About the same price, the RS1 with a new bulb vs. the Panny?

Differences I know of are the auto zoom on the panny which isn't a deal breaker for me. The colors on the RS1 are oversaturated, how much, I don't know as I have not seen one in person yet.

I have a 17 ft. deep room with a possible 128" wide screen. I was thinking 10 ft. wide Wisonart DW diy screen with seating distance around 14ft. Also wanted to go CIH which is easy with the panny. Don't know if zooming on the JVC is difficult or not.

Any thoughts?

Hard to answer as no one has put a Panny through its paces. I would probably encourage you to find a DILA and an LCD to get a feel for the overall differences in technology.

the RS1 has manual Zoom/Focus/Lens Shift so not very convenient if you want to do Zoom for CIH, IMO.

While not the same comparison....

At a HT meet earlier this year we compared an RS2 clone (Pioneer FPJ1) to my AE3000.

While we didn't take any real measurements, the general consensus was that the FPJ1 had better black levels but overall they were fairly close in quality.

Given that and a 2.35:1 screen, I'd take the AE4000 (assuming it is at least as good as the AE3000) over an RS1. The RS2 would probably be a closer comparison.

Hard to answer as no one has put a Panny through its paces. I would probably encourage you to find a DILA and an LCD to get a feel for the overall differences in technology.

Jason,

Your absolutely right. It's just difficult in West Michigan, there are no magnolias and the only decent AV place in Grand Rapids went out of business 6 months ago (classic stereo). So I guess I just need to make a run to Chicago and spend a day running around looking at systems. It's a 3 hour drive but would be worth it. My experience has only been with the Sim2 3000e but out of my price range.

I guess that's why so many members flip systems on a regular basis. Even going to look at them in a show room is hit or miss. What is the room like? Is the system calibrated? Screen, etc. Then you jump in the car, drive a half hour across town and go look at a differen system. By then, it's tough to remember exactly what the last system looked like.

Unless you are able to AB the systems it's a stretch. And even then you wonder if one system is set up better than the other because the seller has more in inventory and wants to move them. I am not suggesting there is no worth, on the contrary. I would be willing to drive round trip 6 hours to do just that. But I can see why someone would own a JVC, then jump to a DLP, then to LCD. It gives the owner an opportunity to live with a system in the same room night after night and learn what the good and bad trates of the PJ really are.

I can't sit on the fence forever. What I know is that whatever I purchase it will be much better than what I own now......which is nothing! I am quite certain that either a used rs1 or a new panny would be a great PJ to start with. The panny with it's warranty and auto lens shift sure is a tempting advantage, even if the picture comes up a hair short.

While not the same comparison....

At a HT meet earlier this year we compared an RS2 clone (Pioneer FPJ1) to my AE3000.

While we didn't take any real measurements, the general consensus was that the FPJ1 had better black levels but overall they were fairly close in quality.

Given that and a 2.35:1 screen, I'd take the AE4000 (assuming it is at least as good as the AE3000) over an RS1. The RS2 would probably be a closer comparison.

Hey Jamis,

Thanks, that's as close a comparo is were are going to get at this point. Your right about the 2.4:1 being a huge benefit, then there is the new lamp and the warranty of the panny as well. Sure makes a tough package to beat. Honestly, the panny should probably be in the $3k range and if it was it would be out of mine so the panny should be a no brainer. I will wait for the locals to review it, certainly something to look forward to!

..... Honestly, the panny should probably be in the $3k range .....

Isn't the AE4000 announced for $1999 MSRP?

Yes it is, his statement suggests they should be asking $3000.00 for it, instead of $1999.00 which is like getting a $3000.00 unit on some super to good to be true deal.

Indeed,

The 3000 was in the mid $2K range and just introduced a year ago. The 4000 has an auto zoom system, better red bulb, etc. and is significantly less. It's a slice of fried gold anyway you cut it.

Native Panny 3000:1
RS1 15000:1

Lcos highest fill rate, lcd lowest

rs1 700 calibrated lumens
Panny less

If you watch movies, no contest, for sports and other stuff Panny will do.

I have RS2 and have seen AE3000, close is NOT what I would describe it:)

Native Panny 3000:1
RS1 15000:1

Lcos highest fill rate, lcd lowest

rs1 700 calibrated lumens
Panny less

If you watch movies, no contest, for sports and other stuff Panny will do.

I have RS2 and have seen AE3000, close is NOT what I would describe it:)

Is the RS2 significantly better than the RS1? Also, does your RS2 have the 3d image I am after. I know it's not a dlp and that they are different pictures but is there any of that depth?

Thanks for the comparison.

If you watch movies - in accurate color - no contest.

The cine4home AE4000 preview shows that gamut in 'color1' mode is near dead on accurate. It also looks like the 4k has an accurate out of the box grey scale and real CMS. I find all of this to be great selling points in favor of the panny, although I'd really like to see some results/feedback on actual production models.

The 3K native is a little disappointing, but a standard iris multiplier of 3 to 4x puts one at 9K to 12K dynamic CR - or getting pretty close to the RS1 native. it is disappointing that the cine4home preview did not publish any dynamic iris contrast numbers....i'm really interested to hear some feedback on the 4k iris implementation.


I was almost certain that my next projector was NOT going to be an LCD. but, at this price point, I guess they are back in the running...I have to think the 4K would compare very nicely to a RS1.....and would have some advantages to an RS2 depending on individual pq priorities....

The 3K native is a little disappointing, but a standard iris multiplier of 3 to 4x puts one at 9K to 12K dynamic CR - or getting pretty close to the RS1 native.



Or you could slap a cap on RS1 and that would bring the RS1 contrast down in line with Panny:)

I just don't care much for iris tricks.

If you really want that "pop" as you say, then I suggest W20K or W10K Benq. They will give you that "pop" for under 2K and you'll be giving up a little in black department. Also if you can track down a Sharp 20K that will pop your eyes out :)

LCD and Lcos are just not there yet, there is something about a single chip DLP that makes them excel in that area.

DLP also excels in motion handling (lcd is slowest hence FI) so for games and sports it would work better.

RS1 gives up little to RS2, and for under 2K it's a great pj, but you can still find an RS2 for not much more new with warranty.

Room color?

Dark room: RS1 will probably crucify the AE4000.

Bright room: probably not so much.

The pannies bring a lot to the table as I've said in another thread. They are generally very easy to live with.

Or you could slap a cap on RS1 and that would bring the RS1 contrast down in line with Panny:)

I just don't care much for iris tricks.

If you really want that "pop" as you say, then I suggest W20K or W10K Benq. They will give you that "pop" for under 2K and you'll be giving up a little in black department. Also if you can track down a Sharp 20K that will pop your eyes out :)

LCD and Lcos are just not there yet, there is something about a single chip DLP that makes them excel in that area.

DLP also excels in motion handling (lcd is slowest hence FI) so for games and sports it would work better.

RS1 gives up little to RS2, and for under 2K it's a great pj, but you can still find an RS2 for not much more new with warranty.

Whatever :eek:/ Their needs to be a forum just for DLP fanatics that they can salivate over each other.You would think by now almost 2010 these guys would have grown up.:o

Or you could slap a cap on RS1 and that would bring the RS1 contrast down in line with Panny:)

I just don't care much for iris tricks.

If you really want that "pop" as you say, then I suggest W20K or W10K Benq. They will give you that "pop" for under 2K and you'll be giving up a little in black department. Also if you can track down a Sharp 20K that will pop your eyes out :)

LCD and Lcos are just not there yet, there is something about a single chip DLP that makes them excel in that area.

DLP also excels in motion handling (lcd is slowest hence FI) so for games and sports it would work better.

RS1 gives up little to RS2, and for under 2K it's a great pj, but you can still find an RS2 for not much more new with warranty.



I was thinking the same thing. I am looking at the used rs1's and they are priced around $1,800 but for $2,500.00 I can buy a brand new in box with warranty for $2,500.00 But if I spend $2,500.00 for $3K I can find a used sharp 20K.

How do you think a Sharp 20K would match up against a RS2 or the Panny 4000. And how do I start with a $1,000.00 budget and always end up at 3 times as much???? I hate this hobby!

I was thinking the same thing. I am looking at the used rs1's and they are priced around $1,800 but for $2,500.00 I can buy a brand new in box with warranty for $2,500.00 But if I spend $2,500.00 for $3K I can find a used sharp 20K.

that's a fairly large jump
1,800-3,000

If 1k is your budget then I'd try to find w5000 for around that price.
1.5-1.7k rs1
2.5k rs2 (there is still one left new with warranty last time I checked on Vgon)
I have seen Sharps for 2k, would not pay 3k for it today.

rs2 vs sharp, I have rs2 so that should answer it for you, but for games and sports I'd go with sharp if you can live with the rainbows and lower lumens in movie mode.


I've had lived with the elusive "dlp pop" for most of my life across all the brands Sharp included, but OVERALL jvc just cannot be beat for under 3k period. The stability of the image and lack of rainbows alone is worth it. The native contrast is icing on the cake.

One thing to consider with RS1-Us, as opposed to RS1-Xs, is that you can't adjust gamma. All of the RSs have gamma that, if left alone, tends to get really low, especially on the higher end, resulting in a flat looking picture. That is why I would pair any RS1-U with a Lumagen HDP/HDQ. This allows you to adjust gamma (and other things) and get your POP back.

If 1k is your budget then I'd try to find w5000 for around that price.
1.5-1.7k rs1
2.5k rs2 (there is still one left new with warranty last time I checked on Vgon)
I have seen Sharps for 2k, would not pay 3k for it today.

rs2 vs sharp, I have rs2 so that should answer it for you, but for games and sports I'd go with sharp if you can live with the rainbows and lower lumens in movie mode.


I've had lived with the elusive "dlp pop" for most of my life across all the brands Sharp included, but OVERALL jvc just cannot be beat for under 3k period. The stability of the image and lack of rainbows alone is worth it. The native contrast is icing on the cake.


That's good advice, thanks. I saw the RS2 in the classifieds, seems like a great pj for the money easily beating out most, if not all, of what's out there for the same price. And I would get a fresh bulb and a warranty which would be nice. There is an RS1 for 2K in the classifieds with a fresh bulb but I am sure the warranty is out or close to it so for an extra $500.00 I would get a new model with a warranty, seems like a smart buy.

One thing to consider with RS1-Us, as opposed to RS1-Xs, is that you can't adjust gamma. All of the RSs have gamma that, if left alone, tends to get really low, especially on the higher end, resulting in a flat looking picture. That is why I would pair any RS1-U with a Lumagen HDP/HDQ. This allows you to adjust gamma (and other things) and get your POP back.



Lawguy,

Thanks for that, I didn't know they went flat over time. That pushes me closer to the RS2 for around 2.5K. Gives me gamma control, a fresh bulb, warranty and an upgraded model. Seems like the right choice, still waffling between DLP and D-ILA. The only DLP I have spent any time with was the sim2 3000e. I didn't notice RBE but that was a really high end machine so I didn't expect to see it. I think either way I would be really happy with the JVC though. Everyone seems to love it.

Goodness gracious!:mad:

I'm really getting tired of the love fest of some JVC posters.

A used RS1 vs a brand new 4000? Not even a little bit close.

First off, the only real advantage of something like the RS1 are the CR / BL numbers, which only matter if you have tightly controlled light conditions in your HT. And here's a dirty little secret; very few do.

In a nutshell the 4000 will have the following advantages;
1) Brighter
2) Sharper
3) Quieter
4) Newer
5) Better video processing

As far as DI "tricks" are concerned, I would tend to agree there, at least until 10 days ago. My new Mitsu 6800 has a DI that works virtually perfectly. I don't know how good the DI is on the new 4000, but if it is any where near as good as my 6800, this should not be an issue. If the DI works and you can't hear it or see it, it should be a non-issue.

Here is some sage advice; I know of not one but two very knowledgeable FP enthusiasts in this Forum at bought a JVC (at about a $3K premium) over the last several years, only to sell it less than 6 months later.

Goodness gracious!:mad:

I'm really getting tired of the love fest of some JVC posters.

A used RS1 vs a brand new 4000? Not even a little bit close.

First off, the only real advantage of something like the RS1 are the CR / BL numbers, which only matter if you have tightly controlled light conditions in your HT. And here's a dirty little secret; very few do.

In a nutshell the 4000 will have the following advantages;
1) Brighter Perhaps in a "brightest setting but not in a calibrated mode
2) Sharper Sharp is not something Panasonic with its smoothscreen technology can be said to be. I would be shocked if an RS1, which compared favorably sharpness wise to many high end DLP's, did not beat an AE4000 in sharpness
3) Quieter Perhaps
4) Newer Is this an advantage? A fresh dump today is not better than yesterday's left over filet.
5) Better video processing Many people don't find Frame Interpolation to be useful for movie watching. The Panasonic does have this feature but for many, it is worthless

As far as DI "tricks" are concerned, I would tend to agree there, at least until 10 days ago. My new Mitsu 6800 has a DI that works virtually perfectly. I don't know how good the DI is on the new 4000, but if it is any where near as good as my 6800, this should not be an issue. If the DI works and you can't hear it or see it, it should be a non-issue.

Here is some sage advice; I know of not one but two very knowledgeable FP enthusiasts in this Forum at bought a JVC (at about a $3K premium) over the last several years, only to sell it less than 6 months later.

At least be honest about it. I've updated your advantages in red...

Also:

How is the convergence on Panasonic projectors? Anyway to move pixels or are you stuck with them?
How do you focus without being able to sharply define pixel edges?
What about dust blobs? They seem to plague LCD projectors...
What kind of native CR do you actually think the AE4000 will have? The 3k only had 2 or 3k:1. Do you expect this to have increased dramatically?

The reason you don't hear the Panasonic being praised as highly as you think it deserves is because most here don't think it has a picture quality that justifies it and they focus their attention on machines that do.

I'll stand by my analysis. And please don't question my honesty. A typical JVC zealot.

Sharper, you bet.
Quieter, you bet
Brighter, most probably; we'll see after Art's review.
I'll take new over 4 year old technology.

I'm also glad you made my more general point of JVC zealotry by your personal attack; I'm glad the other readers of this post are here to read it as well...

Folks, you can make up your own mind here.

I'll stand by my analysis. And please don't question my honesty. A typical JVC zealot.

Sharper, you bet.
Quieter, you bet
Brighter, most probably; we'll see after Art's review.
I'll take new over 4 year old technology.

I'm also glad you made my more general point of JVC zealotry by your personal attack; I'm glad the other readers of this post are here to read it as well...

Folks, you can make up your own mind here.

Where is the personal attack in what mrlittlejeans wrote? I don't see it.

I assume that you have spent lots of time with the JVCs and the Panasonics and that your opinions were formed from your own observations and not from someone else's review?

I won't comment on any LCD projector's picture quality, but so long as they are prone to dust blobs, I won't buy one. Dust blobs are a deal killer for me.

Sharper, you bet.


Out of curiosity, how did you determine the Panasonic is sharper than the JVC?
I directly compared the Panny 3000 projector to the JVC RS2 and did not find any advantage in sharpness. Has this changed in the 4000 model?

I'll stand by my analysis. And please don't question my honesty. A typical JVC zealot.

Sharper, you bet.
Quieter, you bet
Brighter, most probably; we'll see after Art's review.
I'll take new over 4 year old technology.

I'm also glad you made my more general point of JVC zealotry by your personal attack; I'm glad the other readers of this post are here to read it as well...

Folks, you can make up your own mind here.

Trying to pass things off as fact before having ever seen a projector is every bit as bad as being an everbearing zealot.

The two accurate statements you made here were the "we'll see after Art's review" and that it is newer technology.

Everything else is speculation.

As for people switching projectors, I know several people who do that all the time. That doen't mean a thing without knowing the details of why they changed and the conditions that they used the projector in.

I directly compared the Panny 3000 projector to the JVC RS2

briandx -- this is how you draw conclusions. Not by reading specs on a piece of paper and claiming that others are fanboys while at the same time making up random things about a PJ that you have not seen.

I will admit to one thing though. I wish that the shootouts etc that compared products would take one or two from the previous year and compared to the best products of this year.

It is very hard to go back and read reviews about how the JVC RS1, RS2 and RS20 are the best thing since sliced bread and then compare that to new reviews. Including 1-2 old projectors would make this much easier for the consumer........

Goodness gracious!:mad:

I'm really getting tired of the love fest of some JVC posters.

May I suggest moving to "fantasy land" forum then? :rolleyes:


A used RS1 vs a brand new 4000? Not even a little bit close.
First off, the only real advantage of something like the RS1 are the CR / BL numbers...

I agree, that is a real advantage...

In a nutshell the 4000 will have the following advantages;

1) Brighter Fantasy land yes, at D65 NO
2) Sharper I suppose you mean Detail Clarity Processor 3, also known as "fantasy land sharpener"
3) Quieter 22db vs 25db killed that one
4) Newer NO comment
5) Better video processing Yes in fantasy land Lumagen Radiance has Panny chip in it:D


Here is some sage advice

Thank You, but if I want a sage I'll stick to Gandalf...

For those who are interested in the only objective (reality based) review to date please read the informative Cine4home review.

http://www.cine4home.de/indexmain.htm

For those who like fantasy I suggest:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/

Some famous quotes:

"We used to think that Smooth Screen reduced the sharpness of the image. It does not."
" if you boost the Detail Clarity Processor to +3 or +4, you get an extremely sharp picture"
" there is no significant difference in image sharpness between the AE4000 and other models in its price range."

"On most projectors, getting the pixels as sharp as possible is the ultimate objective, but that is not possible on this unit since discrete pixels are not there."
The fairy took them away :eek:

With all sharpness controls off, they appear to be equal in image sharpness. However, the AE4000's Detail Clarity Processor can gently boost apparent detail without imparting bothersome artifacts, thereby creating a picture that looks noticeably sharper than the A900B.

By far my personal favorite...

I havent seen the Panny 4000, but I did have the RS1 and the AE-3000 in my house and I thought that while the JVC was slightly better, the Panny did have a great picture. I would assume that the new Panny should beat the the RS1, but I can say for sure without seeing both again

I obviously can't comment on the ae4000u, but I have owned both the ae3000u and the rs1. For what it's worth, I purchased the ae3000u new and sold it on ebay about 2 months later because it wasn't near bright enough (@ 6500k) for my 130" screen. I then purchased the rs1 (which now has 400 hours on the bulb) and have been in heaven ever since. The punch, depth, and film-like quality of the JVC was better than all my previous projectors. I have owned over a dozen projectors in the past (ae700, ae900, ae3000, w2000, etc.) and have never been as happy as I am with the rs1. I regards to picture quality between the both, I don't think it's close. I'm not a "JVC" fanboy either, just a projector lover.

Not going to lie I have been mulling over the exact same question in my mind over the last few days. I guess ultimately if I found a deal on the RS1 or RS10 I would grab it, but only with a new bulb. I was originally going to hold out stick to my guns and save up for the JVC new, Now that the AE4000 is coming out at the price point it is, Rather than wait, With that price point, I'm really tempted to pull the trigger now on the Panny and in the coming months put some of that money towards a new Integra pre-amp or something like that.

I reasoned somewhat like you Flatnate. I was thinking about $4-6K for a projector. It was definately more than I wanted to spend, but I figured it was worth it. Then I got the B-Stock RS2 price and pulled the trigger within a day. It was to good to pass up and I figured if I buy a $4-6 model then after 1 year it will go down in value about $1,500 so might as well get the RS2 in the low $2k figure and if I want a better PJ in 2 years then I won't be unhappy about the big dollars spent.

I think the panny does set the framework for what will be VERY good PJ's for $2-3K with decent features the next couple of years. Other manufacturer's will have to really look at getting down in price while getting some of the Panny's feature into their models. Hopefully some high-end models will still be out there for those willing to spend that money (plus that technology always comes down to cheaper models within the next few years)

Personally for $2k I would get the new Panny -- it includes a warranty and will most likely have a resale value around $1,000 next year..... of course the other question is if you want the features it comes with then that is another plus

Exactly 4 to 6K was what I was thinking as well. I also want to do a CIH set up in time, but until we purchase a home I will be stuck with a cheap 16:9 screen in my room. What I like about the Panny, is that with the money I save now I could possibly buy an anamorphic lens (yes *gasp* a lens with the Panny), and a high quality 2.39 aspect screen. I could use the zoom function until I buy that lens, and although it may seem silly, I could save to get that SMX pro curve I've been foaming over next, and then use that projector with zoom initially. Give me another six months and then perhaps scale with the lens I really want to mate with a future JVC, until I finally get the money for a new JVC RS?? model of the future that will blow my mind. So the Panny is something that does the job for now, and it gets me closer to being set up to buy the screen and lens that I really want to be running with a JVC model in time. Now if only my wife would let me pull the trigger before Christmas.

One thing to consider with RS1-Us, as opposed to RS1-Xs, is that you can't adjust gamma. All of the RSs have gamma that, if left alone, tends to get really low, especially on the higher end, resulting in a flat looking picture. That is why I would pair any RS1-U with a Lumagen HDP/HDQ. This allows you to adjust gamma (and other things) and get your POP back.
Great points. A higher gamma and using the basic CMS to tame the oversaturated colors makes a big difference on my RS1/HDP combo. I would also recommend that if you have a choice, use the longest throw possible for higher contrast and better optics. I recently went from min throw to a new setup with a much longer TR and it's like I upgraded my projector. The higher contrast seems to be working perfectly with my custom gamma curve producing even better blacks and shadow detail. And sharpness and stability of the image are improved. Doesn't even seem any dimmer, even though the screen is larger. There's just something about a high native on/off contrast that fools you eye into thinking it's brighter than it is.(Granted, it's a completely light controlled room...)

Thanks, I always wondered what the difference was between the RS1-Us vs. the RS1-Xs.

I had an AE3000 that was calibrated, then when Pioneer got out of the television business, I picked up a FPJ1 for cheap. I had it calibrated as well and ran both side by side. The Panasonic was close to the FPJ1, but the Pioneer gave a much better picture. Even my wife noticed the difference, and she doesn't normally ever hear or see the slight differences between components when I change them out. Would I have satisfied with the AE3000, if I didn't get a FPJ1 for cheap, ABSOLUTELY. However, there is a quality difference between both. The FPJ1 beat out the AE3000 in every category except color fidelity. However, I added a Lumagen HDP to correct the primary colors and everything is incredible now. People are amazed everytime they see this combo. Now, I have no idea how the AE4000 will compare, since I am so happy and have no plans to upgrade projectors in the near (hopefully a few years) future.

Long story short, after two weeks of watching both, I sold the AE3000.

If PQ is your only requirement: go with the RS1, the religios zealotry is for a reason.

If you have more requirements: (ease of use, side by side tweaking, powered zoom and the ability to save favorites), go for the Panny. And you will still get a great picture.

I have a AE3000 and I'm upgrading to a AE4000. I know it's blasphemy, but my picture on the AE3000 was amazing enough for my taste. I want the features. If the picture is a little bit better on the AE4000 compared to my AE3000, bonus!

This is a older post and want to see how they compare now that the Panny has been out for some time...Al

The RS1 throws a significantly better image than the 4000 , however one thing to bare in mind is that the advantage in black level and contrast from the RS1 will be mitigated if you do not have a dark room for your cinema. If you have white walls for example you may be better off with the panny .

Also I tend to recommend the pannys as excellent projectors for the beginner, they are always very easy to live with and for the money throw a very impressive and trouble free image.

The RS1 is in a different league though but it does have some foibles and requires a bit of careful set up to get the best out of it. I have one boxed up that I'm just refusing to install in my new house until I get a dedicated room sorted out.

bare in mind is that the advantage in black level and contrast from the RS1 will be mitigated if you do not have a dark room for your cinema. If you have white walls for example you may be better off with the panny .


This is not true for on/off contrast (fade to black). But those scenes with mixed levels, yeah... you'll lose the deep blacks. Point is, you'll get SOME benefit of high cr even with white walls.

This is not true for on/off contrast (fade to black). But those scenes with mixed levels, yeah... you'll lose the deep blacks. Point is, you'll get SOME benefit of high cr even with white walls.

beg to differ , even something like the RS1 has enough level at black to make the wall reflectivity an issue ( I ran one for about 3 years).

Anyway 99% of what you will actually watch on it is "mixed level" unless you like watching a black screen all day.

Anyway 99% of what you will actually watch on it is "mixed level" unless you like watching a black screen all day.

Well, not "all day" but a few seconds at a time, anyway. But yes, what you say here really IS the point, isn't it?

From a picture standpoint the RS1 is still definitely the best of the 4000, 8700ub and RS1. It will still have the best blacks (and without a dynamic iris). More "best" mode lumens too, and not much dimmer than the 4000 at brightest, though the 8700ub definitely is way brighter than the RS1. Still, my RS1 with a new lamp did mid-upper 700 lumens (in best mode) and just under 900 (if I recall correctly) at its brightest.

My email from Art author of projectorreviews.com when I asked him the same question:

"If you are into the picture, RS1 best - 8700ub not as refined, but great for the bucks, pt-ae4000 - never did much for me, but a projector that's overall very good, and has a great feature set.

BTW, after I review a few of the JVC's and the new R series Epson, depending on a lot of things, I may replace my RS20 with an RS50... If so, then my RS20 (which is due for a new lamp) will be on the market in a couple of months. The RS20 was $8K (like the RS25). The main difference is really that the RS25 has creative frame interpolation... the rest is minor refinements.

Most likely I'd replace the lamp (I think about 1900 hours on it at the moment), and sell it for about $3K - $3500... (hopefully closer to $3500... but, you never can tell. -a"