Thought this news should have its own thread.

Kroma will be available from June 2009.

Announced on an Italian website; via http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.afdigitale.it%2Fvnews.aspx%3Fid%3D15012&sl=it&tl=en&history_state0=


Kroma, the first LED DLP from projectiondesign.

"Even avielo by projectiondesign is ready to launch on the market its solution to DLP with LED backlight. This will reduce consumption and increase both the efficiency and quality of the image, thanks to a greater gamut and the absence of the rainbow "


Kroma, one of the first home cinema DLP projectors a single chip to use LED technology as the light source is the result of an extensive research and development at the headquarters of projectiondesign in Fredrikstad, Norway.

Joe Manning, International Market Manager, Home Theater in avielo by projectiondesign, explains: "From one point of view of quality, an LED source offers a contrast ratio of infinity and the complete absence of the 'rainbow'. This means that levels of Kroma produces infinitely black blacks. "

In addition to an improved contrast, the light source LED Kroma offers a color gamut wider to achieve the ultimate in performance and a colorimetric quality that is impressing cinema purists and old sophisticated fans of TV.

In comparison to a standard dual projector lamp, Kroma has a lower consumption by 50 percent. The use of a light source that does not need to be reciprocated also makes it cost efficient and eco-sustainable.

"We are delighted to bring Kroma on the market in a period where energy consumption and operating costs of AV equipment are under review," says Manning.

Kroma will be available from June 2009.


LED from Phillips?

Thought this news should have its own thread.

Kroma will be available from June 2009.

Announced on an Italian website; via http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.afdigitale.it%2Fvnews.aspx%3Fid%3D15012&sl=it&tl=en&history_state0=



LED from Phillips?


It sounds like standard marketing B.S. of every single press release I've ever heard. Sorry to sound bitter, but LED is my most anticipated projector advancement, and it just seems like it'll be a LONG wait until any of us will actually see one in person, let alone afford it. At least there's forward movement.

50% lower power consumption than a dual lamp unit...i.e. the same as a single lamp unit. I wonder what the output might be, and how they intend to manage the output needed for a projector while taking advantage of the switching capability of LEDs. Creating local dimming in a panel is enough of a challenge, but in a projector, well, I'll be very surprised if the infinite contrast ratio is much of an advantage at all. You can get black with a lamp based unit, too, if you turn it off. We have already seen in the flat panels how useless that is.

It sounds like standard marketing B.S. of every single press release I've ever heard. Sorry to sound bitter, but LED is my most anticipated projector advancement, and it just seems like it'll be a LONG wait until any of us will actually see one in person, let alone afford it. At least there's forward movement.

There are actually going to be many this year at Cedia. But, not cheap...that is the problem.

Three things peak my interest with LED projection. Expanded color space, saturation
and claimed infinite contrast ratio. There have been a few prototype displayed at Cedia and other trade shows and none came close to displaying black beyond today's lamp driven system so it will be interesting to see what is delivered once in production as a final product. The technology in its infancy has potential but I am curious how many generations it will take before its delivers anything close to the hyped "infinite contrast"

Infinite contrast is easy. Just put up a white 100IRE test pattern and look at it. Then put up a black 0 IRE window, and close your eyes. Voila! :D

No mention of lumen output, so it must be LOW. My guess would be under 500 lumens.

IB

Maybe, but consider that an 500 Lumen LED light source will be brighter than a 700 Lumen UHP light source after a couple hundred hours, if not sooner.

slighty off topic...My Samsung LED / LCD is giving me the the same satisfaction as my trusty Sony XBR CRT. Nice colors, depth, and contrast. My DLP projector is good, but I still love the look of my old CRT, Hopefully LED based projectors will narrow that gap or even break new ground in projector performance.

Joey

Sounds good so far, I hope to see the Kroma next weekend and hopefully get some more info on its performance and price.

Yeah none of the LED's I have seen to date have been light cannon's. But, still plenty for the majority of room setups. Plus as others have said, there are other advantages.

http://www.avielo.com/HighEnd/pdf/avielo%20kroma%20EN%20web.pdf

"about 600 lumens."

What do we think this means in real life? If this is accurate and at 6500k, that would not be too bad.

Sounds to me like they are simply turning of the LED's for 'full off', hence the 'infinite' on/off contrast. The PDF states 'system contrast' > 2000, up to '7500' adjusted. That sounds like typical DLP contrast to me.

So is it 600 ANSI lumen at a static contrast ratio >2000:1.
Then I would like to know what the lumen output is at maximum static contrast?
RBE at 24x must be gone!

Jason. How many HT LEDs protypes have you seen? I`ve only seen two and they both used the Phat (hope that`s spelled right, too lazy to look it up) LEDs which are known to have about a 600 ANSI limit lighting a DLP. The lens effective aperture would have a lot to do with the actual ANSI out.


What does the 2000 system contrast actually mean? And how is it adjustable to 7500?

Assuming the price is a little south of $30K, will it sell? It would save power (oversees is much bigger on going green than we are) and one would never have to replace the LEDs, the machine would be throw away obsolete before that would happen.

So exactly what benefits does one get. A wider gamut than the standard for TV and movies No thanks. Colors spending more time on the screen much as a three chip machine improves the solidarity of the image but it still wouldn`t approach a three chipper in this regard.

A machine like this is going to at least need a DI and I doubt this has one.


I really am getting a little tired of manufacturers presenting a spec without a definition. useful contrast improvement? System contrast? Adjustable to, how?

Suppose this thing was $15-20K street, would it sell?

"What does the 2000 system contrast actually mean? And how is it adjustable to 7500?"

My guess is that 2000 is static/native CR and 7500 is duty-cycling the LED's to behave as dynamic iris.

This projector will go obsolete faster than you can sneeze. If it sold for 2K it would be an OK deal. Any more than that and you are throwing money down a hole.

IB

I put an email in to a guy that is involved with PD as a tester/consultant of sorts. Great guy. I asked him for the 411 on the Kroma. I will let you know what I find out.

Sounds good so far, I hope to see the Kroma next weekend and hopefully get some more info on its performance and price.

Stephan: Just for info, the german head of distr is there on thirsday and friday. This fox, he didn't tell me that... ;)

"If it sold for 2K it would be an OK deal."

If it performs as well as, say, a Planar 8150, w/same brightness and no lamp replacement required, why should it sell for a fraction of its price?

I am very skeptical about LED lighting.

First, in the only widely available commercial LED light source displays I know of--Samsung rear projectors and LCD flat panels (not the local dimming units)--the LED-lit versions perform WORSE than the conventionally illuminated alternatives. They have higher black levels or worse screen uniformity or both.

Second, what are the purported benefits of LED illumination?

1. Longer lamp life. This simply relieves consumers of the cost of replacing the lamp every 750-1000 hrs or so. But the increased cost of LED more than outweighs this advantage.

2. Quicker start-up times. This is a small usability advantage that has no impact on image quality and hardly justifies the higher cost.

3. Reduction of DLP color separation artifacts. This is a real advantage for those who are very sensitive to this. However, modern single-chip DLPs have virtually eliminated this problem in any case with conventional technology. What percentage of the population is bothered by rainbows from Planar or Marantz DLP single-chip projectors? For those who are not sensitive to this in the first place, LEDs make no difference at all.

4. Wider color gamut. You don't need LED for this. Conventional DLPs are quite capable of providing gamuts out to the DCI standard. But more importantly, why would we want this? This is exactly what JVC has valiantly and successfully labored to fix--a pointlessly oversatured gamut that greatly exceeds production standards. A wider gamut is no more than a marketing gimmick that decreases image quality. Unless and until we get widely available source material mastered in wider gamuts, an extended gamut is a problem to be solved through calibration, not a "feature" to be celebrated.

Home theater technology is getting very close to the place where high-end audio got many years ago. The quality of performance has advanced to the point that all the low-hanging fruit was picked long ago. There is simply very little to be gained in the way of increased performance.

So what are we left with? Only marketing strategies designed to convince consumers of the need to invest in a "new" technology. New doesn't necessarily mean better. In this case, it may very well mean worse.

I am very skeptical about LED lighting.

First, in the only widely available commercial LED light source displays I know of--Samsung rear projectors and LCD flat panels (not the local dimming units)--the LED-lit versions perform WORSE than the conventionally illuminated alternatives. They have higher black levels or worse screen uniformity or both.

Second, what are the purported benefits of LED illumination?

1. Longer lamp life. This simply relieves consumers of the cost of replacing the lamp every 750-1000 hrs or so. But the increased cost of LED more than outweighs this advantage.

2. Quicker start-up times. This is a small usability advantage that has no impact on image quality and hardly justifies the higher cost.

3. Reduction of DLP color separation artifacts. This is a real advantage for those who are very sensitive to this. However, modern single-chip DLPs have virtually eliminated this problem in any case with conventional technology. What percentage of the population is bothered by rainbows from Planar or Marantz DLP single-chip projectors? For those who are not sensitive to this in the first place, LEDs make no difference at all.

4. Wider color gamut. You don't need LED for this. Conventional DLPs are quite capable of providing gamuts out to the DCI standard. But more importantly, why would we want this? This is exactly what JVC has valiantly and successfully labored to fix--a pointlessly oversatured gamut that greatly exceeds production standards. A wider gamut is no more than a marketing gimmick that decreases image quality. Unless and until we get widely available source material mastered in wider gamuts, an extended gamut is a problem to be solved through calibration, not a "feature" to be celebrated.

Home theater technology is getting very close to the place where high-end audio got many years ago. The quality of performance has advanced to the point that all the low-hanging fruit was picked long ago. There is simply very little to be gained in the way of increased performance.

So what are we left with? Only marketing strategies designed to convince consumers of the need to invest in a "new" technology. New doesn't necessarily mean better. In this case, it may very well mean worse.

I a agree that a wider gamut means nothing if there is not source material for it but

The leds out put can be controlled with on off times of 1 usec and have up to 255 gradations in output. that means you effectively have an extremely fast adjustable iris for each color. also you can adjust the output power without using an Iris and without shifting the color spectrum

You should be able to get rid of the fan and the color wheel and reduce dithering artifacts considerably on both single chip and 3 chip dlps

This projector will go obsolete faster than you can sneeze. If it sold for 2K it would be an OK deal. Any more than that and you are throwing money down a hole.

IB

"$2k ok deal"???? You are a moron sorry.

This projector will go obsolete faster than you can sneeze. If it sold for 2K it would be an OK deal. Any more than that and you are throwing money down a hole.

IB

This will certainly not be a cheap projector. Some quality aspect will not go down quickly though. Have you noticed the lens in the referenced information sheet pdf. This is a superb quality lens and something like this will always cost real money. I have seen it and held it in my hands (plural in case you missed it). So yes the electronics will get cheaper but the mechanical and optical side of things have a price associated with real quality.

Look what you can get for pocket change these days. If it were a laser projector with 2,000 lumens, that would be another story.

Epson PowerLite Pro Cinema 7100 Projector

http://www.projectorcentral.com/Epson-PowerLite_Pro_Cinema_7100.htm

Street Price (USD) :$2,999
Brightness (Lumens) :1800 ANSI
Contrast (Full On/Off) :18000:1
Audible Noise:30.0 dB
Eco-Mode:22.0 dB
Weight:16.1 lbs

Second, what are the purported benefits of LED illumination?

1. Longer lamp life. This simply relieves consumers of the cost of replacing the lamp every 750-1000 hrs or so. But the increased cost of LED more than outweighs this advantage.

I agree, this is of dubious benefit to many here, considering we rarely buy a lamp that's not included in a projector :eek:

2. Quicker start-up times. This is a small usability advantage that has no impact on image quality and hardly justifies the higher cost.

Well here's a consideration. With traditional lamps, you want to minimize restarts because startup/shutdown are the hardest operations. Would our usage model change if we could fire it up for 5 minutes, turn it off/on without thinking about lamp life?

3. Reduction of DLP color separation artifacts.

4. Wider color gamut.

You're forgetting/neglecting the contrast benefits. Right now DLPs are horribly inefficient, the spoke time means a lot of light is projected for black that doesn't do us any good. Eliminating that waste light could have a significant effect on CR. This is where I hold out hope for LED illumination. Eliminating filtered light source to create primaries, spoke time, it will be interesting to see just how much of a positive effect eliminating all that waste light has.

And then there's the before mentioned dynamic lighting possibilities....

Home theater technology is getting very close to the place where high-end audio got many years ago. The quality of performance has advanced to the point that all the low-hanging fruit was picked long ago. There is simply very little to be gained in the way of increased performance.

So what are we left with? Only marketing strategies designed to convince consumers of the need to invest in a "new" technology. New doesn't necessarily mean better. In this case, it may very well mean worse.

Yeah, LED and Laser hold a lot of promise, but you can always go lazy and do what Samsung did, just swap out the traditional lamp with LEDs, which does nobody any good. Hopefully FP manufacturers will skip the lazy step and use LEDs and lasers to improve performance.

"Longer lamp life. This simply relieves consumers of the cost of replacing the lamp every 750-1000 hrs or so."

Not so for those of us who need all the lumens of a new lamp and will be wanting after a couple of hundred hours.

But that's assuming the LED pj doesn't cost more.

"You're forgetting/neglecting the contrast benefits."

The CR spec's indicate we'll have to wait longer for that to be realized.

Basically, I said most of this in my short post. I would expect that for a projector at this street price, the adjusted contrast would have to be in the 100,000 to 1 class. We are now effectively achieving 35,000 to 1 or so now with decent lumens. a non decreasing 600 with am adjusted on\off of 5000 won`t cut it.

Are projectors good enough now Tom? Surely you jest in saying they are. The Lumis is getting close for its street price. Better convergence and a better lens would I'd say be good enough but even then on\off and ANSI CR still have a way to go. But a tight convergence spec and lenses such as in the PD line up and HT5000 by Sim2 would substantially raise the cost.

If I paraphrase what info I got, "IMO PD is a bit early to announce the new projector (I viewed it about a month ago), and I'm currently not completely happy with the performance in terms of "correctness"- colors somewhat oversaturated and greyscale wasn't 100% . My Avielo Spectra is definitely better...But I'm sure they will come around - price is about 30,000 €uro"

.But I'm sure they will come around - price is about 30,000 €uro"

That's $40,523.02 at today's exchange rate. :eek:

The many usability features are nice.
long lamp life
more stable light output
perhaps more stable calibration
less noise
no RBE
faster on and power cycling not a problem.

For a first generation 10k$ could sell of few but at 30k$ it is not so attractive. Is exensive low volume and then higher volume and lower cost the only pricing model that works. What about trying with a reasonable price to start selling a few with a slower declinge in price.

That's $40,523.02 at today's exchange rate. :eek:


You can buy a lot of lamps for that money.

It's better to look at it in relatives, rather than absolutes. $40k for a LED PJ might be worth it, but only if it provides performance on that level. There might be "plenty" of people who would jump on a $40k LED projector...

...if it had C3X/Lumis like performance.

I'd say the LED light source is worth maybe 5-10% premium over a PJ with equal/similar performance with traditional illumination. Though frankly, that's probably pushing it.

It's better to look at it in relatives, rather than absolutes. $40k for a LED PJ might be worth it, but only if it provides performance on that level. There might be "plenty" of people who would jump on a $40k LED projector...

...if it had C3X/Lumis like performance.

I'd say the LED light source is worth maybe 5-10% premium over a PJ with equal/similar performance with traditional illumination. Though frankly, that's probably pushing it.

Yes but $40k for maybe 600 lumens?

It is what it is. We don't know really very much yet. My guess is the lens accounts for about $7K of the MSRP. It probably costs them in parts and labor something around $10K plus lens to build it. Add their overhead, marketing, service, and profit and then dealer margin. Ta Da $40K. So they won't sell many and certainly hardly anyone here would buy it. Given their recent distribution additions, the shs shs street price might be under $30K. Few will buy it at that price either. What will eventually happen. The LED illumination will increase over time. The unit will be cheapened by other manufactures and the lens cost and quality lowered and an LED machine will be offered within a year or so for under $25K, say something over $15K and they could start to sell.

Yes but $40k for maybe 600 lumens?

You said "You can buy a lot of lamps for that money. " My only point is you're not buying just "extra lamps" for that money. If the thing comes out and turns out to be a CRT killer (not that that's likely to happen), it will be worth it to a lot of people.

Not saying I'd buy it, but just passing off the machine based solely on MSRP seems a bit short sighted. It may offer $40k worth of performance for some. That's all I'm saying.

I won't be buying one, now if Planar came out with an 8150L with LED illumination for say $500 more, with the same performance, it would be a different story. If they tried to charge double for such a theoretically machine, they'd be out of their mind.

Price, Lumens, and Light Source just aren't enough to judge anything by.

PD puts out some serious high end stuff...ultra high quality components, top notch lenses, etc. Their new lineup is stunning..."Avielo". Norwegian company that takes PJ's very serious, and are used in many screening rooms, etc.

Maybe not as well known in the states, but highly respected in EU. Since moving here I have learned that not ALL the best gear comes from the good ole' USA. Think Sim2 as well....Italy.

BTW...The Avielo Spectra is a DC4 machine, new color wheel, new FW, etc. And there stuff is modular...so if you bought the last gen, you can get the DC4 chip put in, the new color wheel, etc. Great philosophy. Might get the Spectra if I decide to splurge.:D

Understand, that the guy I spoke with has real high standards (ISF trainer in scandanavia...personal friend of Joe Kane..etc.), so when he says that the PJ wasn't dialed in like it should be a month ago......that probably means it would blow the average person away. Either way...you want cutting edge...you will PAY to be the early adopter. I for one couldn't care less about having a super bright PJ, as 600 lumens on a reasonable screen is fine....especially since it won't drop like a traditional bulb. may have benefits for maintaining the accuracy of an ISF cal as well....since the there may be less brightness drop and color shifting with LED...just a guess.

Like I said, we just don't know very much about the machine's performance yet. My comments are based on the released specs. And those specs are less than fully clear, adjusted contrast yada, The company makes good stuff. My comments are based solely on what we know so far. And we don't know much. Sim2 will plenty of Lumis at $36K or so MSRP. The PD will have to come close to it performance wise and then sell on the much better lens (the Sim2 series for the HT5000 which sell for around $7K) and no misconvergence being a single chipper.

Our rep said the projector is not meant for the HT market. They do a lot of simulation
that requires the projectors to run 24/7. This will be perfect for them.
We should see a few LED DLPs at Cedia at half this price target specifically for HT.

Alan. Under $20K MSP? Those might sell at street under $15K. Be interesting tosee the real specs.

Time to guess from who. Maybe a Sim2? That would be consistent with its pricing for a top of the line single chip DLP. But I don't see them coming to market with only 600 lumens. Another guess would be Runco or Planar.

Not Sony. Not Sharp. Not Marantz. Not JVC.

Bring on LED PJ's and anything in the $12-$15K will be worth every penny imo.

I saw the Vivitek PJ (also LED) at CES this year and thought it had the best pictures hands down, and yes I did visit Sim 2 and seen the Lumis and still thought the Vivitek was better.

Will people buy it at a street of say $15K? $15K projectors often street for under $10K. Street of $16K will be too high for most small screen (110 inch D 1.78 and under). With say 600 lumens and screen gain of 1.3, that would be the limit.

Will people nuy it at a street of say $15K? $15K projector often street for under $10K. Street of $16K will be too high for most small screen (110 inch D 1.78 and under). With say 600 lumens and screen gain of 1.3, that would be the limit.

Where do you get your numbers from? 110" 1.3 gain the "limit"?? that would be 21.67 ftL!! On a 120" 16:9 screen with 1.0 gain you would get over 14 ftL that should not dim over time! That's the beauty of LED.

Its just guessing a bit. A 110 inch screen is 36 sq ft. A 123 inch is about 45 sq ft. 600 lumens is max 100 IRE. Real life scenes say about 50 IRE average, actually a bit lower. So say we use 300 lumens for the average scene. At 36 sq ft, we would end up with an average of about 11 ft lamberts. I think going higher than 110, things might be a biit dim for many. It really isn`t in the real world what you get at 100IRE. That`s my explanation and I am sticking to it. real world most won`t get 600 because the throw will be longer and irises cranked in to get better blacks. Time will tell. certainly you could go bigger. Your eyes get used to whatever you put up. As an old CRTer, I lived with average ft lamberts below five and wasn`t unhappy. But today most want bright and can`t go back. Most I suspect with a 1.3 gain will not be happy with a screen larger than 110 but time will tell.

Its just guessing a bit. A 110 inch screen is 36 sq ft. A 123 inch is about 45 sq ft. 600 lumens is max 100 IRE. Real life scenes say about 50 IRE average, actually a bit lower. So say we use 300 lumens for the average scene. At 36 sq ft, we would end up with an average of about 11 ft lamberts.

But the 12-16 ftL recommendation is for a open gate/"100 IRE" signal, not for an "average" scene.

And furthermore, "average" brightness is much closer to 10-20% of peak white than 50%.

I think going higher than 110, things might be a biit dim for many. It really isn`t in the real world what you get at 100IRE. That`s my explanation and I am sticking to it. real world most won`t get 600 because the throw will be longer and irises cranked in to get better blacks.

Then you base your "100 IRE" brightness on having the IRIS cranked, not open of course. But that has nothing to do with the brightness of a scene (and Mark P's data showed DIs don't kick in till pretty low APLs), so yes, you really do get "100 IRE" brightness in average scenes.

Time will tell. certainly you could go bigger. Your eyes get used to whatever you put up. As an old CRTer, I lived with average ft lamberts below five and wasn`t unhappy. But today most want bright and can`t go back. Most I suspect with a 1.3 gain will not be happy with a screen larger than 110 but time will tell.

20ftL only requires 700 Lumens with a 110" 1.3 gain screen. The issue (and the problem for LED marketting people) is we're used to projectors for which 600 lumens doesn't mean 600 lumens. With most projectors after a couple hundred hours 600 lumens means 300 lumens, or less.

An LED based projector, since the light source doesn't dim over time like a lamp, is almost like having a lamp-based projector 2x as bright. A 600 Lumen LED projector will be the equivalent of almost a 1200Lumen lamp projector after a few hundred hours.

And that's assuming we're talking calibrated lumens, like JVC and (sorta) InFocus. If you start comparing to many peoples uncalibrated numbers it's even worse.

I know its 10 to 20 IRE from Mark`s data but I am not trying to start a flame war here. Most want bright. And you don`t get the brightness for your aveage good set up. I am not talking DI either. I know 600 will be about the same same as 1000 lumens after bulb aging. Nevertheless, its bright that sells. Joe Silver is pushing for greater lumens. most of the big boys that have really bright high quality HT machines, love the higher foot lamberts that put up. The industry is moving in that direction. I suspect JVCs new coming model will be brighter than the RS20.


A emerging new technology that`s expensive will have to floor the consumer. By using 110 1.3, the 600 will look great and be competitive. Its not for sale today. Its for the market late end of year 9the coming HT models and it better be displayed bright for it to sell and it better be installed bright. That`s where the industry is going. Play them speakers loud. the louder of two demoed, the more likely the pick.

Real life scenes say about 50 IRE average, actually a bit lower. So say we use 300 lumens for the average scene.
And furthermore, "average" brightness is much closer to 10-20% of peak white than 50%.I know its 10 to 20 IRE from Mark`s data ...I'm not sure stanger89 meant 10-20% IRE (or video level), but if he did that would be way less than 10-20% of the lumens.

50% IRE with 0 base is about 20% of the lumens of reference white, so about 120 lumens if white is 600 lumens. But I don't see any reason to even go down this tact of how many lumens the average scene is in order to disparage 600 lumens. The gamma and what the average scene is are largely already in the differences between white levels, so why not just compare white level? Using the above tact you would just need to decrease all values for white by the same percentage (2000 lumens becomes 400, 1000 becomes 200, etc.), so why not just compare white since it is what has been used to compare projectors and coming up with this new way is likely to cause some people to compare a 20% value from one projector with a 100% value from another projector? Basically what stanger89 said.

I think for most people around here 600 lumens would look pretty bright compared to what they are used to. At least if it had good CR. I would personally want a way to dim it down quite a bit if i was using my 10' wide High Power.

I understand that many people do want brighter images though.

--Darin

The demo shown at Cedia last fall was on a small screen and wasn't all that bright. I understand the theory of all this guys. I suspect when these hit, we will not be getting 600 out the lens. We will have to wait and see at Cedia. I have no special insight here. Most can't use a HP because of set up considerations. I am talking as a seller. Will it sell at $20,000 MSRP. Not unless its bright. It should be bright enough with a 110 and maybe a 120 and a 1.3 gain. But will it knock Joe's socks off. Will Joe perceive it as something special and worth the say extra $10K. My opinion is not unless it is bright,

Why do you think Sim2 held off on bringing out a 600 lumen led lit last year? It wasn't bright enough.

Maybe things are changing and optical path refinement etc has increased the real lumens. We shall see.

The demo shown at Cedia last fall was on a small screen and wasn't all that bright.

Yup, I remember that, the Vivitek. Reports were it was a ~70" screen. Which if it managed 12ftL is only 230 Lumens. Agreed, not very bright.

I understand the theory of all this guys. I suspect when these hit, we will not be getting 600 out the lens.

See, that's saying something entirely different than what Darin and I were disagreeing with. You're right to be skeptical that these things will hit 600 Lumens on screen at D65. But that's entirely different than trying to say "Real life scenes say about 50 IRE average, actually a bit lower. So say we use 300 lumens for the average scene."

LED shouldn't have the same problem with marketing brightness BS, but doesn't mean they won't can't. But even if the 600 Lumens is BS, it's not because content is below "50 IRE", it's because the projector can't do 600 Lumens.

We will have to wait and see at Cedia. I have no special in sight here. Most can't use a HP because of set up considerations. I am talking as a seller. Will it sell at $20,000 MSRP. Not unless its bright. It should be bright enough with a 110 and maybe a 120 and a 1.3 gain. But will it knock Joe's socks off. Will Joe perceive it as something special and worth the say extra $10K. My opinion is not unless it is bright,

Why do you think Sim2 held off on bring out a 600 lumen led lit it last year? It wasn't bright enough.

Maybe things are changing and optical path refinement etc has increased the real lumens. We shall see.

No doubt though it will have to be something special to sell at $20k.

I really don`t think we will see this at $20K this year. I really think we will see it at $30K or higher. i really think Sim2 will show something LED lit at Cedia.

http://uk.cinenow.com/articles/9570

Projectiondesign is exhibiting at MOC in Munich, Germany from May 21-24. Not certain if they have the Kroma on show though.

http://uk.cinenow.com/articles/9570

Projectiondesign is exhibiting at MOC in Munich, Germany from May 21-24. Not certain if they have the Kroma on show though.

I can confirm the Kroma is shown on a 2.5 meter screen. The setup was not ideal, the light was never turned off completely. Nevertheless it was quite dark in the cabin.

For demonstration the quantum of solace blu-ray was shown. They show the boat racing scene, so a very bright one. I have to admit the brightness was absolutely ok for this screen size. The colour was a little bit oversatured but nothing we haven't seen yet. They're not perfect but this kind of wrong many people like.

I asked for a darker scene and the Tosca sequence was shown. Unfortunately the black level is not in any kind of exceptional. I asked for the reason and was told that the that the LEDs are only dimmed when the picture is completely dark. So no adaptive dimming... but an auto-iris (I personally hating).

The price point is 23k Euro... But the expected lifetime of the LEDs is over 11 years... So only 2k per year ;) defenitly not worth it... But it is a new technology so it has its price tag. and for the performance digital projectors weren't any serious competitioners to CRTs in the beginning, too

The Kroma is there, yes. I've seen it with different material and in complete darkness. But the Kroma was clearly not the highlight, that was the new 3-chip Helios. Absolutely stunning machine. More on that later, I'm still at the airport waiting for my flight, writing this on my iPhone. All I'm gonna say for now is, good luck Sim2 selling your old junk. ;)

Change the stat from 600 Lumen to 1200 LBE (Light Bulb Equivalent) Lumens. There, I just solved the marketing problem :)

And here they are:

http://homepage.mac.com/stephan.gimbel/IMG_0303.jpg
Kroma, Optix and Helios

More tomorrow, I'm too tired to write something up now.

Would you mind posting on the Helios in the high end forum? I'm hoping this may fit the bill for my main room, some others are waiting for this too.

It may not have been apparent at the show, depending on how they displayed it, but it still has some issues. There is a lens problem, and some software issues, and the demo units have been delayed.

Did you get a D65 lumen number for high lamp? I need around 4000.

TIA.

Interesting. Kroma, no anamorphic. Not enough light for the bigger screen? The Optix, a Panamorph. The Helios, ahh the big Isco, the only anamorphic I would ever use.

Ok, about the Kroma:
As stated before from another forum member, this was shown on a rather small screen (non-scope, hence no anamorphic lens), while the Helios and Optix were on a larger (I'd say around 1m wider, maybe a tad more) scope screen.

My personal impression, I thought the image was somewhat dim, even for the rather small screen size. It clearly lacked a little punch in some scenes. Black level could have been better, as one could clearly see on the black letterbox bars on Quantum of Solace. Ansi CR was excellent, nothing to complain here. Colors were overall nice, not overblown as we've probably all seen from LED before. Others in the room however said it was bright enough and black levels were ok. Maybe I'm expecting too much? I don't know.

Now regarding rainbows... they're finally gone. I'm very sensitive to rainbows and I have yet to see a 1-chip DLP where rainbows didn't annoy me. I can see them on the Optix as well, but it's far better in that regard than Marantz, Sim2 and others.

But back to the Kroma. Yes the rainbows are gone, but I could see other color seperation artifacts, which only showed on white objects on a very dark background during pans. They look different from rainbows, but very annoying as well. Some people have been reported before about color seperation artifacts on 3-chip DLPs, created by the PWM of the DMD. I've never seen those under normal viewing conditions, but what I've seen on the Kroma looks just like that. There's no color wheel in the Kroma, so maybe this was created by turning on/off the LEDs. Personally, this would be a deal killer for me. But again, I'm very sensitive to these kind of artifacts, so anyone who can live with a 1-chip DLP won't have any issue with this one.

Maybe PD will be able to fix it by increasing the refresh rates and LED cycles, similar to what incresed color wheel speed has done for regular 1-chip DLPs. Guess we'll have to wait and see.

Technical specs are correct so far. 600 lumens at 2000:1 on/off CR and somewhere in between 200 to 300 lumens at the max CR of 7500:1.

According to PD, the Kroma was not on it's highest lumens setting when they showed it off. Probably that's the reason I thought it was a little dim. It was shown at around 7ftL, but it looked more like 10 to 11ftL to me. So yes, it does look brighter than one would expect.

Ansi CR: As stated above I thought it did very well in this area, but the PD rep claimed it is only 300:1 and there would no other projectors having a higher ansi cr than this. I then specifically asked about projectors like the Lumis (which can have around 1000:1 with the T3 lens), units from DPI and the Barco DP1200. Again, he insisted there are no projectors with ansi cr over 300:1. Another PD rep I spoke to later mentioned 500:1, so take this with a grain of salt. I have no number here, but in their setup it didn't look that much different to me from what I've seen on a Lumis with a T2 lens.

LED: As mentioned before, you could run this projector 24/7 for about 11 years before the LEDs die. Nothing to complain about here, but they need more light output in my opinion. Price is €23k (a little over $32k), I think without the lens, as the Optix is cheaper at just under €20k without lens.

Lens adds another €4k to €7k depending on lens choice, I'm not sure if there are cheaper lenses available.

Now, a little about the lenses. All lenses are designed by PD in their HQ and then manufactured by a lens manufacturer in Japan. I can't say what manufacturer, but they're very well respected in the high-end area.
Every lens is fully measured in Japan and only 5% of all manufactured lenses are within PDs specs and accepted by them. That means 95% of all lenses are rejected and end up in the garbage (or they go to another manufacturer... :p). So every lens is handpicked, which assures the highest possible quality.


The Kroma did not have a anamorphic lens due to the choice of screen (rather small and 16:9). Personally I'm a ISCO guy, the ISCOIII is my lens of choice and I wouldn't go with a Panamorph at all.

I spoke to PD about the ISCO and was told they're not a fan of it, as it would soften the image of the Helios so much, but there was no other choice. Personally I've never seen that with other projectors from Sony, JVC, Marantz, Sim2, Runco and others. I would have at least expected to see that with the Sim2 HT5k, but I never have and that unit is using some serious lenses. So either they're working on their own lens which they're planning to sell or the lens of the Helios is so good, that the ISCO III can't keep up. I don't know at this point, but I'll try this at home as soon as I can get my hands on the Helios. PD said they'll contact me soon.

I'll post a little more about the Helios in the $20k forum later.

That ANSI stuff, as you are well aware, is total BS, as is the ISCOIII notion.

I do want to mention the 5% lens thing, as this has been happening for a while, and is misleading people. Almost all the high end companies state this, and they are being slightly dishonest. Heres how.....A lens has a spec range, and PD lenses are guaranteed to be within the top 5% of the tolerance band. That is very different to testing all lenses, keeping 5% and rejecting 95%.

Its possible that all lenses could be near the bottom of the spec range, meaning that selecting the top 5% would still mean lenses near the bottom. If you specify that they must be within the top 5% of the range, no bad lenses can be selected. Current ISCOIII lenses ALL fall within the top 5% of the spec range. This is normal with all high end companies, and its also misrepresented by them all too. Ive seen PD, DPI, SIM2, Barco, Christie, Runco and Meridian pull the same BS.

That idea is the same with graded DMDs. All graded DMDs are within the top 10% of the spec, but that doesn't mean that the other 90% arent. Many are. Grading just guarantees it. Exactly the same thing is done with light engines.

Hope this helps. Thanks for the good info.

This first-hand report pretty much validates my earlier skepticism.

Spending $32K on a PJ that--except for reduced color separation artifacts--performs no better (and in some ways considerably worse) than a conventionally-lit PJ at a fraction of the cost simply for the privilege of having new technology, quick start-up times, and freedom from lamp replacements, doesn't seem wise to me. But that's just me.

What reason would there be to buy this over an RS20 at $7K--that also has no color separation artifacts--but otherwise performs as well or better? I just don't get it.

If you want a good high-end PJ, just get a conventional 3-chip DLP. SIM2 offers a 3-chipper in that price range whose performance is significantly better than this.

I have to say Stephan's report leaves me scratching my head.

On the assumption his report is accurate, who would want to pay exorbitant money for what sounds like piddling image performance at this time from the Kroma LED projector?

I mean, I know when flat panels/plasma first came out people were willing to pay more money even though the image wasn't as good as a good CRT.
But the form factor was a huge difference, many felt worth paying for. But this being front projection, I can't see any similar factor compelling money to be thrown at a technology that doesn't offer any new form factor, and nothing-to-write-home-about image quality. (Again, presuming some of the unimpressed reports are accurate).

I have to say Stephan's report leaves me scratching my head.

On the assumption his report is accurate, who would want to pay exorbitant money for what sounds like piddling image performance at this time from the Kroma LED projector?

Totally agree. $32k, not including lens, for a very weak basic spec= zero sales.

I'll be interested to see whats said about the Helios, because that is certainly NOT the machine it was supposed to be.

I'm not sure where you guys are getting the idea that LED will be cheap. Ever since the first prototype LEDs showed up, everyone knew they would be more expensive than a lamp based projector and they would have less light output.

There will be cheaper LED projectors from other manufacturers, but for PD this is the price range everyone should have expected. The 1-chip Optix retails for just under €20k ($28k), the Kroma is only €3k more. Next step, Sim2 Lumis at well over $40k. Please don't mix up US and european pricing here. You can't compare US prices vs. european prices. So a Kroma is much cheaper than a Lumis in europe and I think it will be interesting for those who don't need the extra light output.

As far as my personal opinion goes, yes, I'd rather buy a RS20 for over $9k street (in europe!) than a Kroma. But again, that's my personal opinion.

However, I think the more interesting question is, do you buy an Optix for €20k or a Kroma for €23k if the Kroma is bright enough for you?

Why don`t you guys read the thread from the beginning instead of scratching? This was almost all predicted. PD doesn`t make cheap stuff. They have their foot in the door in an emerging technology and they feel the 24\7 simulation market presents sales opportunities. This isn`t aimed at the HT market and it certainly isn`t aimed at you guys scratching whatever your scratching.

There are actually going to be many this year at Cedia. But, not cheap...that is the problem.

All Delta's, or also independent designs? Toschiba had a machine at last year's IFA, that didn't look like the Optoma/Vivitek. The Vivitek was said to be 20K USD at 20K hours LED life.

Our rep said the projector is not meant for the HT market. They do a lot of simulation
that requires the projectors to run 24/7. This will be perfect for them.
We should see a few LED DLPs at Cedia at half this price target specifically for HT.

How much is the new Christie WUXGA LED rear projection engine? Also 600 lumens, Christie says in the product literature this should be sufficient for its cubes upto 67" diagonal. This is offcially a 'control room' product.

Why don`t you guys read the thread from the beginning instead of scratching? This was almost all predicted. PD doesn1t make cheap stuff. They have their foot in the door in an emerging technology and they feel the 24\7 simulation market presents sales opportunities. This isn`t aimed at the HT market and it certainly isn`t aimed at youy guys scratching whatever your scratching.

For control room and simulation sharpness reduction due to convergence errors is often not acceptable. That's why Clarity used to be adamantly opposing poly-silicon LCD, itself using deep cubes with a single LCD for its control room cubes.

"There is real progress only when the benefits of a new technology are for everyone.”
Henry Ford

Why don`t you guys read the thread from the beginning instead of scratching? This was almost all predicted. PD doesn1t make cheap stuff. They have their foot in the door in an emerging technology and they feel the 24\7 simulation market presents sales opportunities. This isn`t aimed at the HT market and it certainly isn`t aimed at youy guys scratching whatever your scratching.

It makes sense. Specialty / pro use markets have always been willing to pay more for products that meet their specific needs, and trying to justify the costs for HT use may not make sense. At some point, once R&D costs are defrayed, we will probably see real world pricing on LED projectors, but it's common sense that leading edge products won't be competitively priced or even performance competitive in all areas. Anyone remember the Sony XEL-1?

What is hard for me to understand is the fact that, if anything, these promised FPs using LED light bulbs assembled in conjunction with well-established OEM suppliers of DLP engines should be even less expensive than models currently sold!
I read an article last year in which a rep from Luminus Devices (manufacturer of the highly regarded R/G/B LEDs "PhlatLight" PT-120 chipset) mentioned the fact that these chipsets are sold in large quantity batches for "around $300" each, a rather inexpensive pricing...
That, plus the fact that manufacturers would do away with a spinning color wheel ~ R/G/B color-separation mirrors ~ ancilliary parts & electronics ~ very high internal temperature + the need for powerful fans to intake and exhaust air, etc, etc, then why shoud these projectors with LED bulbs be priced so extravagantly ?
Didn't Delta Electronics ( which is only an 0EM) reps at CES 2009 stated that its unit would be available for sale for "less than $12.000" and sold by partnered companies ?
I think that even at that price point, it would still be way overpriced, considering that nowadays one can purchase a stellar projector such as the JVC 350 for a m.s.r.p. of $4.500, and even if the owner selected to replace a new bulb yearly for a cost of $300 to maintain a more even level of onscreen brightness, the overall cost of the projector during its lifespan would still be considerably less.
Me' thinks that these manufacturers need to wake up and smell the coffee, so to speak...

Who promised anything? Your comments would be valid if some mass FP projector manufacturer such as Sharp, JVC, Infocus, Sony, Epson, Mitsubishi, Panasonic and the like were trying to compete against the other and utilize LED technology as a competitive edge.

this hasn`t happened yet. The company offering a product now does not target the relatively low priced mass consumer market. Let`s be charitable and say below $10K, in reality that market is lower than $10K. They are not producing in mass market quantities and don`t have the same quantities of scale. R&D and tooling costs are hiigh and their goal is to make a profit by selling what there limited market will bear.

Unless this technology can be perfected to yield a machine that is superior to the competition at a competitive price, there is no reason to bring such a machine to the mass market. Green this, longer bulb life that, why would the market buy it. Why gamble the costs. Let TI and others further refine it they will say.

LED engines have had a dramatic effect on pricing in one area - pocket and micro projectors. There are several small 150 lumen models out now that go for under $500. Quite handy for a certain set of applications, although plainly not HT. Those, however, still have pretty blatant color fringing.

I am almost certainly much less experienced than Stephan in evaluating the Avielo projectors.

But remember that PD does not have any cheap projectors. Their smallest projector is almost as expensive as a JVC750. Are they worth it? I think that for me they are not. But as I mentioned before I get a feeling that their optics are of a very high quality when you see them.

Certainly the Helios was very impressive to me, especially with two lamps going.

I thought the Kroma looked good but it also clearly had considerably less light, which should not come as surprise to anybody. I would not gainsay anybody since as I said above, I do not have the most experience in evaluating projectors.

Finally I think that all who compare with US prices should remember that the price of 23000€ would probably include 19% Value Added Tax. Taking this into account the price in US$ would be just over 27K$.

One has to remember that the chassis would require a new tool. No bulb, different engine, different power supply. The tooling cost would be about $300,000 US. Then add the R&D costs. We are talking maybe $800,000 investment that would have to be quickly amortized. At a $10,000 MSRP say, that would have to be a large amount of sales. Would you invest your money in that?

One has to remember that the chassis would require a new tool. No bulb, different engine, different power supply. The tooling cost would be about $300,000 US. Then add the R&D costs. We ate talking maybe $800,000 investment that would have to be quickly amortized. At a $10,000 MSRP say, that would have to be a large amount of sales. Would you invest your money in that?
----------------------------------------------------------
That's an interesting line of thought, Mark.
I just read an article that mentioned the worldwide market for HT front projectors estimated at 600.000 units sold in 2008, so, should we extrapolate that the US share of that market would be at least 250.000 ?
If some company were to announce the availability of a front projector DLP unit using LEDs instead of bulbs to be sold for $10,000 each and, according to your fictional figures, had an estimated total cost in R&D and re-tooling of $800,000, do you think they would consider their initial investment as being re-couped by selling just 100 units, and don't you think that amount would be easily achieveable in a US market estimated at 250.000 units ?
I wonder, what is that "magical" number that lies between initial R&D and re-tooling costs plus parts/labor/storage/shipping/warranties/etc AND pure profit that manufacturers of front projectors would consider to be a fair amount, 30%, 50%, 70% ? In other words, if it costs them X amount of money including all the above caveats to manufacture a front projector, percentagewise how much more is added to the initial manufacturing cost as pure profit ? Does anyone know what that estimated figure is ?
Regards >>> Marcos

I bet after expenses most of these guys make less than 20 percent net profit on sales of 10,000 dollar front projectors or 2000 dollars per projector. which means they have to sell
400 projectors to break even on the investment.

How many front projectors does JVC sell a year Sim2 ect?

Can anyone explain how Samsung can sell its RP wobulated 1080p HL61A750 with Phlatlight PT120 LED for < $1600? But they can't sell us a front projector for the same price??? :confused:

Can anyone explain how Samsung can sell its RP wobulated 1080p HL61A750 with Phlatlight PT120 LED for < $1600? But they can't sell us a front projector for the same price???The main reason is light output. Rear projectors use very high gain screens that allow reasonable brightness from a not-very-bright light source. That's why they hotspot so severely.

The main reason is light output. Rear projectors use very high gain screens that allow reasonable brightness from a not-very-bright light source. That's why they hotspot so severely.

That is certainly true, but the Samsung p400 FP puts out 150 lumens using Phlatlight pt-54 LED. The Phlatlight pt-120 LED--used in Samsung RP--is rated at twice the light output of the pt-54, so theoretically around 300 lumens, plenty of light for most people and pretty reasonable considering light loss from an aging bulb.

... so theoretically around 300 lumens, plenty of light for most people and pretty reasonable considering light loss from an aging bulb.I agree (at least for a lot of people). But I think there is some disconnect between what people think they need and/or have, and what they actually need or have. At least for darkened environments. So, while 300 real lumens would look great to a lot of people in real setups (and does now even if they don't realize they are only getting 300 lumens, like with aged bulbs you mentioned) there is likely to be a marketing problem with trying to sell something where 300 lumens is both the peak and about what it will get when setup well, and get close to that for a lot of hours. With bulbs people tend to see these big specs for lumens, even if they will never use the projector in that mode and it is only possible for a small number of hours anyway. Maybe it is a matter of educating people about how LEDs are different with respect to this, but I still feel for the companies making these products.

If they make them so that they are 600 lumens with low native/static on/off CRs because they have irises and paths that are very open and don't include modes with higher native/static on/off CRs because it would cut the lumens down to 300 or so, then I will be a lot less interested in their products. I'm hoping they take cues from companies like Marantz and Sharp who included higher on/off CR modes at the expense of lumens. Many sales that Marantz and Sharp got would not have happened if the only mode they had was irises open for more light.

I wonder if any of these companies will come up with something like bulb comparable lumens. For instance, take the starting lumens for a bulb projector and the ending lumens (say 50%) and estimate the average at 75% of the peak. Then if LEDs finish at 90% with the same number of hours (I don't know if this figure is right, but just using it as an example) they could say the LEDs average 95%, so an LED projector that starts at 500 lumens actually gives the same average number of lumens over the life a bulb has as a bulb projector that starts at just over 630 lumens (since that ends at 315 lumens and so averages 475 lumens, just like that LED projector for that period of time). And they could also look at giving a number for "calibrated" or D65 lumens to try to get people to think about what the other projectors really give when calibrated.

--Darin

Can anyone explain how Samsung can sell its RP wobulated 1080p HL61A750 with Phlatlight PT120 LED for < $1600? But they can't sell us a front projector for the same price??? :confused:

Because the HT FP market is a boutique market. Some people spend $100k on FP setups and this is the market the LED PJ makers are going to go after first.

Remember when 720p was first hitting the scene. A 720p DLP retailing between $10k and $20k was the norm. Now they are some cheapest HD PJ units out there.

LED is probably the future of PJ technology, but it will follow the typical pricing curve of the HT market. It will be at least 3 to 4years before we see this technology on mainline, ie. attainable, product.

From Engadget:

http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/06/05/projectiondesign-realed-illuminated-fl32-projector-to-debut-at-i/

8000lm 100W single element LEDs are already in commercial use
http://www.forever-lighting.com/ProductShow.asp?ID=327

Light output from these LEDs should be enough.

LED technology is the future. I would not be at all surprised that we will be reading about 200W LEDs this time next year.