Hallov, If the connection between HTPC & PJ is closely to 8-10M range, beware on DVI to HDMI connections to be less stable in terms of data transfer than pure HDMI or DVI connections with adaptor.

Thanks Rwestley for this link. It appears the Z4 will be a great choice for someone interested in taking the plunge into the 2.35 Constant height world :)
My Z2, while using the Zoom mode will vertically stretch 2.35 movies to fill the height and make used of the 33% of panels missed, then I use my Prismasonic anamorphic lens to streth the material horizontally to fill my 10ft 2.35 screen. The problem with the Z2 and Z3 is that this can only be achieved with 480i,p material via component. It appears reading the manual on the Z4, that you can now Zoom 720p or 1080i, in addition there is now a Vertical stretching option, how cool.

Randy
This is music to my ears!! :D :cool: YES!! :D 2.35:1 here I come! :)

Phatass; thx for feedback. So what do i want ? (do you mean DVI cable with adaptor to HDMI in one end is ok; or HDMI with adaptor to DVI in one end will work well ?). (as opposed to DVI to HDMI cable without the loose adaptors i mean).

I'll probably be just around 8 meter since i plan to put the HTPC back in other room once all is set-up nicelly.

Thx !,
MH

So does anyone know what "plasticity" means?

I see it in all the translated reviews; all I know is that DLP still does it better than LCD.

Thanks

Probably a literal transation of "Plastizitaet" - for a picture this would mean the "depth" of the image, how real it looks or if it looks flat.

Neko

We really do need some confirmation on the ability to resize 720 or 1080 images. Without that, it makes CH a lot more difficult/expensive.

Neko,

That makes sense, thanks.

1800:1 is with dynamic Iris.... at 6500K / D65,

The cinema modes do not use the "full" adaptive iris modes...

We are investigating right now how much tuning is possible and will publish the results soon..

Thanks. Maybe there is an issue with the translation as it says:

- with deactivated iris screen the maximum contrast values amount to 1800:1 (dynamics) and/or. 1100:1 (pure Cinema).
Also, I'm looking at the translated link, but I wonder about the accuracy of the comments about which IREs get the iris to move. 30 IRE is about 5-7% intensity (or 1/15th to 1/20th of 100 IRE) and 10 IRE is more like .6% or less intensity, so I don't think it would make much sense for them to wait for things to get that dim to use the iris. Could you please check and see if these should be 10% and 30% intensity instead of 10 and 30 IRE.

Thanks,
Darin

Thanks. Maybe there is an issue with the translation as it says:

Also, I'm looking at the translated link, but I wonder about the accuracy of the comments about which IREs get the iris to move. 30 IRE is about 5-7% intensity (or 1/15th to 1/20th of 100 IRE) and 10 IRE is more like .6% or less intensity, so I don't think it would make much sense for them to wait for things to get that dim to use the iris. Could you please check and see if these should be 10% and 30% intensity instead of 10 and 30 IRE.

Thanks,
Darin


We meant the signal-intensity, not the the light-intensity on the screen. Sure this sounds a bit low yes, but you have to consider that the projector analyses the AVERAGE intensity of the whole screen (maybe that didnt come out clearly in the Babel-translation). And in average, many scenes are below that value. The typical checkerboard ANSI-Test-Screen would just have 50% signal-intensity in average, although it is a very bright picture, no?

For example: The Iris-Movie you can download, was from an indoor dialog scene of Lord of the Rings special edition, part one, 26th minute. This is not a totally dark scene, and still it is way below that 30% average mark and the Iris is working all the time.

Regards,
Ekkehart

We meant the signal-intensity, not the the light-intensity on the screen. Sure this sounds a bit low yes, but you have to consider that the projector analyses the AVERAGE intensity of the whole screen (maybe that didnt come out clearly in the Babel-translation). And in average, many scenes are below that value. The typical checkerboard ANSI-Test-Screen would just have 50% intensity in average, although it is a very bright picture, no?
I understand. But it still sounds very low for Sanyo to decide that if the picture intensity on the screen has an average of 8% the iris is completely open. Especially considering the low static on/off CR they start with and the high black level this would mean there. I think that if I (or you) put up a 50 IRE/0 IRE 4x4 checkerboard (which would have an average intensity of about 9% with a 2.5 gamma) that the iris on the Panasonic AE900 would close down at least a little bit. It does have the faster iris according to reports though. And the iris algorithms don't need to be based just on average, but can also take peak and other things into account. I may try it after I get an AE900.

--Darin

I think that if I (or you) put up a 50 IRE/0 IRE 4x4 checkerboard (which would have an average intensity of about 9% with a 2.5 gamma) that the iris on the Panasonic AE900 would close down at least a little bit.
--Darin



As does the Iris of the Z4, as the average would be 25IRE, no?

Quite some theory here, in any case the picture depth of the Z4 is really, really good (for an LCD).



Regards,
Ekkehart

As does the Iris of the Z4, as the average would be 25IRE, no?
You're right. It depends on how you do the average and I had done it a different way and see what you mean. The average would be 25 IRE, but it would be much brighter than a full screen 25 IRE image. In other words, they would have the same IRE average, but not the same intensity average on the screen. A 50 IRE/0 IRE checkerboard would call for about the same average intensity off the screen as a full screen 37 IRE image. I would think that the people working on the iris algorithms would base them off of intensity called for on the screen and not really on IRE, given this difference.

Quite some theory here, in any case the picture depth of the Z4 is really, really good.
That is good to hear. I'm still a little bit confused about the on/off CR. Is it really limited to 1800:1 or 1100:1 (depending on picture mode), or are you getting more than that? The reason I'm confused is because the translation I'm looking at says that these are with "deactivated iris screen", but you said the 1800:1 was with the dynamic iris and that doesn't sound like enough to get a lot of depth in many dark scenes.

--Darin

That is good to hear. I'm still a little bit confused about the on/off CR. Is it really limited to 1800:1 or 1100:1 (depending on picture mode), or are you getting more than that? The reason I'm confused is because the translation I'm looking at says that these are with "deactivated iris screen", but you said the 1800:1 was with the dynamic iris and that doesn't sound like enough to get a lot of depth in many dark scenes.

--Darin


Yes, I understand your confusion ;-) Actually that is what we wrote in our article, that the different modes are very confusing. The different Iris-Modes are not directly choosable by the customer, instead they are dependant on what Image-Mode you choose.

Our 1800:1 result was measured in the close to D65 "Pure Cinema" mode with the Iris set to "Auto". We consider this the most realistic value as this is the mode the average customer would use to get good gamma, good colors etc. without much hassle.

At the same time 1800:1 is the maximum contrast (no D65) which you can get without the Auto-Iris. It is just a coincidence that these values are the same.


Now when you chose some other mode, like Dynamic for example, the Iris works differently and you can get a maximum of over 7000:1. The drawback is that your colors and the gamma are way off then. Now if you are really really patient, you might get that mode close to the video-standards and get a higher contrast, but this is really difficult as the range of the RGB parameters is not that big. When you use optical color filtering, the situation is different of course. But our review is based on the product itself and not on additional filter-tweaking.

That is why we will release a tweaking article soon seperately, which has nothing to do with the main review ;)


Regards,
Ekkehart, www.cine4home.de

I cant wait to see your review of the Epson TW600, im waiting to decide what to buy as my second prjector. :)

One question; since i now got the Z4 i have one HDMI device (z4) and one DVI (Panny 42 ED Plasma). Usually feeding from HTPC from MyHD card DVI. I also have a Momitsu 880 outputting DVI altough i dont use it much.

What is my best and reasonably priced option for hooking all up ?.

Im thinking Connecting the HTPC DVI out to a DVI to HDMI adaptor, then short HDMI cable to a 2 way splitter, then 2 HDMI cables out, one to plasma and HDMI to DVI adapter, and one to Z4, HDMI all the way.

I would rarelly use the Plasma for surfing anyway since it is ED resolution, but might watch some content from the MyHD card (720p or 1080i material etc). My question i guess is; how does it work with splitter; since i use MyHD card to output DVI; will it be ok for booth displays (i.e. stays 720p or 1080i so it does not sync. in some way to for example Z4 meaning the Plasma wont run optimally).

:) confusing myself now....

and, how do i get the Momitsu in to the game, with booth displays, or is that not gonna work ?.

One question; since i now got the Z4 i have one HDMI device (z4) and one DVI (Panny 42 ED Plasma).

Well how does you rate Z4 vs panny? Well they are different machines ofcourse but just wondering. Do you like Z4?

Head to head comparison by the end of next week at Projectorcentral, cant wait to finally make a decision and start a diy screen

Well how does you rate Z4 vs panny? Well they are different machines ofcourse but just wondering. Do you like Z4?

Was surprised how good the picture is with projector actually; really impressive with only 70 on wall now. Im gonna try 80 tonight and see if too big and move it to 'long' side of room in that case (pain with speakers etc though).

Anyway; small size i know but i see no VB. Only used HTPC for TS files so all is
sweet to me :)

If you are asking me what i pref. (z4 vs Plasma) = cant give so much comment yet since the Z4 is not on HDMI (now VGA) and no screen. But man; size is really impressive so far. I dont like to sit close in cinema but kind of dont have choice at home in Hong Kong; and jaw drops when i put on Return of the King and battle scenes. OK; i use my stuff in living room and during day the Z4 is useless while Plasma is no problem.

By the way; what screen would you recommend for the z4 in a living room; white walls, white ceiling etc. Pretty dark at evening with blinds but not by any means a dedicated room that is blacked out.

Is Matt white 1. gain ok or should i look for something else ? (I got Plasma for daytime so would be for night time viewing).

Hi Hallow,
Maybe you should consider Grey Matte in your light colored room, but it looks like lots of users in HK use White matte with no problems.

Was surprised how good the picture is with projector actually; really impressive with only 70 on wall now. Im gonna try 80 tonight and see if too big and move it to 'long' side of room in that case (pain with speakers etc though).

Anyway; small size i know but i see no VB. Only used HTPC for TS files so all is
sweet to me :)

If you are asking me what i pref. (z4 vs Plasma) = cant give so much comment yet since the Z4 is not on HDMI (now VGA) and no screen. But man; size is really impressive so far. I dont like to sit close in cinema but kind of dont have choice at home in Hong Kong; and jaw drops when i put on Return of the King and battle scenes. OK; i use my stuff in living room and during day the Z4 is useless while Plasma is no problem.

Since I am moving soon, back home with my ex-roommate who cried bloody murder at the barely visible screen door effect on my AE500, how would you rate the SDE on the Z4? My viewing distance is going to be roughly the same as yours in Hong Kong. I am still tossing it up between the Z4 and the AE900, which is reported to have no SDE. Essentially SDE is the dealbreaker at this point as I can't bear to listen to my ex-roommate bitch about it for the next few years.

thanks :)

By the way; what screen would you recommend for the z4 in a living room; white walls, white ceiling etc. Pretty dark at evening with blinds but not by any means a dedicated room that is blacked out.

Is Matt white 1. gain ok or should i look for something else ? (I got Plasma for daytime so would be for night time viewing).

I've been hearing great things about the Optoma Graywolf. With your light walls, this would really be a big help. It has worked very well in tabletop setups with LCD.

And it's really cheap with great performance. So go on and start moving your stuff. :)
It's worth it. 70-80 inches isn't enough for that Z4 you're sitting on. :cool:

Blakes; i found the screendoor a bit much on Z2, and never looked alot on Z3, but now that i have the Z4 at home i must say it does not botter me if im running an 80 screen. However, if i go over that i will start seeing it.

I would like 100 or 90 but not sure how long im in this flat (maybee only a few months) so decided to use it above the plasma. Closest possition would be about 270cm from screen to 'face/eyes'. (i have a closer seat and more off angle on sofa but that will only be used when some unlucky friend or familly visits ;)

Just my 2 cents, but if i had an AE500 now, i would hang on to that a year or so longer till more of an upgrade available.

I ordered a white 80 diagonal OS, manual today; theyre really cheap here in HK.
Still time to change and look in to grey.

What will the benefits on the Grey screen be; deeper blacks and more details in dark areas or ?. Will the viewing angle be affected (wall i project on is not totally straight to sofa in front). Why do you think the Grey will be much better ? (is it especially suitable with the lumens output on Z4 ?).

Ive been using Pure cinema setting so far, a bit to milky contrast on Bourne Supremacy etc but again; on cream wall and i have not tuned it yet and not running HDMI. There is a setting; think it was Dynamic that gives really high contrast but looks too much like a hot/grainy TV in a chain store setup with that on.

Anyway; thx alot for comments, hope we get alot more Z4 owners so we can milk the best out the settings.

I ordered a white 80 diagonal OS, manual today; theyre really cheap here in HK.
Still time to change and look in to grey.

What will the benefits on the Grey screen be; deeper blacks and more details in dark areas or ?. Will the viewing angle be affected (wall i project on is not totally straight to sofa in front). Why do you think the Grey will be much better ? (is it especially suitable with the lumens output on Z4 ?).

Ive been using Pure cinema setting so far, a bit to milky contrast on Bourne Supremacy etc but again; on cream wall and i have not tuned it yet and not running HDMI. There is a setting; think it was Dynamic that gives really high contrast but looks too much like a hot/grainy TV in a chain store setup with that on.

Anyway; thx alot for comments, hope we get alot more Z4 owners so we can milk the best out the settings.

The benefits are many but for you first and foremost is the screen's ability to handle ambient light and less than ideal light walls/ceilings. It's also going to provide additional gain so it'll be more pop in the colors and separation across the board. For the lumens of the Z4, it will no doubt be a very nice match.

The Optoma Graywolf is great for tabletop viewing where you are near the level of the projector from a viewing position. The screen is reflective in this regard to take maximum advantage of the properties to your sitting position. The two sizes are 92" and 106" I believe. (I just got the large one.)

For the cheap cost with the combination of gray and gain, there's nothing close to touch it in this price range.

If you position this well, I have little doubt the Z4 would love this screen. :p

The Optoma Graywolf is great for tabletop viewing where you are near the level of the projector from a viewing position. The screen is reflective in this regard to take maximum advantage of the properties to your sitting position. The two sizes are 92" and 106" I believe. (I just got the large one.)

For the cheap cost with the combination of gray and gain, there's nothing close to touch it in this price range.

If you position this well, I have little doubt the Z4 would love this screen. :p

I will be mounting the Z4 about 4' above the head of the viewers (on a shelf, about 3' down from the ceiling), but the screen is almost 16' away. This gives an angle from lens to eye of about 15 degrees - is this too much for the Graywolf?

Also, does anyone know if there is an advantage to mounting the PJ upside down vs. right side up, or is the lens shift completely symmetrical (as it sounds in the description)?

Thanks.

That angle may be too much from the optimum viewing for the graywolf. Post this question on the screens area for the Graywolf and some users there will help.

Blakes; i found the screendoor a bit much on Z2, and never looked alot on Z3, but now that i have the Z4 at home i must say it does not botter me if im running an 80 screen. However, if i go over that i will start seeing it.

You're seeing SDE on the Z4? I don't know how that's possible. And you also recommend folks not upgrade, even from a Panny AE500?

Please explain.

Heinous.

:(

Hallov & blakes7 -- It sounds like you guys never heard about sitting too close to the screen. The standard recommendation for 720p PJs is to sit no closer than 1.3x the screen width. With pictures that large, the PJ resolution has it's limits and you can't sit on top of the picture (the same goes for RPTVs and Flat Panel displays too).

From the Z3 that I saw, SDE doesn't show up until you get to around 1.0x screen width (on bright colored scenes, it will definitely show up at that distance), unless you have extremely acute vision and then you'll see SDE even at 1.5x screenwidth.

romanesq; im sitting pretty close; dont have a screen door problem with 80. If i go above; yes. I doubt you sit that close; living rooms in Hong Kong (standard flats) are pretty narrow and im working the narrow wall now as that is where Plasma and speakers are.

I would like to have it on another wall; but will have to buy new speakers, or reroute wires etc so i will probably wait with that.

Like i said; thought it would not be good on a distance from 270 cm; but its good on TS files at least.

Upgrade; since we are in the budget section, just my oppinion but i would wait till more of an upgrade. Ive seen the Z2 and AE500; theyre livable for now. OK; if one has the money; sure, (meaning no need to invest in other fun toys :)

CT_Wiebe: i know. I would like to sit further away, and have a bigger screen but i am considering buying a flat or staying and till then i dont wanna drill and pull wires etc on another location.

I could ofcourse go for a 70 size screen but i got the projector home; ran that on wall; looked fine and thought; here i now bought a projector and should i then run a 70 screen (i have a 42 plasma) ?. So i tried bigger; and it works for me.

Like i said in another post; i dont like to sit close in cinema but its not bothering me with the Z4. Perhaps i will feel different after a few weeks (get the screen on Saturday; will post some pics on set-up then).

Please forgive me if this is somewhere else in this thread. I've been keeping up and remember someone asking about this but not seeing any replies...anyone know if the mount screws are on the same place on this projector as the Z3/Z2? Looks like a totally redisigned body, so I'm guessing no...but who knows...upgrading from a Z2 at some point and it'd be nice if it was an easy switch out.

Looks like a thorough review will be coming very soon. CKL's website has some really nice shots.
http://www.avbuzz.com/audio-video/200510/sanyoz4a/index.htm

His reviews so far for the new Sony and Epson are very good too. Crossing my fingers on the Sanyo.

There are too many settings at Z4.
(1) 7 preset picture modes which have different behaviors of the Lamp Iris
(2) There are 64 steps of Lens Iris
(3) Full, A1, A2, half lamp modes
(4) Lamp Iris: Auto, Open, Close
(5) Auto Black Stretch: off, L1, L2
(6) Contrast Enhancement: off, L1, L2
(7) Transient Enhancement: off, L1, L2
(8) HDMI: L1, L2

So there are 290,304 combinations. If I want to try all these combinations, it needs one year at least

CKL, you can bin 5,6 & 7 they are just ways of messing up the picture by trying to over come limitations in laymans terms which are better served by leaving off and applying proper calibration techniques.

I would imagine if you aim for half-lamp mode, and half manual iris you will be shooting from the Z3s base. That narrows down a few more options.

HDMI well they seem to be PC levels and VIDEO levels. If I can get it the correct way around L2 is PC levels, L1 Video levels. Though I am not 100% sure on this.

That leaves the pictures presets, well if they're like the Z3, powerful can be manipulated to give a super-contrasty picture at the expense of correct color balance but can be control with a a CC30R filter. Creative Cinema is your ball-park starting point without filter for reasonable colour balance.

I see what applies to the Z3 here, applying to the Z4 with the added complication of the Lamp Iris ...

Hope that helps.

Thanks Rone's information. I'm joking to test it for one year. But it really takes time to analyse its performance. The critical items are (1)-(4). I hope to post my review next week.

CLK I hope you also get a Panasonic AE900 so you can compare the machines you tested.

The Cine4Home test of the Z4 looks good. No serious issues. Performance improvements in just about all categories. Vertical banding and shading (colour uniformity) both improved. This projector looks good. Come to think of it, its going to be a tighter race this time around. Panasonic, Sanyo and Hitachi will all have D5 PJ's with variable iris.

I'm just getting into the FP market now. I'm thinking this one will be my first, but I have no experience in how it works. How does availability and pricing (in general) work with a new projector? Will they sell out immediately or will there be good U.S. availability right away? Do street prices tend to be consistent at first, or is there a wide variety? Is it pointless to preorder, or is it wise?

J

Don't shoot: I'm only the messenger:

http://www.ausmedia.com.au/sanyo_PLV_z4_projector.htm

It's not a review, but hey we're all just trying to have fun until the big dance, right. :)
There's a link to a chart showing the specs of all the new major players/releases.

Has anyone established if the Z4 does 1:1 pixel mapping over HDMI? When they rerefer to overscan on the cine4home review, I can't work out if they're viewing over component or HDMI.

Squibbly

Has anyone established if the Z4 does 1:1 pixel mapping over HDMI? When they rerefer to overscan on the cine4home review, I can't work out if they're viewing over component or HDMI.

Squibbly

It is a bit unclear since the picture with "overscan off" still shows some oversscan. Perhaps the later remark that there's a bug in analog inputs that even with overscan off there's 10 pixels cropped on all sides explains this picture.

Ekkehart, we need your input here :)

Neko

The benefits [of the Greywolf] are many but for you first and foremost is the screen's ability to handle ambient light and less than ideal light walls/ceilings. It's also going to provide additional gain so it'll be more pop in the colors and separation across the board. For the lumens of the Z4, it will no doubt be a very nice match. :p

Question: are all grey fabric screens improving the 'handling of ambient light and less than ideal wall/ceiling', or does this apply to the Greywolf only? If the latter, why, what's special about the Greywolf?

Neko

It is a bit unclear since the picture with "overscan off" still shows some oversscan. Perhaps the later remark that there's a bug in analog inputs that even with overscan off there's 10 pixels cropped on all sides explains this picture.

Ekkehart, we need your input here :)

Neko


Hi,

The Overscan was wit analog YPbPr... However, in the Z4 which hit the market yesterday, there was a newer firmware than in my testsample. So the Overscan issue has to be checked again..

Regards,
Ekkehart

There is no overscan when it is set to be zero.

Looks like a couple of buyers have received the new Z4 in the UK. Sounds positive:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251260 :cool:

Question: are all grey fabric screens improving the 'handling of ambient light and less than ideal wall/ceiling', or does this apply to the Greywolf only? If the latter, why, what's special about the Greywolf?

Neko

The Graywolf is a nice combination to help with ambient light: It's the gray along with the gain rated 1.8. Together it's just killer, especially for the price. The only real issue is the viewing angle. It has a narrow optimum viewing angle as a result of the reflective quality of light back toward the area where the light is being projected.

Hope that helps.

Well, I also hear it's best used with tabletop projection and it's glass-beaded. Both may pose a problem for me.

Having seens some really bad hotspotting on glass beaded silver screens I'm a bit weary of this combination. There's another brand here that offers gray screens, with standard 1.0 gain.

My question is - will this screen be just as effective as the Graywolf in dealing with ambient light? Or any other gray screen for that matter? Or is there something special about the Grauywolf that reduces the problem of ambient light?

Neko

Likely not (you didn't give the brand, so it's really hard to say). I'm using the Da-Lite Hi-Power (bought through AVS), which seems to do a pretty good job with ambient light, it's retro-reflective. The GrayWolf and my Hi-Power have much lower gains when used with a ceiling mounted PJ.

I believe the GrayWolf works because of using both a gray surface and very fine glass beading (it's not cleanable, the Hi-Power can be cleaned with a damp cloth - see the Da-Lite web site).

For more details on screens, read the threads on the Screens Forum - Tryg has posted some good reviews & summaries.

I am not sure if it was posted already however does anybody know what the ansi numbers are for the Z4? Thanks in advance

I'm I the only person not happy about the powered lens cover? Why you ask? Because I will have to move my panamorph lens out of the way before I power down and back into position when I power up. Maybe I should just get a loan and get the Sony Ruby and be done with this upgrade bug for a few more years ;)

I'm I the only person not happy about the powered lens cover? Why you ask? Because I will have to move my panamorph lens out of the way before I power down and back into position when I power up. Maybe I should just get a loan and get the Sony Ruby and be done with this upgrade bug for a few more years ;)

Somebody will probably find a way to defeat it in the service menu.
If not, you could always save yourself the trouble and wait for a 1080p Z6 projector without this problem ;)

I am not sure if it was posted already however does anybody know what the ansi numbers are for the Z4? Thanks in advance

a german magazine tested the Z4 and the results where: 512 ANSI Lumens in normal and 449 in eco lamp mode. and 300:1 ANSI contrast with cinema presets. plus 0,21 lumen for the blacks.

for a comparison the HS50/51 had (in the same magazine) 442/349 ANSI lumen (normal, eco'), 180:1 ANSI contrast and 0,19 lumen for the blacks.

to make things short, the Z4 might be at least on par with the HS50 in these (theoretical) categories but without all the problems the sony had. and the HS50 is still more expensive then the new Z4.

of course the HS60 might beat the Z4 (and the other D5 beamers) in some categories by a huge margin (i have read of the blacks being below 0,1 lumen for an example).

I'm I the only person not happy about the powered lens cover? Why you ask? Because I will have to move my panamorph lens out of the way before I power down and back into position when I power up. Maybe I should just get a loan and get the Sony Ruby and be done with this upgrade bug for a few more years ;)

Maybe you can just take the thing off. Cine4home disassembled the entire projector.

Likely not (you didn't give the brand, so it's really hard to say). I'm using the Da-Lite Hi-Power (bought through AVS), which seems to do a pretty good job with ambient light, it's retro-reflective. The GrayWolf and my Hi-Power have much lower gains when used with a ceiling mounted PJ.

I didn't name the brand because it's not well known (Beamax). Though I've seen the screenss they sell under other brand names as well, they're made in Italy.

M-series, see www.beamax.com

Neko

Ok, for lack of anything else to say about the Z4, Anssi at Prismasonic said that the auto cover is so close to the Z4's lense that there is no need to disable it and that the anamorphic lenses will work fine with it. Now he nor I have been able to confirm this since we haven't had the projector in our hands but Anssi did see a pre-production model with autocover and didn't feel there would be any issues. This is a good thing since we'll be able to protect the Z4's lense and still have the option for stationary anamorphics. YMMV with panamorph, isco etc.

You'd likely want to consider one of the large aperture lenses like the P752 from Panamorph. Still, that doesn't solve the issue for people like MM ;)

You'd likely want to consider one of the large aperture lenses like the P752 from Panamorph. Still, that doesn't solve the issue for people like MM ;)

Any reason he can't just move it forward a bit given the much longer throw of the Z4? Yes he might have to modify his fantastimagical homemade mount :D

CKL has posted his Z4 review. It is a bit disappointing in that black level is too high and the auto iris does virtually nothing for contrast. You CAN get the 7000:1 contrast and lower black levels using the Dynamic setting, but you can't get accurate colour this way.

It's a bit odd, because it seems that only the lamp iris is dynamic, while the lens iris is user adjustable, but not dynamic. I was under the impression that both irises were dynamic, but that is not the case. Anywho, there's a chance that one of the other 4 settings may be better, but CKL was pretty thorough and it looks as though, if you want accurate colour, you can't get good black level or more than about 1000:1 contrast.

Now, let's see what CKL gets with the Panasonic AE900 and it's 1/60 per second dynamic iris!

Jon

Could you post a link to CKL's review please.

Took a quick read of CKL's Z4 report too. I think his comment on contrast is that the iris trick for LCD's is not substantial overall based on the two models he's seen. He's going to look at the AE900 next and then compare the three.

Was eager to see the Z4 report and he does conclude it is an improvement in many respects over the Z3. He also indicated that there are so many user options he didn't have time to go through them to best calibrate but suggested the vivid option as a means to work through the contrast improvements.

Sounds like this projector would mate very well with a gray screen or the Graywolf. I think that would remove some of the issue around the black levels.

Initial reports from users in the UK sounded positive too. Funny, they don't have the AE900 available and it's the opposite here for another few weeks.

Could you post a link to CKL's review please.

For future reference http://www.avbuzz.com

Yes, colour (in Cinema mode), screen door and ease of setup (longer zoom range) are all better than the Z3. I don't mean to make it sound like the Z4 isn't good or something - I'm very happy with my Z2 afterall and the Z4 is clearly an improvement over the Z2!

I only meant that the calibrated contrast and black levels that CKL managed to obtain weren't quite as good as what I was hoping. For example, the Sony HS-60 quite clearly has better calibrated contrast and black level. But then again, it costs more, has a louder fan and the screendoor effect is more visible.

The Epson TW600 has better black level than the Z4, but the optics are inferior. All of these low cost projectors have a compromise, I was just hopeful that the Z4 would somehow overcome them all (perhaps by magic?) :)

So I'm very eager to see what CKL gets from the Panny AE900. The 1/60 sec. dynamic iris is unique to the Panny, so I'm hopeful it can match the Z4 in most respects, while offering higher contrast and better black level. That would put it over the top IMO.

The Mitsubishi HC3000 is also very interesting, so I'm hoping CKL may be able to review that DLP unit at some point.

For myself, I'd like to upgrade my Z2. The vertical banding and grey blacks are quite noticable to me now. I'm still very happy with it's image, but if I can get a major improvement for around $2500, I'll do it!

All the reviewers seem to agree that the Optoma H78DC3 is still better overall in picture quality than any of these new LCD models though. I'm thinking that DC3 performance could easily drop in price next year as 1080p models are introduced. If DC3 performance drops to the same price level as the current LCD 720p models, then I think it would be better to wait one more year.

It's a tough decision, because every year, there are fairly large improvements and the prices keep dropping! The image from the H78DC3 is, to me, good enough that I likely wouldn't upgrade again until 1080p becomes affordable. The only thing is that it's still a bit high for my price range. If something like the AE900 can get close to the H78DC3 right now, then I might just spring for it!

Fun fun fun!

Jon

thanks for the excellent review CKL

my questions is

is the Z4 and TW600 production units or pre-production units.

just flat out which would you have choosen between TW600/Z4

I only meant that the calibrated contrast and black levels that CKL managed to obtain weren't quite as good as what I was hoping. For example, the Sony HS-60 quite clearly has better calibrated contrast and black level. But then again, it costs more, has a louder fan and the screendoor effect is more visible.

The Epson TW600 has better black level than the Z4, but the optics are inferior. All of these low cost projectors have a compromise, I was just hopeful that the Z4 would somehow overcome them all (perhaps by magic?) :)

So I'm very eager to see what CKL gets from the Panny AE900. The 1/60 sec. dynamic iris is unique to the Panny, so I'm hopeful it can match the Z4 in most respects, while offering higher contrast and better black level. That would put it over the top IMO.



I'm tired once again of everyone taking one review to be gospel. The luminance values make me question everything in his review. With LCD projectors especially you MUST carefully consider the environment in which you view it. I don't know what type of walls etc. CKL has in his reviewing room but with white walls you're NOT going to be able to see much difference between this year's D5's and last year's D4 projectors in terms of contrast and black levels. In the review pic it looks like it's a white room. The exception is Sony where you can probably see the improvement regardless given how high the CR spec is for the HS60. But really the HS60 and Z4 are in different price classes and it's not like the HS60 is better across the board. There are very real compromises.

Cine4home said the Z4 was one of if not the best LCD he has ever seen. The Z4 is very complicated, admittedly by all reviewers, to setup properly. CKL reviewed a less than optimized Z4 which is what he basically said. However I'm pretty sure that Ekkehart ripped that sucker to pieces and meticulously stepped through the various picture modes to find the best combination. To me so far it's up in the air as to which LCD is better. I have stuck by Ekkehart's reviews for a long time now and I only question whether CKL has disclosed his viewing environment. If in fact it's a room with black walls and no ambient light then I will look at his numbers a little closer. I don't question CKL's ability to review a projector or come by his numbers correctly with the equipment at his disposal. I think we would prefer reviews done in a 100% light controlled room with dark walls and carpet along with a projector's performance in less perfect conditions. That way you cover users with both types of theaters.


a german magazine tested the Z4 and the results where: 512 ANSI Lumens in normal and 449 in eco lamp mode. and 300:1 ANSI contrast with cinema presets. plus 0,21 lumen for the blacks.

for a comparison the HS50/51 had (in the same magazine) 442/349 ANSI lumen (normal, eco'), 180:1 ANSI contrast and 0,19 lumen for the blacks.


That's pretty close to last year's LCD low black level champ. Agreed DLP is better in this regard but you can always test your hands at filtering. Can't wait to see the Cine4home tweak review.

I don't know what type of walls etc. CKL has in his reviewing room but with white walls you're NOT going to be able to see much difference between this year's D5's and last year's D4 projectors in terms of contrast and black levels. In the review pic it looks like it's a white room.

White walls impact ANSI contrast but have NO impact on on-off contrast or absolute black levels which is what was being measured.

Now having said that, I do agree that one review should not be taken as a universal thumbs up or thumbs down for a projector.

Any reason he can't just move it forward a bit given the much longer throw of the Z4? Yes he might have to modify his fantastimagical homemade mount :D

yes my fantastimagical mount can move forward :) see my z2 link.

Sigh...looks like the sony ruby for me and one less girlfriend :)

Waiting for a shootout between Z4 - AE900 - TX200 (UDPJ52) and Epson 600.

Also looking forward to finding out the results of each PJ after filter tweaking.

:)

I only question whether CKL has disclosed his viewing environment. If in fact it's a room with black walls and no ambient light then I will look at his numbers a little closer.

His room has total light control and 50% (the half at the screen side) black walls!

regards,

Li On

White walls impact ANSI contrast but have NO impact on on-off contrast or absolute black levels which is what was being measured.



True but it does obviously affect the overall quality of the projected image and thus would affect the subjective nature of the review. ANSI contrast is important in my book because it does takes into account the viewing environment.

But as we've been told, CKL has a decent viewing environment which is good to know.


His room has total light control and 50% (the half at the screen side) black walls!


It's just when I look at a review and see a projector on a white shelf with bright white walls behind (and no pictures of the screen wall etc)I become skeptical about performance numbers. I don't need to mention that all dark walls would be more ideal. I'm not questioning CKL's ability or quality of review just that with the info provided on the room, none, and a picture of the projector in all white I'm looking for more info before considering a review in my decisions. Keep up the reviews CKL. Looking forward to that AE900 review and LCD comparison.

When all the projectors are tested in the same environment, it is fair to compare their picture quality. Please be reminded that the figures of contrast and luminance measured by various reviewers may be different. It is because of different settings/lamp hour/testing method & equipment...... But we can compare the figures measured in the same setup. Comparison is a good reference.

Z4 is a production unit while HS60 and TW600 are pre-production unit. HS60 and TW600 will be formally released at the end of Oct. I will go to have a look afterward.

I'm appreciated Li On's opinion of the projector reviews. We are working together to test projectors for AVBuzz more than one year.

We will receive a production unit of AE900 within these few days.

I found a Z4 review... http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages/plvz4.htm

CKl, thanks for your review of the Z4. Can't wait to see the shootout between the Z4, Panasonic AE900 and the Epson. The Black contrast is very important to me. I hate grey blacks. I had a 700 tweaked with the filter am I am wondering how a filter used on a Z4 or Ae900 would help contrast. Hope you get the Ae900 soon so you can review it.

For future reference http://www.avbuzz.com

Looks like the black level is not as good as the DLP levels ... so, d5 still falls short of dc3 in that respect.

CKL,

Thanks for the detailed review. How would you compare the SDE to a 720p DC3 machine ?

I found a Z4 review... http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages/plvz4.htm

That review sounded much more optimistic.

Looks like the black level is not as good as the DLP levels ... so, d5 still falls short of dc3 in that respect.

CKL,

Thanks for the detailed review. How would you compare the SDE to a 720p DC3 machine ?

Yes, the contrast dream appears over with these new panels. Based on CKL's report, the iris can perform some magic but the measurements show no contest to the good DLPs.

That kind of brought a tear to my eye.

I am not expecting the D5 panel to be as good as DLP. Still, it has improved over the D4. Its LCD and it has its drawbacks vs DLP, but also doesn't have the idiosyncracies of DLP either. To each their own and at least the LCD panels are progressing :)

I have just got a Z4. Its quality seems superior to its predecessors however I have noticed some weird artifacts when connecting it to my PC. In 720p, dark black pixels/areas seems to be surrounded (in every direction) by one or two white pixels. It all the more visible when the dark pixels are surrounded by grey pixels like in a right mouse button context menu (options are in a black font while the background is grey). I have tried to tweak all the settings (even the advanced options) and I didn't manage to get rid of it. I have got the same problem whether I use HDMI or VGA

It is a bit annoying and I fear that the PQ will suffer from it. I don't remember seeing that on a Z2, Z3. Has anybody else seen this too?

Regarding SDE, I rank them as follows:

720P DLP > 720P D5 LCD > 576P DLP>720P D4 LCD.

A good design of Auto Iris does improve the black level and contrast of LCD projector. I don't feel Z4 and TW600 can reach the level as that of DC2 DLP. The best contrast among LCD projectors is HS60. Its black level is as low as those DC3 DLP. Although its on/off contrast is over 5000:1 after D65 calibration which is higher than 2500-3000:1 of DC3 DLP, its real contrast can't beat DC3 DLP. This is because DLP has higher ANSI contrast. HS60 looks like those DLP rated at 2000:1.

Auto Iris lowers the black level and raises the contrast of black to white. But the gray to white contrast is not so good. I mean the contrast from DLP is constant and smooth while LCD plus AI is undulating and inconsistent. Moreover the manufacturers need to improve the response time and detection method of AI.

Hi CKL,

With so many drawbacks on LCD projector, I am still interested why you prefer HS60 over Sharp Z2000, which are at the same price level. Is it because of the color accuracy on HS60 ? I thought you can calibrate the color temp. on the Z2000 to achieve that. Am I wrong ?

You can enter the service mode of Z2000 to calibrate the color temp. But its primary colors (RGB) offset a lot from the standard which can't be corrected. It shows a strange color tone after D65 calibration.

From the previous experiences with Mitsubishi D1208/HC100/900/2000, I believe its new HC3000 should be quite good at its price range. If you are not urgent, you better wait for HC3000. It will arrive at the end of Nov. Otherwise go for Sony HS60. I hope to arrange a shootout between HS60 and HC3000 for AVBuzz members in Dec.

CKL,

Thanks for your additional comments here in follow up to your reviews. It's interesting how you allign the list of products. As for the Sony, we don't have much information on it here in the US although some feel that there will be an introduction next year. And we don't have any pricing information either.

I wonder if some folks will be trying to import the Sony from overseas in the interim.

In 720p, dark black pixels/areas seems to be surrounded (in every direction) by one or two white pixels.

Hi kzeuh,

do you probably use the "Creative Cinema" mode? IF so, the switches for Contrastenhancement Sparpness and ...-enhancements are set to L1 . One of the switches produces the artifacts, you described. Turn them off and the artifacts will hopefully disapear. It worked with my Z4.

Bernd

Can't wait to see the Cine4home tweak review.



Coming soon ;) The Z4 is VERY WELL tweakable, but rather difficult... ;)


Regards,
Ekkehart, www.cine4home.de

You can enter the service mode of Z2000 to calibrate the color temp. But its primary colors (RGB) offset a lot from the standard which can't be corrected. It shows a strange color tone after D65 calibration.

From the previous experiences with Mitsubishi D1208/HC100/900/2000, I believe its new HC3000 should be quite good at its price range. If you are not urgent, you better wait for HC3000. It will arrive at the end of Nov. Otherwise go for Sony HS60. I hope to arrange a shootout between HS60 and HC3000 for AVBuzz members in Dec.

Thanks for your comment. Will probably get a HS60 when it becomes available. HC3000 won't work for me since I need the lens shift function. However, the picture setting that you show on AVbuzz, can that be applied to all HS60, or it will vary because of playback units n screen used.

Coming soon ;) The Z4 is VERY WELL tweakable, but rather difficult... ;)


Regards,
Ekkehart, www.cine4home.de

Great News! But I don't have enough frequent flyer miles to send my projector to Germany for a tweak... Though I'm up for a challenge! Grrrrrrr :mad:

Thanks for your comment. Will probably get a HS60 when it becomes available. HC3000 won't work for me since I need the lens shift function. However, the picture setting that you show on AVbuzz, can that be applied to all HS60, or it will vary because of playback units n screen used.

Different HS60, DVD player and screen needs customized settings. I disagree one group of unique settings for all the same projectors.

Hi kzeuh,

do you probably use the "Creative Cinema" mode? IF so, the switches for Contrastenhancement Sparpness and ...-enhancements are set to L1 . One of the switches produces the artifacts, you described. Turn them off and the artifacts will hopefully disapear. It worked with my Z4.

Bernd

I have noticed that Transient improvement does make the white pixels more visible but even when this option and all the other advanced options are turn off you can tell there is still a couple of white pixels around the black ones. If I set the sharpness to the minimum (-7), the effect is even less visible but it is still there.

It does look like some unwanted image processing. Can anyone else can confirm if he sees this as well?

Thanks

Are you talking the edge enhancement? DVD disc and player have already enhanced the edge to make the picture look sharper. You can't get rid of it by adjusting the setiings within Z4.

Are you talking the edge enhancement? DVD disc and player have already enhanced the edge to make the picture look sharper. You can't get rid of it by adjusting the setiings within Z4.

I have this issue when I connect my Z4 directly to my HTPC, I haven't tried with a standalone DVD player yet. I am supposed to see my Windows Desktop. I expected a 1 to 1 mapping in a 720P resolution which isn't the case since some white pixels in every direction are added. It is a bit annoying since it creates some ghost pictures of the frames of the windows for instance.

It does look like edge enhancement, but it isn't related to the source since I have the same problem with both my Nvidia 6800 and ATI 9800 videocards and whether I connect my PC to the HDMI or VGA input of the Z4.

I have also disabled the advanced image processings such as 'auto black strech', 'contrast enhancement' and 'transient improvement' and reduced sharpness to -7 but it is still there.

This problem is all the more visible when looking at black pixels on a grey background. That is when displaying a contextual menu accessible with a right mouse button.

CKL I would be very grateful if you could check with your HTPC setup whether you have this issue. I am sure lots of PC users like gamers would be interested in knowing if they can get a perfect 1 to 1 mapping with a Z4.

Thanks in advance

Find overscan on menu reduce to 0.

Find overscan on menu reduce to 0.

Thanks for your help,

This the first thing I did when I got my Z4 but it is not related to this particular issue. I am pretty sure there is some edge enhancement done by the Z4, but I haven't found a way to disable it.

Thanks for your help,

This the first thing I did when I got my Z4 but it is not related to this particular issue. I am pretty sure there is some edge enhancement done by the Z4, but I haven't found a way to disable it.

Oh.

that's a bit worrying, I could get 1-1 fine with the 3.

When my Z4 comes this will be the first thing I will report on.

Well there was an issue with 1:1 reported by Ekkehart/Cine4home, though he says his firmware was not current.

The edge enhancement doesn't sound good. How about trying a dedicated DVD player to see if there are particular issues with your PC. Yes it would be even more strange if it was something other than a video card but I hate to assume anything with PC's. Do you have a laptop or a friend with one you could try?

I don't have Z4 in my hand at this moment. I will double check this issue when I meet Z4 again. In my memory, I used Nokia Monitor Test to verify the 1:1 mapping. There is full screen texts pattern showing every character in black with one pixel width. I didn't notice any white edge. You can use AVIA sharpness test pattern which has not edge enhancement in the source. I guess the problem you described like the one at Marantz 12S4.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=541318

Hi CLK

Is it possible to view your older reviews (say the Z3) in English?

Thanks

I just received an email from Projector Central asking when their review will be published on the AE900 and Z4. Their response was that it will be up later today hopefully by noon pacific time. www.projectorcentral.com

I just received an email from Projector Central asking when their review will be published on the AE900 and Z4. Their response was that it will be up later today hopefully by noon pacific time. www.projectorcentral.com

Good news. Thanks rwestley. It's been slow around here for a few days.

Guys, I've got my Z4 and done a quick run down here with a couple of comparisons to the 3.

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2040731#post2040731

Suffice to say I'm a bit disappointed, and my Z4 defo has this EE problem in hdmi.

reviews are up on proj central fyi.....

Guys, I've got my Z4 and done a quick run down here with a couple of comparisons to the 3.

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2040731#post2040731

Suffice to say I'm a bit disappointed, and my Z4 defo has this EE problem in hdmi.

There seems to be a couple edge enhancement settings on the Z4 as I suspected.

From Projector Central:
"The sharpness control on video ranges from a setting of -7 to +7, with the default setting at 0. Though the edge enhancement at the 0 position is not excessive, video purists will want to set sharpness lower than that for the most natural video image. In the ranges of -5 to -4, the sharpness test pattern on AVIA shows no ringing, and is as clean as it gets.

In addition to the sharpness control there is a separate "transient improvement" option, which can either be set to Off, or at Levels 1, 2, or 3, with Level 3 being the most extreme. This is an edge enhancement feature that works beautifully, with a caveat. At Level 1, the picture is noticeably sharper than when the control is off. However, it introduces some noise into the image where details are in rapid motion. Both the sharpness and the potential noise are increased with each step up to Level 2 and Level 3. Nevertheless, it does have a noticeable effect on improving the depth, or three-dimensional quality of the image. The video purist would argue that this feature should not be used. We say baloney -- it can look sensational, and we would advise users to experiment with it to find the desired setting for each type of video material (the ideal setting will vary based on whether you are watching live football in HD or Shrek on a DVD player). The bottom line is that you may think that a little bit of occasional noise is a small price to pay for a picture that looks more clear, sharp, and three-dimensional. "

The http://www.projectorcentral.com/home.cfm reviews on the Panny AE900 and the Sanyo Z4 are up. The review on the Mits HC3000 DLP is delayed for about 10 days. There is also a comparison review.

Good reviews for both but more mentions of slight flaws to the Z4 along with more capabilities to tweak. No VB seen.

I just read the Z4 and AE900 reviews on projectorcentral, as well as the comparison.

The main thing that worries me about the Z4 is the deinterlacer.
Evan says that 480i signals are "difficult to watch". On my Z1 I find them quite watchable. Is it the case that Sanyo has a worse deinterlacer in its current model than the old one, or just that the expectation of the deinterlacer for today's model is much higher than 3 years ago ?

I just read the Z4 and AE900 reviews on projectorcentral, as well as the comparison.

The main thing that worries me about the Z4 is the deinterlacer.
Evan says that 480i signals are "difficult to watch". On my Z1 I find them quite watchable. Is it the case that Sanyo has a worse deinterlacer in its current model than the old one, or just that the expectation of the deinterlacer for today's model is much higher than 3 years ago ?
I don't know, but are there many people here who feed their projector 480i? I don't know about regular TIVO's, but with the HD-TIVO I still output at 720p or 1080i and don't switch to 480i for SD channels. Then with DVDs I think most people would use an upscaling player (including HTPCs) or at least progressive players. I know some people may play old tapes or laserdisks and there are other cases for 480i, but I just think in general this wouldn't be a big deal to most people. If the deinterlacer for 1080i is bad then I would be a lot more concerned.

--Darin

Anyone have confirmation of whether the Z4 will support the vertical stretching necessary to do constant height 2.35:1 (using an anamorphic horizontal stretch lens) through the digital inputs for 480p/720p/1080i?

It appears that it will, but it does not appear that it does pillarboxing on 16x9 material to 4:3 for correction that way. Based entirely on the manual however.

I don't know, but are there many people here who feed their projector 480i? I don't know about regular TIVO's, but with the HD-TIVO I still output at 720p or 1080i and don't switch to 480i for SD channels. Then with DVDs I think most people would use an upscaling player (including HTPCs) or at least progressive players. I know some people may play old tapes or laserdisks and there are other cases for 480i, but I just think in general this wouldn't be a big deal to most people. If the deinterlacer for 1080i is bad then I would be a lot more concerned.

--Darin

Well, the review didn't speak to the PVL-Z4 deinterlacer's 1080i -> 720p capabilities, only 480i -> 720p.

I have two PVRs - a Dish 921 that I use for HD, and a Dish 508 that I use for SD.
The 921 is an HD PVR, which outputs a fixed resolution (I have it set to 1080i), but the hard drive is 250 GB, and that translates to only 25 hours of HD, which is not enough and causes programs to often be overwritten before they have been viewed. So, I use that PVR only for HD programs.

I use my Dish 508 PVR for SD programs. Its 80 GB hard drive can hold about 70 hours of HD, which is a much more reasonable capacity. But the 508 only outputs 480i, through s-video. I use my Yamaha RX-V2400 receiver's upconverting capability to convert that to component 480i, and then send that to the projector. It looks OK on my PLV-Z1 - as good as SD can look on a 106" screen anyway ...

I really wish I could have only one PVR, but right now the hard drive capacity for the HD models are just too small. I think when drives capacitities reach 1 TB, then one PVR will be feasible for me.

For DVD I use a multi-region player that plays NTSC discs at 480p (progressive scan) but PAL discs at 575i, and the PAL discs look extremely good on the PLV-Z1 (the native resolution of the PLV-Z1 is 540 lines, which is very close to PAL).

I also do use VHS on occasion, either SECAM, PAL or NTSC videotapes, and my VCRs do not upconvert the signal. They are sent to the PJ s-video. Unfortunately the Yamaha s-video -> component upconverter only works for NTSC - it loses color with SECAM and PAL signals -, so I have to use the s-video cable to the projector. The VHS tapes don't look too great on the Z1, but they are viewable.

The projectorcentral reviews on the Panny AE900 and the Sanyo Z4 are up. The review on the Mits HC3000 DLP is delayed for about 10 days. There is also a comparison review.

Good reviews for both but more mentions of slight flaws to the Z4 along with more capabilities to tweak. No VB seen.

to make it short. the comparison says that the Z4 has way more features, better contrast and depth plus a much sharper image on the pro side.
on the other side it has not so good blacks in completely dark scenes and the panny has the better deinterlacer.

i have the Z4.
i cannot comment on the comparison to the AE900.
but i can confirm, being subjective, that its image provides a great contast, vivid colors and very good depth.
and yes i am a bit disappointed with its performance in very dark scenes, but i guess i just expected too much.

btw: concerning TV: i am from europe. we have PAL over here and the Z4 actually deinterlaces PAL TV very good.

the thing i miss the most actually would be a second digital input :-)

I've got to say, the Iris on the Z4 is not usable in my opinion. Certainly not on the POWERFUL settings, it swings way too much way too slow.

On the creative cinema setting it's not as bad but I won't be using it.

I'm going to set up a tweak thread on the Z4 shortly after messing tonight.

I have two PVRs - a Dish 921 that I use for HD, and a Dish 508 that I use for SD.
The 921 is an HD PVR, which outputs a fixed resolution (I have it set to 1080i), but the hard drive is 250 GB, and that translates to only 25 hours of HD, which is not enough and causes programs to often be overwritten before they have been viewed. So, I use that PVR only for HD programs.
...
I really wish I could have only one PVR, but right now the hard drive capacity for the HD models are just too small. I think when drives capacitities reach 1 TB, then one PVR will be feasible for me.
It sounds like a 942 modified with an external SATA bay with drives that you can swap in would be a big upgrade for you. I'm not sure if you've looked into it, but I believe this is what Gary Murrell is doing with 250GB drives that he gets for not far from $100 each.

--Darin

There seems to be a couple edge enhancement settings on the Z4 as I suspected.

From Projector Central:
"The sharpness control on video ranges from a setting of -7 to +7, with the default setting at 0. Though the edge enhancement at the 0 position is not excessive, video purists will want to set sharpness lower than that for the most natural video image. In the ranges of -5 to -4, the sharpness test pattern on AVIA shows no ringing, and is as clean as it gets.

In addition to the sharpness control there is a separate "transient improvement" option, .... "

I have disabled 'transient improvement' and all ther other advanced options, set sharpness to -7 and I was still unable to get rid of the Edge Enhancement.

ROne have you managed to get better results with some tweakings?

Can anybody else confirm they have seen the same artifacts? It could be related to only a specific firmware version, mine is V1.00 (press OK + INPUT during a few seconds to get access to the service menu).

I wonder if Ekkehart can confirm the number on his test unit versus the production unit he saw.

I have disabled 'transient improvement' and all ther other advanced options, set sharpness to -7 and I was still unable to get rid of the Edge Enhancement.

ROne have you managed to get better results with some tweakings?

Can anybody else confirm they have seen the same artifacts? It could be related to only a specific firmware version, mine is V1.00 (press OK + INPUT during a few seconds to get access to the service menu).

No the best I've found so far is -3 on sharpness.

It looks like the the transient improvement is still on when it's turned off.

Okay a few things after spending several hours on it ...

Firstly I've measured contrast ratio on the different presets, at first it seemed very disappointing but I think I've realised what sanyo have done.

The contrast ratio of the Creative Cinema Preset comes in a steady 656:1 without dynamic iris. eeek you all say, ah but the colour balance has improved out of the box such that I reckon (to be proved by the spyder) it's close to D65. This would put the Z4 on a par with the Z3 using CC+filters to get to D65 without filters if that makes sense.

So they've sacrificed a bit of true contrast ratio to get color balance better - I would go along with that.

So the D5 panels to me don't seem to be any better CR wise at all. The most I can get without filters/dynamic iris is 1100:1 about the ballpark of the Z3.

Things do get interesting when measuring CR with dynamic iris, in powerful mode I managed to record 6895:1, so it can get there, the only trade of is this movement in iris ... but there's more. The iris when in auto mode can suppress black level loads more than in manual mode, so manual closed is different to auto fully closed to a huge degree. This is auto's undoing, because perceptibly at about 30IRE and above you can't really see the iris adapting, and it works best 30IRE upwards! The problem with below 30IRE is that the shifts are too drastic and serve no purpose other than to give a really low black level that when used in a dim film scene which say is so low as take away too much light from the whole of the screen. What we actually need is a spot iris rather than an iris that effects the brightportions too much in mainly dark scene.

Basically if the Iris was less fussy below this level we could re-evaluate this iris business.

I wonder if we can tune the iris ....?

Not quite ready for a tweak thread yet, and that HDMI EE is still a nag, though -3 on the sharpness limits it a little.

All this chatter about the contrast and sharpness was not endearing.
Okay but that was before the projector central review came in and it is overall very, very positive and states the Z4 is now a contender even with DLP.

That's great news, especially for people who can't consider DLP.

That's great news, especially for people who can't consider DLP.
Both of them?


:rolleyes: ;)

Well they both look appreciative, but hey, who's counting? :)

Strong statement in the projector central comment that the Z4 "is a direct challenge to every single-chip 720p DLP projector on the market."

WoW!

All this chatter about the contrast and sharpness was not endearing.
Okay but that was before the projector central review came in and it is overall very, very positive and states the Z4 is now a contender even with DLP.

That's great news, especially for people who can't consider DLP.

So because one guy who gets PJs sent to him for free and who rarely says anything bad about any PJ likes the pj the others here mentioning the same criticisms are discounted? I'll put mroe faith in the people here mentioning the same issues than Evan at PC praising yet another pj.

Strong statement in the projector central comment that the Z4 "is a direct challenge to every single-chip 720p DLP projector on the market."

WoW!

Even says that about every new/hot LCD pj that comes out each year...

So because one guy who gets PJs sent to him for free and who rarely says anything bad about any PJ likes the pj the others here mentioning the same criticisms are discounted? I'll put mroe faith in the people here mentioning the same issues than Evan at PC praising yet another pj.
Goes both ways. One guy says something bad about a projector in a review and a certain number of people cling to those satatements as gospel, another says something positive and others cling to those. I think it's more about what brands and/or technologies you like, if you prefer DLP then obviously you're going to cling to every bad statement made about LCD, and vce versa.

Reviews are only worthwhile if you're going to buy a projector sight unseen, I figure.

Someone who has the Z4, I'd appreciate checking something. The manual states that you can zoom 2.35:1 material to 16x9 on all resolutions including HD. This is new from the Z3, and great news for people who want constant height setups with an anamorphic lens. What I don't see is whether you can put a 16x9 image in a 4x3 window. So please, if you have the Z4 and an HD source at 16x9, see if you can then put that into a 4:3 window. Everyone who runs CH will thank you for the experiment! ;)

Madpoet are you running an anamorphic lens again, p752? That would be great to scale HD resolutions at the PJ. I bet this will be with component only since digital connections generally bypass the internal scaler. Since I'm a HTPC user and scale with TheaterTek I could never use something like comcast HD cable service with my mutant Panamorph.

It's on now AE900 vs. Z4:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/ae900_plvz4.htm

Hi CLK

Is it possible to view your older reviews (say the Z3) in English?

Thanks

Sorry, I'm quite easy recently to test the new projectors and DVD players. I don't think I have time to do the translation works for the old review. The upcoming new product reviews will have English version.

i think the z3 is spectacular except for dark scenes (which many shows movies have little to none of - lord of the rings tends to always have some bright aspects even in 'dark scenes' so it looked great). but any movie/show with a lot of uniformly dark lit scenes, i think the picture quality is hazy/cloudy, definitely mediocre (i think inferior to the x1 i used to have on that type of material). i am getting the impression that the Z4 is not a much of an improvement in this area. thoughts?

i think the z3 is spectacular except for dark scenes (which many shows movies have little to none of - lord of the rings tends to always have some bright aspects even in 'dark scenes' so it looked great). but any movie/show with a lot of uniformly dark lit scenes, i think the picture quality is hazy/cloudy, definitely mediocre (i think inferior to the x1 i used to have on that type of material). i am getting the impression that the Z4 is not a much of an improvement in this area. thoughts?

Yep and CKL has got it dead right with his review.

I've done measurements and they come in right on CKLs numbers.

He's right the auto-iris in the brighter modes can yield 6895:1, but it's unusable because of color balance and the fact that the iris just dims way too much during dark scenes. And you can see it move.

You are left with Creative Cinema preset, where I got a reading of about 1100:1 with Iris - which is about as good as the Z3 in Powerful with filters on.

ANSI contrast does look to be better than the Z3.

This is the only thing that I've seen which is a definite improvement.

Madpoet are you running an anamorphic lens again, p752? That would be great to scale HD resolutions at the PJ. I bet this will be with component only since digital connections generally bypass the internal scaler. Since I'm a HTPC user and scale with TheaterTek I could never use something like comcast HD cable service with my mutant Panamorph.

Yep, sure am. I have too many sources unfortunately, so I need the PJ to scale them or sping for an external scaler.

ROne, What about brightness? From all accounts it seems the Z4 has more lumen output per setting than the Z3?

Moe

Darin,

It sounds like a 942 modified with an external SATA bay with drives that you can swap in would be a big upgrade for you. I'm not sure if you've looked into it, but I believe this is what Gary Murrell is doing with 250GB drives that he gets for not far from $100 each.

--Darin

I didn't know somebody had managed to hack the 942 to use external drives. Can the 942 use several drives at the same time, or does one need to manually switch to a different drive ? I'm looking for something with the full capacity accessible for recordings and with the remote. The two PVRs are certainly accessible with the universal remote. Also, it would be nice if there was a single big hard drive when going to a single PVR, to reduce noise.

Then there is the fact that MPEG-4 is supposed to be coming to dish soon, which makes an upgrade right now very unatractive. Also, MPEG-4 might reduce the need for bigger capacity (I might be able to live with 500 GB rather than 1 TB ;), but not until after Dish converts all their channels to MPEG-4 ...

i will also add that my z3 has the red 1db attenuator (absolute must for component connections) and a variant of the picture settings i learned about here. i don't use the filters (even though i bought one), i thought it made things murkier, less clear. i guess the upside is that i save money on the upgrade. i just wish that made affordable dlps with H+V lens offset.

ROne, What about brightness? From all accounts it seems the Z4 has more lumen output per setting than the Z3?

Moe

Yes subjectively , though I've not record that yet. But it's black level I reckon to be up on the Z3 hence the similar final CR.

I've had the smart out and done some simple CR figures - all I've been doing is going through all the presets and finding which ones effect the iris and examining the different reactions of it after basic calibration to find the most suitable starting point. There are so many combinations ...

i will also add that my z3 has the red 1db attenuator (absolute must for component connections) and a variant of the picture settings i learned about here. i don't use the filters (even though i bought one), i thought it made things murkier, less clear. i guess the upside is that i save money on the upgrade. i just wish that made affordable dlps with H+V lens offset.

Yes ... looks like 720p dlps can't compete on price & features with the lcds. Thats sad.

I also need lense shift ... have to decide whether to buy z4 or panasonic ae900. The panny, even with lense shift is not good for ceiling mount. That leaves only z4 ... but if z3 is not much worse, may be I should get it and save a bunch.

Someone who has the Z4, I'd appreciate checking something. The manual states that you can zoom 2.35:1 material to 16x9 on all resolutions including HD. This is new from the Z3, and great news for people who want constant height setups with an anamorphic lens. What I don't see is whether you can put a 16x9 image in a 4x3 window. So please, if you have the Z4 and an HD source at 16x9, see if you can then put that into a 4:3 window. Everyone who runs CH will thank you for the experiment! ;)


Ditto :) This would give me a reason to sell my Z2, since it will only stretch a 480p signal over component, HDMI/DVI seems to be locked, but looking at the Z4 manual, it appears that you may be able to achieve this with the Z4, that would be cool. In addition to Zoom, I see there is something that lets you adjust the vertical orientation of the picture, hmmmmm.

New Member


:confused:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just wondering which projector might suit my setup best?
At the moment I have the Mitsubishi HC900 DLP but want to now go LCD, with all the recent improvments.
Things that are important to me is a bright picture thats sharp.
My setup is a white 102" (8' 6") wide screen. Seating 15 ft from screen.
Watching manly DVD in a dark room. Will use HDMI.
Both the Z4 and the 900 sound good for my setup but wonder if my fairly large size screen maybe suited to one or the other better?
Report Post

Is there anyone in Toronto who has or is planning to get the Z4? I'd love to see it in action. You can PM me if you're willing to provide a demo :)

Well it has been said that the Z4 is the better of the new LCD's for large screens. The Z4 picture is going to be "sharper" because the smoothscreen on the AE900 softens even more than the 700. Color accuracy on the Z4 however seems to be not quite as good as the 900. Reading through the Cine4home review it does look like Ekkehart mentions the color not being quite perfect.

Well it has been said that the Z4 is the better of the new LCD's for large screens. The Z4 picture is going to be "sharper" because the smoothscreen on the AE900 softens even more than the 700. Color accuracy on the Z4 however seems to be not quite as good as the 900. Reading through the Cine4home review it does look like Ekkehart mentions the color not being quite perfect.

i read the review saying it was softer but i don't recall hearing people here mention that ae900 was softer in the in-home comparison they did in california.

If you read through the AE900 thread you will see people mention they think it's a bit softer than the AE700. Someone also goes on to say that it looks like the soft picture varies from unit to unit though smoothscreen may not be the culprit of the difference. I don't think the AE900 is the projector for people who must have a razor sharp image. It is however the projector for people who must avoid SDE like the plague. The Z4 sounds to be pretty good in this department as well but there's no doubting the performance of smoothscreen. Though, it just looks like the little details are there for the Z4; Dust cleaning holes, misconvergence adjustments, VB adjustments, tons of picture adjustments. It does look like it's going to be a challenge to maximize contrast performance and calibrate to d65. However, that is the whole point of having a forum like this. So I'm looking forward to tweaking the heck out of this thing with the rest of you guys.

Im about to purchase the Z4 but would like to read the manual online. Anyone know where to find it please? Ive checked out sanyo with no luck. :confused:

Im about to purchase the Z4 but would like to read the manual online. Anyone know where to find it please? Ive checked out sanyo with no luck. :confused:

This is the only place I was able to locate the owners manual online and print it off.

http://www.audiogeneral.com/Sanyo/PLV-Z4_OM.pdf

I think its going to be out at the end of October. Does anyone know an exact date?

Anyone know of a store in San Francisco/Bay Area that has either the Z4 or AE900 setup so that I can checkout the projectors in person? Most of the stores I have called only sell a limited number of projectors or only sell super high-end stuff. You can only read so much...

Reading some of the new reviews for the Z4 saying it is ideal for installation in a rear bookshelf. But reading the manual posted by Troytn (Thanks), the Z4 requires 1.5 foot of space behind the PJ for cooling (Air Intake). Do I really need 1.5 foot of free space behind the PJ, because this sounds excessive for the intake or do I need to get a 2 foot deep bookshelf?
Here in Australia they're talking a late November/Early December release

I think the reviews have said that the Panasonic 900 is the one that is ideal for mounting on a read bookshelf.

I think the reviews have said that the Panasonic 900 is the one that is ideal for mounting on a read bookshelf.

Huh? They have the same lens spec so there's no difference in which one is "better" for shelf mounting. The lack of offset and lower amount of lens shift makes shelf mounting the only real alternative for the AE900. The Z4 on the other hand has enough lens shift to make ceiling mount a worthwhile option.

I have used previous Sanyo models on a shelf. You don't need that much room in the back. I would say 6-10 inches would be fine. You should have free air flow with any projector use use. I think both the Sanyo and Panasonic would work fine on the shelf.

Reading some of the new reviews for the Z4 saying it is ideal for installation in a rear bookshelf. But reading the manual posted by Troytn (Thanks), the Z4 requires 1.5 foot of space behind the PJ for cooling (Air Intake). Do I really need 1.5 foot of free space behind the PJ, because this sounds excessive for the intake or do I need to get a 2 foot deep bookshelf?
Here in Australia they're talking a late November/Early December release

That does seem excessive. They're just giving themselves another reason to deny warranty coverage. I think that if you have "some" space behind ie: not pressed right up against the wall and a foot or two either side that you'll be set.

So I'm thinking the new Sanyo Z4. I'm leaning towards a 119" Da-lite fixed screen (58" x 104"). Again screen to couch is 14' and projector at 15'. Can this projector project at this distance and fill the entire screen? I guess it would be a little over 1.5x screen width and the seating position.

Any suggestions if I go with the Da-mat or the high contrast screen?

My room is painted all sides and ceiling dark brown with one small window fully covered. Again room is 15' wide by 16 feet deep 8' ceilings.

I'm really excited to get this projector. I just need to find a reputable dealer online that will back it up if any issues and also a place to find the screen for a decent price. Hopefully I can figure out the assembly of the screen and getting it all setup.

Any additional input would be appreciated.

Would the Optoma Graywolf work well with the Z4?

Which would work the best for XBox Videogames? the 900 or Z4?

Technaught -- No! That's why niggenz & I did a search (mostly niggenz's effort) for local AVS members that had the PJs we were interested in in the Bay Area that were willing to demo their PJs for us. Since the Z4 & AE900 are very new, I doubt you'll find any in our area yet. There are no local Sanyo or Panasonic front PJ dealers.

Regarding shelf mounting: The biggest difference between the Z4 and the AE900 is that the Z4 has its main air intake port on the back of the PJ whereas the AE900 has two intake ports, one on the side (w/filter) and another on the rear. Unfortunately, we will have to wait until reviewers get their hands on them to find out how much airflow is needed. This could be a factor though and needs to be considered (especially with regard to warranty factors).

I hope reviewers will comment on this potential problem factor.

It seems that the z4 can be shelf mounted (due to the 2.0 zoom lens). But I do think there needs to be enough clearance around the projector. At least that is what I would guess because of the hot air outlet on the side of the projector. The panny 900 has such an outlet on the front, making placement more easy (at least for me)

The shelf should be in the middle of the room so there should be no problem using a shelf mount with the Z4. I had a Z2 and the hot air outlet was on the side and shelf mounting was no problem. The Z2 also had air intake on the back.

I would leave at least 6-8 inches in the back of the Z4 or the Panasonic AE900 so you will have room for air and cables. If you have that space the Z4 should be fine. I would not put either projector up against the back wall on the shelf.

Guys, the shelf mounting has nothing to do with the zoom. It's all about where the intake and exhaust vents are, and having enough air circulation. You WANT to have enough room for air to circulate, believe me.

Guys, the shelf mounting has nothing to do with the zoom. It's all about where the intake and exhaust vents are, and having enough air circulation. You WANT to have enough room for air to circulate, believe me.

Agreed. It's just that the zoom lens is enabling me to project from the back of the room to the screen. Al my former projectors could not achieve this (the throw was too short/image too big). So, in my situation, shelf mounting was not even considered as an option.
But the bigger throw distance does indeed not imply that the pj is fitted for shelf mounting (that's just wishful thinking on my behalf). Though there have been made statements about the Panny 700 in the line of "optimised for shelf mounting" (also described by projectorcentral) due to the front exhaust design. When I looked at the z4, and noticing the side exhaust, I was wondering if Sanyo had the same design intentions (for shelf mounting).

Guys, the shelf mounting has nothing to do with the zoom. It's all about where the intake and exhaust vents are, and having enough air circulation. You WANT to have enough room for air to circulate, believe me.

OK, now how much heat builds up around the projector? I have an open back soffit for the projector with peg hole vents on the front but that is obviously not going to work for this one. I could channel the air from the exhaust into another chamber with a panaflo on the right side of the projector and have another panaflo blow the air out vents on the front of a chamber. Do you think that would provide enough ventilation? The back of the soffitt opens to my equipment room and the spot for the projector is roughly 3 -4 times the volume of the projector so it's not like a small hush box really. I could also pull room temp air from the other side into the projector chamber as well just to give it some cross flow. Again, the rear of the projector will be completely open. What do you guys think?

I don't know how much heat is behind this projector because I'm not terribly certain where the intake and exhaust fans are. I'd have to flip through the manual I guess to find them :). If the exhaust is on the back, then shelf mounting is totally out. If it's on the front then you're golden, unless the intakes are on the back in which case you need to leave enough room for them. Recommended is 1.5' of clearance I believe, but 1' probably works.

My problem is the right side since that's where the exhaust is. I have 4 - 5 feet behind the projector but the exhaust would be blowing directly into a board as it stands. See my proposed solution below.

http://www.independentsector.org/library/projectorchamber.jpg

@dusk:
I'm more or less in the same boat. I don't have too much clearance on the right hand side of the projector (due to the vicinity of a closet). And, ventilation wise, there is plenty of space on the left side, but the shelf cannot be placed more to the left because of a window (window mounting anyone? :D ). For sure I can figure it out and it would not be a deal breaker for me, it's just that the (right)side exhaust presents a problem that doesn't seem to be an issue with the Panny.

Here is an interesting test from the Panasonic 900 thread. He measured contrast and lumens at each extreme of the zoom range. If anyone has a Z4 and the equipment, it would be enlightening to see the same numbers for the Z4. It really makes me question my desire to mount the projector as far back as my room will allow.

Okay, I did some measurements and the light outputs were quite different. I hope nobody will take these as being due to the inverse square law as light drops off after coming out of the lens, but is instead because of what is happening inside the projector and lens.

Here is what I got for the same image size, but with the projector as close to the screen as it would go vs furthest away:

Closest: 126 lux
Furthest: 70 lux

The on/off CRs I measured were different, but slight:

Closest (auto iris on): 3300:1 to 3400:1
Furthest (auto iris on): 3000:1
Closest (auto iris off): 1000:1
Furthest (auto iris off): 800:1

The 10% difference or so with the iris on might be within the margin of error given that I was holding the sensor for the test.

The values for lux were with no filter on the projector and in video mode with settings that I had used with the KR-6 recommended filter, but without total calibration (just enough to make me happy enough to watch for a while). Since I did some calibration with the filter, but didn't have it on there, this means that the images would have been lower in red than D65 would call for. The lamp was on low and if I had put it on high I believe the black level would stay the same (based on a test a few days ago), but the lumens for white would go up (and thus higher on/off CR). This was also with a 116" wide image. Calculating that out gives me the following for lumens:

Closest (no filter): 615 lumens
Furthest (no filter): 340 lumens

Checking how much the filter cut the light at this point and then calculating gave me:

Closest (with KR-6): 375 lumens
Furthest (with KR-6): 210 lumens

--Darin

Here is an interesting test from the Panasonic 900 thread. He measured contrast and lumens at each extreme of the zoom range. If anyone has a Z4 and the equipment, it would be enlightening to see the same numbers for the Z4. It really makes me question my desire to mount the projector as far back as my room will allow.

Is that the way other projectors work or is it the result of something in the 900? Hey, maybe that has something to do with the manual iris in the Z4. Could it be possible that would keep luminance more even across the zoom range? The Ae900 doesn't have the second iris correct? Evan mentioned keeping the iris fully open anyway. Hmmm, lots of questions.

Unfortunately I WANT to mount it as far back as possible with an anamorphic lens :(. Helps cut down on any distortion.

Unfortunately I WANT to mount it as far back as possible with an anamorphic lens :(. Helps cut down on any distortion.

Exactly! That and it helps with any hotspotting or uneven gain issues with a retro-reflective screen for a wider viewing area. I'm really bummed if the Z4 shows this much drop-off at longest throw.

So I'm thinking the new Sanyo Z4. I'm leaning towards a 119" Da-lite fixed screen (58" x 104"). Again screen to couch is 14' and projector at 15'. Can this projector project at this distance and fill the entire screen? I guess it would be a little over 1.5x screen width and the seating position.

Using the calculator at http://www.projectorcentral.com/Sanyo-PLV-Z4-projection-calculator-pro.htm you should have no problem.

I am VERY concerned about this section
"Conversely, the Z4 delivers an abundance of deinterlacing artifacts along with a standard television signal to the point where it is difficult to watch. Therefore, users of the Z4 will be best served by avoiding the internal deinterlacer. This can be achieved by using a good progressive scan DVD player, and a satellite or cable set top box that cleanly converts to 480p or upscales to 720p, or an external video processor."

If this is true, then Video signals over VGA input (PC), and Svideo will require a 1500 dollar signal procesor? Is this really as big of a problem as the reviewer made it out to be?

Are you really going to watch VHS with this projector? Isn't the VGA input progressive? I doubt you'll run into too many problems finding a way to circumvent the usage of the internal deinterlacer on the Z4. The only problem I could see is VHS really or OTA television maybe but again there are ways around it. What sources do you envision having problems with Jtiger?

I'm not going to watch VHS, but I would like to watch TV once in a while. I do not want to buy a $500 tivoHD box right now, when the new units will be out in the spring (Mpeg4). I currently have a DVR80, and the best output I can get is S video.
Thanks for the reply, I am about 90% decided on this projector, and would hate this problem to be true. I am weary of buying the panasonic with only a 1 year warranty.
And thanks to all those people on here who warn others of RBE. I was watching a 7205 today, and saw rainbows for the first time, in 5 auditions of DLP units. I am happy I took the time to do some viewing first

Don't be concerned about video de-interlacing. If all you are worried about is de-interlacing, an iScan or other de-interlacer can be found for very little which will do you fine paired with any projector like the Z4 etc. An iScan Plus or Pro can be had for $200 USD, or an iScan Ultra can be found for $400 or less. An iScan HD or HD+ is getting up towards the higher end, and they are nice processors, but they are not essential. No need for a $1500 processor. I have an Ultra and it works perfectly well for my Hitachi projector, which is essentially similar to the Z3 generation. I will likely keep using the Ultra with my TX100, TX200, Z4, AE900 or whatever else I may get later.

fwiw, the Iscan Pro will deliver beautiful 480p - if that is all the Z4 needs to scale up to the 720p, the Pro is a nice solution, can be found in the neighborhood of 2 bills used. from what we are being told, both above and on PC, that should do the trick. 'course, it WOULD be nice to actually see one of the little buggers....;)

I am VERY concerned about this section
"Conversely, the Z4 delivers an abundance of deinterlacing artifacts along with a standard television signal to the point where it is difficult to watch. Therefore, users of the Z4 will be best served by avoiding the internal deinterlacer. This can be achieved by using a good progressive scan DVD player, and a satellite or cable set top box that cleanly converts to 480p or upscales to 720p, or an external video processor."

i can't comment on the deinterlacer concerning NTSC.
but for the europeans in this forum i can say, that the Z4 does a hell of a good job deinterlacing PAL.

i watched a football (known as soccer in US :-)) match yesterday and i had absolutely no reasons to complain.

still though im looking forward to HDTV coming into my home next spring.

Hi

maybe, this might seem strange to you, but I'll ask anyway :rolleyes:

I do have a 16:9 screen with black masking borders. Most of the movies I watch are in 21:9, though, so I end up with an additional "greyish-black" border on top and bottom.
Since I cannot additionaly mask my screen to have a real black border in 21:9 format, I used the lens-shift funktion to shift the picture up to at least have a black border on top of the picture. Since on top, there is 50cm of black masking, this gives a much better impression than when the picture sits in the center of the 16:9 masking.
My question: is there any way to avoid manual shifting and "electronically" shift the picture upwards to the top? I mean: this would be achieved by simply shifting pixels, there is no recalculation of the picture needed in terms of resizing or up-converting.

If this could be done from within the firmware: whom can I address this suggestion to?

Thanks
Joerg

Joerg, why not reconfigure and go with a constant height setup? Sounds like you'd be a good candidate.

Madpoet

I thought, that this kind of comment would be the first up :)
YES, I am one of these canidates, but I do not have the space (nor the money at the moment) to go for these special lenses. Or is there an electronic way with the Z4 to go for this? I would LOVE to do constant height, since for my kind of cinema-perception, constant height is the "kind-a-real-movie-theatre-feeling"....

Joerg

Well, you can do it without the lense, you simply lose the benefits the lenses provide and you have to readjust your zoom for 16x9 material. The lens is fairly cheap though. A P752 is only $400 or so, and well worth it!

The lens is fairly cheap though. A P752 is only $400 or so, and well worth it! - MP

$495 + $20 ship. The website now states that there are only 5 left!

Ah, sorry.. they raised the price from when I got mine then. Still, well worth it.

I have got a question about lens shift that I'm sure has been answered a million times so forgive me for not remembering as I have tried to keep up with these threads.

I was all set to get the Panny AE900 until I found its height must start at the center of the screen. I have a dedicated HT room in a new house designed for ceiling mount installation. The ceiling is 10' but the wall where the fixed 100" or so screen will be placed is only 8' before it begins to angle in towards the room, and in addition normal viewing height will probably dictate the top of the screen being at 7' or so which places the center of the screen at approximately 54-58" from the floor. I know with Panasonic, you would have to drop the projector down to almost 7' above the floor and then you would still have to use the majority of the vertical lens shift, which negates the use of the horizontal lens shift. Now finally to my questions concerning the Z4 and I have looked for a manual that might have this info but couldn't find anything.

1. Using no lens shift, how does the projector need to be aligned with the screen? Lens in line with the center of the screen or top/bottom?

2. Based on the info above and assuming the answer to #1 is top/bottom, if the Z4 is mounted at 9' would there be sufficient lens shift in both the veritical and horizontal directions?

Any other suggestions are welcome and TIA.

Give or take you would be using most of the vertical lens shift. So we're going to assume that there is a difference 24" from the center of the lens to the top of the screen. That means your screen will need to be at least 48" in height. The Z4 is able to project an image 100% above or below a centered image, giving you 3 full screen heights of vertical mobility. So let's say you take the 48" high image and lens shift so that the center is 24" down. Now you're using 50% of the available lens shift. Moving it down another 50% or 24" puts you right in the middle of your screen again assuming 24" from center of lens to top of screen. With that setup you're using all available lens shift in a vertical direction so none left for horizontal.

A 48" high screen is about 98" diag. A 100" diagonal 16:9 screen is about 49" high so I would go at least that big. If you need to use much horizontal lens shift you're going to need to go a little bigger. Personally I would raise the center of the screen/lower the projector 6" and go with a 110" screen giving you more lens shift in the horizontal directions and would be less of an effect on image quality.

You may also want to talk with owners/reviewers of the Z4 to find out at what % point image starts degrading. If it starts degrading heavily at 75% and beyond you may want to retool the offset of PJ to screen even more. Below are some more scenarios.

The math with 110" screen. Assuming also 18" center of lens to top of screen resulting from 3" move of projector downward and 3" screen hieght gain by switch to larger screen. Veritcal Shift range in one direction is now a total of 54"(equals height from 110" diag.) Your total needed shift is 18+27 which is 45" out of 54". 83% total vertical shift used leaving you a little horizontal play. That's versus the 99% V shift in the previous example.

OK again more. Let's say you like the center of the screen at a certain height and don't want to move the projector so you decide to go bigger screen. That makes sense because seating height is a bit more difficult to change and maybe your mount is set. Going from 48" screen height to 54" screen height nets you 3" higher screen, or 3" vertically closer to the center of the lens. That gives you 21"
+ 27" = 48" total V Shift. You're then using about 89% of the vertical shift.

And finally. Let's say you move the projector a full six inches downward(raising center of screen 6" is same result) plus you go to 110" thus raising top of screen 3". You now have 15" from center of lens to top of screen. 15+27 = 42" total shift. That's about 78% total vertical shift used. Personally I would try to at least match that. If your projector height is set then think about moving your screen up some. You could even go to a bigger screen, say 118" and gain 2 inch vertically closer to center of lens then move the center of screen up 4" to get yor 6" total. Evan at Proj. Central uses 120" screen for tests.

Thanks Dusk.
Unfortunately I have 2 columns in the front of the room that limit my total screen size with a framed border to 99" which probably means I probably can't go above a 104" screen.

I am still a bit confused because I have never had or setup a projector before... if the center of the lens is at the top of the screen will the z4 need to lens shift to center the image on the screen or does it project downward?

If I lowered the projector to 8' and had the top of the screen at let's say 7'6", would that provide ample horizontal shift? Thanks.

OK I see, the columns limit your screen width.

Getting the center of the lens to the top of the screen would be great. Any vertical movement getting the top of the screen closer to the center of your lens is going to pay off. It's up to you if that means moving the projector down or moving the screen up. If you center the lens at the top of the screen you only need to use 50% of the vertical lens shift which leaves you very roughly 50% still to be used for horizontal shift if need be. Plus 50% shift will not visibly degrade picture quality per Evan's review at Projector Central.

The Z4 and Ae900 do not offset the image meaning the center of the lens while using no lens shift will be perpindicular to the center of the screen. Key here is to get the center of lens as close as you can to the top of the screen.

Your scenario as mentioned gives you only 6" from center of lens to top of screen which is good. Assume roughly 48" screen height again, 24"+6" = 30". You would be using only about 62.5% of the vertical lens shift giving you decent horizontal play.

However, is there a reason you can't place the projector horizontally smack dab in the middle thus eliminating the need for H shift?

In reality, I probably won't need much H-shift. The only reason for not being able to center smack-dab in the middle would be because I couldn't find a stud for the projector mount.

What do most people do in situations like this, angle the projector downward and then use keystone correction? Doesn't keystone correction impact image quality?

Thanks again for your time.

In reality, I probably won't need much H-shift. The only reason for not being able to center smack-dab in the middle would be because I couldn't find a stud for the projector mount.

What do most people do in situations like this, angle the projector downward and then use keystone correction? Doesn't keystone correction impact image quality?

Thanks again for your time.

Everyone uses lens shift if they've got it. In the past people have had to tilt and keystone but with lens shift so prevalent at least in the LCD camp nobody uses that stuff anymore. All you do is mount the projector with lens perpindicular to screen wall and then use the lens shift scroll wheels to center on screen.

Check out the manual: http://www.audiogeneral.com/Sanyo/PLV-Z4_OM.pdf

Dusk, Thanks for this link and all your help! Do you have a Sanyo projector?

dvdr, besides a constant height setup, using an HTPC for the source would let you shift the image up as you wish, well, at least for dvd playback using TheaterTek or ZoomPlayer for example.
It would be nice indeed if projectors could add these features for dealing with the 2.35 aspect ratio, like stretching, positioning, ... (some seem to allow stretching now, although not always for all inputs or resolutions). The positioning would cost nothing in performance as you said. I don't know if the projector manufacturers read these threads, they clearly should.

The Z4 and Ae900 do not offset the image meaning the center of the lens while using no lens shift will be perpindicular to the center of the screen.

I don't know why in default mode they want to put the lense at the center of the screen. This means, in any table top or ceiling installation, you have to use vertical shift, limiting the horizontal shift you can get.

Looks like they think the most likely scenario is a book shelf mount at the back of the room almost inline with the center of the screen.

Unfortunately my room is too long for that ... in any case given the serious drop in brightness at the long end of the zoom, I've to decide between off center placement on a bookshelf (and basically use horizontal shift), or a more cumbersome ceiling mount (and basically use vertical shift) :(

nataraj,
I agree... Don't understand why they don't implement an offset lens as well H/V Lens Shift. price tradeoffs would be my guess.

I disagree that an offset will solve everything. It would for some people but not everyone. What about a user that is shelf mounting high up? An offset would destroy the ability to shelf mount at certain heights. Shelf mounting requires a fairly large lens shift since it is basically impossible to center the lens to the center of the screen because you'd be projecting on the back of peoples' heads.

I think we're getting a little picky here. The mounting capabilities of the Z4 are very broad and unrivaled by almost any projector on the market. Ceiling mounting is a distinct possibility without image degradation. However, the Ae900 folks have reason to complain since that unit's lens shift severely limits the ability to ceiling mount much above the top of the screen. The difference between an 8' mounted projector and 7' is pretty big to me assuming top of screen at 7'. To me an 8' projector is up pretty high and has less visual impact on the room and viewing experience when the projector is in front of the seating area. Also remember guys, that these are budget HT projectors and demand flexibility. Offset is for projectors that are intended for very specific use such as the Optoma DV10 with its huge offset making it ideal for coffee table only. The fact that budget 720p LCDs lean towards shelf mounting is no surprise since going that route means no added cost or hassle involved. Plus with all the novices buying these things, how many poor saps are going to install their ceiling mount and find out they can't hit the screen properly? Plenty :D

shelf mount upside down. no offset is dumb.

shelf mount upside down. no offset is dumb.
:rolleyes: Use the lens shift on your ceiling mounted projector. Complain to Panasonic because Sanyo has accomodated the majority of installation locations. Shelf mounting a Z4 upside down when it has buttons on the top makes perfect sense too since I always want the menus and crap popping up when I turn on my projector.

:rolleyes: Use the lens shift on your ceiling mounted projector. Complain to Panasonic because Sanyo has accomodated the majority of installation locations. Shelf mounting a Z4 upside down when it has buttons on the top makes perfect sense too since I always want the menus and crap popping up when I turn on my projector.
sorry, but you're uninformed here, especially about the menus, etc... obviously you've never used a PJ in this capacity at home or at work.

why complain to panny/sanyo when the same experts in the user's guide suggest use as little shift as possible for an optimal image then design the PJ in such a way where it is mandatory ;)

a zero offset image at neutral "shift" is utterly useless and negates the usable shift range. noone has the lens at center screen for home theater.

dusk described my situation to a tee in post #437. I was all set and still prefer the Panny based on what I have heard and read so far, however, the zero offset at neutral shift with limited lens shift capability takes me out of the Panny game because I would have to mount the projector at 7' and still use all the vertical lens shift which leaves no H-shift. Then I would get to listen to the fan and always have a projector in my peripheral. How does anyone use this projector and have it not shining on the back of the viewers heads? Let's say the middle of the screen averages about 60-65" from the floor, where do you put this projector?

The lens shift capability of the Sanyo forces me in this direction. More than likely I can ceiling mount this at 8' and get it too work. I agree though that a zero offset image at neutral shift seems self defeating and is further exasperated by a projector with limited shift capability such as the Panny.

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems most budget DLP projectors don't support or have limited support for lens shifting but implement an offset.

sorry, but you're uninformed here, especially about the menus, etc... obviously you've never used a PJ in this capacity at home or at work.

why complain to panny/sanyo when the same experts in the user's guide suggest use as little shift as possible for an optimal image then design the PJ in such a way where it is mandatory ;)

a zero offset image at neutral "shift" is utterly useless and negates the usable shift range. noone has the lens at center screen for home theater.

I guess I should step down from the Christie installation I'm doing next week :cool:

The perceivable difference in image quality between 0 shift and even 50% of available shift or more is about nil. If you want something with offset and are worried about the negligible difference between image quality there are plenty of other projectors, many high end, out there with built in offset to choose from that also make shelf mounting less desirable. Personally I wouldn't want to set it upside down since the Z4 has menu buttons on the top of the unit. Sure they may be inset but I still find that less than ideal. I also doubt that manufacturers want you to lay it upside down, though ceiling mount is fine. They have provided enough flexibility so that everyone can use the projector as intended whether shelf or ceiling mounted with negligible compromises in image quality.

The perceivable difference in image quality between 0 shift and even 50% of available shift or more is about nil. If you want something with offset and are worried about the negligible difference between image quality there are plenty of other projectors, many high end, out there with built in offset to choose from that also make shelf mounting less desirable. I don't disagree, but it makes little sense to zero the screen to the image either way. Ceiling mounts also would benefit obviously. It's a nonsensical design either way.

Personally I wouldn't want to set it upside down since the Z4 has menu buttons on the top of the unit. That might be your preference but most all PJs have buttons on the top and it's not a problem with a few small rubber pads. Not a rocket science. They also come with remote controls. Very, very, very common especially in mobile settings :)

I can't believe what I'm reading! You guys are trashing the only PJs that offer this kind of lens shift capability for under $10K, and the ones that do, only have about 10% of the lens shift offered by these 2 PJs (AE900 & Z4) :cool: .

For less that $3000, MSRP, you ge a PJ that can adjust from 13% (Panny) to 50% (Sanyo) above the screen to the same below the screen and you're bitching because that's not enough? All of the PJs in this MSRP price class don't give you any choice at all :eek: !

Come on -- get real :p !

I don't understand why they made the Z4 with an inferior de-interlacer when the Z3 had a reportedly superior one. Why are they going backwards? Then again, maybe it is only one review saying this?

I agree, Tim. I'm waiting until Art (presenter) comes out with his review of the Z4 (www.projectorreviews.com). He gave the AE900 a glowing review.

I wonder if Evan has stock in DVDO? As posted ealier, they do have a low cost deinterlacer, however the iScan Pro is an "Archived Product". DVDO makes excellent products, it's just that they're just too much for my budget.

Well I stopped by a store today and they had a Sanyo Z3 and a new Panny 900 going on an 11' screen and a couch at 13' and I must say they looked good! I thought one had to be at minimum 1.5 screen width to not see the pixalation?

Well I must say the Panny looked way better. The Sanyo had visible pixels or small squares all over the screen and the Panny was smooth zero pixels. Of course the Panny is new and the Sanyo is older and the dealer stated that Sanyo was much inferior to Panny when it comes to projection picture quality. Has the technology changed that much in that the new 900 panny looked brighter and smoother then last years Sanyo Z3?

Please tell me the Sanyo Z4 will look better then this Z3 looked? They did not compare. I was leaning towards the Sanyo until I had seen the differences today. I may have to wait until they get a new Sanyo Z4 and see how close the pic quality is to the new Panny and how much better then the current Z3.

The Z4 should look better it uses the new D5 panels and it is new unit.

Troy,
Even with the old D4 panels in a Z3 you will not see this level of difference unless the Z3 is faulty or seriously detuned to make the more profitable 900 look even better than it is and sell faster. My Z2 does not show artifacts such as you describe or I wouldn't own it for a second and I wouldn't be planning to buy a Z4. I would suggest you be very careful of dealing with this retailer. Panys and Sanyos are both quite capable of showing very good pictures in similar environments and have been for several years. Yes there are differences and each year they both get just a bit better. Competition between these two are great for all of us and I hope it just keeps on.

I think to better explain the differences is the Sanyo Z3 had a picture that looked like you were looking through a screen door and the Panny was crystal clear.

By reading initial reviews online of the Sanyo Z4 and Panny 900 I would not think the pic difference would be as dramatic as this retailer suggested. He also told me not to be fooled by low pricing on the net because on-line dealers will not do anything for you when and if it has problems. I plan to buy online and thats my next step is getting good recommendations for an honest on-line dealer for a Sanyo Z4 and a Da-lite screen.

My credit card is thirsting for a Z4 and screen. It seems no one has them available yet. Hopefully it won't be long and online stores will begin to stock the Z4.

I will keep my eye open.

I can't believe what I'm reading! You guys are trashing the only PJs that offer this kind of lens shift capability for under $10K, and the ones that do, only have about 10% of the lens shift offered by these 2 PJs (AE900 & Z4) :cool: .

For less that $3000, MSRP, you ge a PJ that can adjust from 13% (Panny) to 50% (Sanyo) above the screen to the same below the screen and you're bitching because that's not enough? All of the PJs in this MSRP price class don't give you any choice at all :eek: !

Come on -- get real :p !

Nobody is trashing these PJs. I just wonder why in the default state they point at the center of the screen ... The answer seems to be that they have not used an offset lens. Fair enough.

The reason (almost the only) I'm even looking at these PJs instead of a 720p DLP is the lens shift. Infact for ceiling mount, I can't use AE900. Z4 will work ... but it sounds like AE900 is a better projecor. I esp. like the no SDE part ...

So, I wish AE900 had an offset even if that meant less lens shift.

The reason (almost the only) I'm even looking at these PJs instead of a 720p DLP is the lens shift. Infact for ceiling mount, I can't use AE900. Z4 will work ... but it sounds like AE900 is a better projecor.

Huh? The AE900 is even softer than the 700 which was soft to begin with. I prefer to have more features of Z4 and deal with slight defocus which will still be sharper than the 900 than forced softness. SDE is not a factor once you reach a certain distance. Don't fool yourself. It's not like we're talking about SOny projectors here... :p

Huh? The AE900 is even softer than the 700 which was soft to begin with. I prefer to have more features of Z4 and deal with slight defocus which will still be sharper than the 900 than forced softness. SDE is not a factor once you reach a certain distance. Don't fool yourself. It's not like we're talking about SOny projectors here... :p

I guess we have our preferences.

Anyway, I've not seen either of those projectors and am unlikely to be able to see. So I'll go with the opinions of the people on this board whose opinion I trust ...

In any case without knowing distance I want to watch from, how can you even say whether SDE is a factor or not ? My preference for AE900 is because apparently it has better colors ...

Just to add to the mix...I think the Z4 is a better all around match for a constant height setup than the AE900 would ever be which is why it wins for me. Not only does it do the stretching required, but since an anamorphic lens tends to soften the picture somewhat I wouldn't want to couple that with the already softened pixel structure of the AE900. It might be too soft.

Now take a Z4's razor sharp picture, perhaps to the point of having more SDE than the AE900, and run it through an anamorphic lens to do 2.35:1. I'm betting that the slight softening of the resultant image through the lens will be a joyous thing indeed.

As a bonus, I'm liking what I hear about how tweakable the Z4 is shaping up to be.

Nobody is trashing these PJs. I just wonder why in the default state they point at the center of the screen ... The answer seems to be that they have not used an offset lens. Fair enough.

The reason (almost the only) I'm even looking at these PJs instead of a 720p DLP is the lens shift. Infact for ceiling mount, I can't use AE900. Z4 will work ... but it sounds like AE900 is a better projecor. I esp. like the no SDE part ...

So, I wish AE900 had an offset even if that meant less lens shift.

you won't see screendoor from 1.5 times the screen width away.
so SDE should be no issue with the Z4.

anyway pannys smooth screen feature actually defocusses the picture to reduce SDE, so therefore the image of the Z4 is way sharper and has more depth therefore.

at least that is what i've been reading everywhere.
but i cannot compare them objectively by myself as I only own the Z4 :-)

Normal through screen function (manual, page 34) is very cool thing on Z4 and projects 4:3 picture's 480 pixels unchanged to the smaller center portion of the screen. Whith Panasonic 700 after watching an HD program on directv, the regular channels are so annoying that sometimes I have to move back to the second row which is at 2.5x screen width.
Or if I don't want to move from my 1.5 x front seat I have to ask somebody to go on the damn stepladder and zoom to the smallest image :o
Did Z3 have this nice screen size option?
Z4 manual is here and was posted previously (thank you for posting!)http://www.audiogeneral.com/Sanyo/PLV-Z4_OM.pdf

Are you Z4 people preordering or waiting few weeks?

DrA

panasonic 700 with dirty screen syndrome (FPN or VB?) :rolleyes:
120 screen
HTPC HDMI out ATI X800
D*tv H-10 HD receiver
HK AV receiver with component switch
Sony dvd changer

Panasonic's Smoothscreen is not a De-focus....

Normal through screen function (manual, page 34) is very cool thing on Z4 and projects 4:3 picture's 480 pixels unchanged to the smaller center portion of the screen. Whith Panasonic 700 after watching an HD program on directv, the regular channels are so annoying that sometimes I have to move back to the second row which is at 2.5x screen width.
Or if I don't want to move from my 1.5 x front seat I have to ask somebody to go on the damn stepladder and zoom to the smallest image :o
Did Z3 have this nice screen size option?
...



I'm pretty sure it does. Hell, my old Z2 can do that.
:)

Ok, guys... see the title of this thread? It's not here to debate between the two. I don't mind a little discussion of the pros and cons, but rehashing the same arguments across two threads is a good way to tick me off ;)

Ok, to get back on topic then..

Is the availability of the Z4 in the USA still looking like Oct. 31st for most vendors? I'm just wondering how soon I can pick one of these beauties up!

No AVS PowerBuy I take it.... :)

I have seen the Z4 and AE900 both in action. The Z4 is much more larger in physical size. The choice between the 2 are really a matter of preference like when the Z3 and AE700 came out.

The Z4 was released today in Japan, so hopefully its not to far away.

Both the Z4 n AE900 are available in HK for a week already n they did not sell as quickly as originally thought.

I was seriously considering the AE900 but after reading on how sharp the Z4 is, also since I will be mounting the Z4 BEHIND my rear wall (on a shelf) and the air intake is on the rear with the exhaust on the right side (from looking behind the projector) and at my viewing distance, SDE should be non-existant it sounds like a winner! Madpoet, if you get yours first, please let me know, could be a road trip (if your willing).

I'm thinking of a new Sanyo Z4 projecting at 15' and my seating position at 14', projector on a stand directly behind couch. 14' falls in between the recommended 1.5x seating distance of a 119' diagonal and the 133" diagonal. I was at a dealer that had the Panny AE900 with a couch at 13' and it looked great. Zero SD and perfectly clear. So I wonder if these newer projectors can be used comfortably under the 1.5x screen width to seating position. Does anyone have a screen in these sizes and sit under the 1.5x width?

Thanks

Yes, been there done that with the AE700 and now H78 at 12 feet with a 106" Graywolf screen.
That's a 1.3x ratio. What's screen door? :)

Until we hear more users with the Z4, we won't know how it's SDE numbers stack up.

I've got mine on order from a forum sponsor, but they won't be released in the States for a few more days yet.

I have mine ordered but I don't know if it's a forum sponsor. I tried to order from the closest reputable retailer to me. I also tried to find a retailer that didn't mandate the "we can't help you because Sanyo has screwy customer satisfaction policies" policy. Not sure if I was successful on that and hopefully I won't have to find out. Retailer actually talked me out of buying a replacement bulb at the get go due to warranty starting immediately whether you use the bulb or not. Usually I would run one for 40 days and the next for 40 days assuming 90 day warr. but I can throw the money somewhere else for the time being.

"we can't help you because Sanyo has screwy customer satisfaction policies" policy.

dusk, can you explain what you meant by this? Thanks,

Dick

I would appreciate it if anyone would share what type of screen (Matte white, high contrast, etc) you plan to use with this projector and why?

Thanks

I 've been luring around for a while and plan to finally get my first pj in the next few weeks. I have few question I couldn't decide wther to post here or in the tweak thread.

In my case, I could only place the pj @ 16 ft. from the screen. Based on the projectorcentral.com calculations, I would have to use the zoom feature at 1.51 X to achieve the desired diagonal image size, 120". The good news is that I'm supposed to heve lots of brightness at that range so plenty of room for tweaking.
What I wonder about is how is the image effected by using the zoom feature?
I'v read few posts about SDE. I plan to view at twice the image width so it should be a non factor, right?

z4 vs pan 900 shootout on a dutch forum by J.A.F. Doorhof (I hope he doesn't mind me linking it here).

quote:

"Conclusion
For me on THIS moment without doubt the Panasonic 900, the purchase advice is.
Despite the advantages of the cleaning by the Z4 and the better AB and lensshift, I find not tell the iris really many to annoying and thought through by the Z4.
I settle rather for a something lower CR and a fantastic image without artifacts and swings.

Furthermore is them to me striking in order to see them to me how ongelovelijk much more detail there in the small details to to see be by the new panels, by the fifth element and the DVE DIRECTLY demo to pieces is the fantastic details to to see that you on the older panels scarcely wanted to see.

The panasonic is projected for me on THIS moment the best LCD on the market under the 2000.00.
I have been aroused curiosity QUITE to the new Epsons."

I can't give you a direct link, spam prevention.
Feel free to post a direct link below this post.


htorum
.
nl
yabbse
/
index.php?
topic=35753.0



for translation use

freetranslation
com


(also posted in the pan 900 thread)

Could you please post the correct url for this review.

I have to make more posts to get the right to make a direct link.

And another one.

Sorry about this.

I apoligize for my previous posts but I had to get past the no-spam prevention.


Review Sanyo Z4 vs Panasonic 900

http://www.htforum.nl/yabbse/index.php?topic=35753.0

You can use this site for a translation

http://www.freetranslation.com/free/web.htm

I hope it works, let me know if it doesn't.

I have seen the negative comments on the de-interlacer in the Z4. How does 1080i look? Does the de-interlacing look good for HD?

I have seen the negative comments on the de-interlacer in the Z4. How does 1080i look? Does the de-interlacing look good for HD?

This from the AE900 thread ...

My ranking is:

color - HS60, AE900, TW600, Z4
contrast - HS60, AE900, TW600, Z4
sharpness -HS60, Z4, AE900/TW600
brightness - AE900, Z4/HS60, TW600
blacks - HS60, AE900, TW600, Z4
lack of sde - AE900, TW600, Z4, HS60
less noise - HS60, Z4, AE900/TW600
Auto Iris effective- HS60, AE900, TW600, Z4
Auto Iris smoothness- AE900/TW600/Z4, HS60
1080i processing - Z4, HS60/AE900, TW600

I apoligize for my previous posts but I had to get past the no-spam prevention.
Review Sanyo Z4 vs Panasonic 900
http://www.htforum.nl/yabbse/index.php?topic=35753.0


From what I read they complain the contrast on the Z4 is pisspoor until they switch to dynamic mode but there grayscale was totally unusable. And the iris was too slow (6 seconds before it starts closing). However, a bit later he corrects himself as he manages to get it better tuned, but not optimally. He also admits his results aren't the same as Cine4home, when a reader remarked this.

The tester's website is a shop (ICTgroup) He sells Panasonic, but not Sanyo... nah, all tests are free of bias aren't they? :D :D

If you read between the lines, I think it's not that bad. He just exaggerates things too much in the negative sense for the Z4, and doesn't go into any other points except the contrast discussion and keeps hammering on a very slow iris and the absolute black level of the Z4.

Stick to Ekkehart's review for a more balanced view.

Which reminds me: where are those 900 and Mitsu 3000 reviews, Ekkehart? :D Stop having fun with those projectors already and tell us what you see :D

Neko

From what I read they complain the contrast on the Z4 is pisspoor until they switch to dynamic mode but there grayscale was totally unusable. And the iris was too slow (6 seconds before it starts closing). However, a bit later he corrects himself as he manages to get it better tuned, but not optimally. He also admits his results aren't the same as Cine4home, when a reader remarked this.

As one of the participating posters in that thread I must correct you there. He said he could get the same contrast ratio but not with a flat grayscale, whereas the Pana could get the contrast with a totally flat grayscale.


The tester's website is a shop (ICTgroup) He sells Panasonic, but not Sanyo... nah, all tests are free of bias aren't they? :D :D

ITC has made clear why it doesn't sell the previous Sanyo projectors but I just read he is going to sell the Z4. Also the tester has a great track record and his expertise is very well known. I do not think he would put this on the line just because currently he does not sell Sanyo


If you read between the lines, I think it's not that bad. He just exaggerates things too much in the negative sense for the Z4, and doesn't go into any other points except the contrast discussion and keeps hammering on a very slow iris and the absolute black level of the Z4.

Stick to Ekkehart's review for a more balanced view.


Don't forget, it's not a review of the Z4 but a direct comparison

Maybe you should delay judgement until cine4home has tested the ae900 and compared it. If I recall correctly all previous projectors got a very good review on cine4home, but once they compared them the differences (better/best not good/bad) became obvious.

P.S. I am in no way affiliated to ITC..
(edit) ITC will sell the Z4

As one of the participating posters in that thread I must correct you there. He said he could get the same contrast ratio but not with a flat grayscale, whereas the Pana could get the contrast with a totally flat grayscale.

So he couldn't get the same results as Cine4home, which is what I said. And how big a difference is the grayscale Panny vs Sanyo?


ITC has made clear why it doesn't sell the previous Sanyo projectors but I just read he is going to sell the Z4. Also the tester has a great track record and his expertise is very well known. I do not think he would put this on the line just because currently he does not sell Sanyo

For which I have to take his word and yours? I'm not trying to be unpleasant here, but you have to admit it looks fishy. And since Panasonic has no way to correct VB, and refuses any warranty on VB, whereas Sanyo at least has a correction for it in the menu, I am not accepting his explanation of poor service from Sanyo. From what I hear, they're both pretty poor. Maybe Panny gives better margins?

I simply don't like it when shops do reviews, and they only sell one of both tested PJs. Even with the best intentions, the human's subconscious is a weird thing :D


Don't forget, it's not a review of the Z4 but a direct comparison

True, but he only compares one item: contrast, and especially, on/off contrast. What about all the other features and strengths/flaws?


Maybe you should delay judgement until cine4home has tested the ae900 and compared it. If I recall correctly all previous projectors got a very good review on cine4home, but once they compared them the differences (better/best not good/bad) became obvious.

I am not saying either PJ is bad good or whatever, my comments are solely about the way this "review" was written. Cine4home's reviews don't try to destroy a PJ like that ITC review tried to do with the Sanyo, but rather analyse both strengths and flaws. It does require the reader to read both reviews and make comparisons of both text and scores.

ITC may even be right about the contrast difference being in favour of the Panny, but no way to the extent he's trying to suggest in his review. He should try a more moderate tone and evaluate all aspects of the PJs rather than pick one element out to promote his PJ of choice and hammer another.

As for him selling Z4's - they're not listed on his webshop, the brand Sanyo isn't listed on his webshop (I made a screencap in case he changes his mind suddenly :D), so I do think he's not a Sanyo regular. But no dealer will refuse a sell so if a customer specifically asks for it...

Again, I'm not saying he's purposly twisting the facts or anything, but he's not very convincing at all if you look at the whole picture.

Neko

Whats the general stats on vertical banding so far from what can be gathered by people in this thread?

Are the Z4 units better on averaga than the previous Z2 and Z3 units? The same? Worse?

:)

I think we also need to take into account that the Z4 is probably very frustrating for someone trying to get out a review. It's infinitely tweakable while being probably way too complex. Some want to pull out their tools for contrast and luminance, dial it up after an hour or two and say that's the best it can get. The fact that it takes several times longer than other projectors to wiggle through all the various modes and combinations with final output that may not be the best the projector can throw would make me a little upset with the thing. I don't think though, I would assume that because I just went through many settings that I had the projector optimized.

Whats the general stats on vertical banding so far? Are the Z4 units better than the previous Z2 and Z3 units? The same? Worse?

:)

I don't think enough people have had time with the projector yet. We have a few reviewers and then a couple people in the the UK that own the projector. I think we need a dozen or so consumer reviews before we can guess about how good or bad the Z4 is with VB. However, thus far any reviewed projectors that have exhibited any VB have been able to dial it out within the VB menu. I think the Z4 will be pretty decent concerning VB.

Right... it's a little different than the Panny, because it's not out in the US yet. Soon.

Yeah...same with the TX200 ...er UDPJ52... ;)

I guess we'll wait and see.

Like most folks here, I have rad every Sanyo Z4 review and thread.

There's the Projector Central review

http://www.projectorcentral.com/sanyo_plv-z4.htm

The Peterr Putnam HDTVExpert review

http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages/plvz4.htm

The Cine4Home review

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=de_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cine4home.de%2Ftests%2Fprojektoren%2FSa nyoZ4%2FZ4Test.htm

CKL's review

http://www.avbuzz.com/audio-video/200510/ckl-sanyo-z4/index.htm


I am most interested in the Color Management menu which allows before/after comparisons of adjustments that can be made to any on screen color. Do adjustments here affect the r.b.g gain and bias, and if so, do these new numbers show up in that specific menu screen? Does this color managem,ent system really work and help to eliminate any orange in the red, any yellow in the green et al?

Only the review by Cine4Home shows this menu and briefly touches on it. The other reviews do not deal with it (perhaps only a mention among features of the Z4).

It seems that this Color Management system, (in addition to the ability to adjust gamma and r,g,b bias and gain) should merit more discussion by reviewers,

Shelly

Can someone post the complete cine4home translation, please? I'm getting AltaVista translation error msg. 157 when I click on the direct link, above, and when I try to use my translation extension from within Firefox 1.07.

Thanks,

will

http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=de_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cine4home.de%2findex.htm

Thanks, Ximori; the first (main) page translates fine, but when I click on the z4 link, I get the error. Do you/does anyone have this problem? Thanks.

never had a problem. try clicking shelly's link again...

I rebooted and now it works...(go figure).

Thanks for your help!

willdao

The Peterr Putnam HDTVExpert review confirms that the Z4 also doesnt handle 480i signals very well at all. Which for me is important cause i watch regular NON hdtv often (among playing ps2 etc) so the toss up between the Z4 and the 900 is leaning more towards the 900. How much do external scalers cost roughly for a half decent one?

The Peterr Putnam HDTVExpert review confirms that the Z4 also doesnt handle 480i signals very well at all. Which for me is important cause i watch regular NON hdtv often (among playing ps2 etc) so the toss up between the Z4 and the 900 is leaning more towards the 900. How much do external scalers cost roughly for a half decent one?

Can't PS2 do 480p ? The problem seems to be 480i, rather than 480p.

What's the biggest screen size you would go with for the Z4?

I'm considering a 117" W 2.35:1 which I believe is equivalent to around a 100"W 16:9. Total light control in the room. Is this still going to be pushing it at 350 lumens when calibrated?

CoolCanuck

You should be good to go (assuming your using an anamorphic lens, otherwise that may be pushing it). I wouldn't go bigger than 120" 16:9 though.

Hello

after having run the Z4 for a week now with component video from a DVD-player and digitally from a Oppo 971H (impressive!) I tried out the VGA-input yesterday and connected my Samsung X10 Notebook.
I never had ran a monitor on it, so I was fiddling around quite some time with the NVIDIA Nview settings to get it to work. Then I realized, that with the fixed resolutions of 1024x768 and higher, I could not get a proper 16:9 picture, so I downloaded POWERSTRIP. I finally managed to get a resolution of 1280x720 @ 60 Hz to the VGA-output but was not sure, whether all the settings, that go along with that, were right: there were tons of predefined 1280x720 settings offered by Powerstrip (the 50 Hz setting stuttered like mad with the Microsoft WMV-HD clips).
So: does anyone have experience, how to set up Powerstrip correctly with the Z4 (or with some similiar projector, like the Z3 or some other native 1280x720 projector)? There are so many values besides just the resolution, that I have not even heard of....
HDTV Picture quality was really stunning compared to DVD - too bad, that in Germany, we only are starting out with HDTV programming via Satellite and are far from where the US currently is.....

Joerg

Check out the HTPC section of these forums, they have tons of threads about how to tweak powerstrip for every occasion. You will find all of your questions answered there.

Whats the general stats on vertical banding so far from what can be gathered by people in this thread?

Are the Z4 units better on averaga than the previous Z2 and Z3 units? The same? Worse?

:)

Looking better than the Panny 900, where several cases of VB have been seen. There's an AVS sponsor that sold a 900 and isn't taking it back no-questions-asked, one that has VB. They are waiting for Panasonic's reply.

If Panasonic is not going to treat this right and fix it or replace it, US consumers will have the same situation we have had here in Europe with the 700 - buying one is a lottery.

At least with the Sanyo it can be tweaked rather effectively. Sofar the Panny owners have no such luck.

Neko