While I know that the Z20k can output more than that when new, my only thought is for how long it can maintain a minimum of 245 lumens. Tom, did you track your initial lamp? If I can get 500 hours out of a lamp then I am golden...Bob, yes as a matter of fact I did.

422 hours, 278 lumens
670 hours, 220 lumens

This is running in the Medium iris mode. If you run in the High Contrast mode, you will get about 20% fewer lumens. Other than the change in lumens, Medium gets about 4000:1 CR and High Contrast gets about 5500:1. I don't see much difference, but other owners disagree.

It measured 845:1. I don't think it was atypical because I measured the Z12K at 728:1. The Sharp's have been consistently higher than other DLPs, apparently a function of their optical path design. It can be a little tricky to measure checkerboard contrast patterns but my method is very consistent from projector to projector.

gregr

Sorry to be OT but what did the the 11S1 ansi measure ?

D

Sorry to be OT but what did the the 11S1 ansi measure ?
From Greg's article:
4020:1 at F6.0 (high contrast) and 2360:1 at F3.0 (high brightness)

Bob,

Do you have handy what the lumens numbers were for the 11s1 at both those CR numbers? And how Greg measured the Sharp 20k in both modes?

Im just curious how those compare.

Oops, I quoted on/off CR, not ANSI. The correct number for modified ANSI is 530:1. I assume that the Marantz performed similarly at both iris positions, as there was only one number reported.
Do you have handy what the lumens numbers were for the 11s1 at both those CR numbers?
At F6.0 lumens were 416 in normal mode and 330 lumens in eco mode.
At F3.0 lumens were 608 in normal mode.
Both of these numbers were AFTER calibration, and my assumption is that they lost brightness from the factory calibration, as dE was around 20-21 before calibrating and around 1 after.

I hope I am not out of line for reporting Greg's numbers. The Sharp numbers were from January and the Marantz numbers from last September, so I figure that this is old news.

My thoughts on the Sharp vs. Marantz:

1. Better ANSI from the Sharp.
2. Better on/off from the Sharp.
3. Better brightness from the Marantz.
4. Better color accuracy from the Sharp.
5. Better price from the Sharp (recently reduced to $7k MSRP).

Of course this is all hypothetical as there is no real measured data on the Marantz as yet.

Edited for typos...:)

That will definitely be interesting to see. I would hope that a dual iris implmentation would actually put the 15s1 closer to the 10k CR number, but allowing for advertising "inaccuraries" I guestimated, before I paid for it, that at the worst a 50% increase in the advertised specs would lead to at least a relative 50% increase in measured CR, so based on the 4000 CR Greg measured, I hoped for at least a measurement from him of 6000 CR (when he measured it.)

Oops, I quoted on/off CR, not ANSI. The correct number for modified ANSI is 530:1. I assume that the Marantz performed similarly at both iris positions, as there was only one number reported.



Thanks Bob.

D

This thread has gotten a lot of traffic recently, so I thought this might be a good time to update my original review, adding some new material and taking out some erroneous statements, in an attempt to summarize in one post my experience (and the experiences of others) over the last year with this projector.

Tom,

Thanks for the update. I have a couple of questions regarding the default lens alignment with the top (ceiling mounted) or bottom (desk mounted) of the screen. 1. With the default setting, is the lens shift set to 0 or some other number? I remember reading somewhere in the thread that the default is not 0. 2. When you say the lens is aligned to the top or bottom of the screen, is it to the white image part of the screen or the black border?

Yes, that is mostly correct. I have a 139" X 59" HP in 2.35:1 format, so I believe that figures out to around 151" diagonal. Joe, you don't have to sell me on the High Power - It is my my favorite screen under many circumstances. :)

If you use an Isco or any other anamorphic lens your screen actually performe more like 120" diagonal (16x9). You lens give you more brightness like you know.

I have a 104"x43" with my Sharp and it's okay with my high power. But I measured less than 250 lumens the last time I check. I must have 150 hours sor far. Maybe 200. As much as I like my Sharp I think it would be difficult for me to go any bigger. I bought an RS1 to compare but I kept the Sharp. It seem to me that the Sharp is more 3D than the JVC never was.

The vertical shift on the Sharp is from the top to the bottom of the screen, correct?

I have a couple of questions regarding the default lens alignment with the top (ceiling mounted) or bottom (desk mounted) of the screen. 1. With the default setting, is the lens shift set to 0 or some other number? I remember reading somewhere in the thread that the default is not 0. 2. When you say the lens is aligned to the top or bottom of the screen, is it to the white image part of the screen or the black border?

You know, I just re-tested the effect lens shift has on light output and it is less than I remembered, only about 20 lumens. Furthermore, when I tested it about a year ago I got maximum output with the lens even with the bottom of screen. I just remeasured and the best position now seems to be at the center of the screen, which makes more sense. That is the zero lens shift position, but surprisingly not the default position, or at least not the default position mine came in.

In any case, I removed the paragraph about lens shift. I no longer think it is an important enough variable to warrant much consideration. Why it measures different now than it did last year is something of a mystery. I have have changed bulbs, but I can't imagine why that would matter.

This thread has gotten a lot of traffic recently, so I thought this might be a good time to update my original review, adding some new material and taking out some erroneous statements, in an attempt to summarize in one post my experience (and the experiences of others) over the last year with this projector.

Thanks for the enhanced review, Tom. It's interesting to see people starting to come around to the Sharp, after the initial luster of the RS1 has worn off a little. I have yet to see the JVC, though a friend here in St. Louis may have one soon. The one thing I probably would have the most trouble with is color saturation/skin tones, since the post-calibration Sharp is so spectacular in that regard. One thing I remember vividly after my 20k was ISFed was looking up at the sky and thinking, for the first time, "The color of my projector is so close to the color of that sky." My ISF guy showed me the post calibration color results, and they looked just like yours - dead on.

Nice updated review, Tom! I am especially grateful for your rechecking of the vertical lens offset vs. lumens issue. This makes me more comfortable, especially since my shelf mount is roughly at the mid point of the screen.

Tom, one minor correction - Greg's reported ANSI contrast was 845:1, not 800:1.
If you use an Isco or any other anamorphic lens your screen actually performe more like 120" diagonal (16x9). You lens give you more brightness like you know.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. AFAIK there is only a very minor reduction in light output due to the ISCO III lens, but I have never heard anyone say it gives more brightness. The lumens stay pretty much the same with or without the lens, but the light is spread out over a larger area, thus reducing the ftLs coming back at the viewer. I must be misunderstanding you, so would you please explain?
The one thing I probably would have the most trouble with is color saturation/skin tones, since the post-calibration Sharp is so spectacular in that regard.
Then don't even consider the RS-1/RS-2! You will be very disappointed after watching the Sharp.

Then don't even consider the RS-1/RS-2! You will be very disappointed after watching the Sharp.

I'm really happy with the Sharp - not going anywhere for a long while. :)

Actually, I had the Optoma H79 before the Sharp and was fairly happy with that, but I couldn't keep it running for more than a couple of months without sending it in for a lamp failure. It failed 7 times in 2 years.

Another great thing about my 2 Sharp projectors has been the reliability. I had a 9000, too, and it was like the 20k in this regard. I plugged them both up and they worked the way they were supposed to. No flaky menu issues, such as the Optoma, where I was warned not to go into a particular menu section and adjust anything, or face sending the pj back to Optoma. Not that that would have mattered, because it was going back all the time anyway. :(

The vertical shift on the Sharp is from the top to the bottom of the screen, correct?The vertical lens shift allows you to place the projector anywhere between the top and bottom of the screen.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. AFAIK there is only a very minor reduction in light output due to the ISCO III lens, but I have never heard anyone say it gives more brightness. The lumens stay pretty much the same with or without the lens, but the light is spread out over a larger area, thus reducing the ftLs coming back at the viewer. I must be misunderstanding you, so would you please explain?

Sorry if my point wasn't clear. Sometime it's a language barrier.

What i'm saying is that if brightness is satisfying for you on a 120inchs dagonal 16x9 screen then it will be satisfying for you on a 151 inchs diagonal 2.35:1 screen with Isco lens. You get the same ftls that way.

Most people talk in term of 16x9 screen on this forum. I was just trying to make sure that people will understand that getting the right brightness on a 2:35:1 screen wasn't that difficult if you have an anamorphic lens.

Ok, gotcha. What you say is true for people who leave the anamorphic lens in front of the regular lens all the time (like I do). Under those conditions light is being spread out over the entire surface of the screen regardless of what the AR is that you are watching, so ftLs are calculated based on the total screen area regardless of any black bars or columns that are being displayed. But if a user moves the anamorphic lens out of the way when he watches non 2.35:1 material, there is a significant difference (increase) in brightness (and apparent horizontal resolution) due to the fact that the light is no longer being spread out over the screen area and is instead concentrated to within a 16:9 area subset of the 2.35:1 screen. Same lumens - different footlamberts.

I know we are saying the same thing but I just wanted to make it clear to people how this works...:)

For what it's worth (exactly $448.21 USD), the replacement lamps can be ordered directly from Sharp.

http://www.sharp-cart.com/ecom/accessories.htm?action=searchAccItems&view=catalog/acc_search_items

If the url doesn't get you there, the part number is AN-K20LP. Just search "Accessories and Supplies" at the SharpUSA website.

Thanks,

Nick :cool:

For what it's worth (exactly $448.21 USD), the replacement lamps can be ordered directly from Sharp.

http://www.sharp-cart.com/ecom/accessories.htm?action=searchAccItems&view=catalog/acc_search_items

If the url doesn't get you there, the part number is AN-K20LP. Just search "Accessories and Supplies" at the SharpUSA website.

Thanks,

Nick :cool:

Thanks, Nick. There's a spot for a promotional code for a discount. Does anyone know of one? If not, I'm going to order a lamp tonight. My original lamp won't last too much longer.

That's considerably cheaper than the $599 price I saw somewhere earlier. :)

If you are ready to order from overseas you can get it for 100$ cheaper than the Sharp site.

If you are ready to order from overseas you can get it for 100$ cheaper than the Sharp site.

Is it the same part? And where do you order it from?

Nick :cool:

Bob, what have you decided to get? I am in the same boat as you. I have a 12K now with 1600 hours and the bulb is quite dim. I would like to get a 1080 projector instead of buying a new bulb! I am using a Silverstar 120" diag. The picture was bright enough at the beginning in the HC mode, but, or course, now I am using the HB mode more and more.

I was concerned that the lower wattage bulb on the 20K would produce a dimmer picture, but I think the ANSI lumens were reported to be about the same for both.

Now, after reading all this 2.35:1 chat, I am thinking of changing the screen to a 10' wide screen. I don't know if the projector will be bright enough with a different screen material (e.g. Carada 1.4 brilliant white, or similar).

I have been very happy with the 12K, but I can see pixel structure, in the front row (13'), so I would like to change to the higher resolution. I did have to get the projector repaired once because of a stuck iris. In addition, it is actually too loud in the HB mode.

I am also thinking about the Marantz VP15S1 and the Sim2 projectors (perhaps the HT3000e). Of course the latter is quite a bit more expensive. Some have reported possible problems with the Brillant Color wheel with the secondary colors (e.g. less saturated). It will be difficult to see and compare these projectors before buying one.

Any thoughts?

Jeff

Jeff,

Ill have my 15s1 scope setup up and running tomorrow.

We took down and packaged my HD1 and got the new PJ and scope mounts up. Tomorrow the 15s1 and the Panamorph lens go up.

Im running them with a 117' wide Carada BW. The 15s1 looked very good filling the 16:9 portion of the screen, even with 2.35 images, so Im very hopeful that its gonna look better on my scope.

I had the HD1 running for the last few months, and I loved the crap out of it, but I havent been as satisfied as I have been with the RS1 in the past few weeks with an ND4 filter on it.

Im a real believer that black absolute blacks make a night and day difference with the RS1 and that even though the 15s1 is dimmer, that you can hit similar absolute blacks and when you combine those with the high ANSI, and that its pretty bright, too, man is it a very nice picture.

I hope I can get that same 3d feel with the scope setup. If its not quite there, Im thinking ill help it along by getting a slightly smaller firehawk screen.

Ill let you know how it goes tomorrow.

Thanks, Catdaddy. Let us know the ANSI lumens at HC if you can measure the light output.

Jeff

Bob, what have you decided to get?
I haven't decided yet. I am waiting to get some real measurements on the Marantz before committing myself.
Ill let you know how it goes tomorrow.
Great! I'll be looking forward to your report also.

I have attached 3 spreadsheets that I thought 20K users might find helpful. They will allow you to calculate

lumen output
dE for both grayscale and primary/secondary colors
gammaYou will need a colorimeter and calibration software for the dE readings. You only need a light meter to measure lumens and gamma.

I suppose I'm biased, but, after owning a Qualia 004, a Sony Pearl, and now the Sharp (and after having attended CEDIA and watched JVC and Runco demos), along with the new Sony . . .

I'm happy as a clam with the Sharp. With the recent price reduction, I hope it gets lots of people to join in on a superb performer, and keeps Sharp enthusiastic enough about Front Projectors to keep it up.

My new bulb (I want easy replacements when I'm ready--I run in the high brightness mode) is on its way.

Thanks,

Nick :cool:

Hey Bob and Jeff,

Its a day or so late, but it looks damn good. I am posting it on the same Marantz thread I had been posting on, as I dont want to clutter the Sharp 20k thread with it.

Hey Tom,
New to the forums.. just got done reading your updated post - wanted to hear your thoughts on a couple things if you have a moment

The set up:
110inch wide screen, 16ft throw (screen to projector), 9ft ceiling, dedicated room basement (re: very dark) etc.

Basically, I have 7-9k to spend on the projector. Was planning on the Sony, but given the price drop, should I go with the sharp (or perhaps even another brand/unit)?? It's a tough price range I know (just below a lot of solid units it seems).

Thanks in advance for any advice you can provide,
Will

Hey Tom,
New to the forums.. just got done reading your updated post - wanted to hear your thoughts on a couple things if you have a moment

The set up:
110inch wide screen, 16ft throw (screen to projector), 9ft ceiling, dedicated room basement (re: very dark) etc.

Basically, I have 7-9k to spend on the projector. Was planning on the Sony, but given the price drop, should I go with the sharp (or perhaps even another brand/unit)?? It's a tough price range I know (just below a lot of solid units it seems).

Thanks in advance for any advice you can provide,
Will


Welcome aboard, Will. Tom is certainly the most well-informed on this thread, but I can recall Chuck Williams comments when he calibrated my XV-Z20000, as well as the enjoyment I get out of this projector. I've owned two projectors that retailed in excess of $25,000 (an NEC CRT, and a Qualia 004), and this projector is great in my setup, which has a 114" screen. I believe that Tom has commented that 110" is about the limit he'd suggest, but you're right there, and my extra 4" don't concern me.

I was at CEDIA, and I wanted to fall in love with the new Sony. I saw it and the RS-2 (or the HD-100 or whatever they're calling the new model at JVC), and nothing suggested that I'd improve over what I already have. The price-drop makes the Sharp a no-brainer.

Nick :cool:

Hey Tom,
New to the forums.. just got done reading your updated post - wanted to hear your thoughts on a couple things if you have a moment

The set up:
110inch wide screen, 16ft throw (screen to projector), 9ft ceiling, dedicated room basement (re: very dark) etc.

Basically, I have 7-9k to spend on the projector. Was planning on the Sony, but given the price drop, should I go with the sharp (or perhaps even another brand/unit)?? It's a tough price range I know (just below a lot of solid units it seems).

Thanks in advance for any advice you can provide,
Will

If you are not sensible to RBE and like the "DLP look" I can HIGHLY recommend the Sharp Z20k. With the new price tag it is a no-brainer IMHO.

If mine would catch fire and burns to ashes I would pick up another 20k in a heartbeat to replace it - can you be more satisfied with a product than this? - I guess not.

The only unit in the market right now I consider a real upgrade to the 20k is the upcoming $30k Sim2 1080p C3X 3-chip DLP.

Welcome aboard, Will. Tom is certainly the most well-informed on this thread, but I can recall Chuck Williams comments when he calibrated my XV-Z20000, as well as the enjoyment I get out of this projector. I've owned two projectors that retailed in excess of $25,000 (an NEC CRT, and a Qualia 004), and this projector is great in my setup, which has a 114" screen. I believe that Tom has commented that 110" is about the limit he'd suggest, but you're right there, and my extra 4" don't concern me.

I was at CEDIA, and I wanted to fall in love with the new Sony. I saw it and the RS-2 (or the HD-100 or whatever they're calling the new model at JVC), and nothing suggested that I'd improve over what I already have. The price-drop makes the Sharp a no-brainer.

Nick :cool:

Nick,

Thanks for the help mate! I can't tell you how much it helps to have someone vouch on a purchase of this magnitude (albeit small when compared to your 25k investments ;) )

Quick question, when you say "110inches is about the limit he'd suggest" are you saying that I should go with a little bigger screen if the wall allows for such?

Also, is the 16' throw ok distance wise? To be perfectly honest, my installer and builder really haven't spoken at length on what I'm sure is consider pretty basic stuff (re: desired distance from screen to couch etc.)

Will, I wouldn't go over 110" UNLESS I had a screen with a very high gain. Several users have reported good results with the DaLite High Power. At 110" I would recommend the Stewart Ultramatte 150.

For a 110" diagonal screen, you can place the projector lens between 14.8-20 feet back. 16 feet would be a good choice.

You can take a look at the spreadsheet I uploaded a few posts down for a calculator that helps you decide on screen size/gain. I'd shoot for an initial fL of 16, understanding that the bulb will lose brightness fairly quickly.

Regarding the choice in general, I don't really have anything to add to the list of pros and cons at the end of my initial review. I know that to my eyes and for my installation, there is no other PJ I would accept as a trade at anywhere near its price, although the forthcoming DC4 units may offer some advantages.

Will, I wouldn't go over 110" UNLESS I had a screen with a very high gain. Several users have reported good results with the DaLite High Power. At 110" I would recommend the Stewart Ultramatte 150.

For a 110" diagonal screen, you can place the projector lens between 14.8-20 feet back. 16 feet would be a good choice.

You can take a look at the spreadsheet I uploaded a few posts down for a calculator that helps you decide on screen size/gain. I'd shoot for an initial fL of 16, understanding that the bulb will lose brightness fairly quickly.

Regarding the choice in general, I don't really have anything to add to the list of pros and cons at the end of my initial review. I know that to my eyes and for my installation, there is no other PJ I would accept as a trade at anywhere near its price, although the forthcoming DC4 units may offer some advantages.

Good to hear! 110" seems plenty big from where I'm sitting. Have 3-3.5k budgeted for a fixed screen - the installer said he has something lined up that he likes, but that was assuming we were going to go with the Sony.

Also, apology for any and all newbish questions - will search the rest of the forums for answers from this point on, and thanks once again for the info =)

You really ought to send for a sample of the High Power fabric from Da-Lite. I have a 110" HP, Cinema Contour with the Pro finish (absorbs light, very classy looking, fixed screen). It compares very favorably with my Stewart Firehawk with a similar frame, except the HP frame is much, much cheaper, and the HP is head and shoulders above the Firehawk in image quality. I got the HP screen and frame for a song compared to your budget - less than $1,200 from AVS. Contact Jason about current pricing. I could not be happier with the HP. It's a perfect companion to the Sharp 20k. After 1900 hours on the original Sharp lamp, I'm still satisfied with the brightness. It's very satisfying to watch, although it's no doubt less than half as bright as it was when new.

If you are not sensible to RBE and like the "DLP look" I can HIGHLY recommend the Sharp Z20k. With the new price tag it is a no-brainer IMHO.


The sharp20k is among the most impressive projectors I've seen (maybe THE most impressive). What is the new price on that model?

just got off the phone with my installer (Towne Tv) - he reps both Sony and Sharp. Told me he hasn't really been impressed with Sharps "service" and advised against the purchase. He also questioned the price drop in general - says that that usually indicates a discontinuing of a particular line.

Didn't really have anything to say after that...

Which, of course, left me with the following questions: why the major price decrease? And what about Sharp's service? And is service really that important?

Couple of thoughts:

1) Your installer may not like Sharp much -- personal pref plays a big role in anyones attitude

2) Your installer may have had some bad experience with Sharp -- worth considering, but also worth collecting more case reports on -- one may be his only sample

3) Your installer may be familiar only with Sharps lower-end units (nice enough, but unexceptional).

I've had a Sharp 9000, 10000, 12000 and now a 20000. All except the 10000 were in service for at least two years (I got the 10000 right before the 120000 was and quickly turned the 10000 around for a 12000). I've never had any problem at all with the units and I've been through at least 4-6 bulbs in the 9000 and 12000 (still on the first bulb for the 20000). It just works.

As for the price break, in part, I suspect it's because the JVC RS1 really rocked everyones boat -- its a pretty nice projector (if you can live with inaccurate colors) and pretty inexpensive. That inexpensive price has really put the cramp on other units that in the "high but not super high" end category. I think the only folks "immune" form this are Marantz and that is because they've rarely, if ever, tried to compete on price.

Also, the Sharp line has done this with nearly ever projector in the past -- usually after about a year or so, the prices start dropping a whole lot. I think it just happened faster this time because of the RS1 effect. Sharp is a big company and I think they are used to milking the early adopters and then determining when that pool is drying up and dropping the prices to get the rest of the folks.

Certainly listen to your installer because you want him to know his opinion matters, but I would balance his one opinion with as many other experiences as possible (and not just all online -- try to see if you can find a 20k to try).

If you can't see one locally, you buy the 20k through AVS and if you don't like it (within a reasonable period of time), they are pretty good about taking it back and exchanging it for some other type of unit.

I'll add my voice to the chorus -- I think Sharps high end line is an amazing combination of performance and price and that the machine, competes pretty much on level with much more expensive units (i.e. Marantz). It would still be a great performing machine, though less popular, if it sported Marantz like prices. As long as you have the right environment (light controlled, smaller screen or HP/SilverStar, etc) and you are not affected by RBE, it's a pretty unbeatable projector. The 20k, in particular, finally takes care of my last left over "wants" from when I switched off CRT projectors (24hz, super accurate colors, CR, etc).

Gerry

Thanks Gary =)

This is going to be tough decision between the ruby and sharp 20k =/

Finally, my Sharp XV-Z20000 has arrived! :D:DTurned it on and the picture's very bright. At default, the Iris is set to High Brightness and Lamp on Bright. I didn't have time to play with it earlier but will have more time tonight. Does anyone here have any idea on how to find out the build/manufacture date on this unit? I couldn't seem to find it.

Finally, my Sharp XV-Z20000 has arrived! :D:DTurned it on and the picture's very bright. At default, the Iris is set to High Brightness and Lamp on Bright. I didn't have time to play with it earlier but will have more time tonight. Does anyone here have any idea on how to find out the build/manufacture date on this unit? I couldn't seem to find it.

You'll want to go to Eco mode on the lamp, 6500 color temp and High Contrast on the iris. That'll get you closer to where you should be, and it will bring the light level down considerably. It's a good place to be until you can get a calibration.

just got off the phone with my installer (Towne Tv) - he reps both Sony and Sharp. Told me he hasn't really been impressed with Sharps "service" and advised against the purchase. He also questioned the price drop in general - says that that usually indicates a discontinuing of a particular line.

Didn't really have anything to say after that...

Which, of course, left me with the following questions: why the major price decrease? And what about Sharp's service? And is service really that important?

The latest rumor is that the 20k is not being discontinued. As to the price drop, that's almost certainly a direct result of stiffer competition from models like the JVC RS1. I can't speak much to the issue of Sharp service, except to say that with my Sharp projectors, I have had very little need of it. They have been very reliable (9000 and 20000). I just set them up and they worked from day 1 - no big surprises and certainly no disappointments. That's been pretty much the experience of most people I know of in the St. Louis area who have owned Sharp projectors.

Thanks Gary =)

This is going to be tough decision between the ruby and sharp 20k =/Ruby??? You better look at the VPL-VW60 then. That would be a fairer fight.

Joseph,
Thanks! Yes it did drop the brightness but it's still watchable. I'd compare it to my 9" CRT Marquee (when in Eco-mode/High Contrast) and Panasonic AX-100u (when in Bright/Medium).

Tom,
I tried playing with the lens shift and I did not detect any changes in the picture brightness/contrast whatsoever. No matter what input or zoom level I tried, there were no changes. By default, the lens is aimed about 1/3 from the top of the screen near the center but not centered as you mentioned. Also, you mentioned about the shift level like -6, +10 or something similar and there's no such number on my projector. Where did you come up with those numbers?

I have the projector on a desk but will eventually mount it on the ceiling. Question: Is there a fan noise level difference when ceiling mounted vs desk?

Ruby??? You better look at the VPL-VW60 then. That would be a fairer fight.
Yankees v RedSox fairer or Yankees v Giants fairer :D

I tried playing with the lens shift and I did not detect any changes in the picture brightness/contrast whatsoever. No matter what input or zoom level I tried, there were no changes. By default, the lens is aimed about 1/3 from the top of the screen near the center but not centered as you mentioned. Also, you mentioned about the shift level like -6, +10 or something similar and there's no such number on my projector. Where did you come up with those numbers?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/member.php?u=57551

I was just referring to inches from top or center.

You may be too close to the projector for your sensor size. Move far enough back that moving the sensor 50% further back has no effect on the least significant digit of your contrast ratio. Keep the sensor in the center of the block. You could also reduce the aperture size of the sensor. Be sure you have enough digits of resolution. Check the linearity of your sensor at low light levels with filters. Have you completely covered the screen so there is no reflection from it? Have you tried a black curtain behind your sensor that blocks the entire pattern from the screen and end wall? Have you tried a "tent" around the sensor? Have you tried masking the area around the sensor with black velvet? Is the sensor in exactly the same position (tripod mounted) when measuring each white block and the corresponding black block?Greg, somehow I missed this post until now.

I have done some of these things (curtain behind and tripod mount) but not others. I'll employ some of these other techniques and see if I get a different reading. Thanks for the suggestions.

OK, how about the effect on the light output in relation to the lens shift? I did not detect any changes on mine.

Yankees v RedSox fairer or Yankees v Giants fairer :DI don't know how to respond. I'm not a baseball fan.

I don't know how to respond. I'm not a baseball fan.

I am a baseball fan and I don't know how to respond. :confused:

Maybe you have to be a New York Yankees baseball fan?

Hmmm...I am not a baseball fan, but I live in Yankees/Red Sox land, and they are arch rivals in the same division (around here you don't have to be a fan to know that) while I have no clue about the Giants. Maybe it has something to do with them being in the same division and HHF was making a point of comparing projectors in the same technology "division". Just a wild guess.

Hi.

Just bought a used 21000.
Want to check if the timer for bulb life (lamp) has been reset.
How can i access the service menu??
If it is possible to see.

OK, how about the effect on the light output in relation to the lens shift? I did not detect any changes on mine.The link I provided in my previous post was wrong.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=11642952&postcount=262

It is highly unlikely that you would be able to detect a 20-lumen difference just by eyeballing it.

This is going to be tough decision between the ruby and sharp 20k =/
Definitely worth seeing them in person though -- I've seen both the Peral and Ruby (and obviously the Sharp). There is a little matter of tasted involved -- I like th e very "sharp" picture of DLP and found the SXRD projectors very slightly "soft". Soft is probably a misnomer because in many ways, the pic was sharp, but there was a slightly "softer" feel to it and I believe it comes down to artifacts of SXRD vs DLP.

Gerry

Can someone who has spent a lot of time with this projector and with the Sharp 12k please tell me what I can expect if I upgrade?

I currently own a 12k and have spent some time with a 20k that was set up in what were pretty good conditions. I came away feeling pretty good about my 12k, which suggests either I was missing something or that the 20k is not much of an upgrade (other than in resolution).

Can someone shed some light on this?

Bonus money is eating a hole in my pocket and I would hate to have to put it to profitable use. On the other hand, I want to see some benefit from upgrading so I can't just upgrade for the sake of it.

In had a 12k for 2 years and upgraded to a 20k about 5 months ago. I have a 110" (diag) SilverStar screen in a light controlled room.

What I saw that made this more than worth it for me:
* Pixel structure is gone (from my front row -- you could see it a tiny bit before). Not huge, but gives a smoother look
* Better colors - red and blues in paticular, seem much more accurate. Reds always seemed to have a very slightly orange tint on the 12k seem much more "red" now. Blues seem to pop a lot better now.
* 24p - the ability to have judder free movie display is a big deal for me.
* Additional CR -- while I believe I could see it, it's a more subtle improvement to me compared to the above (I always run in high contrast mode)

I consider it well worth it, at least for me. Others may have found other difference more standout than these.

Gerry

Better colors - red and blues in paticular, seem much more accurate. Reds always seemed to have a very slightly orange tint on the 12k seem much more "red" now. Blues seem to pop a lot better now.Post-calibration, the biggest improvement is with green. On the 12K, especially the MkII, there's an uncorrectable yellow tint to green.

Using the CMS you can get red pretty much spot on with the 12k or 20k.

In had a 12k for 2 years and upgraded to a 20k about 5 months ago. I have a 110" (diag) SilverStar screen in a light controlled room.

What I saw that made this more than worth it for me:
* Pixel structure is gone (from my front row -- you could see it a tiny bit before). Not huge, but gives a smoother look
* Better colors - red and blues in paticular, seem much more accurate. Reds always seemed to have a very slightly orange tint on the 12k seem much more "red" now. Blues seem to pop a lot better now.
* 24p - the ability to have judder free movie display is a big deal for me.
* Additional CR -- while I believe I could see it, it's a more subtle improvement to me compared to the above (I always run in high contrast mode)

I consider it well worth it, at least for me. Others may have found other difference more standout than these.

Gerry

I have a 12k MarkII and I get the opportunity to see my friends 20k on a regular basis. Becuse he has such a large screen it is a little challenging to do a apples to apples comparison. The impact of viewing the 20k on a 126 inch Ultramat 150 takes the overall presentation to another level. That being said my impressions are that the 20k appears to have the following advantages.

1) Improved color saturatuation and accuracy especially with reds
2) A little more depth and 3d look
3) Slightly better blacks as a result of improved on and off and ANSI
4) I believe and my eyes tell that the 20k is brighter

I cannot say that I really notice a significant improvement in resolution but I am sure that is a factor albeit a minor one.

I find it a little curious that the 20k measures about 20% brighter and performs like a brighter projector given that it has a lower wattage bulb than the 12k MKII, but I believe that most of the reviews and testing have confirmed that it is. FYI for those of you who think the 20k is relatively dim, my friend uses the high brightness mode econo bulb on, and his picture is very bright, in fact he gets to my suprise an acceptably bright picture when using medium mode with econo bulb on.

Yesterday I spent a few hours with a Sharp Xv-z20000.

I could not do an A/B with my Sharp 12k but I did bring a lot of source material that I was familiar with.

The 20k that I viewed was ISF'd. My 12k has not been. Viewing conditions were similar for both (good). I use a High Power Screen. The 20k I viewed was on a lower gain and slightly larger screen.

The overall presentation of both projectors was very similar. There were definitely more similarities than differences.

Color: The 20k had been ISFd. My 12k has not been. Both look pleasing to me and I could not detect much difference between the colors. I tried viewing things like Lord of the Rings where things like green fields are really pronounced. I am sure that if I A/Bd them I would see differences, by my mental memory honestly did not favor either or find fault with either.

Contrast. This is one area that I was sure I would be able to pick a winner in because the 20k is spec'd much higher. It is not so obvious, however. The specs don't lie but I suspect that the amount of difference in the specs does not translate into a difference that the eye (at least my eyes) can easily see. Black levels were ever so slightly better on the 20k, but I suspect that this is kind of a function of the high power screen that I use. Thus, while on my HP screen, the 12k seems similarly bright to the 20k on a lower gain screen, the black levels on the 12k seem just a bit higher on the 12k. I suspect that if I used the 20k on my HP screen, the 20k would be brighter than the 12k but have a similar black level.

SDE: The winner here is obvious. I cannot see pixel structure on the 20k at any reasonable viewing distance. On the 12k, I can see pixel structure several feet out from the screen. In my setup SDE is not a factor for me so I would not upgrade based on resolution alone.

Scaling. I viewed cable broadcast TV, HD-DVD, and DVD material, but I did not habve any test dvd to specifically test for scaling or image processing errors. Both do a pretty good job, in my opinion. The 20k accepts 1080p signals and the 12k does not. I am sure that this must translate into some image quality differences when displaying HD material. I could not tell without an A/B if this is true.

Conclusion: I will not be upgrading to the Sharp 20k. I have made up my mind that I will not upgrade unless the projector that I buy is (1) brighter than the 12k and (2) has a much lower black level (no shadow puppets) than the 12k. The 20k is not that projector. If I were using a low gain screen with my 12k, I might feel differently because I supect that an a/b on the same screen would show the 20k to be brighter. That is not the case for me, however.

Next I will be spending some time with the RS1.

Benq W10000?

Benq W10000?

BenQ W10000 what?

I had one (although apparently not a very good one) and sent it back to AVS for the Sharp 20k. No comparison.

I have a Sharp XV-z9000 that I was using at my old house with a 92" Stewart firehawk (that I now need to sell). I'm in my new house and my wife gave me carte blanche with the basement. You know what that means? Dedicated room - 16' x24'. No windows or external doors. Perfect light control. Woo hoo. I read new pj reviews and was all set to pull the trigger on the RS-1, and was shaken abour news of the RS-2 and new Sony BP. I called AVS to get advice (I really like them and have purhased from them before), and they were concerned that since I was used to DLP and the 9000 (which I thought was great - even with a slight screen door at 6 feet or so), I might not like the image of LCOS or DILA. Now Sharp dropped the price (as did AVS) on the 12000.. Now what?? Do you agree that the Sharp is a better choice, especially if my only pj experience was the 9k??

Also, my front row of seats will be about 15' or so from the screen. I'd like to go with a 130+" screen. I read that 110" is the max recommended for the Sharp. Really? I'm planning to mount it on a shelf that's an extension of a HVAC trey about 20' or so from the screen. I don't want to spend more than about $6k and the Marantz is more $$. I'm hesitant about high power screens because of what I've heard about hot spots and brightness differences/viewing angle. I'll have 4 chairs in the front: 2 and 2 with a 4' space in the middle to get to the 2nd row of 5 chairs.

Am I better off with a smaller screen, different pj or do I have to go high powerfor 130"+??

Please help!

Every time I think I'm set, I read more and everything changes.

I can easily recommend a High Power if you have a narrow seating arrangement, but yours is outside what I'd consider optimal. However, I doubt you'd be able to go with a 130" screen with the 20k without a high gain screen. You might consider a SilverStar from Vutec, but I'd send for a sample first. I didn't like the sheen of the SS, but some people are not bothered by it at all. The HP has no sheen. If most of your viewing is in a primary seating area close to the lens, the HP is still worth considering. For me, 98% of our viewing takes place with just a couple of people, who are within a couple of feet of the lens (left, right, up, down - not back to front).

I used to have a 9K, too. If you liked it, you'll love the 20k. It's a big step up in almost every respect.

BenQ W10000 what?

I had one (although apparently not a very good one) and sent it back to AVS for the Sharp 20k. No comparison.

what were you using as a video processor? im using Anthem D2 with gennum, I had a sharp 12k, great projector but customer service just plain sucks, 12 months warranty? yea right! Im sure that the 20k is a good projector but heres a tip, hope you have an extended warranty and careful playing with that manual iris, mine went out on my 12k, called up for tech support and company thought it was some kind of tv, way to go sharp. service from Benq is much better and they know the difference between a projector and a toaster overn.

what were you using as a video processor? im using Anthem D2 with gennum, I had a sharp 12k, great projector but customer service just plain sucks, 12 months warranty? yea right! Im sure that the 20k is a good projector but heres a tip, hope you have an extended warranty and careful playing with that manual iris, mine went out on my 12k, called up for tech support and company thought it was some kind of tv, way to go sharp. service from Benq is much better and they know the difference between a projector and a toaster overn.

I'm using a Lumagen. However, in fairness to the BenQ, I may have simply gotten a lemon. I couldn't get a watchable image on the unit I received - bad color, bad black level, banding issues out the butt. It was also soft and hazy. My Sharp 9K worked from day one, no problems. My Sharp 20K has worked from day one, no problems. Many other people I know in the area have similar experiences with Sharp projectors. Just as I got a bad BenQ, you may have gotten a Sharp lemon. It happens with every manufacturer.

comapre with RS1

Just as I got a bad BenQ, you may have gotten a Sharp lemon. It happens with every manufacturer.

fair enough, I can accept that statement, I do remember that in the begining Benq had some QC issues and seemed to have turned that around, I hope Sharp rethinks their warranty for this projector, 1 year is just not enough to give a lot of folks that warm and fuzzy feeling, that was one of the things that steered me away from the sharp 20k and into the
Marantz VP11-S1, I also use the W10000 in the theater on a second drop down screen

Sharp sells the extended warranty for somewhere north of $200. You then get a two year warranty on the projector.

For a small price, you can get adequate protection.

Thanks,

Nick

Here’s my mini- review of my new Sharp XV-Z20000:

My Setup:
Room: Very dark, light controlled
Screen: Studiotek 130 Microperf 138” diagonal (54” x 127”)
Projector is ceiling mounted with lens centered to 1/3 top section of the screen. Projector (in a hush box) is approximately 16’ from the screen. Prismasonic H1200-M upgraded with FE (Front Element).

Inputs:
On the projector, I’m using 2 inputs only. DVI for HTPC and HDMI 1 for the rest (Dish, HDDVD, DVD Recorder, Xbox 360, and Video Camera) connected thru Lumagen HDQ.
On the HTPC, I’m using 1600 x 900 resolution instead of 1920 x 1080 because the on later, the picture is compressed, as mentioned in the manual. The 900 looks very good. I use HTPC for watching regular DVD’s using Theatertek and Over-the-Air High-Def using DVICO.
There’s one odd thing I’ve been noticing about the HDMI 1, the picture would occasionally flicker. This doesn’t happen on the DVI (HTPC). I’m suspecting it’s the Lumagen. I’m using 1080p output resolution. Could there be something in the setup that I need to change, like DVI (HDCP, EDID, HOTPLUG) or Output Resolution timings, etc…. If anyone knows, please chime in.

PJ Setting:
Picture mode is set on Standard and changed Color Temp to 6500.
Gamma and Advanced settings (like CMS) are left untouched.
I’m using Eco-mode, Medium Iris most of the time. High Contrast on Bright Lamp looks good on space or on very dark scenes. I find that the High Contrast on Eco-mode a little too dark for me. When watching home videos, I use High Brightness on Eco-mode.

Wish List:
For the price one is paying for this projector, I would expect the following missing features:
1. A single button on remote that would ALL display the current status, like the current input, resolution, iris setting, lamp setting and hours on the lamp. Currently, for example, you can find out the current iris setting by pressing Iris on the remote (press again and it changes to the next Iris setting).
2. An additional Iris setting between High Brightness and Medium Mode. There’s a big jump in light output between those two Irises.
3. Test Patterns like Stairstep Gray Bars, IRE’s, Crosshatch with circles, Color Bars, and Texts for focusing.
4. A much quieter fan.

Overall, I’m extremely happy with my upgrade. :):):)

Hmm, you can't get pixel to pixel 1080p via hdmi from a PC?

Hmm, you can't get pixel to pixel 1080p via hdmi from a PC?

Yes, you can. I do it with an nVidia 7950 GT OC video card for HD DVD playback.

Doesn't that contradict Francis concerning the compression for 1920x1080 output?

I don't think so. The Sharp's DVI input supports limited resolutions, for some reason, but the HDMI inputs will do full 1920x1080p. I'm using one of my HDMI inputs for HTPC use and the other for my Lumagen output. I'm getting an occasional flicker with the Lumagen, too, if I try to output 1080p to the Sharp's HDMI input. I haven't come up with a solution that works, so I let the Sharp scale the 1080i input from the Lumagen. It is an occasional flicker to black that happens every few seconds. The Sharp's other HDMI input doesn't have a problem with the HTPC's 1080p output (nVidia 1950 GT OC). That HTPC output, BTW, is coming from quite a long DVI to HDMI cable to the Sharp, so the 7950 has a strong signal.

Interesting... Thanks for the clarification. Is the flicker you are mentioning a widepread issue?

Have you tried flipping the 1080p Lumagen and HTPC HDMI connections on the projector to see if it is a problem with compatibility with the Lumagen, or just a general problem with one of your HDMI inputs?

Don't know how widespread it is. I tried using both HDMI inputs and got the same result. I thought maybe it was cable length related, but I tried a shorter cable with much the same outcome. I also tried a Gefen DVI extender (the Lumagen output is DVI), and that helped reduced the flicker but did not eliminate it.

Joseph,

Whew!!, I'm relieved that I'm not alone on the HDMI (Lumagen HDQ) flicker. Funny thing though, as I'm typing this, I don't see any occasional flicker anymore (knock on wood!). However, when it did, the flickering would only happen every few minutes or so. I'm still suspecting that there must be something in the HDQ's setup that needs to be changed. I might ask Lumagen about this.

Regarding using 1600 x 900 HTPC resolution as opposed to the 1920 x 1080, I tried the 1080 at first but the sides are cut off. I pressed Auto Sync on the remote and it's still the same. According to the manual, when a 1920 x 1080 signal is input, the image is compressed before it is displayed on the screen. Since I have my HTPC connected to the DVI input on the PJ, I assume they're talking about the DVI.

Joseph, since you're using one of your HDMI inputs on the PJ for your HTPC, I guess it's different and indeed it is per your experience. I just wish the manual is clear about this.

I'm using Nvidia GeForce 7950 GT also though I don't overclock. Nevertheless, I'll stick to 1600 x 900 (on DVI) cause it looks real good on mine.

If you have one of the HDMI inputs available, you shouldn't have any problem getting 1920x1080p to work with it, with a simple DVI to HDMI adapter or cable. Maybe an inexpensive switch? I have several DVI and HDMI sources.

I don't overclock manually. My BFG 7950 GT OC is overclocked out of the box.

I have the HDMI 2 available but I might try connecting my HDDVD player connected straight to it. I'll keep my HTPC connected to the DVI using 1600 x 900 resolution. It already looks great to me.

Gamma and Advanced settings (like CMS) are left untouched.This had me scratching my head. You are really leaving a not trivial amount of this PJ's value on the table.

I have the HDMI 2 available but I might try connecting my HDDVD player connected straight to it. I'll keep my HTPC connected to the DVI using 1600 x 900 resolution. It already looks great to me.
If you have an HTPC, why not drive it at 1920x1080? I drive my 20k from my HTPC at 1080P @ 24hz (vis DVI) and I could not be happier with the result. I do a moderate (light by most standards) ffdshow processing and the result is smooth pans and a really excellent pic. Of course, it can't quite compete with a HDDVD unit, but it is surprisingly close on good source material.

Gerry

OK, I'll try the 1080p 24hz tonight. As I mentioned before, I couldn't use 1080p @60hz because the picture is cut off on the sides. My HTPC's connected to the Sharp's DVI.

You do need to make sure you have updated the 20k with the new firmware that supports 24hz. But if you have it and if you can set your video card to 1080P @24hz (and assuming your DVD player software will support 24hz properly -- I use TheaterTek), it really can make a difference.

Best of luck,

Gerry

For gaming, I wouldn't think that 24 Hz would be a fast enough refresh rate. Has anyone had success with outputting 1080p at 60 Hz?

Maybe I'm confusing myself. When gaming, 24 fps (24 Hz) is pretty damn low. Movement a little choppy, etc. I would assume 60 Hz would allow for 60fps.

Bottom line, I'm thinking Bioshock on a 110" screen :) Anyone get this working (well)?

Gerry,

How do I determine the firmware version of my 20k and how do I update?
I use Theatertek also.

HAve any of you done anything to mitigate the noise? I hear that the Sharp is pretty loud. I'm thinking of having it about 3 feet behind me.

The noise the Sharp produces doesn't bother me at all. That's roughly how far it is behind me - about 3'. Occasionally, I sit right next to it - I mean less than a foot away. Even there, it doesn't bother me. It's a very gentle sound, unlike other pj's I've heard.

Update on the flicker with Lumagen.
The flicker is now gone! :)
I post the problem at Lumagen's forum and they recommended that I change the Genlock to the opposite setting, which in my case to ON. I did this on all the input memories and now the flicker is gone. I have watched for 2 hours now. To adjust Genlock, press Menu, In, Config, Cntrl, Genlock, then set to ON. The first time I did this, the picture turned white and snowy. I selected a different input and then went back.

If you are ready to order from overseas you can get it for 100$ cheaper than the Sharp site.

My lamp arrived at almost exactly $100 cheaper (with shipping included). The letters on the box are in both English and Japanese, with the identical model number. Total cost was $379, shipping included, and paid for via Paypal.

This projector is simply one of the best on the planet, and, especially based on my recent projector-fest at CEDIA, is easily the best value as well.

Of course, I write with an owner's bias, but I generally try to call them as I see them. After living with a properly calibrated SHARP for several months, I can't go back to anything less than the great color accuracy that is simply not there with most other projectors.

l've never seen a rainbow, and I've tried mightily to do so.

I can't wait to see the Indians smoke the Yankees in the first round, starting this Thursday. Did I mention that the SHARP also doubles as a good-luck charm? ;)

Nick :cool:

Update on the flicker with Lumagen.
The flicker is now gone! :)
I post the problem at Lumagen's forum and they recommended that I change the Genlock to the opposite setting, which in my case to ON. I did this on all the input memories and now the flicker is gone. I have watched for 2 hours now. To adjust Genlock, press Menu, In, Config, Cntrl, Genlock, then set to ON. The first time I did this, the picture turned white and snowy. I selected a different input and then went back.

Thanks so much for that. It worked for me, too. I changed Genlock to "On" and the flicker went bye bye. :)

My lamp arrived at almost exactly $100 cheaper (with shipping included). The letters on the box are in both English and Japanese, with the identical model number. Total cost was $379, shipping included, and paid for via Paypal.

This projector is simply one of the best on the planet, and, especially based on my recent projector-fest at CEDIA, is easily the best value as well.

Of course, I write with an owner's bias, but I generally try to call them as I see them. After living with a properly calibrated SHARP for several months, I can't go back to anything less than the great color accuracy that is simply not there with most other projectors.

l've never seen a rainbow, and I've tried mightily to do so.

I can't wait to see the Indians smoke the Yankees in the first round, starting this Thursday. Did I mention that the SHARP also doubles as a good-luck charm? ;)

Nick :cool:

You'll have a PM for info on that lamp, Nick. I just noted that I'm up to about 2100 hours on my original lamp and I'm not going to wait much longer to get a new one. I do suspect that I'll come close to letting this lamp go the whole distance to failure, though. I'm still very satisfied with the image its throwing onto the HP. And you are so right about the color accuracy. I could not go back to watching inaccurate colors again. The skin tones are so natural, and not until I saw them on the Sharp did I realize how cartoonish the colors looked on other projectors.

You may be right about the Sharp being a good-luck charm. I got it last year and the Cards won the series. Coincidence? I don't see how that's possible.

Out of curiosity, is there an official press release from Sharp quoting the price reduction of the Z20000 that was mentioned earlier in this thread??

Thanks,
Jim

How do I determine the firmware version of my 20k and how do I update? Not really sure on the firmware -- what the correct version and such is. You can search these threads for info on how to get it -- I believe the docs that accompany it include the firmware check/version.

Sorry -- did this a few months ago and forgot the details.

As for game play @ 24hz -- wouldn't know -- I only use my HTPC for media playback (I built myself a MAME cabinet for other games).

I do know that I can tell when I'm watching film at 24hz vs 60 easily enough -- it's all about panning/motion. I wouldn't call it the most profound impact ever, but I think it's pretty noticable and since most folks with this projector have it because they want the best PQ, I'd think there would be a lot of interest in 24hz as being another step forward in the overall viewing experience.

Gerry

The way I understand it, BD and HD-DVD's are in 24Hz format on the disk. Conversion from 24 Hz to a nonmultiple of 24 (such as 60) introduces judder.

PC's (and maybe consoles?) have all kinds of refresh rates possible. Most LCD monitors these days refresh at 60 Hz. Think of a video card outputting to the LCD as BD or HD-DVD that is native 60 Hz on the disk. You wouldn't have any judder included in the image on the projector if the projector was displaying in 1080p60.

Maybe I should just post this question in the main thread.

The way I understand it, BD and HD-DVD's are in 24Hz format on the disk. Conversion from 24 Hz to a nonmultiple of 24 (such as 60) introduces judder.

PC's (and maybe consoles?) have all kinds of refresh rates possible. Most LCD monitors these days refresh at 60 Hz. Think of a video card outputting to the LCD as BD or HD-DVD that is native 60 Hz on the disk. You wouldn't have any judder included in the image on the projector if the projector was displaying in 1080p60.

Maybe I should just post this question in the main thread.

This has been covered and apparently all the disk formats store movies at 24P , including bluray , HD-DVD and DVD. The reason stated was that this is the most efficient way to store film based material (i.e. 24fps shot film stored as 24fps), then the players convert this to various outputs and apply 3:2 pulldown algorithms and scaling as needed. Nice thing about output and display of 24P is that there is less processing involved along the path and this results in smoother image in fast horizontal pans and some other situations (so I'm told- I don't have this capability . . . yet) where all but the VERY BEST processors are not quite up to the challenge of processing 2 million pixels of full HD film-based material 60 or more times a second.

non-film-based material (like sports, concerts, most TV shows and games) are shot using video at 50 or 60 and will not benefit (and should look worse) from 24P output-so it's really only for movies. keep using the standard output for these.

I wasn't talking about disc format... I was talking about using a PC to play games. Which can be at virtually any refresh rate. I would assume the refresh rate of a PC would be the dual of HD-DVD's frame rate. Nevermind though.

I've just decided to try connecting my Toshiba XA2 HDDVD player straight to my PJ's HDMI2 input (bypassing the Lumagen HDQ) and noticed improvement in the picture quality right away. :)The XA2 now outputs 1080p unlike before when connected thru the Lumagen, it would output only 1080i (at least that's what it shows on the XA2).

This isn't surprising. The Reon chip in the Xa2 offers considerably more sophisticated processing than the Lumagen. In fact, I would guess that outputting 1080i from the XA2 into the 20K would also look better.

The Lumagen's processing is quite dated now, which is why they are working on the Radiance. However, it has some nice calibration features, which the 20K simply doesn't need.

Now I wish the Sharp has more HDMI inputs!!!
I prefer the 1080p output of the XA2 over the 1080i.
With results like these, I wonder if the component inputs on the projector would make the same picture improvement (ie by bypassing the scaler)? I'd hate to buy 23 ft worth of component cable and find out there's no difference. If the results are good, I'd use them for my Xbox 360 and Sony Camcorder (HD-FX1) which outputs 1080i.

Well I am happy to say I just placed an order for an XV-Z21K (the EU model of the 20K). It should be with me in a week at the most (fingers crossed). Now I will have to read all the calibration and similar threads by Tom :D as I know he has got one too ;)

Apparently Sharp considers this model to be end of the line nowadays so I managed to get it with, what I think, a very good price for what it has to offer even if it's end of the line. So I paid £3K (~$5900).
I know there are newer models out and a lot more are coming out soon (BenQ20K etc) with newer DC chips and other goodies but I don't think they'd been around the price I've paid for this one.

Can't wait to look under the bonet on this baby ;) and start the tweaking. Is it true that colours are quite off out of the box? Nevertheless, that's where the CMS will come very handy :D

Regards,

Kopa13

Well I am happy to say I just placed an order for an XV-Z21K (the EU model of the 20K). It should be with me in a week at the most (fingers crossed). Now I will have to read all the calibration and similar threads by Tom :D as I know he has got one too ;)

Apparently Sharp considers this model to be end of the line nowadays so I managed to get it with, what I think, a very good price for what it has to offer even if it's end of the line. So I paid £3K (~$5900).
I know there are newer models out and a lot more are coming out soon (BenQ20K etc) with newer DC chips and other goodies but I don't think they'd been around the price I've paid for this one.

Can't wait to look under the bonet on this baby ;) and start the tweaking. Is it true that colours are quite off out of the box? Nevertheless, that's where the CMS will come very handy :D

Regards,

Kopa13



Yes you really should get that baby calibrated right away,

I just tried outputting 1080p24hz from my XA2 and my projector doesn't seem to confirm it. Yes, there's picture but upon checking the Signal Info, the vertical refresh rate is still 60hz not 24hz. Isn't my projector supposed to accept 24hz? Isn't my projector supposed to be updated? If not, then how do you update?

I just tried outputting 1080p24hz from my XA2 and my projector doesn't seem to confirm it. Yes, there's picture but upon checking the Signal Info, the vertical refresh rate is still 60hz not 24hz. Isn't my projector supposed to accept 24hz? Isn't my projector supposed to be updated? If not, then how do you update?

Are you switching the signal through an AVR? If so that is likely the issue and will need the FORCE 1080p/24 mode that is supposedly coming in an upcoming firmware.

The output from my Lumagen is 24p and the Sharp reports 48hz. I updated just recently to 24p on the Sharp. If I start with 60p playback from the Lumagen, I have to switch from one Sharp HDMI input to another and back to get smooth playback, though. Just switching from 60 to 24p output on the Lumagen creates stuttering playback issues unless I make the switch on the Sharp.

One kind soul PM'd me a link or a program for the update, but I had difficulty opening. I don't see it on the Sharp website.

Can anyone provide instructions and a link for the update? I'm wondering why it's not on the Sharp website.

Thanks,

Nick :cool:

Can I have the link to the update too please?

regards,

kopa13

Can I have the link to the update too please?

regards,

kopa13

To the best of my knowledge there is no link to Sharp's site to either download the 24p update nor any instructions on how to do it.

This thread discussed the issue and someone was able to obtain the software independently: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=790059&highlight=sharp

I took some screen shot tonight. I just install a Prismasonic with front element. What do you think?

Dalite high power 104 inchs wide
Low lamp, high contrast. no calibration. Set at Natural.

http://s117.photobucket.com/albums/o48/bgosselin_photos/IMG_0354.jpg

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o48/bgosselin_photos/IMG_0353.jpg

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o48/bgosselin_photos/IMG_0360.jpg

I know I still need some work on the lens to square the image a bit. It look better in my theater.

Hi Bruno,

Is this the FE is sold you? Looks good!
Glad you're happy with it. :)


Francis

Yes it is. I measured light loss with and without the lens in place. I have less then 1% in low light mode iris close and 3% with the Iris open.

Prismasonic make a very good product. Your new lens is even better?

It would be better if I could install my projector further. But I'm already at the extremity of my room. I would be a good canditate for an oversize lens I guess.

I'm upgrading from the xvz-3000 which has a 1200 lumens with a 100inch screen. Does anyone who is familar with the 3000 know if i will see a big improvement in PQ with the xvz-20000. And will there be a big difference in the brightness with this one only have 1000 lumes. I have always run in the high brightness mode. Thanks

Yes you will be very happy with the improvement in PQ going to the 20K I would say blown away but it all depends on if you get it setup correctly. I would think that you will not notice any difference in the brightness.

thanks i really like my 3000 but had an oppurtunity to sell it to a friend and with the price drop on the 20000 i thought i'd go for it and get 1080p. But do you think i will notice a significant diff on just regular hd materil not in 1080p

Just ordered the uk model for £1999 or $4000 including a free blu ray player.
Bargain.

How many bulb hours of use before getting calibrated as i would like this done asap?
thanks
Kevin

Hi

I’m seriously considering this as my first projector, so please forgive a few very basic questions! Apologies if I’ve posted in the wrong thread.

I’ll be using this at a distance of approx (give or take a few inches) fifteen foot six inches from lens to screen.

According to Projector Central at that distance I’ll get the following (16X9) screen size:

Height = 42” Diagonal = 86” Width = 75”

(I'm not allowed to post the projector central link as I'm new here)

I’m not sure if I’m using their guide properly. If I alter the screen size to something more preferable, the throw distance alters.

Is it possible to have a larger image at that throw distance? In other words can I zoom out and fill a larger screen?

Ideally I’d like something about 96” wide and 110” diagonal?

Is that feasible from a distance of 15’ 6” ?


Also a few other questions.

If I could achieve that image size, would the projectors brightness be sufficient?

The room would be light controlled with all dark matt surfaces.

What screen gain should I be looking for?


Finally does the projector include vertical stretch facility should I ever want to go 2.35:1?

Sorry for so many questions!

I appreciate any help anyone can give.

Hi

I’m seriously considering this as my first projector, so please forgive a few very basic questions! Apologies if I’ve posted in the wrong thread.

I’ll be using this at a distance of approx (give or take a few inches) fifteen foot six inches from lens to screen.

According to Projector Central at that distance I’ll get the following (16X9) screen size:

Height = 42” Diagonal = 86” Width = 75”

(I'm not allowed to post the projector central link as I'm new here)

I’m not sure if I’m using their guide properly. If I alter the screen size to something more preferable, the throw distance alters.

Is it possible to have a larger image at that throw distance? In other words can I zoom out and fill a larger screen?

Ideally I’d like something about 96” wide and 110” diagonal?

Is that feasible from a distance of 15’ 6” ?.

Any time you are contemplating a major purchase such as a projector etc... the first thing you should do is consult the owner's manual for that product. It is full of useful information and should answer most of your questions.

It is located here: http://www.sharpusa.com/files/hom_man_XVZ20000_DT5000.pdf

Page 17 of that pdf. gives you your answer. To fill a 100" 16 x 9 screen you need a minimum of 13" 5". Now you can look up the rest.... :)


Also a few other questions.

If I could achieve that image size, would the projectors brightness be sufficient?

The room would be light controlled with all dark matt surfaces.

What screen gain should I be looking for?


Finally does the projector include vertical stretch facility should I ever want to go 2.35:1?

Sorry for so many questions!

I appreciate any help anyone can give.

The projector does not have a built in cinemascope mode etc.... You would need an external scaler and an anamorphic lense to get 2.35.

As far as brightness etc... then it would only be my opinion at this point. I'd say you can safely go to a 110" screen. I'm particular about picture quality so I'd recommend a Stewart StudioTek 130. That's just my opinion of course.

Thanks Jim for your very helpful reply - I appreciate it! :)

I was trying to track down the manual via Sharp's UK site (which is where I am) without success so far.

Obviously I should have looked at the US site first!

Anyhow, thank you very much, I'll have a good read now.

And probably more questions later!

As I took down my projector for repair, I noticed that mine is made in China. Aren't Sharps usually made in Japan? Just wondering if any XV-Z20000 owners out there can check where their pj is made.

Got mine the other day and it looks awesome. Much more "'tv" like picture than my last projector and the 1080p picture is unbelievable.

As I took down my projector for repair, I noticed that mine is made in China. Aren't Sharps usually made in Japan? Just wondering if any XV-Z20000 owners out there can check where their pj is made.

Ouch! I'm running over to look where mines made before I say anything! :eek:


Wipes sweat from brow.... RS1 made in Japan.

My XV-Z20000 is made in China.

How does the sharp 20000 compare to the Marantz VP15S1 anyone see both. I can get the sharp XV Z20000 for $4400.00 and the Marantz for $6500.00 is the Marants worth the extra $2000.00.

How does the sharp 20000 compare to the Marantz VP15S1 anyone see both. I can get the sharp XV Z20000 for $4400.00 and the Marantz for $6500.00 is the Marants worth the extra $2000.00.

I've seen both. The look very similar in fact. Both as about the same brigthness. Both use the same type of IRIS. My Sharp as a little bit better contrast but it was not that different in term of image.

The plus for the Sharp is the CMS but you need professional calibration to get it. It seem to me the Marantz has a small advantage in out of the box calibration. It may as a slightly better lens but that may differ from projector to projector.

The Sharp is more limited in term of installation. It as zero offset. The Marantz give a bit more room.

I guess you should also consider warranty, service etc... You can go wrong with any of them.

If you have an HTPC, why not drive it at 1920x1080? I drive my 20k from my HTPC at 1080P @ 24hz (vis DVI) and I could not be happier with the result. I do a moderate (light by most standards) ffdshow processing and the result is smooth pans and a really excellent pic. Of course, it can't quite compete with a HDDVD unit, but it is surprisingly close on good source material.

Gerry

Really??? :eek: One of the reasons I got into HTPC was to get a better picture and was always told that it was better than stand-alone units. This I believe was true for DVD. Has things changed for HD & BD? and what HD-DVD model are you referring to? I don't believe it's the low end a2 or a3, is it?

What I mean is that the HTPC with processing on a normal SD DVD can be very, very good, but it still can't compete with a good HD-DVD or BR-DVD.

Granted, if you stuck a standard DVD into the HD-DVD player, the pic would probably look worse than a well configured HTPC. So I'm not suggesting the HD-DVD player box is better than the HTPC, just that when playing a HD-DVD disk @ 1080P/24hz, it beats my HTPC playing a standard DVD that has been processed and scalled to 1080P/24hz.

Gerry

I'm wondering if Sharp has adjusted its Iris somewhat. On my 20K, which was one of the first sold, I got approximately 3500:1 in Medium and 5500:1 in High Contrast. However, others have measured significantly higher contrast numbers with somewhat lower lumens.

I just calibrated a new 20K, and I got around 5000:1 in Medium and 8000:1 in High Contrast with somewhat lower lumens.

Anyway, I thought it was interesting.

BTW, I just wanted to point out that Sharp has best non-dynamic iris implementation in the business, and by a large margin. It is the only manufacturer whose iris can offer these kinds of cr/lumens ratios. The iris implementations of other manufacturers (Sony, Marantz, SIM2) offer only marginal improvements in CR with huge hits in light output.

Going from High Brightness to High Contrast you lose a little more than half the light output, but you quadruple the contrast. No other manufacturer comes close to this. The Sony Black Pearl, for example, with the fixed iris fully engaged you also lose approximately half the light output, but you only get a 30% improvement in contrast. The Marantz 15S loses nearly 60% of its light output with the iris fully engaged but results in worse contrast than the 20K in the Medium mode.

The 20K leaves room for improvement in light output and RBE, but in terms of color performance, ANSI contrast, and fixed iris implementation it offers state-of-the-art performance.

I just calibrated a new 20K, and I got around 5000:1 in Medium and 8000:1 in

The 20K leaves room for improvement in light output and RBE, but in terms of color performance, ANSI contrast, and fixed iris implementation it offers state-of-the-art performance.

Wow, those are great numbers! Let's hope the rumors of Sharp's exit from the FP realm are false. I want to see one of these things with the DC4 chip in it!

Definately +1

As much as I love my 20K I know Sharp can beat it with the DC4 and some other enhancements....come on Sharp bring it on!

DC4 will bring 'marginal' improvements. We have tested this already. The sharp 20000 kicks the pants of almost any projector even 2-3 times the price.

My 20000 amazes everyone who sees it.

www.Franks-Home-Theatre.piczo.com.

Guys after firmaware update to version 1.1.5 the Sharp does 48hz with 24p input ?

As a result of this being my 5th projector in the last four years, I have learned that it is always best to defer passing along impressions until you have lived with your new toy for at least a couple of weeks. With that being said, I would say that overall my upgrade from the 12K Mark2 to the 20K has easily met or exceeded my expectations.

My rationale for making an irrational decision was based soley on the hopes and belief that the 20K would give me a nice uptick in brightness and contrast at the same time for any given iris position. This is where the exceeded my expectations part comes in. With the 20K I can use the high contrast, low bulb mode on my 96" diagonal Carada 1.4 screen. This was never an option for me with th 12k even when it was new. This translates into a more dynamic and punchier picture than that of the 12k. The added dynamic range along with noticebly more saturated colors of the 20K on much of the source material I watch creates that 100 inch plasma look that I prefer. The 20K is slightly more 3D and dimensional over the 12k and has a quieter fan, which was another unexpected bonus.I should add that the improvements that 20K has over the 12k range from marginal to substantial depending on the source material. So I can see why some folks believe that it is not a slam dunk upgrade. The very fact that the the 20K's PQ is more source dependent than the 12K confirms that it is simply more accurate and transparent which is always a good thing. This may have something or everything to do with the higher resolution.

Forgive me for resurrecting a dead post, but I currently own the Sharp z12000, not the mark II. I have it for about four years now. It does look great with Blu Ray movies playing through a Panny BD30. I always wonder what I am missing by not going to 1080p from 720p. I really want to go with the Sharp z20000. Since I originally paid about 6k (ouch!) for my original pj, I really need to justifiy to me (translation: my wife) why I should upgrade. Is there really a big differance in pq from the 12000 to the 20000. Don't get me wrong, the picture is stunning on the 12000- I just watched Ironman blu ray and it looks fantastic. Anyone out there please chime in and let me know, some pictures side by side would also be helpful. Does the 20000 do 24fps? If it does, is it a big difference from 60fps? Thanks.

If you don't get much response, you might want to open a new thread. This one is pretty much played out, so those who might have some insight on your question may no longer be visiting here.

If you don't get much response, you might want to open a new thread. This one is pretty much played out, so those who might have some insight on your question may no longer be visiting here.

Thanks, maybe I will start a new post :)

There were some reviews/comments comparing the two. I got the general feeling to be it wasn't worth the price delta from those that upgraded. I never felt that anyone was dead sure that the projector was any different at 24P (required a firmware upgrade).

I haven't checked recent pricing. I would be tempted at $3500 (probably still unlikely), but I have not done any investigation to the new projectors that have come out in the past 12 months.

FWIW,
mark

Forgive me for resurrecting a dead post, but I currently own the Sharp z12000, not the mark II. I have it for about four years now. It does look great with Blu Ray movies playing through a Panny BD30. I always wonder what I am missing by not going to 1080p from 720p. I really want to go with the Sharp z20000. Since I originally paid about 6k (ouch!) for my original pj, I really need to justifiy to me (translation: my wife) why I should upgrade. Is there really a big differance in pq from the 12000 to the 20000. Don't get me wrong, the picture is stunning on the 12000- I just watched Ironman blu ray and it looks fantastic. Anyone out there please chime in and let me know, some pictures side by side would also be helpful. Does the 20000 do 24fps? If it does, is it a big difference from 60fps? Thanks.Depends a lot on your seating position. The closer you sit the more it will matter. I wouldn't pay more than about $3k for a 20k and if your budget is close to what you originally paid for the 12k you might want to be somewhat patient and look at getting the JVC RS20 or upcoming DLPs with LEDs instead. Part of this comes down to things like which iris position(s) you use and what your throw ratio is or will be, since it affects how much light you need and how much light you might get with other options.

--Darin

Finding a new 20k for under 4500$ will be about 4-6 months away.

The new LCD models for the price will be tough to beat especially the panasonic 3000.

The new LCD models for the price will be tough to beat especially the panasonic 3000.

yes, sure ... and good luck with shading and dust blobs issues

Aside from a brightness disadvantage of the 20000 to many other DLP models there in not one present year model of single chip design aside from the marantz and sim2 lines that throw a 'better' image than the sharp even though the design is over 2 years old now.

I am looking to go with a 2.35.1 set up and have seen that this has a vertical stretch mode,I cant find it can someone confirm if it does have that mode and if so where it is.:confused:
thanks
Kevin

I am looking to go with a 2.35.1 set up and have seen that this has a vertical stretch mode,I cant find it can someone confirm if it does have that mode and if so where it is.It does not have a vertical stretch mode.