We had a little get together Saturday night in the Seattle area with some local enthusiasts, top Secret AV writers and Audio buffs to review some of the most talked about 1080p offerings. About 11 people?

In 7 hours we only reviewed 3 projectors

JVC RS1
Sony VPL-VW50 (Pearl)
Marantz 11S1

I’ll be brief so others that were can comment on what they saw, but man it was fun. Great cross section of people, interests, and equipment. We even had a Canadian! :eek:

I want to thank Mike Lavigne for hosting us and treating us to some fabulous equipment, hospitality and great food!


http://home.comcast.net/~tryghoff/MSO02.jpg


First off we watched material on the Marantz. Of course including test patterns. Then the RS1. Of course we then had to compare those two projectors. Then everyone wanted to see the lonely Pearl hanging there from the ceiling. Not too lonely as it’s mated with a Crystalio and ISCO III Lens…and of course my homemade slider :p Then we did the comparison of the Pearl vs RS1. More on this Later.


http://home.comcast.net/~tryghoff/MSO06.jpg


The Screen was a 10 foot wide Cinemascope Da-Lite Imager with Pearlescent material (1.5 gain) and Da-Lite masking system.


http://home.comcast.net/~tryghoff/MSO07.jpg


Wow, did we see some fantastic examples of top notch images! Darin (darinp2) of course brought all the goodies. He has some fabulous HD source material that he’s put together so it was a real treat. Clips from almost everything.


http://home.comcast.net/~tryghoff/MSO01.jpg


So we get down to business and had a great time comparing the projectors.

Here’s three screen shots (sorry for the blur, I didn’t have a tripod :o ) but you can get the idea of what we saw. These split screen shots had the RS1 on the Left, and the Pearl on the Right.


http://home.comcast.net/~tryghoff/MSO08.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~tryghoff/MSO09.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~tryghoff/MSO10.jpg

Conclusions.

All three were fabulous projectors and I was totally blown away at how good the Pearl looked (the setup is everything). I’ve seen a half a dozen of them and this one was flawless. Matched with the ISCO and Crystalio nobody would be unhappy with this projector which is an absolute bargain! But… it was trumped by the RS1. The RS-1 was the top of the heap. Better contrast, better processing, better colors and about the same brightness.

I’ll add more details later but the my order of preference was

1. RS1
2. Pearl
3. Marantz

.




Now Mike has the grueling decision of which projector to keep RS1 or Pearl. Oh the burden :D

Great! Looking forward to more specific comments.

As a side note, Darin's opinions will not count since he has (what I am sure was the first of many) beer in hand! I'm sure you didn't have any Tryg, so your opinions will definitely count!

I think I had the most :D 2

SHOCKER!

:p

Looks like fun, sorry I couldn't make it out to Mike's I was busy.

Very cool ! Thanks very much for the comparisons. How did they compare in low APL. The RS 1 appears to have rich color in comparison. How were panel errors rainbows etc ?

Art

Great! Looking forward to more specific comments.

As a side note, Darin's opinions will not count since he has (what I am sure was the first of many) beer in hand! I'm sure you didn't have any Tryg, so your opinions will definitely count!

So now I know why Darin never sees Rainbows with his DLPs. It's the beer goggle effect :D (j/k Darin).

Any idea why so much detail is washed out on the Pearl in this photo? I could understand some brightness compression doing this but even some dark detail is missing.

http://home.comcast.net/~tryghoff/MSO10.jpg

Very cool ! Thanks very much for the comparisons. How did they compare in low APL. The RS 1 appears to have rich color in comparison. How were panel errors rainbows etc ?

Art

RS1 had the best detail in low APL to me. And I'm thinking it was the sharpest of the bunch, but I would have to do more comparisons. We're at a sharpness level now that it's not something I focus on. There's much bigger issues like processing. I saw studdering, polarization, macroblocking, and of course Rainbows :eek: on the other projectors. I didn't see this on the RS. I was impressed. I'd say it had the best detail but others may have seen something else. What is cool is the RS could shift pixels right from the menu. Of the 5 RSs I've seen this seamed to be an average unit.

I dont want to slam Marantz as the unit throws a great picture but. Anything with rainbows for me is not a consideration at any price. Sin City was unwatchable. Also the colorwheel noise would be a deal killer for me :(

I saw similar studdering on the pearl as I did with the marantz. Slight posterization on the Marantz and some macroblocking on the Pearl (when it wasn't hooked up to the Crystalio).

Overall the Pearls image may have been the most flat looking. The Marantz slightly better? RS1 definately a jump up in 3D for most of the scenes.

I know we like to focus on the flaws of each projector to help us decide which is better, but the bottom line is the RS1 in my opinion just did a lot more things right than the other projectors.

I would like to see the Crystalio hooked to the RS. It made the Pearl look amazing. I'd like to see what it does with the RS even though they technically have the same processing.

Any idea why so much detail is washed out on the Pearl in this photo? I could understand some brightness compression doing this but even some dark detail is missing.



The image was slightly more detailed on the left to start. Couple that with the different projectors, my camera, no tripod, my photoshop compression and differences of displays we are viewing this on, the right probably looks pretty bad. The RS did have more detail, more contrast and much better colors.

Although we were able to get these projectors at similar brightness we did not have them at similar color temperatures

I saw studdering, polarization,

Yeah there is a lot of polarization on the RS1 and Pearl, not much on the Marantz though :D

Overall even with the occasional rainbow, I was mightly impressed with the Marantz when I saw it, I like the RS1 better but they are very different beasts.

oops I meant posterization ;)

I dont know what causes the studdering because it could be a variety of things. We saw it on both the Marantz and Pearl (when not hooked to Crystalio) So far I have not seen it on the JVC. This is an improvement. I know Sony is trying to go to 120 hz so this may finally solve these issues.

oops I meant posterization ;)

I know I'm just giving you a hard time :) It's a slow news day lol.


I dont know what causes the studdering because it could be a variety of things. We saw it on both the Marantz and Pearl (when not hooked to Crystalio) So far I have not seen it on the JVC. This is an improvement. I know Sony is trying to go to 120 mhz so this may finally solve these issues.

A lot of it could be in the source too. My A1 studders a lot now with the lastest firmware.

I was on hand for this and really want to thank Mike for letting me come. I wasn't on hand for the Pearl comparisons, I left before that. I did see the VP11S1 (which I personally own and use) and the RS-1.

I was extremelly impressed with what I saw of the RS-1. It definitely had better absolute blacks than the Marantz. The image was also a lot sharper than what I've seen from LCOS in the past as well.

As for which I would rather have? Hard to say. Personally I didn't think any objective comparisons were made and neither projector was calibrated to the level that a fair comparison could have been made in my opinion. Looking at any test pattern showed severe differences in grayscale and brightness overall so it would be easy to make subjective comments on one over the other but if you put them in a room and calibrated them properly the results could be vastly different.

I also didn't have any issue at all with rainbows. I used to hate DLP because of rainbows, dithering and motion artifacts. The S1 is the first DLP PJ I've seen that didn't have these issues. I still see rainbows with severe black and white transitions if I move my eyes rapidly, but that is it. Lots of the guys last night were seeing them a lot though, so I guess everyone is different.

Overall I thought the RS-1 was amazing given its price point and I really hope I'll have the oppurtunity to see one at some point in my room and properly calibrated. Until then there is no way I could do a fair comparison to the Marantz.

Now Mike has the grueling decision of which projector to keep RS1 or Pearl. Oh the burden :D

not too grueling, actually. the Pearl had a new home before noon today. it's sold and paid for.

the evening was great fun for me and i want to thank all the AVS 'heavy hitters' that showed up to assist me in my decision. i must admit to feeling quite clueless for most of the night as almost all the 'tech-talk' went over my head. i had expected to just listen and learn anyway. as the evening progressed i started to understand enough so most of it did make sense........particularly the last hour where we had the Pearl and RS-1 'side-to-side' allowed me to really see what everyone was talking about. we would 'pause' and comment or replay parts.

i felt extremely lucky to be able to experience that kind of high level comparison.

even though i sold the Pearl i would have been very happy to have kept it. it has an amazing picture......just not quite as good as the RS-1. the RS-1 simply had a more 3-D involving picture. i agree with Tryg's ranking but understand that the three projectors were not necessarily optimized so it was not a definitive comparison. i don't have enough experience with the potential effect of further tweaks to comment beyond that.

i just finished mounting the RS-1, connecting it to the Crystalio II to it; and adjusting the ISCO III lens. i am looking forward to enjoying my new toy.

I would have loved to been there, I did not think I would be going away from dlp.

I was very impressed with the Marantz. It is the first DLP in which I only saw dithering/banding artifacts ONCE for about a split second. I used to see these constantly on other units when nobody else would, so I believe that I'm fairly sensitive to this. On a bigger screen it might have been aparent, but not a problem on this one.

I am sensitive to rainbows however so that is a deal breaker for me (not to mention the cost). I was very impressed with the sharpness of this projector. It is just dead on. Interscene contrast was also fantastic. I think that if they can up the refresh rate perhaps by using LEDs, TI will really have something to run with, particularly given a "simpler" design compared to a 3-chipper IMHO.

But I am expecting to receive my RS1 which I plan to be very happy with. Finally a great image without significant artifacts all while not breaking the bank. Well done JVC.

I was concerned about the noise from the RS1. Reading some other posts already had me looking for hush box solutions. Are you kidding me? Yeah, I know that you can physically HEAR the projector, but it is not any louder than my AE900 was. I believe it to be a non-issue. Sure it can get better, but anything can.

Thanks Mike for the wonderful hospitality. Soon we will know how the RS1 looks on a 14' wide high power.

"The Screen was a 10 foot wide Cinemascope Da-Lite Imager with Pearlescent material (1.5 gain) and Da-Lite masking system."

How did the JVC look on the 10' 1.5 gain screen? From all the rave reactions I assume it was bright enough. Was it in Normal or High lamp mode? I've been thinking I'll need an HP for 10' but the 1.5 gain screen would have a better viewing cone if it works well.

"The Screen was a 10 foot wide Cinemascope Da-Lite Imager with Pearlescent material (1.5 gain) and Da-Lite masking system."

How did the JVC look on the 10' 1.5 gain screen? From all the rave reactions I assume it was bright enough. Was it in Normal or High lamp mode? I've been thinking I'll need an HP for 10' but the 1.5 gain screen would have a better viewing cone if it works well.

It was plenty bright in normal mode. The Marantz was significantly dimmer (for various reasons) and before switching to the RS1 I never thought that it was dim. So this screen is not a problem.

However, I personally did not like the material. It had hot spotting issues and you could see screen texture, particularly with bright solid things like a blue sky or a white light. The High Power does not have these issues, although of course the viewing cone is smaller. If you can deal with the cone based on your seating location, I would go with the High Power. Otherwise the screen looked very nice... but one could likely get away with a non-gain screen.

High bulb mode was of course brighter but you pay for it in fan noise. The noise isn't horrible but I would prefer to use normal mode myself for this reason.

We measured the Marantz at 150 lumens. RS measured 400. Pearl was about the same.

I liked the Pearlescent material. 1.5 gain is about the max you can go without really noticing hotspotting and with a wide cinemascope screen and a projector in short throws I thought it did an amazing job. Yes you can see the surface if you really look from close, unlike the High Power, but that material would be overkill for this size. All in all the Pearlescent material pleases me. I'd love to do a shootout between it and Stewarts Ultramatte 150.

Scott you are in for a treat. When I test drove the RS on my 12' HP the other night it was simple breathtaking. Rivaled the best setups I've ever seen.

Any comment on the yellow tint all over the RS1 screen?

I noticed similar yellow tint on all program material vs properly calibrated projector with correct primaries.

Edit: spelling

We measured the Marantz at 150 lumens. RS measured 400. Pearl was about the same.

I liked the Pearlescent material. 1.5 gain is about the max you can go without really noticing hotspotting and with a wide cinemascope screen and a projector in short throws I thought it did an amazing job. Yes you can see the surface if you really look from close, unlike the High Power, but that material would be overkill for this size. All in all the Pearlescent material pleases me. I'd love to do a shootout between it and Stewarts Ultramatte 150.

Scott you are in for a treat. When I test drove the RS on my 12' HP the other night it was simple breathtaking. Rivaled the best setups I've ever seen.


Tryg,

Have the RS1's you measured been consistent with lumen measurements, or have you found big differences between them? It sounds like this one measured significantly lower than the first one you reported which hit 440 lumens (normal bulb) at max throw if I remember correctly.

Tryg,

Have the RS1's you measured been consistent with lumen measurements, or have you found big differences between them? It sounds like this one measured significantly lower than the first one you reported which hit 440 lumens (normal bulb) at max throw if I remember correctly.

I've only measured 3. All at different throw ratios and bulb life. I'll measure more units when I get a chance.

It would be nice if others just bought a meter. We'll buy a $300 power cord but not a $120 scientific instrument that might tell us something? :rolleyes: How much would we be wiling to pay for a speedometer in our car if didn't come with one?

I've only measured 3. All at different throw ratios and bulb life. I'll measure more units when I get a chance.

It would be nice if others just bought a meter. We'll buy a $300 power cord but not a $120 scientific instrument that might tell us something? :rolleyes: How much would we be wiling to pay for a speedometer in our car if didn't come with one?

Thanks.

last night after getting the RS-1 mounted and connected to the Crystalio II, i played around with the ISCO III. luckily; the RS-1 dedicated Chief mount put it right where the Pearl had been relative to the ISCO III......actually about 3/8" farther away from the ISCO III than the Pearl had been.

my Son and I had spent quite a bit of time trying to eliminate 'pincushioning' onto our 115" 2:35 screen. no matter what we did we stiill had 2 to 3 inches of pinchusioning on either side. now; with the ISCO farther away from the RS-1 i was able to totally eliminate any pincushioning. this is from 140" away from a 115" screen.

could it be that the improvment in the RS-1 lens had something to do with that?

i really have no idea.

in any case; the Crystalio II --> RS-1 --> ISCO III --> 115" X 49" 1.5 Gain 2:35 screen looks fantastic. as good as the Pearl looked with this setup and as good as the RS-1 had looked thru Darin's gear at the shootout; now it has really gone to a whole new level. the ISCO takes all that detail and 'pop' from the RS-1 and makes it seem more detailed; smoother and more 3D.

personally; i have not seen a better picture anywhere. i'm now sitting at about 1 x screen width which is very immersive......i see no screen artifacts.....but i'm not the most experienced viewer.

note; i have not been to Art's house or seen any of the new 3-chip 1080p DLP's. i'm also a bit excited at the moment. draw your own conclusions.

how much is the Crystalio II contributing? i don't know and since i need the C2 for the vertical stretch for the ISCO III i don't know how i would find out. i suppose i could remove the ISCO III and try the RS-1 both with and without the C2.

anyway; i'm one happy camper.

Thanks for the post Mike. Let us know if you do the comparison with the Crystalio taken out of the loop.

I was concerned about the noise from the RS1. Reading some other posts already had me looking for hush box solutions. Are you kidding me? Yeah, I know that you can physically HEAR the projector, but it is not any louder than my AE900 was. I believe it to be a non-issue. Sure it can get better, but anything can.


I take this back a little bit. Got my RS1 today and it is louder than my old AE900. I can't quantify it, but I would prefer it to be quieter. It isn't horrible though.

I take this back a little bit. Got my RS1 today and it is louder than my old AE900. I can't quantify it, but I would prefer it to be quieter. It isn't horrible though.

Where is your projector mounted?

-Tyler

I take this back a little bit. Got my RS1 today and it is louder than my old AE900. I can't quantify it, but I would prefer it to be quieter. It isn't horrible though.

And post pictures.

personally; i have not seen a better picture anywhere. i'm now sitting at about 1 x screen width which is very immersive......i see no screen artifacts.....

I would love to see it.

You may have one of the best images available at any price right now.

Congrats Mike


Scott,
I cant wait to see pics too!

"I take this back a little bit. Got my RS1 today and it is louder than my old AE900.""

How was your AE900 set up? Inverted? In high power mode...etc...etc.

Thanks,

Shawn

Thanks to Mike for the great hospitality and to Tryg for organizing the event. I too found it a full time job to keep up with all the comments flying back and forth between the "big guns". Actually, finding out additional things to worry about that I never even knew existed before may not be such a good thing...

Both the Marantz and the JVC were extremely impressive. The step up in resolution from 720p to 1080p certainly helps the window (3D) effect. I tested this after the meeting by playing the same King Kong HD-DVD on my 720p Samsung H710. If I get back about 2.5X screen widths from the H710 then I could get the same effect. But at 1.7X or so, while the image still looked great on the H710, the window effect wasn't there to the same extent. I don't know if that is due to the decrease in actual detail resolution, or lack of screen door and pixelation, or a combination of the two.

One other thing I noticed though was that, while flesh tones looked natural on the JVC, certain colours just "glowed". In particular, the yellow taxi cab in the street scene towards the beginning of King Kong. It was almost fluorescent on the JVC but on the Samsung (which is supposed to have the colours dialed in) it looked more like an authentic (colourful but a bit grimy) NYC cab. This difference was not particularly subtle and is consistent with what some others have been noting.

While the Marantz in max contrast mode seemed plenty bright enough on its own, the JVC, with just a few hours on the lamp and in normal mode, was way brighter. In fact it was so bright that it hurt my eyes when it jumped to a blue screen (input disconnected). The difference in brightness made objective comparisons really difficult. It was clear however, that the JVC had significantly lower absolute black levels than the Marantz (even with the Marantz in max contrast mode). On the JVC the 2.35 black bars could not be seen above the small amount of ambient room light falling on the screen whereas on the Marantz they could (just).

Speaking of light meters and brightness measurements, I thought it was kind of amusing to see Darin and Tryg up at the screen with their light meters busy figuring out lumen measurements in their heads. But it was even more amusing that, not content with debating the relative merits of the projectors over the course of the meet, they stayed in the room debating the merits of their respective light meters while everyone else went out to the kitchen for a pizza break. :p

I couldn't hear the JVC (normal mode) over the colour wheel noise of the Marantz. But with an ear right up to the vent it is clear that the noise is lower pitched and less annoying. JVC bright mode still didn’t stand out that much with the Marantz running. Can't say much more than that about noise.

Brent

I wander how Mitsubishi 5000 will fit among those 3 PJ in terms of overall picture quality :rolleyes: !?!?
Correct me if i am mistaken but only Mitsubishi has DVI input :rolleyes: !?

next time TRYG maybe you can count me in. Love to come also with this gathering
and mingle with other fp enthusiast

Peter

next time TRYG maybe you can count me in. Love to come also with this gathering
and mingle with other fp enthusiast

Peter
me too! me too! It kills me to think that this was going on right here in Redmond where I live.


D

T
One other thing I noticed though was that, while flesh tones looked natural on the JVC, certain colours just "glowed". In particular, the yellow taxi cab in the street scene towards the beginning of King Kong. It was almost fluorescent on the JVC

Changing brown into yellow is a JVC trademark.
So already bright yellow becomes fluorescent. Glad to see someone pick it out!

A limitation to this comparison is the rooms designer color. It will definitely impart a color-cast to the picture.
Also each photo should use all of the 640 AVS pixel resolution. That is, post each projectors photo separately and vertically.

Now I haven't actually seen the Mits, but I've seen Panasonic 1000 and the Marantz so someone can correct me if I am off base with the here - but these guys are in a different league from the Mitsubishi - a great projector no doubt - but not compared to these heavy hitters.

Someone can correct me if I am off base - but these guys are in a different league from the Mits - a great projector no doubt - but not compared to these heavy hitters.

Hey vigga...based on the post you're responding to, I think you forgot this: :rolleyes: !?

Right on :-) :)

I seem to have lost my sense of humor waiting for my RS1 ;)

I can probably have people over next week to checkout the RS1 on the 14' wide High Power screen if there is interest.

"I take this back a little bit. Got my RS1 today and it is louder than my old AE900.""

How was your AE900 set up? Inverted? In high power mode...etc...etc.

Thanks,

Shawn

Non-inverted on a stand right behind me. In low mode I could not hear the projector during a movie. In high mode I could hear it, but it wasn't too distracting. I would say that the RS1 is a little bit louder than the AE900 in High Bulb mode.

I must say that it will be a non-issue for most. It really only matters to me because I do late night viewing at low volume levels, and the noise floor in my place is pretty low.

Pictures! I just got off the phone with Pultzar....says it's too bright on his 6' x 14' High Power :D

"Non-inverted on a stand right behind me. In low mode I could not hear the projector during a movie. In high mode I could hear it, but it wasn't too distracting. I would say that the RS1 is a little bit louder than the AE900 in High Bulb mode."

Thanks, I had my AE900 right over my second row of seating in a very quiet room and with it inverted in low bulb mode it was louder then I'd like. So it sounds like the JVC will be a little louder then that. I will deal with it some way if needed.

Thanks,

Shawn

Any chance you'd be interested in bringing the RS-1 over to my place sometime Pultzar? I would love to compare it to my Marantz in my room. Plus I think you'd enjoy the audio! Anyone else is more than welcome to come as well. My room is a bit more humble than Mike's gorgeous audio setup, but it definitely gets the job done!!

Oh boy looks like its time for a road trip :D

Any chance you'd be interested in bringing the RS-1 over to my place sometime Pultzar? I would love to compare it to my Marantz in my room. Plus I think you'd enjoy the audio! Anyone else is more than welcome to come as well. My room is a bit more humble than Mike's gorgeous audio setup, but it definitely gets the job done!!

That sounds fun. I'm busy until at least next week however.

So it looks like two parties are in order, as I also have a very interesting audio system :)

Pictures! I just got off the phone with Pultzar....says it's too bright on his 6' x 14' High Power :D

I'm used to it now and it looks great. The brightness may have dropped off after the first few hours. The dynamic range of this unit is just incredible. I am yet to see a scene that looked washed out or lacking of shadow detail (unless in the source of course). The lack of artifacts is so refreshing. No iris moving. No compression. No rainbow, fixed pattern noise, or dithering. Just an amazingly clean picture.

The only area in terms of picture quality that makes it seem "less like film" IMHO is the response times. The blur is very minimal, but it isn't as quick as film is.

I'm used to it now and it looks great. The brightness may have dropped off after the first few hours. The dynamic range of this unit is just incredible. I am yet to see a scene that looked washed out or lacking of shadow detail (unless in the source of course). The lack of artifacts is so refreshing. No iris moving. No compression. No rainbow, fixed pattern noise, or dithering. Just an amazingly clean picture.

The only area in terms of picture quality that makes it seem "less like film" IMHO is the response times. The blur is very minimal, but it isn't as quick as film is.
This post illustrates what the self proclaimed AVS "experts" have been missing.
Namely "The dynamic range of this unit is just incredible." Like hello Bob?

Its nice to read the opinions of competent and unbiased people who serve justice to the RS1's true 15,000 contrast. (Brand name loyalty blinds people).
Thanks for the incredible post!

Any chance you'd be interested in bringing the RS-1 over to my place sometime Pultzar? I would love to compare it to my Marantz in my room. Plus I think you'd enjoy the audio! Anyone else is more than welcome to come as well. My room is a bit more humble than Mike's gorgeous audio setup, but it definitely gets the job done!!


Kris,
Keep me informed on your impressions if this happens. You know where I stand but I have a few units on the way for customers and I am still debating whether or not to keep one for myself. Your thoughts can help me and go a long way to possibly saving me some time.

Finally I have a few moments to post a few comments on the shootout I was lucky to be part of on Sat/Sun.

First, thanks to Mike for his amazing hospitality (the pizza kept me awake on the drive back, big thanks to your wonderful spouse :) ) and to Tryg for organizing the shootout, you are a pal! Being from Canada it was a real treat to meet all you guys (Darin, Tryg, Kris, Pultzar, Brent, Tyler and others) It was worth the 10 hour drive through the deluge...

Mike's setup is amazing, both his 2 channel audio barn and his smaller HT place. I am still envious of that Isco 3, you could fry a cow if you focus it right with sunlight, it's that big! :eek:

My observation for what it counts:

Darin's Marantz is a superb projector, when viewed on it's own at the lowest iris setting it's black level was as good as RS1. Although it clearly did not put out as many lumens as RS1 in direct comparison and it did seem dimmer, when on it's own I found nothing lacking in the brightness department. I think when your eyes adjust to a lower level and pupils dilute, the image can be just as enjoyable. It's when you throw a light canon on to compare and then switch back quickly, the Marantz seems visibly dimmer.

Even with 6x color wheel rainbows or color break down can be seen. I wonder where do you have to go to get rid of it (3 chips only or 10x color wheel...)
This takes away from "image stability" in my opinion, plus my eyes get tired.

I was surprised to still see some motion blur on pans, ever so slight and much better than my HD7100 DC3, some of it was source I am sure, other times DLP timings...

Finally, it was the sharpest looking pj of the bunch, although not an issue for me as they all looked great. They were within 10% of each other at best if I was to quantify and this would not be something I would base my purchase opinion on.
Marantz just had a little more "see through" effect in day scenes. In dark scenes I did find a bit more depth, but again you really have to look for it and I wonder how much I would care in the middle of an action sequence...


RS1 was great, it left very little to Marantz, was visibly brighter when comparing the two, and although I did not find the brightness an issue btw. them when watching in dark setting, I can see it being useful when less than optimal conditions occur.
I did find the colors more saturated and a bit less natural but I had to account for the non calibrated "new out of the box" condition of the RS1.

I found the image very stable and "easy" on the eyes vs. DLP. Motion blur was there if ever slight and I would say at the same level of the Pearl, but different from DLP.

The image was definitely more "contrasty" than Pearl and Marantz, it will probably wear off as the bulb ages.

The big surprise was the Pearl. I though it was not outclassed by either of the two above and with ISCO 3 and Crystalio it was superb. Mind you that was 10K+ of extras :)

It was almost as bright as RS1 if a bit less "contrasty", probably due to DI, and presented to my eye a very smooth, butter-like image, but still detailed if not as sharp as Marantz or RS1.

On the grid the misconvergence was much greater IMHO, with pixel shift in different colors, where RS1 was adjusted to perfect convergence on half and center of the screen.
All in all RS1 was a step up of anywhere from 5-15% depending on source and scene, but at its price point Pearl is hard to beat.

RS1 is a new benchmark for me in the 5K-10K scene. I think it's more how much $$$ you want to spend that counts as they are all excellent pj's.

One thing that was obvious to all of us, is how much a good source counts in making these 1080p pj's shine. I would not buy these to view my DVD collection only as it would be a waste of a good pj :)

Thanks again guys for a great night! :D

Mike

Great comparison, thanks for taking the time. It sounds like all of these projectors are winners.

^ I second that. I read that with great interest. Level headed, objective observations, gave a little, took a little. I also really liked how percentages were used to QUANTIFY the observed differences. Alot more effective to give a value like "10% better" versus "a little more pop".
Bravo, excellent review!

Anyone else notice Rob Tomlin constantly bumping theads with 1 sentence posts. You can set your watch to it. :rolleyes:

. Motion blur was there if ever slight and I would say at the same level of the Pearl, but different from DLP.


What causes this and is there a way to correct it? I see the motion blur also on my Pearl.
Does it have to do with scaling or is it just the nature of the beast.
It's not horrible but would be nice to get rid of if I could.
I don't remember seeing it on my Optoma H77, DLP.

Thanks,
Scott

I can probably have people over next week to checkout the RS1 on the 14' wide High Power screen if there is interest.

PM sent!

Brent

Like I said in another thread, we did the comparaison in my living -room and the third one was not the Marantz, but the Ruby.

It is difficult to get a definitive opinion about a projector. What can look better, can be less, after a few days of watching the "beast".

Our conclusions were similar. The jVC seems to have a bit sharper picture, more 3 D like the the two Sony's we had. I prefered the Ruby over the pearl, who was a bit paler, it was bright, but contrast was better on the Ruby.

Now the JVC could be the pleaser, but I wonder if it would on long term. For my amusement I played the next days with my Ruby and I think with the change of setting, I came very close to the picture delivered by the JVC!

The Ruby is out of the box, much softer, less agressive. IMO, colours are more accurate. With playing with gamma, brightness and putting it in Dynamic mode, you have a total different picture. Never forget if you comlpare the two, that the Sony is more adjustable!

Now I used the Ruby a few days, in my imitations HD 1 setting. It was impressive, bright colours more 3d then before. But guess what, after a few days I went back to my old settings, as I was tired of that more CRT image and prefered the more "movie" image from before.

Note. Although I think I came close, the Jvc, has a better lens and will be a bit sharper. Not that much as you may think, as the lively coulours and the higher contrast will boost that impression, not always the sharper image itself.