Panny AE900 Official Thread- Please post here! [Text View] - Page 8

KOYKOYRAKIS L.

11-28-05, 06:31 AM

Hello everybody!! I am a new member to the forum but an old member to the sport of HT here in Greece. I've started 10 years ago with a 46 inch crt back projection tv and upgraded 6 years ago with the first 16:9 sony 400qm pj. I have ordered today the AE900 and expecting it sometime this week. I haven't seen the pj playing and my opinion is based only from what it was written by the frends members of the AV site i'm a member in here in Greece, who have torture tested the usual suspects: Sanyo z4, AE900, Hitachi 200. All have come to a conclusion that though the Z4 has a little better blacks than the AE900, the panny outperformes the others by far. All the pjs were profesionaly calibrated.

I personally have seen a side by side comparison of the AE 700, Z3,Sony 50 and Sharp 2000. Although the winner in that comparison was sharp 2000 (considerably more expensive than the others) , the AE700 had an overal better image quality over the other lcd pjs. Z3 had a little better blacks but had grainy picture and worse colors and brightnes than AE700. Sony had better blacks than the others but suffered the same brightnes loss and "digital" image thing as sanyo.VB was minimal to my eyes on all the pjs.
Sharpness was THE SAME for all pjs. ATTENTION HERE!! AE 700 was as sharp as the others although the smouth screen system makes you think is a little bit blury . BIG MISTAKE!! The comparison showed me that all picture information on the others pjs were the same with the AE700. The thing is that the others are projecting a lot of noise that trick the eye and makes you think that is extra imformation while is not. All the details are there on all of them but the AE700 lacks the noise artifacts thus projecting a "softer" image to the eye.

My opinion is that it was the most film like pj in this category of price. That is why after i've red about the results of the torture test and the writtings of all you good people here, i've desided to purchase one AE900. Even if it is 10% better than AE700, it would be a killer!( It was about time. My 400qm almost run out of lamp!).

Thank you all for sharing your expertise and opinions(sorry for my rusty english). Great thread!!!

More to come when i'll have the pj for view. Can't wait!!!!!

Do you think a side by side comparison with the 400qm with snapshots would be nice? :D

DrA

11-28-05, 07:38 AM

My AE 900 has a pretty distinct convergence issue that creates a slight rainbow effect as well. The panels all seem to be slightly off. I mostly notice it on the left side of faces where there is a distinct green edge about one line width. The right side of faces seem to have a red line about one line width. I also have a green line one line width at the bottom of the screen. If you have any movies with a desert background these edges really stand out. Also the two sun section in Star Wars New Hope will show these lines as well. Check it out. Panasonic is sending someone to my house on Monday, the 28th, to check out my projector. I'll update the board after the visit from the tech. I'm really surprised that Panasonic is sending someone. I couldn't even get my dealer that I bought an extended warranty from to come out.

Elio
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrunner102
Hi,
I noticed a few rainbow like colors on the credits(white text) after the movie on my AE 900. previously I had an epson home 10 and did not notice it, has anybody else experienced this.

Thx
I have the same convergence problem. Please see attached picture. Mine is only 1 pixel misconverged horizontally and vertically but still is annoying. It would be nice if the Panasonic will send someone to your house with the Service kit that generates crosshatch pattern signal and adjust the panels until no color fringing shows. I don't understand, how difficult is it to get this right from the factory? I hate to send mine to Panasonic because I am afraid of them messing something when I am happy with everything else :) .

1.No SDE at 1.2X. I returned the Z4 mainly because of very bad SDE among other problems.
2.Almost no VB compared to my old 700.
3.90% uniformly white screen. The Z4 had a horrible uniformity problem.
4. Very good colors. I took some screenshots of WMV YD movie trailers. Awesome. (I think there is also HD video calibration dvd by DVE in WMV format.)
5. DVD looks good. From my cheap Toshiba 850 DVDs look "movie film like". Wait until HD dvds come out. This projector will handle them nicely based on my WMV HD impression.
6. TV looks good except SD channels from directv. I have to move back 1.5 X or farther to enjoy an SD program ( garbage in garbage out). HDTV is great with HDMI out from HD DVR 10- 250.

Please everyone take a look at your convergence and report yes or no. I hope only very few people have it which would suggest that it is easy to correct and it is not part of a bigger problem that others sugested with no proof like lens shift, long zoom lens. or smothscreen. I mounted 900 at exactly the same place where my old 700 was. In my opinion 700 had the same lens and the same smoothscreen as 900. There was no convergence problem then.

rboster

11-28-05, 08:15 AM

Did you use the same cables for both?

Yes

DrA

11-28-05, 08:17 AM

WMVHD screenshots

eliocon

11-28-05, 08:36 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by rrunner102
Hi,
I noticed a few rainbow like colors on the credits(white text) after the movie on my AE 900. previously I had an epson home 10 and did not notice it, has anybody else experienced this.

Thx
I have the same convergence problem. Please see attached picture. Mine is only 1 pixel misconverged horizontally and vertically but still is annoying. It would be nice if the Panasonic will send someone to your house with the Service kit that generates crosshatch pattern signal and adjust the panels until no color fringing shows. I don't understand, how difficult is it to get this right from the factory? I hate to send mine to Panasonic because I am afraid of them messing something when I am happy with everything else :) .

1.No SDE at 1.2X. I returned the Z4 mainly because of very bad SDE among other problems.
2.Almost no VB compared to my old 700.
3.90% uniformly white screen. The Z4 had a horrible uniformity problem.
4. Very good colors. I took some screenshots of WMV YD movie trailers. Awesome. (I think there is also HD video calibration dvd by DVE in WMV format.)
5. DVD looks good. From my cheap Toshiba 850 DVDs look "movie film like". Wait until HD dvds come out. This projector will handle them nicely based on my WMV HD impression.
6. TV looks good except SD channels from directv. I have to move back 1.5 X or farther to enjoy an SD program ( garbage in garbage out). HDTV is great with HDMI out from HD DVR 10- 250.

Please everyone take a look at your convergence and report yes or no. I hope only very few people have it which would suggest that it is easy to correct and it is not part of a bigger problem that others sugested with no proof like lens shift, long zoom lens. or smothscreen. I mounted 900 at exactly the same place where my old 700 was. In my opinion 700 had the same lens and the same smoothscreen as 900. There was no convergence problem then.
So I spent all weekend playing with the projector and found that the issue was an artifact that the projector was creating with 720P signals. Component and 1081i signals show 0 convergence issues. Really weird.

Elio

mdmaclean

11-28-05, 10:00 AM

So I spent all weekend playing with the projector and found that the issue was an artifact that the projector was creating with 720P signals. Component and 1081i signals show 0 convergence issues. Really weird.

Elio

I had a similar problem recently with artifacts caused by a faulty DVD up-scaling DVD player attached to my Z1. Switched the player (which used to work fine), and artifacts are gone.

mrPEPE

11-28-05, 10:03 AM

xxThe Deanxx

11-28-05, 10:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by rrunner102
Hi,
I noticed a few rainbow like colors on the credits(white text) after the movie on my AE 900. previously I had an epson home 10 and did not notice it, has anybody else experienced this.

Thx
I have the same convergence problem. Please see attached picture. Mine is only 1 pixel misconverged horizontally and vertically but still is annoying. It would be nice if the Panasonic will send someone to your house with the Service kit that generates crosshatch pattern signal and adjust the panels until no color fringing shows. I don't understand, how difficult is it to get this right from the factory? I hate to send mine to Panasonic because I am afraid of them messing something when I am happy with everything else :) .

1.No SDE at 1.2X. I returned the Z4 mainly because of very bad SDE among other problems.
2.Almost no VB compared to my old 700.
3.90% uniformly white screen. The Z4 had a horrible uniformity problem.
4. Very good colors. I took some screenshots of WMV YD movie trailers. Awesome. (I think there is also HD video calibration dvd by DVE in WMV format.)
5. DVD looks good. From my cheap Toshiba 850 DVDs look "movie film like". Wait until HD dvds come out. This projector will handle them nicely based on my WMV HD impression.
6. TV looks good except SD channels from directv. I have to move back 1.5 X or farther to enjoy an SD program ( garbage in garbage out). HDTV is great with HDMI out from HD DVR 10- 250.

Please everyone take a look at your convergence and report yes or no. I hope only very few people have it which would suggest that it is easy to correct and it is not part of a bigger problem that others sugested with no proof like lens shift, long zoom lens. or smothscreen. I mounted 900 at exactly the same place where my old 700 was. In my opinion 700 had the same lens and the same smoothscreen as 900. There was no convergence problem then.

Just an FYI, some of us here use the AVS white format and that was next to impossible to read without highlighting it.

Scott B

11-28-05, 10:31 AM

Hi,

Does anyone find that using maximum zoom affects picture quality ??

I have a 120 inch 16x9 screen - the manual says 3.5 - 7.0 meters distance

At the moment its positioned at 3.6 meters away - almost max zoom

Would moving it back a bit more improve picture quality ????

Moving the projector back may increase contrast a bit (probably not noticeable) but will decrease light output due to the focal ratio of the zoom lens increasing as the projector is moved farther and farther away.

Greg Matty

11-28-05, 11:44 AM

I think that would be difficult ... you might be using all of the vertical shift. How wide is your screen ?

I will be running a Greywolf at 106" 16:9 which is about eight feet wide. I have heard using all the lens shift is bad as the image distorts somewhat. If that is the case, then I may have no choice but to go with the Z4.

Greg

DanLW

11-28-05, 12:14 PM

I recently saw an AE900 at a show. This particular unit had a misconvergence of about half a pixel. The source was a HTPC with 1:1 pixel mapping, and it was displaying a computer screen.

When I do get a 900 (providing nothing better is out by that time) I'd consider opening it up after the warranty expires and adjusting the panel alignment myself. Is there a way to get shop manuals for these projectors?

nataraj

11-28-05, 12:25 PM

I will be running a Greywolf at 106" 16:9 which is about eight feet wide. I have heard using all the lens shift is bad as the image distorts somewhat. If that is the case, then I may have no choice but to go with the Z4.

Greg

That gives you a height of about 54". At the maximum vertical shift you can put the projector 15% above the top of the image i.e. about 8 inches.

This could cause some non-uniform convergence (search this thread / see reviews) and also you would have no horizontal shift at all.

I've the same problem ... I might just put the projector on a rack behind the seats (my room is too long for the book shelf at the back of the room option). The problem with Z4 is SDE. If you sit close to the screen (even 1.5 times the width), that could be an issue ... so I've given up on Z4.

bcatwilly

11-28-05, 12:40 PM

I've the same problem ... I might just put the projector on a rack behind the seats (my room is too long for the book shelf at the back of the room option). The problem with Z4 is SDE. If you sit close to the screen (even 1.5 times the width), that could be an issue ... so I've given up on Z4.

My room is too long also, so I used a rack behind the seats with my Z4. I sit back about 1.5X screen width and do not get bothered by SDE. That does not mean that I don't think that I may see some every once in a while if I am really trying to look for it (not a concern to me if I have to look that hard, and maybe it is simply my mind playing tricks because I am trying to find it), particularly in white lettering.

However, I for one can deal with those brief moments of a slightly wondering if that was SDE that I just saw so that I can have the sharpest and most "noise" free image possible compared to the AE900. Shrek in HD on NBC last night was simply stunning, and I don't recall seeing any SDE :)

Greg Matty

11-28-05, 12:40 PM

That gives you a height of about 54". At the maximum vertical shift you can put the projector 15% above the top of the image i.e. about 8 inches.

This could cause some non-uniform convergence (search this thread / see reviews) and also you would have no horizontal shift at all.

I've the same problem ... I might just put the projector on a rack behind the seats (my room is too long for the book shelf at the back of the room option). The problem with Z4 is SDE. If you sit close to the screen (even 1.5 times the width), that could be an issue ... so I've given up on Z4.

Sigh.

My HT room is just a converted family room that opens to the kitchen at the back end. A shelf mount is not an option given these circumstances. SDE is a concern for me with a Z4 so I'll have to demo one before I buy. I really think I'll be okay with it as I won't specifically look for it. I could look at the HC3000 as that unit is designed for ceiling mount, but that PJ is kind of out of my price range. Not sure what to do now.

Greg

bcatwilly

11-28-05, 12:50 PM

SDE is a concern for me with a Z4 so I'll have to demo one before I buy.
Greg

Greg,

These forums really are great in general, but it does amaze me how they end up causing people, including myself, to be "looking" for things in the image that they may not have noticed before reading all of this stuff.

I for one probably would have never noticed any SDE on my Z4 if I hadn't read these forums. Having said that, it sounds like someone should definitely go with the AE900 if they plan to CONSISTENTLY sit as close as only 1 times the screen width. That is simply too close for my taste all the time. Now I will say that I tried sitting that close to my Z4 and could certainly do that if I really wanted to on occasion, simply ignoring any SDE and enjoying the great big picture :) But certainly SDE becomes hardly any concern at 1.3x screen width and is virtually gone in even the graphics at 1.5x screend width unless you really want to simply look for it in some scores on ESPNHD instead of enjoying the football game.

Another thing to consider is video "noise", as I and some others have noticed the AE900 appears to have more of this. Check this thread for that discussion:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=608164

Don't agonize too much longer, simply pick one and have a great time with it,
Chris

Greg Matty

11-28-05, 02:27 PM

Greg,

These forums really are great in general, but it does amaze me how they end up causing people, including myself, to be "looking" for things in the image that they may not have noticed before reading all of this stuff.

I for one probably would have never noticed any SDE on my Z4 if I hadn't read these forums. Having said that, it sounds like someone should definitely go with the AE900 if they plan to CONSISTENTLY sit as close as only 1 times the screen width. That is simply too close for my taste all the time. Now I will say that I tried sitting that close to my Z4 and could certainly do that if I really wanted to on occasion, simply ignoring any SDE and enjoying the great big picture :) But certainly SDE becomes hardly any concern at 1.3x screen width and is virtually gone in even the graphics at 1.5x screend width unless you really want to simply look for it in some scores on ESPNHD instead of enjoying the football game.

Don't agonize too much longer, simply pick one and have a great time with it,
Chris

The agonizing will end soon enough. I really like the lens shift of the Sanyo so I leaning that way. Also, with a 106" screen I'll sit at least 13 feet back so I am easily at the 1.5 ratio. Just a little closer to year end for tax planning and I am free to buy a new PJ.

Greg

Jack Gilvey

11-28-05, 03:06 PM

SDE is a concern for me with a Z4 so I'll have to demo one before I buy.

Smart, since SDE levels that some people dismiss drive other people nuts to the point of returning a projector. This has always been the Achilles heel of LCD, and a reason I avoided it until Smoothscreen. You might be ok at 1.5x, although CKL recommends the 900 for up to 2x (!) below:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=608219

nataraj

11-28-05, 04:15 PM

SDE is a concern for me with a Z4 so I'll have to demo one before I buy. I really think I'll be okay with it as I won't specifically look for it. I could look at the HC3000 as that unit is designed for ceiling mount, but that PJ is kind of out of my price range. Not sure what to do now.

Where can you see Z4 ... any retailer around the Sound has one ?

HC3000 apparently is not being discounted at all ... so, looks like it is out for me as well. Wonder how the new Optoma will be ...

Aussie Bob

11-28-05, 04:40 PM

This is only half on-topic but I thought you AE900 aficianados might be interested, especially as the lamp in the AE900 is the same or similar to the AE700's.

Earlier this year - about April - my AE700's lamp failed at 763 hours, 342 of them on HIGH LAMP, 221 power-ons. The lamp went to about 5% brightness after power-on one day, and never went back. After much hassle I got it replaced under warranty as a "faulty manufacture" item.

Now the new lamp has blown, at 774 hours with 329 of them on HIGH LAMP, 209 power-ons: pretty-well exactly the same statistics as before.

This time, getting the lamp replaced under warranty is moot, as Panasonic Australia has no stock for the forseeable future (until 2006), so I've had to purchase a new lamp at retail prices from a dealer who had some in store.

Looked at one way I got 1500 hours plus about 700 hours on HIGH LAMP for the cost of one replacement lamp. Looked at another way (the "cup half empty" approach) I've had two virtually identical early lamp failures in the space of 13 months.

What's with Panasonic?

Is the AE900 going to be the same story as the AE700? Do these projectors represent technology taken far too close to the edge and hence subject to unpredictable failure?

And why would I (or anyone else, given the problems reported in these forums) take the risk of EVER buying a Panasonic projector, ever again?

Greg Matty

11-28-05, 05:24 PM

Where can you see Z4 ... any retailer around the Sound has one ?

HC3000 apparently is not being discounted at all ... so, looks like it is out for me as well. Wonder how the new Optoma will be ...

I also wonder about the Optoma. I need it to street for under $2,499 to even consdier it and that may not happen. Some more specs would be nice and I wonder what the delay is. Supposedly the PJ is supposed to ship in December so you would think there would be more information out by now.

I went to the Lynnwood Magnolia Hi-Fi on Saturday and they do NOT have a Z4. Visual Apex on Bainbridge Island sells them, but they don't have a showroom. Looks like I'll be buying site unseen from a place that will allow me to return it should I have SDE issues, should I go with that model.

I have thought about contacting a smaller retailer, like *name deleted*, to see if they would have a demo night. They could get a Z4, Panny 900 and an HC 3000 and charge people $25 to preview all of them. If you buy from them, the money goes towards your purchase, if not, they keep your cash but you only had to pay $25 to know for certain which PJ is right for you. Then the retailer can sell the three PJ's as slightly used and make up for the dollars lost with the entry fee. Limit the number of people to say 40 per night over one weekend and everyone wins.

Would you pay $25 to get to demo the three PJ's above? I would.

Greg

chayto

11-28-05, 05:47 PM

I finally made my choice and got the AE900 a few days ago :-) It's great, no dead pixels, no VB that I could see, no funny noises and of course no SDE. The sharpness is very fine too, pixels clearly do not overlap.
Unfortunately my new 50ft HDMI cable is a bit too long for my newly built HTPC,a lthough the same cable works with another PC and an HD STB :-( I'm gonna need some boosting.

I noticed that when using the VGA or HDMI inputs with the PJ, you really have to turn the sharpness all the way down to disable any edge enhancement processing. At zero, there is still some. Maybe the sharpness enhancement is what some are seeing as convergence problems ?

jsm88

11-28-05, 06:05 PM

I've had two virtually identical early lamp failures in the space of 13 months.

What's with Panasonic?

Is the AE900 going to be the same story as the AE700? Do these projectors represent technology taken far too close to the edge and hence subject to unpredictable failure?

And why would I (or anyone else, given the problems reported in these forums) take the risk of EVER buying a Panasonic projector, ever again?

This is exactly what has kept me from pulling the trigger on a panny, even with the price drops - and the only response you ever get is, "oh you only hear about the people who are complaining" - the 150 hour "bulb fart" issue and the sub 1000 hour failures on the ae700 are not just random complaints - they are common enough in the large sample size of the various AV sites to indicate an early failure rate in the double digits - at the very least a non-trivial concern. Additionally the seeming lack of availability of 700/900 lamps leaves one concerned - I'm not having 20 people over to my house for the superbowl without a spare bulb on hand, to do otherwise would just be rude. It would be helpful if someone with actual knowledge could post on this - it would also be helpful to hear from people who already have 200+ hours on their 900 and whether they've seen a reemergence of the sudden brightness drop seen on the 700.

rwestley

11-28-05, 06:16 PM

There can be premature bulb failures with any Projector. There have been some on the Panasonic & also on the Sanyo. There was a previous thread discussing the issue and asking for the amount of time users had on there 700 lamp. Many were over 1,000 hours and still working and there were a few over 3,000 hours. It is possible that Bob was unlucky. The best thing to do for those who are concerned is to buy an extended warranty with the money save from the rebate. Be sure it covers blub replacement. I would suggest again that the best way to preserve a blub is to clean the filter often.

mdbones

11-28-05, 07:34 PM

[QUOTE=nataraj]That gives you a height of about 54". At the maximum vertical shift you can put the projector 15% above the top of the image i.e. about 8 inches.

Sorry to dip in on this but I have no knowledge....I admit it! If I am reading this correctly, I could ceiling mount the 900 as long as it is right at or within a couple of inches of the top of the screen with a throw of 13.5 feet??? If yes then the next question is, could I use a 92" screen or would it be too small for that range. I have been stressing over this decision for a couple of weeks the projector sounds awesome but I have no experience with them at all!!! Thanks for any help...Mike

Capek

11-28-05, 08:48 PM

Well, my head has been in the clouds for a couple days, but now I feel like crap. I recieved my ae900 on the 22nd, have turned it on maybe 5 times, and have loved it. Until today, when I went to turn it on. The bulb came on for 2 seconds, ran through the colors of the rainbow, then went off, and the Bulb light started blinking red, and the fan turned on high. The manual says "there may be an abnormality in the lamp circuit", so I'll be contacting my dealer first thing tomorrow. I'm really bummed, because prior to this, my projector seemed to be problem free (ie no iris or other abnormal noise, no soft picture problem etc).

I'm under the assumption Panasonic will replace a defective projector within the first 30 days with a new one. Is that the case? If so, I hope the one I get back is also problem free. :(

For longer the 6 days that is. :mad:

HTX^2steve

11-28-05, 11:05 PM

WhooooooooHooooooooo! 160 hours on my lamp, I mean my tasty Betty Crocker Oven! I think I am going to celebrate by cleaning my filter.

To mdbones: I have my PJ ceiling mounted with the center of the lens 3 inches down from the top of the image. It is 9 feet from lens to screen. That give me a 91 inch diag image. That is with max zoom out. So in your case you would have no problem displaying a 92 inch diag...you would just have to zoom in a bit. I say go for it...you won't be disappointed.

Steve.

cmwmjt

11-29-05, 06:46 AM

Just put in faxed an order for my AE900 from Panasonic, $2700AUD :)

On another note, Ive setup and an AE700 at work with 720p running into it via component, not impressed. VB is very noticeable, far worse than i've seen on any other projector, I have an EpsonTW10 and its VB is nothing like the AE700. Also I still think the screen door effect is noticeable, in comparison to the 900 I saw.

The AE900 I saw basically left the AE700 i've seen for dead. Personally I though the Hitachi PJ-TX100 was far better overall than the AE700.

Glad I didn't get a 700.

LKA

11-29-05, 08:54 AM

Jason Turk

11-29-05, 08:54 AM

rboster

11-29-05, 09:07 AM

My AE900 appears to have a speck of dust on th lens as it is projecting out a spot regardless of the screen. I was wondering if any of you have had this problem and could tell me how to clean the lens. I can send it back to the vendor to clean, but that is such a hassel. Is it possible to clean the lens without screwing up the projector?

PS thanks for all the great info on this Thread

Go to a local photo store and they will have lens cleaning cloths and other items for this task. Fairly straightforward. I wouldn't send your projector back to the dealer to clean the lens. This is not meant as a slam, but to put into perspective.....it would be equal to taking your car into the dealer to put air in the tires.

But, what you may have is a dust blob inside the projector, which would require a panel cleaning. I have not cleaned the inside of a Panny, so i can't comment on the complexity of it. I would imagine it's the same process as the AE700, which I would imagine has been outlined in a previous thread.

Ron

rsmith4321

11-29-05, 09:16 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by rrunner102
Hi,
I noticed a few rainbow like colors on the credits(white text) after the movie on my AE 900. previously I had an epson home 10 and did not notice it, has anybody else experienced this.

Thx
I have the same convergence problem. Please see attached picture. Mine is only 1 pixel misconverged horizontally and vertically but still is annoying. It would be nice if the Panasonic will send someone to your house with the Service kit that generates crosshatch pattern signal and adjust the panels until no color fringing shows. I don't understand, how difficult is it to get this right from the factory? I hate to send mine to Panasonic because I am afraid of them messing something when I am happy with everything else :) .

1.No SDE at 1.2X. I returned the Z4 mainly because of very bad SDE among other problems.
2.Almost no VB compared to my old 700.
3.90% uniformly white screen. The Z4 had a horrible uniformity problem.
4. Very good colors. I took some screenshots of WMV YD movie trailers. Awesome. (I think there is also HD video calibration dvd by DVE in WMV format.)
5. DVD looks good. From my cheap Toshiba 850 DVDs look "movie film like". Wait until HD dvds come out. This projector will handle them nicely based on my WMV HD impression.
6. TV looks good except SD channels from directv. I have to move back 1.5 X or farther to enjoy an SD program ( garbage in garbage out). HDTV is great with HDMI out from HD DVR 10- 250.

Please everyone take a look at your convergence and report yes or no. I hope only very few people have it which would suggest that it is easy to correct and it is not part of a bigger problem that others sugested with no proof like lens shift, long zoom lens. or smothscreen. I mounted 900 at exactly the same place where my old 700 was. In my opinion 700 had the same lens and the same smoothscreen as 900. There was no convergence problem then.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but every LCD PJ I have seen has that misalignment problem. I think that it might be normal. The thing we've got to remember is if you can't see if from a normal seating distance, then it doesn't matter. If everyone would quit staring at thier screen from 6 inches away we would be a lot happier :) I'm planning to get one of these soon, I would like to know if noticing some color bleed is normal.

abielecki

11-29-05, 09:18 AM

AE900 vs Sharp XVZ9000 ? Is it worth replacing my trusty Sharp of 4 or so years with the AE900. I have been longing for more contrast and a brighter (Yet still vibrant) picture. My apologies if this is a "No brainer" decision, would just like to be sure.

rsmith4321

11-29-05, 09:26 AM

Mike,

Thanks for the response. I figured it wasn't anything to worry about. I just thought I'd mention that I have the particles also. Like I said, the image the projector throws looks great to me...

On another note, would you guys suggest doing a dead/stuck pixel test? Or is that one of those things that if you don't see it, it's best not to look. I've already watched a few movies and haven't noticed any anomalies. I'm thinking that even if I do have a couple problem pixels, it might be best to let sleeping dogs lie...

Alan

I think you answered your own question.

rboster

11-29-05, 09:57 AM

Know I am thinking about using Goo paint so I can adjust the screen size depending on what I am watching. Has anyone used Digital Grey Light Goo with this projector?

I stumbled across your question. Here is a thread on that topic in the DIY Screen Forum:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=606820

mdbones

11-29-05, 11:50 AM

Boftas

11-29-05, 02:08 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by rrunner102
Hi,
I noticed a few rainbow like colors on the credits(white text) after the movie on my AE 900. previously I had an epson home 10 and did not notice it, has anybody else experienced this.

Thx
I have the same convergence problem. Please see attached picture. Mine is only 1 pixel misconverged horizontally and vertically but still is annoying. It would be nice if the Panasonic will send someone to your house with the Service kit that generates crosshatch pattern signal and adjust the panels until no color fringing shows. I don't understand, how difficult is it to get this right from the factory? I hate to send mine to Panasonic because I am afraid of them messing something when I am happy with everything else :) .

1.No SDE at 1.2X. I returned the Z4 mainly because of very bad SDE among other problems.
2.Almost no VB compared to my old 700.
3.90% uniformly white screen. The Z4 had a horrible uniformity problem.
4. Very good colors. I took some screenshots of WMV YD movie trailers. Awesome. (I think there is also HD video calibration dvd by DVE in WMV format.)
5. DVD looks good. From my cheap Toshiba 850 DVDs look "movie film like". Wait until HD dvds come out. This projector will handle them nicely based on my WMV HD impression.
6. TV looks good except SD channels from directv. I have to move back 1.5 X or farther to enjoy an SD program ( garbage in garbage out). HDTV is great with HDMI out from HD DVR 10- 250.

Please everyone take a look at your convergence and report yes or no. I hope only very few people have it which would suggest that it is easy to correct and it is not part of a bigger problem that others sugested with no proof like lens shift, long zoom lens. or smothscreen. I mounted 900 at exactly the same place where my old 700 was. In my opinion 700 had the same lens and the same smoothscreen as 900. There was no convergence problem then.

This is my convergence! This really makes it hard to get a sharp picture. I have more problems, the blacks are equal or worse then my AE700 and when i zoom I get green bleeding of the edge (see pictures). I have send it into service, hopes they can fix all of this.

By the way , I had to turn in my AE700 2 times for the convergence before i was satified. Now that one is good and sharp.

With this, I dont really think I will bought a Panasonic next time. It seems that 1 of 5 is real good and 1 of 5 is real bad :( .

86Duke

11-29-05, 02:59 PM

Tried posting this several hours ago, but there must have been a glitch. I've got my 900 set up on temporary shelves projecting on 120" screen, but tonight I'm permanently mounting it to the ceiling. I can put it anywhere between 13' and 17' throw.

Is there an advantage to closer vs. further? Further means less of a zoom. Does less zoom result in a better picture? Does closer necessarily mean more light (for the same size screen)? The on-line calculator doesn't seem to show any change in light. Are there any perceptible reasons to mount the pj further vs closer?

simpsonb

11-29-05, 03:09 PM

From what I've been reading, setting it back in it's range would result in a more evenly saturated picture in terms of light consistency. Remember, you're projecting a "cone" of light to a center point to be distributed across a wide surface. The further back, the better light distribution. I'm considering getting this projector and the Stewart FireHawk 106" and that's what Stewart said was the best for a ceiling mount with this screen. I imaging it would hold true for most situations.

Let us know how the 900 PJ works out for you.

rsmith4321

11-29-05, 03:09 PM

rsmith4321

11-29-05, 03:11 PM

This is my convergence! This really makes it hard to get a sharp picture. I have more problems, the blacks are equal or worse then my AE700 and when i zoom I get green bleeding of the edge (see pictures). I have send it into service, hopes they can fix all of this.

By the way , I had to turn in my AE700 2 times for the convergence before i was satified. Now that one is good and sharp.

With this, I dont really think I will bought a Panasonic next time. It seems that 1 of 5 is real good and 1 of 5 is real bad :( .

I see your covergence problem, but the blacks look way better on the 900 in your picture. I see at least twice as many stars.

Scott B

11-29-05, 04:05 PM

If you room is full of fog I guess it might :)

Most projectors vary in brightness as the zoom lens is varied. This results from a change in focal ratio. Refer to the Sony Ruby threads where this has been discussed in detail. The Panny 900 with a 2x zoom will vary by approximately 100% between minimum and maximum zoom settings. This is easy to see. Set the zoom to maximum and project an image on your screen. Now set the zoom to mimimum and move the projector back to display the same image size. You should notice a significant decrease in picture brightness.

Boftas

11-29-05, 04:39 PM

I see your covergence problem, but the blacks look way better on the 900 in your picture. I see at least twice as many stars.

Yes thats right, but thats because the 900 have more 'punch'. I can agree that the 900 have more contrast, but the basic black are equal or worse. Look at the space against the unprojected screen and compare.

I have one more screenshot.

The AE700 have over 2000h on the lamp. so its a bit dimmed to what it was when it was newer.

When I switch between Dynamic Iris ON/OFF, It's bigger change on the AE700.
Is this right? I would think that the AE900 should have a more working iris then the 700.

tvted

11-29-05, 05:54 PM

Most projectors vary in brightness as the zoom lens is varied. This results from a change in focal ratio. Refer to the Sony Ruby threads where this has been discussed in detail. The Panny 900 with a 2x zoom will vary by approximately 100% between minimum and maximum zoom settings.

If it lost 100% there would be no more light. ;)

Originally Posted by 86Duke
Is there an advantage to closer vs. further? Further means less of a zoom. Does less zoom result in a better picture? Does closer necessarily mean more light (for the same size screen)? The on-line calculator doesn't seem to show any change in light. Are there any perceptible reasons to mount the pj further vs closer?

Scott is right - this was pointed out by none other than AussieBob way back when in the 700 thread.
The 700 has an F-stop variance of about 1 stop. Each stop changes light transmission by 1/2 or 2X depending on the up or down, so if you have 12 Ft lamberts at the minimum zoom you've got half that at max.

It *is* a consideration with long throw.

ted

jumpy27

11-29-05, 06:15 PM

Yes thats right, but thats because the 900 have more 'punch'. I can agree that the 900 have more contrast, but the basic black are equal or worse. Look at the space against the unprojected screen and compare.

If the ANSI contrast ratio is higher (which the 900 is supposed to have), then an equal or even lower (greyer) black level will "look" blacker because of the greater difference between the blacks and the whites.

tvted

11-29-05, 06:15 PM

Yes thats right, but thats because the 900 have more 'punch'. I can agree that the 900 have more contrast, but the basic black are equal or worse. Look at the space against the unprojected screen and compare.

Are these properly and equally calibrated?
Are you suggesting you've measured this? If not some math would point out to you how black levels work.

If both PJ's are calibrated for the same lumens output - say 1000 Lux for 100 IRE white, then Black level will be that measure divided by CR. Thus the PJ with the greatest Full Field On/Of CR will have the lowest blacks. Screenshots are too variable to portray this unless under the strictest conditions. Simply having a different exposure will change things. The two Pj's could also not be viewed side by side as the one with lower blacks is likely to be affected in black levels by the other unit.

If these are not measued calibrations then there is also the fact that each PJ might be calibrated differently with respect to Blacker than Black and Whiter than White levels.

ted

DrA

11-29-05, 06:18 PM

This is my convergence! This really makes it hard to get a sharp picture. I have more problems, the blacks are equal or worse then my AE700 and when i zoom I get green bleeding of the edge (see pictures). I have send it into service, hopes they can fix all of this.

By the way , I had to turn in my AE700 2 times for the convergence before i was satified. Now that one is good and sharp.

With this, I dont really think I will bought a Panasonic next time. It seems that 1 of 5 is real good and 1 of 5 is real bad :( .

Your convergence of 900 is real bad anything that should be 1 pixel shows 3 pixels and looses sharpness.
For your 700 convergence did they adjust the panels or replaced the whole lcd panel block that must come from factory adjusted?
Good luck with your service and let us know what they did to correct.
DrA

Scott B

11-29-05, 06:53 PM

If it lost 100% there would be no more light. ;)

What a smartass :) What I mean is that the light output at maximum zoom would be approximately 100% greater than the light output at minimum zoom.

calibos

11-29-05, 07:36 PM

.................Earlier this year - about April - my AE700's lamp failed at 763 hours, 342 of them on HIGH LAMP, 221 power-ons. The lamp went to about 5% brightness after power-on one day, and never went back. After much hassle I got it replaced under warranty as a "faulty manufacture" item.

Now the new lamp has blown, at 774 hours with 329 of them on HIGH LAMP, 209 power-ons: pretty-well exactly the same statistics as before.............................

I know I am at the other end of the on/off cycle scale with my extended runtimes but I have to say your on/of cycles seem excessive.

On my first AE300 bulb which lasted the full 5000 hours I had approx. 600 cycles and my second bulb which also lasted 5000 hours had even less @ about 450 cycles.

209 cycles in only 774 hours is too far in the other direction IMHO

ie. On/Off cycles kills bulbs quicker than extended runtimes.

You are better off leaving a projector on if you figure you'll be back in the room within about 1 hour-1.5 hours rather than switching it off and back on several times a day etc.

In my case the projector is being watched by someone in my family of 2 parents and 3 siblings 3/4 of the time that its on so in effect I am wasting 1250 hours (1/4 of 5000) of the bulbs life. I'd rather waste those hours to guarantee the full 5000 hour lifetime of the bulb and in effect get an almost guaranteed 3750 hours than turn the PJ on and off all the time so as not to 'waste' those 1250 hours but in the end it turns out to be a false economy when by not 'wasting', the bulb only lasts 750-1000 hours anyway.

jstein

11-29-05, 08:12 PM

Aussie Bob averages about 3.7 hours per turn on and Calibos averages 8.3 hours per turn on.

I only use my PJ (currently a Sony 10HT with an AE900 on the way) to watch movies. My average turn on is even lower then AB's. On my 10HT, with one exception when removing a matchbook propping up one of the 10HT's feet blew a bulb, the bulbs lasted for their rated hours even with an average turn on of under 3 hours.

Under 800 hours for each of two bulbs is pretty darn poor IMHO. :( I am not going to be a happy camper if my AE900 has bulb failures at less than 800 hours. Hopefully, this will not be the case.

rsmith4321

11-29-05, 09:37 PM

Yes thats right, but thats because the 900 have more 'punch'. I can agree that the 900 have more contrast, but the basic black are equal or worse. Look at the space against the unprojected screen and compare.

I have one more screenshot.

The AE700 have over 2000h on the lamp. so its a bit dimmed to what it was when it was newer.

When I switch between Dynamic Iris ON/OFF, It's bigger change on the AE700.
Is this right? I would think that the AE900 should have a more working iris then the 700.

That's your problem exactly. 2000h is a lot, it will be almost half the brightness of new. The 900 is probably putting out about 70% or more brightness over the 700, it's going to have worse black, but a much better overall contrast I would imagine. I don't have the PJ yet, but from what I've read the Iris can be adjusted to put out less light in certain Cinema modes to improve black at the cost of light output.

rsmith4321

11-29-05, 09:40 PM

What a smartass :) What I mean is that the light output at maximum zoom would be approximately 100% greater than the light output at minimum zoom.

I don't get what you are saying either. The light output should change very little. If you are making the same size say 100" image from 10' or 20' I would think the light that hits the screen should be nearly identical. You are just dispersing or focusing the light, but the end result is the same.

By the way, I'm getting this PJ soon. Anyone want to buy a very nice Infocus 4805 with about 500 hours on it, out of 4000. Barely broke in.

Riverplace

11-29-05, 10:25 PM

[QUOTE=rsmith4321]I don't get what you are saying either. The light output should change very little. If you are making the same size say 100" image from 10' or 20' I would think the light that hits the screen should be nearly identical. You are just dispersing or focusing the light, but the end result is the same.
QUOTE]

The amount of light hitting the screen is a function of lamp output (which is constant) and the distance it travels (which varies from 10' to 20')

The light hitting the screen surface at 20' is 1/2 of the amount of light hitting the screen at 10'

That is what he is trying to say.

Aussie Bob

11-29-05, 11:20 PM

rsmith,

Read the manual. At maximum wide angle the f-number is f/1.9. At maximum "thin" angle it is f/3.1: 1.2 stops dimmer than the maximum wide angle version at the SAME screen size, if you're shifting your projector around to achieve it.

The inverse square rule (half the size, four times the brightness) has to be factored against the inefficiencies of the lens design that gives rise to a sliding f-stop as the picture is made smaller by zooming. The end result is that, keeping the projector in a fixed position, if you go from max wide to max thin you will get first a THEORETICAL 400% increase in brightness (due to the inverse square rule) OFFSET AGAINST a 1.2 stop diminuition in efficiency of the lens (due to the lens design). Result: what you would have thought would have been a 400% brighter picture is only about 175% brighter.

At the same screen size, moving the projector around and zooming to get that same screen size, the picture will be brightest at the closer position of the projector.

Summary: Due to inefficiencies in the zoom lens design of this particular projector (and others, by the way), the closer you can manage to position the projector to your screen for any given screen size, the brighter the picture will be.

Belieevvvee it.

P.S. New lamp arrived just now. Why do I feel so flat about this (apart from the AUS$650 I paid for it, that is)? Maybe it's because Panasonic didn't stock the lamp, so having it examined for warranty replacement was not a practical option. Nice way to avoid your responsibilities, methinks: just don't stock parts and make the customer wait forever, finally giving up.

Bitter and twisted right now.

"Panasonic? Never again."

EAS

11-29-05, 11:40 PM

The Panny 900 with a 2x zoom will vary by approximately 100% between minimum and maximum zoom settings. This is easy to see. Set the zoom to maximum and project an image on your screen. Now set the zoom to mimimum and move the projector back to display the same image size. You should notice a significant decrease in picture brightness.

Normally the brightness could be calculated based on the ratio, but because the AE900 has a variable aperture controlled by the "dynamic iris" it may be difficult to quantify. Not sure how the unit compensates the iris with zoom. Normally the brightness could be calculated if the aperture was fixed during the zoom while keeping the screen size fixed.

Just thought I would throw that in ;)

hemster

11-30-05, 12:49 AM

Scott B

11-30-05, 04:39 AM

Normally the brightness could be calculated based on the ratio, but because the AE900 has a variable aperture controlled by the "dynamic iris" it may be difficult to quantify. Not sure how the unit compensates the iris with zoom. Normally the brightness could be calculated if the aperture was fixed during the zoom while keeping the screen size fixed.

Just thought I would throw that in ;)

I see no evidence that the dynamic iris changes to account for the zoom setting. I guess it is possible, but I doubt it. Maybe somebody with a light meter can quantify the effects of altering the zoom.

jstein

11-30-05, 05:29 AM

An interesting question for those who have measured output, is where was the zoom set when the measurements were done? If we were to know this, then we could figure out the AE9000's ouput at other focal lengths. And we could approximate the focal length based upon where in the throw range for a given screen size the projector is positioned.

While measurement at full-wide and full-telephoto would be useful, I think that Aussie Bob nailed the issue. At full-telephoto, less than half the light will get through than at full-wide. I also rather doubt that the iris setting or behaviour is impacted by the zoom setting (IOW, I rather doubt that Panasonic set things up so that the iris closes down as the lense zooms out to a wider angle).

Fixed f-stop zoom lenses are considerably more expensive to make than variable f-stop zoom lenses. In photography, fixed f-stop lenses tend to be expensive professional lenses; variable f-stop lenses, less expensive consumer lenses. And while I am not familiar with the lense specs for other projectors, I suspect that many other projectors also used variable f-stop lenses.

This is where the 2:1 zoom range of the AE900 is a mixed blessing - less of a zoom range is less flexible in terms of positioning, but also has less variation in output between full-wide and full-telephoto.

I already own a 106" diagonal DaLite High Power screen (2.7 gain), so I am not too concerned about having enough output. I might end up running the projector in Cinema 1 with auto iris and low bulb output. If I didn't own a screen, I would likely project onto a white wall and wait for more data about output at various zoom settings and after a couple of hundred hours on the bulb before committing to a screen material.

Croc

11-30-05, 06:15 AM

I;m still considering the 900but have a concern about the remote.

Thomas Norton in his review on the Ultimate AV site states

"...in order for the projector to receive commands, the remote had to be pointed directly at the sensor on the front of the projector. It wouldn't respond when I pointed the remote at the screen (as it does with most projectors) or at the back of the projector (the only sensor is on the front). Fresh batteries didn't help."

As my projector would be mounted on a high shelf several feet above and a few feet in front of my seat, how would I be able to send commands through the remote if this is true?

I would have no choice but to bounce the signal off the screen or front wall, as the remote sensor is located on the front of the pj. My current pj has sensors on the front and back, and both can be active together.

Shelly

in my case the remote with original bateries is really sucks.
after reading here that replacing batteries helps - i just progrmamed 900's remote into my universal RC and now it bounces off the screen - what a revalation - no need for IR extender :rolleyes:

Samsun19

11-30-05, 06:40 AM

Hi guy's.

Thanks to everyone here for helping me learn a great deal....

I started out two weeks ago and I had no idea how big the projector world was.

Now I am exhausted, but in a good way.

I've ordered the 900, my very 1st projector!

It will be here Thursday... Very Excited.

And I already want to tweak it ...... LOL.

I have so much to learn but to get started....

If you guy's could set me straight on DVD players, that would really be great.

I have an old JVC XV-S500... it has s-video, component YPP, a 480P switch, PCM/Stream & Coaxial Digital out.

What would be the best choice for connecting this to the 900?

Also, how much better is the Oppo 971 going to look?

And if it's Really that much better... ( smile ) What's the fastest way to get one, in Los angeles?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks Very Much

Sam

rwestley

11-30-05, 07:09 AM

I own the Oppo and the Panasonic 971. Both work great with the AE900. The Oppo is a great buy. I just ordered a second for a friend from Mike at Surf Audio Video. He is a club member and sells the Oppo. His posts have been great on the tweak thread and his company deserves our support.

tvted

11-30-05, 07:55 AM

I don't get what you are saying either. The light output should change very little. If you are making the same size say 100" image from 10' or 20' I would think the light that hits the screen should be nearly identical. You are just dispersing or focusing the light, but the end result is the same.

I understood what Scott said - I *am* a smartass - I merely fleshed out what he is saying. Did you read my comment? The lens varies about 1 F-stop throughout its range which will lower or raise the transmission of the lens depending on its focal length (zoom). Some telephoto lenses *do* maintain a constant F-stop throughout its range (considerably more expensive - most PJ's (as cameras) do not.

Check the specs you will see a range given for the lens. Each F-stop varies the light transmission by a factor of two - 1/4, 1/2, X2, x4 etc. referred to what the setting is.

ted

tvted

11-30-05, 08:01 AM

The amount of light hitting the screen is a function of lamp output (which is constant) and the distance it travels (which varies from 10' to 20')

The light hitting the screen surface at 20' is 1/2 of the amount of light hitting the screen at 10'

That is what he is trying to say.

No, this is also a misunderstanding - given a lens that maintains its focal length that remains constant, as long as the screen *area* remains constant the ,lumens hitting the screen should be the same. The inverse square law only applies if the area being measured changes as it would with a normal point source. The zoom changes that. Where the misunderstanding occurs is that the lenses F-stop (light transmissibility) varies throughout its focal length. Both Scott and I have been saying this.

I would suggest those who do not believe this simply get out a meter and read a bit about how lenses work.

ted

DrA

11-30-05, 08:27 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but every LCD PJ I have seen has that misalignment problem. I think that it might be normal. The thing we've got to remember is if you can't see if from a normal seating distance, then it doesn't matter. If everyone would quit staring at thier screen from 6 inches away we would be a lot happier :) I'm planning to get one of these soon, I would like to know if noticing some color bleed is normal.

From my seating 1.2x width first I saw it and then started "staring at their screen from 6 inches away". Someone here posted that after 2 returnes he has no problem and I did not have it with 700 so you have a chance of getting one with no convergence issue. If you sit 2x screen width don't worry about It order it and enjoy. My projector has a great potential for my seating after needed adjustments.
But it is not normal because service centers repair it if it is more than a half or full pixel wide. I am not sure about what the official number is but 1 pixel annoys me.
Attached are HDnet test patterns. Enlarge the #2picture 2x on your monitor to see what I see from my seating distance or if your projector is connected to a pc you know what to do.
Warning: Please do not use this pictures to adjust your monitor or Pj :mad:
Test patterns come on HDnet around 4am. It is nice because HD VE Pro. in WMV format costs 10x more than regular Digital Video Essentials.
DrA

Scott B

11-30-05, 09:46 AM

rsmith4321

11-30-05, 10:05 AM

From my seating 1.2x width first I saw it and then started "staring at their screen from 6 inches away". Someone here posted that after 2 returnes he has no problem and I did not have it with 700 so you have a chance of getting one with no convergence issue. If you sit 2x screen width don't worry about It order it and enjoy. My projector has a great potential for my seating after needed adjustments.
But it is not normal because service centers repair it if it is more than a half or full pixel wide. I am not sure about what the official number is but 1 pixel annoys me.
Attached are HDnet test patterns. Enlarge the #2picture 2x on your monitor to see what I see from my seating distance or if your projector is connected to a pc you know what to do.
Warning: Please do not use this pictures to adjust your monitor or Pj :mad:
Test patterns come on HDnet around 4am. It is nice because HD VE Pro. in WMV format costs 10x more than regular Digital Video Essentials.
DrA

I see it, that is pretty bad. From my experince with LCD's they just seem to bleed some red and blue out of a white line, but not where the red line is a pixel away. I don't even see how it could produce an image if one color is off by a whole pixel. I sure wish DLP's would get down to this price range.

rsmith4321

11-30-05, 10:08 AM

No, this is also a misunderstanding - given a lens that maintains its focal length that remains constant, as long as the screen *area* remains constant the ,lumens hitting the screen should be the same. The inverse square law only applies if the area being measured changes as it would with a normal point source. The zoom changes that. Where the misunderstanding occurs is that the lenses F-stop (light transmissibility) varies throughout its focal length. Both Scott and I have been saying this.

I would suggest those who do not believe this simply get out a meter and read a bit about how lenses work.

ted

That's exactly what I was trying to say, it seems so completely logical, I don't understand why there is a question about it. You are changing the focus and the distance from the screen, but the screen size is staying the same. The only way light output goes down is if you move back the PJ, but don't change the focus, making a larger screen size. Again, unless your air is full of fog or something, the light hitting the screen is exactly the same if the screen size remains the same.

Scott B

11-30-05, 10:30 AM

simpsonb

11-30-05, 11:19 AM

tvted

11-30-05, 11:21 AM

Again, unless your air is full of fog or something, the light hitting the screen is exactly the same if the screen size remains the same.

No, you are missing what has been said. Do you understand the way lenses work? To keep the screen size the same you must utilize the zoom. As the focal length of the zoom changes to do this, the aperture changes, since aperture is glass size divided by focal length. This changes the F-stop of the lens which affects its light transmissibility. What you are suggesting is true *only* if the lens aperture remains the same as I said. In this case (and most cases) it does not.

ted

tvted

11-30-05, 11:23 AM

This has nothing to do with fog, smoke, or drinking too much beer.

Smoke works. ;)

ted

Greg Matty

11-30-05, 12:16 PM

tvted

11-30-05, 12:23 PM

That is why my Nikon f2.8 70-200VR cost $1,500!!! Constant aperture baby! :)
Greg

:)
Ah the reality of cold hard cash, and one of the reasons that Panasonic (and others) are able to keep these boxes in this price range.

ted

Riverplace

11-30-05, 12:24 PM

No, you are missing what has been said. Do you understand the way lenses work? To keep the screen size the same you must utilize the zoom. As the focal length of the zoom changes to do this, the aperture changes, since aperture is glass size divided by focal length. This changes the F-stop of the lens which affects its light transmissibility. What you are suggesting is true *only* if the lens aperture remains the same as I said. In this case (and most cases) it does not.

ted

Let me make it even simpler (but not entirely correct technically)

Between the lamp and the lens there is a disc with an opening to let light through. This opening varies in size. when you get closer to the screen the opening is big, letting more light through. If you get farther from the screen, the opening has to close down to maintain the same screen size. The result is less light will be allowed to pass through. therefore you'd have a dimmer image even though you have the same lamp with the same output.

For those people who don't take old-fashion photography you might not be familiar with aperture, F-stops stuff and it might be hard to understand.

N9IWP

11-30-05, 12:38 PM

Just pulled the trigger! My credit card is offering a $50 rebate on any (I think)>$400 purchace which expires today. Found an excelent deal from an AVS sponsor. Went for the free shipping. Just ordered, so no arrival date yet.

Now to build a shelf for it, and get a screen (probably going for a duotherm board which I'll paint if that is unsatisfactory). and cables.

Brian
add me to the 1st projector club

eliocon

11-30-05, 12:40 PM

I was just about ready to purchase the 900 until I started reading several posts on convergance and bad pixel issues. Is this a big problem with LCD PJ's? If this is so then I may be thinking DLP to avoid these issues but really like the 900 features a lot. Color is a big thing for me too which is why I want the 900.

This is my first PJ and and I watch mostly movies and will be getting Dish HD in a few months of the PJ purchase. SDE and convergance issues really bother me and I want to avoid that but don't want to take a chance on getting a bad "but not bad enough to be out of spec" projector and be stuck with it.
Hi,

I thought I had a convergence issue and it turned out that my DVD player was creating an artifact around the color red when I was going out of the DVI at 720P. At 1080i the image looked great with 0 convergence issues. If I step right up to the screen I can see a small blue/red glow on a white line but I literally have to be right on the screen to see it. I have a 92" diagonal Greywolf screen. I also have Dish Network and the HD is pretty awesome.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Elio

simpsonb

11-30-05, 12:55 PM

tvted

11-30-05, 03:36 PM

Let me make it even simpler (but not entirely correct technically)

Between the lamp and the lens there is a disc with an opening to let light through. This opening varies in size. when you get closer to the screen the opening is big, letting more light through. If you get farther from the screen, the opening has to close down to maintain the same screen size. The result is less light will be allowed to pass through. therefore you'd have a dimmer image even though you have the same lamp with the same output.

For those people who don't take old-fashion photography you might not be familiar with aperture, F-stops stuff and it might be hard to understand.

So - You are making it simpler for me? :confused: :confused:

If so perhaps you should read again as I outlined in "technical" terms exactly what you are saying. If not why quote me? Unlike you, I don't feel the info I provide is beyond the ken of anyone in this group so I see no need for condescension,

I work in a biz that *requires* very expensive lenses to work *and* I get to touch them, not to mention that I've got a poopload of camera stuff that I rub occasionally.

So you are preaching to the converted. Perhaps you misquoted or meant this for someone else? If not: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Anyway I'm done with this subject - its been covered. Back to the topic. If you want to try and convince me that you are saying something different than me my PM box is not locked.

ted

simpsonb

11-30-05, 04:15 PM

Riverplace

11-30-05, 04:17 PM

So - You are making it simpler for me? :confused: :confused:

If so perhaps you should read again as I outlined in "technical" terms exactly what you are saying. If not why quote me? Unlike you, I don't feel the info I provide is beyond the ken of anyone in this group so I see no need for condescension,

I work in a biz that *requires* very expensive lenses to work *and* I get to touch them, not to mention that I've got a poopload of camera stuff that I rub occasionally.

So you are preaching to the converted. Perhaps you misquoted or meant this for someone else? If not: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Anyway I'm done with this subject - its been covered. Back to the topic. If you want to try and convince me that you are saying something different than me my PM box is not locked.

ted

Ted,

I am so sorry for not making myself clear. I just added on to your technical explanation and tried to use a simpler explanation for other people who might not be familiar with lenses. But not for you (why would I try to do that when you obviously know the subject?)

I did some work with camera, and was also taught mechanical engineering courses (optics being one) so I always tried to find a simpler explanation than the person before me (self improvement on teaching techniques). Obviously I didn't make the point clear enough that I wasn't addressing you.

Cheers!

Aussie Bob

11-30-05, 05:00 PM

Don't you just want to scream, TVTed?

A specific example: a 100-inch wide image at 10 feet throw will be brighter than a 100-inch wide image at 15 feet throw.

Why? Because to get the 100-inch wide screen after you move the PJ back from 10 to 15 feet, you have to zoom the lens to a narrower cone. When you zoom the lens to a narrower cone you increase the f-number (this is in the "Specifications" part of the manual). Why does the f-number increase? Because that's the way the zoom lens in the AE-700/900 is designed.. It's not any law of physics or anything, it's just the design. The design could be improved, true, but these designs are expensive to manufacture. The lens would probably be worth more than the rest of the projector with a "constant f-stop" lens attached.

Second example, using full zoom range: For the reasons outlined above, a 100-inch wide image at minimum throw (maximum beam angle, where the lens is f/1.9) will be 1.2 stops brighter - more than twice as bright - as a 100-inch wide image at maximum throw (minimum beam angle, where the lens is f/3.1).

The "Inverse Square" rule does partially apply (as a projection system approximates a point-source system), but must be offset against the change in lens efficiency between zoom settings.

The generic formula is: Final Brightness = (Old screen Area/New Screen Area) x (Change in lens efficiency - "change in f-stop" - due to change in zoom).

When the "Old Screen Area" and the "New Screen Area" are the same (i.e. screen size is fixed), the first half of the formula is unity, "1". Therefore, the only factor affecting brightness in the "fixed screen size" scenario will be the change in f-stop from one zoom position to the other. The narrower the cone (or the longer the throw), the dimmer the picture (and vice versa)

Which leads us to....

HOME THEATRE DESIGN RULE OF THUMB: Given a fixed screen size, when deciding on where to locate your projector, if brightness is your main consideration, ALWAYS locate the projector closer to the screen if you can. This will give you the brightest picture possible for any given fixed screen size.

presenter

11-30-05, 05:32 PM

Nope, you are incorrect. If you maintain a constant image size, but move the projector closer or further away using the zoom lens to compensate, the image will be brighter with the projector closer to the screen. This has nothing to do with fog, smoke, or drinking too much beer. Is it simple physics owing to the change in focal ratio (f-stop) of the zoom lens.

I have to agree, virtually all zoom lenses (if not all) will have a lower F stop (let more light out in "wide angle" mode (largest image size from a given distance).

However, in most cases the difference between widest and narrowest (or closest to furthest) from the same sized screen, in F stop is relatively small. On many home theater projectors the zoom ratio is 1.2:1 or 1.3:1 and the difference (without checking) is probably less than 10-20% - a slight variance.

With the new breed of LCD projectors like the Panny and Z4, though (and the older Panny 700u), the 2:1 zoom ratio, would normally have a greater range in the F stop.

I just checked the Panny 900u spec sheet, the f stop range is f1.9 (wide) - F3.1 (telephoto/furthest).

I'm rusty on these things, but as I recall, a doubling of the F stop, say from f1.9 to F3.8 means half the light with F3.8. This is obviously a non-linear measurement as each doubling means half the light. As a result, from f1.9 to f3.1 is probably something in the range of a 30-40% drop in brightness.

With those other projectors with less range on the zooms, as I said, the loss would be negligible.

Bottom line, for a given size screen the closer you place the projector, the brighter it will be, but not drastically so.

At the same time lens are normally not at their best at their extreme ranges, so ideally you don't want to be at minimum distance or maximum distance. Also the keystone effect and need for lens shift is greater when the projector is closer.

That said, for max brightness and good picture, probably within 20% of the closest will let the lens perform well and still return almost maximum brightness.

And conversely if you arent worried about getting every last lumen, place it further back, not at maximum distance but close to the back and say, 20% of the range between the maximums. ie. if for your screen size the range is 10 ft to 20 ft, try 17-18 feet - you'll lose some horsepower but have less lens shift/keystone to deal with. -art

PS, for those that haven't been to my site read or read the end of September preliminary review of the 900u, the final/final version is up on the site. Killer projector. Still not a true competitor to Darkchip 3 DLP's which start at over $3500 street price, but one fine projector for your $2K and change. The review can be found at http://www.projectorreviews.com/review.asp?reid=50

More recently I posted reviews of the Sanyo Z4, and the Epson Cinema 550 for those of you still "on the fence". Hope you find it useful. -art

nolio

11-30-05, 06:09 PM

I posted this question in the forum but was told to post here for better results..

I am entertaining the idea of stacking 2 AE900's like one of the other AVS members did with there higher end projectors.

I am wondering if anyone else has done this with an equivalent projector and also how much better they performed together rather then just running one..

Would I be wasting my money on the stack or would I be just as well off running just one pj if I am trying to project an image of 130-148" diag ??

what do you guys think?

Robert Clark

11-30-05, 06:26 PM

If it were me (and it is since I'd like to go larger too) I'd wait a year or so for a 1080p projector to go that large.

The AE900 looks to be a fine interim answer, don't know how they'd look stacked...

tvted

11-30-05, 07:04 PM

Robert ClarkThe AE900 looks to be a fine interim answer, don't know how they'd look stacked...
Interesting thought.

presenter
Elegantly said.

ted

Aussie Bob

11-30-05, 07:25 PM

"I'm rusty on these things, but as I recall, a doubling of the F stop, say from f1.9 to F3.8 means half the light with F3.8. This is obviously a non-linear measurement as each doubling means half the light. As a result, from f1.9 to f3.1 is probably something in the range of a 30-40% drop in brightness.

Sorry to say so Presenter, but your rustiness is showing. A doubling of the f-stop QUARTERS the light. For example, f/2 to f/4 lets one quarter of the light in or out of the lens. f/2 to f/2.8 lets one half of the light in or out.

To find the difference in light transmission between two f-stop numbers, the formula is:(1/(f1/f2)) squared

where f1 and f2 are the two f-stops numbers in question.

So, using f/2 and f/2.8 from the example above,

(2.8 divided by 2) = 1.4 (as the f-numbers are rounded this is actually 1.4142)
1/1.4142 = 0.7071
(0.7071 squared) = 1/2
Therefore: f/2.8 is HALF as bright as f/2.

Another example, using f/5.6 and f/11,

(11 divided by 5.6) ~= 2
1/2 = 0.5
(0.5 squared) = 1/4
Therefore: f/11 is ONE QUARTER as bright as f/5.6 i.e. two stops dimmer.

Taking the Panasonic, we have limits at either end of the zoom range of f/1.9 and f/3.1.

(3.1/1.9) = 1.6315
1/1.6315 = 0.6129
(0.6129 squared) = 0.375

f/3.1 is about 37.5% the brightness of f/1.9, or 3/8ths as bright.

This is quite an appreciable dimming, not trivial at all.

rsmith4321

11-30-05, 07:27 PM

I have to agree, virtually all zoom lenses (if not all) will have a lower F stop (let more light out in "wide angle" mode (largest image size from a given distance).

However, in most cases the difference between widest and narrowest (or closest to furthest) from the same sized screen, in F stop is relatively small. On many home theater projectors the zoom ratio is 1.2:1 or 1.3:1 and the difference (without checking) is probably less than 10-20% - a slight variance.

With the new breed of LCD projectors like the Panny and Z4, though (and the older Panny 700u), the 2:1 zoom ratio, would normally have a greater range in the F stop.

I just checked the Panny 900u spec sheet, the f stop range is f1.9 (wide) - F3.1 (telephoto/furthest).

I'm rusty on these things, but as I recall, a doubling of the F stop, say from f1.9 to F3.8 means half the light with F3.8. This is obviously a non-linear measurement as each doubling means half the light. As a result, from f1.9 to f3.1 is probably something in the range of a 30-40% drop in brightness.

With those other projectors with less range on the zooms, as I said, the loss would be negligible.

Bottom line, for a given size screen the closer you place the projector, the brighter it will be, but not drastically so.

At the same time lens are normally not at their best at their extreme ranges, so ideally you don't want to be at minimum distance or maximum distance. Also the keystone effect and need for lens shift is greater when the projector is closer.

That said, for max brightness and good picture, probably within 20% of the closest will let the lens perform well and still return almost maximum brightness.

And conversely if you arent worried about getting every last lumen, place it further back, not at maximum distance but close to the back and say, 20% of the range between the maximums. ie. if for your screen size the range is 10 ft to 20 ft, try 17-18 feet - you'll lose some horsepower but have less lens shift/keystone to deal with. -art

PS, for those that haven't been to my site read or read the end of September preliminary review of the 900u, the final/final version is up on the site. Killer projector. Still not a true competitor to Darkchip 3 DLP's which start at over $3500 street price, but one fine projector for your $2K and change. The review can be found at http://www.projectorreviews.com/review.asp?reid=50

More recently I posted reviews of the Sanyo Z4, and the Epson Cinema 550 for those of you still "on the fence". Hope you find it useful. -art

Let me see if I understand you correctly, because some here seem to be indicating that the difference between maximum and minimum zoon at the same screen size would be as much as half a bright. You saying it wouldn't be that much, probably around 30% to 40% correct? Also, what if you are in the middle of the zoom range, would that be the best location, or is it usually best to be at minimum zoom? I wish someone had a lightmeter and could actually test this in real world circumstances. Thanks for the info.

Aussie Bob

11-30-05, 07:32 PM

R Smith, Presenter is wrong. See my post above yours.

jstein

11-30-05, 07:34 PM

Nolio, I think that you would be better off using a high gain retro-reflective screen and coffee table mounting the projector fairly close to the screen so that you can take advantage of the lense's increased light transmission at a wide angle setting. Buying two projectors is expensive and it can be difficult to converge the output of both projectors.

Retro-reflective screens send most of the light that hits them back to the source. So, a coffee table setup will maximize image brightness. An added advantage is that ambient light tends to be reflected back to the source, rather than at the viewer. In addition, you get less self-wash-out from self-reflectance and thus improved contrast (a bright part of the image will not wash out adjacent dark parts of the image).

With my Sony 10HT, I used a 106" diagonal DaLite High Power screen with a gain of 2.7 and there was no hot spotting. It took Bill Cushman a couple of years of suggesting I go with the DaLite High Power screen material before I followed his advice. I wish that I had listened to him sooner.

If you like to sit close to the screen (say 1.5 screen widths away), your first row of seating might have to be two chairs on either side of the projector, rather than a couch. Figure out the near minimum throw distance for your screen size (say 1.55 screen widths, absolute minimum is about 1.43 screen widths) and see if this will work for you. As far as couch placement goes, don't forget to take into account the depth of the projector as the throw distance is from the front of the lense and leave enough room to get to the couch without bumping into the coffee table and the projector (say three+ feet). If you would like to be able to lie down on the couch and watch, you might want to raise the couch a tad as you may need a fairly tall coffee table to accomodate the lense shift range.

Until we get better data on average output over the life of a bulb at both wide and tele settings, this is more of a suggestion than an absolute truth.

Presenter, an approximately 40% increase in f-stop will reduced light transmission by 50%. The reason for this is that the square root of 2 is approximately 1.4. The magic 1.4 number represents the ratio between the larger aperture at the smaller f-stop and the smaller aperture at the larger f-stop. For a tedious explanation of all this, see here (http://www.uscoles.com/fstop.htm) . As AB pointed out, with the AE900 the output difference between full-wide and full-tele is pretty darn significant.

eliocon

11-30-05, 07:51 PM

Thanks Elio, that's good to hear. Maybe that's what others have been experiencing and not a convergenace issue with the projector. I know proper interconnects and scallers have a lot to do with the PQ.

I did call an online vendor and he told me they work with Panasonic on a case-by-case basis if there is an issue. He said he has sold many of these units with ever hearing of convergence or pixel issues of any type so that's reassuring I guess.

How does DVD look on your 900? I plan on using the DVI/HDMI connection with a Bettercables from my Denon 1910, it does upscale to 720p and 1080i.
Depends on the DVD. I'm using a Denon DVD 3910 and most everything looks great. All the Star Wars movies are mastered so well it's hard to imagine what you'll gain when the hi-def versions come out. Best Buy has all the Super-Bit DVDs on sale for 9.99 and it's worth it. Every one of those discs look great. Anything in the 1:85 aspect ratio looks better than most 2:35 "Scope" pictures since there's no black bars along the top and bottom to reference so black looks blacker. If your Denon allows you to crush the blacks a bit give it a shot. I changed the IRE from 7.5 to 0 on mine and was stunned at how much black the projector could pump out (or not pump out as the case may be). Anyhow if the DVD player has an Enhanced Black for DVI/HDMI use it. Makes a huge difference.

Good luck with the projector. I have over 800 DVDs so if there a partucular title you feel is a reference title for you ask me how it looks. I may have it.

Elio

tvted

11-30-05, 07:52 PM

That is because 1.9 to 3.1 is *greater than 1 F-stop, hence the 63% loss give or take good glass that Aussie Bob is measuring.

1 stop halves the light from the previous larger setting. If the numbers seem odd its because the area of a circle involves its diameter - not linear mathematically.

ted

Aussie Bob

11-30-05, 07:58 PM

Better Put, tvted: "the area of a circle involves the square of its radius - not linear mathematically."

eagletree

11-30-05, 08:25 PM

Got my 900 this week. First projector.

Dealer came and set it up. Feeding it with a Panny S97 through a 30' hdmi cable. Instant handshake between the 2. Automatic upconversion through hdmi. Yipee! These 2 are a perfect combo!

Feeding my new HD-PVR (Scientific Atlanta 8300) through my receiver. Image sizing problems, out of the box. They maybe real or simply receiver config. issues, have not had time to configure the reciever with the projector yet. I will advise the board if I cannot fix the problem (haven't really tried yet).

Probably projecting about 92" from about 13' back - set up on an end table, using about 50% vertical lens shift and 15% horizontal. No VB, noise or misalignment noted. Fan exhauts warm air, but nothing to get exited about. And since this is Canada in the winter, any warm air is good air. Certianly not enough to cook any back-bacon, eh!. Fan is super quiet. My forced air heating system is noisier than the projector.

I haven't fooled around with my new toys yet for 2 reasons:
. Too busy at work
. Showed the wife the picture from the Panny 2 days ago and she said 'Well, let's watch a movie'. So I plopped in 'The Perfect Storm' turned down the lights and away we went. Great picture right out of the box: everything is set at 'flat' on Cinema 1 from the factory (no calibration of any sort), projecting on a 4x8 peice of white melamine from Home Depot. It can't get any worse than this. At one point during the movie I ask my significant other if she wanted some refreshments & she answered 'don't bug me - I am so into the movie'. She said after the movie: 'No need to go to the Cineplex anymore: your picture is better, your sound is better. and you will stop the movie if I need to go to pee.

She even likes it better than the $16,000 (Cdn) 61' plasma that we saw at the dealers'.

As to the whole 'sharpness issue' - let me tell you, I think that it depends on the source material: I watched 'Crossroads' the Eric Clapton & Co. guitar fest DVD. I must say that the resolution on the 'performer scenes' looked ok, but when they showed closeups of the young, well-endowed and very tightly atired young female members of the audience - the resolution was positively Blu-Ray like. Any one else notice this?

So, all is well in my little corner of projector land. For people with the necessary amount of and right space, this may be a tipping point. Really great price, great (BIG) picture, relatively easy to set up, quiet, small & flexible to position.

Maybe these little digital projectors have come of age.

The next few years should be really fun for us consumers.

CT_Wiebe

11-30-05, 09:01 PM

You guys are getting tangled up in your underwear :eek:. Your f-stop discussions are relative to fixed lenses. With the AE900 (and Z4, etc.) we are dealing with a zoom lens! See this quote from jstein’s link (Basic Optics 101 :cool: ):

Well, because the f/stop is a ratio of the focal length to diameter, our 50mm lens at f/2.8 would have a diameter of 50/2.8 = 17.86mm. The area of the circle thus formed would be π X (17.86/2)2, or 250.5 square mm.
With a zoom lens, the focal length increases as the lens is zoomed out and the “diameter” of the image deceases (focal length/diameter = f-number). If there were no re-focusing, then there would be no change in brightness because, with a simple zoom lens, the relation between focal length and image “diameter” does not change. Unfortunately, we also have to re-focus. This is where the brightness change comes in, since re-focusing also changes the effective focal length :rolleyes:.

When Panasonic says that the effective f-stop changes from 1.9 to 3.1 (minimum zoom to maximum zoom), then they’re saying that the effective brightness of a focused image changes by 1.63 (= 3.1/1.9) f-stops (about 38% brightness change) over their full zoom range.

Both presenter and tvted are correct :D. The problem is that all of the other arguments are only considering fixed focal length lenses, not variable ones :p.

Example: a low cost zoom lens for a camera (Nikon: $300) with a 2.86 zoom ratio has an f-stop change of 1.4 (f/4 @ 70 mm to f/5.6 @ 200 mm). Nikon wants about $1500 for a similar lens that changes by a factor of 1.24 (f/4.5 to f/5.6) from wide to max zoom.

So an f-stop change of 1.63 in light output for a 2:1 zoom ratio is actually very good considering the price of the AE900.

Aussie Bob

11-30-05, 09:29 PM

Hey, CT_Wiebe!

I was right, too! My result was 37.5% as bright at narrowest zoom, WITH BETTER EXAMPLES.

I'm hurt....sniff...

If you tell me the following is a good idea, then I'll cheer up immediately.

BRIGHT IDEA: As the lamps lose about 30% in brightness or more over their lifetime, why install the PJ on a sliding rail to compensate as time goes by?

I even made a pun ("BRIGHT IDEA")

rwestley

11-30-05, 09:32 PM

CT_Wiebe

11-30-05, 09:33 PM

Aussie Bob -- Sorry mate, I didn't mean to exclude you :eek:!

I'm guilty of not reading all of the posts regarding the brightness vs. zoom argument.

Aussie Bob

11-30-05, 09:34 PM

It's nice to be included. You must be a very inclusive person, CT.

Cheers,

Greg Matty

11-30-05, 10:57 PM

Example: a low cost zoom lens for a camera (Nikon: $300) with a 2.86 zoom ratio has an f-stop change of 1.4 (f/4 @ 70 mm to f/5.6 @ 200 mm). Nikon wants about $1500 for a similar lens that changes by a factor of 1.24 (f/4.5 to f/5.6) from wide to max zoom.
.

I think you mean $1,500 for a lens that goes from 70-200mm but stays at f2.8. That is the only lens Nikon makes that sells for $1,500 in that focal range.

http://www.nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5

They have a 70-210 for about $150, is that what you meant?

FWIW.

Greg

jstein

11-30-05, 11:15 PM

CTW, I think that most of us are in violent aggreement. Those explaining f-stops in terms of aperture were expaining the implications of the spec. Those explaining f-stops in terms of focal length were partially explaining the reason why the aperature changes across the zoom range.

Personally, I found the "image 'diameter'" analogy clear as mud, but that might just be me. The reason I lean towards explaining the meaning of the spec rather than the reason why the spec varies across the zoom range is that the latter doesn't quite explain the spec. The AE900 has a 2X zoom range. In a variable f-stop design, f-stop is not directly proportional to focal length. If it were, a 2X zoom lense such as on the AE900 would have an f-stop range from n to 2n, but the AE900 lense has an f-stop range of n to 1.63n.

Just fidgeting while I await the arrival of my AE900 tomorrow (assuming that the winter storm watch doesn't pan out too badly).

jumpy27

12-01-05, 05:40 AM

You guys are getting tangled up in your underwear :eek:. Your f-stop discussions are relative to fixed lenses. With the AE900 (and Z4, etc.) we are dealing with a zoom lens! See this quote from jstein’s link (Basic Optics 101 :cool: ):

With a zoom lens, the focal length increases as the lens is zoomed out and the “diameter” of the image deceases (focal length/diameter = f-number). If there were no re-focusing, then there would be no change in brightness because, with a simple zoom lens, the relation between focal length and image “diameter” does not change. Unfortunately, we also have to re-focus. This is where the brightness change comes in, since re-focusing also changes the effective focal length :rolleyes:.

When Panasonic says that the effective f-stop changes from 1.9 to 3.1 (minimum zoom to maximum zoom), then they’re saying that the effective brightness of a focused image changes by 1.63 (= 3.1/1.9) f-stops (about 38% brightness change) over their full zoom range.

Both presenter and tvted are correct :D. The problem is that all of the other arguments are only considering fixed focal length lenses, not variable ones :p.

Example: a low cost zoom lens for a camera (Nikon: $300) with a 2.86 zoom ratio has an f-stop change of 1.4 (f/4 @ 70 mm to f/5.6 @ 200 mm). Nikon wants about $1500 for a similar lens that changes by a factor of 1.24 (f/4.5 to f/5.6) from wide to max zoom.

So an f-stop change of 1.63 in light output for a 2:1 zoom ratio is actually very good considering the price of the AE900.

So are you saying that there is a 38% brightness difference, or are you saying that the lowest brightness is only 1/3 (or 38%) of the greatest brightness?

{Godlightsoul}

12-01-05, 07:09 AM

and CT, is the brightness loss linear?

thanks

simpsonb

12-01-05, 08:13 AM

eliocon

12-01-05, 08:18 AM

There has been much discussion of the noise and sharpness issue on the A900. What I find interesting is that if the source is good the picture is very good with little noise. Several posters including myself have pointed this out. Others have correctly stated that with poor sources video noise does show up. It goes back to the computer saying "garbage in garbage out." If we can agree that a good source produces an excellent picture might the problem be related to the source? Is is possible that the Panasonic presents what in available from the source and that we are placing the blame for the noise in the wrong place. I do know that on a poor tv the noise is often masked by lack of sharpness and other problems. Could it be that the Panasonic is good enough to not mask poor source material? I am raising these questions for consideration and would like to hear the opinions of others.
I have to agree with you. This projector really puts to the test any source material you pump into it. WHen a DVD is mastered well it's an amazing thing to behold on the projector. The Superbit Underworld is as crisp as any HD material I've seen. Movies that are mastered from HD sources also seem to have a crispness that's lacking from you standard "Digitally Mastered" fare. Godzilla vs. The Smog Monster looks twice as sharp and more filmlike than the first collectors edition of Sound Of Music. Would'a figured Fox would have paid better attention to this title. I've run the gamut of disc manufacturers and distributers through my projector and the best results haven't always come from the major companies. Anchor Bay's pressing of Suspiria is a great reference disc for this projector (if you can stand the gore and violence). Argento's almost fetishistic use of primary colors to enhance a scene really shines. The color looks painted on the screen. And there are enough dark scenes with one bright spot in it to really test the iris. And the Panasonic performs masterly.

Conversely, Jurassic Park looks AWFUL. Universal should be ashamed of themselves. The picture is muddy with edge enhancement all over the place. This one needs a re-pressing badly.

Anyhow, that's my spiel. Have a good one folks.

Elio

tvted

12-01-05, 08:30 AM

Well I did say I would shut up but I lied.

Claus,
I have to disagree with the percentage loss you cite.

An F-stop affects transmission as follow:
......1/32, 1/16, 1/8, 1/4, 1, 2, 4, 8........
Assuming 1 is the starting pointing notice that each stop is a successive halving or doubling of the previous position.

Given that the lens on the Panasonic is over 1 stop then there would be #greater than 50% loss - about 63% thereabouts (37 remaining) which is consistent with Aussie Bob's measurements, I believe,(and mine when I first set my box up btw).

I could go though the math but I bet that would confuse the issue. It works something like this 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 or 50% of 50% of 50% ad infinitum. It never reduces to 0 but reaches a point of diminishing returns.

jstein I am sorry but "diameter" is not an "analogy" but part of the formula for calculating light transmission in a lens - which is what F-Stop is.

The numbers have been standardized as such:
1 - 1.4 - 2 - 2.8 - 4 - 5.6 - 8 - 11 - 16 - 22 - 32
Each step is an F-stop. My comment was in reference to the numbers not having a linear relationship - because of the way it is calculated.

From http://www.uscoles.com/fstop.htm which is a readable explanation:

On the face of it, going from f/4 to f/5.6 doesn't sound like halving the amount of light. What's more, 5.6 is a larger number and sounds like it ought to be more light, not less. Neither does f/4 to f/2.8 sound like doubling the amount of light. In fact, each of the numbers in this sequence is a halving/doubling of the amount of light from its immediate neighbours, just like the shutter speed settings are. Not only that, but it makes sense, as I shall show below.

For those thinking they might like to clarify some of their thoughts without us yammering in their eyes with turgid foggy prose:

Wikepedia has a good explanation with a diagram that compares the various sizes which makes the impact obvious http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number

The thing I'm getting at is that the lens on the Panasonic decreases light by *more* than 1 stop (as noted) or more than 50% - this is *not* surprising. All zoom lenses suffer this fate. Even the Ruby's lens is not constant aperture.

Guess I'm done now. :cool:
Bet you're happy (not you Claus ;) - a pleasure to see cross your message path once again)

Anyone want to discuss depth of field and whether MPEG exaggerates it? :eek:
ted

tvted

12-01-05, 08:33 AM

and CT, is the brightness loss linear?

thanks

It halves or doubles from your start point so no, it is exponential . My previous rewrite of War and Peace provided links.

ted

DimDragon

12-01-05, 08:50 AM

Hello, I'm completely new to projector world and now I'm considering getting AE900U as my first one. I'm a computer geek and all my A/V setup is based over the PC. Currently my setup is GF 7800 video card with dual DVI output and Dell 2405FPW monitor with Yamaha RX1400 AVR handling all sound. My questions are as follows :

- what kind of connection is best to be used between video card and projector ? I will need a long cable in anycase at least 6 m in length so it is either good quality DVI to HDMI cable going into HDMI port of projector or DVI - DVI cable with DVI to RBG adapter supplied with the video card going into PC IN port of projector.
- I have read posts here about HDMI port of previous model AE700 which indicated some cropping is done. Is this still valid for AE900 and is there any feeling that AE900 is not suited for HTPC?
- GF 7800 have build-in encoder to HDTV and HDTV out, I'm pretty new at this and don't understand in which cases I can use this along with AE900U ? Is this means that I can have non HDTV sources like SD TV on my tuner or DVDs converted to HDTV by my card ? What settings of video card can I use to help improve HDTV signal feed to projector?

Please excuse me if some of those questions seem stupid to most of you and I'll really appreciate any feedback to help me with this. Thx in advance.

Regards Dimitar

tvted

12-01-05, 08:59 AM

Hello, I'm completely new to projector world and now I'm considering getting AE900U as my first one. I'm a computer geek and all my A/V setup is based over the PC. Currently my setup is GF 7800 video card with dual DVI output and Dell 2405FPW monitor with Yamaha RX1400 AVR handling all sound. My questions are as follows :

- what kind of connection is best to be used between video card and projector ? I will need a long cable in anycase at least 6 m in length so it is either good quality DVI to HDMI cable going into HDMI port of projector or DVI - DVI cable with DVI to RBG adapter supplied with the video card going into PC IN port of projector.

Regards Dimitar

I am using a 7 meter RAM (AVS sponsor) HDMI cable with an HDMI to DVI adapter on a 700 with good results. I chose the HDMI over DVI because HDMI seems to be the way it is going though currently more expensive.

Will this be your first use of HTPC? The HTPC forum is very active and helpful. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=&f=26

ted

rwestley

12-01-05, 09:04 AM

goatsncows

12-01-05, 09:50 AM

Dimitar I will try to answer some of your questions.

1. I would use a DVI to HDMI connector. (Monoprice has low cost 25' connectors that work)
2. Set you card to up for the resolution you need 720p. Use the PC settings on the remote and test the connection. The 900 is a true 710p projector.
3. With the 900 you can get 1x1 mapping by turning the overscan off.

My first post! :) Let me start by humbly confessing my ingnorance: I have hardly got a clue as to what you just said. I ordered a Panny 900 from Apex and it will arrive Monday. It is my first projector and I would like to get it up and runnig quickly (Need to justify the 2 grand cost to my wife :D ). My computer has a Geforce 6800gt with DVI output and I have a DVI cable that came with my monitor. Question: When I buy the DVI to HDMI adapter are they all the same or do I need to be concerned with gender issues?

Thanks guys and gals.

rwestley

12-01-05, 10:41 AM

Hi again,

This should be the cable that you need. The Gforce 7800 is a fine video card but it does not have a tuner. You did not state if you plan to watch HDTV. For playing DVD disks you will not have true HD but at 720p. the picture should look great. I would read the instructions that came with the video card to see what resolutions you should set it at to work with the Ae900. I know this card will work. The other question I have is how you plan to get the audio output to the reciever. I don't know if you have a coax or optical output on the PC. I have not used a media center with the AE900 but I know others have with great success. I am using an Oppo upscailing player because I can get similar results and for me it is easier. You could also use the cable with the Oppo DVD player.

Cable Link

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10231&cs_id=1023101&p_id=2121&seq=1&format=2&style=

tvted

12-01-05, 10:51 AM

My first post! :) Let me start by humbly confessing my ingnorance: I have hardly got a clue as to what you just said. I ordered a Panny 900 from Apex and it will arrive Monday. It is my first projector and I would like to get it up and runnig quickly (Need to justify the 2 grand cost to my wife :D ). My computer has a Geforce 6800gt with DVI output and I have a DVI cable that came with my monitor. Question: When I buy the DVI to HDMI adapter are they all the same or do I need to be concerned with gender issues?

Thanks guys and gals.
Welcome aboard - avoid frequent usage if you value your time, family and sanity. ;)

Gender has to be considered.
I would go M to M on the HDMI and adapt accordingly.

Some words for HTPC use - ffdshow and DScaler5. In your case since you've a 6800GT - I assume with NVidea codecs - look into TheatreTek 2.2 + ffdshow and use the latest Nvidea codecs.

Answers can be found in the HTPC forum om AVS.

ted

DimDragon

12-01-05, 11:54 AM

Hello again and thx for the quick replies.

rwsetley : I hope this HDMI issue is really solved in AE900 as you stated so it will be no problem then :-) To answer your questions - first I must say I'm from Europe and have no HD broadcast available as TV signal, so I'm using my TV tuner card getting SD signal, so I was wondering how will 7800 convert this to 720p and will this look ok at 4:3 ratio on this projector but I guess indeed have to look into spec on the card to fugure this out. On the sound setup I'm using Creative ZS card and have receiver connected to it both analog with 3 RCA cabels and digitally with one mono to SPDIF cable. For games ang computer files ( avi ) I use analog out using receiver as amplifier only since SB card already decodes audio stream and for DVDs I use SPDIF passthrough and let receiver handle the decoding. Must say I'm very much satisfied with this setup and my 7+1 speakers produce amazings surround output both from DVDs and HDTV sources.

tvted : Thx for the tip on HTPC forum. I have found some nice posts in there !

Thx again to everyone I think I'll get AE900U as a Christmas gift to myself :)

Regards Dim

mdbones

12-01-05, 11:56 AM

Is it possible instead of mounting the 900 inverted with a ceiling mount, sit it on a shelf (right side up) that is about a foot from the ceiling? I don't want to use the lens shift too much if at all.

My ONLY mounting option is a "close to ceiling" mount and I was just wondering if this was an option since I have a wall at this location and would save on the mount expense.

I was actually on the phone with the salesman I have been dealing with at VA last night and he suggested that install for me. Now I am trying to figure out how, I am not sure of is if the shelf needs to be at a downward angle similar to the ceiling mount or not.

simpsonb

12-01-05, 12:05 PM

I was actually on the phone with the salesman I have been dealing with at VA last night and he suggested that install for me. Now I am trying to figure out how, I am not sure of is if the shelf needs to be at a downward angle similar to the ceiling mount or not.

He didn't give you any specifics?

From the manual it looks like you would have to use the vertical lense shift (almost all of it) which would degrade the PQ. Inverting the PJ would solve it with the image flipped but then you are setting it on it's top, up side down which is not good.

I imagine sitting it on a angle would work but the you would get key-stoning which is also bad. Also, Panasonic does not recommend tiping more thatn 30 degrees.

I've been reading more on this and it seems the only option is to invert it with a ceiling mount :-( unless anyone elso has an creative ideas that will work with the 900.

rboster

12-01-05, 12:33 PM

I thought some of you might enjoy this discussion in another thread about calibration:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6634665#post6634665

HTX^2steve

12-01-05, 02:27 PM

Projector Mount ($40) - Bolted a flange in the joists up in the ceiling to a threaded pipe to another flange to a clear plastic sheet with rubber washers that the PJ is mounted to.

This is a pic of my mount. Take a picture of where you are going to mount yours but if you can get into the attic the way that I did works great!

Steve.

simpsonb

12-01-05, 02:36 PM

That looks good. Question, are there screws (and holes) on the projector to mount the plate too? Are they the feet of the projector? Maybe a picture with more detail of the plate mount if you can get one.

Also, what's your setup for throw, PJ height, screen diag and make, height of screen from the floor, and vertical lense shift? From the picture it looks like it's shifted quite a bit. How does this affect the PQ?

Thanks and great work!

mdbones

12-01-05, 03:07 PM

Very nice job on your mount... Unfortunately the attic isn't an option for me but you have definately given me an idea... :rolleyes:

Key-stoning???? uhhhh I'll look that one up...I am very new to the projector world and all the "lingo". Thanks though, I guess it's back to the drawing board...I'd hate to buy the mount if I could avoid it. And no he didn't give me any specifics...Just the generic "it's a gret projector with a lot of adjustments you'll be happy" lines. To be fair though I didn't really know what to ask either.

HTX^2steve

12-01-05, 03:08 PM

hahahaha that's what you get for taking a break from installing my VGA and HDMI cables and checking the forum...BUT hell I wouldn't be where I would be if it weren't for all of you :)

Now don't mind the VGA cable slumped over the pj, I had to do a dry test and I love it just with the VGA playing those WMV-HD files and listening to music and watching the colorful visualizer bouncing to the music!

Ok, to your questions...

Are there screws (and holes) on the projector to mount the plate too?

Yes...4mm which I bought at Home Depot.

Are they the feet of the projector?

No (look at pic)

Maybe a picture with more detail of the plate mount if you can get one.

Up on the ladder I go...Done.

Also, what's your setup for throw, PJ height, screen diag and height of screen from the floor, and vertical lense shift?

Ok...Look for my posts with the advanced search feature and you can see my review of the 900 when I first came online. But from what I remember...throw is 9 feet from lens to screen. PJ height is around 8 feet (10 foot ceilings). Screen diag is 92" and from the floor is 52". With regards to the vert lens shift well I could have bought a longer pipe and mounted the pj further down towards the center of the screen but I would then need to have gotten longer cables so I went with the lens shift and from the picture you can see that I am about 20% which does cause a bit of a bow on the bottom of the picture but with masking can level it out. But really I am at the point where I don't care and nobody else really pays much attention to it so screw it.

Just love watching those bigger than life movies!

Steve.

Aussie Bob

12-01-05, 03:17 PM

"So are you saying that there is a 38% brightness difference, or are you saying that the lowest brightness is only 1/3 (or 38%) of the greatest brightness? " - Jumpy27

The latter.

A scenario: Say you have a 100" fixed-size screen. Further, say due to your room architecture and layout, you can only position your PJ in one of two positions to fill this screen - at a close distance where you have to use maximum wide zoom, or further away where you have to use maximum narrow zoom to achieve a 100" wide image.

If you position the PJ at the longer distance - where you have to use maximum narrow zoom - the 100" wide picture will be 37.5% of the brightness of the 100" picture at the closer location: just over a third as bright.

So, when deciding on where to physically locate your PJ, get it as close to the screen as possible if brightness is a prime concern.

P.S. There are some who say the max wide zoom's image geometry is worse than max narrow zoom. Sorta true, but from my experience,it's not that bad. You get used to it after about five minutes: minimized if you can go easy on the offset joystick.

P.P.S. Seems to me that seeing as the brightness differential between max wide and max narrow is so great, a 2:1 optical reducer adapter (with an f-stop of less than f/1.9) would be an interesting invention. You could zoom out to max wide at a long distance and then reduce the picture size with your Reduce-O-Matic adapter. That way your long throw picture would be as bright as your short throw picture, except for a few per cent loss due to internal reflection in the adapter. You'd effectively be almost tripling the brightness performance of the long throw position. Handy...

Don't ISCO make something like this? If so, you'd probably have to sell the kids to afford one.

Michael A

12-01-05, 03:35 PM

I'm about to purchase the Panny...

The question I have is that I need to mount it on a shelf at the back of the room - this would be at 22 feet from the screen. I was hoping to get a 120" wide image (wide, not diagonal) and this would be a 2:35 aspect ratio screen. Anyone comment on whether this is okay with the Panny? Would I be using too much zoom? Would you use a smaller size screen? If so, which size?

Thanks in advance...
~hemster

Hemster, my room is 22.5 ft long and the distance from lens to screen 21.5 ft. I've mounted mine on a shelf on the back wall approximately 7ft off the floor. I'm glad that I didn't have a chance to study the f stop vs. zoom vs. distance issue or it probably would have scared me out of buying the AE900. I've had it two weeks and am currently projecting on the opposite wall which is a medium grey color. It looks great. I have Da Lite samples up and the gain certainly lightens up the bright areas but it's fine right on the wall. Da Lite High Contrast Da Mat is much darker in color than my wall; High Contrast Cinema Vision is lighter. I originally had 96" wide in mind but after about 12 hours of viewing various media 114" is about perfect with a viewing distance of 11-12 ft, which is midway of the room---and obviously in violation of the 1.5 X screen width rule. However, I and my guests to date enjoy viewing at this distance. There is obviously still plenty of room in the zoom to go much larger and I have done so and the screen is still adequately bright in my opinion. The limiting factor is loss of detail/obvious pixelation at this viewing distance. I think seating arrangements and distance, not brightness, will be your limiting factor. BTW, I don't notice much difference between high/low lamp power on my wall with my arrangement. It's there but not, to my eyes, a major difference. Also BTW, no VB, SBE, convergence issues, nada---(KNOCK ON WOOD!!!). Colors look great, works super right out of the box. My first PJ, but I am trying to be as observant of technical issues as my fried brain cells allow.

Regards,

Michael Arvanetakis
Cypress, Texas

tvted

12-01-05, 03:38 PM

Michael A

12-01-05, 04:30 PM

BTW, I have a dedicated media room with no windows.

Regards,

Michael Arvanetakis
Cypress, Tx

Aussie Bob

12-01-05, 07:09 PM

Hemster, I'm running a 2.35:1 120" screen too, from 15 and a half feet and I have problems with brightness. At 22.5 feet, your image will only be 60% as bright as mine. I don't know how you could stand it. Try for closer.

Jack Gilvey

12-01-05, 07:21 PM

I did a really simple masking setup yesterday with cheap "black velvet" drapes, rods, and valances for my constant-height setup. About $60 all together. Here's the screen (2.35:1, ~7' viewable width + border) with drapes drawn in for 16:9:

http://home.comcast.net/~tgilvey/1.85.JPG

And pulled out for 2.35:

http://home.comcast.net/~tgilvey/2.35.JPG

Various bad screenshots:

http://home.comcast.net/~tgilvey/HD.JPG
http://home.comcast.net/~tgilvey/ROTK.JPG
http://home.comcast.net/~tgilvey/Starship.JPG

HTX^2steve

12-01-05, 07:32 PM

Sweet HT room Jack! Nice Job.

Steve.

P.S. I used to live in West Caldwell back in the day...good to see Verona on the fourm!

Jack Gilvey

12-01-05, 07:57 PM

Cool! Thanks!

t4uecker

12-01-05, 09:17 PM

hi there-

i'm about to get my ae900 next week and had a question about the best mode to set it on. i read ckl's review of the projector in which he suggests using the dynamic setting coupled with an 81C filter to get the best black levels and contrast. is that the best way to go or are people finding that other settings work equally well (or better)? wanted to know before ordering a filter. thanks,

tu

LENNY 2112

12-01-05, 09:19 PM

nataraj

12-01-05, 11:27 PM

Question 2
The top of my screen is 20" from the ceiling, can I mount the Panny 28" from the ceiling at 16' throw?

Yes. You would have to use a bit of vertical shift but it should have no effect on picture quality.

hemster

12-02-05, 12:05 AM

Thanks, Michael Arvanetakis and Aussie Bob..

I have now definitely decided on the AE900 and plan to create a 2:35 setup with a horizontal lens and a scaler/HTPC. Now evaluating scaler vs. HTPCs.. boy is that a confusing world!

~hemster

eliocon

12-02-05, 08:31 AM

Confirmation of Room setup!

I May buy the Panny before the end of the year (if Santa bonus is good). My theater is 17 feet deep and I have a 92" diag. Draper screen. I can shelf mount it on the back wall but it will be 2-3' above the rear couch and 2 feet below the ceiling.

Question 1
The rear couch backs against the wall will the noise level be a problem with this projector?
See my theater under construction
http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=7592806&uid=3684429&members=1

Question 2
The top of my screen is 20" from the ceiling, can I mount the Panny 28" from the ceiling at 16' throw?

Question 3
My H31 (850 lumens) is bright enough at 12' throw, will the Panny be bright enough at 16'

Thanks all.

PS. Nice pics Jack, hope to see more pics from all the users in this thread!
Question #1: Noise will not be a problem. My projector sits a foot over my head on a ceiling mount and I can never hear it with the lamp in low mode. With the lamp in hi mode I can sometimes hear it but it's still very quiet and since hi mode isn't all that much brighter I never use it.

Question 2: Yes

Question 3: Should be. Depends on how dark the room is and what kind of screen you have but it should be plenty bright enough.

Elio

simpsonb

12-02-05, 10:20 AM

Just so I understand, if you mount the projector inverted on the ceiling and the center of the lens is at the same height as the top of the screen, are you going to use any vertical lens shift? I thought there was a predertmined projection angle with this projector and the lens shift was used to offset this if needed.

My plan is to place the PJ lens and top of the 106" screen at 80" with a throw of 14.5'. Would I be using much of the shift with this setup?

LENNY 2112

12-02-05, 10:27 AM

Thanks nataraj and Elio!

MikeSRC

12-02-05, 11:06 AM

Just so I understand, if you mount the projector inverted on the ceiling and the center of the lens is at the same height as the top of the screen, are you going to use any vertical lens shift?

Yes, you will use most of it. The "0" position is with the lens in the middle of the screen vertically. This applies whether it's ceiling mounted or table mounted.

My plan is to place the PJ lens and top of the 106" screen at 80" with a throw of 14.5'. Would I be using much of the shift with this setup?

Yes, 79% of the vertical lens shift. Full shift would put you 13% of the screen height above the top of the screen. There a diagram I posted earlier in this thread, but you'd have to search for it as it's buried.

simpsonb

12-02-05, 11:18 AM

So can I assume that most people are using the majority or some of the lens shift with ceiling mounts? My sitting ares is directly under the PJ at 14.5' with a window directly behind that in the wall (with blackout blinds). So if I bring the PJ down more it will be in the window area.

If having the lens shift at 73%, will that affect the PQ. Would it be better to bring it down more than that?

How do projectors that don't have a lens shift set up with a ceiling installation?

Thanks

Capek

12-02-05, 11:35 AM

Before my projector malfunctioned (after 6 days:( ), I had it on a table in the back of the room while I waited for my ceiling mount to arrive. I used 100% of the vertical lense shift to get the image above the seating in front of the table, so that the bottom of the image was in line with the middle of the lense, and I noticed zero image distortion. I saw zero convergence issues in the picture or the text of subtitles, although I never bothered to actually put my nose to the screen to see if any was there at all. But sitting 12' back from an 120" diagonal image, and messing with cables about 5' from the screen, I saw none.

I just hope my replacement projector is as problem free. :(

jcdestiny

12-02-05, 12:15 PM

Hi all,
I'm a bit of a newbie with projectors, my equipment is a AE900 and a Denon 1920 DVD player. I'm checking out some DVD's, like the "Incredibles" with 1.85 aspect ratio. I was expecting to see just small gray bars at the top and bottom of my screen, which would indicate the correct 1.85 aspect ratio. When the projector is set up for 720 resolution using the HDMI input and the DVD player is set up for a monitor with 720 widescreen format and the DVD is set to output 720, I get an image that shows an aspect ratio of about 2.2 with large bars on the top and bottom. I played with all the settings I can find but I can't seem to get a 1.85 aspect ratio. The only way to get lower than a 2.2 ratio is for me to output 480 from the DVD player and put the AE900 in zoom mode, which fills the 16:9 screen, but I believe crops some of the picture.
What's the proper setup for the popular 1.85 aspect ratio???
Any help would be appreciated!

Best regards,
Joe

bukiwhitey

12-02-05, 12:23 PM

Joe,

All Scope films i.e. 2.35:1 are going to have Bars on the top and bottom of a 16x9 screen. There is no way to eliminate this with out using an anamorphic lens.

David

MikeSRC

12-02-05, 12:26 PM

If having the lens shift at 73%, will that affect the PQ. Would it be better to bring it down more than that?

I recommend keeping the projector lens within the height limits of the screen. As you approach the limits of the lens shift, there are some misconvergence issues and a bowing of the bottom of the picture. This is all discussed earlier in this thread, so recommend to anyone that they search the thread for answers to many of the questions that have been posted recently.

How do projectors that don't have a lens shift set up with a ceiling installation?
Thanks

Most projectors without lens shift have an offset from the lens to the top of the screen of a foot or more. Depending on the installation, you can always tilt the projector and use keystoning as well.

MikeSRC

12-02-05, 12:29 PM

simpsonb

12-02-05, 12:38 PM

Thanks Mike, I'll probably bring the projector down a bit from the top of the screen to help out the lens shift. Hopefully I won't be using much more than 50% of the shift.

tvted

12-02-05, 12:45 PM

Hi all,
What's the proper setup for the popular 1.85 aspect ratio???
Any help would be appreciated! Best regards, Joe

The Incredibles is in fact 2.35 not 1.85 so those big black bars you see are correct. See IMDB, or believe me since I own it ;).

Source (DVD) player should be set for 16:9 display as the 900 is 16:9.

I would leave all sources as connected to a 16:9 display and use the PJ's aspect control to control ratio.

The 900 ideally should be set to AUTO for all Original Aspect Ratio (OAR) DD's unless it is non-anamorphic in which case you should use the ZOOM mode on the PJ.

If you wish to go beyond this you would want to look into scalers and anamorphic lenses. See the wide guys forum for more details if interested http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=117

ted

Dubauskas

12-02-05, 05:55 PM

drj2000 ,
That is the EXACT thing that mine is doing. I sent pics to my companies tech support and they told me somethings wrong and they want to replace the unit. It has something to do with the alignment of the lcd panels or something along those lines.

So is mine.

chuckr

12-02-05, 07:46 PM

jumpy27

12-02-05, 09:00 PM

I just talked to a salesman who told me that the Hitachi TX200 blows away the AE900. In fact he said the AE900 looked horrible in comparison. He said it was MUCH brighter and sharper. Only when I found out that he was color blind and saw no colors at all did I finally dismiss his opinion. They only did a quick comparison days earlier and did not have it set up permanently for me to compare them for myself.

My question is, would being color blind affect how projectors look to this guy? It must, because there is not the huge difference in picture quality between the AE900 and the TX200 like he was describing (from what I have gleaned from this forum).

mdbones

12-02-05, 10:45 PM

This is all discussed earlier in this thread, so recommend to anyone that they search the thread for answers to many of the questions that have been posted recently.

Search this thread! Are you nutz? A person could be lost for weeks!!!:D

Actually I have read the whole thing, much to my employer's chagrin... I still have a question though. If you are going to use vertical lens shift if shelf mounted high(right side up) or ceiling mounted (inverted) is there an advantage to one over the other. I am already sold on the unit and will be ordering Monday I am just trying to figure where the heck I am going to put it...

Raddest

12-03-05, 02:13 AM

I have seen post where users have mounted their machines upside down. The ceiling bracket I got with my 900 will put it upside down also. Fine to acess the buttons and such.
Question is, where is the menu control to flip the picture?
I scanned the manual but couldnt find a reference to it.

I appreciate yur help, if possible
Ron

jumpy27

12-03-05, 04:07 AM

MikeSRC

12-03-05, 11:11 AM

Search this thread! Are you nutz? A person could be lost for weeks!!!:D

It was worth a shot. :D

Actually I have read the whole thing, much to my employer's chagrin... I still have a question though. If you are going to use vertical lens shift if shelf mounted high(right side up) or ceiling mounted (inverted) is there an advantage to one over the other. I am already sold on the unit and will be ordering Monday I am just trying to figure where the heck I am going to put it...

I've tried it both ways in the same location and it's the same either way. Since you're starting at the center of the screen and can go the same distance both ways, there's no difference.

MikeSRC

12-03-05, 11:15 AM

Is anyone else seeing a green glow in the corners of their AE-900?

I'm attaching a picture of the projector showing an all black image, driven by
a HTPC via VGA input at the native resolution. Is this leakage from the light
engine? Is it normal, or is this excessive?

No, that's not normal. First, try another source and input (if you're able) to see if it's source-related. Also, what picture mode are you using? (Video, Normal etc.) Try a different one (like Cinema 1) and see if that removes the color. If you still get that color with eveything, return the projector.

Croc

12-03-05, 01:10 PM

did some calibrations this weekend...........

this is an image of Normal mode after contrast+brightness calibration was done using Avia:
http://photofile.ru/full_image.php?id=21630908

and this is after 30 minutes with progressive labs sensor on top of previous calibrations:
http://photofile.ru/full_image.php?id=21630909

my conclusion - even thougt 900 looks good out of the box - a calibrations is still necessary :)

MikeSRC

12-03-05, 03:02 PM

rsmith4321

12-03-05, 03:32 PM

Has anyone here done a shootout of the 900 vs Z4, I really can't decide which one to get. The 900 is a bit cheaper, but the Z4 has a 3 year warranty. Also does anyone know what size the screws are, I'm building my own mount like I did for the 4805. Are the screws the same? Also, if full lens shift is only 13% above the top of the screen, I will probably be using all of it. Is there any image loss due to this? I know a normal PJ such as the 4805 has about this projectors maximum lens shift built in. Thanks for the info.

spyder696969

12-03-05, 03:53 PM

Search this thread! Are you nutz? A person could be lost for weeks!!!:D
HA HA HA! Go try the Infocus 4805 thread if you think this one's too big! ;)

Capek

12-03-05, 04:11 PM

oth

12-03-05, 04:41 PM

Well add me to the list of satisfied 900 users. I received mine yesterday and did a really quick setup. I placed it carefully on top of two printer paper carton boxes twelve feet back from a typical textured white wall which happens to be in our seldom used living room. Next I connected a Yamaha DVD player component outputs to the projector, stereo to amplifier and fired it up.

Absolutely gorgeous!

The last time I considered a projector was an early series Sharp and rather than a screen door effect was more like chicken wire in those days. :-)

After watching a few movies and but not having any test equipment other than Avia DVD I proceeded with a quick test patterns check. Using factory default configuration "Normal" mode I found it to exceed my wildest expectations. Other that perhaps running the lamp on low and backing off on red a tad this project is just "right on". I thought our rear projection Pioneer SD533 was reasonably good but I find the 900 better and at twice the diagonal 55 vs 110 that's got to be impressive.

The only down side is lighting control necessary to optimize the experience. We have two 8x5 windows to deal with and all white ceilings, walls and carpet. On the bright side we don't need a room light. We will have to deal with that later when we decide on a screen. But, for the short term it's just nice to have a big screen experience again with full Dolby Digital 5.1.

As for our normal viewing will continue to use the family RPTV's for just about everything else.

Enjoy..

oth

rsmith4321

12-03-05, 05:06 PM

I used 100% of the vertical lense shift, with zero horizontal shift, and noticed zero convergence issues or image degradation, even a couple feet from the screen. YMMV though. The screw hole size for the ae900 is M4x16mm.

Am I correct this is the same screw as the 4805, so I can use the ones I've got.? That's nice. Thanks.

Jack Gilvey

12-03-05, 05:19 PM

Am I correct this is the same screw as the 4805, so I can use the ones I've got.?
Yup, same thing. Not sure on length, careful how deep you go.

simpsonb

12-03-05, 06:36 PM

I just ordered the Panasonic AE900U online for a great deal, 2 yr. warranty, ceiling mount and DVI-D to HDMI cable. I can't wait to get it and share my experience. Thanks to everyone on the forum for the input and guidance in my decision, it's tough to make this kind of purchase without actually seeing a demo (which is impossible in most areas). I took a leap of faith and based on others opinions I won't be dissapointed I'm sure. I'll be checking into the forum for tweaks and setup info after it arrives. I'll post some pictures of my theater when it's done over Christmas break.

Next purchase, the screen. I'm going to wait until I get the PJ and determine a comfortable size and watch it on a painted wall (flat light grey) for now. Then I'm going to order a Stewart Firehawk, probably 106". I'm getitng the Firewawk becasue this will be the first and last screen I buy for quite a while and I don't want any issues with it. And I know I'll be happy with it.

Happy day! :)

TAllen01

12-03-05, 06:58 PM

Also add me to the list of satisfied AE900 users. Awesome pic. Using it with a DIY screen (97.5") of melamine with a velvet border, in a light controlled room.

Very pleased with the results. Happy to send screen shots if anyone wants them.

Using it with Denon AVR-2805, 7 NHT SuperOnes and a Hsu VTF-3 sub, and DIY NHT 1259 sub. Sounds incredible!

oth

12-03-05, 07:39 PM

Using it with a DIY screen (97.5") of melamine with a velvet border, in a light controlled room.

Very pleased with the results. Happy to send screen shots if anyone wants them.

I be interested in seeing your "DIY screen (97.5") of melamine" as I am looking for short term low cost solution till we decide on a final location. Perhaps some details on the screen itself, cost what sizes available, from whom, etc.

Tx

oth

Flyhigh

12-03-05, 08:04 PM

Anyone know where I can view a demo of a Panny 900 in the Allentown PA area?

jcg

12-03-05, 09:11 PM

Anyone using the 79Avi with a Panny AE900? I just got the 79AVi and it is hooked up to a Panny AE900 via HDMI, but I'm not getting a picture. I hooked it up via component to a TV and brought up the menu and under initial settings HDMI is grayed out? I had a Sony NS70 (which I returned) hooked up a couple weeks ago via HDMI and everything was fine. Any ideas?

I turned the projector on first and then had power cycled the 79AVi a few times so the HDCP stuff should be working. Is there something I need to set to get HDMI working or it should just come up when connected to an HDMI display?

jcg

chuckr

12-03-05, 09:27 PM

No, that's not normal. First, try another source and input (if you're able) to see if it's source-related. Also, what picture mode are you using? (Video, Normal etc.) Try a different one (like Cinema 1) and see if that removes the color. If you still get that color with eveything, return the projector.

I went through all sorts of gyrations tonight. There's nothing I can do in order to tweak it out of the picutre. It's there on every input, all source material. It's there when the projector starts up with no inputs, so that pretty much seals the deal. I'll email the dealer and see what can be done.

Bummer.

(One last picture to prove I'm not seeing things - long exposure)

Raddest

12-03-05, 10:23 PM

Thanks jumpy..
I guess I needed it clearer than the manual sez it.
:>

rdalcanto

12-03-05, 10:25 PM

I had originally ordered the Optoma H31, but then decided to cancel that order and go with the Panny based on the reviews here and on other sites. I fired her up this weekend, and I was BLOWN AWAY!!! The picture is ten times better than that from the more expensive projectors they have at RCWilley. The colors are vibrant! Resolution is very good. My rear projection HDTV is going to be downgraded into the kids room. The projector is MINE!!! :D :D :D
I had ordered a 92 inch GreyWolf screen. It arrived dented. After seeing the quality of the projector, the dent is a godsend. Now I'm returning the screen and going up to a 106 inch. :cool:

Rick

jumpy27

12-03-05, 10:27 PM

I went through all sorts of gyrations tonight. There's nothing I can do in order to tweak it out of the picutre. It's there on every input, all source material. It's there when the projector starts up with no inputs, so that pretty much seals the deal. I'll email the dealer and see what can be done.

Bummer.

(One last picture to prove I'm not seeing things - long exposure)

What are we supposed to be looking for?

jsteel7

12-03-05, 10:58 PM

What are we supposed to be looking for?

The greenish tint in the corners of the picture I believe.

chuckr

12-03-05, 11:00 PM

What are we supposed to be looking for?

Sorry - a green glow in the upper left and lower right corners of the picture.

I was asking if anyone else is seeing this. When you project an all black image from source, does it look all black? Top to bottom, left to right?

Capek

12-03-05, 11:58 PM

Sorry - a green glow in the upper left and lower right corners of the picture.

I was asking if anyone else is seeing this. When you project an all black image from source, does it look all black? Top to bottom, left to right?
Totally black. If it's not sorce dependant, your projector is definitely defective. I only got a chance to check out the Component and S-Video connections before the lamp circuit in my projector went out, but there was nothing like what your seeing with your projector.

Croc

12-04-05, 04:21 AM

Cinema 1 is by far the closest to having correct greyscale right out of the box, so i recommend using that setting if you don't have calibration equipment. However, it does have the lowest light output, which may be a problem if you don't have good light control in your room.

oh yea - i calibrated Cinema1 first but after few movies i felt that the picture is too dim (i have almost 120" screen mind you) - so i went back and calibrated the Normal.

the strange thing is that Jason's calibration parameters was so OFF balanced picture :eek:

Croc

12-04-05, 04:25 AM

DrA

12-04-05, 07:01 AM

Is anyone else seeing a green glow in the corners of their AE-900?

Everything else on the projector has been perfect, but the only thing I find a
bit bothersome is a green glow I get when it's projecting something that's very
dark or completely black.

I'm attaching a picture of the projector showing an all black image, driven by
a HTPC via VGA input at the native resolution. Is this leakage from the light
engine? Is it normal, or is this excessive?

Return it right away.
Looks like an alignment problem affecting the color uniformity. Or mirrors?
I returned a Z4 because of the same problem and requested a 900 because could not stand Z4's SDE. B&H charged me $200 because I had more than 2 hours lamp time and did not want to send it for SANYO service. Representative told me you have to discover the problems (if any) with 900 within 120 min and they will take it back with no charge. What a moronic rule. If it is defective logic suggests that Panasonic must exchange it for them no matter it has 2 hours or 20 hours. Unless they want to sell it back to us as new without repairing which is illegal.
If I did not have this Exchange issue with B&H I would have got it from AVS dealer who stated on this tread few days ago that they will replace defective units during first 30 days.
Following tests must be done as soon as anyone gets their projector unless you bought it from Costco. :)
I know, I know this is not our job and must have been done at the factory.

All this tests are done with no lense shift. I did not use my Gefen HDMI switcher to keep things simple.

First thing I checked was Uniformity: it was Ok with only reddish shadow at the left edge of the screen. For this test I used white windows desktop. I switched from HDMI to component to eliminate any potential connection problem from ATI X800 video card. To eliminate source issue then I switched to directv logo from my H-10 receiver on white background.
Then I checked VB. it was OK except one little spot. For this I projected a green images from PC and moved it across the screen from left to right. I went to service menu and changed green panel 15 to 14 and got rid of that VB spot. but to conform it I switched to D*tv receiver looking for a green football or soccer field.
Next thing I checked was Convergence. I used HDnet convergence pattern recorded on my DVR and I saw some misconvergence but disregarded it thinking it is just a color bleed less than 1 pixel. because of the Smoothscreen I could not see the pixels let alone counting misconverged pixels even few inches from 10 feet diagonal screen.
At this point I was very happy with no VB, no SDE and no color shadow.
Later when convergence problem started annoying me I zoomed the crosshatch pattern to maximum from 20 feet and saw clearly that red panel is off at least 1 pixel to the left and 1 pixel is up horizontally. I should have done this within my 2 hour limit. The limit finished long time ago and I can not return 900 anymore.
Attached is my misconvergence picture. Everyone please tell me do you see one or more pixel misconvergence?
If I get the service kit to remove the board to make room to access the panels do you think it is easy to adjust 1 red panel. Or anyone know in home service person in Southern Cali that can do panel calibration? Heartland, Panasonic's service tells me they just change the entire panel block. I am afraid I might get another defective block.

rwestley

12-04-05, 07:19 AM

Dr. A, Heartland is usually very good for service. You can talk to a live person and explain your problem. Ask them to do a convergence check with the new block if you send it to them. Send them your screen shots showing the problem with this unit so they can compare it. I would not trust a local service center.

John Ballentine

12-04-05, 09:15 AM

ericsilv

12-04-05, 01:07 PM

DrA

12-04-05, 02:02 PM

quote:
"First thing I checked was Uniformity: it was Ok with only reddish shadow at the left edge of the screen. "
DrA:
Can you please elaborate on this a little more? I watch a lot of B&W films and this is important to me. Have you tried to calibrate it out?

I don't think you can calibrate uniformity problem by the remote control. The mirrors and /or reflectors must be adjusted. mine was narrow enough at the edge that it is not distracting.

tvted

12-04-05, 07:07 PM

I don't think you can calibrate uniformity problem by the remote control. The mirrors and /or reflectors must be adjusted. mine was narrow enough at the edge that it is not distracting.

Mirrors? Reflectors?
As in the optical block before it hits the panels which pass and reflect the primaries?

Uniformity is more likely to be a panel issue.
ted

calibos

12-04-05, 07:18 PM

Mirrors? Reflectors?
As in the optical block before it hits the panels which pass and reflect the primaries?

Uniformity is more likely to be a panel issue.
ted

Convergance is a panel issue, colour uniformity is a mirror and/or lamp faceted lens thingie (name of part escapes me :D ) issue afaik

tvted

12-04-05, 07:52 PM

Convergance is a panel issue, colour uniformity is a mirror and/or lamp faceted lens thingie (name of part escapes me :D ) issue afaik

But if the panel does not pass the light uniformly then it is a panel issue - much like VB.

I am aware that convergence is not what is under discussion.

Are you suggesting this is related to the optical block and the way it divides the light and passing it to the polarizing filters+ panel?

I doubt the lamp would be involved as it is too far out of the focal plane.

I am looking for clarification on what is meant by "mirror" in this case.

ted

wwyjoe

12-05-05, 01:19 AM

has anyone used the ae900 with a stewart firehawk? Most interested to know what are the calibrated settings. Thanks

N9IWP

12-05-05, 10:24 AM

If I place the AE900 on a shelf (right side up), how close could I put a shelf above it? I mean 5 inches between shelves is probably too close, and 2 feet is almost certainly far enough, but is 1 foot too close?

Note that these shelves will be open on 3 sides.

thanks,

Brian

simpsonb

12-05-05, 10:27 AM

has anyone used the ae900 with a stewart firehawk? Most interested to know what are the calibrated settings. Thanks

I'm interested as well. I just ordered the 900 and will get it in a week and the Firewawk is the screen I was considering. I did call Stewart and gave them my room, white ceiling, light carpet, half dark walls and half light grey. They recommended the Firehawk becasue of the reflected light with a size of 100" or more. For less than 100" the GrayHawk becasue of the smaller size and reflected light. I'm thinking the 106" FireHawk but am waiting for the PJ to determine a final size and project it on a wall until then.

I'm assuming you have a FireHawk, how do you like it? What are your room colors? Did you get the Luxus Frame?

Gadget_girl

12-05-05, 10:43 AM

We've had our projector for 5 days. We are projecting onto a sheet on our wall for the time being. At first I was somewhat underwhelmed. The first movie we watched was Moulin Rouge. Rather than fiddle with the settings too much, we trusted in several recommedations including that of the manual in that we should use the cinema setting to watch movies. With my light coloured walls, I found the movie dimmer than I would have liked. We were half-way through watching the incredibles on Cinema3 when I decided to let my kids choose the mode they wished to watch it at. Dynamic was the overwhelming winner here. Black blacks and vibrant colours with punch, even on a white sheet. I'll probably go back and try Moulin Rouge again with different settings see what I like. Keeping in mind, this is all out of the box, no calibration whatsoever. Otherwise...no problems with any video artifacts, source or otherwise. Will probably make a DIY screen.
Happy to answer any questions.

Capek

12-05-05, 11:39 AM

Flyhigh

12-05-05, 11:47 AM

Getting close to 2000 posts here so if this has been asked forgive me, I didn't come across it.

If I am going to ceiling mount the ae900 and it is going to be no higher then the top of the screen, say 7.5 feet, do I HAVE to invert it or can I put it in a shelf coming off the ceiling, right side up? At what point in elevating the PJ does it need to get inverted if at all?

MikeSRC

12-05-05, 12:24 PM

If I am going to ceiling mount the ae900 and it is going to be no higher then the top of the screen, say 7.5 feet, do I HAVE to invert it or can I put it in a shelf coming off the ceiling, right side up? At what point in elevating the PJ does it need to get inverted if at all?

You can do it either way. It has the same range of lens shift in both directions vertically, so it doesn't matter whether it's inverted ot not.

HTX^2steve

12-05-05, 12:31 PM

I have found that the 900 needs to be tweaked from the box. I found the greens are really oversaturated and I still get a slight green flicker even when trying to correct it from the flicker menu. But I went from Normal and corrected from there.

I really enjoy my DIY screen. Easy to make and hang it like a picture and you are done.

My review has details of how I made it... My 900 review (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6374502#post6374502)

Enjoy...Steve.

rsmith4321

12-05-05, 04:22 PM

jstein

12-05-05, 04:31 PM

My AE900 arrived last Friday. This is my third projector. My first was a NEC 9PG Xtra CRT projector and my second was a Sony VW-10HT LCD PJ.

The AE900 is being driven by an HTPC via the 900's computer input (720P for DVD and 1080i for HD material). A DVI to HDMI cable will be arriving this week. The PJ was eye calibrated in Cinema 1 using Digital Video Essentials. The screen is a 106" DaLite High Power, which has a gain of 2.7. The PJ is on a coffee table and the 900's zoom lens is very close to its maximum wide angle position. The bulb is on the low output setting. This yields a very bright image - I would say around twice theater brightness or around 24 foot lamberts. My personal preference is for decent black level, decent contrast and a high white level - I am not a black level/contrast freak.

I did a tremendous amount of viewing over the weekend, including Finding Nemo on DVD and several HD movies. The HD movies included Master and Commander, Black Hawk Down, The Matrix; and parts of Alien, Bulworth, Dangerous Beauty, Day After Tomorrow, Excaliber, Fifth Element, Gladiator, Ice Age, Star Trek First Contact and Star Wars Attack of the Clones.

THE GOOD:
Good black level, good white level, good contrast, no SDE and color with no obvious flaws. Overall, in these regards, the image was a marked improvement over the 10HT and is certainly one I could live with for a few years until 1080P PJ's drop in price. Convergence was good with no more than 1/4 pixel variance across the screen. Also, there were no stuck pixels (on, off or in between). Even though there are fewer pixels on the 900 than on the 10HT, the improved black levels, contrast and brightness yielded considerably more observable detail than the 10HT had.

THE NOT SO GOOD:
The projector had noticeable flicker when the Windows desktop (set to a light grey) was displayed and on bright scenes in movies. It also had vertical banding (VB) that was visible on both the Windows desktop and movie scenes such as fog and others containing large swatchs of light, pastel-like colors. There was also a barely noticeable horizontal band the occupied about 2/3 of the screen width about 4/5 of the way towards the top of the image.

I performed the flicker tweak from the first page of the AE700 tweak thread. This considerably reduced the flicker, which is now just barely noticeable on the Windows desktop and no longer noticeable on movie material. However, this did little to reduce the VB. The barely noticeable horizontal band remained.

I am going to do a bit more critical watching to see if the VB is something that I will stop noticing once I start watching movies, rather than the projector. My current feeling is that it is marginal in this regard.

One problem with a high white level is that it ofen seems to amplify projector flaws. IOW, I wonder if the image brightness were lower, would the VB be visible? Also, I do not know if the flicker adjustment is supposed to just lower the flicker, or if it should be able to eliminate it. I couldn't eliminate it completely on any of the three colors and on the green screen, still had considerable flicker on the right side of the image. When adjusting the flicker, it took a while to be able to judge exactly which setting was best as often the flicker would move from one part of the image to another while making adjustments (say from the center to both sides). I think you need to take in the entire screen and not just a part of it in judging flicker.

In terms of noise, the projector was certainly quiet enough. I did notice that the PJ was slightly louder with Auto Iris turned on, even when viewing a static image. Also, the top of the PJ on the right side (facing the screen) was very warm. Warm enough that I might be concerned about putting say a DVD case on top of the right hand side of the PJ. It was not hot enough to be painful to the touch.

Ignoring the banding issue for the moment, I was very impressed with the image given that the price of the PJ was less than 40% of what I paid for the 10HT five years ago.

Anyway, subject to the need to buy from a dealer who will work with you if there are VB issues, I am very impressed with the PJ. And while the decision about whether to call the dealer and ask for an exchange is one I have to make, advice in this regard would be appreciated. Part of my hesitation is the possibility that if I can and do exchange the unit, I will end up with one that has worse/different problems (maybe see if I can temporarily buy two and return one?).

DrA

12-05-05, 04:51 PM

My AE900 arrived last Friday. This is my third projector. My first was a NEC 9PG Xtra CRT projector and my second was a Sony VW-10HT LCD PJ.

The AE900 is being driven by an HTPC via the 900's computer input (720P for DVD and 1080i for HD material). A DVI to HDMI cable will be arriving this week. The PJ was eye calibrated using Digital Video Essentials. The screen is a 106" DaLite High Power, which has a gain of 2.7. The PJ is on a coffee table and the 900's zoom lens is very close to its maximum wide angle position. The bulb is on the low output setting. This yields a very bright image - I would say around twice theater brightness or around 24 foot lamberts. My personal preference is for decent black level, decent contrast and a high white level - I am not a black level/contrast freak.

I did a tremendous amount of viewing over the weekend, including Finding Nemo on DVD and several HD movies. The HD movies included Master and Commander, Black Hawk Down, The Matrix; and parts of Alien, Bulworth, Dangerous Beauty, Day After Tomorrow, Excaliber, Fifth Element, Gladiator, Ice Age, Star Trek First Contact and Star Wars Attack of the Clones.

THE GOOD:
Good black level, good white level, good contrast, no SDE and color with no obvious flaws. Overall, in these regards, the image was a marked improvement over the 10HT and is certainly one I could live with for a few years until 1080P PJ's drop in price. Also, there were no stuck pixels (on, off or in between). Even though there are fewer pixels on the 900 than on the 10HT, the improved black levels, contrast and brightness yieled considerably more observable detail than the 10HT had.

THE NOT SO GOOD:
The projector had noticeable flicker when the Windows desktop (set to a light grey) was displayed and on bright scenes in movies. It also had vertical banding (VB) that was visible on both the Windows desktop and movie scenes such as fog and others containing large swatchs of light, pastel-like colors. There was also a barely noticeable horizontal band the occupied about 2/3 of the screen width about 4/5 of the way towards the top of the image.

I performed the flicker tweak from the first page of the AE700 tweak thread. This considerably reduced the flicker, which is now just barely noticeable on the Windows desktop and no longer noticeable on movie material. However, this did little to reduce the VB. The barely noticeable horizontal band remained.

I am going to do a bit more critical watching to see if the VB is something that I will stop noticing once I start watching movies, rather than the projector. My current feeling is that it is marginal in this regard.

One problem with a high white level is that it ofen seems to amplify projector flaws. IOW, I wonder if the image brightness were lower, would the VB be visible? Also, I do not know if the flicker adjustment is supposed to just lower the flicker, or if it should be able to eliminate it. I couldn't eliminate it completely on any of the three colors and on the green screen, still had considerable flicker on the right side of the image. When adjusting the flicker, it took a while to be able to judge exactly which setting was best as often the flicker would move from one part of the image to another while making adjustments (say from the center to both sides). I think you need to take in the entire screen and not just a part of it in judging flicker.

In terms of noise, the projector was certainly quiet enough. I did notice that the PJ was slightly louder with Auto Iris turned on, even when viewing a static image.

Ignoring the banding issue for the moment, I was very impressed with the image given that the price of the PJ was less than 40% of what I paid for the 10HT five years ago.

Anyway, subject to the need to buy from a dealer who will work with you if there are VB issues, I am very impressed with the PJ. And while the decision about whether to call the dealer and ask for an exchange is one I have to make, advice in this regard would be appreciated. Part of my hesitation is the possibility that if I can and do exchange the unit, I will end up with one that has worse/different problems (maybe see if I can temporarily buy two and return one?).

For flicker I put a white cardboard as close as possible around 2 feet from pj and focus it. You will notice minor differences better.

boykster

12-05-05, 05:12 PM

For flicker I put a white cardboard as close as possible around 2 feet from pj and focus it. You will notice minor differences better.

I used this technique and tweaked 99% of the VB out of my pj. On scenes where it was very noticeable before, it is either very barely visible, or not there at all.

Rich

DrA

12-05-05, 05:46 PM

The thing that's really holding me back from getting the 900 is convergence. Coming from DLP this really bothers be. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't any change in proper perfect covergence be like lowering the resolution of the projector. For example, if the red was one pixel to the left and the blue the right, effectively colors from one pixel are mixing with the other and taking away the actual crispness and resolution of the image. If 3 or 4 pixels are all mixing together, what is the point of even upgrading from a 4805. Even if the convergence was slightly off it seems like it would really hurt the clarity of the image. Perhaps it's not as bad as it seems like it would be, anyone have any thoughts?
Yes on the resolution pattern you see black lines in rainbow background instead of white. you loose sharpness in edges too. Let say you watch a snowman on my pj where red panel is off horizontally and vertically, left side and top of the head is red. Right and lower side is cyan because if you take away red from white(R+G+B) you get cyan. substractive law?
Anyone who adjusted their panny 500 or 700 panels please help.

tvted

12-05-05, 07:35 PM

THE NOT SO GOOD:
The projector had noticeable flicker when the Windows desktop (set to a light grey) was displayed and on bright scenes in movies. It also had vertical banding (VB) that was visible on both the Windows desktop and movie scenes such as fog and others containing large swatchs of light, pastel-like colors. There was also a barely noticeable horizontal band the occupied about 2/3 of the screen width about 4/5 of the way towards the top of the image.

This sounds like a dot clock issue. Have you used AUTO in the POSITION menu?
Since you are moving to HDMI - this should correct the issue assuming 1:1 mapping.

One problem with a high white level is that it ofen seems to amplify projector flaws.
Quite true, particularly with as it relates to pixel structure and MPEG artifacts. Have you calibrated with consideration for Blacker than Black and Whiter than White? See this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=494606) if this all sounds like blathering nonsense,

ted

pcaulfie

12-05-05, 07:47 PM

This sounds like a dot clock issue. Have you used AUTO in the POSITION menu?
Since you are moving to HDMI - this should correct the issue assuming 1:1 mapping.

Quite true, particularly with as it relates to pixel structure and MPEG artifacts. Have you calibrated with consideration for Blacker than Black and Whiter than White? See this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=494606) if this all sounds like blathering nonsense,

ted

AUTO helped a lot for me. Using Powerstrip with my HTPC and AUTO, then adjusting the Horizontal position, I've got a rock solid desktop. The only thing I notice is that when I'm open/closing windows, the auto iris starts to play with the contrast. No big deal though, movies are stunning!

ericsilv

12-05-05, 08:05 PM

if somebody could help i would appreciate i am getting confused with the shift capabilities of the AE 900. it would seem to me if you place it further back with the same size screen you would need less lens shift and the a 25% of screen width at min distance and maximum would require more of and angle or is a straight lateral movement of lens ?i am planning on a 106 diagonal screen.The projector would be 196 inches back 2 inches below bottom of screen and 23 inches lateral to center of screen . Does it work ? or how high do i have to raise projector to make it work as the lateral movement would be more difficult. thanks for the help

called one of sponsors today told to call panasonic. Called panasonic tech support they couldn't answer told to call another engineer.He didn't know said for me to try another engineer at a different number still waiting for him to get back to me. I been looking at their charts and diagrams and some of there published spec 50% vertical 25% horiz shift but on page 4 of spec sheet they have example for 100 in diag of dist from center to right as 1'8" -5'4" that means from 20% shift at min dist i.e. less telephoto to 73% shift at max dist Is this correct or is the shift percent fixed and independent of zoom distance?

DrA

12-05-05, 08:16 PM

I am not calling Panasonic any more for my convergence problem. Let them contact me and send me a defect free projector before they read their name on the news :)
Attached are Exhibit A, B and C

rwestley

12-05-05, 08:42 PM

Dr. A, I would ask for a RMA and send the unit into Heartland, Panasonic service center.

They have been very good in the past. I have a 900 with no convergence problem. There is obviously something wrong with your unit. I am surprised that your dealer did not help you.

Easley

12-05-05, 09:01 PM

Uh oh...

I recieved my AE900 a few weeks ago and am LOVING it. But tonight I noticed an unusual noise coming from it. I got closer and it sounds like the fan is going. It is making a rattling/knocking sound like the bearings are rubbing. It is considerably louder than the normal quite whirrr it makes.

Anyone reported this problem yet? Anything anyone can think of that I should check? If it matters I have been running it for many many hours this week while I configure my HTPC. Could it be overheating?

wwyjoe

12-05-05, 09:19 PM

I'm assuming you have a FireHawk, how do you like it? What are your room colors? Did you get the Luxus Frame?

Hi Simpsonb,

Yes, i'm using a 82' Firehawk Deluxe Screenwall Frame . My video setup consists of a Panasonic RP82 SDI feed to the iScan HD, upscaled to 720p to the ae900 via DVI-HDMI cable. Viewing is done in a fully dark environment

Projector is ceiling mounted. Vertical lens shift set near to the maximum, and horizontal lens shift left at the centre. Initially, i'm seeing really bad convergence with green bleeding 3-4 pixels to the left of the test grid pattern, and red abt 1 pixel on top. After fine-tuning using the focus ring, only the bottom left portion of the screen shows the green bleeding abt 1 pixel to the left and red abt half a pixel on top. And this is only noticeable upon close-up. Going up to 1x the viewing distance, i can hardly see any convergence problem. At my normal viewing distance of 1.8X, the grid lines appear 'perfectly' white. Using the focus ring to fine-tune really helps a lot

Out of the box, picture is slightly greenish as pointed out by HTX2Steve. I then tried several Cinema 1 HDMI input settings from Jason Turk, MikeSRC, and CKL, and found Mike's settings work best. :) Biggest improvement is that flesh tones have a more natural look, attributed by the Contrast Green setting of -5 as per Mike's setting. Picture is still a little reddish so i brought down the Contrast Red to 0 (Mike's setting was at +1). Contrast and Brightness after calibrating with Avia is 0 and -1 respectively

Even though the Cinema setting has the lowest lumen output and lamp set to Low, picture still appears quite bright, mebbe because my viewing room is fully dark and i'm using a smaller screen (82')

The 2 biggest improvements i see over my infocus 4805 is the richness of colors, and smoothness of the picture, like many others here have reported. Definitely a significant upgrade over my 4805. :)

Hope to do further tweaking and report back my findings.

Just a question - by feeding a 720p signal, the Cinema Reality feature is turned off? The manual did not list it as a compatible signal, so would like to confirm. Thanks

jstein

12-05-05, 10:14 PM

tvted, I tried the Auto setting while feeding 720P. It had no effect on the VB. The funny thing is that I get different dot clocks and phase when doing it with the Windows desktop and when doing it with a movie running full screen. And when I do it with a movie running full screen, I get different results each time, presumably because there are different frames playing while the auto adjustment is taking place.

Aside from the Auto setting not helping, I am curious as to what one should be watching/playing when doing the adjustment?

Also, I adjusted saturation and hue while inputing 1080i. I noticed that the saturation and hue controls are not available in 720P. I assume that to calibrate 720P, I should be using the individual color contrast and brightness adjustments available on the Advanced menu?

Anyway, I will wait till I can feed the PJ HDMI before making any final conclusions/decisions about the VB.

Thanks for the reminder about the blacker than black stuff, but I have calibrated for it. I am rendering with VMR Windowless, not overlay.

wwyjoe, as Cinema Reality appears to be a 3:2 pulldown toggle, it doesn't apply when feeding the PJ 720P - there is nothing to correct for with a progressive signal. When feeding the PJ 720P, it is the responsibility of the source device to do the pulldown for film-based interlaced source material as well deinterlacing interlaced source material in general.

Samsun19

12-05-05, 11:08 PM

Hi guy's,

I just got my first projector, the 900 on Thursday.

It's Very Cool.

Except! There seems to be a problem with the image when the camera pans....
It blurs out like when you throw a rock in the water and you see the ripple waves.
Is this what the call VB?

I think it's worse when the camera pans up and down the screen then it is across the screen.

Do I need to send it back?

Or can that be adjusted out?

If so, could you please tell me how?

Or does it need to be done by a Pro?

Sorry if this has already been discussed.

Thanks Very Much
Sam

LMJohnson

12-06-05, 03:48 AM

Aside from the Auto setting not helping, I am curious as to what one should be watching/playing when doing the adjustment?

Try searching on the HTPC forum, they have a 1 pixel checker board pattern which you can put up as a background on the windows desktop. You will see instantly if the clock settings are out.

Liam

JaMiR

12-06-05, 05:11 AM

manufanatic

12-06-05, 08:09 AM

Just wondering if anyone received the rebate back yet. I know its early days but just interested.

Easley

12-06-05, 10:25 AM

Could it be the iris? Try to disable the iris and see if it make a difference.

After I posted I turned off the projecter (with the power switch), let it sit 30min, then powered it back on. It made a subtle high pitched squeel for about a min then stopped. I didnt hear any unusual noise from it for the rest of the night.

If it does it again I will try disabling the iris like you said.

nastyboy

12-06-05, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by Easley
Uh oh...

I received my AE900 a few weeks ago and am LOVING it. But tonight I noticed an unusual noise coming from it. I got closer and it sounds like the fan is going. It is making a rattling/knocking...

I have the exact same problem with the 900 when the unit boots up you can hear a rattling / static noise. When one scrolls through the menu screens and or change channels you can hear it. Will disable the iris tonight and post results.

tvted

12-06-05, 11:17 AM

tvted, I tried the Auto setting while feeding 720P. It had no effect on the VB. The funny thing is that I get different dot clocks and phase when doing it with the Windows desktop and when doing it with a movie running full screen. And when I do it with a movie running full screen, I get different results each time, presumably because there are different frames playing while the auto adjustment is taking place.

Seems like a bit of confusion here methinks. Dot clock adjust is within the POSITION menu where since you are using VGA I would select AUTO. I was responding to the way you were perceiving your desktop and was giving you another tweak you might try. Other than shifting its position this will likely have no effect on VB which is tweaked via the flicker settings in the extended OPTIONs menu. It will however help with sharpness and detail as it will provide proper 1:1 mapping.

If VB is your sole complaint then I apologize for misconstruing what you were seeing. Time and usage will ameliorate this somewhat though not entirely. For VB, my 700 was never that bad to begin with so I just used the provided screens. Focusing on a white card a few feet in front of the PJ as some have suggested is likely to give you more accuracy in your adjustments.

Unfortunately the HDMI is unlikely to alleviate your VB. As to hue & saturation unfortunately many pj's do not provide these controls on their digital input - believing it to be unnecessary since its "digital" so in this case adjusting the primaries individually would be your only recourse though that might affect your colour balance. Why not create colour profiles at source - your HTPC- though I never recommend adjusting source?

ted

jcdestiny

12-06-05, 12:10 PM

Does anyone have calibration settings that would be a good start for setting up the 900 with a Carada 1.0 gain, 92" 16:9 format screen? My projector is about 14 feet from the screen, I'm using a Denon 1920 DVD player and a HDMI connection.
Thanks for the help,
Best regards,
Joe

CostasEAR

12-06-05, 01:19 PM

I just upgraded from 700 to 900 and i keep on using the same good old filter, 81EF. (B&W KR6 77mm).

The 900 panny is sure a step forwards, in all aspects, but really i was not shocked by the difference...

In Details:

1. Yes, the black is blacker, but far from REAL BLACK.. I mean there is much light left, quite dissapointing...

2. Colours: Yes, much better colours, richer and solid.

3. Contrast ratio: from 2000:1 (700) to 5.500:1 (900) i was expecting much more. There is quite a difference, but not what i was expecting.

4. Details: The image is much crispier, the edges are sharp, sharpness is still high...

5. Light output: the luminance is much better indeed. From 1000 to 1100 i was expecting less but i was surprised in a good way here!

6. Noise: much much better

7. Pixel: What is this? Good work Panny!

Well, i keep on reading from the AE900 Tweak Thread that this filter is too dark.
But this should be your target! This projector is not the best in blacks, and if you really want to have deep black levels you have to cut the light over there!
And after all there is enough light even for big screens!

The black level is what really matters in cinema!

So, let's go to settings and equipment:

Filter: 77mm B&W KR6 (81EF) (this mainly cutts the blue and 2/3 of a stop in light)
DVD player: OPPO (HDMI to HDMI cable with HDMI-DVI adapter).
Screen Da-lite 92' hi-contrast matt white.

my settings:

oppo DVD player (all other defaults):
-brightness -2 (helps hiding the macrovision effect and less calibrating from the panny)
-CSS off
-noise reduction off

panny AE 900 projector (all other defaults):
picture dynamic, lamp low
contrast +2
colour temp -1 (some might like better -2)
NR off
GH +1
GM 0
GL +6 (some might like better +7)
CR 0
CG -6
CB 0
BR -3
BG 0
BB -4

With these settings i have the best contrast and the more light from all other fine settings i read in here and in the tweak thread.

Try them and let me know your opinion.

But i also have a question:
In the panny 700 with 2000:1 contrast ratio, some guys measured more than 2300:1 contrast with this filter!
In the new panny 900, with 5500:1 contrast ratio, why don't we have really high numbers of measured contrast ratio? (i mean 2300-2700:1 is not a good measurement, don't you agree?)

I suppose we can have better than 4500:1 contrast ratio (i even wish better than 5500:1), but i am still looking for the settings...

Anyone with high numbers here??????

thaxx

12-06-05, 01:29 PM

If you change that Dynamic setting to either Cinama1, 2 or 3, I think you will see blacker blacks.

MikeSRC

12-06-05, 01:47 PM

Does anyone have calibration settings that would be a good start for setting up the 900 with a Carada 1.0 gain, 92" 16:9 format screen?

Check out the AE900 Tweaks thread.

MikeSRC

12-06-05, 01:49 PM

If you change that Dynamic setting to either Cinama1, 2 or 3, I think you will see blacker blacks.

You don't want to do that in conjunction with the 81EF filter.

tvted

12-06-05, 01:51 PM

3. Contrast ratio: from 2000:1 (700) to 5.500:1 (900) i was expecting much more. There is quite a difference, but not what i was expecting.

That would amount to a little over an F-stop for most people this amounts to subtlety. Visible but subtle nonetheless. People need to read up on The Zone System as it offers insight into CR and its effects on PQ.
http://www.normankoren.com/zonesystem.html
http://www.zone2tone.co.uk/index.htm
http://www.digitalsecrets.net/Sony/AdvancedKnow.html

The black level is what really matters in cinema!
Only if you think that.
To each his own.

panny AE 900 projector (all other defaults):
picture dynamic, lamp low

:eek: :eek: The DYNAMIC mode.
Again to each his own.

Pls note your adjustments to the GAMMA curve - precisely why the Dynamic mode has nothing to do with film viewing not to mention that D65 ain't worth the effort.

In the panny 700 with 2000:1 contrast ratio, some guys measured more than 2300:1 contrast with this filter!
In the new panny 900, with 5500:1 contrast ratio, why don't we have really high numbers of measured contrast ratio? (i mean 2300-2700:1 is not a good

Because Panasonic provides On/Off specs for a non D65k mode which means the colour balance and Gamma settings have nothing to do with industry standards?

ted

MikeSRC

12-06-05, 04:14 PM

Dubauskas

12-06-05, 04:26 PM

Is anyone using the 900 along with the Panasonic S77 (or S97) DVD player? Do you notice if this combination has the macroblocking problem? I have ordered my 900 along with a screen and am looking for a relatively inexpensive upconverting DVD player that mates well with the 900 (and looks good of course).

Jim

I have this combination (s77.... offical word is that this is the replacment for the s97).... if you could give me a DVD title to try where I might see Macroblocking I will give it a try.

pepar

12-06-05, 04:27 PM

Can anyone tell me if the AE900 has a threaded section just inside the lens where it would be possible to mount an IMX lens? I have a micro-perfed screen and, unless there is ZERO SDE, I would need to mount my IMX to eliminate moire. I would certainly try it w/o the IMX, but I wouldn't want to buy a 900 w/o the option of using it if I had to.

TIA!!

Dubauskas

12-06-05, 04:34 PM

I just purchased the AE900 and have only watched a couple DVDs. At this point I really like the projector (my first), but still haven't done any calibration. I need to get a 50' HDMI cable to hook up to my DVD player and was wondering if anyone is running HDMI cables this long with the AE900? I looked on bluejeans, ram and monoprice and they all have 50ft cable, but the monoprice one is about 1/2 the price of the others. Anyone using monoprice? Are their cables of similar quality to the others?

jcg

I bought a 25' monoprice... what I like about the monoprice cable is that it has ferrite cores on it. No complaints signal is excellent.

I read somewhere that over 33' feet you want to switch to optical.... which gets you up into the $300 range.

jstein

12-06-05, 04:36 PM

tvted, I also was a tad bit confused as everything I have read indicated that the dot clock had no impact on VB - no problem. I have no issue with the clarity and sharpness of the desktop.

I have done the flicker tweak and it had little impact on the VB. I sure wish I could find an explanation of what causes VB and in particular an explanation of why it gets better (less VB) with use. My suspicion is that the VB becomes a bit less noticeable because of the lamp dimming significantly after the first hundred or two hours of use, rather than the VB actually lessening. If I had a long enough cable, I could simulate future brightness by zooming the lens to see if the apparent VB decreases.

My hope is that the RGB contrast and brightness controls do not impact gamma. I also would rather not adjust color in the HTPC. For one thing, I may still use RGB to play with refresh rates that avoid cadence issues with film material (i.e., ~72Hz refresh rate), and would rather not have to deal with multiple color profiles on the HTPC (as in forgeting to change it).

Thanks for your posts.

MikeSRC

12-06-05, 04:42 PM

Can anyone tell me if the AE900 has a threaded section just inside the lens where it would be possible to mount an IMX lens?

Yes, it's 77 mm. However, there's been talk on this forum that there may be some issues using it with an IMX lens, so you may want to check into that further. I'd say that the AE900 comes about as close to having zero SDE as any 720p projector I've seen.

tony123

12-06-05, 04:46 PM

That would amount to a little over an F-stop for most people this amounts to subtlety. Visible but subtle nonetheless. People need to read up on The Zone System as it offers insight into CR and its effects on PQ.
http://www.normankoren.com/zonesystem.html
http://www.zone2tone.co.uk/index.htm
http://www.digitalsecrets.net/Sony/AdvancedKnow.html

Only if you think that.
To each his own.

:eek: :eek: The DYNAMIC mode.
Again to each his own.

Pls note your adjustments to the GAMMA curve - precisely why the Dynamic mode has nothing to do with film viewing not to mention that D65 ain't worth the effort.

Because Panasonic provides On/Off specs for a non D65k mode which means the colour balance and Gamma settings have nothing to do with industry standards?

ted

I use Dynamic mode when watching HD OTA material. For DVD's I am cailibrated using Normal.

federiko

12-06-05, 05:01 PM

I have just received the Panny900 projector which I have paired with an OPPO DVD. The image is superb. The only problem I´ve encounter is that during some DVD previews, specially on bright images (before the actual movie starts) and sometimes on the yellow subtitles, there seems to be some horizontal black lines in between, which disappear if I stop the DVD. Does anyone know what that could be?
Thanks

pepar

12-06-05, 08:10 PM

Yes, it's 77 mm. However, there's been talk on this forum that there may be some issues using it with an IMX lens, so you may want to check into that further. I'd say that the AE900 comes about as close to having zero SDE as any 720p projector I've seen.
Thanks much. Was the talk re IMX on this thread?

wwyjoe

12-06-05, 11:29 PM

dear all, i'm currently using MikeSRC's Cinema1 settings which is giving me good results. By adding a 81EF and readjusting the settings, what improvements can i expect? Any trade-offs as a result?

MikeSRC

12-06-05, 11:38 PM

Thanks much. Was the talk re IMX on this thread?

I think it was on an IMX thread. Do a search for IMX and AE900.

MikeSRC

12-06-05, 11:39 PM

boykster

12-07-05, 01:31 AM

Well I finally built my serial cable and hooked my pj up to a computer/girder. Works great. If anyone is interested in using girder to control their AE900, let me know and I'll post my export file and serial port settings file. I made entries for all possible commands (at least the ones listed in the manual).

Cheers....

Rich

PS...still lovin my AE900 after 3 weeks...

CostasEAR

12-07-05, 02:35 AM

dear all, i'm currently using MikeSRC's Cinema1 settings which is giving me good results. By adding a 81EF and readjusting the settings, what improvements can i expect? Any trade-offs as a result?

As MikeSRC said, with the filter you will not use cinema1 settings.

Without the filter:
The cinema 1 is the closest to 6,5k from the factory.
But even then, with good settings i believe normal gives better CR.
Also, cinema1 is the "darkest" setting, with the less light output.

With the filter:
Dynamic is my first choise, Normal is the second (video is close).

Improvements with the filter:
Much better black level.
The 81EF cuts blue and dynamic mode can be used for movies.
Greater CR, by getting more red and less blue.

trade-offs with the filter:
2/3 of a stop less light output. The whole picture gets darker. For some guys this is not a good choise for low gain big screens. IMHO there is no problem until 120' (at least for my taste in my room).

For your case: I am sure that dynamic mode with the filter gives more light output than cinema1 mode without the filter. So, if you are happy with the cinema1 mode now, you will be better with the filter installed.

Oriphus

12-07-05, 03:42 AM

I've fully calibrated Cinema1 mode and then added an 81C filter to give better contrast nad blacker blacks. However, i've been reading a good bit on the forum. Do people feel that Normal mode with an 81EF fully calibrated would give a brighter image, but still maintain the deep blacks, or even get better blacks?

Thanks
Chris

rotelryu

12-07-05, 05:05 AM

I have done the flicker tweak and it had little impact on the VB.

Also try the Panel adjust in the same menu. Although the scope for adjustments doesn't seem to be wide, it definitely affects the level of VB.

willdao

12-07-05, 06:14 AM

Hometheaterhifi has a review of the AE900 up now. It's not very detailed and the statements about how the CCM works are incorrect. Some decent observations otherwise though. It's posted here (http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_12_4/panasonic-pt-ae900u-projector-12-2005-part-1.html).

Yeah, Mike, I read this the other day, and was gonna post the link, but as I was somwhat unimpressed with his review (not the norm), I decided to bag it.

Looking back, that was rather presumptious of me, eh? :D

rwestley

12-07-05, 06:32 AM

Mike has stated in the tweak thread that he will be testing the 81a & 81B filters soon.
Check that thread and compare the results with the 81ef when he posts his results. You can also try CKL's settings for the A&B filter combo. There is also a link in the tweak thread to purchase low cost 81A & B filters.

wwyjoe

12-07-05, 07:32 AM

As MikeSRC said, with the filter you will not use cinema1 settings.

Without the filter:
The cinema 1 is the closest to 6,5k from the factory.
But even then, with good settings i believe normal gives better CR.
Also, cinema1 is the "darkest" setting, with the less light output.

With the filter:
Dynamic is my first choise, Normal is the second (video is close).

Improvements with the filter:
Much better black level.
The 81EF cuts blue and dynamic mode can be used for movies.
Greater CR, by getting more red and less blue.

trade-offs with the filter:
2/3 of a stop less light output. The whole picture gets darker. For some guys this is not a good choise for low gain big screens. IMHO there is no problem until 120' (at least for my taste in my room).

For your case: I am sure that dynamic mode with the filter gives more light output than cinema1 mode without the filter. So, if you are happy with the cinema1 mode now, you will be better with the filter installed.

thanks costas, u've answered my questions.

raghu13

12-07-05, 08:27 AM

I have 155 hours on the lamp. I am noticing a problem recently which I believe was not there initially. When a white background is displayed (like snow) the image is not uniformly white. While it is white in the middle, it is slighly reddish on the right edge and bluish on the left edge. (Projector is ceiling mounted. I think if it is shelf mounted, red will be on the left and blue will be on the right. I am using maximum vertical lens shift and minimum horizontal shift. I have an anamorphic lens - Prismasonic H1000 in front of the projector right from the beginning. I am using Cinema1 mode.)

While it is barely noticeable most of the time, when the background is white it becomes very clear even to untrained eyes. Is this something I can fix or I have to call Panasonic for warranty support?

Thanks,

Raghu

tvted

12-07-05, 09:01 AM

I have done the flicker tweak and it had little impact on the VB. I sure wish I could find an explanation of what causes VB and in particular an explanation of why it gets better (less VB) with use. My suspicion is that the VB becomes a bit less noticeable because of the lamp dimming significantly after the first hundred or two hours of use, rather than the VB actually lessening. If I had a long enough cable, I could simulate future brightness by zooming the lens to see if the apparent VB decreases.

Garnered from reading here and there, so not definitive: :)

LCD pixels are organised as columns and are addressed as such, on alternate phases of the display clock. It looks like this ABABAB and so on. The clock that steps the alternate group of columns is an inversion of the same clock that drives the other set. This allows for simultaneous driving of all columns on the panel such that all pixels are refreshed simultaneously. So, yes phase errors between the master pixel clock and its inversion could make the columns more apparent but his would be an issue of timing - that is pixels are out of synch. This would result in the blurring effect you see if you adjust the dot clock when driving with VGA.

VB is more perceptible as a luminance difference between the columns. I think this is likely to occur because currently LCD panels (which are analogue devices btw) are driven by analog voltage control. What this means is that after processing there is an A to D conversion. I would think that there are likely to be small discrepancies between component matching in this group of components that present small voltage differences to the columns being addressed. Be aware these are small voltages, so small errors can represent a large percentage of the drive voltage. Thus errors introduced in this manner will affect the luminance of that particular column. So large fields of colour that span multiple columns can appear to be vertically striped.

As the unit ages in a constant thermal enviroment (a break in period) these components are likely to stabilize hence the minimizing of VB. Have you noticed any changes from the beginning of a viewing session to the end? Flicker adjustments with the 700 were recommended to be performed about 1/2 hr after warm up. Many of us used to disconnect our unit from the mains as for some reason when we turned it on there appeared to be less VB.

As a side note LCOS which is fundamentally an LCD tech also can exhibit VB, however the driver scheme for these panels have been advanced to digital drive which means there is less chance for small component differences to introduce luminance errors. I believe the next generation of Epson panels (which all but Sony use) called C2Fine will incorporate digital drive which should alleviate any remaining VB. This of course does nothing to help you and Panasonic should have addressed this more astutely - the Z4 I believe does not exhibit this issue to the same degree. If you find this artifact unacceptable then I'd recommend you return it if possible.

My hope is that the RGB contrast and brightness controls do not impact gamma. I also would rather not adjust color in the HTPC. For one thing, I may still use RGB to play with refresh rates that avoid cadence issues with film material (i.e., ~72Hz refresh rate), and would rather not have to deal with multiple color profiles on the HTPC (as in forgeting to change it).

If you are considering altering the individual primaries then yes you can change the colour balance and Gamma - this is why it is better to use the Brightness (Master Black) and Contrast (Master White) - both misnamed in the consumer industry - but that's just another sore point. ;) As to refresh, I believe the Panasonic will simply convert it to its native panel rate of 60 Hz so there is no net gain but if you have any success let me know. I don't believe we will see this issue resolved until all devices operate more like multisynch CRT's and playback devices are able to provide us with 24p rates for film source.

ted

pepar

12-07-05, 10:09 AM

I think it was on an IMX thread. Do a search for IMX and AE900.
Thank you!

N9IWP

12-07-05, 12:47 PM

Is the remote manual online somewhere? I've found the main unit manual, but it refers to the "Remote control unit Guide"

Brian
(one of those weird people who like reading manuals)

pepar

12-07-05, 02:32 PM

Michael A

12-07-05, 02:48 PM

I give up; gone blind trolling all the pages. Search yielded no results. Someone care to point me to the AE900 tweak thread before I lose my mind?

Thanks,

Michael A

tvted

12-07-05, 02:55 PM

I give up; gone blind trolling all the pages. Search yielded no results. Someone care to point me to the AE900 tweak thread before I lose my mind?

Thanks,

Michael ACan you get more blind than blind? ;)
You can find out by starting to read this thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=589234)

Let us know.
ted

simpsonb

12-07-05, 03:29 PM

I've searched this thread (and others) for IMX and have found only peripheral mention of it. MikeSRC confirmed that there are threads, but I'd like to hear from someone who's mounted an IMX on the AE900. My application of the lens is to eliminate moire on my 92" wide microperfed Stewart Firehawk.

Is is a problem with that screen? I'm getting my 900 this week and was planning on getting the FireHawk (not microperf) as my screen (106"). Do you like the application? And, I'm assuming you're using a ceiling mount with minimum 1.6x back as Stewart recommends.

Thanks

MikeSRC

12-07-05, 03:45 PM

I've searched this thread (and others) for IMX and have found only peripheral mention of it. MikeSRC confirmed that there are threads, but I'd like to hear from someone who's mounted an IMX on the AE900. My application of the lens is to eliminate moire on my 92" wide microperfed Stewart Firehawk.

I couldn't find it either. I finally remembered the issue I was thinking about was using the AE900 with the Prismasonic lens in the CH forum. Sorry for the mixup. The IMX shouldn't be a problem.

Scott B

12-07-05, 03:58 PM

byancey

12-07-05, 04:13 PM

Joe,

All Scope films i.e. 2.35:1 are going to have Bars on the top and bottom of a 16x9 screen. There is no way to eliminate this with out using an anamorphic lens.

David

While that is technically true, you can effectively eliminate black bars with a good adjustable masking system. I have an adjustable masking system that I put together using black micro-velvet which has settings for 1.78 and 2.35. In the 2.35 setting, the bars are completely undetectable even in dark scenes (though they are technically still there).

The masking material used is extremely important though. I previously used an anamorphic lense in my setup, and I could get by with a cheap black felt mask because there was no actual light being projected onto the mask. When I eliminated the anamorphic lense from my setup (for reasons I won't go into here), I had to switch my masking material to more expensive velvet to visually eliminate the bars in scope material...but it does effectively eliminate the bars.

Just thought I'd point that out since good masking is a viable (and less expensive) alternative to an anamorphic lense. :)

--
Bryce

pepar

12-07-05, 04:14 PM

Is is a problem with that screen? I'm getting my 900 this week and was planning on getting the FireHawk (not microperf) as my screen (106"). Do you like the application? And, I'm assuming you're using a ceiling mount with minimum 1.6x back as Stewart recommends.

Thanks
Nah, no problem with the stock screen, but a perf causes moire on fixed pixel pj's. At least it does 'til we get to 1080. My ceiling-mounted Sony HS20 looks great with the IMX lens on it. My seats are .8x and 1.3x screen width (92"). The 1.35 gain of the Firehawk is reduced by - I think - 11% with the perfing. As I said, the HS20 looks excellent; a higher output pj would be even better and provide a brighter picture when using low lamp and dynamic iris.

pepar

12-07-05, 04:19 PM

I have an IMX lens which I used with my Epson Cinema 500. It helped diminish the SDE to a great degree. I just recently purchased a Panasonic 900 and feel that there is no need to use the IMX with it. The IMX lens I have has the universal mount which is attached to the shelf/ceiling just in front of the lens. The universal mount comes highly recommended the IMX lens is no longer projector specific. I am a bit surprised that you have moire with your 900/microperforated FireHawk. The IMX will help in this regard. BTW, I will be posting my IMX lens in the AVS Club for sale marketplace.
Again, my use of the IMX is not to get rid of SDE, per se. It is to eliminate the moire resulting from the interaction of SDE and the perfed pattern. The universal mount was being developed when I bought my lens. As the developer seemed to be abandoning the IMX - he's evidently up to his eyeballs in work with the Panamorph - I'm surprised to hear people still talking about the IMX.

Anyway, even the slightest screen door effect would cause moire, so I need to find someone with a 900, a perfed screen about my size and NO IMX.