Projector Central (http://www.projectorcentral.com/panasonic_ae4000_projector_review.htm)just posted a review of the Panny AE4000 and it looks like it will list for a hair under $2K.

Bench-racing just got more interesting!
:D

Here is the link to the Panasonic Site. (http://panasonic.net/avc/projector/products/ae4000/)

Link to the spec sheet. (https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/pro...00/ae4k_sf.pdf)

Links to manuals. (https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/projector/extranet/main/products/ae4000/ae4000manual.html)

Thanks to the guys on the >$3k forums for keeping this warm for us. ;)

Link to a video (http://www.avforums.com/tv/index.php?videoid=127) about the new PJ.

Thanks, Lorjam.

Link to a video (http://www.avforums.com/tv/index.php?videoid=127) about the new PJ.

Thanks, Lorjam.

Guys, this is a serious price drop which will spark competitors in rethinking their pricing on some of the new models that came out.

Could we see prices dropping on other units by year end?

This will be very interesting to see what happens.

I dont own a PJ, but now I have these three on my list:

1) Sony VPL - HW 15
2) Mitsubishi HC3800
3) Panasonic AE4000

I hope to see all three of these in the future.

Dave

ae4000 v. epson 8100? Which to choose in a room with some ambient light? Is it worth the extra $400?!?! =)

I think the Epson is brighter so maybe in a room with light it is the better choice.

It looks like the Panny will thoroughly trounce the Epson in a light controlled theater though.

100,000 to 1 contrast, frame interpolation, lens memory, lens shift for under 2 large? Yeah, the game has changed... :)

The AE3000 was an excellent projector, this looks better in every way.

Very cool, however MSRP is $2,499.00

Can the mods merge the other thread into this one?

I'd given up my dreams of a CIH setup due to the associated costs... now its back on the table. Its between this and the Mitsubishi HC3800 for me.

This PJ is a game-changer for sure.

Very cool, however MSRP is $2,499.00

MSRP is $2499.00 according to the press release, but Panasonic projectors have a history of a street price well under MSRP immediately upon introduction. That's in contrast to Epson projectors, where MSRP really seems to mean MSRP, except for announced rebates.

Evan's review doesn't say that the MSRP will be $1999, only that that the street price will be. Presumably he means MSRP of $2499 but MAP of $1999?

I'd given up my dreams of a CIH setup due to the associated costs... now its back on the table. Its between this and the Mitsubishi HC3800 for me.

This PJ is a game-changer for sure.

Notice PC review shows street price, which would be the retail price of $1999. This makes sense since the MSRP itself will reflect the $2499.

Thus MSRP OR LIST = $2499
Sales Price/Retail Price = $1999, so maybe this thread header should be changed. This is how I understand it. Still fantastic price and I hope other competitors will drop prices so I can have more options:)

Dave

Looks like panasonic is throwing down the Gaunlet.Pretty much PUTS Sony JVC EPSON ect out of buisness.

Pretty much PUTS Sony JVC EPSON ect out of buisness.

:confused:

Oh happy days!...The only sad news is I just put a new bulb in my 3000U and now someone is going to be able to steal it from me...:(

MSRP is $2499.00 according to the press release, but Panasonic projectors have a history of a street price well under MSRP immediately upon introduction. That's in contrast to Epson projectors, where MSRP really seems to mean MSRP, except for announced rebates.

Evan's review doesn't say that the MSRP will be $1999, only that that the street price will be. Presumably he means MSRP of $2499 but MAP of $1999?

I agree and saw they mentioned street on the review. To the left of that review it shows MSRP $2,499, my post was in regards to the title of the thread so I just wanted to clarify. I'm loving 1,999.00 for this projector though. :D

Looks like panasonic is throwing down the Gaunlet.Pretty much PUTS Sony JVC EPSON ect out of buisness.

If not, they'll be eating macaroni and cheese for a while...lol...;)

I agree and saw they mentioned street on the review. To the left of that review it shows MSRP $2,499, my post was in regards to the title of the thread so I just wanted to clarify. I'm loving 1,999.00 for this projector though. :D

Yep. I imagine that Epson's "undetermined MSRP but below $3000" for the 8500UB just dropped a bit.

Way to go Panasonic. They are doing to the $2000 range what Optoma did to the $1000 range.

I'd never thought it, this is very exciting. I've been looking at pjs for I while now and my room is almost ready.

I just posted this in another thread but... has anyone seen the updated price of the 3000? I checked last night and couldnt believe how low it was. Just checked again..WOW! Should I pull the trigger or wait for the 4000?

My guess is that they dropped the AE3000 to $1999 and will sell the AE4000 at the $2299 price. I'm going to wait

My guess is that they dropped the AE3000 to $1999 and will sell the AE4000 at the $2299 price. I'm going to wait

The AE3000 is at $1699 now!

Nice!
OK, now that's one more to consider. Ugh.

So when will it show up on PP's website? Any idea? Release still end of October?

Just starting to appear on UK dealer's websites now. They are posting £2,399 pre order and £2,499 as 'normal' retail price once launched. Looks like you guys are getting a much better deal than we are, not that I'm in the market myself thankfully.

Posted in the other thread as well:

I just got confirmation from PP that it will in fact be $1999!!!! How crazy is that?? Also that " the 4000 is superior in every respect to the 3000"
They said they "heard it could be in by the end of the month".

THis is definitely a game changer...I love the smooth screen technology. And if the red color is more accurate, this could be huge! It's really remarkable what can be had for 2k these days...

guess I'll ask the question in the proper forum now ;)

huge news on the pricing, pulls me back from all the brighter pj's I was looking at. Question for the group: I have a new, large room, non-light controlled (for daytime sports) but which can get quite dark (so a high contrast pj is still worthwhile). I am currently using a holdover ae900 shooting a 144" (like it BIG) picture at 17 feet. the PC calc says that's 7FL on the screen. It is clearly no good for daytime sports but works in the evenings. The PC calc says the 3000 would put 11FL on the screen with those specs - I'm assuming the 4000 will be higher. Will a 50% increase be enough for the daytime viewing (bad blacks and all) or do I have to give up all the cool features of the 4000 and stick with one of these new, bright dlps?

before anyone asks, I've tried the epsons, they are certainly bright, but I (and that's all that matters, if you can't, good for you) can clearly see the pixel structure on the epsons and that kills it for me. If I'm going with LCD again it's smoothscreen or bust. Thanks.

Posted in the other thread as well:

I just got confirmation from PP that it will in fact be $1999!!!! How crazy is that?? Also that " the 4000 is superior in every respect to the 3000"
They said they "heard it could be in by the end of the month".

It's funny how just before Cedia they had bumped up the price on the 3000 by 300 bucks:confused: Hopefully not to many got taken, especially for what it's going for now.

I just pee'd a little.

I just pee'd a little.

Ditto! This is very exciting :D

I'm going to go for an Epson 8100 but I have just changed my mind :p :D

My budget was initially geared towards the viewsonic pro8100, then I started considering the mitsu HC3800 (have always had DLP and love the look), and now I'm trying to convince myself that I can stretch it to the AE4000.... I think I'm going to need to see a smoothscreen pj before I make the decision though. Anyone around Columbus OH have an AE3000 I could check out?

jsm88 -- Don't believe the ftL numbers in the PJC's Calculator sheet. They are not always correct, and sometimes not even close (they don't provide a reference to their numbers). Use the Lumen outputs in their review and calculate your own ftL:

Foot-Lamberts = PJ Lumens x Screen Gain / Screen Area (in square feet).

jdoughertyiv -- Read the PJC review: http://www.projectorcentral.com/panasonic_ae4000_projector_review.htm. The performance on their 1080p models does not effect the image sharpness as much as on their older models. The version on the AE4000 seems to provide the best of all.

I had an older Panasonic PJ and the smooth-screen worked just fine.

It will be out later this month, probably the same week as the epson 8100:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/2009/10/panasonic-pt-ae4000-front-projector-coming-in-october/

if the street price is acurrate, it will have a lot of people trying to pony up the extra cash over the epson.

Just starting to appear on UK dealer's websites now. They are posting £2,399 pre order and £2,499 as 'normal' retail price once launched. Looks like you guys are getting a much better deal than we are, not that I'm in the market myself thankfully.

If you don't mind me saying...for someone who has bailed out on Panasonic models and gone to JVC, shouldn't you be frequenting the JVC threads?...I mean, you seem like a nice guy, but all you do is politely bash Panasonic and talk about how great the JVC is...It doesn't make sense... If you were not happy with the Panny product, why do you spend so much time here?...I guess I'm just curious...:confused:

looks like panasonic is throwing down the gaunlet.pretty much puts sony jvc epson ect out of buisness.

ok.

Man, as much as these prices entice me, i can't help but think i'd be much better off just waiting for 2010, all these "120-240Hz" talk is really meaningless to me if they don't accept an input higher than 60Hz for 3D stereo.

I'd really like one... but i know for a fact that as soon as a 3d stereo version became available i'd want to switch.

Phew, glad I waited...won't make it much longer but glad I made it to this point.

jsm88 -- Don't believe the ftL numbers in the PJC's Calculator sheet. They are not always correct, and sometimes not even close (they don't provide a reference to their numbers). Use the Lumen outputs in their review and calculate your own ftL:

Foot-Lamberts = PJ Lumens x Screen Gain / Screen Area (in square feet).

jdoughertyiv -- Read the PJC review: http://www.projectorcentral.com/panasonic_ae4000_projector_review.htm. The performance on their 1080p models does not effect the image sharpness as much as on their older models. The version on the AE4000 seems to provide the best of all.

I had an older Panasonic PJ and the smooth-screen worked just fine.

I'm using the 950 lumens PJC quoted in their review in "normal" mode and a 100" 1.0 gain screen and I calculated 32.2 Foot-Lamberts. Is that correct? That seems extremely bright.

:eek: ... I'm a little taken back by this entry... I was under the impression Panasonic wasn't going to release any new models this year. I could have sworn I read that somewhere. Guess don't believe everything you read comes into play here.

This is great and all, but a bummer for me who has been agonizing over which of the new breeds to get. Finally settled on the Epson 8100 and now this contender drops in. I wonder what Sanyo's gona do now? Do they also have a new one coming too? Seems like every year the Panasonics and Sanyos battle it out...

This cycle never ends! haha... I should take the advice from a PM i got to just pic a projector and never return back here until it dies. :D

I believe panasonic now owns Sanyo so no more "duking it out".

I've had dlp's and lcd's..and both are good. Dlp's tend to have a noiser fan though...which usually leads me back to a nice, quiet lcd. With everything this thing offers....it's a great deal. And huge screens in smaller rooms require smoothscreen IMHO.

I'm interested to see how it fares against the Sony...

VERY NICE! Just reached over 2700 hours on my VP4001. This will be a worthy upgrade once my Marantz hits the dust.

VERY NICE! Just reached over 2700 hours on my VP4001. This will be a worthy upgrade once my Marantz hits the dust.

My 3+ year old Optoma HD70 only has around 600-700 hours and yet I am still itching to buy this AE4000U!!! I can't wait. For me the switch is revolving around my plans to move to a 120-135" 2.35 CIH setup and away from my 100" 16:9 setup. And I won't mind the deeper blacks. :)

I just pee'd a little.

What are you, 3 yrs old.
I just came in MY pants. :D

If someone wants out from their 3000...let me know. I like to stay along the trailing edge....

I'm preparing myself to get very angry at Panasonic Canada's MSRP.

Don't get angry, just buy it from the states.

Don't get angry, just buy it from the states.

Thats what I am planning on doing. What are the warranty options for us Canadians who are going to be ordering this projector from the states?

I just put in my preorder with projectorpeople! I almost bought the AE3000 yesterday when they dropped the price, and I thought that was a good deal. I'm so glad I waited until today!

Did they have any confirmation of price or release date?

anyone have any idea how big an upgrade this would be from a sanyo z2000?

Did they have any confirmation of price or release date?
$1999 and "end of October."

Looks like they read the press release......hopefully it's an accurate one. Me, I'll be looking for 1999 at least and a place where you can use bing.

Thats what I am planning on doing. What are the warranty options for us Canadians who are going to be ordering this projector from the states?

No warranty.

How bad is the dust blob issue with Panasonic PJs? Why don't they have a sealed path and avoid the issue altogether?

No warranty.

Can we buy any kind of extended warranty from Panasonic Canada or some other warranty place? I just cant justify paying double up here.

Can we buy any kind of extended warranty from Panasonic Canada or some other warranty place? I just cant justify paying double up here.

I've heard people talk about Mack warranties, but I know nothing about it.

I think we would be paying for shipping+duty+taxes.

Don't get angry, just buy it from the states.

Exactly...in a few weeks, our dollar will be on par again anyways...

What are you, 3 yrs old.
I just came in MY pants. :D


Classic

I've heard people talk about Mack warranties, but I know nothing about it.

I think we would be paying for shipping+duty+taxes.

I will look into the warranty thing. I am getting mine shipped to the UPS store across the border($10 charge from UPS to accept the package). That way its free gound shipping. Then just pay tax at the border. Its an option for anyone within reasonable driving distance to the States.
Still a way better deal versus buying within Canada. Especially with our dollar close to par there is no excuse to be charging us that much to buy it within Canada.

How's this compare to the new Epsons -- such as the 8100?

Which is better and why?

How's this compare to the new Epsons -- such as the 8100?

Which is better and why?

Good questions for the future, as I'm sure no real comparisons have been done yet. Hopfully soon.

Wow...this one is at the top of my list for 2010!!

As others have said, the reviews up at PJC.com, pretty soft, I'm ready for head to head comparisons with Epson and JVC, course, I'm thinking of buying this one just on the principle that its the first 1080p "flagship" product to be in this forum and not the one above! (I think that was in my original criteria for buying a 1080p pj 5 years ago when they were all $5K) the JVCs will not try to be price competitive as they don't have to, but Epson's going to really be between a rock and a hard spot with this pj at $1999 and the arguably better JVC at $4K...there's lots of one dollar bills in there there and subjectively not all that much difference in performance (black level, brightness, etc).

Should be an interesting race...I'll probably be cheering from the fence again! :eek:

How bad is the dust blob issue with Panasonic PJs? Why don't they have a sealed path and avoid the issue altogether?
I am interesd in this as well. I also wonder how good the Lens Shift is too. Especially in a room with ambient light. Wondering how it will compare to the Epson 8100 in this regard. I have not heard of the Epsons having "dust blob" issues either, is it really that bad with the Panny's?

I am interesd in this as well. I also wonder how good the Lens Shift is too. Especially in a room with ambient light. Wondering how it will compare to the Epson 8100 in this regard. I have not heard of the Epsons having "dust blob" issues either, is it really that bad with the Panny's?
I have owned 5 Pannys over the last 5 years and never seen a dust blob until recently. But it was a piece of cake to blow it out of there. ;)

I will look into the warranty thing. I am getting mine shipped to the UPS store across the border($10 charge from UPS to accept the package). That way its free gound shipping. Then just pay tax at the border. Its an option for anyone within reasonable driving distance to the States.
Still a way better deal versus buying within Canada. Especially with our dollar close to par there is no excuse to be charging us that much to buy it within Canada.

At the very least I would hope that Panny would allow us to ship it back and forth at our cost. I'm sure we would come out way ahead.

Thats what I am planning on doing. What are the warranty options for us Canadians who are going to be ordering this projector from the states?

Yes, of course you'll have a warranty. The same warranty as anyone else who buys it. This is a strange misconception...though you may have to send it back to the States. I buy electronics in the US all the time and never had warranty problems. Just last year I contacted Pentax about a DSLR I bought in the US, it was repaired under warranty in Canada.

Dogone, just been looking at your theatre build. Wow. ( seriouly have a 133 inch screen in your bedroom? Man you have it bad! You'd be thinking an ae4000 might work ok in your new theatre I guess? Lol

Yes, of course you'll have a warranty. The same warranty as anyone else who buys it. This is a strange misconception...though you may have to send it back to the States. I buy electronics in the US all the time and never had warranty problems. Just last year I contacted Pentax about a DSLR I bought in the US, it was repaired under warranty in Canada.

I believe that there is a Mack Canada that u can purchase warranty from.

S

Other than their feature set I have never been truly impressed with any Panasonic digital projector, hope this one has 'real world' upgrades over the AE3000 (the comparisons that are sure to come should be interesting). The new street price is indeed a welcome 'upgrade' ;).

Jason

Other than their feature set I have never been truly impressed with any Panasonic digital projector, hope this one has 'real world' upgrades over the AE3000 (the comparisons that are sure to come should be interesting). The new street price is indeed a welcome 'upgrade' ;).

Jason

"Other than the feature set..."

What does that mean?... the PQ?
What didn't you like about the 3000?
I'm not sayin, I'm just askin.
I've never owned a Panasonic, nor seen one in action, and am seriously considering the 4000 to get me though the next few years.

Link to a video (http://www.avforums.com/tv/index.php?videoid=127) about the new PJ.

Thanks, Lorjam.
Thanks for the link. That fills in on some of the details.

But I've been searching for a video of the PT-AE4000U's Intelligent Lens Memory with Auto Detection feature in action. The above link shows a clip of 2.35:1 source material being zoomed...to a larger version of the same 2.35:1 source material but with nothing particularly CIH about it. Odd.

Does anyone know of a link where they show, say, 1.78:1 or 1.33:1 source material and then they switch to 2.35:1 source material (or vice versa) to show how the projector quickly/smoothly/easily/accurately accommodates both sources and aspect ratios while retaining CIH?

Jason,

are you serious? Did you ever check out the 3000 in person? We both come from the land of the crt...and I think the 3000 was an amazing projector...what did you not like about it?

I'm all over one of these when they come out later this month. In NZ they come with a replacement bulb as well. :)

Wow, I haven't considered an LCD projector for quite some time but this looks like a real steal. The CIH function is really attractive to me especially at this price. Depending on Art's review this might just have to be my new projector.

"Other than the feature set..."

What does that mean?... the PQ?
What didn't you like about the 3000?
I'm not sayin, I'm just askin.
I've never owned a Panasonic, nor seen one in action, and am seriously considering the 4000 to get me though the next few years.

Dave,

The features of the newer Panasonic(s) are out of this world (mainly the AE2000/AE3000) but the image quality has never really impressed me, it's not bad by any means just not something that makes me say "wow". Hope that clarifies what I meant ;).



Jason,

are you serious? Did you ever check out the 3000 in person? We both come from the land of the crt...and I think the 3000 was an amazing projector...what did you not like about it?

Yes I have seen both the 2000 & 3000 in person and to be honest they just don't 'wow' me, I am ultra picky however and have evil eyes (mainly due to years of calibrating CRT projectors ;)) so my opinion should make little difference to most viewers.



Jason

The increase in lumens for a 1080p, LCD makes this interesting to me.

Yes I have seen both the 2000 & 3000 in person and to be honest they just don't 'wow' me

Jason, so what modern projectors have you seen that 'wow' you? Just curious.

I wasnt going to be in the market for a projector until the late spring anyway but this is good news. I had pretty much decided, based on many factors, that the 3000 was going to be my purchase.

Seems like the 4000 will get the nod now :D

Jason, so what modern projectors have you seen that 'wow' you? Just curious.

The pimp is a big DLP guy ;) That is like asking the Devil for icewater :D

At the very least I would hope that Panny would allow us to ship it back and forth at our cost. I'm sure we would come out way ahead.

Agreed. I am ordering from the states!

Yes, of course you'll have a warranty. The same warranty as anyone else who buys it. This is a strange misconception...though you may have to send it back to the States. I buy electronics in the US all the time and never had warranty problems. Just last year I contacted Pentax about a DSLR I bought in the US, it was repaired under warranty in Canada.

Thats good to know. I feel better about buying from the states now!
Thanks!

Thats good to know. I feel better about buying from the states now!
Thanks!

I wouldn't take this for granted.

Panny is known as a company that does NOT support US purchases in Canada.

The US arm may or may not ship it back to you at your cost.

After looking over the Panasonic AE3000 vs Epson 6500ub on projector central, is it safe to say the AE4000 beats or is egual to the 6500ub in black levels and brightness or overall pq?

Hmm.....wonder if this will cause the prices on the AE3000 to drop? I wouldn't mind taking the AE3000 either actually. The only thing I'm scared of is I have friends who own Panny PJs (AX200, AE2000) and it seems quality control and long-term reliability is somewhat an issue.

I guess I'm just spoilt by my 2700 hours running strong Marantz that hasn't given me a single issue to this day, despite running over 15 hours a day in the weekends.

Are there any 1080p DLP PJ's out yet that are close to Ae3000/AE4000 in performance?

Hi have a panny projector I bought 3 years ago. They have not supported US projectors in the past. I would check with them before purchasing. I ended up buying from a dealer in Canada, had a problem and was glad I purchased here. Got a good deal though, so if the price was low enough I would buy from the U.S.
What is the Canadian MSRP on this? I just looked on the Canadian Panny site and it is not listed.
I wouldn't take this for granted.

Panny is known as a company that does NOT support US purchases in Canada.

The US arm may or may not ship it back to you at your cost.

I pulled the trigger and pre-ordered a ae4000.

One thing that I'd like to mention is that the US dollar is sinking faster than a brick in a pond. Believe me, this will affect our electronics purchases. At $2k, how much lower can the ae4000 go? Sure it uses a lot of the same nuts and bolts of the ae3000, but seriously.

Based on the track-record of the ae2000 and ae3000, if you're in the market for a feature-packed, great performing front projector at an unbeatable price, I don't know why the the ae4000 cannot be at the top of your list. Having said this, I am looking forward to what Epson brings to the table with their 8500. I am sure Epson is upping the bar as well.

Hi have a panny projector I bought 3 years ago. They have not supported US projectors in the past. I would check with them before purchasing. I ended up buying from a dealer in Canada, had a problem and was glad I purchased here. Got a good deal though, so if the price was low enough I would buy from the U.S.
What is the Canadian MSRP on this? I just looked on the Canadian Panny site and it is not listed.

I dont think we know the Canadian MSRP but I think its safe to say it will be outrageously high!

I'm using the 950 lumens PJC quoted in their review in "normal" mode and a 100" 1.0 gain screen and I calculated 32.2 Foot-Lamberts. Is that correct? That seems extremely bright.

Not to rain on your parade but, just to be realistic...knock off some for however much zoom you'll use (up to 40%-ish) plus I always knock an additional 10-20% off as that's how much the lamp will dim in the first month you watch it (watching it constantly as you probably will be)...but don't put too much stock in the numbers, judge with your own eyes (or get a slightly higher gain screen to compensate).

I wish manufacturers would run these things on high for a 100 hours at the factory, then they would be stable for calibration the day they hit your house and premature problems with the unit and bulb could be identified...guess you probably have to spend a whole lot more to get a unit with this kind of QC process.

Jason,

are you serious? Did you ever check out the 3000 in person? We both come from the land of the crt...and I think the 3000 was an amazing projector...what did you not like about it?

If it isn't DLP and/or a 2 year old projector that 'used' to list for $15,000 but now sells for $3,000, he isn't going to be impressed. I think most of us can safely ignore his criticism of LCD projectors and get what makes us happy. In his defense, he even said that (in slightly different words).

So according to early reports, how would the new 4000 compare to the JVC HD350 or the Sony VW 60? I am fairly new to this and am looking at getting a new projector. I have been considering the JVC and the Sony and would appreciate anyones opinion on how they all compare... thanks in advance for the advice... I am hoping to buy a new projector for the family for Christmas.

Agreed. I am ordering from the states!

Same here. In Norway you can pre-order it for NOK 24.599,- and that equals to USD $4353.

The AE3000 sells for USD $3716

Well i pulled the trigger and went with a sure thing at a good price. I ordered the AE3000 at $1699 and now i wont have to worry about any new bugs that need to be worked out.
I am not a video expert and probably wont see the big difference between the two models. I almost bought the AE3000 last week at $2299. So i feel like i got a great deal, am happy!


Vid53

Those of you that are taking things to a personal level of criticism need to relax, there's absolutely no need for that here.

My comments mentioned the Panasonic digitals and no other, there are many 'non' dlp digitals that impress me (calibration accuracy aside). I guess I am just somebody that does not care for their 'smooth screen' tech and yes I am not a fan of most LCD's (coming from CRT this is fairly common as DLP, LCOS, D-ILA are closer to the look of CRT). I find several of the JVC models to be impressive as well as a couple of the Sony & Epson's so I am not only 'wowed' by DLP. As I stated, for features it is near impossible to compete with the Panasonics, they are truly in a class all their own at this price range. I am eager to see the AE4000 and truly hope it sets a new level of price/performance so that we all benefit :).

Jason

I've had a Panasonic projector for almost 5 years now, and I love the Smooth Screen. You read all over this forum about people trading off pixel visibility against seating distance or using expensive anamorphic lenses to minimize pixel visibility for 2.35 CIH - well with Panasonics the SDE is a total non isuue at any viewing distance, even when zooming up for 2.35 CIH. And don't believe the Panasonics bashers who claim that SST softens the picture - that is simply not true (as noted by Projector Central) - my picture is as sharp as a tack.
I won't even consider a projector that has ANY pixel visibilty so my next projector will definately be the AE4000.

I'm using the 950 lumens PJC quoted in their review in "normal" mode and a 100" 1.0 gain screen and I calculated 32.2 Foot-Lamberts. Is that correct? That seems extremely bright.PJC's numbers always seem inflated. That number is in the "Normal" (high power) lamp mode (with the Picture mode set to "Normal") may actually be closer to 900 Lumens (~30 ft-L for your screen) - it also depends on how far the AE4000 is from the screen. Typically Panasonics (like the AE3000) output can drop off by as much as 40% to almost 60% from the closest throw distance to the farthest. I would wait for Art's review (www.projectorreviews.com) before you jump to conclusions. You will also lose some brightness if you run in the low lamp (eco) mode too (although that seems to be less for the Panasonic PJs than for others - the AE3000 drop-off was 11%).

If you run in the Cinema1 picture mode, it can be a lot dimmer (by around 50%). Although the AE3000, and presumably the AE4000, output a very good quality picture in their Normal picture mode.

BTW, 30 ft-L is not too bright, if you run your PJ with some ambient light in the room. Plus, that will drop considerably if you use one of the Cinema modes. PJC makes their output claim at the closest mounting distance, if I recall correctly. I just checked PJCs calculator, and they claim 20ft-L with the AE4000 at 13' from a 100" screen in the low lamp mode (unfortunately no info on which picture mode though). The PJC review states 548 Lumens in Normal Lamp, Cinema1, modes (= 18.5 ft-L for your 100" screen at a 13' throw, using the standard ft-L equation).

pottscb has made some good points too, in response to your post.

Hey Claus,

I currently use the Epson Home Cinema 400. Am I correct in thinking that you owned that same pj at one time??

Seeing as how you seem to have the tech specs figured out, I'm curious if you would know how the Epson would compare to the 3000/4000 for lumen output.

I use the Epson at 12 feet from a 44 x 103.5 cinemascope screen with no lens, and would have to drop in a 3000/4000 right in the same spot.

Any input or help is greatly appreciated.:)

Those of you that are taking things to a personal level of criticism need to relax, there's absolutely no need for that here.

You are right that the attack(s) sort of came out of left field, so to speak. I appologize for that. I recall going back and forth with you some months ago on a discussion, and you just wouldn't budge your point of view. There's nothing wrong with that, we are all entitled to our opinions.

I think more than anything, I just didn't want a newbie coming in here reading this and thinking that the AE4000 would have a crappy picture. You are well spoken and have a lot of knowledge, and thus you come across as a reliable source in these forums. However, your particular tastes are very picky and differ from the majority. I'd be willing to bet that a newbie couldn't tell the difference between an AE4000 or any other PJ in the sub $5k range, especially considering the room conditions they'll possibly watch it in and the fact that it might not even be calibrated. I'm going to buy my 4000 under those assumptions as well, even having read these forums for over a year and a half.

I've seen several PJ's demo'd, in various price catagories. I doubt any of them were properly calibrated. They all looked stunning under the right conditions (no ambient light) and they all looked a bit washed out under the wrong conditions. It's my firm belief that any of the modern 1080p PJ's is going to look fantastic in my home theater if I give it the best conditions that I can, and thus I'm shopping more on features than anything else. It doesn't hurt that the AE3000 (and presumably the 4000) is claimed to have a pretty nice picture relative to the other LCD's in it's price range. DLP is too loud for me (my PJ will be right above my seats) and doesn't have zoom memory, and DILA is too expensive and doesn't have zoom memory.

Not everyone is striving for that extra .01% performance, especially at the cost of useful features and considerable extra money.

Maybe good things do come to those that wait.

I've been back and forth over a replacement for my aged BenQ PE-7700. With 2300 hours on the lamp not much life left. Makes no sense to buy a new lamp for old technology.

BenQ W5000 wouldn't fit. Epson 6500 early problems, probably solved by now, but near the end of it's retail cycle.

Along comes the BenQ W6000. Had just about decided on that one.

Now Panasonic comes with this surprise. They do seem to be changing the game. All the features at this price. Who would have dreamed this was possible just 4 years ago.

What looks really impressive is how much is available to adjust everything. With HCFR and one's choice of colorimeter and SW this might be a tweaker's delight. And done very cheaply.

With my setup I can mount this just 13' 3" from a 133" screen. That's perfect.

End result based upon PJC's report of 548 Lumens in Cinema 1: 16 Foot Lamberts. That is the SMPTE standard IIRC.

And thanks to Claus and other respected folks here on AVS my bias against LCD is quickly diminishing.

Can't wait for Art's take, and others. Soon I hope.

Sorry for rambling on.

Joe

Varrius ,

I appreciate the apology, thank you.

Indeed we all have varying opinions and different sets of priorities, and indeed mine do generally come from an Image Quality above all else standard (never have I claimed otherwise). This does not however make my opinions any less valid than somebody else's who might be praising features (zoom memory, crazy amounts of lens shift, # of HDMI inputs, etc.), because to me those are usually IQ trade-offs (even though in many circumstances they might be required trade-offs). Now if the AE4000 truly delivers on IQ and has all the features of the AE3000 (plus) then it will certainly be THE price/performance leader in this area of the forum (and I will be just as thrilled as those that intend to purchase it).

Almost nobody here (including myself) can state anything other than speculation regarding the AE4000 so there is no reason to get bent out of shape on 'speculative' comments ;). I am just as hopeful as you are regarding the performance of the AE4000 as it pushes the industry forward and we all reap the benefits in the end :D.

Now let's not get the thread derailed with this silly bickering, I think we are on the same page this time (no hard feelings about last time either) ;).

Thanks again,
Jason

It's my firm belief that any of the modern 1080p PJ's is going to look fantastic in my home theater if I give it the best conditions that I can, and thus I'm shopping more on features than anything else.

It seems more and more people are making similar statement. I am inclined to agree that the difference is not as big as it used to be. I would imagine the difference in PQ, between the Panasonic and a good DLP or DLIA like the JVC RS20, would be no more than 5-10 % in a proper setting. I am a DLP guy and thinking of upgrading to the JVC RS20. I would very much like to try a Panasonic in my own room, and I would if there is a return policy with no restocking fee from any vendor and save a ton in the process.

Alex,

The difference is much closer than it used to be, no doubt about it and usually only picky sob's (like myself) can actually see the differences. For the record I am right there with you on saving some coin, if something impresses and it's more cost effective then why the heck not :D. If I just so happened to be blown away by the AE4000 I would certainly be inclined to buy it (regardless of the tech behind it). A major issue with LCD's has always been reliability/life span but I think they have greatly improved in those areas as well, have several friends with more recent LCD's (last couple years) and no issues worth mentioning from them.

Jason

I have owned at least 20 different crt's...and 10 or so digitals of both dlp and lcd technology. It really bothers me when people defend their projector or projector technology...in general, I don't like lcd's as much either....until I saw the 3000 at a local boutique shop. In particular I love the film-like look of the smooth screen technology. This is very much in line with what a crt delivers.

Add to this the fact that lcd's are usually quieter...in fact, quite a bit quieter than dlp's. They also don't have a mechanical wheel which can sometimes be noisy in itself...another plus for lcd :)

I have a pretty keen eye for image quality too...and I think the 3000 has a heck of a lot going for it. And I suspect that a more accurate red color along with this new price is really a benefit to everyone!

In the end, it doesn't matter what people think of a projector that you like...because it's YOUR projector, and your opinion is the only thing that matters. Go and see it, and if you like it, buy it.

PS. I also think the extensive tweaking that can be done will satisfy the tweaker in me...which was what I loved about crt (may it rest in peace).

Man i don't have a projector yet but i am so tempted to get one now. I would even go with the AE3000 if i could find it for a good price in Canada. I have the screen ready to go (got it from my theater when we replaced the screen for our first Digital 3D theater) Only if i was paid better and again had somewhere to get this at a reasonable price.

It seems that Panasonic is betting the store on this. Will lowering the price will sell more projectors? If they are correct this move could be really big. More and more people are building home theatrers and it seems that many want the biggest screen size that they can afford. This move could move projectors into a new position in the consumer market. We will have to wait and see how sales go and the reaction from other companies.

Those of you that are taking things to a personal level of criticism need to relax, there's absolutely no need for that here.

My comments mentioned the Panasonic digitals and no other, there are many 'non' dlp digitals that impress me (calibration accuracy aside). I guess I am just somebody that does not care for their 'smooth screen' tech and yes I am not a fan of most LCD's (coming from CRT this is fairly common as DLP, LCOS, D-ILA are closer to the look of CRT). I find several of the JVC models to be impressive as well as a couple of the Sony & Epson's so I am not only 'wowed' by DLP. As I stated, for features it is near impossible to compete with the Panasonics, they are truly in a class all their own at this price range. I am eager to see the AE4000 and truly hope it sets a new level of price/performance so that we all benefit :).

Jason

Hope you did not take my post as personal pimp'I had wink and big grins.Was just having a little fun.I injoy your wisdom and have followed your advice.You have allways been a DLP guy it seems and I myself love DLP.I was so close to jumping on the benq 6000.But back to the ae4000.As you say lets hope it sets a new benchmark on price /performance.This will only help drive down the price for all of us.Look forward to your opion:D

Man i don't have a projector yet but i am so tempted to get one now. I would even go with the AE3000 if i could find it for a good price in Canada. I have the screen ready to go (got it from my theater when we replaced the screen for our first Digital 3D theater) Only if i was paid better and again had somewhere to get this at a reasonable price.

maybe get a 720 pj for less $; WAY better than having no pj!

you can upgrade later.

I've had a Panasonic projector for almost 5 years now, and I love the Smooth Screen. You read all over this forum about people trading off pixel visibility against seating distance or using expensive anamorphic lenses to minimize pixel visibility for 2.35 CIH - well with Panasonics the SDE is a total non isuue at any viewing distance, even when zooming up for 2.35 CIH. And don't believe the Panasonics bashers who claim that SST softens the picture - that is simply not true (as noted by Projector Central) - my picture is as sharp as a tack.
I won't even consider a projector that has ANY pixel visibilty so my next projector will definately be the AE4000.
+1.

I have a Panasonic AE900 now and love it. I'm way over 3,000 hours on the original bulb and, to my eyes, the PQ still outperforms anything I've seen in a home theater boutique for thousand$ more. And I attribute that to zero screen-door effect.

The AE4000's feature set is the first cause for me to want something drastic to start happening to my AE900 so I'll be forced to upgrade.

The prospect of getting an even better picture while the Lens Memory w/Auto Detection automatically adjusts for Constant Height on a 2.35:1 screen when I switch from Casablanca on Turner Classic Movie Channel to Lord of the Rings on HBO HD, all for about the same as it cost to buy my first projector (AE700) 6-7 years ago is almost too sweet to ignore.

It seems that Panasonic is betting the store on this. Will lowering the price will sell more projectors? If they are correct this move could be really big. More and more people are building home theatrers and it seems that many want the biggest screen size that they can afford. This move could move projectors into a new position in the consumer market.
i for one would love to see that.

Hey Claus,

I currently use the Epson Home Cinema 400. Am I correct in thinking that you owned that same pj at one time??

Seeing as how you seem to have the tech specs figured out, I'm curious if you would know how the Epson would compare to the 3000/4000 for lumen output.

I use the Epson at 12 feet from a 44 x 103.5 cinemascope screen with no lens, and would have to drop in a 3000/4000 right in the same spot.

Any input or help is greatly appreciated.:)

Mr. Pants (!):

...I've enjoyed your posts over the years and now have a chance to respond to one.

I, too, use an Epson Home Cinema 400; it is about 28 months old and we're on our second bulb. The first bulb went about 2000 hours before dimming enough that I thought we would benefit from a new one. We run on the living room setting and project onto a painted wall...and I cannot justify a professional calibration. I know I know...but we've either had a Sony large CRT in the room also (or, now, a THX Panasonic 54" plasma) that we can eyeball with the Epson projector...and quite literally, the Epson 400 (in combination with good surround sound, a Sony PS3 and an HTPC) has transformed the way we watch television, sports and movies.

Have you replaced the bulb in your 400?

I am not so happy with the new bulb; it is brighter...at first it seemed like the blue tint on one side of the screen (with pink tint on the other) was a bit worse with the new bulb (compared to the old one)...but I can sort of live with that 'problem'.

And indeed, either I got used to the blue/pink problem...or else after a few dozen hours (we're now at 300 hours)...the problem seems to have minimized.

Unfortunately, I now spot a new problem.

In the uppermost portion of the image...a little bit right of center...if I were to try to draw a cloud...a tannish-yellowish cloud...that perhaps takes up less than five percent of the entire projected image...well, if I project a solid white image (the very same kind of image that shows the blue-pink tinges)...this light tan-yellow 'cloud' is apparent.

This 'cloud' is only apparent with a white or light grey background.

Have you (or any other AVS member) seen anything like this with your 400?

I've looked around on the site and seen a few references to something like this but not too many.

Thanks...and I love AVS.

Well i pulled the trigger and went with a sure thing at a good price. I ordered the AE3000 at $1699 and now i wont have to worry about any new bugs that need to be worked out.
I am not a video expert and probably wont see the big difference between the two models. I almost bought the AE3000 last week at $2299. So i feel like i got a great deal, am happy!

Vid53

Same here... my 3000 is on its way. But I confess... I missed the news on the AE4000 price, and assumed it would hit the street at closer to $3k. Still, I got a great deal on an awesome projector, so I won't lose any sleep over it. :D Ya gotta pull the trigger sometime.

Paul

In the uppermost portion of the image...a little bit right of center...if I were to try to draw a cloud...a tannish-yellowish cloud...that perhaps takes up less than five percent of the entire projected image...well, if I project a solid white image (the very same kind of image that shows the blue-pink tinges)...this light tan-yellow 'cloud' is apparent.

This 'cloud' is only apparent with a white or light grey background.

It's almost surely this common problem (http://www.***************.com/forum_topic.cfm?which=8972) with polarizers on LCD projectors with organic panels. Here's the AVS Forum thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=572889) you want.

Mr. Pants (!):

...I've enjoyed your posts over the years and now have a chance to respond to one.


Thanks for the kind words man.:)
I wish I could help you with your problem, but I'm no guru when it comes to projectors.
I've seen several in action, but the 400 is the only one I've ever owned, and I haven't had any problems with it.
I've always run it Theater2 mode 99% of the time in a dark room.
A few games have been watched in Living mode.
Approaching 3000 hours on the bulb now, with hopefully a lot more to go.

Now I'm looking to replace it soon, with maybe something like the Panny 4000, or even a 3000 if I can get a killer deal on one.
I'll try to bleed some profit out of the 400, but if not maybe use it for an outside theater projector.;)

I've had the Samsung SP-H710AE Projector with 700 ANSI and Contrast (Full On/Off) : 2800:1 for 3 1/2 years and I'm pulleding the trigger on the AE4000.
I think this will be a big upgrade in pitcher quality for my Home Theater :D:D

So how do you guys think the 4000 will do in ambient light conditions for watching sports, etc.

I just finished reading the PC review of the AE4000.

From PC:

"The Panasonic PT-AE4000 sets a new benchmark for price/performance in the home theater industry. In both picture quality and features, it easily surpasses the AE3000. And at just $1,999 it will have an earthshaking effect on prices throughout the industry. No other projector is as fully-loaded with user friendly features as this one; other than the AE3000, no other competing model even comes close in features and functionality. But what it always comes down to is picture quality. And in this regard, the AE4000 surpasses not only the AE3000, but all other 1080p models that we have yet seen under $3,000. It is not the brightness unit on the market by any stretch. Several other inexpensive 1080p models have brighter Cinema modes. But if you are looking for extremely high image quality and are willing to give up a little lumen output to get it, the AE4000 produces a refined, elegant picture that is extremely difficult to beat.

Since the AE4000's picture quality not only surpasses the competitors in its price range, but rivals and in some cases exceeds that of "high-end" models selling for five times the price or more, it warrants a solid 5 stars for performance. Since it has more features than any other home theater projector ever built, 5 stars is not even enough to illustrate its distinction in this category. Similarly, its ease of use is unrivaled-perfect color calibration out of the box in Cinema 1 mode, smart menus that are easy to navigate, lens memory to accommodate 2.40 super widescreen without an anamophic lens-no other projector has all of these things, and most have none of them. All of this adds up to a remarkable value proposition: at a street of $1,999, we've simply never seen this much performance at this price."

I usually don't give PC review much weight review has caught my attention. Can't wait to see Art's and cine4home review. If all three have the same take of this PJ, and it gets glowing reviews from owners, then this will be a game changer for sure. I never considered LCD to have a good PQ like DLP and LCOS but I guess the gap is much narrower that I thought.

O boy!
I had almost got on the H20 vagon, than placed an order for 3800. I guess I would have to cancel it and wait for Pany.
When do they anticipate the first shipments? In the meantime I am projectorless - that sucks :mad:

I will be glad to see a few reviews from some of the ae3000 owners. That will help me make up my mind.

cine4home has made a preliminary review.

I just tried to go to cine4home.com and a warning popped up that it is an attack site.

explorer states in german that access is prohibited

explorer states in german that access is prohibited


Occasionally those annoying kiddie hackers who like to disrupt people's online businesses and personal websites will hack in to sites with malicious code and i wish we could have some sort of international law tracing thse idiots ( very hard to do if they use a proxy ) as the harm they do is great and they can cost businesses real money as well as cost good websites a reputation they took years to earn.

cine4home has made a preliminary review.

I just tried to go to cine4home.com and a warning popped up that it is an attack site.

explorer states in german that access is prohibited

http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cine4home.de%2Fnews%2FPanaAE4000%2FAE4000 Preview.htm&sl=de&tl=en&history_state0=
(http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cine4home.de%2Fnews%2FPanaAE4000%2FAE 4000Preview.htm&lp=de_en&btnTrUrl=Translate)

Just tried Internet Explorer and i don't see any warnings. I have my Avira premium running which usually pops up warnings if sites are compromised.

Now a few months back the SVS subwoofer official site had issues and i did get that warning but i'm not getting it with this site using either I.E. 8 or Firefox 3.

Oh wait..........I'm looking up Cine4home.de i better recheck for .com

I will check the .com version and rewrite this post.

Yah rewriting post i'm getting reports that it's been compromised and is an attack site.

The google translate version of the cine4home.de preview is a bit better (the link in the previous post actually goes to babelfish):

http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcine4home.de%2Fnews%2FPanaAE4000%2FAE4000Prev iew.htm&sl=de&tl=en&history_state0=

And for anyone who missed it, that preview was also discussed fairly extensively last month:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1176184

Smarty-pants -- Sorry I missed your post on the 9th (we were visiting my other half's mother in LA, and my visits to the AVS Forum was sporadic). I had the PT-L300U (= AE300). I had replaced it with the DLP Toshiba MT700 (a real disaster due to lamp design defects - Toshiba's solution was to drop the PJ). Last October I bought a LCD Mitsubishi HC5500, and loving every minute. My reaction is that any 1080p PJ will blow everything else out of the water.

I'm not in the upgrade mode this year, at least (I'll wait until the 2011 or 2012 models come out). If I was, the AE4000 would be at the top of my list (pending Art's review - I don't trust PJC that much, too many errors as of late). Relative to the Epson 8500UB (I don't consider the 8100, since the 1080UB is better, IMHO), my guess is that in the best modes they are pretty much equal. Based on last years models, the Panny best mode is a little brighter than Epsons. However, the Epson 85ooUB has other modes which are a lot brighter (and not that much worse PQ). I can't really count on it, until Art give us more info, though.

^Thanks Claus!:)

Here is how to get to cine4home.de. Just type cine4home in your google search box and it will give you the link to the site as well as translate it automatically.

So how do you guys think the 4000 will do in ambient light conditions for watching sports, etc.

You may want to consider a Hi-Power screen or a brighter projector. I currenty have an AE2000 mated with a 119" Da-Lite Hi-Power and am very happy with the results. Will probably upgrade to the AE4000 soon though. The AE2000 has been flawless so far, but I'd like the CIH features of the newer units.

I just pulled the trigger on a pre-order thru Visual Apex to replace my rock-sold but aging AE900. I can't wait!

So are the AE3000 and AE4000 the only projectors that offer the CIH zoom/shift/lens memory function?

Yes.

I dont think we know the Canadian MSRP but I think its safe to say it will be outrageously high!

Australian RRP for the AE4000 is $5499 that's about $5000 USD at the current exchange rate. Now that outrageously high IMO. Considering the JVC RS25 is RRP $8000 in the US and RRP $9499 AUD here I think that's more reasonable.

attempting to talk myself into this. i currently have a AE900U. only has about 700 or so hours on it and has performed flawlessly the past two years. decisions, decisions.....

attempting to talk myself into this. i currently have a AE900U. only has about 700 or so hours on it and has performed flawlessly the past two years. decisions, decisions.....

Has it been colorimeter calibrated? You need that before you need a new projector. The AE4000 will still be there two years from now, only cheaper and the AE5000 will be calling your name. Save your cash, and enjoy your "flawless" performances.

I think this will make me upgrade but I already have an awesome projector in the Sharp XVZ 12000U Mark II! Still I really like the CIH feature and I may just jump on this one!!! Well it will make an awesome birthday gift for myself next month so what the heck!!

Australian RRP for the AE4000 is $5499 that's about $5000 USD at the current exchange rate. Now that outrageously high IMO. Considering the JVC RS25 is RRP $8000 in the US and RRP $9499 AUD here I think that's more reasonable.

Are you sure it is that high. New Zealands Recommended Retail is $5,300 and that comes with a second Bulb included. I would have thought yours would be around the $4,900 to $5,000.

I could not tell from the specs if the AE4000 will have organic or inorganic panels. Anyone know?

You may want to consider a Hi-Power screen or a brighter projector. I currenty have an AE2000 mated with a 119" Da-Lite Hi-Power and am very happy with the results. Will probably upgrade to the AE4000 soon though. The AE2000 has been flawless so far, but I'd like the CIH features of the newer units.
Interesting. I can make the room fairly dark by closing some sliding glass door blinds, but during the summer months inparticular, I like to keep them open going out to the swimming pool. Maybe I should just stick with the Epson 8100 like I was planning before the 4000 announcement.

I could not tell from the specs if the AE4000 will have organic or inorganic panels. Anyone know?

One of the links to Panasonic's site in the first post stated that the panels were inorganic.

What is the difference between organic and in-organic? what are the advantages?

From what I've read:
Organic panels generally have higher degradation due to use and heat than inorganic panels. Also, organic panels are suspectible to image-retention.

There really is no reason to consider an LCD projector with organic panels today, unless someone is looking for an older model on the cheap.

fteixeira

Wow, I bought an AE900 a few years ago and it's amazing how far FP technology has come. I still love my AE900 and I don't have the money to buy the 4000. Maybe once I'm out of college in a couple of years I can get one used for a few hundred bucks :).

Has it been colorimeter calibrated? You need that before you need a new projector. The AE4000 will still be there two years from now, only cheaper and the AE5000 will be calling your name. Save your cash, and enjoy your "flawless" performances.

care to elaborate on the colorimeter calibration? i love this projector--was my first!!--and i often wonder whether i should upgrade or not. i guess if i am happy and have plenty of hours left on the bulb. perhaps an upgrade once the bulb runs down.

Are you sure it is that high. New Zealands Recommended Retail is $5,300 and that comes with a second Bulb included. I would have thought yours would be around the $4,900 to $5,000.

That's only what's on the panasonic.com.au site. I had a look for them on a few popular sites that sell them at lower prices but they aren't showing anything yet. They would have to be under $4000 before I would consider one.

attempting to talk myself into this. i currently have a AE900U. only has about 700 or so hours on it and has performed flawlessly the past two years. decisions, decisions.....

Wow, I bought an AE900 a few years ago and it's amazing how far FP technology has come. I still love my AE900 and I don't have the money to buy the 4000. Maybe once I'm out of college in a couple of years I can get one used for a few hundred bucks :).

If you're happy with the AE900, you may want to wait to see how things shake out. I owned an AE900 a few years back and was very happy with it. I currently own an AE2000 and without a side by side comparison I'd say it has a sharper, more detailed picture, better overall color performance, better color uniformity and somewhat better black levels. But the AE900 is still a very nice projector. If the AE900 didn't have the smoothscreen, I'd say upgrade for sure. But the smoothscreen provides a very filmlike picture imo.
Plus, you probably won't get very much for it if you sell. Maybe $500??

I was thinking of upgrading to the AE4000 too, but may wait for now. I'm kind of torn, because my parents want to buy a projector and I could sell them mine for say $1000.00 and then upgrade. Otherwise they'll probably end up with an AX200 or one of the lower end 1080p units. I'm very tempted, but fear I won't see enough of an improvement to justify the extra expense right now.

Interesting. I can make the room fairly dark by closing some sliding glass door blinds, but during the summer months inparticular, I like to keep them open going out to the swimming pool. Maybe I should just stick with the Epson 8100 like I was planning before the 4000 announcement.

I doubt the 8100 is THAT much brighter than the AE4000 in brightest mode, it's just that the Hi-Power screen helps out a lot in environments with ambient light.

For those of you fighting upgrade fever - my unsolicited advice would be to chill out.

I'm in this thread because my ae700 just died. Won't start up at all. I've had the thing quite a few years now and until yesterday it was just fine.

Go back a few years and the ae900 was getting rave reviews about how much better it was, and now people diss it - that's the way it always goes around here (I've been here awhile...) and yet the picture is basically the same now as it was then.

Everyone has their own priorities, but personally I think buying a new projector more then necessary is just wasteful.

What will I get by going to this new projector from my ae700 -

More contrast (nice, but the 700 was fine with a filter on it)
More lumens (nice, but I was already lighting a 10 foot 2.35 screen adequately)
Quieter - nice, but the ae700 was already right over my head and was plenty quiet
1080p - this I'll probably appreciate, but again watching 720p was just fine.

Anyway you get the point - my advice, being a long time member here is don't get too uptight about the latest projectors, because in a year or two they will be talked about like trash around here, even though the picture will be the same as when it was the "greatest."

I am really pi$$ed off! Just got the AE3000U three days ago! Opened the box to test it, less than 30 mts on the bulb. Now the new one comes out. My HT will not be ready for another month, so it would have been perfect timing for the AE4000.

Now I have to return the AE3000 (doubt if the seller will take it back seeing the new model is coming), or sell it on ebay.

Anyone here interested in a brand spanking new AE3000U?

Here is a link to the PAnasonic page:

http://www.panasonic.net/avc/projector/products/ae4000/index.html

Also a link there to the manual.

http://www.panasonic.net/avc/projector/manual/pdf/AE4000E_En.pdf

Just a question....from what I read the Panasonic projectors will refuse to work once they reach 2000 hours on the bulb?! If they are run in low lamp mode will they reach 3000 hours?

On my z4 I am past the projected life of my bulb but it still works (now at 3800 hours).

Why can't Panasonic get 4000 hours out of a lamp like Epson?

Actually, looking back I've had my ae700 5 years now. Panasonic has a cool little page showing the evolution of their projectors here: http://www.panasonic.net/avc/projector/special/ae_projector/

I'm 6 generations behind at this point, but quite honestly I would have gone another year or two at least if mine hadn't stopped working. I actually have a brand new bulb ready to use, guess i'll have to ebay it.

Anyway, placed a preorder from projector people tonight. My home theater is out of commission until it ships :(

One question: I'm not quite understanding how the lens memory function works - does this projector and the ae3000 actually use the whole panel to display a 2.35 AR? I assume it's just dropping pixels, so I'll still need to use my anamorphic lens.

Actually, looking back I've had my ae700 5 years now.

How many hours did you get before it died?

I'm not sure - probably around 1500 or so I'm guessing. (Original bulb).

Just a question....from what I read the Panasonic projectors will refuse to work once they reach 2000 hours on the bulb?! If they are run in low lamp mode will they reach 3000 hours?

I can't speak for the other models, but I've got about 3,500 hours on the original bulb (low mode) in my AE900 and have no problem firing it up and using it. Picture still looks fine, too. Maybe it'll go poof anytime now, but so far so good. And I still have a new spare bulb on hand!

As I posted earlier, I kind of wish I was having serious problems with my AE900 in order to justify an upgrade to the AE4000. However, if I'm not careful I'll be talking myself into waiting for any bugs to be worked out of the AE4000 introduction and purchasing it anyway...on the premise that my AE900 will make a fine back-up pj for any unexpected glitches with the AE4000 on Oscar night or Super Bowl Sunday, a luxury level second pj for the bedroom, or a "mobile" pj that I won't feel too nervous about taking on the road to a friend's house on special occasions. :cool:

Nice call Pap.

For those of you fighting upgrade fever - my unsolicited advice would be to chill out.

I'm in this thread because my ae700 just died. Won't start up at all. I've had the thing quite a few years now and until yesterday it was just fine.

Go back a few years and the ae900 was getting rave reviews about how much better it was, and now people diss it - that's the way it always goes around here (I've been here awhile...) and yet the picture is basically the same now as it was then.

Everyone has their own priorities, but personally I think buying a new projector more then necessary is just wasteful.

What will I get by going to this new projector from my ae700 -

More contrast (nice, but the 700 was fine with a filter on it)
More lumens (nice, but I was already lighting a 10 foot 2.35 screen adequately)
Quieter - nice, but the ae700 was already right over my head and was plenty quiet
1080p - this I'll probably appreciate, but again watching 720p was just fine.

Anyway you get the point - my advice, being a long time member here is don't get too uptight about the latest projectors, because in a year or two they will be talked about like trash around here, even though the picture will be the same as when it was the "greatest." Yeah I can agree with you. In my case my panny ptl500 is not to bad 5 years or so into its use. But I want a new projector so I am kind of interested in what the new ones look like. After a few reviews I may get one. When it came out (the panny 500) it got fairly good reviews, but now some would laugh at it for its picture. I dont upgrade to often so I am kind of excited about the new ones.

Yeah I can agree with you. In my case my panny ptl500 is not to bad 5 years or so into its use. But I want a new projector so I am kind of interested in what the new ones look like. After a few reviews I may get one. When it came out (the panny 500) it got fairly good reviews, but now some would laugh at it for its picture. I dont upgrade to often so I am kind of excited about the new ones.
LOL!!
viva el ptl500!
mine's into its 5th year also and holding its own.
for sure, one of these new ones sure would be nice. i have no complaints about my 500 tho. it's been a good pj.

Go back a few years and the ae900 was getting rave reviews about how much better it was, and now people diss it - that's the way it always goes around here (I've been here awhile...) and yet the picture is basically the same now as it was then.

TOTALLY! It's a crime how perfectly good projectors that got raves from all sides are suddenly complete dogs hardly better than watching an old B&W TV set. Well to hear some tell it, that B&W set was better even; with your old 1/2 burned out bulb and decaying LCD panels and yellowed polarizing filters - my god it's lucky you aren't electricuted just turning that clunker on.......

In fact, many 720p's give great and consistent results. Sure 1080p is a bit nicer, but not nearly to the extent imagined before you buy it. In truth, calibrating your existing machine with a colorimeter, and maybe adding a new bulb would do more for the movie than spending $2 or $3k on a 1080p.

When your machine dies, or your bulb explodes, then is the time to find a new toy. Before that is a waste for most.

One question: I'm not quite understanding how the lens memory function works - does this projector and the ae3000 actually use the whole panel to display a 2.35 AR? I assume it's just dropping pixels, so I'll still need to use my anamorphic lens.

The memory just changes the lens's zoom so that you can have a CIH setup without the anamorphic lens. All of the pixels are still used, but you'd blow the image up to display the black bars on the screen's masking.

TOTALLY! It's a crime how perfectly good projectors that got raves from all sides are suddenly complete dogs hardly better than watching an old B&W TV set. Well to hear some tell it, that B&W set was better even; with your old 1/2 burned out bulb and decaying LCD panels and yellowed polarizing filters - my god it's lucky you aren't electricuted just turning that clunker on.......

In fact, many 720p's give great and consistent results. Sure 1080p is a bit nicer, but not nearly to the extent imagined before you buy it. In truth, calibrating your existing machine with a colorimeter, and maybe adding a new bulb would do more for the movie than spending $2 or $3k on a 1080p.

When your machine dies, or your bulb explodes, then is the time to find a new toy. Before that is a waste for most.

Wrong again.You need to really get out of the Senior Citizen home more and see what a new Fp can do.

Agreed. But, I might have said it more politely :). I went from a 720p DLP (Mits HC3000) to the Panny AE3000U and the difference was pretty dramatic. I'm using a 120" 2.35:1 Dalite HP screen. But, I'm probably not going to upgrade to the AE4000U, even though the price is very tempting.

Wrong again.

I have no problem with your personal opinion being expressed - devoid of any useful information as it is.

You need to really get out of the Senior Citizen home more and see what a new Fp can do.

I do have a problem with personal attacks which add nothing to the discussion and serve only to demean members and the forum.

The memory just changes the lens's zoom so that you can have a CIH setup without the anamorphic lens. All of the pixels are still used, but you'd blow the image up to display the black bars on the screen's masking.

You aren't understanding how the anamorphic scaling and a lens work. When the anamorphic scaling mode is engaged the entire 1920x1080 display is used, no black bars. Obviously this distorts the image. The anamorphic lens then takes this image and returns it to it's proper geometry. The advantage is that by using the entire panel, rather than simply zooming just the active pixels, brightness is increased. So PAP will want to use his lens for his 10' scope screen to increase the available lumens.

...The advantage is that by using the entire panel, rather than simply zooming just the active pixels, brightness is increased. So PAP will want to use his lens for his 10' scope screen to increase the available lumens.
Anyone who already has an anamorphic lens might as well compare both methods to see which works best for them, but the additional brightness will be minimal once you take into account losses through the extra lens and the fact that the projector actually works more efficiently when zoomed.

Anyone who already has an anamorphic lens might as well compare both methods to see which works best for them, but the additional brightness will be minimal once you take into account losses through the extra lens and the fact that the projector actually works more efficiently when zoomed.
I'm a newbie on this, but from what I've read, this makes sense.
A anamorphic lens would really only make sense to me if anamorphic blu-rays existed. I guess the only other advantage is you don't have to worry about masking top & bottom (if that bothers you) or sub-titles being off screen.

For the Canadians on this form (yes there are more than a few of us). I recently received an email from Panasonic Canada stating that the AE4000 might not even be carried by them. I don't know if this is real or not, but in the past Panny Canada hasn't cared to much about us. Ow well if I have to buy from the US then that is what I (and many others) will do. Panasonic.CA's loss is Panasonic.USA's gain.

I have to go now, I have to clean up the mess a moose made of my garbage cans last night.

Andrew from Ontario
----------------------------------
From: "Panasonic-Lumix_Concierge" <LumixConcierge@ca.panasonic.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:34:02
To: <andy-man@rogers.com>
Subject: Dm-RE: General Inquiry/Misc., Home Cinema Projector

Thank you for your email to Panasonic Canada Inc.

We apologies for the inconvenience. There are many factors that determine pricing; It is uncertain at this time that the PTAE4000 will be released in Canada and if so to what price.

New releases are launch generally during the fall and spring time. All new releases for the fall have been released. More information should be available late winter early spring.

Regards,

DM
Customer Care Center
Panasonic Canada Inc.
5770 Ambler Dr., Mississauga, ON, L4W 2T3
Off: 1-800-561-5505 Fax: 905-238-2360 E-Mail:
customercare@ca.panasonic.com

Dear Panasonic Canada

I have been a long time front projector fan and have had many Panasonic projectors (AE300 /700 / 900). I really wanted to buy a AX1000 but was put off by Panasonic Canada's unreal pricing and so I bought a Sanyo. When the AE3000 came out I wanted one of those as well; but again was so put off by the Panasonic Canada pricing (in comparison to the USA) that I bought a projector from the states. With the recent announcement of the AE4000 I am hoping that the Canadian price is very close to the US price. If not, that is it for Panasonic and me. Please don't respond with a form mail about Canadian / USA differences such as bi-lingual manuals and packaging...... We have heard it before and it is a bunch of BS (and you know it).

Hoping to a MSRP of 2500$

Andrew

For those of you that seem to be VERY confused on the Constant Image Height scenario, and exactly what the benefits are when using an external anamorphic lens, PLEASE go visit the CIH forum here on AVS and read the FAQs and learn.
It can me a bit confusing when you don't know the facts, but once you learn how it works, you'll be better off knowing... ESPECIALLY if you are considering using a Cinemascope (2.35:1) screen in your setup.

For the Canadians on this form (yes there are more than a few of us). I recently received an email from Panasonic Canada stating that the AE4000 might not even be carried by them. I don't know if this is real or not, but in the past Panny Canada hasn't cared to much about us.
Quebec Acoustic is accepting pre-orders (http://www.quebecacoustic.com/Panasonic-PT-AE4000U_en_955prod.html), so it definitely should be available in Canada. They don't yet have the price or a shipping date though (not sure who wants to pre-order without knowing those two things!).

TOTALLY! It's a crime how perfectly good projectors that got raves from all sides are suddenly complete dogs hardly better than watching an old B&W TV set. Well to hear some tell it, that B&W set was better even; with your old 1/2 burned out bulb and decaying LCD panels and yellowed polarizing filters - my god it's lucky you aren't electricuted just turning that clunker on.......

In fact, many 720p's give great and consistent results. Sure 1080p is a bit nicer, but not nearly to the extent imagined before you buy it. In truth, calibrating your existing machine with a colorimeter, and maybe adding a new bulb would do more for the movie than spending $2 or $3k on a 1080p.

When your machine dies, or your bulb explodes, then is the time to find a new toy. Before that is a waste for most.i can watch my 1080p projector without getting tired, on a non hd signal it seem like my eyes are trying to focus the picture.

Yeah I can agree with you. In my case my panny ptl500 is not to bad 5 years or so into its use. But I want a new projector so I am kind of interested in what the new ones look like. After a few reviews I may get one. When it came out (the panny 500) it got fairly good reviews, but now some would laugh at it for its picture. I dont upgrade to often so I am kind of excited about the new ones.
I see your PTL500 and raise you an 540p AE300u! It is no longer my main projector, however. After reaching 4000+ hours a few years back it was retired to our family's cabin where it only sees a few hours a year... still on the 1st bulb though! Its low res and dim, but damn if it still doesn't throw a great picture for outdoor movies!

Anyone out there still use the AE100? 480p resolution in all its glory...

i can watch my 1080p projector without getting tired, on a non hd signal it seem like my eyes are trying to focus the picture.

It's true, once you have seen great HD it is very difficult to watch anything else.

I have noticed that many blurays still have that slightly blurry look to them as if they were not mastered from a good source. I have also read that given the degradation that takes place during copying from a master to intermediates to bluray that 1280x720 often is sufficient to show all details possible and that 1080p adds some sharpness but not additional details. I think Spyderman3 is like that; its not super sharp and definitely has a soft look to it during parts.

I'm a newbie on this, but from what I've read, this makes sense.
A anamorphic lens would really only make sense to me if anamorphic blu-rays existed. I guess the only other advantage is you don't have to worry about masking top & bottom (if that bothers you) or sub-titles being off screen.

You also get increased vertical resolution with an anamorphic lens. If the projector is letterboxing your movie, you are not getting the full 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

So I'm assuming the 4000 just zooms the image up so that the black bars are off the screen? Is there an anamorphic mode on the 4000 that lets you use an anamorphic lens?

You also get increased vertical resolution with an anamorphic lens. If the projector is letterboxing your movie, you are not getting the full 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

So I'm assuming the 4000 just zooms the image up so that the black bars are off the screen? Is there an anamorphic mode on the 4000 that lets you use an anamorphic lens?

I actually believe it's the opposite. The panamorph mode will use all 1080 pixels and there will be no black bars either on screen or off.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

You also get increased vertical resolution with an anamorphic lens. If the projector is letterboxing your movie, you are not getting the full 1080 lines of vertical resolution.
But surely it's not 'real' resolution (i.e. in the source material). You're just digitally processing the image to stretch it up and then optically stretching it out wide again?

Is so, for Blu-ray at least, that seems a lot of overhead for little benefit compared to the simple zoom feature of the Panasonics.

I see your PTL500 and raise you an 540p AE300u! It is no longer my main projector, however. After reaching 4000+ hours a few years back it was retired to our family's cabin where it only sees a few hours a year... still on the 1st bulb though! Its low res and dim, but damn if it still doesn't throw a great picture for outdoor movies!

Anyone out there still use the AE100? 480p resolution in all its glory...

My 6 years old AE200 (480p) is still alive. My son has been using it since I gave it to him 4 years ago. Other than a bulb change, everything is still like brand new. It has a total of 6000 hours. The polarizers are still like new. It must have inorganic parts.

At far as PQ is concerned, people used to complain about 2 things in LCD. First is SDE and second is low ANSI CR. The last LCD I saw was the AE700. So how much have things improved? (My last two pjs are DLPs and I do appreciate the high ANSI CR.)

1. LCD - is smooth screen really still needed with 1080p? At 1x or more viewing distance I assume you don't see any SDE with ANY 1080p LCD. So is it just a matter of preference between a sharper picture and a smoother (more film like) picture?

2. ANSI CR - how's ANSI CR on current crop of LCDs compared to other technology?

I am really pi$$ed off! Just got the AE3000U three days ago! Opened the box to test it, less than 30 mts on the bulb. Now the new one comes out. My HT will not be ready for another month, so it would have been perfect timing for the AE4000.

Now I have to return the AE3000 (doubt if the seller will take it back seeing the new model is coming), or sell it on ebay.

Anyone here interested in a brand spanking new AE3000U?

Hooray for Projector People. They are going to take it back. I've placed my order for the AE4000. I am told it will be available last week of October or 1st week of November and there are already about 100 people ahead of me.

Excellent service, I must say.

Hooray for Projector People. They are going to take it back. I've placed my order for the AE4000. I am told it will be available last week of October or 1st week of November and there are already about 100 people ahead of me.

Excellent service, I must say.

Hmmm, I wonder if they'll take $1300 for that open box 3000.:rolleyes:

You also get increased vertical resolution with an anamorphic lens. If the projector is letterboxing your movie, you are not getting the full 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

So I'm assuming the 4000 just zooms the image up so that the black bars are off the screen? Is there an anamorphic mode on the 4000 that lets you use an anamorphic lens?

Yea but the resolution is not their to start with so you can't increase it any, what it is, it is. You are adding the extra lines digitally, makeing them up out of information that is their, stretching and distorting the image and then using the lense to compress it back down. Now I have never seem a lens set-up, but on paper it seems like all the extra digital processing and lenses would degrade the image more then help it. Doesn't using a lense also require a curved screen to be displayed correct also?

For those of you that seem to be VERY confused on the Constant Image Height scenario, and exactly what the benefits are when using an external anamorphic lens, PLEASE go visit the CIH forum here on AVS and read the FAQs and learn.
It can me a bit confusing when you don't know the facts, but once you learn how it works, you'll be better off knowing... ESPECIALLY if you are considering using a Cinemascope (2.35:1) screen in your setup.

^ I reiterate once again... ^
I will even provide a link this time.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=554901

November? Noooooooooooooooo, no 4000 by halloween horror fest.....scary thought

Yea but the resolution is not their to start with so you can't increase it any, what it is, it is. You are adding the extra lines digitally, makeing them up out of information that is their, stretching and distorting the image and then using the lense to compress it back down. Now I have never seem a lens set-up, but on paper it seems like all the extra digital processing and lenses would degrade the image more then help it. Doesn't using a lense also require a curved screen to be displayed correct also?

Ah, no. Not the way it works at all. Nothing is being added. What you are doing it taking full advantage of your projector's resolution and brightness and Optically, restoring AR. The image is only processed to stretch it - nothing added/removed/modified in any way.

CIH is the holy grail of HT. If you don't get it or want it fine, but don't spread mis-information.

Huh? PP is saying end of this month. Are you saying not until end of November??

Huh? PP is saying end of this month. Are you saying not until end of November??

Perhaps with over 100 preorders...the initial shipment may be all sold. I'm kinda waiting for the Canadian dollar to keep rising....every little bit helps!

Too bad PP charge right away with a preorder...there are other stores that offer preorder without full payment but they don't ship to Canada....vis-ap (see projector central)

^I could have sworn I just read on PP's website yesterday that they do not charge until shipment.[/headscratch]

Hello
Even if I read this forum regularly, this is my 1st post.
I am on the market for a 1080p projector between 1500 and 2000 $. I though I have decided to go with the epson 8100 but this Panasonic is very tempting.
I plan to have a 90in screen projected from 9 ft. Is it correct to say that I will not feel the ae4000's lack of luminosity thanks to the short throwing distance and small screen ? I plan to use it in ambient light so luminosity is important to me but If I can also have very good black this would be perfect ...

^I could have sworn I just read on PP's website yesterday that they do not charge until shipment.[/headscratch]

Unless they changed their policy, and I would be very surprised if they have, they do not charge until shipment.

A quick story about this Forum sponsor. Almost 4 years ago I bought my BenQ PE-7700 from PP. At the time had a question before ordering so I called instead of ordering online. Perhaps a wise move.

Eleven days after the unit arrived BenQ had a price reduction of $400. That represented a 20% drop. At first I thought well that's life, the product is what I expected it to be and prices drop without notice to anyone, including vendors.

Sent an email to the salesperson in thanks for a pleasant transaction with a mention of mild frustration concerning the price drop.

To PP's credit this sales rep took ownership of the concern and about a month later a check for $400 arrived in the mail. I was impressed.

I'm sure other sponsors are as good. Jason at AV Science comes to mind.

Noticed that the Panny 3000 is no longer listed on PP.

With only the one year warranty are some of you considering an extended service contract with a purchase of this pj? My BenQ came with a 3 year warranty. Used 3 times, last time with 1 day to go.

Joe

Will this PJ have any problem throwing a 97.5" screen from 10 feet?

One of the calculators from Projector Central says that it will work (but just barely) and another one says it won't.

Can anyone clarify?

I am really pi$$ed off! Just got the AE3000U three days ago! Opened the box to test it, less than 30 mts on the bulb. Now the new one comes out. My HT will not be ready for another month, so it would have been perfect timing for the AE4000.

Now I have to return the AE3000 (doubt if the seller will take it back seeing the new model is coming), or sell it on ebay.

Anyone here interested in a brand spanking new AE3000U?


haha same happened to me, i got it 2500$ 2 months ago from eBay now the 4000 is out and 500$ cheaper! i think i'll just stick with what i got.

Will this PJ have any problem throwing a 97.5" screen from 10 feet?

One of the calculators from Projector Central says that it will work (but just barely) and another one says it won't.

Can anyone clarify?

Try the calculator Panasonic has on their site:

http://www.panasonic.net/avc/projector/calc/html/cal_menu.html

Ah, no. Not the way it works at all. Nothing is being added. What you are doing it taking full advantage of your projector's resolution and brightness and Optically, restoring AR. The image is only processed to stretch it - nothing added/removed/modified in any way.

CIH is the holy grail of HT. If you don't get it or want it fine, but don't spread mis-information.
I agree that CIH is the 'holy grail' of HT of sorts. I am doing CIH in my personal theater.

However, the poster you quoted was correct. You are interpolating the VERTICAL resolution with the image processor...and interpolating means that you are adding data to the video that wasn't originally there.

...Nothing is being added...The image is only processed to stretch it - nothing added/removed/modified in any way...

How can you stretch video vertically without adding information? This 'stretching' process is called interpolation and you are definitely adding information that wasn't there to begin with.

A blu-ray movie has a set resolution and a 2.35:1 blu-ray is wasting some of the vertical resolution with black bars on top/bottom. For a 1080p movie, the video processor just takes the ~720 vertical lines of ACTUAL VIDEO, cropping off the black bars, and stretches (interpolates) them to fit the full 1080 vertical lines of the PJ. Then the a.lens just stretches the image horizontally to correct for the screwed up AR after the vertical stretching.

In summary, a lens setup does use the full 1080 lines of the projector...although you don't really have anymore data than what was there before because you had to interpolate in order to fill those 1080 lines. There was never 1080 vertical lines in the source movie...so the benefit of stretching to 1080 and then shrinking optically is debatable... The clearer advantage to using a lens is that since you are using all 1080 vertical lines...you get that much more light from your projector actually being used on the video image instead of being wasted on the masking above and below screen. So you get a brighter image (although this isn't 1:1 because you do lose some light going through a lens, and there are arguments that zooming also gives you a brighter image because of the lens position...but all arguments on the table, I do believe you get a slightly brighter image overall using a lens.)

Long story short...if money is no concern, a lens setup is probably the best way to go. You can get a slightly brighter image and more importantly you can choose between a much wider range of PJ's.

If money is a concern, then the panny is a great way to go. You get nearly as good of an image compared to a lens setup. You cost will be at least half that of a lens setup. The biggest problem to a zoomed 'CIH' setup is that you are limited to ONE projector...this panny. (not counting those that manually zoom a projector by hand, that would get old real fast for me)

I am doing the zoomed CIH setup using the panny. I think its by far the best bang for the buck CIH setup and I will be very happy with it.

Try the calculator Panasonic has on their site:

http://www.panasonic.net/avc/projector/calc/html/cal_menu.html

Thanks a lot, exactly what I needed.

It said I could do it from as little as 9.53 feet so it looks like I'm in the clear.

I've never bought a PJ and definitely never been through an anticipated release. Can anyone tell me:

1) It looks like you can pre-order for $1999, is there usually places that will discount even further right after release to $1800-$1900 or are the prices usually uniform across online dealers?

2) Is it possible that these would actually sell out if I don't pre-order?

If there's no chance to get it much cheaper, and it's feasible that it may actually sell out I'll go ahead and put in my order now to one of the two sponsors currently offering the pre-order.

1) sometimes, though typically not with hot products. However you may get things like free shipping, which PP does not offer for preorders. Keep in mind I don't think we're supposed to talk about street prices here, just MRSP, which is higher than you quoted.
2) For an initial launch maybe - you might have to wait a few weeks to get one after launch. If you're not desperate for one then not as big a deal. For me, I'm dead in the water until this gets here so I sure hope I'm in on the initial shipments.

One thing to consider - like many products sometimes the initial launch has bugs. typically firmware upgrades will fix these, but personally unless I really need something, I tend to wait a bit to make sure real world users don't have problems and that the product lives up to the pre-launch hype.

Bob - I'm actually looking forward to trying this projector without my lens. The lens I own (a prismasonic) does induce some barrel distortion and a bit of trapezoidal distortion as well. It's pretty minimal but on a 9 foot wide 2.35 screen it adds up.

If I can get good lux levels and resolution without the lens, then that will make one less thing to worry about in my HT. The lens is always a topic of conversation however with folks who've never seen the theater....

Bob - I'm actually looking forward to trying this projector without my lens. The lens I own (a prismasonic) does induce some barrel distortion and a bit of trapezoidal distortion as well. It's pretty minimal but on a 9 foot wide 2.35 screen it adds up.

If I can get good lux levels and resolution without the lens, then that will make one less thing to worry about in my HT. The lens is always a topic of conversation however with folks who've never seen the theater....

I've never seen the 3000 in action, but based on what I have read and heard...
If you don't mind sacrificing just the bits of the benefits that the lens does offer, in exchange for the more uniform picture you will get without the lens, I think you will most likely be happy without the lens.
What would discount that theory maybe, is if you are throwing a large pic from a long distance. If that is the case, thens may be more beneficial.
Imagine though, that if you sold your lens, then subtract that $$ from the price you pay for the pj. :cool:

This projector sounds fantastic, and the price makes it sound incredible !

I'm quite excited for this projector. I expect to begin building my home theater room in the Spring, hopefully finishing by Autumn.

Unless the AE5000 is released then (3D?), there's a very good chance this will be my first projector purchase!

CIH is the holy grail of HT. If you don't get it or want it fine, but don't spread mis-information.

Not for everyone. :)

For me CIH is still limited.

To me the Holy Grail of HT is to have an extra large screen with 4 way masking (automated being ideal), to vary the image size to suit my mood, the movie or the source quality. That way I can have a "just right" experience of each source/movie. Projection is the only display technology that allows one to change the size of the image this way - I say why not take advantage?

And on that note the Panasonic and it's zoom/lens memory features sounds
like it would be a great benefit to the approach I just outlined.

Not for everyone. :)

For me CIH is still limited.

To me the Holy Grail of HT is to have an extra large screen with 4 way masking (automated being ideal), to vary the image size to suit my mood, the movie or the source quality. That way I can have a "just right" experience of each source/movie. Projection is the only display technology that allows one to change the size of the image this way - I say why not take advantage?

And on that note the Panasonic and it's zoom/lens memory features sounds
like it would be a great benefit to the approach I just outlined.

This is exactly what I am going for. But I was thinking 3 way not 4. Keeping the top fixed. I want to have as many options as possible.

I was thinking of going with a High Power screen with this projector 2.40:1 (6'x14.4') am I ok or is there a better choice? Also I have total light control.

I agree that CIH is the 'holy grail' of HT of sorts. I am doing CIH in my personal theater.

However, the poster you quoted was correct. You are interpolating the VERTICAL resolution with the image processor...and interpolating means that you are adding data to the video that wasn't originally there.



How can you stretch video vertically without adding information? This 'stretching' process is called interpolation and you are definitely adding information that wasn't there to begin with.

A blu-ray movie has a set resolution and a 2.35:1 blu-ray is wasting some of the vertical resolution with black bars on top/bottom. For a 1080p movie, the video processor just takes the ~720 vertical lines of ACTUAL VIDEO, cropping off the black bars, and stretches (interpolates) them to fit the full 1080 vertical lines of the PJ. Then the a.lens just stretches the image horizontally to correct for the screwed up AR after the vertical stretching.

In summary, a lens setup does use the full 1080 lines of the projector...although you don't really have anymore data than what was there before because you had to interpolate in order to fill those 1080 lines. There was never 1080 vertical lines in the source movie...so the benefit of stretching to 1080 and then shrinking optically is debatable... The clearer advantage to using a lens is that since you are using all 1080 vertical lines...you get that much more light from your projector actually being used on the video image instead of being wasted on the masking above and below screen. So you get a brighter image (although this isn't 1:1 because you do lose some light going through a lens, and there are arguments that zooming also gives you a brighter image because of the lens position...but all arguments on the table, I do believe you get a slightly brighter image overall using a lens.)

Long story short...if money is no concern, a lens setup is probably the best way to go. You can get a slightly brighter image and more importantly you can choose between a much wider range of PJ's.

If money is a concern, then the panny is a great way to go. You get nearly as good of an image compared to a lens setup. You cost will be at least half that of a lens setup. The biggest problem to a zoomed 'CIH' setup is that you are limited to ONE projector...this panny. (not counting those that manually zoom a projector by hand, that would get old real fast for me)

I am doing the zoomed CIH setup using the panny. I think its by far the best bang for the buck CIH setup and I will be very happy with it.

I get it now. Too bad they don't have versions of the 2.35:1 movies that are anamorically squeezed into 1920x1080 on the BluRay disc instead of 1920 x 720 with black bars on top and bottom. Then we truly would get more true resolution out of an anamorphic lense.

One thing you might gain besides brightness with an anamorphic lense is less Screen-door effect. Since you are interpolating the 1920 x 720 image over the entire 1920 x 1080 panel, there are more pixels represented on the screen (and more blur). Of course the 4000's smooth screen feature probably makes this a unecessary.

The thing I'm still not sure about is why all the fuss over constant HEIGHT? In my proposed theater space I have a limit as to the width that I can make the screen, not the height. With the 4000 as my projector, wouldn't I be better off with a constant WIDTH screen? That way 2.35:1 and 16:9 would both be at there max size. I also think it would be easier to construct a removeable matte for the bottom of the screen when I'm in 2:35:1 than two side sliding mattes if I were to go with a constant HEIGH setup.

Julst like everyone I am awaiting the delivery of AE4000. I am building a 120" diagonal 2.4AR screen. I used the distance calculator and it suggests min of 12.8 ft and max of 18.8 ft. I can pretty much mount anywhere between those distances but to the pros out there what's the optimal distance. My screen is Seymour AV center stage XD. It's in the basement so pretty well light controlled.
Thanks!

The thing I'm still not sure about is why all the fuss over constant HEIGHT? In my proposed theater space I have a limit as to the width that I can make the screen, not the height. With the 4000 as my projector, wouldn't I be better off with a constant WIDTH screen? That way 2.35:1 and 16:9 would both be at there max size. I also think it would be easier to construct a removeable matte for the bottom of the screen when I'm in 2:35:1 than two side sliding mattes if I were to go with a constant HEIGH setup.

Yeah, the "CIH Superiority" belief hinges on the pre-supposition that all 2.35:1 movies should be the largest image you view in your setup, just as the director intended, and all that...in this scenario all HDTV and HD movies (1.78 and 1.85) are irrelevant...which is not applicable to most of us (and also why the CIH thread had 1/10 the traffic of the other threads...flame away!) With the AE4000 though, everyone gets what they want I think because it can do CIH by zooming out enough for 2.35 movies to be the same height as HDTV. Those who insist on the external lens could do it, but at a huge added expense (and I don't think they would be looking at this pj if they had $3-5K to throw away). I have a friend that use to say "you can go 1st Class, for only 85% more"...which pretty much sums up animorphic lens use these days.

I assure you, if Panasonic incorporated an internal animorphic lens into the AE5000, there are CIH enthusiasts that would have a problems with something about it.

Anyone know if this is true, I was thinking all of the pixels were not used...like letterbox on any 16:9 flat panel showing a 2.35:1 movie.

I believe you two are using different definitions for what 'all of the pixels are used' refers to.


I believe what Ecidious means by that is to say, all the pixels are active no matter what mode you are in. There isn't a physical shutter or anything. However, some of the pixels are simply showing black as you suspect. ie, it's letterboxed. The zoom modes are not doing any sort of anamorphic stretching (though it does have that option if you actually have a lens).

...Too bad they don't have versions of the 2.35:1 movies that are anamorically squeezed into 1920x1080 on the BluRay disc instead of 1920 x 720 with black bars on top and bottom. Then we truly would get more true resolution out of an anamorphic lense.

Yep...if there was a way to do this, you WOULD actually benefit from using a lens. Although this would never happen because it wouldn't play correctly on a normal 16:9 screen (99+% of displays). So we will always be stuck with 16:9 video sources in the foreseeable future (even though many movies, maybe even a majority of new releases, are a 2.35:1 AR...they are still actually 16:9 video sources with black bars on top and bottom).

One thing you might gain besides brightness with an anamorphic lense is less Screen-door effect. Since you are interpolating the 1920 x 720 image over the entire 1920 x 1080 panel, there are more pixels represented on the screen (and more blur). Of course the 4000's smooth screen feature probably makes this a unecessary.

Yes...this is another incremental benefit to using a lens.

The thing I'm still not sure about is why all the fuss over constant HEIGHT? In my proposed theater space I have a limit as to the width that I can make the screen, not the height. With the 4000 as my projector, wouldn't I be better off with a constant WIDTH screen? That way 2.35:1 and 16:9 would both be at there max size. I also think it would be easier to construct a removeable matte for the bottom of the screen when I'm in 2:35:1 than two side sliding mattes if I were to go with a constant HEIGH setup.
There are several reasons for constant height being the primary focus. Most 'epic' big blockbuster movies are in a 2.35:1 AR. So people with CIH systems want these 'epic' movies to feel more grand than a more run of the mill movie that is 1.78:1 AR. Doing a constant WIDTH system will yield a much larger image for your 1.78 AR material vs 2.35:1 AR material. So there is a mental thing here where the bigger blockbuster movies are usually 2.35:1...so these are the types of movies that you'd want to get the most oooo's and awww's from.

So one reason for constant image height is a mental thing as I touched on above. However...the other more technical reason is that our eyesight/peripheral vision is more sensitive to height than width. So it is easier to go wider than taller w/o getting an image that is too overwhelming. For instance, if you are sitting 10-12 feet back and you personally find that a 100" (49.5" high x 87.5" wide) 16:9 screen is the perfect size. You could probably use a 125" (49" high x 115" wide) 2.35:1 screen and not be overwhelmed by the extra width. However...if you had a 132" (64.5" high x 115" wide) 16:9 screen...the extra height of 15 inches would probably be too much and the image would be too overwhelming.
So long story short...since humans tend to be more sensitive to image height than width, in a CIH system, it tends to be generally more reliable to size your screen via height. So you pick a height that you like best for your seating position and then everything you watch will be the same height.

As stated before, everyone has different tastes and the 'holy grail' of anything in theater varies from person to person.

I personally like the idea of CIH because I want the more epic/blockbuster films to 'feel' the grandest in my theater. I DON'T want the anamorphic movies to have less viewing area than 'chick-flicks'.

CIA (Constant image area) is a way to maximize every single AR in either vertical or horizontal directions...but doing a 4-way masking system just wasn't worth it to me. And I actually like the idea of movies with 1.3, 1.78, 2.35 AR's respectively getting more viewable area and an increasing grandeur feel.

Also, can the mods bump this thread? 200 posts in a week counts as serious traffic I would think...

The thing I'm still not sure about is why all the fuss over constant HEIGHT? In my proposed theater space I have a limit as to the width that I can make the screen, not the height. With the 4000 as my projector, wouldn't I be better off with a constant WIDTH screen? That way 2.35:1 and 16:9 would both be at there max size. I also think it would be easier to construct a removeable matte for the bottom of the screen when I'm in 2:35:1 than two side sliding mattes if I were to go with a constant HEIGH setup.

Look at it this way - a 16:9 projector is constant height for 4:3 and 16:9. If the optimal shape of your screen wall is 4:3, would you go for a 4:3 screen to maximize both 4:3 and 16:9 content?

I personally like the idea of CIH because I want the more epic/blockbuster films to 'feel' the grandest in my theater. I DON'T want the anamorphic movies to have less viewing area than 'chick-flicks'.


This supports my point above about "feeling" the biggest in your setup...also, don't kid yourself about the animorphic widescreen chick flicks...(http://www.allmovie.com/dvd/ultimate-chick-flick-collection-6-discs-41726)there are a ton. Conversely, only 3 out of IMDBs top 10 movies of all time are 2.34:1 (1 other was 2.4:1)...definitely not a majority.(http://www.imdb.com/chart/top)

The thing I'm still not sure about is why all the fuss over constant HEIGHT? .over better experience. the wow factor:D

What I don't quite get is why would higher-end pj users (or those who aspire to a higher-end result) think a Lens Memory feature that zooms to make a 2.35:1 image larger is inferior to elaborate masking systems they might spend thousands on that slide in or out to accommodate the difference between 1.33:1/1.78:1 images and 2.35:1 images.

In both cases, no additional pixels are added to the central image, right?

And as a far as the downsides of zooming in general goes, isn't zooming in or out at initial setup something virtually every pj user does to one extent or another except for those whose home theater setups allow for perfect placement of their pj in the first place? And that's assuming everyone in the audience can sit in the best seat in the house relative to that supposedly perfect position.

I mean, is there really likely to be a huge difference in the eye of the beholder with regard to pixels between zooming an image to make it slightly larger and physically moving yourself from the third row to the first row in a home theater setup?

If money is a concern, then the panny is a great way to go. You get nearly as good of an image compared to a lens setup. You cost will be at least half that of a lens setup. The biggest problem to a zoomed 'CIH' setup is that you are limited to ONE projector...this panny. (not counting those that manually zoom a projector by hand, that would get old real fast for me)

I am doing the zoomed CIH setup using the panny. I think its by far the best bang for the buck CIH setup and I will be very happy with it.

What happens to the black bars when you zoom for CIH with the typical black masking border on a typical screen? I currently have a Carada screen 16 x 9 -- and if went CIH would probably buy a Carada 2:35 screen (which at its best has about a 3 or 4 inch black felt border -- the higher end Carada). Is that enough to hide the black bars when zooming, or will you still see them on your wall?

I have a black painted wall by the way -- you can see my current setup in my signature link. But I'm thinking that the black bars will still be slightly visible on the wall, to the extent it overspills the black felt border on any Carada screen. So would you need to buy special masking for CIH zooming - -which adds to the cost?

What happens to the black bars when you zoom for CIH with the typical black masking border on a typical screen? I currently have a Carada screen 16 x 9 -- and if went CIH would probably buy a Carada 2:35 screen (which at its best has about a 3 or 4 inch black felt border -- the higher end Carada). Is that enough to hide the black bars when zooming, or will you still see them on your wall?

I have a black painted wall by the way -- you can see my current setup in my signature link. But I'm thinking that the black bars will still be slightly visible on the wall, to the extent it overspills the black felt border on any Carada screen. So would you need to buy special masking for CIH zooming - -which adds to the cost?

Darn nice room! I've got similar equipment as yours but I guarantee it sounds better in your setup. In an ideal setup, and assuming that you have enough zoom capability left after you set up your pj (might affect where you place it to accommodate this option), zooming the image bigger makes the blank on the image spill off the screen onto your black screen border and, unless your front wall is white, you won't notice the low light spill on the outside of the border. NOw that I think about it, it shouldn't matter where you place the pj in the room, the ability to zoom a pj out to fill a CIH screen is inherently built into the zoom ration of the lens. I remember reading somewhere that a ~1.35X zoom would just give you enough range for the desired effect, as 2.35 divided by 1.3 = ~1.78:1, which will also allow you to take advantage of 1.85 material as that falls in the zoom range between 2.35-1.78. If you were using a 2.35:1 screen your problem would be on 1.85:1 material, as your black bars would "fall" on the left and right side on the actual screen material. My ideal way would be to have 2 retractable screens, 1 for 2.35 and 1 for 1.78 (or 1.85). Now that, would be high cotton.

Did this answer what you were asking?

I have a black painted wall by the way -- you can see my current setup in my signature link. But I'm thinking that the black bars will still be slightly visible on the wall, to the extent it overspills the black felt border on any Carada screen. So would you need to buy special masking for CIH zooming - -which adds to the cost?
Great looking home theater, Caesar.

I have a Carada screen too and wanted to extend the black fabric borders well beyond the usual 3 1/2" width. I went to my local art supply store, bought large pieces of foamboard, cut them to size to accommodate all four sides of my screen, "gift wrapped" them in a black fabric very similar to the one Carada uses with all the folds of the wrapping on the backside of the foamboard and simply nailed the fabric wrapped panels to the wall flush to the outer edge of the screen frame with black nails. Most people think the additional 12" black fabric "frame" all around my screen came with my Carada screen and is part of the frame.

You can probably find better solutions to this problem in the home theater construction forum, but my solution was very easy and probably didn't cost more than $50 total including the foamboard, fabric and nails.

Great looking home theater, Caesar.

I have a Carada screen too and wanted to extend the black fabric borders well beyond the usual 3 1/2" width. I went to my local art supply store, bought large pieces of foamboard, cut them to size to accommodate all four sides of my screen, "gift wrapped" them in a black fabric very similar to the one Carada uses with all the folds of the wrapping on the backside of the foamboard and simply nailed the fabric wrapped panels to the wall flush to the outer edge of the screen frame with black nails. Most people think the additional 12" black fabric "frame" all around my screen came with my Carada screen and is part of the frame.

You can probably find better solutions to this problem in the home theater construction forum, but my solution was very easy and probably didn't cost more than $50 total including the foamboard, fabric and nails.


Thanks. But I guess my question is -- is it necessary to add to the 3.5 inch Carada border when zooming for CIH (particularly with a black painted wall)? Or will the black bars be somewhat visible without adding to the border as you did (or doing something similar)?

Put it this way -- I'll consider CIH with this projector if all I have to do is buy this projector and a new Carada screen in 2:35 ratio. If I have to do anything else -- like add to the masking, etc. -- I'll probably just stick with 16 x 9.

Darn nice room! I've got similar equipment as yours but I guarantee it sounds better in your setup. In an ideal setup, and assuming that you have enough zoom capability left after you set up your pj (might affect where you place it to accommodate this option), zooming the image bigger makes the blank on the image spill off the screen onto your black screen border and, unless your front wall is white, you won't notice the low light spill on the outside of the border. NOw that I think about it, it shouldn't matter where you place the pj in the room, the ability to zoom a pj out to fill a CIH screen is inherently built into the zoom ration of the lens. I remember reading somewhere that a ~1.35X zoom would just give you enough range for the desired effect, as 2.35 divided by 1.3 = ~1.78:1, which will also allow you to take advantage of 1.85 material as that falls in the zoom range between 2.35-1.78. If you were using a 2.35:1 screen your problem would be on 1.85:1 material, as your black bars would "fall" on the left and right side on the actual screen material. My ideal way would be to have 2 retractable screens, 1 for 2.35 and 1 for 1.78 (or 1.85). Now that, would be high cotton.

Did this answer what you were asking?


Thanks -- I should be okay with my PJ placement where it is (16 feet back from the screen). the largest 2:35 screen I'd probably do is 126 inches diag. My 16 x 9 screen is 114 inches diag. Based on Panasonic's site, I would be fine where I am now if I switched to a 126 inch diag 2:35 screen.

As long as I don't see the black bars on a black painted wall -- I'm fine. I just need to know for sure.

I'm starting to get a headache here.
Why is it so hard to discuss CIH in the CIH forum?
I can understand some comments about the Panasonic memory function, but this is starting to get out of hand.
I just spent a half hour reading though CIH babble (which more than half of it is technical misinformation).
.
.
.
2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=117)
.
.
.

Can soft screen be truned off?

I'm starting to get a headache here.
Why is it so hard to discuss CIH in the CIH forum?
I can understand some comments about the Panasonic memory function, but this is starting to get out of hand.
I just spent a half hour reading though CIH babble (which more than half of it is technical misinformation).


Because the defining feature of the Panny is the lens memory, which greatly facilitates CIH. The Panny is the only budget projector that raises awareness of CIH, so naturally we'll see a lot of CIH questions in Panny threads. Just keep pointing them to the CIH forum :).

I'm starting to get a headache here.
Why is it so hard to discuss CIH in the CIH forum?
I can understand some comments about the Panasonic memory function, but this is starting to get out of hand.
I just spent a half hour reading though CIH babble (which more than half of it is technical misinformation).
.
.
.
2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=117)
.
.
.


Dave,
I seem to be having trouble with this constant image height thing...Is there a link or something you could provide that might help me...
Best,
Chris

Can soft screen be truned off?
are you trolling? :eek: It is "smoothscreen", and no is your answer....
Best,
chris

are you trolling? :eek: It is "smoothscreen", and no is your answer....
Best,
chris

Sorry for the wrong term :o

Was just wondering, some people seem to like it and some not. Seems like it would be an easy feature to turn beable to make user selectable. Make everyone happy, well sort of any way.....

...Conversely, only 3 out of IMDBs top 10 movies of all time are 2.34:1 (1 other was 2.4:1)...definitely not a majority.(http://www.imdb.com/chart/top)
True...although you need to also take into account the dates for those movies:
Shawshank Redemption, 1994, 1.85
Godfather, 1972, 1.85
Godfather II, 1974, 1.85
il buono, 1966, 2.35
Pulp Fiction, 1994, 2.35
Schindler's List, 1993, 1.85
12 Angry Men, 1966, 1.66
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, 1975, 1.85
The Dark Knight, 2008, 2.35/1.78 (or 1.85?)
Star Wars, 1980, 2.20

So...it is a little unfair to compare the top ten movies when 6 of the 10 movies where all 1980 or earlier. I think 2.35 movies have become more popular lately, especially with blu-rays.

So while your point is well taken...there are a lot of good movies that are in a 16:9 format. My personal opinion is that 2.35 is becoming more popular than 1.78/85 with newer movies...especially on blu-ray format.

I noticed projector people just put up a rebate for this model....no surprise, its the 2 year limited warranty or 2000 hour bulb whichever comes first deal. Useless for me of course, I plan on having 2000 hours on this baby by xmas.

Dave,
I seem to be having trouble with this constant image height thing...Is there a link or something you could provide that might help me...
Best,
Chris

:D You mussa forgot to put on your tri-focals today.:D

Thanks. But I guess my question is -- is it necessary to add to the 3.5 inch Carada border when zooming for CIH (particularly with a black painted wall)? Or will the black bars be somewhat visible without adding to the border as you did (or doing something similar)?

Well, I have a white wall but have only allowed spill-over of the black bars onto my DIY black fabric extra border I described, where I don't notice it at all.

However, pottscb seems to have more experience with the black painted wall situation and thinks it wouldn't be noticable on a black painted wall.

That being the case, from the pictures of your screen setup, the only place where it might be an issue is your white ceiling. If your 2.35:1 screen is mounted with the top edge as high as the top edge of your 1.78:1 screen is mounted now, the Lens Memory zoom might cause the top black border to spill onto your white screen (where it might not be all that much of a distraction there either). But if the top edge is a few inches lower, the top border probably won't ever get that far anyway, not even with Ben-Hur.

So am I correct, that when incorperating the lens memory function of the 3000/4000, that the black bars on top and bottom a still projected as they normally would be?
The pj does not some how eliminate the bars from being projected?

2nd, is there more that just one memory available for the above function?
To switch from 16:9 mode to 2.35:1 mode, you just hit a button and it's all automatic, right?
So can this be done with other aspect ratios too?... like 1.66:1 or 2.50:1?... in addition to the 2.35:1 mode?
I hope I am making this clear.

TIA for any info.:)

Response below in blue.

So am I correct, that when incorperating the lens memory function of the 3000/4000, that the black bars on top and bottom a still projected as they normally would be?
The pj does not some how eliminate the bars from being projected?

Correct.

2nd, is there more that just one memory available for the above function?
To switch from 16:9 mode to 2.35:1 mode, you just hit a button and it's all automatic, right?
So can this be done with other aspect ratios too?... like 1.66:1 or 2.50:1?... in addition to the 2.35:1 mode?
I hope I am making this clear.

The 3000 has 3 memory positions, the 4000 has 6. For the 3000, you enter the lens memory menu, select at memory position, wait ~12 secs for the projector adjust zoom/focus/shift, and then exit the lens memory menu. The 4000 is the same, but now it has the auto-switch feature; let's say you're in default 16:9 lens mode, the 4000 analyzes the image and if it detects black bars, it will automatically call out a user defined lens memory and adjust zoom/focus/shift accordingly.
TIA for any info.:)

Awesome! Thanks ilsiu.

So am I correct, that when incorperating the lens memory function of the 3000/4000, that the black bars on top and bottom a still projected as they normally would be?
The pj does not some how eliminate the bars from being projected?

2nd, is there more that just one memory available for the above function?
To switch from 16:9 mode to 2.35:1 mode, you just hit a button and it's all automatic, right?
So can this be done with other aspect ratios too?... like 1.66:1 or 2.50:1?... in addition to the 2.35:1 mode?
I hope I am making this clear.

TIA for any info.:)

I am totally confused. I thought you didn't want to talk about CIH here. :rolleyes:

Thanks. But I guess my question is -- is it necessary to add to the 3.5 inch Carada border when zooming for CIH (particularly with a black painted wall)? Or will the black bars be somewhat visible without adding to the border as you did (or doing something similar)?

Put it this way -- I'll consider CIH with this projector if all I have to do is buy this projector and a new Carada screen in 2:35 ratio. If I have to do anything else -- like add to the masking, etc. -- I'll probably just stick with 16 x 9.

I don't want to sound like a fanboy, but ever since I switched to 2.35:1, I can't imagine ever switching back. Your setup is screaming for 2.35:1. Just look at all that black on the sides that is wasted. You can have the same height screen and add so much more picture. I have the largest Carada 2.35:1 Criterion screen available (with Brilliant White screen option) and I used it with a CRT projector. I have no worries whatsoever about it being too big for the Panasonic that I am considering purchasing.

Regarding your question, there will definitely be spill over because the boarder of the Criterion series is not as big as the black bar. However, Any work that you have to do is WELL WORTH IT to go with 2.35:1 IMHO.

You can probably get away with your white ceiling. I had the same setup and it never bothered me too much even though there was light bouncing off of it. There will probably be more light bouncing off of it from reflections off your screen than any black bar would light up on it.

That being said, in the long term, you might want to either paint them black or replace them with black tiles. It will make your screen more vibrant most likely.

Take care,
Mike

I am totally confused. I thought you didn't want to talk about CIH here. :rolleyes:

Not talking about CIH. Talking about the lens/memory feature of the projector. Not the same thing.
Hopefully your confusion will clear up soon.
If not, your doctor may be able to write you a prescription to help.;)

Not talking about CIH. Talking about the lens/memory feature of the projector. Not the same thing.
Hopefully your confusion will clear up soon.
If not, your doctor may be able to write you a prescription to help.;)

LOL! (about you're whole post) :D

Hey give Smarty Pants a break. He admitted to not being a guru on this stuff.

He has been rather helpful if, acerbic at times, in many places on AVS.

We all appreciated his posts concerning the development of the BDP-83 as a beta tester.

He does have a point. This is not about a CIH implementation, it is about the rather unique capabilities of this Panny unit. What does that afford users. A simple question.

In my case I have a 133" diagonal 16:9 screen in my HT. The maximum vertical and horizontal screen size that will fit in my room.

CIH sounds good on the first look. I'll survive with aspect ratios that don't conform to 16:9. Black bars at top and bottom okay here if they are close to 0 IRE.

Joe

Sorry, I guess my feathers get a little ruffled when someone posts in huge bold letters telling people to stop talking about something when the discussion starts going down a path they don't like, but maybe those who are involved in the discussion are enjoying it, even if it is in the wrong forum. Then to turn around and join the discussion, knowingly or not, was a bit odd. I didn't mean to belittle him or his knowledge in any way. It was more in defense of the discussion.

In my case I have a 133" diagonal 16:9 screen in my HT. The maximum vertical and horizontal screen size that will fit in my room.

CIH sounds good on the first look. I'll survive with aspect ratios that don't conform to 16:9. Black bars at top and bottom okay here if they are close to 0 IRE.

Joe

It sounds like in your case you did the right thing. If your front wall is more square in shape and you can fill it horizontally and vertically with a 16:9 screen and still have room for your speakers and other equipment I can see why you would want to go with 16:9. In my case, I had lots of horizontal room available and was able to get a much wider screen with 2.35:1, not to mention most movies are 2.35:1 or 2.4:1 so it really takes advantage of the screen. If you watch a lot of HDTV, then 16:9 would be the majority of the content.

Thanks -- I should be okay with my PJ placement where it is (16 feet back from the screen). the largest 2:35 screen I'd probably do is 126 inches diag. My 16 x 9 screen is 114 inches diag. Based on Panasonic's site, I would be fine where I am now if I switched to a 126 inch diag 2:35 screen.

As long as I don't see the black bars on a black painted wall -- I'm fine. I just need to know for sure.i just check out you HT wow Nice setup, you will enjoy 2.35:1 my HT it 22'x15' aprox. with 140" 2.35:1 screen im thinking about going to 150"

If you watch a lot of HDTV, then 16:9 would be the majority of the content.This is very true...almost all HDTV is in 16:9 mode.

However...has anyone else started noticing a few shows/series are throwing in a bit wider AR? Not sure what ratio it is exactly...its not a full 2.35:1, maybe more llike 2.0:1 or something...but I've just noticed a sprinkling of shows on tv with black bars on top and bottom.

I'm not insinuating that more TV shows will go this direction, I don't think they will and really hope they don't. Just thought it was interesting.

Totally off topic. Not really at topic at all.

But since nobody at my work cares about this kind of stuff I had to tell somebody that when I called projector people last week for the 4000 the rep. told me I was the first one on the list!

Here is hoping that these units come into the US at the end of October as planned.

Have a nice day guys from Canada.

i just check out you HT wow Nice setup, you will enjoy 2.35:1 my HT it 22'x15' aprox. with 140" 2.35:1 screen im thinking about going to 150"

Nice theater! Do you notice the black bar spillover at the top/bottom of your screen (beyond the felt) with the ae3000? If so, is it distracting? Do you think flat black paint instead of your dark red on the screen wall would help?

Just got my pre-order in yesterday with VA, hopefully I'm on the first shipment.

Can anybody suggest a good (and cheap) ceiling mount that would work with this? It's my first pj so I don't currently have one.

There are cheap, extreamly flexible, and you can lower them to any height you want by using a piece of 3/4 " pipe (spray paint to match your decor).

http://www.crutchfield.com/App/Product/Item/Photos/Default.aspx?i=051VMPR1&tp=1416

Does anyone know if ceiling mounts for the AE3000 will work for the AE4000? Thanks in advance.

Nick

Does anyone know if ceiling mounts for the AE3000 will work for the AE4000? Thanks in advance.

Nick

I was told that any decent universal mount will work. I'm going from an AE900 to an AE4000, using a Premier PBL-UMS and the folks at Visual Apex told me that should work.

Just learned that Panasonic is offering a free additional year's warranty for any AE4000's purchased from authorized dealers from now until 12/31/2009. Nice bonus!

"Shoot-out: 1080p Home Theater Projectors", interesting read at PJC. They compared the AE4000 with the following 1080p PJs.

* BenQ W6000
* Epson Home Cinema 8100
* Mitsubishi HC6800
* Samsung A900
* Sony BRAVIA VPL-HW15

Where is the shootout article? When I click on it, all I see is a paragraph stating that a shootout of the new PJ's took place? Am I missing something?

Where is the shootout article? When I click on it, all I see is a paragraph stating that a shootout of the new PJ's took place? Am I missing something?

http://www.projectorcentral.com/1080p_shootout_2009.htm