad a VP manufacturer couldn't come out with one that could do 120hz. If the VW200 were to receive a source that is already 120hz they say it would double it to 240hz... :eek: Seriously... :)

Lasers are the perfect replacement for xenon. They might be costly but at least the consumere does not have to fear an expensive replacement light source any time soon.

Sony should increase the static contrast of their panels and I but they can. They also should run with the 120Hz and DFI advantage that they have.

JVC should also go with lasers. In addition I also think they can gain alot by updating their panel driving technology. They wont change the digital drive but they can improve it. Remember how much the dmd drive technology improved when dlp migrated to 1080p. I also think alot can be gained from using two lens options to cover a range of installation requirements. This could improve ANSI, sharpness and available light output in your specific installation.

I know they use 10 bit vid processing but I was told in the owner's thread (probably about 15 pages back) that it does have 8 bit panels by the most knowledgeable members. I also know I read it somewhere in their literature. If they were 10 bit panels then they would have that on their main spec page like Sony does. Even if they were 10 bit that would not help explain why they don't handle motion (panning) and do produce some strange artifact from time to time. Case in point, we watched Amusement with the RS20 about 2 weeks ago. Tonite, with guests I put it to the best scene (about 30 minutes in). It is night and starting to thunderstorm with lightning. On the RS20 you get the weird artifact (there was a thread dedicated to it and it was mentioned in a couple reviews like Home Theater Magazine) when the lightning hits on the house around the hanging lamps. Sorta looked like the same noise on the girls arm from that thread. Hard to explain unless you see it. And I know those artifacts are very few and very far between. But tonite with the VW200 it played it perfectly without a trace of it. And the fast motion... Another comparison, my family watched Mamma Mia (I did not) on the RS20. Now my Wife never notices anything or at least she never says anything. In the beginning they are driving on the island. My Wife pointed out that it seemed much smoother tonite. I pointed out that's because we are back using the old VW200. She said the last time they watched it, it had more of an "earthquake" effect. I liked that expression. :D Anyway, again the RS20 is good with contrast and blacks but it does have room for improvement in those two areas. I would have easily been content and kept it if it weren't for them or the fact that I got used to being spoiled with the VW200...

My main point here is if JVC can "fix" this in their next gen then they will have the PJ to beat. Oh and add Dark Frame Insertion with some MotionFlow for sports while they're at it. :)

The white paper seems pretty clear on this.

It would be cool if Sim2 offered a lower light output version of the Lumis at about 2 to 3x the cost of an RS20. That would be a killer product.

The white paper seems pretty clear on this.

Wasn't that paper from 2007? Again, whether they are 10 bit or 8 bit it doesn't hide the fact that they are inferior with motion (panning). And if they truly are 10 bit then where is it stated on their main page with the RS20/HD750 specs? It's not.

It would be cool if Sim2 offered a lower light output version of the Lumis at about 2 to 3x the cost of an RS20. That would be a killer product.

That is what I have planned to get from day one when I first had the Optoma H79... I have been waiting for them to crack the 15K mark or so... By then we will probably be at Lasers or 4K. :D

Wasn't that paper from 2007? Again, whether they are 10 bit or 8 bit it doesn't hide the fact that they are inferior with motion (panning). And if they truly are 10 bit then where is it stated on their main page with the RS20/HD750 specs? It's not.

Again, my point is just that the white paper is pretty clear that they are using 10 bit panels. I have nothing else to add one way or the other.

Again, my point is just that the white paper is pretty clear that they are using 10 bit panels. I have nothing else to add one way or the other.

I hope that paper is wrong then and the sources that told me that it is 8 bit are correct. Because if they are using 10 bit then Mark will probably be right (as usual) and they won't fix it in their next gen...

I think unfortunately that until the economy turns around many companies are going to shelf projects, and ramp up production on the cheaper models. Look what happened to Pioneer...the best TV just wasn't appealing to Joe blow for the $.

Ah, well. I guess placeholder Pj it probably will be for me, because 3D, lasers, led, whatever is still a few years away from being viable and under $10,000.:(

At least we have something to look forward to!:)

I actually think 3D is viable and possible now, it does not require LED or Laser or any really new standards or technology - it just needs to be released to consumers. HDMI 1.3 is capable of the frame rates - 1080p60 can show the 24fps 3D (i.e. 1080 48fps with some frame repeats) that all Hollywood 3D movies are being shot in currently. Sony was showing prototypes of the Playstation 3 doing 3D gaming (on LCD monitors) at this year's GDC, so that could be another source, and the PS3 can drive wireless 3D shutter glasses without hardware changes. For 3D PC gaming 1080p60 3D (i.e. 120hz) with dual-link DVI is quite an amazing experience (Samsung already has a 3D monitor available that comes with wireless 3D shutter glasses), and something that can be moved from monitors to projectors.

DLP rear projection sets with 3D input capabilities already exist and it would not be a huge leap to see it on a front projector.

I think James Cameron's 'Avatar' this summer will be the start of a bigger movement to 3D in Hollywood (see this very interesting interview (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864.html?categoryid=1009&cs=1)) not least because it offers an experience that is still not available in home theaters, giving consumers a reason to visit an actual theater. Which just means that more home theater enthusiasts are going to want it at home, soon enough.

Panny normally has a new projector every year at Cedia in Sept, and then it starts shipping around Nov. I would assume this year they will have a 4000, and it will probably have incremental improvements over the 3000.

jcg

I've been researching for some time before buying my first projector. Like many others, for me it's down to the 6500UB or the AE3000U. The 6500 would've been a slam dunk, but the nagging issues with the unit have kept me from pulling the trigger. Similarly, I'm hesitant to get the seemingly more polished AE3000U because I read over and over again that the 6500 (when working) outperforms it by just a tad.

As for the 6500, it seems that most of the issues have been worked through or are currently being addressed by Epson, so if I ordered today, it would probably be my choice.

Having said all that.... now I'm thinking that since we're 5 months into the year, what's on tap with next year's models? When do manufacturer's typically start issuing (or leaking) info on the new goodies? I know there's always going to be something better on the horizon, but if we're just talking about another month or two, I may just wait. If I can't expect any info until November or so, I'll probably get the Epson now. Opinions, advice, news?

"Direct 2.35 AR support with panels that have a 1:2.35 aspect ratio using 1080 x 2538 pixels with video processing to scale (33% zoom) the 2.35 images on BDs to this display resolution while providing full 1080 x 1920 resolution when displaying normal 1.78 HD material. This will maintain square pixels and eliminate any image degradation (reduced ANSI contrast ratio, degraded MTF, increased chromatic aberrations, etc.) that can result from the use of an anamorphic lens"

The light lost by the inefficiencies of illuminating that shape display would cost brightness, which I want more of, for more pixels, which I have no desire for.

I don't think JVC will do anything really drastic. I think Ohlson"s suggestions to Sony and JVC are on point. Howver we will not soon see laser powered from these companies. UHP lamps are not that expensive and the costs of lasers are notjustified in potential bulb savings. For a variety of reasons, including warranties of fitness for use and potential eye safety considerations and liability, I just don't think we are going to see laser driven projectors any time soon. BWTFDIK?

Sure. I'd like to see the 90 with a Xenon lamp. But Sony is not going to do it. They will not spend a dime on a new $15K projector. Times are tight. I do believe that everything in the 200 could show up in a new $8K except for the xenon plus lots more that doesn't exist now for Sony. Remember Sony sees the JVC RS20 and all its sales at a MSRP of $7500. So they think they can take JVC on at that price point and win. They think consumers are spending at the $7.5K level for the JVC. Sony is not going forward with a new $5K machine either. $3K and $8K is where they perceive market quantity is at. They are so wrong because of MSRP vs street.

But they need to re-evaluate their street pricing policy, hard for an $8k MSRP projector with no street discount to compete with a $7.5k MSRP one with a significant discount.

I think unfortunately that until the economy turns around many companies are going to shelf projects, and ramp up production on the cheaper models.

I'd be more worried next year about new models than this year. Development is a rather long term process, anything being shown at CEDIA 09 would have to have been in development for at least a year or two, I wouldn't think you'd want to shelf a product that's "almost done", after spending all the money on R&D. Now reducing 09 R&D for 10/11 products, that's a different story.

Look what happened to Pioneer...the best TV just wasn't appealing to Joe blow for the $.

Pioneer saw the writing on the wall. People by flat panels for form factor/convenience/style and not PQ. Plasma's just can't compete in that market for some reason.

Wasn't that paper from 2007? Again, whether they are 10 bit or 8 bit it doesn't hide the fact that they are inferior with motion (panning). And if they truly are 10 bit then where is it stated on their main page with the RS20/HD750 specs? It's not.

I hope that paper is wrong then and the sources that told me that it is 8 bit are correct. Because if they are using 10 bit then Mark will probably be right (as usual) and they won't fix it in their next gen...

Number of bits driving the panels would have no little/no effect on motion handling. The VW200 is better because it's got things like DFI and maybe some other features but not because it's 10 bit.

I actually think 3D is viable and possible now, it does not require LED or Laser or any really new standards or technology - it just needs to be released to consumers. HDMI 1.3 is capable of the frame rates - 1080p60 can show the 24fps 3D (i.e. 1080 48fps with some frame repeats) that all Hollywood 3D movies are being shot in currently. Sony was showing prototypes of the Playstation 3 doing 3D gaming (on LCD monitors) at this year's GDC, so that could be another source, and the PS3 can drive wireless 3D shutter glasses without hardware changes. For 3D PC gaming 1080p60 3D (i.e. 120hz) with dual-link DVI is quite an amazing experience (Samsung already has a 3D monitor available that comes with wireless 3D shutter glasses), and something that can be moved from monitors to projectors.

DLP rear projection sets with 3D input capabilities already exist and it would not be a huge leap to see it on a front projector.

I think James Cameron's 'Avatar' this summer will be the start of a bigger movement to 3D in Hollywood (see this very interesting interview (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864.html?categoryid=1009&cs=1)) not least because it offers an experience that is still not available in home theaters, giving consumers a reason to visit an actual theater. Which just means that more home theater enthusiasts are going to want it at home, soon enough.

I respectfully disagree. I think 3d is an interesting effect and useful in adding drama in certain action heavy visuals, but even in the best cases it adds to viewing fatigue for most people. Sometimes it is just a small amount of fatigue, other times it's a lot. There are also many tiny things in a stereo presentation that can disrupt the viewing experience and that little disruption pulls you out of the story. We are getting better and better at making films that minimize/avoid these snafus, but a stereo view just has certain limits (single convergence plane, screen edge pop in/out, apparent depth variation dependent upon viewing position and screen size).

The technical downsides to 3d are many. You lose a lot of brightness. You need a display engine that is "high speed" because you in effect need double the frame rate - each eye gets its own stream. DLP is fast enough, but regardless of technology I personally wouldn't be willing to sacrifice bit depth for refresh rate.

Then you have just the general annoyance of which "standard" is needed for connecting your video source to the display engine (we have simple dual stream, side by side, above below, and others - that's the great thing about standards, we have so many to choose from! :).

Finally, while there is some great content coming, most content is still 2d. Moreover the 3d movies that are coming out are really good movies regardless of whether you view 'em in 2d or 3d (and the ho hum movies that rely purely on the 3d effect aren't that compelling to watch or rewatch in my personal opinion even if I can watch them in 3d every time).

I'll turn the question around. How much extra would you be willing to pay for a projector and glasses to get the 3d capability? 2000$, 3?

It will be interesting to watch 3d develop and to see if it is just a fad or not.

Number of bits driving the panels would have no little/no effect on motion handling. The VW200 is better because it's got things like DFI and maybe some other features but not because it's 10 bit.[/QUOTE]

Even waching the VW200 with DFI and MotionFLow Off for Movies it is much more smoother. Panning and just Motion in general. I would think that it could also be their path they use. Either way, they are not doing something that the Sony does.

Even waching the VW200 with DFI and MotionFLow Off for Movies it is much more smoother. Panning and just Motion in general. I would think that it could also be their path they use. Either way, they are not doing something that the Sony does.

Consider this, DLPs are lucky to be able to resolve 8 bits, yet they often/generally do motion better than LCOS. The VW200 is probably great, but it's probably due to tuning of the drive electronics or something.

I hope that paper is wrong then and the sources that told me that it is 8 bit are correct. Because if they are using 10 bit then Mark will probably be right (as usual) and they won't fix it in their next gen...

There is no way these are 8 bit. I have worked on many 8 bit products in the past and the RS20 is much better than that.

There is no way these are 8 bit. I have worked on many 8 bit products in the past and the RS20 is much better than that.

Then you would think they would add it to their specs on the main page.

Consider this, DLPs are lucky to be able to resolve 8 bits, yet they often/generally do motion better than LCOS. The VW200 is probably great, but it's probably due to tuning of the drive electronics or something.

Good point. :)

Wasn't that paper from 2007? Again, whether they are 10 bit or 8 bit it doesn't hide the fact that they are inferior with motion (panning). And if they truly are 10 bit then where is it stated on their main page with the RS20/HD750 specs? It's not.

From the JVC doc: "so in theory there are 2^24 gray scale steps. In practice a combination of bit sequence that allows over 10 bit, 1024 addressable states, is used. Thus a gray scale can be reproduced without image contouring found in time sequential operation devices."

Seems pretty clear to me they support over 10bit on the RS2. Just because they don't blast this info everywhere doesn't make it not true. Remember, JVC is probably the only manufacturer in this price range to have other specs (like contrast ratio) to actually be true, while others seems to grossly exaggerate their specs. Based on their honesty with other specs, they would be the last projector company that I'd doubt regarding a spec they claim.

I don't think anyone is claiming that 10-bit = better motion. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

Then you would think they would add it to their specs on the main page.

But the bit depth used to drive the panels is essentially worthless information. All our sources are limited to 8bits. JVC doesn't seem to be in the habit of advertising stuff like that (useless info).

OK. Enough. DLPs are lucky. The little girl who use to say its the mirrors was not so lucky. What's she doing now? Did the elephant step on her?

Touchy?

Do you disagree that bit depth has little to no relation to motion handling?

I only mentioned DLP as an example that shows how bit depth and motion handling are completely unrelated, since joerod seemed disappointed that JVC was using 10bit drive/panels because he thought that meant motion couldn't be improved. My intent was to illustrate simply that that's not the case, JVC could easily improve motion handling without changing bit depth of their panels, because the two are unrelated.

Sorry guys. I didn't mean to stir up trouble. I just would love to see a newer JVC model with its excellent contrast and deep black levels handle motion (panning) better. I really think that would be the one to beat. As of now if you could combine the Sony's motion handling and some of its features with the JVC's CMS, contrast and black level we would almost be in.... :)

I'm a newb to front projection and I jumped on the Pioneer FPJ1 deal (RS2 clone) and it doesn't take much to see that it has judder issues and panning isn't smooth. I'd like to see that improved as well. Part of the judder I'm sure is in the source and judder can be seen on any TV that doesn't have some sort of frame interpolation to compensate.

The layoffs and retirements are massive. Most of us dealers will now get their product from a distributor. So we will deal with the distributor and not Sony directly anymore. Sony sheds a lot of costs and the distributor takes ver the service and we pay a slightly higher price. Sony says we will still have lots of contact. Hell. They now send us a newsletter every day. But. There is no way to keep track of who still has a job. Sony killed off the qualia folks two years ago. Did that kill some innovation from Sony. Sure did. Less people having to do more. If Sony is going to lose money in high end projection, they will vacate the sector. Is Sony now going to be any different that sau Samsung or Panasonic. Me too building cheap boxes mostly. We shall see at Cedia. I am not really optomistic.

Things are changing but it's not the end of the world. It's just that unrealistic expectations can no longer be afforded. It may be a good thing because real values will start to matter a bit more again. Go out and have a drink.

Blantons and a cubano would be nice, but I am the designated driver, alas only an 8 bit driver.

. Sony killed off the qualia folks two years ago. Did that kill some innovation from Sony. Sure did.

Does that mean the Diamond is now dead? I was hoping that was still in development. Maybe with a 4-panel SXRD and 4096x2160 resolution with the ability to do DCI and deepcolor/xvcolor.

Sony really needs to come out with something like that in the ~$50,000 range or slightly lower. It could be used by very small cinemas, board rooms and elite prosumer applications. Possibly also for use by directors and cinematographers themselves too.

Last summer there was a rumor about a high contrast 4k sxrd projector from Sony with good light output. Sony probably has something but is waiting for the right time to launch it and that time is probably not soon.
I think Diamond is a dead project and no longer active.

I do not think the best strategy is just lowering costs. In the end you have to innovate to survive. New technology in any form is a key advantage. That is why I think lasers for example can have a chance. Remember that lasers allow the manufacturer to simplify the layout of the projector. There are many components in a projector needed to shape, split and distrubute the light coming from a UHP lamp.

What I can agree with is for Sony to stay away from the very low volume high light output market. It makes sense to have consumer projectors and digital cinema projectors but no prosumer projectors.

The technical downsides to 3d are many. You lose a lot of brightness. You need a display engine that is "high speed" because you in effect need double the frame rate - each eye gets its own stream. DLP is fast enough, but regardless of technology I personally wouldn't be willing to sacrifice bit depth for refresh rate

Interesting about the doubled frame rate as it relates to this discussion, and motion issues with current PJ tech.

At Cedia 2008, JVC had a 3 D demo that was really excellent. They utilized 2 previous gen RS1 PJ's in a rear PJ set up to project some of the best 3D I have ever seen, short of Imax. If what you say about doubling the frame rate is true, JVC seems to be able to ramp up the DILA light engine for higher speeds as needed for 3D.

I also saw a very convincing demo of 60hz vs 120hz vs 240 hz at the Sony LCD flat panel display booth. Going from 60hz to 120hz offered a marked improvement in motion handling. Going from 120 to 240 was less so, but still very noticeable to me. The 240 hz panel looked fantastic with the sports demo they had going.

So, shouldn't JVC be able to improve motion handling in their new PJ by increasing the "speed" of the light engine to 120hz or even 240hz?

Pretty much agree with the two above posts. But we are not going to see lasers. Not now.

JVC has a winner now with the RS20. There is really no need for them to do anything right now. The end user market isn`t requiring it. But they will do something. Because the installer market is seeking it. It wants something more expensive to sell higher end jobs but whatever they sell it must be better.

JVC could increase the refresh rate. That would be a relatively simple upgrade. JVC could up the lamp power. Not so easy. A rather expensive change. JVC could go to more expensive interchangeable lenses splitting the present zoom range into say 3 or 4 ranges. As Ohlson suggests, that would improve performace but it would addd to the costs because of the need for a lens mount and much lower economy of scale. One size fits all lowers PQ but is much cheaper. JVC could add a DI. It could be done with the lenses but once again the economies of scale would raise the costs even more.

The display market is prettty much moving to higher refresh rates. JVC will have to go there with their FPs at some time. So I think that would be a likely feature of an upscale model. What else. I really can`t fiqure out what they will do. The thing that would make the most sense is the lens things because of the reasons set forth by Ohlson. A lot of specs would improve. better ANSI, higher light output, less CA, the list goes on and on. Perhaps making the unit as a head unit with driver box. That would fit the custom install market well. Better processing chip too. I doubt they would give us a DI but if they would wow would one have specs. Its the market thing. The JVC`s blacks are just not that good compared to a CRT. The native with iris certainly beats the competition, but calling a spade a spade the art has a long long long way to go.

What else. Well they could cherry pick light engines. Actually pick them with a much tighter convergence.. Is there any real reason why any manufacturer couldn`t tighten this spec? Its cost related but hey its going to be a more expensive machine.


Now assume you have the cash and are willing to spend it on a more expensive projector. Would you shell out say $8.5K street for a machine with the features outlined above. Bigger better lenses that gave better ANSI, more light out, allowed greater lens shift without degradation, a high refresh rate, a tight convergence spec, better processing, maybe a 2 piece unit? One must be realistic here. We are not going to get a different technology machine this year. Just something better that could be easily done. Its being designed and protyped now. It won`t be sold until about 2010. I have no info on what it really is and nobody at JVC US knows either. At Cedia they will be as surprised as all of us.

I would love to see JVC offer an RS 30 with-

1. Legitimate, high quality, long throw lens option. IE something longer than the one offered by the Marantz 11s2

2. 120-240hz refresh

3. Automatic, one button push, lens zoom/shift/focus for 2.35/16:9 zoom AR change. Panasonic was able to put this into a lower cost PJ, so all manufacturers should be able to as well.

Of the three, obviously the new lens would be the biggest added cost.

From what I have seen so far, with various current blu-ray titles, problems with the image are most often due to the source (blu-ray title) and not the RS 20 or the blu-ray player. To put this another way, I feel the current performance capabilities of the RS20 meet or exceed that of most of the currently available blu ray titles. Therefore, improving the install flexibility and motion handling would be the obvious next step.

The reality is, in most HT setups, the room set up degrades the performance more than anything else, at this point.

Interesting about the doubled frame rate as it relates to this discussion, and motion issues with current PJ tech.

At Cedia 2008, JVC had a 3 D demo that was really excellent. They utilized 2 previous gen RS1 PJ's in a rear PJ set up to project some of the best 3D I have ever seen, short of Imax. If what you say about doubling the frame rate is true, JVC seems to be able to ramp up the DILA light engine for higher speeds as needed for 3D.

Actually my guess is it's just way easier to plop two machines on the table with polarizers, than to "invent" an entirely new machine, just for a 3D demo.

I also saw a very convincing demo of 60hz vs 120hz vs 240 hz at the Sony LCD flat panel display booth. Going from 60hz to 120hz offered a marked improvement in motion handling. Going from 120 to 240 was less so, but still very noticeable to me. The 240 hz panel looked fantastic with the sports demo they had going.

That depends on your definition of "improve". JVC already does, IIRC, 96Hz refresh, at least of 24fps sources. But just increasing the refresh rate (increasing the number of times the same image is refreshed) won't help motion at all.

I assume the demos you're talking about were incorporating Frame Interpolation to create 120 and 240Hz refresh. In such a case "60Hz" to "120Hz" would definitely be a big change, especially when the "60Hz" probably had no FI, and the "120Hz" did. The 240Hz was probably better mostly due to an improved FI algorithm/processing vs the 120Hz model.

So, shouldn't JVC be able to improve motion handling in their new PJ by increasing the "speed" of the light engine to 120hz or even 240hz?

Not really, 120Hz and 240Hz, and whatever are all just meaningless buzzwords IMO. If you don't use FI, then 120Hz is no better than a display that can display 24fps, 30fps, and 60fps without introducing judder, the JVCs can do this (AFAIK). That's the only benefit of 120Hz, is it can display all three framerates without introducing cadence (3:2 pulldown) judder.

What's happened is it's easier to explain: "This display does 120Hz, the faster refresh allows it to handle motion better.", than it is to explain what's really going on: "Movies have a very low frame rate, that causes motion to be poor, this display will analyze the frames and use motion to create new intermediate frames that reduce Sample And Hold effect, and make motion seem more fluid".

120Hz, 240Hz, IMO it's all marketing, the actual rate has almost no meaning (60Hz is about the limit of what we can perceive, past 60-75Hz we can't tell the difference between framerates), it's the other technologies that go with them that make the difference.

Frame Interpolation
Dark Frame Insertion

A JVC with DFI would be killer. If they did that without creating horrible flicker, something on the order of what the VW80 or VW200 have, well, all I can say is "wow".

Stranger,

I was thinking more along the lines of motion blur on pj's when viewing live sporting events broadcast over HDTV.

I'm not aware of the specifics of how 240hz is implemented on these new lcd panels, but I can tell you it works and works well. The resultant image is smooth and highly detailed. If PJ manufacturers can incorporate it, it would be great.

Stranger,

I was thinking more along the lines of motion blur on pj's when viewing live sporting events broadcast over HDTV.

I'm not aware of the specifics of how 240hz is implemented on these new lcd panels, but I can tell you it works and works well.

Oh, I don't doubt that, I'm just pointing out that it's most likely the FI and not the refresh rate that's at the root of that.

Sorry for my lack of preciseness. When I wrote increase refresh rate I meant that with frame interprolation. Obviously, going from 60 to 120, there would be one artificial frame added. Going to 240 three artificial frames are added. How well the frames are created is what it is all about and the ability to do it without creating banding. I am not even going into dark frame insertion here.

So CM. Sim2 is coming out with a $15K single chip DLP that will employ a similar DB implementation to that found in the Lumis.


We won`t see laser. Yes we will see LED but not from JVC or Sony.

The the only point in LED is will it offer a substantial performane improvement. Spending what it will cost to avoid buying one or two bulbs over the short life span of a projector before it get obsoleted highly merits the investment.

I would love to have a source (VP) that could create 120hz and then send that to my VW200. According to Sony, if it were to receive 120hz it would double it to 240hz. I would really like to see how that would do with the Dark Frame Insertion. The BIG question has to be: how hard is it to do? Can a VP manufacturer achieve this feature in the next couple of years?

Joe. I have a top notch video processor but it won`t put out 1080p 72 let alone 120hz. We are talking bandwidth, it will do 1024 72. There are limitations to what an HDMI will do. The output chips of processors and the receiving chip of the Sony, To send 1080P
120 we are not talking single feeds but two wires.,

Ok. so there as another 1-2 years before lasers come true. I will wait.

I still think laser will be important for JVC to combat dlp when they go mainstream with DB and LEDs.

I just would love to see a newer JVC model with its excellent contrast and deep black levels handle motion (panning) better. I really think that would be the one to beat.

i agree 200%! that and the low ansi contrast are the only things that REALLY bother me about the JVC's

"JVC could up the lamp power. Not so easy. A rather expensive change. "

Perhaps not.

Several generations of previous DIAL's had 420 W lamps vs. the current 200 W ones.

They were noisy, but even w/o newer quieter cooling system designs, I'd think that a lot of custom install jobs have the pj behind the back wall, or if not a hushbox wouldn't be an issue in the scheme of things.

A JVC with DFI would be killer. If they did that without creating horrible flicker, something on the order of what the VW80 or VW200 have, well, all I can say is "wow".

I agree. The only semi-important criticism that I have of the RS20 is the apparent loss of resolution in some scenes with fast horizontal pans (Sample and Hold Effect).

I would think that moving to 240hz panels would allow fewer black frames to be inserted (resulting in less flicker and loss of contrast) and might be the best currently available easy solution to the problem.

I have no interest in frame interpolation.

I hope coldmachine is right about the single chip lumis-type projector, which will likely be from Sim2. Following the Lumis thread in the other forum, shows what a beast that machine is. I might prefer it over a three-chipper because Sim2's spec on panel alignment seems to be pretty loose (resulting in large misconvergence in some shipped units) and I don't need three-chip-type lumens. I don't see rainbows but knowing me, I will begin to.

Why do you think just black frame insertion will solve the problem you are describing? You might want to google black frame insertion and read up on it. It will improve the blacks but it would really dim things down. i

Why are you not interested in frame interpolation. That is what is required to solve the problem. But you need multiple frames between the original frames. Are you against FI or just poorly executed FI?

Projectors are so much like life. People become brand and technology loyalists. I don`t want this. Its bad.

Take a DI for example. It would be a killer addition to the JVC`s. Sooner or later JVC will add it because the other manufactures who use it will have upped their native enough to pass JVC. We will see it start to happen in September.

Why do you think just black frame insertion will solve the problem you are describing? You might want to google black frame insertion and read up on it. It will improve the blacks but it would really dim things down. i

Why are you not interested in frame interpolation. That is what is required to solve the problem. But you need multiple frames between the original frames. Are you against FI or just poorly executed FI?

Projectors are so much like life. People become brand and technology loyalists. I don`t want this. Its bad.

Take a DI for example. It would be a killer addition to the JVC`s. Sooner or later JVC will add it because the other manufactures who use it will have upped their native enough to pass JVC. We will see it start to happen in September.


You misunderstand DFI and Frame Interpolation.

DFI addresses the root cause of the Sample and Hold Effect, which is the reason for the apparent loss of resolution in horizontal panning. It is an optical illusion because the resolution really isn't lost, it gets blurred together. Inserting dark frames breaks the illusion and allows the eye to see the frames as they are.

Frame interpolation is said to correct the fact that most source material is frame limited (24 fps, for example). So, it manufactures new frames. It is a preference whether you like it or not. I don't like it.

I hope coldmachine is right about the single chip lumis-type projector, which will likely be from Sim2. Following the Lumis thread in the other forum, shows what a beast that machine is. I might prefer it over a three-chipper because Sim2's spec on panel alignment seems to be pretty loose (resulting in large misconvergence in some shipped units) and I don't need three-chip-type lumens. I don't see rainbows but knowing me, I will begin to.

LG, I didn't actually post that. Im sure you will both understand, and excuse, the pedantry. I'll repeat what I did post below. I had a post up with some thoughts on what will be seen this year, but was asked to delete it as it contained something that shouldn't have been there. I, roughly, wrote the following....

The search for increased ANSI in JVC machines does not lie in a better lens. The Meridian 810, which is basically a JVC 4k, has an astronomically better optical system, but still only delivers a theoretical max of 350, but in practice delivers closer to 200. Meridian cant improve this as its due to the architecture.

1. I think JVC will be worth watching at CEDIA. I believe they will be moving into the mid level sector soon. I think they have the desire and the ability to do that. I also believe that 2010 will see JVC improve their ANSI number considerably. I think that they will start to look at splitting zoom ranges (but not constant apperture zoom units), sub-pixel performance, motion handling and sharpness.

2. The traditional "Heavy Metal", big screen, 2000+ D65 lumen, PJ companies may get a rude awakening this year from an unexpected quarter.

3. Two, highly regarded, companies will announce that they have been working on LED solutions and are ready to go. This will not be the sort of lame solutions we have already seen discussed.

4. A sub $20k, single chip, machine will significantly raise the bar. This may, or may not, include LED developments. I believe the intention is that it will, if possible.

5. T.I. will get into 4k in 2010.

6. Lasers are not on the horizon. Scanning lasers are not being looked at by anyone.

I use Dark Frame Insertion on its lowest level with everything! I used to not use it with my 1080p/24 Blu ray titles because of the flicker. But for some crazy reason I don't see flicker with this latest VW200 I now have. I would not see it with 1080p/60 on the old VW200 and of course still don't with this one. I really like what it brings to the image. As long as there is no flicker I will use it with 1080p/24. As for MotionFlow, I would not use it even with its lowest setting for movies. Sports on the other hand, totally different story. I really feel like havig a good combo of those features makes your PJ perfect for movies and perfect for sports. As long as these features are executed correctly like the DFI on this newer VW200.

LG, I didn't actually post that. Im sure you will both understand, and excuse, the pedantry. I'll repeat what I did post below. I had a post up with some thoughts on what will be seen this year, but was asked to delete it as it contained something that shouldn't have been there. I, roughly, wrote the following....

I guess it was just wishful thinking (and reading) on my part.

Why do you think just black frame insertion will solve the problem you are describing? You might want to google black frame insertion and read up on it. It will improve the blacks but it would really dim things down. i

Lawguy hit it, but DFI reduces or eliminates Sample and Hold effect, which is where our visual system blurs motion together when the movement doesn't track as we expect it to. This (SAH) is a prime cause of poor motion handling on most displays these days.

Why are you not interested in frame interpolation.

Because it destroys films for a lot of us. The film "magic" is lost.

That is what is required to solve the problem. But you need multiple frames between the original frames. Are you against FI or just poorly executed FI?

There are two different issues. One is SAH, which is an artifact of the way displays (especially LCD/LCOS/DiLA) hold the frame continuously until the the next change, this can be remedied by DFI. DFI gets you back closer to what we see in the theater.

The second is the low temporal resolution of film. This requires FI to correct, but also destroys something that many of us find important in film content. I have no problem with the low temporal resolution of film, it's the way it is and I don't see a need to fix it.

SAH-induced motion blur, DFI could fix and I would like to see that.

The second is the low temporal resolution of film. This requires FI to correct, but also destroys something that many of us find important in film content. I have no problem with the low temporal resolution of film, it's the way it is and I don't see a need to fix it.

So many people strive for accuracy in image reproduction. Frame Interpolation actually creates frames that are not in the original. I can't think of anything that could destroy accuracy more than that. If someone likes it for non-critical viewing like sports, that's fine too. I said I don't want it because I am sure I would never use it.

I don't know where Mark get this "brand or technology loyalist" stuff from. I have owned dlps, LCOS and LCD projectors from four different manufacturers. He also should be aware that DFI has nothing to do with improving black levels (which it won't affect - other than just making the picture darker overall).

Obviously film is film and should be displayed temporarily as it is displayed in a film theater. Specifically what is DFI? A serious question. I thought it was something like BFI but boosting up the real frames to make up for the loss of light because of the projection of black. Or is it having partially lit frames What is thev difference if you flash more frames than a film would flash?.

Judder comes from the display technology. What is needed display wise to reduce.it ?.

6. Lasers are not on the horizon. Scanning lasers are not being looked at by anyone.

Well, Microvision's pico projector will be available in July. It will require stacking or blending multiple units to improve brightness and resolution. None the less, it will be the first consumer scanning laser projector. :)

http://macvoices.tv/macvoicestv-931-matthew-carmean-of-microvision-demos-their-pocket-sized-iphone-projector/

Obviously film is film and should be displayed temporarily as it is displayed in a film theater. Specifically what is DFI? A serious question. I thought it was something like BFI boosting up the real frames to make up fotr the loss of light because of the projection of black. Of is it having partially lit frames What is thev difference if you flash more frames than a film would flash?.

Judder comes from the display technology. What is needed display wise to reduce.it ?.


BFI is the same thing as DFI. See here (http://www.grobi.tv/system/galleries/download/downloads/GROBI-SONY-VPL-VW200-Motionflow-100hz.pdf)for an explanation of how they try to get rid of SAH artifacts.

Well, Microvision's pico projector will be available in July. It will require stacking or blending multiple units to improve brightness and resolution. None the less, it will be the first consumer scanning laser projector. :)

http://macvoices.tv/macvoicestv-931-matthew-carmean-of-microvision-demos-their-pocket-sized-iphone-projector/

Im aware, as I think we all are, of the pico. I was referring to serious HT applications, rather than the novelty sector. The power difference between the 2, and the obvious implications, is where the problem lies.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see it. I just wont be holding my breath, other than to disguise my Halitosis.

coldmachine
Sanyo has just recently showed their 3DLP laser projector prototype. They are planning to make it a product in 1-2 years.
I also hope that others have secret laser projects that you are not told about. :)
I know there were advanced laser projects years ago so I refuse to give up on the any time soon future.

I know there were advanced laser projects years ago so I refuse to give up on the any time soon future.

Nor should you. I would love to see it.

If scanning laser units come to market, I will, out of respect for your consistent evangelism, send you a Magnum of Champagne and a nice Cuban (Cigar, not Stripper.)

Obviously film is film and should be displayed temporarily as it is displayed in a film theater. Specifically what is DFI? A serious question. I thought it was something like BFI boosting up the real frames to make up fotr the loss of light because of the projection of black. Of is it having partially lit frames What is thev difference if you flash more frames than a film would flash?.

BFI (Black Frame Insertion) and DFI (Dark Frame Insertion) are different versions of the same thing. Both (with current technology) induce a CR and brightness hit. They reduce overall white level (since the duty cycle of the display is lowered) but have no effect on black (that's limited by the panels).

BFI inserts completely black periods between the display of the frames. This has the effect of simulating the inter-frame blanking period on a film projector. However unlike a film projector where the light source is completely blocked durring the blanking period, on current PJs black is still being "projected" thus only the white level is reduced, not black level, hurting CR.

DFI is a twist on the idea, where the black frame is replaced by a "dark" frame, which is a frame that's just enough darker, so as to produce the desired effect. But being only darker, has less of a hit on CR.

This is one area where LED/Laser illumination are very exciting, they offer the capability to completely turn off the light source to create a blanking interval without affecting CR.

Judder comes from the display technology. What is needed display wise to reduce.it ?.

Well there's odd-cadence judder (3:2 pulldown) which requires displaying at a multiple of the source (ie input 1080p24, output at 48, 96, 120, etc). This retains "accuracy" to the source.

Then there's low framerate judder, temporal aliasing, "blinky"/"flashy" pans, reverse spinning wagon wheels, etc. Frame Interpolation can fix some of these, but not all. But this does not retain "accuracy" to the source.

Finally there's Sample and Hold effect, where detail is lost during motion, or (I think) seeing "double frames", which is caused by the brain's motion integration conflicting with a series of static images smushed together. Dark/Black Frame Insertion can solve this while retaining "accuracy" to the source.

coldmachine
I am a humble man so I will initially settle for just a projector with lasers as the light source.

CM knows all. He is the source and sink of all projector knowledge. He even knows it is legal to ship cuban cigars from Canada to Denmark.

Thanks for the explanation Stanger89.

I recently popped into a local theater(plex) and was allowed to pop in to see various movies. It was all projected film (not digital projectors). It's actually been a while since I went to the movies in a theater and it was quite a reminder of how much visible flicker there is compared to what we are used to watching at home. Not to mention quite a bit of strobing/film judder with camera and character movement.

3. Two, highly regarded, companies will announce that they have been working on LED solutions and are ready to go. This will not be the sort of lame solutions we have already seen discussed.



any price range?

Three projectors were announced at CES 2009. One by Delta (the HT8000), one by Vivatek(the H6080FD), and one by ChiLin Technology. There was a very recent oress announcing discussing the HT8000 but not presenting any specs. Delta doesn't really sell machines like this to the consumer, it OEMs consumer use machines to be sold and serviced by others. The r4eseller can contribute to the design, specifying certain things like fixed iris settings, user interface systems and the like even supplying such things as the input board. Take the Sim2 HT5000, for example. It MSRPs for something like $67000 with lens. With a LED light source, I am guessing Sim2 might offer it at $85K. Just guessing. We aren't going to see any high lumens LED consumer HT projector say under $20K in the near future.

Three projectors were announced at CES 2009. One by Delta (the HT8000), one by Vivatek(the H6080FD), and one by ChiLin Technology. There was a very recent oress announcing discussing the HT8000 but not presenting any specs. Delta doesn't really sell machines like this to the consumer, it OEMs consumer use machines to be sold and serviced by others. The r4eseller can contribute to the design, specifying certain things like fixed iris settings, user interface systems and the like even supplying such things as the input board. Take the Sim2 HT5000, for example. It MSRPs for something like $67000 with lens. With a LED light source, I am guessing Sim2 might offer it at $85K. Just guessing. We aren't going to see any high lumens LED consumer HT projector say under $20K in the near future.

but coldmachine said "two, highly regarded, companies", that doesn't describe Chillin or Delta IMO. Also he said they will not be "solutions we have already seen discussed" which those two units have been.

ceger000, you still only have this one post. I'm curious as to what you decided. I really suggest that you don't wait. It will drive you nuts, when you could instead be watching your projector.

Projection Design just announced a LED DLP projector to be available June 15. Wouldn't be surprised to see it at the shortly coming show in Germany. I wouldn't be surprised to see it from Digital Projection soon either but I don't know. Delta is a highly respected manufacturer who I wouldn't be surprised to be OEMing one for some company right now. I wouldn't be surprised to see it introduced by Sim2. Price for these, unknown but I would guess $85,000.

Projection Design just announced a LED DLP projector to be available June 15. Wouldn't be surprised to see it at the shortly coming show in Germany. I wouldn't be surprised to see it from Digital Projection soon either but I don't know. Delta is a highly respected manufacturer who I wouldn't be surprised to be OEMing one for some company right now. I wouldn't be surprised to see it introduced by Sim2. Price for these, unknown but I would guess $85,000.To be clear, are you guessing $85k for a single chip DLP of maybe 600 lumens, just because it has LEDs? If so and that is the price, I don't know who would buy one over a projector like the SIM2 Lumis. Unless there is something about the performance I'm missing. Some mode where they turn the LEDs off for blackouts, but the image pumps horribly because they don't have enough native on/off CR to support doing that any more than other companies have had enough native on/off CR to close irises all the way, wouldn't do it for me, but maybe they will surprise me and actually do very high on/off CR without causing more harm than good.

--Darin

The Marantz VP 11S2 still beats anything that has or will ever come out in the future. No contest. All other projectors tremble at it's mere presence.

:D Was that too over the top.

The Marantz VP 11S2 still beats anything that has or will ever come out in the future. No content. All other projectors tremble at it's mere presence.

:D Was that too over the top.

Over the top AND mis-spelled :)

Darin. I rea;y don`t know the price. From what I am expecting, the lumens will be huge. i don't know why or how. My guess for $85K would be for a three chipper.. A single chipper, maybe just under $30K.

Over the top AND mis-spelled :)

Dooh.

I am too lazy to spell check these days. :cool:

Sad my little quip lost all it's savvy appeal right from the start.

Oh well.

"My guess for $85K would be for a three chipper."

The only benefits I can think of for a 3-chipper are 2nd-order, like less dithering.

Maybe more light. Could perhaps have multiple leds for each color with each chip getting its own color. Perhaps a lens or something after the group of leds of the same color to collate the light from the multiple leds. I don't know but something trick needs to be going on to supply the needed brightness for large screens. There are not single LED sources to supply the quantity of light many would want now.