Dear AVS,

First of all, let me say, "Thank you!" to all the folks that stopped by Optoma booth, I had a great three days so far meeting up with David Bott, Greg Rogers, Darin, and many others. It was fun and a pleasure talking to you all.

I've seen many CES comments, and many more questions or confusions over HD81, so I think since it's officially announced at CES, there is press release that people can find, why don't we create an official discussion link and make it sticky?

Let me simply write down the "facts" hopefully to clear out some confusions.

1. It is a true 1920x1080 DMD, 0.95", same as Sharp/SIM 2/Projection Design were using and showing at the show.
2. The image was on 135" Studiotek HD130 screen.
3. I was preparing to show D-VHS/DVD running through HD3000 video processor box then to HD81, but the Optoma show manager decided that it is easier to show a loop of trailers so that no maintenance is needed.
4. The four trailers are: Fastest Indian, Cars, Over the Hedge and Narnia. All 1080p and can be found on apple web page. I think Darin was saying that he is going back to download those, and compare on his Ruby. Let's wait for his comments.
5. It does not have lens shift, we decided to hit the market early and at the right price point, and have more people to enjoy it, hence we use the platform of our other SX+ DLP platform, the same 0.95" optical system, EP910.
6. The throw ratio is about 1.8 to 2.2:1 (about), the offset is 27% (of vertical height), sorry that this may not fit everyone's installation.
7. HD81 is a 2-piece architecture, MSRP $9999 comes with an external scalar box, powered by Gennum and a dedicated video enhancement chip. This dedicated video chip will allow users to enhance even more after Gennum does the 1080p conversion.
8. The scalar box comes with 3x HDMI, 2x BNC, 2x YPbPr, 3x Composite/S-video and one VGA. The box will send HDMI out to HD81 projector body, and a RS232 to command projector.
9. The scalar box is similar to the one being used on the three BigVizion 80"/90"/100" RPTV that were shown at the show, we fed 1080i YPbPr and the box upscale to 1080p and show on BigVizion. Those who are questioning about the scalar box can use the images on the BigVizion as a reference.
10. I've shown the special features designed in the scalar box to a few people, Darin included, the new and unique features should please many hard-core video fanatic.
11. Many people commented the image was very bright and strong intensity on the 135" screen, I measured the light output, for the demo unit, after calibration, shows a 900+ ANSI lumen. We will add IRIS to HD81 to allow people to vary the light output and increase the contrast ratio.
12. the demo room had some ambient light coming from the trade show floor onto the screen, unfortunately, washing out a bit on the dark scenes.
13. I've met many people who returned for the 2nd or 3rd times just to see the demo again, and compared to TI booth's demo (who also used a different Over the Hedge trailer). It's good to see everyone's smile after the demo! :)

That's about it, welcome to write your comments here and discuss HD81 here.

I'll dig out the press release later, and add it to this link.

Can we make it sticky? Again, thanks for everyone who stopped by, it was a great show!

I'm in, this projector really looks exciting.

I love a two piece solution, a top notch video processor, 1080P DLP, 6 color coor wheel, 3 HDMI inputs, small, quite, terrific pricing, VERY BRIGHT .. What is not to like ??

-- Cain

Can you explain "no lens shift" but it does have a "27% offset" ?? Those two statements seem mutually exclusive.

Can the projector be mounted above the screen, without tilting it down, and no keystoning ??

Thx!!

-- Cain

Can you explain "no lens shift" but it does have a "27% offset" ?? Those two statements seem mutually exclusive.

Can the projector be mounted above the screen, without tilting it down, and no keystoning ??

Thx!!

-- Cain

I always thought lens shift meant adjustable offset. Whereas most projectors have a fixed offset, so they can be mounted above the screen. Is this correct?

Lens shift = adjustable offset. This projector has a fixed offset of 27% of image height, if I am understanding TzungLin correctly. For example, if you have a 60" tall screen with this projector then the center of the lens will be (0.27*60")=16.2" above the top edge of the picture with the projector mounted level (no tilt).

Thanks for these informations.

I have the following questions :

- where can we find the official press releases about these new products (HD72, HD7300, HD3000, HD81, ?) ?

- is the HD3000 the external scaler box of the HD81 ? If not, what's the difference between them ?

- will the HD3000 be sold alone ? is it the same as the VX3000 referred on the gennum site ?

- what's the benefits of the RGBCYM wheel since it seem's that only Optoma uses such wheel ?

- does the HD7300 has the same RGBCYM wheel ?

- is the scaler box of the HD81 is the same as the scaler box of the 7300 ?

- is there a version of the HD81 sold without his external scaler box ?

- is there a version of the HD7300 sold without his external scaler box ?

- is there a difference between the projector of the HD7300 "bundle" and the HD72 (one seems to be HD2+DC3 since the other has the new 1280x768 TI chip) ?

- is there any difference between H81, HD81 and H72, HD72 ?

The same post is needed for the other upcoming Optoma products !!!

Thx,

Richard.

Someone who saw the demo said earlier that they were able to comfortably walk under the mounted projector, so it had some amount of offset, and now we know how much!

$9999 MSRP.

so street pricing should/will be less?
are Optoma's pj's consistently street priced a certain % below MSRP by many dealers?
or do they usually hew closer to MSRP?

Does Optoma (or 1080p DLP in general) finally get rid of the motion artifacts (loss of sharpness, blurring, loss of color depth) current DLP's are know for?

TzungTLin,
Thanks for all the great info - keep it coming!
TM

Lens shift = adjustable offset. This projector has a fixed offset of 27% of image height, if I am understanding TzungLin correctly. For example, if you have a 60" tall screen with this projector then the center of the lens will be (0.27*60")=16.2" above the top edge of the picture with the projector mounted level (no tilt).

This makes good sense, thanks HiFi. That would work fine for me.

So what does 'lens shift' do then ?? This all sounds like a lens shift to me <scratching head>...

-- Cain

TzungILin -

Thank you for starting this thread. I really believe that having a "manufacturer's rep", especially someone of your caliber and passion, available on a forum such as this adds value to a product line.

The lack of lens shift is very unfortunate in what otherwise sounds like a very exciting product. That is not the sort of compromise I expect to have to make, especially at this price point. But thank you for sharing the reasoning behind this decision.

Some specific questions:

- Was the CES demo at iris full open ?

- Will the HD81 be capable of user firmware upgrades ?

Thanks,
Brent

Lens shift = adjustable offset.

An important distinction between lens shift and preset offset is that units with lens shift usually mount within the borders of the screen (below the top or above the bottom), while fixed offset projectors usually mount outside of the screen borders. If this projector is using this kind of offset, this would mean that on a ceiling mount installation, the center of the projector lens would need to be 27% above the top of the screen (like hifiguy1 mentioned), or 127% above the bottom of the screen, and the projector could not be mounted (without tilting) anywhere within the vertical borders of the screen.

I am stressing this point because this is in opposition to the way that the current Optoma H 77/78/79 series mounts, and for some people, this could be a problem (me...as I have a low ceiling :( ). I am somewhat surprised by this move, as Optoma may be alienating a lot of their current customers, as many people won't have the option of using either type of mount. That is, people who bought the H77/78/79 and required lens shift to make it work will not be able to buy this projector, and people who require fixed offset probably never bought the current Optoma products because of the lens offset. The two groups are for the most part mutually exclusive.

Now if I have misunderstood Tzung's 27% offset figure, and that in this case the projector mounts 27% above the bottom or below the top of the image, keeping the mounting within the confines of the screen, then this would make the HD81 somewhat more accessible to their current customers. I fear that this is not the case however... :(

Bob, I read this the same way you do, that the projector would have to be placed 27% higher than the top of the screen. This means that you would need either a very high ceiling or a small screen. We are just about to begin basement room construction, but the available ceiling height won't accomodate this projector's offset.

We are just about to begin basement room construction, but the available ceiling height won't accomodate this projector's offset.

Same here. Though I understand Optoma's reasoning in getting a unit out fast and priced as low as possible, the omission of lens shift may turn out to be a critical mistake. As I've followed all of the issues with the Ruby, I had been hoping that Optoma would release a product that would compete head to head with it, but with one unit sporting lens shift and the other fixed offset, they won't compete all that much. Also, 27% is a pretty huge offset, further limiting the number of possible installations. Something in the area of 10% to 15% would accommodate a lot more people. Remember, you can always drop a projector down lower in a high ceiling, but you can't raise the projector any higher in a low ceiling...:)

Wow, no lens shift (and a 27% offset) certainly rules this one out for me. Ive been an optoma customer but it looks like ill have to try something else for 1080p. Seems a lot of people on the forum are concerned with the lack of a lens shift and will be unable to buy the PJ without it. I have 3 questions:

1. If you try to appeal to more people by lowering the price arent you balancing that benefit out by removing a key feature. Seems it alienates the same # of users it adds to their market by lowering the price.

2. If price is so important why add a ~$2k scaler?

3. If youre trying to lower the price to a more mainstream user, arent you going to need lens shift more for them than the high-end custom user? My feeling is that the mainstream user isnt caculating offsets and whatnot. LCDs in the lower price range have both horizontal and vertical lens shift.

Expletive, good points! Since the scaler is a totally separate unit connected vis standard HDMI, why not add the lens shift back and make the scaler an option? I know that this is self serving, but I'll bet that a LOT of people would prefer this route, if the HD81's release configuration is not already written in stone. Just food for thought...

Bob,

"why not add the lens shift back and make the scaler an option? I know that this is self serving, but I'll bet that a LOT of people would prefer this route"

Definitly. I can handle the scaling with my Lumagen (though the Gennum would be interesting to see in action) but the 27% offset makes the projector a non starter. In my room I need to projector aigned with the top edge of the screen.

The 27% offset sounds like something that will effect quite a few ceiling mounted customers. I'm sure it is just the thing for a table mounted projector in a meeting room but maybe not as useful in a home theater.

Shawn

It must have a smaller offset or lens shift. I agree with Bob. 27% is way too high. My current HD2 dlp has a 13% and I made it work in a basement setup with 7'4" ceilings. Optoma please rethink this or make a second gen model soon

If Optoma were to sell the HD81 without a scaler, then the end user would have to supply their own. Optoma could of course could take the circuitry from the external scaler and build it into the projector, however, this is unlikely to save much money given that Optoma and not a third party is the supplier of the external scaler. This would also eliminate the benefits of a two box setup.

I had a lot of interest in the HD81, however, the fixed offset is too much for my HT. I suppose the projector AND the screen could be tilted so that there is no keystoning, however, I would really rather not take this approach.

I had a lot of interest in the HD81, however, the fixed offset is too much for my HT. I suppose the projector AND the screen could be tilted so that there is no keystoning, however, I would really rather not take this approach.

That will be a lot of tilt. I am in the same boat. I have some tilt with a pj with a 13% offset.

Other than that it sounds great

TzungLin,
Could you clarify the point that the offset puts the projector outside of the image height, or inside as Bob suggested as a possibility?

Example 1: 100" screen height, vertical offset 27" above (or below) the image

Example 2: 100" screen height, vertical offset 27" below top or above bottom of image

Which is accurate?

TzungLin,
Could you clarify the point that the offset puts the projector outside of the image height, or inside as Bob suggested as a possibility?

Example 1: 100" screen height, vertical offset 27" above (or below) the image

Example 2: 100" screen height, vertical offset 27" below top or above bottom of image

Which is accurate?

take you screen height and multiply by 27%

I have a 52x92 (106 diag) screen

52*27% = 14.04" so the center of the lens must be 14" above or below the screen

By the way a 100" screen is HUGE

D_B,
I understand how to calculate offset, thanks, but as Bob pointed out, it could be positive or negative. Hence my examples. Hopefully TzungLin will shed some light on this for us. Actually, 27% of 52" is 14.04", but you are SO close!! :D

The 100" height is just to make the math obvious to anyone who sees the post.

Are the Optoma HD81 1080p, Sharp, SIM 2, and Projection Design 1080P DLP all a 1 chip or 3 chips DLP projector?

Were there any 3 chips 1080P DLP?

Wow, no lens shift (and a 27% offset) certainly rules this one out for me. Ive been an optoma customer but it looks like ill have to try something else for 1080p. Seems a lot of people on the forum are concerned with the lack of a lens shift and will be unable to buy the PJ without it. I have 3 questions:

1. If you try to appeal to more people by lowering the price arent you balancing that benefit out by removing a key feature. Seems it alienates the same # of users it adds to their market by lowering the price.

2. If price is so important why add a ~$2k scaler?

3. If youre trying to lower the price to a more mainstream user, arent you going to need lens shift more for them than the high-end custom user? My feeling is that the mainstream user isnt caculating offsets and whatnot. LCDs in the lower price range have both horizontal and vertical lens shift.

I think if you re-read the comments on lens shift you see it is a time to market equasion as well. Not just cost. I am sure that lens shift would only add a small additional cost but because this PJ is using an existing light engine without lens shift. adding that feature to this engine would push the release date to an unacceptably late timeframe. So you can either have the PJ sooner without lens shift in 2006 or get it in 2007 with lens shift.

I think that Optima wanted to release their 1080 projector sooner rather than later to get on the front of the early adopor wave. and to establish a presence in the 1080 market space. That way they don't lose out on early 1080 sales completly.

They all appear to be 1 chip.

The presence of lens shift was important in my decision to upgrade from my old fixed offset BenQ to the H79. Installed just above and behind the viewing position I've been able to use a High Power and utilize near maximum gain; this wouldn't be possible with the HD81 and my low ceiling would in fact probably prevent me from using it at all.

Dan

I think if you re-read the comments on lens shift you see it is a time to market equasion as well. Not just cost. I am sure that lens shift would only add a small additional cost but because this PJ is using an existing light engine without lens shift. adding that feature to this engine would push the release date to an unacceptably late timeframe. So you can either have the PJ sooner without lens shift in 2006 or get it in 2007 with lens shift.

I think that Optima wanted to release their 1080 projector sooner rather than later to get on the front of the early adopor wave. and to establish a presence in the 1080 market space. That way they don't lose out on early 1080 sales completly.

Understood about the time to market but given the dearth of 1080p content is it really worthwhile to spend anytime engineering a solution without lens shift on a product with a 10k MSRP? IMO, the time they spent engineering this unit (even if thye have re-used a data-based design) was somewhat of a waste since theyll probably do a LS-capable design at some point anyway. IIRC they are one of TIs largest DLP manufacturers, how much presence do they need? Optoma should still be able to leverage their relationship with TI and their general 'size' to beat competitors to market.

I think if you re-read the comments on lens shift you see it is a time to market equasion as well. Not just cost. I am sure that lens shift would only add a small additional cost but because this PJ is using an existing light engine without lens shift. adding that feature to this engine would push the release date to an unacceptably late timeframe. So you can either have the PJ sooner without lens shift in 2006 or get it in 2007 with lens shift.

I think that Optima wanted to release their 1080 projector sooner rather than later to get on the front of the early adopor wave. and to establish a presence in the 1080 market space. That way they don't lose out on early 1080 sales completly.Yes, this is the most probable background of the HD81. I guess that they came to a decision, to do something against the danger of Ruby dominating the early 1080 market, only some time after the Ruby introduction.

Then they had no chance to design a specific HT projector. They took a business PJ already in a progressed design phase, i.e. the EP910, which had a comparably large DMD, and threw in the 1080 stuff.

From this business PJ we got the strange offset. As you said, it was not cost but time-to-market. The same is true for the external processor. It's quite inefficient with regard to cost, but the fastest option for getting something out.

IMHO this all means that the HD81 in its presently announced form will be very shortlived. Apart from its PQ it is not a good HT PJ, and its manufacturing cost are not optimized. Completely unaccaptable for a company like Optoma.

So they will replace it quite soon, I guess before the end of the year.

But an early adaptor like me still may have enough reason to buy one, simply due to the lack af alternatives. So I will do so in early summer, if then there is still no bright and cheap alternative. Cheap it must be, because everything out of this crop of 1st gen 1080 PJs will be shortlived, because they all are a done on a hasty defensive against the Ruby.

I would have upgraded my H79 for this one. No lens shift is a pretty large omission.

Dear AVS,


6. The throw ratio is about 1.8 to 2.2:1 (about), the offset is 27% (of vertical height), sorry that this may not fit everyone's installation.

8. The scalar box comes with 3x HDMI, 2x BNC, 2x YPbPr, 3x Composite/S-video and one VGA. The box will send HDMI out to HD81 projector body, and a RS232 to command projector.


I have 2 follow-up questions related to the 2 items above:

#6 I assume the throw ratio is times the screen width, is this correct? For example for a 120 inch wide screen the front of the projector would need to be back somewhere in the range of 216 inches (1.8 x 120) to 264 inches (2.2 x 120).

#8 If the box to the projector needs both an HDMI and a RS232 cable, what type of connectors are required on each end of the RS232 cable (DB9, DB25, ?). I will be building a new home theater in a few months and would like to pre-wire for the cables (up the wall and across the ceiling) before the drywall goes up.

Ron Jones

kuebler,
I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with their approach. I agree that it isn't the ultimate in flexibility, but if it works for a given application, then it works. I also agree that they will (probably already working on) have a home-centric product out later. I actually think the two box solution is SUPERIOR to all in one, so there we differ. It certainly looks like they didn't compromise the video processor performance using the Gennum VXP plus the additional chipset. Bottom line, if this projector does what you want, and it fits in your room, then why would you want to swap it in the short term? Based on the few reviews I have heard from people who saw it at the show, it doesn't sound like anything is going to come along and just blow it away for the price any time soon.

Falk got this pegged perfectly. Optoma threw a 1080p DMD in with a business projector light engine and then connected it to an external scaler in a huge rush to get a 1080p to market. The best of intentions...

Sony caught TI with their pants down and now manufacturers like Optoma are forced to rush something to market. I blame this on TI, not Optoma.

I actually think the two box solution is SUPERIOR to all in one, so there we differ.

So do I, as long as the box is OPTIONAL. I have been eagerly awaiting any manufacturer to sell a "head only" unit that would allow me to connect my scaler of choice. This way I could afford to buy a better head end and not spend more money repeating the functionality of a scaler that I already own.

I have 2 follow-up questions related to the 2 items above:

#8 If the box to the projector needs both an HDMI and a RS232 cable, what type of connectors are required on each end of the RS232 cable (DB9, DB25, ?). I will be building a new home theater in a few months and would like to pre-wire for the cables (up the wall and across the ceiling) before the drywall goes up.

Ron Jones

As I read (and it could be wishful reading) it the RS232 connection is on the scaler, allowing it to be controlled by RS232 control devices. The only connection to the projector is the video cable, which some are saying is an HDMI connection. I seem to remember reading that the scaler to projector connection is Fiber Optic, but I can't find it now and I may be confusing it with another projector scaler combination.

Allen

Oh no! :(

This will make for a bit of a problem, currently my HT room is 91" tall and my 106" diag screen is mounted 12.5" below the ceiling, assuming a 52" tall screen I'm already in trouble as this requires a 14" offset! :eek:

I just checked and concrete to floor joist is only 93"... I was hoping to increase the screen size but even with the screen I have, I would need to drop it lower on the wall to accommodate this PJ.

Some specific questions:
- Was the CES demo at iris full open ?


Thanks,
Brent

I will add to this question. The calibrated lumen output mentioned by TzungILin was very nice but if that is with an open iris we would like to know the contrast at that brightness.

It is good to hear that a variable iris will be added so brightness can be traded for contrast.

Bob,
In your case, I agree, but not everyone who will buy a video projector like the HD81 already has a scaler, and even if they do, it may not be as good as this one looks to be, with the Gennum and the flexible input switching. I, for one, would be happy with it as it is, since I have an HDLeeza I want to get rid of anyway. I think the processor included with this bundle is better than what I have right now. I would definitely like to see them offer just the head unit separately, but if I were to buy one, I would get the combo anyway.

I sure would like TzungLin to come back and clear up this positive/negative offset question. I hope he has time this evening to post a response. 27% outside the image height is fairly substantial, but for me it would be better than the alternative you suggested where it is inside the image height.

As I read it the RS232 connection is on the scaler, allowing it to be controlled by RS232 control devices. The only connection to the projector is the video cable, which some are saying is an HDMI connection. I seem to remember reading that the scaler to projector connection is Fiber Optic, but I can't find it now and I may be confusing it with another projector scaler combination.

Allen
The RS-232 is a DB9 connector on the Scaler. The interface from the Scaler to the projector is HDMI. I've got their color brochure with a photo of the Scaler connections. The IR extension and the 12V triggers are on the Scaler as well as an AV receiver loop on HDMI. Hope this helps.

6. The throw ratio is about 1.8 to 2.2:1 (about), the offset is 27% (of vertical height), sorry that this may not fit everyone's installation.
TzungILin - Just to be absolutely clear, is the 27% (of vertical height) referenced to:

a) the centre of the screen ?
b) the top (or bottom) of the screen ?

If it is b) is the offset outside the screen or inside the screen ?

A numerical example might be helpful. Sorry if this has already been adressed.

Thanks,
Brent

In your case, I agree, but not everyone who will buy a video projector like the HD81 already has a scaler, and even if they do, it may not be as good as this one looks to be, with the Gennum and the flexible input switching. I, for one, would be happy with it as it is, since I have an HDLeeza I want to get rid of anyway. I think the processor included with this bundle is better than what I have right now. I would definitely like to see them offer just the head unit separately, but if I were to buy one, I would get the combo anyway.

Yes, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I am in complete agreement that the two package solution is superior to having the scaler built into the projector. My point is just an addition to what you said - since the head and scaler are two separate units, hopefully connected by a HDMI cable, why not keep the scaler optional in order to please everybody? It's kinda like the audio receiver vs. prepro/power amp situation. Separates offer greater versatility and options.

Well, in the end Coretronic/Optoma is a company, as such they need to have a high customer orientation but also secure their yields, of course they are dependent of each other.
Yes, lens-shift mechanism let alone can be done tomorrow(CAD drawings, Raytraycing, establish correct dimensions, manufuacturing establishment, Design for Robust construction/ assembly/manufacturing etc)

As kuebler already said, the profit window in this market is small, very small. Even worse(for them), the pay-off time has increased. High start up(like in this case) and warranty HIGHLY affects the profits. A product that misses the market within the "correct" time frame (hello benq) can misses 1/3 or even more of the potential life cyle profit. Being in time but 50% overspent budget normaly only cut profit with 3-4%.
so they better start doing something about it NOW, but then..

As for introducing LATE engineering changes, it will have a devasting affect in final verification and quality. Don't! espacially if the R&D and production aren't located in the same country.

In this case, the update is minor(from the 910 model) so there may be no need for a extended start-up phase requering low production(yet still they need full speed in this phase)(training, set up machines, inspection etc). Therfore ramp-up can start.
So both load and capacaity paramteters can be "undercut" this way.

So it isn't really about "a lens shift mechnism"

Yes i agree with bob, Falk and the rest of you BUT!!
On the other hand, this CAN't be a suprise for Optoma??

They need better customer orientation.
Really, did TI called them last week and told them about a 1080p dmd with DC3 manufacturing ?

No they didn't....

Did customers started to ask about lens-shift and 1080p projectors last week?..

No they didn't...

i blame it on TI AND optoma =)

Still, i am looking forwad to the product AND i do like optoma. :cool:

Thanks for starting thread so quickly, I have a RUBY on order and was still a little gun-shy about the purchase. But this makes it easier for me, because I know the HD81 wont fit, even if I removed the ceiling fan completely. This does look like a great projector though. I love the idea of being able to move your equipment around the room where ever you want, and keeping dvd and set top box cables to a minimum length. And I have always wondered why so many projectors come in bright reflective colors when the whole idea is to get the room as dark as a cave. Hope every one catches on, I personally like the black look much better, regardless of what it does to help improve the picture.

Did Sony rush the Ruby to market? I have been on the fence awaiting news from the DLP camp. The Sony was never intended for screens over 100". How could Sony ignore so many projector users wanting to upgrade to 1080P buy selling a $10,000 projector that has such low lumens? Should buyers of the Sony be forced to replace their current screen in order to use a "high gain alternative" in order to have a "large" viewing experience.

I also never recall anyone chastising Dwin with their choice of a "2" box solution on their dlp projectors or Runco?

Every projector has strengths and weakness's that each purchaser must weigh before the make a purchase based on their install needs.

This constant bashing of DLP and the slant that "Sony is the Only" is fruitless. :rolleyes:

6. The throw ratio is about 1.8 to 2.2:1 (about), the offset is 27% (of vertical height), sorry that this may not fit everyone's installation.

Useless for me also. I wont be able to upgrade my H79 either. I'm guessing anyone with 8.5 foot or less ceilings wont be able to ceiling mount this projector.

I would have to lower my screen about 4 inches to utilize a 27% offset. My 8 foot ceilings just wont allow it.

Brad

This constant bashing of DLP and the slant that "Sony is the Only" is fruitless. :rolleyes:
What bashing? Most of the comments here are from DLP owners who want to upgrade to a 1080p DLP, but are disappointed with the mounting limitations of this projector.

Now I hope that the "offset" is within the screen as some suggest. My apologies to HiFiGuy1 as he was trying to get me to understand that this was a possibility. I had not heard of it before. With my low ceiling that might just work if the pj is at the outer reach of the throw distance.

Hope still lives :)

I was possibly looking to upgrade to this PJ as well. But given the parameters, I doubt I could either. I guess I could try Optoma's future flagship HD83 or HD84 when they include all the features. I like having lens shift. I am spoiled on it. Besides, wouldn't a 3 chip 1080p PJ be worth the wait? People tend to get over excited when a new product comes (I do as well), but let's not forget how excited they were over the H79 and other great pjs as well. Now hearing some of the specs and features (or lack there of) is turning this into a killjoy for me.

Just joining the chorus. I was cheered by the early news on this piece. But, the combination of limiting throw in concert with such a high offset are potential deal killers for many. Not just a few, many. I believe (personal opinion only) that most of us have 2 interests in this pj: good brightness output for use on large screens and a resolution to meet Ruby and others. So, it would seem counter-productive to me to have such a very large offset. The larger the screen (which is why you want all that brightness to begin with), the worse the offset becomes. They tantalize you with how nice it looks on a 135" Studiotek - BUT - the avg. HT probably has 8' or possibly 9' ceilings. Do the math. The min. throw on that would be 18 or more and require ceilings of 11' or so for normal setup.

You'd have to mount that size screen about at floor level or slightly above to get it to work! Even using a 123"d Firehawk (which was my original choice for my new HT with 8' ceilings but all else flexible), you are looking at a 9' wide screen, yielding 60" ht. This means mounting at about 16" or a little more above the screen. Just assuming an 8' ceiling requiring a pj mounted as close to ceiling as possible (assuming at least 8-10" of clearance below ceiling for mounting) results in:

ceiling (8') = 96" minus 10" mount clearance
pj mount position = 86" minus 27%offset (16") for 60" high scrn (123"diag)
max top of scrn (offset)= 70" minus scrn physical ht of 60"
bottom scrn to floor = 10" left for center speaker, etc and abnormally low viewing angle

This pj screams for a larger than Ruby screen, but needs a 10' or higher room to do it and a potential throw distance starting at about 16.5' and rapidly growing with screen size and desire not to minimally mount so close.

Too bad, unless I misread it, this PJ had all the potential but the very large offset amount works against its proposed use of brightness for large screens. It seems to miss the room conditions of its intended audience to a large extent. I don't mind the 2 box solution, I just want it optional so I can use my box of choice. All of this is really disappointing after such initial terrific reports. Sounds great for those of you with really tall rooms or those willing to seriously downsize the screen, but when you do that, you eliminate the brightness advantage and enter Ruby territory with 3 chips and better contrast. A real mix of conflicting specs. Too bad.

27% outside the image height is fairly substantial, but for me it would be better than the alternative you suggested where it is inside the image height.

Same here.

I actually have tall ceilings (10 feet high) so while this will technically work for me, I would still prefer the flexibility of having a lens shift.

Guys, I was half joking when I suggested that the 27% offset might possibly be within the confines of the screen - It was more like wishful thinking. Since then I discovered that this projector uses a business/presentation light engine, and it would be very typical to have a 27% external offset for such a unit (think large board room with projector mounted on table). Unfortunately this is not optimum for us home theater folks. But please don't get your hopes up thinking that the 27% offset might be within the screen borders - the chances of this are almost zero.

Bob,
Definitely with you on that, but it is at least a possibility, and I would very much appreciate a direct response for us from TzungLin himself as to the specifics of the offset (from screen center or edge, positive/negative offset, etc.). I am not holding my breath, though. Actually, it works fine for me the way we already think it will be, I am just hoping for the sake of my basement-enhanced AVS brethren that it will work for them. I can't really afford one yet anyway, even if it fits, unfortunately.

Ok, I've created a sample installation so that people could get an idea of what 27% offset will mean in real life. I am going to use a standard 8' (96") ceiling for my example, and I am going to assume that I am able to build a "hugger" ceiling mount for the projector in order to get it within 4" of the ceiling. Also, I am going to use my actual screen, a 16:9 100" X 56" wall mount (114" diagonal) with 1.5" frame all around. Here's how it fits:

96" total height
92" high is center of lens (4" down from ceiling)
77" high is top of viewable screen (I rounded off 15.12" to 15" - top of frame would be 78.5" high)
21" high is bottom of viewable screen
19.5" high is bottom of frame

Using a 114" diagonal screen in an 8' room, "hugging" the ceiling with the projector would then leave you with 19.5" below your screen to place your center speaker, or you could mount it above the screen since your screen will be 78.5" down from the ceiling (Edit: oops, that's 78.5" up from the floor), giving you 17.5" above to work with.

Now, if you increase the size of the screen, don't forget that the screen will need to mount lower on the wall, as the 27% of screen height offset will increase as the screen gets larger.

If you use a more normal mount with a drop of 8" instead of 4", shift everything down 4".

You can also "fudge" things a bit by tilting the projector in order to mount the screen up higher and/or use a larger screen, but make sure you have a fairly wide black border to absorb the slightly trapezoidal image that will result from tilting the projector.

I have provided this example just so that people can get a feel for how this projector will or will not fit into their particular plans.

I have a 7' ceiling and my center speaker speaker measures 72" X 18" X 18" (yes, it really is that huge!), so unfortunately the HD81 won't work for me. :(

It would work for me, but I would also prefer a lens shift. I'm not in that big of a rush, but I admit that this projector is tempting. I would like to see a big improvement over my current 720p DC3. I don't sit that close to the screen so I'm not sure how much of an improvement the 1080p would actually be. With this projector I would require a new screen also as I currently use a 92" wide HighPower.
I think a 10 ft. wide screen would work quite well.

Noone here here has to make a decision now as the projector is not even available yet, and by the time it is there may be some other choices in the works and I guess it may even be possible that lens shift could be added. I would also like to know about lamp price and how many hours it is rated for.

I'm out too.....fixed 27% offset makes it a non-starter for my installation... :(
Looks like I'll have to keep my Sharp 12K till Q3 and then get the 20K.

Oh yeah, and one more thing - retroreflective screens like the High Power and Optoma's own Graywolf would not be recommended in these types of installations. You'd be best to stick with angular reflective screens with such a large offset.

Ok, I've created a sample installation so that people could get an idea of what 27% offset will mean in real life. I am going to use a standard 8' (96") ceiling for my example, and I am going to assume that I am able to build a "hugger" ceiling mount for the projector in order to get it within 4" of the ceiling. Also, I am going to use my actual screen, a 16:9 100" X 56" wall mount (114" diagonal) with 1.5" frame all around. Here's how it fits:

96" total height
92" high is center of lens (4" down from ceiling)
77" high is top of viewable screen (I rounded off 15.12" to 15" - top of frame would be 78.5" high)
21" high is bottom of viewable screen
19.5" high is bottom of frame

Using a 114" diagonal screen in an 8' room, "hugging" the ceiling with the projector would then leave you with 19.5" below your screen to place your center speaker, or you could mount it above the screen since your screen will be 78.5" down from the ceiling, giving you 17.5" above to work with.

Now, if you increase the size of the screen, don't forget that the screen will need to mount lower on the wall, as the 27% of screen height offset will increase as the screen gets larger.

If you use a more normal mount with a drop of 8" instead of 4", shift everything down 4".

You can also "fudge" things a bit by tilting the projector in order to mount the screen up higher and/or use a larger screen, but make sure you have a fairly wide black border to absorb the slightly trapezoidal image that will result from tilting the projector.

I have provided this example just so that people can get a feel for how this projector will or will not fit into their particular plans.

I have a 7' ceiling and my center speaker speaker measures 72" X 18" X 18" (yes, it really is that huge!), so unfortunately the HD81 won't work for me. :(


Good work Bob!

Still looks like this will be a close call for those with 8 foot ceilings, especially if they have a larger screen.

Bob,
Excellent point to make about angular vs retro-reflective screens. It is even more important to heed this advice when a projector has a substantial offset.

Falk got this pegged perfectly. Optoma threw a 1080p DMD in with a business projector light engine and then connected it to an external scaler in a huge rush to get a 1080p to market. The best of intentions...

Sony caught TI with their pants down and now manufacturers like Optoma are forced to rush something to market. I blame this on TI, not Optoma.

That explains why it looks just like a EP910 with a different lens.

On making the scaler optional:

I have (or will have) a nice Gennum scaler in my Anthem D2. I'd probably sell the included scaler and think of it as a rebate. Should fetch more than $2k on the open market? It's pretty much bleeding edge.

Ken

Ken,

"I'd probably sell the included scaler and think of it as a rebate. Should fetch more than $2k on the open market? It's pretty much bleeding edge."

Depends upon how flexible it is. If it has say just a fixed 1080p output (what the Optoma needs) then it would be less useful to others as a scaler.

Shawn

Dang I have the H77 and was waiting until the H81 to upgrade. However, I have my screen mounted only a few inches down from the ceiling and no lense **** puts me out too. Hopefully they will have an H82 soon and include lense shift on that model. I love optoma and if no lense shift in the next year I will have to look at the new sharp 20000

Ok, I've created a sample installation so that people could get an idea of what 27% offset will mean in real life. I am going to use a standard 8' (96") ceiling for my example, and I am going to assume that I am able to build a "hugger" ceiling mount for the projector in order to get it within 4" of the ceiling. Also, I am going to use my actual screen, a 16:9 100" X 56" wall mount (114" diagonal) with 1.5" frame all around. Here's how it fits:

96" total height
92" high is center of lens (4" down from ceiling)
77" high is top of viewable screen (I rounded off 15.12" to 15" - top of frame would be 78.5" high)
21" high is bottom of viewable screen
19.5" high is bottom of frame

Using a 114" diagonal screen in an 8' room, "hugging" the ceiling with the projector would then leave you with 19.5" below your screen to place your center speaker, or you could mount it above the screen since your screen will be 78.5" down from the ceiling, giving you 17.5" above to work with.

Now, if you increase the size of the screen, don't forget that the screen will need to mount lower on the wall, as the 27% of screen height offset will increase as the screen gets larger.

If you use a more normal mount with a drop of 8" instead of 4", shift everything down 4".

You can also "fudge" things a bit by tilting the projector in order to mount the screen up higher and/or use a larger screen, but make sure you have a fairly wide black border to absorb the slightly trapezoidal image that will result from tilting the projector.

I have provided this example just so that people can get a feel for how this projector will or will not fit into their particular plans.

I have a 7' ceiling and my center speaker speaker measures 72" X 18" X 18" (yes, it really is that huge!), so unfortunately the HD81 won't work for me. :(

One additional point to add: if you buy that eye level should be about 1/3 of the way up from the bottom, then this puts eye level at 39.67" (not too bad with a decent couch/chair). If you drop the mount 4", then you start looking for bean bags or those Recaro-wannabe gaming seats.

Later,
Bill

The large offset makes it unworkable for me as well.

TzungILin, I imagine Optoma is already at work on a model that will allow upgrading from H7x.

Will it retain the powered zoom/focus (I hope so)?

Can you say when it might ship?

Thanks

I thought the Optoma was the best thing to be seen at the show. Everyone walked away stunned at the power of the image, the blacks and the great colors, the color being very strong and especially natural in facel tone/hues. The Narida clip was simply amazing and I reveled in the tone hues in the actors faces. Nice3 job (Tz) on the color and good to meet you.

The color wheel is at a new speed, 180hz which Wing says puts it over 6x's speed. Rainbows could not be seen period. Both the H81 and the H80 use the Gennum chip and the RGB/RGB-1Dark-green segments.

http://www.cigarbest.com/sales/h81nardia1.jpg

http://www.cigarbest.com/sales/h81nardia2.jpg

http://www.cigarbest.com/sales/h81.jpg

Pictures don't show it but this PJ was extremelty bright with vivid color and deep blacks. Action scenes with panning were rendered very fast and smooth. I don't think the people looking for trailing pan problems will have any trouble.

Actually a couple of other demo's I saw showed odd combing during pans. Not sure if it was the giant SXRD at Sony or some of the LCD's I saw. The Hitachi, Sanyo, Epson.

I'm sorry to say the LCD's all showed what I'll call a high crammed dot image. A problem if you're looking for smooth film type video. These are extremely low priced machines so it could be ok. Shows fill is very important.

noah katz said:
Will it retain the powered zoom/focus (I hope so)?

Probably so.

Can you say when it might ship?

Probably not. :D

Tom,

"The color wheel is at a new speed, 180hz which Wing says puts it over 6x's speed. Rainbows could not be seen period."

If you're not susceptible to RBE, this doesn't mean much.

Were there normally susceptible people there who didn't see it?

Thanks

As far as the offset, it will work easy for me. I have average 8' ceilings, with my cheif mount that puts the screen right in the sweet spot.

The other projectors.
http://www.cigarbest.com/sales/otpomagroup.jpg

The H72 looked very good, the H80 looked twice as good. :)
The h72 will be a super deal for HD resolution. It does have brillant color and Faroudja processing. The 768 vertical res can be used for a taller classic 4.3 image but you'll need a motorized screen to line up the 4.3 image tighter.

The 72 can be used with 16.9 screens displaying in typical fashion. 16.9 and normal 4.3 with black bars on the sides. I have an electric screen so I could utilize the larger 4.3 image and still retain natural 16.9 also.

This other machine taking over for the H79 is a two item deal. The projector uses the Dark chip 3 comes with the Gennum processor seperate box HDMI swither scaler which has extra goodies. The MSRP is $6k.

If I got the prices right the -
H81 $9999
H80 not sure, we need to know the stand alone H80 msrp? My guess $7999
HT7300 $5999
H72 $3999

You must know the street levels by now so prices across the board look very nice. Too cheap I think. :)

Tom,

The HD81 brochure says the wheel is RGBCYM. Is this not true?

Thanks,
Ken

Nope defeintely RGB/RGB/Green

http://www.cigarbest.com/sales/h81nardia1.jpg
The polar bears' fur looks green to me. Hopefully that's an artifact from the camera.

Tom,

"The color wheel is at a new speed, 180hz which Wing says puts it over 6x's speed. Rainbows could not be seen period."

If you're not susceptible to RBE, this doesn't mean much.

Were there normally susceptible people there who didn't see it?

Thanks

True I'm not bothered buy the rainbow effect but I could bring them out with projectors if I tried. Same for Wing, he tried also. I'm not sure if this will help people that get eyestrain. Chances of reports from rainbow people are a low percentage prop.

Oh, I didn't gamble much but beat Winn's new Casino for a clean $1200, thx Mr. Winn. :)

Wing and Tz, I'm not rude at not showing at your party, thanks for the invite. I was there on line to go in but I travel in Las Vegas with running shoes on. They threw me off the line (no sneaker guys allowed) Sorry. But I did hit thier Casino for the $1200. :)

Bob, glad you came back in to quiet all the excitement about a "negative" offset and no lens shift...
My first question would have been... "has anyone ever seen a projector with a negative offset?" What would be the purpose of this design... and who was it designed for?


Second as Tzun told us from the gitgo that the housing was stolen from a business projector, just think about a business presentation... you always have the portable projector on the conference table projecting an image up where everyone in the room can see it.

I agree that this was a "warp-speed" effort by Optoma to counter the Ruby threat.... what amazed me was just what a terrific job Optoma did! This thing is just drop dead gorgeous!

I am sure Optoma will be following this with more cool stuff and hopefully they will be able to address the needs of folks with low ceilings..... but at least they have a great performing platform to work from!

My first question would have been... "has anyone ever seen a projector with a negative offset?" What would be the purpose of this design... and who was it designed for?TI's reference designs have all been fixed negative offsets, haven't they? And they've appeared in projectors like the Infocus line I know.

Don't Panamorphs or ISCOs change the native offsets of projectors? If so, would they help or hurt in this situation... maybe the HD81 could be a perfect 2.35 setup for some.
-Matt

Isn't the most accurate part of the lens the center. I know a lot of people with the Dwin TV3 had problems with ghosting when the lens was shifted more. I guess this may have been caused by stray light reflecting off the sides of the optical chamber or poor design.

I'm just wondering if a lens shift may complicate things a bit versus just a straight shoot through the middle.

I thought the Optoma was the best thing to be seen at the show. Everyone walked away stunned at the power of the image, the blacks and the great colors, the color being very strong and especially natural in facel tone/hues. The Narida clip was simply amazing and I reveled in the tone hues in the actors faces. Nice3 job (Tz) on the color and good to meet you.

The color wheel is at a new speed, 180hz which Wing says puts it over 6x's speed. Rainbows could not be seen period. Both the H81 and the H80 use the Gennum chip and the RGB/RGB-1Dark-green segments.

http://www.cigarbest.com/sales/h81nardia1.jpg

http://www.cigarbest.com/sales/h81nardia2.jpg

http://www.cigarbest.com/sales/h81.jpg

Pictures don't show it but this PJ was extremelty bright with vivid color and deep blacks. Action scenes with panning were rendered very fast and smooth. I don't think the people looking for trailing pan problems will have any trouble.

Actually a couple of other demo's I saw showed odd combing during pans. Not sure if it was the giant SXRD at Sony or some of the LCD's I saw. The Hitachi, Sanyo, Epson.

I'm sorry to say the LCD's all showed what I'll call a high crammed dot image. A problem if you're looking for smooth film type video. These are extremely low priced machines so it could be ok. Shows fill is very important.

Tom,

Do you have any pix of the HD81/Narnia scene from the dark portions, like when they were just walking to the wardrobe??? The background walls were full of noise when I saw the demo, just curious if someone else saw this? I'm sure this will be worked out in production.

So then what is the official model number for the PJ that is replacing the H79 that runs for 6,000? Is it the HT7300? Does it not have lens shift either? And is it 1080p?

I would like to come back to Matt's point: Is an Isco nearly mandatory for such a model, isn't it ? It would sharten the throw ratio to a usable format (1.8-2.2 is simply to long for me) when using 1:2.35 and can help to give some kind of lens shift.

"and can help to give some kind of lens shift. "

Not really. You can move the image up/down by tilting the ISCO but in doing so you increase geometric distortion top and bottom on the picture. With a lens shift that doesn't occur.

The tilt and vertical positioning of the ISCO is basically used to minimize distortion. You align the projector with the screen then setup the ISCO for the same alignment with the least distortion.

Shawn

The offset kills it for me too :( A shame.

TM

The RS-232 is a DB9 connector on the Scaler. The interface from the Scaler to the projector is HDMI. I've got their color brochure with a photo of the Scaler connections. The IR extension and the 12V triggers are on the Scaler as well as an AV receiver loop on HDMI. Hope this helps.

Could you can and post this brochure for all to see?

Thanks

Well done, given this it will work for me after all, my screen is slightly smaller at 106" diagonal and I currently have the center channel on the floor and point slightly upward. Future plans did include a riser for the rear seats for a 'mini stadium' view over those in front... could work out fine.

What was the throw for this going to be like, my room is about 21' long

Ok, I've created a sample installation so that people could get an idea of what 27% offset will mean in real life. I am going to use a standard 8' (96") ceiling for my example, and I am going to assume that I am able to build a "hugger" ceiling mount for the projector in order to get it within 4" of the ceiling. Also, I am going to use my actual screen, a 16:9 100" X 56" wall mount (114" diagonal) with 1.5" frame all around. Here's how it fits:

96" total height
92" high is center of lens (4" down from ceiling)
77" high is top of viewable screen (I rounded off 15.12" to 15" - top of frame would be 78.5" high)
21" high is bottom of viewable screen
19.5" high is bottom of frame

Using a 114" diagonal screen in an 8' room, "hugging" the ceiling with the projector would then leave you with 19.5" below your screen to place your center speaker, or you could mount it above the screen since your screen will be 78.5" down from the ceiling (Edit: oops, that's 78.5" up from the floor), giving you 17.5" above to work with.

Now, if you increase the size of the screen, don't forget that the screen will need to mount lower on the wall, as the 27% of screen height offset will increase as the screen gets larger.

If you use a more normal mount with a drop of 8" instead of 4", shift everything down 4".

You can also "fudge" things a bit by tilting the projector in order to mount the screen up higher and/or use a larger screen, but make sure you have a fairly wide black border to absorb the slightly trapezoidal image that will result from tilting the projector.

I have provided this example just so that people can get a feel for how this projector will or will not fit into their particular plans.

I have a 7' ceiling and my center speaker speaker measures 72" X 18" X 18" (yes, it really is that huge!), so unfortunately the HD81 won't work for me. :(

I have a 120.5" screen and an eight foot ceiling. I have roughly 15-16 inches from the ceiling to where my screen starts (past black border). Center channel is below the screen. So with my screen being 59 inches tall, does this mean this PJ will NOT work for me as well?

From my CES Report:

Best Front Projection 1080p -- Optoma H81: Without a doubt the best front projector demo that beat the six-figure competitors. I don’t know if someone had fully tweaked both the projector and the source material, but all in our group agreed that the Optoma H81 blew away all other demos of DLP projectors. Amazing black levels, color saturation, and most of all, smooth and detailed picture resolution.

Good News – Bad News: In March, Toshiba will release two HD-DVD players at $499 and $799 MSRP. A number of movies will be released at this time. The bad news is that due to HDMI compatibility issues, the movies will be released in the 1080i format. Since most people have digital displays at native 720p, or hope to someday have a 1080p display device, the use of 1080i is disappointing but it seems a necessary evil to ensure that HD-DVD will play on as many systems as possible.

Bob, glad you came back in to quiet all the excitement about a "negative" offset and no lens shift...
My first question would have been... "has anyone ever seen a projector with a negative offset?" What would be the purpose of this design... and who was it designed for?
Some of the JVC projectors had a 40% offset, IIRC (SX21, HX1/2, HD2K?). The way JVC measured offset, this put the bottom 10% of the image below the lens centerline. Also, I think the Panasonic LCD projectors also had this as well, before Panasonic got lens shift religion with the AE500 (?).

I am another of the H7x owners who, it looks like, Optoma no longer wants as a customer (need that lens shift!). So, hopefully the Sharp won't be absurdly priced, nor have an excessively short throw.

Later,
Bill

Bill I don't think Optoma is trying to "dis" there current 7x customer base by leaving out the lens shift.... rather the business projector they used as a basis for the H81 was probably the only box currently available that could handle the DMD size and lens they needed to use.

It is undoubtably a series of compromises to get the machine on the market to blunt the Ruby freight train. We all speculated that the DLP manufacturers had to do something to respond to Ruby as Sony definitely caught TI in napping mode. It seems that Optoma was the manufacturer that was able to respond the quickest and as such will be rewarded with a bunch of sales that would have otherwise gone to the Ruby... Is it a perfect solution... nope, but I am guessing that Tzun and company already have a team assigned and working hard to bring out the next model that will use this DMD and the Brilliant color technology.

And I Carnac jr. proclaim it WILL have lens shift.........!! Of course now if I could predict when it would show up... then I would be a true prognosticator!

It is undoubtably a series of compromises to get the machine on the market to blunt the Ruby freight train.

Steve, it is one thing to try to capture some sales that would otherwise go to the Ruby, but it is also quite another to alienate their already loyal following. Optoma customers are used to having lens shift. If they take that very important feature away by putting the new DMD into a presentation frame/light engine, they will probably sell some of these to their business customers, but they are leaving a bad taste in the mouths of the loyal home theater crowd. Sure, some people will be able to use the presentation offset, but many will be left out in the cold. At first I blamed TI for getting caught with their pants down, but the more I think about it, the more I have to agree with an earlier poster who mentioned that Optoma must have at least known the size of the DMD well in advance of its release. I have to believe that they have had at least a year to prepare some sort of light engine for the new DMD and not have to resort to using a presentation engine. Maybe I'm wrong. Where is Tzung?

I don't know how many people are in the same boat as I, but I was waiting to find out what showed up at CES before making my next purchase. I had high hopes for the HD81, and I would even consider waiting as long as March to buy one if I could possibly use it in my theater. Seeing that no one else seems to be releasing anything any sooner, it looks like I will be buying a Ruby, warts and all, simply because I don't have any other option other than waiting and hoping. If I buy a Ruby now, at least I can get a year or maybe more of 1080p enjoyment before the DLP people get settled with 1080p offerings. What I really long for is a 3 chip 1080p DLP, and based on how long it is taking just for the single chippers, I fear that affordable 3 chippers will be at least a year away, probably a lot longer. So do I wait a year or whatever for Optoma to release a lens shift version of the HD81 or do I buy a Ruby now?

Please don't take this as Optoma bashing and/or Ruby praising. I have no particular affection towards Sony and their products, but unless Optoma offers a lens shift version OR can at least drastically reduce the offset (if that could be done without a major redesign), I am FORCED to look elsewhere. I would prefer to buy an Optoma if they would offer one I could use!

I have no particular affection towards Sony and their products

I would think that EVERY HT enthusiast would have affection towards Sony right now, if only for completely redefining the price/performance curve! :) I suspect that a Ruby is not in my future (too long for my shelf mount needs), but I do send warm, positive thoughts towards that billion dollar plant in Pittsburgh that necessitated Sony pursuing a mass-market strategy with SXRD.

As for knowing the dimensions of the 1080p chip, I'm not sure we can actually say what the manufacturers knew and when. In reality, they had a few basic issues:
Pulling together a processing solution that can deal with 1080p
Tweaking the reference motherboard design to fit their needs
Deciding between dropping the chip into an existing light engine and having a much shorter throw as a result (Sharp 20K?), or cutting new glass to maintain/extend the throw range (Optoma and PD kind of cheated here by having SXGA models already)
Hitting a $10k MSRP that allows them to be profitable in the first year, knowing that Sony will have almost a year's head start on them, with discounted pricing to follow.

Basically, I agree that Optoma chose the best route available to hit TTM (time-to-market) considerations. By the time the HD82 (or whatnot) shows up, with lens shift, it will probably be CEDIA, at the earliest. I'm just not going to be in the market for an Optoma machine until the lens shift makes it back in. Fortunately for them, most of my HT budget for the year is already slated for HD-DVD/BDA source components and software. :)

Later,
Bill

Expletive, good points! Since the scaler is a totally separate unit connected vis standard HDMI, why not add the lens shift back and make the scaler an option? I know that this is self serving, but I'll bet that a LOT of people would prefer this route, if the HD81's release configuration is not already written in stone. Just food for thought...
Completely agreed. A lot of customers who are in the market for a $10K projector will already have a scaler, but the lack of lens shift rules this projector out entirely--scaler or no scaler--for a lot of people (including me). Oh well.

I would assume they won't add the lensshift back in this unit because they don't have a lens to use right now, in other words, they (or whoever builds these for them) need to design one, which will take time...

The link to the photos in my Optoma HD81 CES 2006 Pics & Screenshots - Best HT Projector at the Show - thread is now fixed if anyone is interested.

I don't know how many people are in the same boat as I, but I was waiting to find out what showed up at CES before making my next purchase. I had high hopes for the HD81, and I would even consider waiting as long as March to buy one if I could possibly use it in my theater. Seeing that no one else seems to be releasing anything any sooner, it looks like I will be buying a Ruby, warts and all, simply because I don't have any other option other than waiting and hoping. If I buy a Ruby now, at least I can get a year or maybe more of 1080p enjoyment before the DLP people get settled with 1080p offerings. What I really long for is a 3 chip 1080p DLP, and based on how long it is taking just for the single chippers, I fear that affordable 3 chippers will be at least a year away, probably a lot longer. So do I wait a year or whatever for Optoma to release a lens shift version of the HD81 or do I buy a Ruby now?

Please don't take this as Optoma bashing and/or Ruby praising. I have no particular affection towards Sony and their products, but unless Optoma offers a lens shift version OR can at least drastically reduce the offset (if that could be done without a major redesign), I am FORCED to look elsewhere. I would prefer to buy an Optoma if they would offer one I could use!I am in the very same boat and my thoughts are quite the same. However, I'm prepared to live with 720 for a while longer until things sort themselves out and am focusing on calibration and optimizing my Optoma (sorry) H79 until CEDIA. After that, it'll be a ~7-8K$ street priced Ruby (II?) or single chip 1080 DLP with lens shift. I, too, doubt that any 3-chip DLPs will be in that price neighborhood for a couple of years, but 1080 LCOS or LCD offerings may be very interesting by then.

Dan

TzungILin,
Hopefully, your adjustable iris will have enough range to reduce the light output and bring up the contrast to lets say, in marketing speak, to 9,000:1. With Optoma's traditional discount off MSRP, and flexibility in the light output and contrast, would make this projector a winner.

Can Someone Tell Me If The Hd72 Can Be Mounted Between The Top And Bottom Of The Screen Or Does It Have To Be Above The Border Like The H81? Thank You Very Much. Sam Zeoli

TzungILin,
Hopefully, your adjustable iris will have enough range to reduce the light output and bring up the contrast to lets say, in marketing speak, to 9,000:1. With Optoma's traditional discount off MSRP, and flexibility in the light output and contrast, would make this projector a winner.

I like the adjustable iris also, but I doubt it will affect the contrast ratio much in my room. I think at full open that the projector may be too bright(at least with a new bulb) on certain screens. It would also allow you to open it up when more ambient lighting is present. I would hope it would also be powered since it looks like most people that would buy this projector would have at least 9 foot ceilings.

I copied the following post from another thread. I've been reading this forum a long time and have come to respect Alan Gougers's opinion. I think it is unusual to have someone selling projectors to be so honest as Alan. I have never suspected him of even exaggerating about one technology or the other for personal gain, he just tells it the way he sees it. So here is where a 4000:1 contrast ratio projector beats a 15000:1 contrast ratio projector. He's talking about the 3 chip Mercury.


Administrator

Alan Gouger's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Somewhere in the good ole USA
Posts: 11,659

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tryg
Alan, lets not be cryptic

Is the picture from this 720p projector better than the 1080p Ruby?



Clearly in every way. Ive invited Darin and we will get together in a few months to have a look at some of this side by side.

__________________
Alan Gouger
alan@avscience.com

The Optoma HD81 was also the best projector I saw at the show, and the scaler is most impressive in number of inputs and features. Sony didn't even have the Ruby hooked up; the only place to see one in Las Vegas was the Sony Style store in the Forum mall.

True I'm not bothered buy the rainbow effect but I could bring them out with projectors if I tried. Same for Wing, he tried also. I'm not sure if this will help people that get eyestrain. Chances of reports from rainbow people are a low percentage prop.

Oh, I didn't gamble much but beat Winn's new Casino for a clean $1200, thx Mr. Winn. :)

Wing and Tz, I'm not rude at not showing at your party, thanks for the invite. I was there on line to go in but I travel in Las Vegas with running shoes on. They threw me off the line (no sneaker guys allowed) Sorry. But I did hit thier Casino for the $1200. :)


I am somewhat suseptible to eyestrain with 1 chippers but had absolutely no difficulty with the Optoma H81 (unlike the Infocus demos). I stayed for quite some time, and could have easily stayed there all weekend.. ;)

For my humble experience, this was the projector to come closest to the ideal size, brightness, detail, color saturation, and smoothness of image.

A real beaut...


Oh yeah, thanks Sony for having the Ruby on display..... on a pillar. :rolleyes:

Guys,

There are some creative ways to use a high offset projector in low ceiling or type of enviroment.

Here is an install of HT1000 in a 7 foot ceiling HT.

http://mrwigggles.250free.com/Tiltedscreentheaterfull.JPG

How did he get a high offset projector down so low? Digital keystone correction? Nope. Serious overscan? Nope.

He tilted the projector up slightly and the screen forward slightly. A 5 degree tilt will give you 1 inch vertical image shift per foot of throw.

With the specs Tzung posted earlier, on the H81, it works out to about 4 degrees of tilt to turn it from a 27% to 0% offset projector. (0% means the lens lines up with the top edge of the picture.)

Some tilt is actually visually appealing IMO. 4 degrees is definitely not too much. Here is rough sketch if you still don't quite follow me:

http://mrwigggles.250free.com/projector_tilt.jpg

The sketch is only for reference. (I free-handed it and then told the program to rotate it 4 degrees - I think it actually turned out fairly accurate)

This level of tilt is not objectionable. For the person in the chair the tangent line is still above their eyes so it doesn't look like the screen is falling forward.

Anyway, where there's a will there's a way. High offset is not that difficult of a problem to overcome.

-Mr. Wigggles

There's a couple of side benefits to this:

1. Less reflection from high mounted lights

2. As Peter (Cineramax) pointed out, this reduces visual keystoning from the top of the screen being farther from your eyes than the bottom

There's a couple of side benefits to this:

1. Less reflection from high mounted lights

2. As Peter (Cineramax) pointed out, this reduces visual keystoning from the top of the screen being farther from your eyes than the bottom

Will tilting affect focus uniformity at all?

There's a couple of side benefits to this:
...

2. As Peter (Cineramax) pointed out, this reduces visual keystoning from the top of the screen being farther from your eyes than the bottom
I guess that means Peter is collecting royalties.

Yes, when you first walk into the room the slight tilt will be unusual, but once you sit down I think it makes viewing more enjoyable. You don't feel like you are looking up at the screen but the screen has been pointed more towards you. It is a subtle thing, either way, but doesn't detract from the movie at all.

-Mr. Wigggles

Lots of question but no replies from optoma expert. I wonder why.
Paul

Lots of question but no replies from optoma expert. I wonder why.
Paul

Ummm, maybe he is on a long plane flight back to Taiwan.

Ericglo

Lots of question but no replies from optoma expert. I wonder why.
Paul

Good question. I think the lack of a lens shift option is going to be a show stopper for many of us here.

Hopefully they are reading thses posts and will do something by the time this thing ships.

Weren't they saying late Q3 for this projector ??

There's a couple of side benefits to this:

1. Less reflection from high mounted lights

2. As Peter (Cineramax) pointed out, this reduces visual keystoning from the top of the screen being farther from your eyes than the bottomI had a nearly identical setup in my previous theater (ceiling was 8ft, but a Panamorph added offset). Two more benefits:
Smaller angle = increased gain on High Power screen
Breaks up sound reflections between screen and back wall
Overall, I liked the effect. It seemed very natural, and I never felt like I was looking up at the screen.

--Dan

Guys,

There are some creative ways to use a high offset projector in low ceiling or type of enviroment.
Clever! :cool:

Clever! :cool:

Clever enough to work too! does this address the screen gain issue raised?

Might just be an option, because I have a real hard time bringing myself to put money down for a 720 when a 1080 unit will soon be available.

BTW I actually do this with my current PJ to overcome a poor mounting height, Mr. Wiggles, thanks for the reminder!

Clever indeed. And well explained, showcased. It's just unfortunate IMO that such cleverness is required of the consumer (and in this case only a very FEW consumers I wager) to overcome seemingly rushed production and/or poorly thought out engineering by the manufacturer. I get the "business presentation" bit, etc and understand why they thought this was the best alternative for now given box restrictions. But I question the value of the decision to bring the product out, basically half-baked. Would it not have been better to show it as prototype and explain the issue with a promise to deliver? As it is, they still had to make a promise to deliver, so the only thing to change is how long. And, in the meantime, do that many people really expect to buy a PJ with such limitations? Especially knowing it's a stop-gap product that will shortly (whatever that means) be replaced? I was intrigued by it and, as much as I find Wiggles solution wonderfully clever, I somewhat resent having to go through that many hoops just to make it do its basic job.

It almost reminds me of how difficult InFocus makes selling you an SP777. They make a nice unit but make it almost impossible to buy one due to their extremely limited distribution. Both processes seem counter-intuitive to me. But then, I used to fly airplanes and helicopters and was expected to be a bit more direct, precise and on-target. As well as on time. And that despite all the technology involved.

I have to think that Optoma will listen and will do all it can to add lens shift before they start shipping these units. Yes, I am optimistic about Optoma! :)

Maybe they are working on a projector with a lens shift and I would guess they probably are. Also maybe putting this projector out now(now as in 3 to 6 months) will not slow the release of a new model with lens shift, but only allow an earlier entry for the ones that desire to buy sooner and are able to use it as it is.

I don't think anyone knows when TI gave them the info they needed to start production on a new projector.Would it be possible to add lens shift to this projector as it is now in the current projector chassis?

Why is this a stop gap projector? Is it because it doesn't have lens shift? What digital projector out now is not a stop gap projector?

I have to think that Optoma will listen and will do all it can to add lens shift before they start shipping these units. Yes, I am optimistic about Optoma! :)

When was the last time anybody on this forum was invited to participate in a "round table" discussion group with a manufacturer so that the manufacturer builds to the recommendations of the "group"? Ummm... maybe never? For that matter, just for shicks and giggles, maybe Optoma already did a focus group, and discovered that the market for $10k projectors isn't really based on 8' tall or less ceilings. Maybe they discovered that the demographics say they'll sell through many more units into homes with higher ceilings and that the 8' tall or less ceiling represents only x percentage of the market. If so, then you can assume lens shift was weeded out by the beancounters through market analysis.

Regarding the Optoma rep not getting back on the forum, lately. #1 - He just went through CES. Just a little time consuming and tiring, I can promise you from my experience. Also, he's soon going to be gathering together any product bashing on this (and other) forums and then he'll go to a higher up in engineering/design/research/product development and get "company responses" to submit for approval. Only once those responses are approved will he convey those responses to this group. The hierarchy in these companies require it. So don't get down on him, just be patient. The replies will come, eventually.

...
5. It does not have lens shift, we decided to hit the market early and at the right price point, and have more people to enjoy it, hence we use the platform of our other SX+ DLP platform, the same 0.95" optical system, EP910.


Hi TzungILin - if Optoma wanted more people to enjoy it, they should add a lens shift :) because unfortunately there will be a lot of people that will have to pass on this pj because they simply can not fit it into their room. For instance I only have 4" of space between the top of my screen and the ceiling...

Could you can and post this brochure for all to see?

Thanks
I'll try to remember to take it to the office to scan it.

But I question the value of the decision to bring the product out, basically half-baked. Would it not have been better to show it as prototype and explain the issue with a promise to deliver? As it is, they still had to make a promise to deliver, so the only thing to change is how long. And, in the meantime, do that many people really expect to buy a PJ with such limitations?

, maybe Optoma already did a focus group, and discovered that the market for $10k projectors isn't really based on 8' tall or less ceilings. Maybe they discovered that the demographics say they'll sell through many more units into homes with higher ceilings and that the 8' tall or less ceiling represents only x percentage of the market. If so, then you can assume lens shift was weeded out by the beancounters through market analysis.
.


I actually disagree here. Usually the simplest explanation is the right one. In this case, they used an existing model and retrofitted it. You know the old saying a picture is worth a thousand words. The images projected will be cemented in many of those minds that saw it. The timetable till shipping gives them the opportunity to implement the required features eg lens shift. Most projectors of this calibre have it. Having a static prototype with all the bells and whistles on paper and maybe with 24carat gold trim means nothing. How many times have you remembered the image of a pretty girl with XXXX walking down the street!

I know if I saw this and it said PROTOTYPE. I would probably be not as interested. We want to look at the real thing, whats available now or very soon. Just enough time to hold back a purchase from a competing manufacture.

This was Optomas and any other manufacturers PRIME opportunity to showcase to thousands a working product in real life.

Ben

Sam
to answer you question...... the H72 has a fixed offset that requires the projector to be mounted on a table below the screen or inverted from the ceiling above the screen.

There is also I thread totally dedicated to the H72 in the under $3500 forum.

Bob

If you are looking for a purchase in March the H81 would not be a starter for you anyway... I would doubt it will hit the street before CEDIA. I believe they were quoting Q3 in the booth for the H81... the H72 should be out in Feb however.

Feedback is good but in this instance all I can say is what a fabulous welcome for TzungILin (sarcasm). Especially since he didn't defend the lack of lens shift and honestly stated that there was a rush to get this to market. FWIW, I think this PJ will do quite well. Just about every client I deal with wants the PJ as close to the ceiling as possible and being able to place the PJ up and out of the way is great. Not that lens shift wouldn't be even better, but if it has to be fixed, Optoma probably made the right choice for the marketplace. As always, the wants of the marketplace as a whole do not necessarily remotely reflect the wants of the hobbyist.

"I believe they were quoting Q3 in the booth for the H81"

Q2 from the engineers I talked to. The Iris will be motorized in steps controlled by the remote. This projector with that Iris will have extremely high contrast, on and off plus ANSI.

Compare it to the Ruby? Most will prefer the DLP for the brightness power / Ansi and low priced bulb, plus the lower street price. I buy! :)

Design works for my 106" screen and 8' ceilings. My main problem is taming the light output, the surprise Iris will fix that. The Iris was a pleasant surprise for me at the show.

Count me in as another potential customer who can't get this PJ because of the lack of lens shift.

Bob Sorel said this a couple of days ago, bold added for emphasis:

27% above the top of the screen (like hifiguy1 mentioned), or 127% above the bottom of the screen, and the projector could not be mounted (without tilting) anywhere within the vertical borders of the screen.

Me thinks you might have a typo in der bold print ;)

That should probably read something like "27% below the bottom of the screen" :)

Best,

Falk Kuebler says:

IMHO this all means that the HD81 in its presently announced form will be very shortlived. Apart from its PQ it is not a good HT PJ, and its manufacturing cost are not optimized. Completely unaccaptable for a company like Optoma.


When did PQ stop being the primary aspect of a projector that we're talking about? And when you throw in the high quality Gennum based scaler...

Count me in as another potential customer who can't get this PJ because of the lack of lens shift.After the flood of energetic refusals, somebody must be prepared to keep Optoma motivated, so I jump in as the lonely volunteer :D

If the HD81 becomes available early, then I will buy it and will take the risk to modify the builtin offset mechanically. I guess that even if lens shift is more complicated with a DLP, reducing an existing offset is not so difficult. The (for my setup) not matching long throw can be compensated with an Isco 0.8 wide angle lens, which I have by chance left.

What means "early"? Well, this is relative and depends on the alternatives in late spring. The LCOS (Ruby, maybe Cinetron) are not bright enough, so the only competition is the PD Action 1080. They apparently have rushed in a similar way to the early 1080 market, because they also use a business PJ design (their penalty seems contrast, not lens shift) and an external scaler. If the HD81 is available in late spring, I'll take it. If not, I'll possibly bite the bullet and take the somewhat overpriced Action 1080.

Waiting for next Cedia is not an option, because everything announced there will not really be available before Jan 2007, and this would overstretch my anyway somewhat limited patience. I want to see now some progress in my HT, and I cannot endure my temporary Epson for any longer than another 3..6 months :mad:

So I hope for Optoma the motivation of getting at least one customer for the HD81 is enough for not dropping the whole machine :D :D :D

Falk Kuebler says:
IMHO this all means that the HD81 in its presently announced form will be very shortlived. Apart from its PQ it is not a good HT PJ, and its manufacturing cost are not optimized. Completely unaccaptable for a company like Optoma.
When did PQ stop being the primary aspect of a projector that we're talking about? And when you throw in the high quality Gennum based scaler...I don't want to throw in the Gennum, because I have a Vantage on order. So I would anyway prefer an (rumored) H80 without scaler, but I somewhat doubt its availability.

PQ is also IMHO the primary aspect of a projector. But consider it getting a high weighting factor, with other aspects having a lower weighting, but their absence being a show stopper. That may be similar to a sports car, where racing performance is the primary aspect, but if it has only one seat or comes in the form of a Lotus Super Seven, then it simply cannot be bought by most people for practical reason.

BTW: My personal weighting would accept the HD81, as you see from my parallel post. I made my remark speculative for the average HT user's viewpoint, who doesn't want to fiddle with lens shift and the like.

At the end everything in this imperfect world is a question of weighting factors...

Falk, as this is based on a buisness machine I highly doubt that this is a TIR design (the offset alone implies it not a TIR) and then it should be VERY difficult if not impossible to change the offset due to the lightpath. All DLP projectors with lens-shift use a prism (TIR design); I remember Bob Williams from Infocus once explained that you can't get around the offset without a prism. I will try if I can find his post... So even if you had the tools and skills, you would not be able to do it.

Falk, as this is based on a buisness machine I highly doubt that this is a TIR design (the offset alone implies it not a TIR) and then it should be VERY difficult if not impossible to change the offset due to the lightpath. All DLP projectors with lens-shift use a prism (TIR design); I remember Bob Williams from Infocus once explained that you can't get around the offset without a prism. I will try if I can find his post... So even if you had the tools and skills, you would not be able to do it.One never learns out, as we say in Germany :D

Ok, my own experience is admittedly from 3LCD, and what you say suggests that the HD81 has this type of prism. Then I would be without luck.

Anyway, rude and 1080-thirsty as I am, if the HD81 gets to market early, I would borrow its EP910 business sibling for my company and open it for looking at the internals, for deciding whether I should stay brave or not :cool:

But your remark indeed increases the probability of Optoma losing their last loyal HD81 customer-wannabe :D

I don't want to throw in the Gennum, because I have a Vantage on order. So I would anyway prefer an (rumored) H80 without scaler, but I somewhat doubt its availability.

Tom (Guitarman's) speculation about an HD80 is just that at this point, speculation. When quizzing Optoma reps (several of them) about a unit without the scaler, they all said there was not going to be a unit without a scaler. Does this mean that there won't be an HD80? No. If there is going to be one, they sure aren't admitting to it publically.

So all we have to go on is speculation from various people and a website.

PQ is also IMHO the primary aspect of a projector. But consider it getting a high weighting factor, with other aspects having a lower weighting, but their absence being a show stopper. That may be similar to a sports car, where racing performance is the primary aspect, but if it has only one seat or comes in the form of a Lotus Super Seven, then it simply cannot be bought by most people for practical reason.

Well for those of us that don't follow sports cars, it's hard to follow your analogy ;)

I'm not sure that 27% is as bad as many people are thinking if you're taking into account all of the considerations. Appropriate seating distance from screen, appropriate screen width for room, and considering position of viewers/listeners with respect to loudspeakers as well.

If you're really concerned with a quality experience rather than a "my screen is bigger than yours" I think the 27% will work for more installations than the initial thoughts would lend one to believe.

It certainly wouldn't work in my very height limited room (7'1") unless I lowered my screen about 6-7". This would put me at about screen centerline which wouldn't be the end of the world. Not ideal, but workable. Since my screen is electrically retractable this is a relatively easy adjustment to make.

I'm not thinking in terms of my current room though, I'm thinking in terms of my next room, which will be more along the lines of 8'6" (or about 2.3m if you prefer to think in meters).

BTW: My personal weighting would accept the HD81, as you see from my parallel post. I made my remark speculative for the average HT user's viewpoint, who doesn't want to fiddle with lens shift and the like.

At the end everything in this imperfect world is a question of weighting factors...

Right. The thing about no lens shift, is once you get the projector perfectly locked in place, it's never going to need readjustment though :)

Cheers,

I think it is unusual to have someone selling projectors to be so honest as Alan. I have never suspected him of even exaggerating about one technology or the other for personal gain, he just tells it the way he sees it. So here is where a 4000:1 contrast ratio projector beats a 15000:1 contrast ratio projector. He's talking about the 3 chip Mercury.


This is good news the contrast ratio race is over, anything over 4000:1 can not be decerned by the critical viewer. :rolleyes: If you read all of Alans posts what he likes is the overall picture quality that the Mercury has. The Mercury's bright sharp picture and the over all quality of its video processing allows one to over look its lack of contrast and resolution. This is not going to be the case with the Optoma. The Optoma will be a good lower price alternative to the Ruby with lots of brightness and enough contrast to keep any one shopping for a projector in the under $7k (street price ) range happy. With Optomas traditional discounts off of MSRP there will be nothing in its price range that can compete, at least for this year.

No, what I say suggests that the HD81 is not a TIR design, so no prism, if it were it would have been a piece of cake for Optoma to change the offset or even implement lensshift right away with the EP910 lens.

I will try to find the post of Bob, If I remember correct MrWigggles suggested something comparable in the context of, was it the SP4805, when Bob chimed in and explainedt in detail why this would not work. He made it pretty clear that without prism it is a no go.

Besides a DLP without prism is more dust-prone or to put it another way, with prism you have a lot less dust problems if any. I would expect quite a few reports of dust in the HD81 due to the non TIR design alone.

BTW this is post #1000.

If you're really concerned with a quality experience rather than a "my screen is bigger than yours" I think the 27% will work for more installations than the initial thoughts would lend one to believe.But in this case you may want to consider, whether the Ruby is the more appropriate machine. For me the big screen has an important satisfaction factor. In a silent moment though I admittedly have to look inside myself in order to check for the "mine is bigger than your's" factor. You see, "quality" is a complex weighted composition :D :D :D
Right. The thing about no lens shift, is once you get the projector perfectly locked in place, it's never going to need readjustment though :)

Cheers,If the 27% should be an offset from central, then I might find a compromise, but that appears somewhat unlikely with a business-origin design.

Otherwise I would be out of luck (without modification) because I really love my High Power screen. Not only for size and brightness, but also for ambient light suppression.

So while I'm prepared to scratch the (lens shift) limits, I'm also not an easy HD81-customer-wannabe...

Cheers ;)

If there has to be a PQ robbing prism put in the path, please leave lens shift out!

Ken

...
BTW this is post #1000.I hope you don't just stop posting for keeping the nice number ;)

Why is this a stop gap projector? Is it because it doesn't have lens shift? What digital projector out now is not a stop gap projector?

I would think the very large number of posters saying "I really want one, but it's out for me due to its unfortunate offset limitation" is a good example of why. The HD81 ia a bright DLP, meaning it has the larger screen potential that Ruby and other dimmer projectors lack. Yet, given its price point, it is aimed at the middle market of HT users (as represented on this forum anyway). While many can afford the $10k (or probably less), I would doubt most live in mansions with first floor HT's and 10' ceilings. Read the posts by Bob Sorel, John Kotches, Alan Gouger and see their ceiling height. I have 10' ceilings in my under-construction home - but my finished media room, while 20'W by 32' L, has 8' ceilings.

It's not specifically the lack of shift, but that the fixed offset is so darn large! By admitting the problem was known (thx for the honesty Optoma) but that they wanted to have a model ready, they are also admitting this is a "stop gap" solution with more to come to make it work better. It's not, IMO, simple evolution. It's a business decision to get a product out there with known limitations to staunch the bleeding from Ruby until they can improve it. That is why I call it stop gap and yes, there are many projectors out there that are NOT stop gap in this sense and have much longer anticipated lives with a greater potential user base.

I know if I saw this and it said PROTOTYPE. I would probably be not as interested. We want to look at the real thing, whats available now or very soon. Just enough time to hold back a purchase from a competing manufacture.

I'm not suggesting they put a big label on it as PROTOTYPE, but rather to introduce it as a "work in progress" rather than a totally finished one. I take your point on being scared off or delayed by the use of "prototype" but I think that's what it is in reality. Do you believe that once they have a very similar version with the addition of lens shift or, at least, much less offset, that they will still produce the current one and simply add the 2nd? I don't, unless there are other significant changes/additions.

I think this PJ will do quite well. Just about every client I deal with wants the PJ as close to the ceiling as possible and being able to place the PJ up and out of the way is great. Not that lens shift wouldn't be even better, but if it has to be fixed, Optoma probably made the right choice for the marketplace. As always, the wants of the marketplace as a whole do not necessarily remotely reflect the wants of the hobbyist.

I agree with much of that except where it seems to assume that simply wanting a "close to the ceiling" proj. solves the issue. It does (and is desirable, me included) right up until you have that lower ceiling but want the bigger screen. It just limits this apparently fine projector's market. And that is where I either disagree or misunderstand your last distinction.

I assume you mean the "hobbyists" (AVS) vs. Joe Normal (marketplace). But I would think even Joe Normal, who is about to spend $10k will want the "big screen experience" or he wouldn't be spending $10k. (Joe Normal is usually spending less). When he asks about that big Firehawk he saw and the dealer is forced to discuss his ceiling height.... Personally, I don't agree that the wants of the "marketplace" in this situation "do not remotely reflect" the hobbyist. This isn't about seeing rainbows or slight misconvergance, that the less-informed marketplace probably wouldn't notice. This is about - will it fit in my room and fill my nice large screen. I think the interests are far more similar in this case than you suggest.

I would think the very large number of posters saying "I really want one, but it's out for me due to its unfortunate offset limitation" is a good example of why. The HD81 ia a bright DLP, meaning it has the larger screen potential that Ruby and other dimmer projectors lack. Yet, given its price point, it is aimed at the middle market of HT users (as represented on this forum anyway). While many can afford the $10k (or probably less), I would doubt most live in mansions with first floor HT's and 10' ceilings. Read the posts by Bob Sorel, John Kotches, Alan Gouger and see their ceiling height. I have 10' ceilings in my under-construction home - but my finished media room, while 20'W by 32' L, has 8' ceilings.

If things go as planned, I will have about 8'6" for the room that whatever FP that I purchase lands in. Whether that's a Ruby, an HD81 or a still unnamed projector I can't say.

I have the luxury of not having to make my purchase immediately. I am taking a "wait and see" approach for the next several months, realistically until about the May or June timeframe.

Regards,

Clever enough to work too! does this address the screen gain issue raised?

Might just be an option, because I have a real hard time bringing myself to put money down for a 720 when a 1080 unit will soon be available.
I'm in the same boat as you, although my theater will be finished in late March, long before the H81 will be ready. I'll probably wind up buying an Epson 550 to hold me over until some real-world H81 users report in... I can always eBay the 550! :cool:

Feedback is good but in this instance all I can say is what a fabulous welcome for TzungILin (sarcasm). Especially since he didn't defend the lack of lens shift and honestly stated that there was a rush to get this to market. FWIW, I think this PJ will do quite well. Just about every client I deal with wants the PJ as close to the ceiling as possible and being able to place the PJ up and out of the way is great. Not that lens shift wouldn't be even better, but if it has to be fixed, Optoma probably made the right choice for the marketplace. As always, the wants of the marketplace as a whole do not necessarily remotely reflect the wants of the hobbyist.

I agree. People are being a little preoccupied on this one aspect.

Not to get anyone started on something else but the actual throw ratio seems more problematic. We are talking 1080p here and most viewers are going to want to be in the 1.0 to 1.4 screen widths away. With the min throw 1.8, we are talking about a projector that is likely going to need to be behind your back wall in some situations.

The projector is highly praised in everything else. I wish we could concentrate on the everything else. Give Tzung some warm-fuzzies

-Mr. Wigggles

This is good news the contrast ratio race is over, anything over 4000:1 can not be decerned by the critical viewer. :rolleyes: If you read all of Alans posts what he likes is the overall picture quality that the Mercury has. The Mercury's bright sharp picture and the over all quality of its video processing allows one to over look its lack of contrast and resolution. This is not going to be the case with the Optoma. The Optoma will be a good lower price alternative to the Ruby with lots of brightness and enough contrast to keep any one shopping for a projector in the under $7k (street price ) range happy. With Optomas traditional discounts off of MSRP there will be nothing in its price range that can compete, at least for this year.

Have you compared the Ruby and the HD81? I think I have read most of Alan's posts, at least in this forum. I seem to remember one where he says the blacks on the DLP & the Ruby were very close and that he could discern very little difference in C/R between the two. Unless you have the black cave theater, you will never see 15000:1 C/R with the Ruby. I don't have a lot of experience comparing myself(I think few do) but I have read a lot of what others here have said. The difference between 4K:1 and 15K:1 is not as much as you would think. Unless you have the ability to A:B the projectors on a split screen in a black cave most would probably not see the difference.
I would guess that a fade to black may be the point where the higher contrast ratio may be more obvious.

I agree. People are being a little preoccupied on this one aspect.

Not to get anyone started on something else but the actual throw ratio seems more problematic. We are talking 1080p here and most viewers are going to want to be in the 1.0 to 1.4 screen widths away. With the min throw 1.8, we are talking about a projector that is likely going to need to be behind your back wall in some situations.

The projector is highly praised in everything else. I wish we could concentrate on the everything else. Give Tzung some warm-fuzzies

-Mr. Wigggles

Lovely. And to think I was one of the few who will have a room that will work with the fixed offset, only to find that the throw ratio probably won't! :(

Have you compared the Ruby and the HD81? I think I have read most of Alan's posts, at least in this forum. I seem to remember one where he says the blacks on the DLP & the Ruby were very close and that he could discern very little difference in C/R between the two. Unless you have the black cave theater, you will never see 15000:1 C/R with the Ruby. I don't have a lot of experience comparing myself(I think few do) but I have read a lot of what others here have said. The difference between 4K:1 and 15K:1 is not as much as you would think. Unless you have the ability to A:B the projectors on a split screen in a black cave most would probably not see the difference.
I would guess that a fade to black may be the point where the higher contrast ratio may be more obvious.
Well if you read gregr's review of the Ruby there is a significant difference between the iris on ( ~5,200:1) and iris auto (~17,000:1). The differences will be seen in dark scenes ( U517, Dark City, ... )

A lot of us would certainly like the option of an irised HD81 with say 8K:1 to 10K:1 CR!

The Optoma will be bright with high real time contrast with pop. No haze, just high brightness and deep blacks. ;)

The motorized Iris with stops will give you the option to taylor the contrast for each different setup, screen gain etc.

Wing says later Optoma will make a Auto/Iris. Marketing shows people like it.

A lot of us would certainly like the option of an irised HD81 with say 8K:1 to 10K:1 CR!

Just to make it clear we want a calibrated 8k:1 to 10k:1 not a marketing number ;)

Well if you read gregr's review of the Ruby there is a significant difference between the iris on ( ~5,200:1) and iris auto (~17,000:1). The differences will be seen in dark scenes ( U517, Dark City, ... )

A lot of us would certainly like the option of an irised HD81 with say 8K:1 to 10K:1 CR!

I understand the higher contrast ratio will look better in the optimum viewing environment. I just think that few have that environment. I don't. I know I prefer a bright picture and I also know that in my room I get light back to the screen which washes out some of the higher cr. I also would like the adjustable iris, but I have a feeling that I would use it more towards the open end than the closed. I would venture to guess that Greg Rogers was viewing under optimum conditions. The Ruby is also a dim projector(with a dynamic iris) compared to the HD81 and therefore less light would be reflected back to the screen.

If almost no light were being reflected back onto the screen, then would a stepped down iris still give a better CR than a full open iris(not talking about a dynamic iris)? I've never used a projector with an adjustable iris but I think it would be fun to experiment with.

So, after reading the (1000's of) Ruby posts, and following this thread, am I correct to conclude that for a 12' wide 'scope screen:
a) rule out Ruby for brightness issues, at least with a mid-life bulb
b) rule out H81 as it would put the bottom of the screen frame basically on the floor with my 8' theater ceiling, unless I go with MrWigggles screen tilt

Regarding the Optoma rep not getting back on the forum, lately. #1 - He just went through CES. Just a little time consuming and tiring, I can promise you from my experience. Also, he's soon going to be gathering together any product bashing on this (and other) forums and then he'll go to a higher up in engineering/design/research/product development and get "company responses" to submit for approval. Only once those responses are approved will he convey those responses to this group. The hierarchy in these companies require it. So don't get down on him, just be patient. The replies will come, eventually.Also, according to this
I work for Coretronic, the DLP OEM manufacture for many brand names. Optoma is just one OEM customer.
from here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6407513&&#post6407513), TzungILin is (or at least was last October) not directly representing Optoma. Obviously this could further constrain what he can say and when.

Brent

TzungILin is (or at least was last October) not directly representing Optoma. Obviously this could further constrain what he can say and when.

Tzung-I Lin does work for Optoma. He gave me his business card at CES.

3no,

When you say 12' 'cope, you don't mean curved do you just 2.35:1? Anyway your room is going to need to be about 23' deep. I take it that is not a problem. Also, how do you plan to display some movies in 'scope format and then others in 16:9 format? The zoom range on the H81 is not large enough to do that (you would need 1.33:1 min and the HD81 is only 1.22:1). If you were thinking about an anamorphic lens, let us know.

To answer b), with such a long throw, it won't take many degrees of tilt to get the image off the floor. 3 degrees would give you a foot and at that point the top of your screen would then be touching the roof - your image is almost 7 feet (if you aren't using an anamorphic).

Unless you really need a 12' wide screen, I don't recomend it. You will more than likely need a perfed screen because audio localization is likely to be tough with the center channel above or below. This throws out many high gain screens as options

-Mr. Wigggles

Unless you really need a 12' wide screen, I don't recomend it. You will more than likely need a perfed screen because audio localization is likely to be tough with the center channel above or below. This throws out many high gain screens as options

-Mr. WiggglesI want to throw in a different opinion: I use a 12ft screen and have the center (Martin Logan Theater i) at the bottom. No problem with localization. Never would I use a perfed screen (actually have a High Power).

But everything is subjective...

A 12' foot scope screen is 61" tall. 16.5" for the offset. Min. maybe 4" (best case) for mount. Top of viewable screen area would need to be 20.5" say 21" from ceiling. 21"+61"=82". Bottom of screen would be 14" from floor in an 8' high room. Certainly reasonable, and could go higher very easily with small tilt. It's not far as is from being just about right anyway (obviously without knowing other room parameters).

David

Tzung-I Lin does work for Optoma. He gave me his business card at CES.
I also hope that his superiors don't view the criticism of their product too strongly. People aren't dissapointed in the product per se. Many, but definitely not all, are simply trying to figure out how to get it in their room.

And to make things abudantly clear to those who might struggle comprehending our conjecture, sarcasm, and various ramblings:

We like the HD81. We like Tzung.

We hope he can continue to contribute. Ultimately it helps Optoma's products and their image.

-Mr. Wigggles

A 12' foot scope screen is 61" tall. 16.5" for the offset. Min. maybe 4" (best case) for mount. Top of viewable screen area would need to be 20.5" say 21" from ceiling. 21"+61"=82". Bottom of screen would be 14" from floor in an 8' high room. Certainly reasonable, and could go higher very easily with small tilt. It's not far as is from being just about right anyway (obviously without knowing other room parameters).

David

His screen might be 'scope but that doesn't mean the projector's image is 'scope. At 12 feet wide, the image IS 81" tall and thus the offset is about 22".

If he is using an ISCO lens then things are a little different. Let's let 3no respond with more details.

-Mr. Wigggles

Spparently Optoma is trying to keep costs down and no lens shift helps in this regard. Everything helps - a ittle here, a little there, and next thing you know margins are not as impacted due to the new competitive pricing structure.

However my point is that if Optoma saves $x per unit by not having a lens shift, but losses a fairly significant amount of customers (myself included) because they simply cannot fit it into their room, then in the long run this cost cutting decision will hurt their sales and profits much more. In other words - if they did have a lens shift and it cost them $x more to make but their sales increased y%, my guess it that they'd come out far ahead that way.

The reason I am expressing this is because I believe the HD81 really will put out a tremendous projector and its one I would be very interested in. So hopefully all this lobbying by those that want the lens shift will be heard and they will add it.

BTW, it may have already been said, but in addition to no lens shift preventing some customers from fitting it in - it completely destroys the gain for those with high power screens. In fact you simply could not use this pj with a high power screen and a ceiling mount - the gain would actually be less than 1.0 that way. So no lens shift is a show stopper now for two categorizes of customers.

In a day and age where lens shift is a standard feature - even to the point of many pjs including the Ruby that now also offer horizontal shift - no lens shift on the H81 is a big step backwards IMO. I hope they do something about it.

...I would venture to guess that Greg Rogers was viewing under optimum conditions. The Ruby is also a dim projector(with a dynamic iris) compared to the HD81 and therefore less light would be reflected back to the screen. ...
.
I will reserve judgement on the brightness of the Ruby vs. the HD81 until someone like gregr puts the HD81 through the ringer. I have seen mention of 800 to 900+ d65 calibrated lumens from the HD81. My neighbor's 3 hour bulb Ruby measured IIRC ~750 lumens d65 calibrated/ min throw. There is not a big difference between 750 and 900 lumens IMO. :)

You are absolutely correct that if you do not have a completely light controlled room you will get better real CR with much more lumens.

After reading the WSR again the only way to get top brightness out of the Ruby is Iris off but this comes with a haze effect which burdens many LC displays. Using Iris on it's way too dim. Auto Iris seems the best but you really get a false contrast rating with white compression. I'll stay the the DLP/mirrors way of contrast, white and black on the screen at the same time.

The equasion looks good on the Optoma for future tests. 300watt bulb double the mirror reflection add on the Iris and you have a high probability for super contrast / Ansi contrast also.

I can't wait to test one of these out

I will reserve judgement on the brightness of the Ruby vs. the HD81 until someone like gregr puts the HD81 through the ringer.

You may get your wish. Tz met with GR at the show. I also saw GR checking out the Sharp XZV20000 when I was exiting the demo booth. My personal unprofessional opinion is the Sharp can't hold a candle to the HD81. Ruby was a no show.

After reading the WSR again the only way to get top brightness out of the Ruby is Iris off but this comes with a haze effect which burdens many LC displays.
The "haze" in dark film has nothing to do with LC. It is because of the ~3,000:1 CR in that mode. That same "haze" is described for the H79 review which measured 2,900:1 calibrated.

The "haze" was still present at ~5,200:1 calibrated (iris on). If the HD81 came in at < 5,200:1 calibrated you would have the same effect!

It was only in the iris auto (16,700:1) that gregr said "we are there" as far as CRT level no dark scene "haze"

There's no haze in black with the H79. I figure what he was talking about by haze is the lack of detail in the blacks or hazy.

There's no haze in black with the H79. I figure what he was talking about by haze is the lack of detail in the blacks or hazy.

We are getting off topic (which I am often responsible for). "No haze" is totally subjective. Can we leave it at that?

-Mr. Wigggles

Man, leave you guys for 24 hours and look what happens!

QQQ and Wigggles,
I agree that some of the comments on here mean it is starting to sound like the honeymoon is already over before we get to the hotel, but I for one would like to chime in with the fact that I have a very ordinary 14' x 18' with 9' ceilings, and this projector will work for me on my 52" x 92" screen with no monkey business. It will still work for me with an ISCO or comparable anamorphic lens and my future 52" x 122" screen, also. I am actually looking more forward to the suggested adjustable iris than anything, because I like bright images, but don't want retinal searing from my "pathetically small" screen with an open iris as it stands now. That, and I look forward to being able to open it up a stop at a time as the bulb ages, for consistent performance over the life of the bulb. I posted a few comments about requesting info from TzungILin for whether the offset was positive or negative, but I hope it wasn't taken as being insistent. Just wanted to clarify the specs. I think, now, that even before he responds, it is likely to be positive offset. And thank you, Wigggles, for the brilliant geometry refresher. What an ingenious way to work with a low ceiling/high offset combo! I agree there are other side benefits to this arrangement. Heck, even if you have lens shift, you might be better off doing this anyway.

To reiterate, "TzungILin, we love you, man!"

BTW QQQ, Wigggles, and everyone else sticking up for Optoma and TIL,

Please don't misunderstand comments (at least mine) regarding the HD81. I'm really happy this PJ is here (or soon will be) - I think it'll do great things for the market overall, and the reports from the show seem to be raves for the most part. However, to criticize others for focusing on 1 issue - the lack of adjustable lens shift - is plain silly, since the issue explicitly prevents some (many?), myself included, from using the pj!

This is not some debate about the relative merits of 2500:1 vs 4000:1 here, or 150 ANSI vs 204 ANSI. This is a binary issue. I can't use this PJ, and neither can several others by the sounds of things. That bums me out, and others too from the sounds of things. But I can't believe that Tzung would be thin skinned enough to stop posting because some of us are simply stating the obvious.

Optoma made their choices - and told us about them (even better!) re: time to market vs. features and price. That doesn't mean I can't, or shouldn't state that the choices don't align with what works in my room. Hopefully Optoma will release a later model with an adjustable lens offset and an otherwise similar feature set. I'd sure be anxious to give it a test run!!

TM

Just for the record, I am with Wigggles on this, I like the HD81 and Tzung and I very much appreciate the fact that he started this thread. There is not a single perfect projector, all have issues to a certain extent, so does the HD81, but that does by no means imply that it is a bad product. I am looking forward to see the HD81 in action.

BTW the tilting off the projector is exactly what I use in my ~2m high basement HT. I always wanted to tilt the screen as well but I am to busy otherwise and as long as none of my guests complains (so far nobody noticed that the image is not keystone corrected)...

Tz isn't posting because he's way up in the food chain at Coretronics, he's the boss lol
Probably pretty busy getting the final product up and running.

I'm just glad it works for my 8' ceiling and 106" screen. Though I'm not sure how far I'll have to have the PJ back yet. I have a 17' limit. Like the Seleco HT200 I had was way too long for my room. I had it in the Kitchen not the family room.

There's no haze in black with the H79.
In a totally light controlled room setup a H79, or any other ~3,000:1 CR pj. Compare it to a good 8" LC CRT, or a Ruby in iris-auto. Pop in Dark City, U571, or your favorite dark scene.

The "haze" will be very clear! :) :)

Tom I have the same size screen. I too would like to know how far back the PJ will be.

If he is referring to 106" diagonal, then I also have the same screen size (16:9). Therefore, it is 92" wide. Tzung said it had 1.8 to 2.2 approximate throw ratio. So the distance for a 92" wide screen would be 165.6" to 202.4". That translates to between 13.8' and 16.87', and seems pretty flexible to me. I understand the case isn't all that large, so even in Tom's room, he could use almost max throw. In my 18' 2" long room, I could probably use max throw.

14' back as a minimum for a 106". That will work for me.

It's this light engine design which I just took a look at for throw. I like a good 4.3 projector, wish they would add a RGB/RGB wheel to it. :)
http://www.projectorcentral.com/Optoma-EP910.htm

The proposed remotely adjustable iris might affect where the BEST place in the throw is, re light output vs. throw ratio. I don't know if that is endemic to the Ruby design, or relates to any PJ with an iris. If it doesn't affect the HD81 when it has the iris, that would be more flexible. As it stands right now, the one they showed at CES didn't have the iris, so it doesn't matter as much.

3no,

When you say 12' 'cope, you don't mean curved do you just 2.35:1? Anyway your room is going to need to be about 23' deep. I take it that is not a problem. Also, how do you plan to display some movies in 'scope format and then others in 16:9 format? The zoom range on the H81 is not large enough to do that (you would need 1.33:1 min and the HD81 is only 1.22:1). If you were thinking about an anamorphic lens, let us know.

To answer b), with such a long throw, it won't take many degrees of tilt to get the image off the floor. 3 degrees would give you a foot and at that point the top of your screen would then be touching the roof - your image is almost 7 feet (if you aren't using an anamorphic).

Unless you really need a 12' wide screen, I don't recomend it. You will more than likely need a perfed screen because audio localization is likely to be tough with the center channel above or below. This throws out many high gain screens as options

-Mr. WiggglesI should have posted more info:

1) I have a Prismasonic H1200R anamorphic lens

2) The room is a strange shape: 17'+ wide, 10' tall at the screen wall, 10' ceiling going towards the rear for the first 12', then sloping down at 6"/ft until it reaches 5' at the rear wall, 22' from the screen wall. But... I have a dormer in the back, centered in the rear wall, so in the centerline of the room the ceiling slopes down until it reaches 8', then extends back into the dormer, beyond the rear wall. I can theoretically mount a projector as far as 33' from the screen, but at anything further than 16' back the ceiling is 8'. See the drawing attached.

3) Front row seating will be at 12' eye-to-screen, 1.35 screen widths from the 16:9 image size (yes, I know that's "too close", but I am a sucker for immersion and that's why 1080 is so important for me.)

"However, to criticize others for focusing on 1 issue - the lack of adjustable lens shift - is plain silly"

Saying "This won't work for me" is different than vilfying Optoma for their choice.

Regarding offset, wouldn't it decrease with higher throw ratios?

Noah,

Who is trying to vilfying optoma ?
Please, optoma was in the known about a 1080p dmd chip in late 04, early 05 just as the rest of those who build projectors with DLP technology. PD was able to design an entire new platform including an entire new light path,lensshift, lcd monitor,scalers, upgradable parts etc.

I am not aware of any other company who will release a 1080 dmd excluding lens-shift with such a huge offset. Mitsibushi HC8000, marantz, sharp, infocus, PD, Digital projection etc.

Still i do buy Optoma projectors (can't afford anything else currently that even comes close in PQ).
Still HD81 isn't a very HT installation friendly product, so who else can we blame ?

I can't believe that Tzung would be thin skinned enough to stop posting because some of us are simply stating the obvious.TM

I can assure you that thin skinned has nothing to do with it. The 60 or so posters (so far) to this site represent what.. 1/10th of 1% of target market in the U.S. ? Maybe?

He has bigger fish to fry than to spend his time here when there are marketing plans to develop, meetings with department heads, bankers, government officials, lobbyists, patent attorneys, distributors, sub-contractors, etc. Be thankful he provided what he has.

But remember if there are 60 posters here who have issues then how many non AVS folks are going to have installation issues? Believe me, a lot here can mean a TON for the majority of home theaters...I think AVS represents many common people's theaters. And if our statistics are alarming imagine the rest of the markets...

HD81 isn't a very HT installation friendly product, so who else can we blame ?

I disagree, although your own personal situation undoubtedly clouds your judgement. Typical new homes since about 1994 (target market: maybe new home builders putting in dedicated media rooms?) have average 9' ceilings (at least in Dallas, TX and surrounding communities) with many building in 10' ceilings. With an assumed minimum of 6" to the center of the lens from the ceiling, that places the top of the screen at around 7'-4" from the floor. That leaves a whole lot of room for just about any size screen and a lot of play in how far a designer can drop the projector in to fit.

I thought Mr. Wiggles excellent post regarding overcoming the offset would have eliminated all the detractions about offset and possibly have prompted many in this forum to start thinking out of the box.

But remember if there are 60 posters here who have issues then how many non AVS folks are going to have installation issues? Believe me, a lot here can mean a TON for the majority of home theaters...I think AVS represents many common people's theaters. And if our statistics are alarming imagine the rest of the markets...

I think of the sixty or so posters here, only a few have insurmountable problems. Besides, don't delude yourself into believing that this forum has that much sway over any company.

Digital dilemma

And a roll-up screen scenario with this "excellent solution" ? which apparently makes you think "outside out of the box"

Also, with the same MSRP on HD81 as H79 i think Optoma is targeting the same customers as h79 once were.

I disagree, although your own personal situation undoubtedly clouds your judgement. Typical new homes since about 1994 (target market: maybe new home builders putting in dedicated media rooms?) have average 9' ceilings (at least in Dallas, TX and surrounding communities) with many building in 10' ceilings...
I thought Mr. Wiggles excellent post regarding overcoming the offset would have eliminated all the detractions about offset and possibly have prompted many in this forum to start thinking out of the box.

What may be clouding your own judgment is that, despite your casual use of the word typical, I suggest it is atypical for most HT enthusiasts to have their media room located in the main section of the house where the 10' ceilings are located. Those buying $25k-and-up projectors may be in this situation, but it is NOT typical in my experience for those looking at <$10k projectors. Most, I believe, are using basements or finished rec. rooms or even specific media rooms - but in the lower level with lower ceilings. Thus the problem with the large offset.

I agree on WIggles post, as I said elsewhere. However, it is at best, a clever "way around" a built-in limitation and requires significant additional adjustments that the average install does not. It's like the ever-widening hoops Ruby owners are expected to go through to get sufficient brightness by using a High Power screen which requires trigonometric angles of incidence calculations which are enough to cause headaches.

And I don't get why so many here consider this to be "bashing" Optoma and feel the need to constantly repeat "nothing is perfect, nothing is perfect" until we're in a trance-like state. We all know "NOTHING IS PERFECT". Plus, the critique of the Optoma is actually useful praise. It appears to be so good and have such potential that many want it on speculation alone. They just turn out to be disappointed when they read the offset amount, requiring high ceilings and/or smaller screens and/or special tilts of both proj. and screeen (tricky in itself with roll-downs and non-fixed mounts), etc. Optoma should be pleased to have generated so much buzz and should be recognizing that the offset issue should be addressed soon to further increase that buzz and take full advantage. That's what a business does, to succeed. No one is flaming Tzung, but simply providing useful feedback to increase the product's usefulness.

And I don't get why so many here consider this to be "bashing" Optoma and feel the need to constantly repeat "nothing is perfect, nothing is perfect" until we're in a trance-like state.
It's all about context. Several posters actually seemed to be upset and take it as a personal affront. Otherwise, I think the feedback of saying "I'm disappointed that the offset won't work for me" is good feedback. It's just a matter of having a mature thread that makes the manufacturer want to participate. There was a thread over in the digital processors forum a few weeks ago where someone from a manufacturer tried to particpate and after a few pages basicaly said "thanks but I don't feel like be hammered about the lack of that feature any more I've explained it about 5 times, goodbye". It just seems to me that everyone has expressed their opinion and now it's time to move on and actually ask the manufacturer questions.

I especially find it irritating BTW, because most manufacturers BS or defend and TzungILin was very open about why the choice was made. So I think we should move on and discuss other aspects of the PJ and accept the reality that at this point it is what it is. But I doubt that will happen :).

p.s. It's pretty obvious TI got caught here with their pants completely down. TI had absolutely NO intention/desire of showing ANY of these 1080 PJs at CES if it had not been for the Ruby. Both TI and their manufacturers were obviously scrambling to even have PJs to show. Point being again, that realistically speaking, this is not a project like the Ruby that someone had 2 years to work on after bringing the Qualia to market.

It's all about context. Several posters actually seemed to be upset and take it as a personal affront. Otherwise, I think the feedback of saying "I'm disappointed that the offset won't work for me" is good feedback. It's just a matter of having a mature thread that makes the manufacturer want to participate.
I haven't looked at much of the early part of the thread, so can't comment too much on how people phrased their concerns. I did get to meet TzungILin at CES and talk to him for a little bit though. He came across to me as a very good guy with a lot of intelligence about this stuff. I mentioned that I had been thinking that one advantage their 1080p projector would have over the Ruby in the marketplace was size, but that without lens-shift I felt that the number of installations where lens-shift wasn't needed but the size difference between the projectors would matter a lot was fairly small. We also talked a little bit about the reasons for going with fixed offset. One thing I mentioned to him is that I may be different than much of the market because I would rather have an ugly projector with lens-shift than a nice looking projector without it, all else being equal. There wasn't any defensiveness or anything, just a couple of people talking about choices and implications.

BTW: For those claiming that PD can make a 1080p with lens-shift and so why can't Optoma, take a look at the size of that lens on the PD unit. It is huge. I'm sure Optoma can do lens-shift with the 1080p chip, it is just a matter of weighing the options and implications. I can understand going either way.

--Darin

http://mrwigggles.250free.com/projector_tilt.jpg

I've been giving MrWiggles' idea some thought, but I wonder what implications this arrangement would have on a Da-Lite High Power. Since I recently discovered how wonderful a screen the HP is, I would like to work its usage into such a setup. Darin or anyone else knowledgeable about the HP, would this arrangement make sense in a room with a 7' ceiling?

Certainly this projector will most likely work ( offset wise anyway ) anywhere an HT1000 / 1100 does.

Tom - when you get one of these I'd love to drop on by and check it out!!!

Ummm, maybe he is on a long plane flight back to Taiwan.

Ericglo

Ericglo, thanks for your educated guess! After a long flight, I just got back to Taiwan.

Allow me to read through the mails and this long post, before I can answer the questions.

Stay tuned.

Hey D.D., I am not even suggesting that by us posting here we could sway a company. DO NOT put words in my post. I am simply stating that for a 10K PJ there should be lens shift (especialy in 2006). And my home was built in 2005 with 8 foot ceilings. As were most of the people in the Chicagoland area. I am not deluding myself as you put it. If Optoma chooses to leave off an important feature that the loyal Optoma Hx people have gotten used to, then we either wait for their nextr PJ or try another company. But they should remember who has supported them..BTW, I love my H79!

"Who is trying to vilfying optoma ?"

I guess that was too strong a word.

As QQQ alluded to, many people's tone was rather angry, which is not nice for the recipient, and will in the best case be ignored and at worst drive away the bearer of the infornmation we all thirst after.

...anyone else knowledgeable about the HP, would this arrangement make sense in a room with a 7' ceiling?

The lower the ceiling the lower the angle from the projector to your eye - thus more gain.

Ken

Hey guys,

Ericglo, thanks for your educated guess! After a long flight, I just got back to Taiwan.

Allow me to read through the mails and this long post, before I can answer the questions.

Stay tuned.

He's BAAAACK!!!

Thanks for the reply, Ken, but I am still a bit unclear what the ramifications on the HP would be under these circumstances. Right now, in my 7' high theater, I have my H-79 mounted at 6' and I am getting plenty of gain in my seating position (MUCH brighter than my Firehawk! - I've tested them on a split screen arrangement). Assuming that I mounted the HD81 in the same spot, tilted the projector and screen as per MrWiggles idea (thanks, MrWiggles!), would the gain from the High Power increase, decrease, or remain the same from my plain vanilla H-79 setup? The only thing I would be changing is the tilt on the HD-81 and the corresponding tilt of the screen.

Edit: I know this may seem off topic, but it also might be valuable to a lot of people trying to figure a way to use the HD-81 in a low ceiling environment.

"Who is trying to vilfying optoma ?"

I guess that was too strong a word.

As QQQ alluded to, many people's tone was rather angry, which is not nice for the recipient, and will in the best case be ignored and at worst drive away the bearer of the infornmation we all thirst after.
I can't speak for anyone else, but my tone wasn't angry, just... disappointed. Hopefully the clever solution MrWiggles posted will be field-tested by someone with 8' ceilings and 20' throw like yours truly, because (except for the AWOL lens shift) the H81 may be just the projector I've been waiting for.

Agreed...disappointment, not anger. And I still have hope using MrWiggles' tilt idea!

...for a 10K PJ there should be lens shift (especialy in 2006)...Agreed, or put another way, at this price point, I would prefer not to have to make such a big compromise in installation flexibility & even resale value (what happens when Optoma releases the "HD82" that includes lens shift ?)

I think that, because the HD81 does not allow something like a HighPower to be used optimally, one can argue that it will also indirectly compromise available ANSI contrast, ie: what could be achieved with a HighPower relative to less directional screens when used in a less than ideal rooms. (I have pretty much ruled out use of angular reflective screens such as Grayhawk, Firehawk, etc. due to cost, hot-spotting, & sparklies).

Brent

Bob,

If you put the HD81 lens in the same position as your H79 and your eye in the same position as well then the gain would be identical. The HP only cares about this eye to lens angle.

Ken

Did some more measuring today, and I think this pj will work in my HT as is....barely.

If you put the HD81 lens in the same position as your H79 and your eye in the same position as well then the gain would be identical. The HP only cares about this eye to lens angle.

Ok, gotcha...I was overthinking the angles, but now I understand..:)

Thanks, Ken!

I have a 8' ceiling and it looks like I should be able to go with a 106" dia. I wonder how it will look on a Da-lite HCMW or a HCCV screen. One good thing that it will have a IRIS so I could dial in more contrast and open it up as the lamp ages. One thing I would like to know is the firmware a big improvement over the H76,7,8,9 series projectors, hopefully it will be. Tom, Darin and anybody else that seen it how does it sync between other sources and aspects ratios? Hopefully a lot faster!!! It does have a processor in line so it should. And hopefully H81 and there next HT designed case, won't have the lamp issues the H76,7,8,9 series does. As far as deep colors go I agree with Tom it is one of best line of projectors there.

The HT1100 I had a hell of a offset as well. At least it was not hanging as low as my H77 is now. I prefer a fixed offset for my 12X35X8 room. Yes it would be nice if it did not have as much of a fixed offset. I do agree with Optoma in wanting get something out on the market to compete with Sony.

I think they will be working on a HT case with either a lens-shift or a more install friendly fixed lens offset unit in the near future if they are not already.

Dale

How much would the lens shift cost to implement? 2k 3k???

Ben

http://mrwigggles.250free.com/projector_tilt.jpg

I've been giving MrWiggles' idea some thought, but I wonder what implications this arrangement would have on a Da-Lite High Power. Since I recently discovered how wonderful a screen the HP is, I would like to work its usage into such a setup. Darin or anyone else knowledgeable about the HP, would this arrangement make sense in a room with a 7' ceiling?

The gentleman whose theater Mr Wigggles showed does use the high power screen with that setup. I have been there and it looks great

For those that could not make it, here are some photos of the HD81 demo (from a Japanese website (http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060110/dg62.htm) ) with the clips Optoma used:

First demo clip is Chronicle of Narnia:

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060110/dg6205.jpg

The one following it is Over the Hedge:

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060110/dg6204.jpg

And the third one is Fastest Indian :

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060110/dg6206.jpg

I can assure you that thin skinned has nothing to do with it. The 60 or so posters (so far) to this site represent what.. 1/10th of 1% of target market in the U.S. ? Maybe?

He has bigger fish to fry than to spend his time here when there are marketing plans to develop, meetings with department heads, bankers, government officials, lobbyists, patent attorneys, distributors, sub-contractors, etc. Be thankful he provided what he has.



Thanks for missing my point, wide by about a mile :rolleyes:

QQQ - truer words were never spoken - TI just got spanked by Sony, dating back to CEDIA where the pre-show rumors made them do a mad scramble to get *any* 1080p 1 chippers shown there (only TI had a prototype up and running at all). I applaud all the DLP mfrs for doing whatever they can to get 1x1080 DLP to market soon, at great prices.

And Noah - I have to take exception to your comment *if* you're referring to me. I did nothing approximating bashing and simply pointed out that the fixed offset wouldn't work for me (sadly!) Others may have been harsher, though I still don't think they were bashing.

TM

PS - Tzung - PHENOMENAL images, thanks!

I have one big question -

WHEN?

I am hoping a for something a little more specific than a "Q" number...:D

Certainly this projector will most likely work ( offset wise anyway ) anywhere an HT1000 / 1100 does.

Tom - when you get one of these I'd love to drop on by and check it out!!!


Yeah it will work just like any HT1000 or Infocus or any of the past PJ's we were using. 27% is actually a nice easy offset. That's only 14" above the screen for me.

The demo I saw was excellent best thing at the show, wait till they add the Iris.

Speaking of Iris I know Optoma has a fixed Iris in the H79. I never thought to ask if they worked out a more closed down fixed Iris for the H81 CES machine?

Hi all,

I was able to see the HD81 at CES last weekend and was very impressed. It was one of my personal best-of-show products. I was particularly impressed at the light output on such a large screen which allowed the PJ to overcome noticeable light bleed in the lower right corner even on moderately bright scenes. This thing should be excellent for larger screen installations where the lens shift and throw are not showstoppers. Of course, it's not certain how well this brightness will hold up after calibration.

For the record I have the 60" Sony RP SXRD and felt that the overall smoothness of the image from the HD81 was competitive with what I see at home, which is something that I could never say about the 1080p DLP RPs (the wobulated ones). The resolution actually appeared to be higher than my Sony despite the equivalent panel resolutions, likely due to better optics, slight misconvergence of the 3 panels on the Sony, or simply better source material. While shadow detail appeared to be similar to my SXRD, I was unable to evaluate the last little iota due to the aforementioned light bleed.

I wish I could have compared the HD81 with the Ruby but Sony seemed to prefer pushing products that no consumer can currently or would ever buy (PS3, Blu-ray, and 4k digital cinema projectors). I understand the desire to build excitement for new things, but to basically ignore significant chunks of your available product line....? :confused: IMO Panasonic killed Sony in this regard. But that's a rant for another thread...

FWIW, I also really liked the BigVizion 1080p 100" display out front. I think that's a great solution for (deep-pocketed) people who want that size screen but don't want to watch TV in a cave. It pretty much needs to be recessed into custom cabinetry, but at the price point they're talking about, most people will be building custom cabinets anyway. From what I saw it was the best way to get a 100" high quality image in a non-light-controlled room (better than black screen, 100+" plasmas, or an RP setup using a recessed short-throw FP). Panny's 103" plasma prototype was amazing for it's size, but when can you buy one and how much are you going to pay (and likely get lower contrast)? I don't know how large the market for BigVizion is, but it's something of a singular product (as far as I know). I do think that the cost will need to fall quite a bit ultimately to get any level of significant volume (probably to ~$10k for the 100") but for now Optoma can reap the rewards of being the only game in town. I wouldn't be surprised to see someone else follow Optoma's lead here. Infocus already tried something similar in RPTVs so they have the technical competence.

Sorry to go a little OT there at the end but I guess it is somewhat related.

Anyway, just my $0.02.

Alan

Alan,

Thanks for your comments. To clarify, when you say "light bleed" you are talking about light entering the viewing room at the show not light bleed in the image itself, correct?

-Mr. Wigggles

Alan,

Thanks for your comments. To clarify, when you say "light bleed" you are talking about light entering the viewing room at the show not light bleed in the image itself, correct?

-Mr. Wigggles

Mr. Wiggles,

That's correct. The room was pretty well blacked out, but the doorway was allowing some ambient light from the show to fall directly on the lower right half of the screen. Even though it wasn't a great deal of light, I was still very impressed by how the PJ managed to overcome it. Basically, when the clips started, it went from being very obvious to being virtually unnoticeable. It was still there if you wanted to look for it, but wasn't very intrusive at all for casual viewing. This really caught my attention because of the screen size which I think was somewhere around 120 - 140" (I'm not really good at estimating sizes, but it was definitely a larger screen than what I see in most HT store FP setups - 100 or 110" usually).


The price for this level of brightness may be elevated blacks but, as noted, I was unable to really check this due to the slight ambient light. In any event, it's easy to reduce the light output if necessary. By contrast (no pun intended) the Sharp 20000 demo seemed just slightly "faded" even though it was in a completely light controlled room (there were a fair amount of LEDs on equipment and whatnot however, so there was a tiny bit of ambient there as well). It's not my intent to bag on the Sharp since I was comparing the machines under show conditions which were far from ideal. I just felt that of the two *demos* the Optoma had just a bit more attractive image. This might very well not be the case in a fully light controlled, fully calibrated shootout with production units.

Alan

Alan, the Bigvizion is unique. I saw Troy on that at the factory in a room that had fluorescent lights, contrast and blacks were still there.

The H81 was tuned for 65k by TzungILin which is why brightness was down to 900lumens. First thing I talked about was who ever did the tuning did a bang up job. Didn't you like the colors/ flesh tones especially? Even with it being so bright it didn't disappoint me when I was looking for scenes with dark blacks.

Hi all,
I wish I could have compared the HD81 with the Ruby but Sony seemed to prefer pushing products that no consumer can currently or would ever buy (PS3, Blu-ray, and 4k digital cinema projectors). I understand the desire to build excitement for new things, but to basically ignore significant chunks of your available product line....?
Alan

Agree. What were they thinking. :(

I actually did try to compare the HD81 which I saw on Saturday and then headed down to the Forum shops at Caesars to check out the Ruby the next day. It felt like a spotlight was shinning into the room where they hung the Ruby. Unwatchable. Too bad those people didn’t take the time to hook it up in the qualia004 room since they said they got it 2 days before. It would have been a successful trip to CES and an eye candy experience to compare the ruby where they had the blu-ray demo in the qualia room to the 1080p loop the HD81 was showing.

On the HD81, one thing I notice was the Red feathers of the arrows in the narnia clip were orange-red bias instead of deep red like in the signature theaters where I saw the movie or on good g90 or 9501lc. I’m sure a good CC10 filter will help the reds a little. The Qualia they demoed had nicer reds and more to my liking. Fwiw, I would be very happy with either one, especially if the Ruby is better than what I saw on the qualia.

They were also showing the slim depth 55" SXRD RPTV and 1080p LCD flat panels. Those were significant intros as well.

"Speaking of Iris I know Optoma has a fixed Iris in the H79. I never thought to ask if they worked out a more closed down fixed Iris for the H81 CES machine? "

I got my question answered by Wing. The H81 at CES was wide open, they didn't have time to add a fixed Iris. So things can only get allot better with the upcoming adjustable Iris. The demo still had deep blacks for no Iris. If you want the story on how soon. They could have machines ready to go one month after they get the chips. Time line is Ti may send the chips in March but they're not always on time like they say.

As you know they chose the 910 light engine for speed and to keep the price low. It's easier and cheaper to use a machine which they already have the tooling for. This model fit the bill because of the larger lens and it's set for the brighter bulb. The Iris will tame it down for better HT usage, expect some nice high contrast on the final machine. Fan sound will be lowered as much as they can. At stock the 910 is at 27db.

I asked why not use the H79's case, no go the lens is too small for the larger chip. Probably the next 1080p model will have all the goodies. The new combo replacing the H79 will be out much sooner, H7300. I'm in for one of the first available. I mainly want to test the Gennum deinterlacer scaler box with the HQV disc and torture scenes.

That's a DC3 w/Gennum box for $5999msrp, a deal.

Tom I have the same size screen. I too would like to know how far back the PJ will be.

It works for us.

Per Hifiguy -

"So the distance for a 92" wide screen would be 165.6" to 202.4". That translates to between 13.8' and 16.87', and seems pretty flexible to me"

I'm curious about something. Why so much concern over making the proj. work with a High Power (though it's nice to know it will)? Unless you are already using one and are committed or just want to know in general, I would think the High Power would not be a prime choice for the HD81, given its already nice light output. Wouldn't a less odd-install-dependant screen with other good imaging characteristics be a better choice than an HP which is usually (AFAIK) for light-challenged Ruby types? Like I said, just curious, as I would not default to HP for this machine, but to something with less gain and more contrast or other traits.

Tzung,

A search on CNET came up with this link:

http://www.cnet.com.au/hometheatre/projectors/0,39026003,40059457,00.htm

where the author says the chip is still a wobulated version. You might want to shoot him an email to let him get his story straight.

-Mr. Wigggles

flint350,
Yeah, good question. I have been wondering why all the hubbub about HighPower when this thing seemingly doesn't need it. As a matter of fact, it may be the last thing you would want to pair it with. Even though the show version didn' t have the iris yet, it seems like 900 lumens with a pretty well setup machine ought to have you looking for a low or unity gain screen, or at least reaching for a lower iris setting when it comes out. Maybe a 1.3 or 1.5 gain angular reflective screen, just to cut down a little on light scatter from the side walls and floor/ceiling by narrowing the viewing cone a little.

... or at least reaching for a lower iris setting when it comes out.
If it has adjustable iris that gives more CR at lower lumens, then being able to go big (the High Power can go up to 128" wide in a 16x9 without a seam) and also be able to use a higher on/off CR mode are reasons some might want to use the High Power.

--Darin

Allow me to read through the mails and this long post, before I can answer the questions.

Stay tuned.


Fear Not........... Now can we all have a Group Hug? :D

Good point darin. My old-school perspective on "large" is different from a lot of people. Even 8' wide seems big to me. I learned to be a proponent of smaller screens, so images can "pop" without stressing the display, from installing Vidikron CRTs back when CRT was pretty much the only game in town, and Vidikron was still an Italian company with its US base in New Jersey. I admit I am an old dog that needs to learn a few new tricks, it seems. I am a little behind the times since I haven't yet gotten on the superscreen bandwagon yet. Since TzungILin and the Optoma were lighting up a 135" screen with 1.3 gain at CES, and people seemed delighted with the brightness, I figured how much bigger do you need? But then there are guys like William Mayer that have screens that are taller than his wife! He is my hero! Anyway, you definitely have a good point.

If it has adjustable iris that gives more CR at lower lumens, then being able to go big (the High Power can go up to 128" wide in a 16x9 without a seam) and also be able to use a higher on/off CR mode are reasons some might want to use the High Power.

--Darin

The tilting method I mentioned earlier also works well with the High Power since it is retroreflective.

Even if you have a 9'+ ceiling and are alright with the high offset of the HD81, with the High Power, you probably should still lower it a foot or so from the ceiling, tilt it up and then tilt the screen forward as I showed earlier. This will give you more screen gain from the High Power. (The only downside to lowering the projector is obvious occlusion concerns. So don't go lower than 7' or you will start shinning brightly in people's eyes.)

My friend's room I pictured earlier had a High Power and a HT1000 and it worked great in that fashion.

-Mr. Wigggles

You may get your wish. Tz met with GR at the show. I also saw GR checking out the Sharp XZV20000 when I was exiting the demo booth.
And you didn't say hello???

The tilting method I mentioned earlier also works well with the High Power since it is retroreflective.
...
My friend's room I pictured earlier had a High Power and a HT1000 and it worked great in that fashion.

Was this a fixed screen or a pull-down? I imagine it would work well with fixed, but I'm not so sure that it would work all that well with a pull-down.

--Darin

Was this a fixed screen or a pull-down? I imagine it would work well with fixed, but I'm not so sure that it would work all that well with a pull-down.

--Darin

Post #99, His is a fixed screen, but a pull-down would also work with some screens for such a small angle - some slight tension would probably be needed for best results.

-Mr. Wigggles

O.K., I'm back! (after sleeping the whole day yesterday ...)

Before I begin to answer most of the questions, let me say first, that there are too many questions for me to answer in one day, so I'll go through page by page. Secondly, I'll try not to repeat answer the same concern (like offset), I am feeling bad for those that cannot do without lens shift. And lastly, let's us all be reason and well-tempered on isssues that not everyone agrees upon. No need to attack a brand and no need to defend a brand, just express your concerns, disappointments, encouragement or disagreement, and let us stay on the focus on a HT projector, picture quality, video processings, etc.

For this first post, let me address the some of the most-asked issues:

1. Offset & lack of lens shift
Being a company which developed H56/H57/H30/H31, H77/H79, we know the nice thing about lens shift. But when we faced the question of building a 1080p from the ground up with lens shift, but will take a long development time or do we first use an existing platform with good performance but with a faster schedule, we decided to go for quicker schedule and also to hit a better competitive pricing. If we delay the schedule in order to build a brand new engine, optics and ID, when we have it, competition may already be ready to launch their second gen., then why bother? Optoma is a small company, unlike most competitors, which are all big and powerful, they can sell a few high price 1080p with a delayed schedule, take the loss while their main business is still making money (well, be it true or not). We always need to stay agile and competitive all the time since projection is our main business. So, a decision was made that to make the best out of an already working and good performance platform as soon as we can (if TI can speed up a bit). That's the story of HD81. As many of you know that Optoma has been trying very hard to create good looking HT projectors, be it telecentric engine (the one that do lens shift) or non-telecentric engines. On HD81, my job is simply to make it look unique and good, next to competitions, based on the given platform and all the conditions/issues that I have. CES demo is just our first step, we still have months ahead to make it even better.

That being said, (and since HD81 is schedule to hit the market in Q2), with HD81 showing a good demo at CES (no tricks or a 3-chip hiding beneath the small package), we are on to next year product planning, with non-telecentric HD81 to hit, what would be next then? :) But, the new platform/optics and the resulted system will be higher price than HD81. So, we will have toys for every tastes. ;) So please skip the lens shift issue, and let us focus on more the heart and soul in HT projector --> the color, the picture depth, the balanced design of brightness/contrast.

2. How to have a 120" in a 8' ceiling?
Thanks to Bob, who has done an excellent job explaning how to fit a big screen in 8' ceiling. Here is my take, very similar to his, actually.

120" is a big screen for many people, of course, the 135" we showed at CES is even more "theater"-like, but 120" 16x9 is a mighty image for most folks. So, how can HD81 work for 120" in 8' ceiling? An 120" 16x9 diagnal screen has 60" height, with offset, let us say it's 18", if a flush ceiling mount takes 4", it's 82" in total so far. 8' ceiling is 96", so there is 14" at the bottom for the lower edge of the image to the floor, for center speaker.

If one hides the speaker behind the screen (with special screen of course), then one can even put a 135" image in 8' ceiling (4 + 67 + 20 = 91" total). Keep in mind that when we sit down, the eyes to the floor is about 1 meter height, 3', we want to have the screen center close to the same height as well for easy viewing. One does not want to raise the neck or eyes to watch movies for >2 hours.

So, it's still possible to create moderately big screen in 8' ceiling.

For those with 7' ceiling (84"), one can still have 120" (82" needed) if one hides speaker in the back of the screen. Or the method that Mr. Wigggle proposed that someone actually did a HT1000 install in a 7' ceiling space.

Hopefully, with these two issues explained, we can now focus more on other important issues. And thanks to those who were encouraging us (not just myself, but Optoma in general) or defending me, I'm really quite open to criticism and suggestions, I myself is a HT lover, I can understand the frustration and disappointment, so, that is fine for me. But please let us not be buried by one issue, then we will get no where. There is a MyAV forum in Taiwan with a tougher crowd out there (many maligned attack and so on), and I'm surviving O.K.

I'll address other issues, page by page, in separate posts. Thanks.

I was just wondering how you tilt a pulldown screen.

Besides securing it with something to pull it from the vertical, something needs to keep the bottom of the screen parallel to the wall.

And I guess the slight vertical curvature isn't a problem for focus?

Excellant start TzungILin!, I'm saving for the move from ED to true HD and this projector is at the top of my list, your thoughtful answers will go a long way to filling the facts that we are all looking for.

Keep up the good work!

Regards,

Thanks TZUNGILIN! You explained things very clearly. I will re-evaluate my set up tomorrow and if for any reason it just won't fit I will wait for the next 1080p (from Optoma) that will...

What a well reasoned, even tempered and HONEST post TzungILin! Very much appreciated.

"with HD81 showing a good demo at CES (no tricks or a 3-chip hiding beneath the small package), we are on to next year product planning, with non-telecentric HD81 to hit, what would be next then? But, the new platform/optics and the resulted system will be higher price than HD81. So, we will have toys for every tastes"

Well there you go. A new design with 1080p and all the goodies (lens shift/power zoom/focus) Tz failed to mention the probable Dynamic/automated Iris. :)

For now I'll be more than happy with what I saw at CES. The H81 w/Gennum processor two box system. Like I said at the show, I buy! :) (NYSE lingo) ;)

Cain,

Yes, HD81 can be mounted above the screen, see my previous post, you will need 18" above the screen if you project a 120" image.

rlemesle,
1. Optoma USA web page: here is the link (http://www.optomausa.com/pressreleases.asp)
2. The version HD81 will use is a dedicated-1080p version of HD3000 (slight different H/W and S/W, dedicated for 1080p)
3. HD3000 is the same as VX3000, Optoma USA updates the name to "HD" (I like the original VX better, but that's just me ...) A stand alone scalar box is being considered, please contact Optoma USA for this.
4. We are still investigating various color wheels, so not decided yet.
6. (answered in item 2)
7. No, they are a 2-piece system, sold together only.
8. No.
9. HD7300 uses the 0.8" DC3 DMD, as found in H79, while HD72 is a new, smaller 0.65" WXGA DMD.
10. HD81/H81 and HD72/H72 are the same, they just use HD from 2006 on.
11. I'll try to start a HD7300 and HD72 official discussion link as well.


Starred,
Get rid of the artifacts? Viewers will be the judge. I think some have commented that HD81 were among the easiest DLP to look at. Rainbow and motion artifacts are reduced a lot. But that really depends on how sensitive one's eyes is.


Kiwishred,
1. Yes, the IRIS is full open, so to speak.
2. Yes, user upgradable via www download

Bob Sorel,
Thanks for your later post on fiting a sizable image (106"?) in 8' ceiling. Please see my thoughts in previous post on the offset/lens shift. You are right that it's easier to drop down the projector than raise the ceiling. :p But not all people want the projector to be within the image height, some don't like a projector sticking down from ceiling too far (wife factor), and some may not have bookshelf to use. In my opinion, lens shift is good for book shelf mounting, for ceiling mount, it's actually better with an offset angle, so that the projector can be near the ceiling as much as possible. An ideal lens shift is one that can position projector outside above the screen in ceiling mount. Most of the lens shift projectors are +-100%, meaning they cannot be above the screen.

Expletive,

A good scalar is important for 1080p, since the extra pixel will not be useful if the scaling is bad. This is true especially for the lack of true 1080p source.

HiFiguy1,
A 100" height screen is 200" diagnal! You will need a 3-chip 1080p for that! :D
See my previous post on simulation of 120" or even 135" diagnal in 8' ceiling space. If you meant 100" diagnal screen, the height is 50", then the offset is about 15" only, for example.

gmgav,
yes, they are all single chip 1080p DLP, true 1920x1080. I've seen SIM2 and PD, but not SHARP's, Sharp has a controlled viewing every hour, I went there twice, could not get in. SIM2 and PD are showing nice picture as well.

Kuebler,
THanks for the explanations for us, indeed, you are right, (see my previous post) But let me add some comments to yours.
1. When we design EP910, we already know that there is this 1080p 0.95" DMD that may fit in EP910's 0.95" optical system, so we designed EP910 and HD81 in the same ID, so EP910 looks quite different from Optoma previous high brightness projector, like EP759.
2. Non-telecentric engine is said to have more contrast than telecentric engine, so it's a good thing for video application. The engine is not "specifically" a dedicated data projector engine per say, it's more choice of cost and schedule, not data or video platform.
3. On my product planning, HD81 will live through 2007 .... :cool: so it will not be shortlived.
4. If you have a 8' ceiling, and can take 120", HD81 is still a viable solution for you by end of Q2, since I would guess only SIM 2 and PD are planning in Q2 launch, and they will be priced well over $15,000 unless they break their tradition and come down to compete against HD81 in under $10k range. Sharp is late Q3 to Q4 (according to AVS discussion), and Marantz is unknown yet.

Ron Jones,
1. 120" screen is diagnal, its width will be 105", so you are looking at 1.8x to 2.2x of 105", which is 16' to 19' from screen.
2. DB9 RS232 on both ends

Allen,
The scalar box and the projector head are connected via HDMI (for signals) and RS232 (for controls). THere is another RS232 on the box for connecting to Creston or other contollers.

Al Sherwood,
If you can change to a flush ceiling mount (I'm sure Optoma will have a good one for HD81), then in my previous post, you can have a 120" in your 93" setup, with room to spare at the botoom (actually, 11" left) THen again, we need the big screen to be lower or closer to the floor to bring down the screen center to close to our eyes when seated, so that we do not raise our neck or eyes to watch the movies ...

HiFiGuy1,
1. Exactly, some may not like the inside the image height thing. If the 120"/8' works for you, then HD81 may still worth considerations.
2. Optoma would only sell projector/scalar as a system, not separately. Gennum is a good video chip, and the box provides enough future video sources than one ever needs.

tyree91,
Thanks for the help! It is correct.

Aero,
Thanks for putting on the pressure! :o like we are in need of more!!
Kidding aside, you seem to know the industry very well. I've explained our position in my previous post, take a look.

bdavidson,
If you could see my calculation, 120" in 8' ceiling is still possible. I'm not arguing, maybe it does not fit to your "current" configuration. If you can upgrade to a better screen, then you probably can change your configuration. Just a thought.

flint350,
Please see my calculation, you will need a new mount that is closer to the ceiling. Optoma now has a Berling mount or something that can get H79 very close to the ceiling, I'm sure this same mount can be used for HD81, so you don't need a 10" mount. It's possible to do 120" screen in 8' ceiling with 12" left to the floor.

Rob Tomlin,
In your 10' ceiling condition, actually offset works better for you, sicne you can mount the projector closer to ceiling, and not worrying about the odd presenence of the projector. A "within the screen frame" len shift will mean a very long ceiling mount neck in your 10' ceiling ...

Bob on #54 post,
Thank you for explaning that there is stilll a way to fit a relatively large screen in 8' ceiling, of course, the center speaker has to be smaller than yours!!

KenLand,
You may want to keep the scalar box, as it has many nice features in addition to a good Gennum chip. It has a dedicated video enhancement chip that will perform RGBCYM color management, advanced per-pixel detail enhancement, many user features. So it's not just a Gennum inside. :D

That's it for now, for the first two pages.

Starred,
Get rid of the artifacts? Viewers will be the judge. I think some have commented that HD81 were among the easiest DLP to look at. Rainbow and motion artifacts are reduced a lot. But that really depends on how sensitive one's eyes is.





That's certainly the feelings I had after spending much time in the HD81 room (I'm pretty sure I saw you there!) I can see rainbows on any 1 chip, but for me the problem is eye fatigue after a varying lengths of time depending on the projector. I felt no discomfort at all with the HD81.

BTW TzungILin, thanks for coming here and keeping us in touch!

For now I'll be more than happy with what I saw at CES. The H81 w/Gennum processor two box system. Like I said at the show, I buy! (NYSE lingo)

Tom,

If I had the scratch, that's absolutely what I'd be saying! The HD81 is about as close as I've ever seen to what I would like to enjoy at home...

For those that could not make it, here are some photos of the HD81 demo (from a Japanese website (http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060110/dg62.htm) ) with the clips Optoma used:

First demo clip is Chronicle of Narnia:

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060110/dg6205.jpg



Boring Q&A aside, let us have some fun here.

Many have commented that the Narnia trailer is what makes HD81 demo so impressive. There are some interesting observations, let me share with you:
1. Many people who stopped by told me that this demo looks much better than what they saw in theater.
2. So I finally went to see the movie last night (after my long sleep to recoup myself), to my astonishment, the movie looks so different than the Apple trailer! Like one noted before the Red in the theater is more deep red (more like dark USC crimson) than the HD81 which is more vibrant. I guess this is the differences in transfers, the theater film is transferred in a warm hue (maybe 5500, not D65?), but the Apple trailers is more toward D65?
3. The noises that some mentioned, I think maybe from the source? as I also saw that, but that dark noises were not present in other segments, Over the Hedge, a computer animation, has lots of black, too, but no obvious noise. On the gray scale pattern we looked at before going to CES, there is not noises that we can detect. I'll check the trailer on other display to judge this noise issue.

Like I said, when I was preparing for CES demo at Taipei, I've extensively look at HD81 on several different sources, and I picked out the followings that I wanted to show:
1. Ricky Martin performance in Victoria Secret 2005. This is a 1080i very dark video, with Ricky singing "Dropping on me!" (what does it mean anyway!?) and latin beauties dancing around him. In this segment, there is so much black and dark details (the audience sitting down the stage), it's a good demo for black level and contrast.
2. VS 2005 last segment "I love Candy!", very colorful scene and beatiful curves. Marnatz was showing this on their Plasma in CES. But image it on 135" 1080p image!!! :eek: It was really eye candy!! Even though I'm on diet, I'll try some of the candy any day, any time. ;)
3. Jay Leno interviewing Dennis Richard. Before I know it's Dennis, I only saw a beautiful blonde in her 30' with tight black/beige dress that looks astonishing in Jay's 1080i setup, the texture feeling on the leather sofa, the spekles on Dennis's neck, her golden hair is like shining golden silk in HD81's intense light!! I thought to myself, where do we have this beauty that I don't know of. Then my US colleage told me that she is Dennis, and was 4 month after her giving birth to her child, I was like, Uh!? My jaws are dropping to the floor, she is so good looking and seems to happy. I've watched her from Starship Troopers to Wild thing and to the forgetable 007 flick, she was never this good looking, ever!

Above are 1080i source, I was also planning to show Under Tuscan Sun, for the natural shot, very film like, this will be a good demo of Gennum's 480i upconversion. When I saw HD81 in Taipei using this segment for the first time, I was like seeing the movie for the first time! The brightness brings out another layer of picture information, the whole image is very film like, with 1080p pixels to interpret the 480i DVD content.

Unfortunately, the show manager decides to use trailers, it would have been nice to show the four segments that I have chosen, the booth will be packed (not that it was not packed!) full time at CES, the charisma of Ricky, the latin dance, the VS models (Tyra, Heidi Klum, ...), Dennis and Diane, it would be fun to see them on 135" screen!! I guess I would be the only one to appreciate them! ;)

Too bad, I will just show these segments to local MyAV forum memebers here in Taiwan. :cool:

TzungILin,

I've got a question that will add fuel to the fire :). I'm sure you have seen the Sony Ruby. I'd enjoy hearing how you would describe the H81 versus the Ruby.

Thank You

TzungILin,

I've got a question that will add fuel to the fire :). I'm sure you have seen the Sony Ruby. I'd enjoy hearing how you would describe the H81 versus the Ruby.

Thank You

QQQ,

You really cannot get enough fun, can you? :) Let me warn you though, you asked for it!

Yes, I've viewed VW100 in 3 occasions, first in CEDIA last year, 2nd in CEATEC at Japan, and the last time, a detailed 2 hour review in a MyAV member house, who purchased among the first batch of VW100 that arrive in Taiwan.

To begin with, VW100 is a very capable projector, it's so far THE 1080p projector to beat! I've seen JVC's HD11 and HD12 1080p at higher MSRP, VW100 is better. When I first saw it at CEDIA, I said to myself, and may even posted back in AVS forum that its image gives me a feeling of DLP's HD2+ level performance (DC2 level). Then of course, I read Greg Roger's review, and was surprised to see the contrast ratio is close to the HD2+ DLP and even better (since HD2+ contrast is peak, while VW100 is real usage, after calibration).

Then on the detailed analysis, the 2 hour review on a 120" white wall, I came to realize that VW100 is even better, it was so smooth and ease to look at. The color is intense and deep, very film like. It certainly looks like a G90 with higher brightness only with less black level ;)

But it has its weakness:
1. No lamp control, unless the Xenon lamp does not reduce light output along its life, this could be some issue for serious owners.
2. The auto IRIS mode kills the intensity of the normal viewing, it becomes much less "life" compared to IRIS off position. In fact, the 7 or 8 viewers there all agree that it's better to leave the IRIS at off, to have more image intensity. But this is the mode that SONY claims to have 15000:1 contrast, gregr commeted on the white compression, it is true and can be easily detected.
3. Scaling is good, but I think Gennum or HQV can do better.
4. Image is soft, maybe due to the 3panel convergence, or maybe it's inherit in the SXRD technology that is problematic.

Even with these weakness, I'm sure many 3-CRT owners will be delighted to have VW100. But what about original owners of DLP?

Then, I had the chance to tune and play with HD81 in full color and actions, I tuned as much as possible based on the given conditions and certain "goals" in mind (to look better than VW100, for one), and showed it at CES. I couldn't tell which is better, since this is very subjective, and I did not do a side by side. Darin said he would go back to download the same trailers and play back on VW100, maybe he will be the one to say how these two compared.

I can only say DLP 1080p is worth waiting for the following reasons:

1. Brightness: It provides a chance to be better in brightness than VW100
2. Image sharpness: Single chip DLP is definitely sharper than 3-chip VW100, it gives you a more "definitions" feeling.
3. Contrast and black level wise, I believe both technologies are close, we are still experiementing IRIS on HD81, so I don't have a better feeling yet. But DLP being brighter, it will give you a "perception" that its contrast is better to normal folks. To trained eyes of AVS forum experts here, they will know the differences.
4. 1-chip DLP has been under attack for its eye fatigue and rainbow, I certainly hope the dual DDP3021's much faster speed can make up some here. If like Robert Clark's observations, maybe HD81 with our current CW tuning can reduce the weakness.

So, what chance does HD81 stand to compete?
1. Brightness (as obvious in this CES 135" vs. Sony 100" at CEDIA, or was it 110"?)
2. Gennum processor with a dedicated video enhancement chip (from Japan) in a outboard scalar box for easy installation
3. variable IRIS
4. Optoma color :)
5. I have many ideas in my mind now after talking to people at CES, and compare the image of VW100 to the HD81 images at CES. Color and image is a mere mix and create type of thing, like cooking, the same ingredients for different chef, they may come out differently. HD81 image at CES is only our first try, with more ideas to play with and experiment, who knows what might eventually come out?
6. Improved DLP processing on rainbow and other issues people might be sensitive to.

Is it not possible to imitate VW100 image look on a DLP? I don't know, only time will tell. I know some will be laughing that one-chip could never imitate the 3-chipper. But, without trying, how does one know the extent of technology improvements and creativity? If we do, and we can offer more than just Ruby/G90 film look, but also traditional DLP bad-axx sharp and constraty look, then user can choose which to enjoy depending on the source content or their own taste. I guess as long as we are open to ideas and be more creative, we could add many differentiations to our 1080p DLP machines that can compete well against other competitors.

Did I fire up the whole forest?

TzungILin user downloadable firmware now that is great news. It sure beats boxing it back up and wondering if the FedEx man will take special care of it. In which we all know they don't give a rats a$$ about our packages. UPS and DHL is not much better.

Also it is good that you will be putting an IRIS on it. I would like to know if it will have eco and normal lamp settings? Also will there be a adjustable fan speed setting for us desert dwellers also high altitude users?

Will the H81 be selling through there current USA dealer chain that the H77, H78 and H79 are?

QQQ I finally got to see a Ruby tonight and thought it looked dam good. But I am not a Sony fan because of the HS10 problems I had with the machine and there US service so I will not buy one. I was sitting on the fence waiting for Optoma or Infocus to come out with a 1080P projector. I figured that they would most likely be the only manufactures to come out with a good qualiy 1080P for under $10000 msrp. I guess Infocus does not want to get on the 1080P bandwagon now. :confused: So Optoma H81 is my choice.

TzungILin I respect that you come on here and started this thread. We are a lot better off knowing it shortfalls upfront, then buying one and to find out that it will not work in our HT rooms. But in my case it will work fine for a 106"dia in my room. So now it is waiting for it to be released so I can play with my next toy. :D

TzungILin Thanks for starting this thread.

Dale

TzungILin

If we ever get to HD DVD or Blue Ray, would the scaler allow a 1080P pass thru to the pj. Or what ever better setup your egineers might devise. I am just suggesting that these future options be considered now.

Someone mentioned that the audio would only go the the reciever via HDMI also. Most would need digital coax or toslink to the reciever and those outputs should also be equiped with audio delay if that is needed to allow the video processing to catch up.

Thanks

I've said that if people can use a flusn ceiling mount, then to have a 120" in a 8' ceiling may not be a problem.

Here is one example of what I'm talking about. Optoma USA provides a Bering mount for H77/H79,

http://www.optomausa.com/images/accessories/BM-2003N_s.jpg
Here is the link (http://www.optomausa.com/store_productdetail.asp?product_subcategory=8&productcategory=Ceiling%20Mount)

This is different from the more traditional ceiling mount where it's one long stick that drops down from ceiling, and cannot be adjusted. for example:
http://www.optomausa.com/images/accessories/BM-1002C_s.jpg

HD81 will be about the same or less weight than H79, so I would imagine this ceiling mount should work nicely with HD81. It has two turning knobs that user can change the height of the ceiling mount, from completely flushed near the ceiling or drop down some height or distance from ceiling. In fact, this is like a mechanical projector shift to change the projector height.

And I'm sure one can find similar ceiling mounts elsewhere that can change the height or swing to the side (horizonal movement/positioning of a projector).

Just FYI.

Hello TzungILin

Thankyou for your time and contribution on the forum to educate us.

Could please comment on the suitability for my room. Unfortunately we are in metric here. I probably will be buy the benq pe8720 end of this month as a short term projector and trade up to the hd81. I have been told from the Australian distributor expect 6 months minium.

Here is my specifics:
top of ceiling to screen .500mm
screen equivalent of 101" diagonal 16:9 (actual screen is 2.35:1 130"diagonal)
need to mount the project as far back as possible (prismasonic horizontal expansion lens h1200r) I am figuring about 6.0meters

One of the key attributes that I like about this projector is it is bright (quote specs), 1080p, good contrast ratio and fair price considering its opposition.


Thanks
Ben

Thanks for the continued updates TzungILin!

Question: you alluded to TI having to hurry up - I assume you are referring to (volume) delivery of the 1080 consumer chip. You also mentioned the next (or one of the next) PJs in your development pipeline - a 1080 1-chipper with an adjustable offset. SO my question is: any chance that TI delays the 1080 chip so long that you're able to go right to the next PJ? (Well, based on what you said it sounds like you'd offer both PJs side by side).

Thanks,
TM

Hello TzungILin

Thank you very much for your efforts.

One thing that interests me is your attidude towards 3-chip-DLP. From the moment I experienced a super high brightness (read "punchy") picture for the first time I was sold. I'm also looking into setting up a dedicated HT room with a real large screen (considering 140 inch wide...) . A really bright (16+ ft/l), punchy picture on a large screen - thats were everybody addicted to our hobby will be heading eventually IMHO.

Now on to my questions:

- Does Optoma "consider" the development of an 1080p 3-chip-design? Or do you have no desire to touch that high-end market?

- Does Optoma "consider" the possible integration of a "gamma adjusting" dynamic iris?

I know that you possibly have no desire of talking about future developments and that you will not rule out nor confirm any of it BUT any hints/personal opinions would be very much appreciated. THANK YOU!!!

Bob Sorel said this a couple of days ago, bold added for emphasis:



Me thinks you might have a typo in der bold print ;)

That should probably read something like "27% below the bottom of the screen" :)

Best,

Actually 27% above the top of the screen or 127% above the bottom is the same distance... Then again 27% below the screen works too for table top placement.

TzungILin,
Thanks for all the great information. I have a couple of questions I don't think have been asked.

Does the HD81 have any lightspill either around the projector or to the sides of the screen?

Also will the projector be sold already with a good calibration to D65(plug & play)?

Thanks again.

Thanks for your detailed responses, TzungILin! I think you may have put the H81 back on my short list of projectors to evaluate (the others being two three-chip 720p projectors, the Sim2 Grand Cinema C3X LITE and the InFocus ScreenPlay 777).


1. Ricky Martin performance in Victoria Secret 2005. This is a 1080i very dark video, with Ricky singing "Dropping on me!" (what does it mean anyway!?)
It means Ricky isn't fooling anyone by surrounding himself with beautiful Latina dancers. ;)

QQQ, .....

Did I fire up the whole forest? Actually, an amazingly candid and informative answer. And a great attitude also. Competitiveness and desire to best the competition while taking the high road. Sounds like this baby will be a winner.

Thanks TzungILin for this great update on the latest product releases. We are really grooving on it. I too am hopeful to hear more about the 1080p with some placement variability.

Would like to know about vertical and horizontal. I have a 10 foot ceiling so I don't know about any ceiling options for the upcoming 1080p release but my guess is I will be in the second wave.

Hai,

To add to the lightspil question, do these 4 or 5 blue leds go OFF when the projector is in use and is there a big blue led on the powerconnector side again ? Please Please Please don't do that again we now all have H78/H79's with taped of blue leds and thats just silly.

on the scaler, i like most already own one but if we have to take the scaler (which is fine im sure) does it have image shift ? So that we can 'slide' a 2.35 image down in the 16:9 area ? Alof of us use that to make it easer to mask a 2.35 image and get it lower. Also does it allow 1080p througput so we could hook up 2 scalers (since we already own one).

Daniel.

Actually 27% above the top of the screen or 127% above the bottom is the same distance...

Right...It wasn't a typo...:p

I was simply reinforcing the mental image of the relationship of the projector to the screen by describing the same measurement in different terms. Most offset figures I have seen use the 1xy% method, as it is not open to interpretation like the xy% version is. ;)

Bob,

It's also easier to be miscontrued.

I prefer direct statements like:

27% above the top of the screen for ceiling mounted installations.
27% below the bottom of the screen for floor mounted installations.

That's as clear cut as you can make it.

127% above the bottom of the screen is pretty direct to me. And is a faster way to determine the total height from the screen bottom to the center of the lens. Subtract that number from your ceiling height and you know how much room you've got left for your mount and/or to get your screen off the floor.

Tzung-I Lin does work for Optoma. He gave me his business card at CES.

Coretronic is the parent company of Optoma judged from their websites.

I'm new to the FP game. With RPTV's one did always get a stand so that the center (height-wise) of the screen was about at eye level (~38"). Does one also try to do this with the large screen of an FP set-up? It doesn't seem possible to me. (Is one assuming that there will be raised seating?)

There is some debate about this in the screen forum. I personally prefer to have the vertical center of the screen slightly above seated eye level, which for me is about 43 or 44". Right now my 51.75" high screen is 36" from the ground, making the center of the screen about 18 or 19" above seated eye level for me. I like it. YMMV. (or, "one may or may not enjoy it" ;) )

Oh, and as far as it being possible to put the vertical center of a large image even with seated eye level, as long as your screen height didn't exceed 72" you could theoretically do it. I would recommend an acoustically transparent screen in that situation.

Oh, and as far as it being possible to put the vertical center of a large image even with seated eye level, as long as your screen height didn't exceed 72" you could theoretically do it. I would recommend an acoustically transparent screen in that situation.

But do you really want the screen going down to just a few inches of the floor? This doesn't seem right to me. (The situation you mentioned above, with the bottom of your screen 36" above the floor, sounds reasonable. A quick calculation for your screen and eye level suggests that your eyes would hit the lower 1/3 point on the screen if it were lowered to 27" above the floor; would that be better, or not?)

This thread has been enormously useful to me, as someone who has been with RPTV for several years but has been seriously considering FP for my 'next thing'. From what I understand, the HD-81 would be ideal for my room: 17.2 ft long, 13.5 ft wide, and 8.3ft (100") ceiling, and I would be using a 106"diag screen. All the measurements seem to be right in the ballpark, with space under the screen for my 16" present tv stand (with various components in it) and center speaker sitting on top (below the screen).

The one thing I still can't feel comfortable about, though, is whether FP is practical for a general purpose, den-type tv room, where there will be some light on when watching tv. (For dvd's, the lights are typically off and then there is no problem.) If FP really is only for theater-type setups, then I should probably investigate other ways of getting a 'really big' screen. Correct, or not?

millerwill,

To make a good HT, you need to reduce the amount of light and more importantly control the light. Halogen MR-16 Down lights are very popular, dimmers are a necessity, wall should be darkly painted (but don't have to be black), and the golden rule is never let room light shine directly on the screen.

I know how you feel. You don't really want to watch Sunday Football (or similar programming) in a cave. The good news is those programs are typically pretty bright to begin with so they can handle more ambient light (and those programs aren't for critical viewing either).

My advice is to snag any portable business projector you can borrow and try and do some testing with it. A white wall or a thick white sheet will give you a good indication of how things are going to work and if it is worth persueing or not.

With a little planning it really isn't that hard and I think you'll like the results.

-Mr. Wigggles

Ps. I don't want to get to far off topic. Should probably take your concerns to a different forum or pm me or others for specific details.