At least to me.

So I've been watching my PLV-70 clone for about 5 years now (2200 lumens with everything on factory default, which looks great, though I tweak ever so slightly for shadow detail). Yet I kept reading about 3D effects, and midnight blacks and depth of the picture and super high contrast and how high contrast is the most important thing to realism and how your eye adjusts and "experts" were watching at 3 and 4 ft.L........

So I finally get pushed over the edge and get a new tech 2000 (rated) lumen LCD pj with higher contrast chipset and a dynamic iris and a great big contrast ratio. (I admittedly did not buy it for my main theater, but put in another (darker and smaller) space with a 106" diag. 16:9 Da-Lite High Power (my third one of that screen material as I love them).

Well it looked great. Not really THAT much different that my PLV-70, but clearly more contrast in that room than I was used to with great skin tones and a totally pixel free effect from very close. The picture looked beautiful, colorful, smooth and real. At night. In the dark. Evan Powell's review said it was watching 343 lumens in the calibration mode I was watching. We put about 500 hours on it there.

HOWEVER, I decided it looked so good that I would replace my PLV-70, thinking the image would be superior and satisfying. It was a quick switch as the mounting plates were coincidentially interchangeable. But it was now being displayed on a 119" 16:9 Da-Lite High Power in my usual viewing room.

It looked pretty dark. So I ran through all the preset options to get a brighter picture. Powell said I was watching about 800 lumens when I finished. It was still clearly not as bright as I had been watching, but smoother and blacker blacks. The lack of brightness really bothered me. As did the pumping of the dynamic iris. It seemed like I couldn't see anything I was used to seeing. The more HD DVR I watched, the more it bothered me. So I went ape and started "calibrating". I ended up with a good picture. But to do it, I had to turn off the dynamic iris and I had some minor skin tone color problems. At night, in total darkness, it looked pretty amazing. Nevertheless, my wife and kid started complaining almost immediately. I got out the calibration disks and went over it again. I realized I was crushing blacks and whites to try to see the rest of the picture clearly. It looked ok, but it was not very good at all for daytime viewing even with as much light control as I could muster (lots of light leakage).

So after quite a few weeks, I caved in and switched back to the PLV-70 just to see if the difference was as big as they said it was. I didn't want to believe it was, because it could look so good in the dark.

Well, the difference was gigantic. The good news was that I now had a new eye for contrast and 3D and I could tweak the 70 to get something near what I had been getting out of it's replacement.

The result: I have a lot of fixed pattern noise again, that was entirely missing on the AX100. The picture doesn't look as smooth. However, I started noticing those 3D effects again very clearly, so the brightness must actually help with that (regardless of what I read about blacks being the key). I see all the detail in the program material I was missing. As I say, it's like somebody switched on the lights so I could see. The shadow detail is clear.

I know what I am trading off. And it's more than a fair trade. I just have to be able to see what's in the source, both bad and good. I've already started ignoring the fixed pattern noise. And I see a very clear picture and don't miss the smoothness at all.

I'm just glad the PLV-70 has a PLV-75 out there to back me up. Because none of the other manufacturers seem to be getting the frik'n point. You've GOT to be able to see the source material.

Have you ever had a good look at a 3DLP with say 2000 ANSI lumen and good contrast. The Kodak version of IF 777 sounds like something you would like.

So I've been watching my PLV-70 clone for about 5 years now (2200 lumens with everything on factory default, which looks great, though I tweak ever so slightly for shadow detail). Yet I kept reading about 3D effects, and midnight blacks and depth of the picture and super high contrast and how high contrast is the most important thing to realism and how your eye adjusts and "experts" were watching at 3 and 4 ft.L........

So I finally get pushed over the edge and get a new tech 2000 (rated) lumen LCD pj with higher contrast chipset and a dynamic iris and a great big contrast ratio. (I admittedly did not buy it for my main theater, but put in another (darker and smaller) space with a 106" diag. 16:9 Da-Lite High Power (my third one of that screen material as I love them).

Well it looked great. Not really THAT much different that my PLV-70, but clearly more contrast in that room than I was used to with great skin tones and a totally pixel free effect from very close. The picture looked beautiful, colorful, smooth and real. At night. In the dark. Evan Powell's review said it was watching 343 lumens in the calibration mode I was watching. We put about 500 hours on it there.

HOWEVER, I decided it looked so good that I would replace my PLV-70, thinking the image would be superior and satisfying. It was a quick switch as the mounting plates were coincidentially interchangeable. But it was now being displayed on a 119" 16:9 Da-Lite High Power in my usual viewing room.

It looked pretty dark. So I ran through all the preset options to get a brighter picture. Powell said I was watching about 800 lumens when I finished. It was still clearly not as bright as I had been watching, but smoother and blacker blacks. The lack of brightness really bothered me. As did the pumping of the dynamic iris. It seemed like I couldn't see anything I was used to seeing. The more HD DVR I watched, the more it bothered me. So I went ape and started "calibrating". I ended up with a good picture. But to do it, I had to turn off the dynamic iris and I had some minor skin tone color problems. At night, in total darkness, it looked pretty amazing. Nevertheless, my wife and kid started complaining almost immediately. I got out the calibration disks and went over it again. I realized I was crushing blacks and whites to try to see the rest of the picture clearly. It looked ok, but it was not very good at all for daytime viewing even with as much light control as I could muster (lots of light leakage).

So after quite a few weeks, I caved in and switched back to the PLV-70 just to see if the difference was as big as they said it was. I didn't want to believe it was, because it could look so good in the dark.

Well, the difference was gigantic. The good news was that I now had a new eye for contrast and 3D and I could tweak the 70 to get something near what I had been getting out of it's replacement.

The result: I have a lot of fixed pattern noise again, that was entirely missing on the AX100. The picture doesn't look as smooth. However, I started noticing those 3D effects again very clearly, so the brightness must actually help with that (regardless of what I read about blacks being the key). I see all the detail in the program material I was missing. As I say, it's like somebody switched on the lights so I could see. The shadow detail is clear.

I know what I am trading off. And it's more than a fair trade. I just have to be able to see what's in the source, both bad and good. I've already started ignoring the fixed pattern noise. And I see a very clear picture and don't miss the smoothness at all.

I'm just glad the PLV-70 has a PLV-75 out there to back me up. Because none of the other manufacturers seem to be getting the frik'n point. You've GOT to be able to see the source material.

It's proven for you. Not for everyone.

I have a Sharp XV-z20000 that output less than 300 lumens on my hi-power screen. 103 inchs wide (2.35: setup). The image is amazing with it's 6800:1 on/off contrast. My Iris doesn't work well and got stuck open for a week or so. With the Iris Open my projector ouput 750 lumens but contrast go down to 1950:1. Yes some bright scene look a bit more realistic. But darker scene were very flat and had lost all the 3D effects I got use too, grey black is also a compromise I can't leave well with.

Higher lumens is not for me. Not until I see better on/off contrast measures.

Bruno

I have been using a PLV-70 in my dedicated theater for about 4 years now, and it is a FINE projector. I have not had ANY major issues with it. When watching 2.35:1 material, I use the motorized lens shift to move the image to the upper border of the screen and have a flat black mask that covers the lower black border. This enhances perceived contrast considerably, but still does not completely fix the issue of details in "dark scenes". I have just given the order to secure me a RS-1, and now your comments have me "second guessing" my move.

I just want to have blacks that are "deep enough" to where I don't have to perform the same "lens shift" and border masking maneuver. That is about the closest thing that I can get to "constant image height" in my theater, as the room is not wide enough to support a native 2.35:1 arrangement.

Whenever we have guests come over, it is like a running joke that I have to go grab my 8 foot wide mask and attach it to the screen every time we start up a 2.35:1 movie. I would like to be able to change aspect ratios without doing this every time...

Lee

And guitarman is posting that after measuring a bunch of bulbs, after 500 hours they have only 60% of their original brightness. So how fast can you replace bulbs?

The RS1 has twice the lumens as the AX100 when both are calibrated to dark theater. JimmyR loves his, and he likes a bright picture.

As for shadow detail, I have my gamma at 10. (and no, that's not the top, which is 16 I think).

I kind of agree with you Joe. I have high lumens at my disposal, and some picture material looks better with my iris opened up.

Joe, on the AX100, turning the iris to the off setting might be a part of your lack of brightness problem. The iris setting also modulates the lamp power and if not mistaken when it's set to off the bulb dims to try and preserve blacks to some extent, although not so well.

Try a small test to confirm. Using Avia or any cal disc put up a 100IRE (full white), turn the iris off and on to see if the screen gets brighter. If it does, it's not the iris (since it's all white screen) but the lamp power modulated by the iris setting. One way to work around keeping the iris off but still keeping lamp at full power may be to set the light harmonizer to manual (instead of off) and slide it up to 9(max IIRC).

Joe

Thanks, but I already took it down. I always had the harmonizer off, and the lamp on High. I'd like to hear what someone else finds who does this.

The 100 got about half as bright as the 70 in some circumstances, but I never could get the colors just right.

And since I was at 600 hours, it was apparently about half as bright as it started out to be according to guitarman, and it was on a bigger screen (33 sq. ft. vs 42 sq.ft). So there's a double whammy.

Have you ever had a good look at a 3DLP with say 2000 ANSI lumen and good contrast. The Kodak version of IF 777 sounds like something you would like.


That's a good thought too. Thanks. Though I can't find it anywhere.

AVS may still have some left at a great price.

Scott

Hi Joe
In my year and a half here at AVS and almost 1700 posts this is actually the first thread I have read in the 3000 and up forum. I’m actually a little shocked myself about that but I just haven’t stuck my head in here before.

I started into this projector odyssey a bit different than most I guess and although I could have bought any projector screen combo I wanted. I took a slightly different approach and tried to see how much I could do with how little. I half wanted a media room and I half wanted to investigate all the implications of projection and ambient light issues. I found a home base in the DIY screen forum but soon found my credo read everything believe nothing. There is a wrath of information there some gems mixed in with all the overburden.

I started out with what many here would conceder a projector suitable for a boat anchor or a wheel chock. A Sharp XR10X that retails for around 700 bucks and sports XGA DLP and 2000 lumens and a 2000:1 CR rating. After reading countless tales of people being under lumen-ed and loosing CR to the slightest ambient source I started with a goal of maintaining CR rather than purchasing it. I made some rather astonishing finds, at least to me concerning the relationship between lumens and CR as related to the rooms environment and the shade of neutral gray of the screen.

Attacking the problem from the reverse direction and desiring a screen of a gain of maybe .6 or .7 needing to kill lumens at the screen rather than compress them with higher gain made some extraordinary things happen concerning ambient light tolerance (I hate the term rejection) and maintaining CR and the real biggie perceived blacks and perceived CR. I wont waste a lot of time going into what I think about all this but below in my signature are some threads that explain what I found out. It’s all documented with meaningful photos or as meaningful as I could produce.

Not unlike your above analyst of your tests I discovered similar things.

One thread many might find interesting is the one where I projected bright white images with deep blacks and vivid colors from a coal black screen. it took about 1000 foot lamberts :eek: :D to do it but the image maintained itself under bright inside lighting. It was an experiment taken to an extreme.

Ok thanks for the invite upstairs here to your thread now its back down to the budget basement to do some reading. (Iris’s huh, ….. and I thought they were some kind of flower…..hmmmmm….) ;)

And since I was at 600 hours, it was apparently about half as bright as it started out to be according to guitarman, and it was on a bigger screen (33 sq. ft. vs 42 sq.ft). So there's a double whammy.


Man is your experience with Sanyo products different from mine. My Proxima 9270 (Sanyo XP40) is the identical unit to the PLV70 except it was XGA. In three years I went through three sets of polarizers and complete LCD assembly replacements. I cleaned the filters weekly yet it did collect dust blobs internally on the panels which are not very well sealed. I was fortunate to have purchased the three year Proxima service plan so other than its cost I saved a bundle on the repairs. Sanyo I hear and read is not very good about replacing the panels and polarizers under their warranty by blaming it on abuse.

The difference between the Sanyo/Proxima unit compared to the Panasonic AX100U - is night an day. On that we agree but in the opposite direction. The Sanyo units have big, ugly screen door effect. The Sanyo's contrast is poor and after 600 hours on econo mode my AX100u is far brighter than the Proxima unit - which in my case was a 2500 lumen rated product. The Sanyo's bulb would fade dramatically at around 600 to 1000 hours (it varied from bulb to bulb) and it was one noisy sucker with extremely loud fans. Since those AX100u's cost less than a third of the XP40/PLV70 you could afford to buy a new Panasonic each year and still be ahead of the game compared to that noisy, behemoth of a Sanyo elephant sized (18 pound) projector.

I suspect you are so used to the Sanyo's low contrast, heavy duty screen door that a decent new unit like the AX100u with practically no screen door and a CR over 1000 just won't do it for you. You need those grey blacks and shadow mask over the image to feel comfortable. I also suspect since you have had the Sanyo so long without having to replace the panels/polarizer you must barely use it. I use my units six to ten hours a day. You must be posting messages here six to ten hours a day and watching your Sanyo a couple of times a week to have owned it for so long and not having to get it serviced.

Icon Master

I'm just glad the PLV-70 has a PLV-75 out there to back me up. Because none of the other manufacturers seem to be getting the frik'n point. You've GOT to be able to see the source material.

Seems to me you used to challenge my touting of the Canon LCOS units but they have 1000:1 CR and come in 2500 and even 3500 lumen models. With the LCOS they too don't show the pixels and their bulbs last a long time. From what I am reading here the folks on this web site are fully content with their low lumen (1000 or below) 1080p projectors so there is no sales pressure/incentive for the manufacturers to bump up the lumens on the home theater models. It looks like you will have to continue to be content with your Sanyo or buy a Canon unit or put the AX100u up and simply not fiddle with the color settings as you did to get it "purfect" but at the same time you brought the lumens down to below half of its rated output. You fiddled and you burned your own bridge to a newer projector. Did the color and CR have to be Purfect? Every review of the AX100u praised it but you found your four year old unit to be better because its brighter? In case you have forgotten I am also of the brighter bigger fan club but I don't feel compulsed to have a unit perfectly calibrated to enjoy the image it projects. In the reviews most acknowledged the AX100u needed little adjustment to project a color accurate image. I think you defeated yourself on this one.

You do have some other choices however. Panasonic, Sony and Barco do make theater class models with 6000 and more lumens. For a guy with the compulsive itch to calibrate I'll bet you could get a dead on color perfect image out of any of those units and still have them putting out around 2000 lumens. :)

Icon Master

Joe - always love your posts! And I'm definitely in the high lumens camp.
But I bet if most of the folks here saw your picture, they would shake their heads... :rolleyes:
To each his own I say!

JHouse, agree. Lumens is the ony reason I did not buy a 1080p projector yet. When will manufacturers realize some people are not trolls and they want the full experience. If someone is outside in the blinding light it is important that your projector be blinding. If he is in a dark cave it should be dark

Icon Master, You need a nap.

Sorry you had a crap unit.

The Micro Lens Array on my unit dramatically minimizes screen door, so I don't have that problem. If you go to the screen with your reading glasses and look very closely while adjusting the focus behind your back with the remote focus you can make it look very subtle and invisible from the sofa. Sure, not as smooth as the AX100, but certainly not objectionable.

You must be thinking of someone else on the Canon. I was pretty excited about that pj, though I never saw one. It was just when everyone started saying I had to have a signal processor and a panamorph and all that crap (like the old days trying to make business projectors work for Home Theater) I just decided it was going to be too much trouble.

I'm the last guy to whine about contrast ratios. A lot of folks tend to confuse a lot of really dark black areas with high contrast. I think that is often a sign of crushed blacks, which I hate. I'd rather see the shadow details well (which I can). I have also found that high lumens make even objectively light blacks look very black when viewing source material, so I don't fret much about that either as it doesn't show up as looking fake at all.

We keep our pj on about 5 hours a night (except when we go out or vacation) and almost all day on Sundays. I've been doing that for 5 years on this pj. I have, however, put a bunch of bulbs in it. I'd estimate they usually don't get to 1000 hours, but I have very good reason to believe that is a bulb issue rather than a projector issue. Still working on that.

I do cut the power to it after each use, as leaving the power on causes the blue blob in the middle of the screen.

Read a little closer. I didn't fiddle with it to fix the color. On Cinema 1 the color was perfect. The picture was fantastic IN THE DARKEST DARK. The problem was I couldn't see a damn thing under any other conditions, so I tried to jack everything up to get it as bright as I needed it to be. I just couldn't get a "2000" lumen pj to look anywhere NEAR as bright as a "2200" lumen pj, so I'm guessing that rating is a little optimistic to say the least. JimmyR says his RS1 is actually brighter, and it is 700 or so calibrated.

I am not known to be a tweaker. Far from it. I'm the set and forget type. Did I misspell "perfect". Sorry, and KMA.

I didn't say my 5 year old unit was better, it was just as bright as I needed it to be (to get my family off of my @$$). And after changing back, and watching some of the same stuff I was amazed how much I was missing (while telling myself I was seeing everything so clearly and what a great picture it was). So the new/old the picture looks good enough (even great most of the time).

Joe - always love your posts! And I'm definitely in the high lumens camp.
But I bet if most of the folks here saw your picture, they would shake their heads... :rolleyes:
To each his own I say!


The truth is I've only had a few projector savy people over, and they love the picture. How can you not like a 10" diagonal LCD flat panel?

But it's like porche guys making fun of corvette guys (while getting their butts kicked). I'm so unsophisticated. But it rips.

JHouse, agree. Lumens is the ony reason I did not buy a 1080p projector yet. When will manufacturers realize some people are not trolls and they want the full experience. If someone is outside in the blinding light it is important that your projector be blinding. If he is in a dark cave it should be dark


If anyone ever put a bright WXGA pj in a commercial viewing room, they wouldn't be able to sell the rest of their inventory (unless it was waaaaay cheaper).

I've yet to hear anyone fail to slobber all over a 2000 lumen 3 chip DLP. They just cost a lot.

If anyone ever put a bright WXGA pj in a commercial viewing room, they wouldn't be able to sell the rest of their inventory (unless it was waaaaay cheaper).

I've yet to hear anyone fail to slobber all over a 2000 lumen 3 chip DLP. They just cost a lot.

Sorry if I misunderstood your posts. On the AX100u I have gone back and forth on the default settings and I hate to admit it but I favor the Normal mode which is far brighter than either of the Cinema modes. Maybe I am not dead on color accurate there but in Normal mode the lumens must be 1600 if not more. I agree that Cinema mode knocks it down to where you need a dimmer room or smaller image.

I just don't feel like I need to be a crowd follower and have that color curve dead on to enjoy the movie of HiDef TV shows I watch. That seems to be a real issue with many here but I had a lengthy thread/discussion once with William, the guy who was/is the JVC calibration expert, and he acknowledged that while he can calibrate for a given source like dvd all the TV stations, satellite telecasts and even movie downloads like from Apple are just not 6500 perfect. Heck if I am going to sit there and tweak the unit for each source before I watch it. If I did that I might get to see one show/movie a night if that.

I had two different model Sanyo/Proxima units. The XP41 had the micro lens array. I had them side by side for a week and went back and forth. I had several friends over too and the end result was that the lens array made each pixel look like a bubble and it crushed the light areas of the image. I could not get it to improve in that area regardless of how far down I turned the brightness and adjusted contrast. So I do differ with you on that point. I think the image in the AX100u blows away the Sanyo I had including the one I tested with the micro lens array.

But as we like to say here - especially to those of us who differ with the 1080p low lumen groupie bunch so prevalent here - to each their own. I gave up on trying to convince those folks we need more lumens so we can have our 10 foot plus wall size screens. The AX100u and the SX50 and SX60 Canon do just fine on ten foot images but the Panasonic does beat the Canon's on the CR front due to the Iris.

BTW, I still do have my Canon and I use both it and the AX100u depending on what I am watching. The 4:3 Canon is still good on the old movies and SciFi channel TV shows. I really don't like to see 4:3 content in small format in a letterbox within the 16:9 image nor do I care for the distorted stretch solutions.

I have had discussions with high ranking Panasonic marketing folks and the same with Canon practically begging them to put the heat on their engineers to produce a high lumen, no screen door, 16:9, 1080p, high contrast projector. I told them whoever does this coujld own the HT market. So far I have heard of nothing happening in the home theater area so the AX100u (in normal mode) truly is the only one that has close to those specs except the 1080p bit. I am especially disappointed in Canon since they do have the resources (money), engineering and basic projector product capable of giving us even 3500 lumens. They just need to go to 16:9 and improve the CR. Panasonic is close too but so far they have shown nothing. As long as the 1080p crowd is happy with 700 lumens (RS1/Pearl/Ruby) then we may never see that 2000 lumen 1080p unit.

From what I have read here three DLP units do have noticable screen door and that keeps them off my radar screen even if they are high lumen. Lastly, I did defocus my Proxima/Sanyo but lets face it - that approach sucks. It does soften the image and the screen door is still there - just a tad grayer via blurring. The Canon wins in that department with its LCOS, near invisible pixel structure yet it is as sharp as can be. The Panasonic is not far behind with its trick to hide the LCD screen door. If it looks like a digital image - forget it. Sanyo's loose on that count too.

Icon Master

Sorry if I misunderstood your posts.

No problem, I may not have been clear enough.

On the AX100u I have gone back and forth on the default settings and I hate to admit it but I favor the Normal mode which is far brighter than either of the Cinema modes. Maybe I am not dead on color accurate there but in Normal mode the lumens must be 1600 if not more. I agree that Cinema mode knocks it down to where you need a dimmer room or smaller image.

I too preferred "Normal" and thought it looked fine. But maybe my bulb was gone after 500 hours, so I needed it on "VIVID" which really does make the colors ugly, so I had to try to fix them.

I just don't feel like I need to be a crowd follower and have that color curve dead on to enjoy the movie of HiDef TV shows I watch. That seems to be a real issue with many here but I had a lengthy thread/discussion once with the guy who was/is the JVC calibration expert and he acknowledged that while he can calibrate for a given source like dvd all the TV stations, satellite telecasts and even movie downloads like from Apple are just not 6500 perfect. Heck if I am going to sit there and tweak the unit for each source before I watch it. If I did that I might get to see one show/movie a night if that.

Agreed, I'm not quite that OCD.

I had two different model Sanyo/Proxima units. The XP41 had the micro lens array. I had them side by side for a week and went back and forth. I had several friends over too and the end result was that the lens array made each pixel look like a bubble and it crushed the light areas of the image. I could not get it to improve in that area regardless of how far down I turned the brightness and adjusted contrast. So I do differ with you on that point. I think the image in the AX100u blows away the Sanyo I had including the one I tested with the micro lens array.

From what I can tell, the MLA will actually act slightly differently in different projectors because the exact installation positions can vary (I guess like convergence does). I have lived with two, and I have been able to go one way or the other (right or left on the focus ring-with one way being better than the other) while maintaining the integrity of the pixels and convergence, while softening and thinning the grid lines. Though I have seen reports that other individual MLA pjs were bad at this, so that may be the luck of the draw.

From what I have read here three DLP units do have noticable screen door and that keeps them off my radar screen even if they are high lumen.

I've yet to see one, and I'm not that demanding on DLP screen door, as it doesn't bother me if I can't see it from where I sit. I realized that the AX100 (and LCOS)has that super smooth look which is somehow perceptible from the seating area, and it is a great look, but I've had to forgo that. I suppose the need for convergence will probably exagerate the grid on a 3 chip DLP a fair amount of the time (as compared to a single chip).

Lastly, I did defocus my Proxima/Sanyo but lets face it - that approach sucks.

I agree.

You are really making me curious about whether my experience has been the result of another premature lamp failure. I may look into that down the road. I guess I need to get one of those meters.

Regarding high lumens...

I've been a flat panel fan for many years, much preferring plasma over LCD. Until recently LCD couldn't compete with the best plasma black levels, but LCD has nonetheless had a BIG advantage in terms of light output. The LCDs can just be blazingly bright! In the stores, side-by-side with plasma, it's hard to ignore the natural instinct to be attracted to the much brighter image of the LCD. But longer term viewing shows that, for people like me, LCDs are simply unsatisfactory for movie viewing. There is just too much significantly dark content in movies that LCD can not render without looking flat and washed out. And there is also only so much light I need, or can take, in a dark viewing environment. So the display with the better black levels, as long as there is enough light output for a suitably lively image for daylight scenes,
is much more preferable over the long run than the one that simply pumps out a brighter image.

I see no reason why this won't hold for projection (to my tastes). Coming from plasma I certainly like lively, punchy images, but not if it's going to be at the expense of good, deep black levels. That's why I think I'll find the less bright projector with the better contrast more satisfying than the one that simply pumps out the most light.

I bought a AX100, and it was my first projector. When I bought it, I thought I would need the lumens it puts out because I have an acoustically transparent screen that is .9 gain and 115" diag. I was pretty sure that I was a guy who liked a bright image.

After having used it for over 1200 hours now, I find that I never watch it in the bright "normal" mode. Instead, I watch it in the cinema 1 and in econ mode. It turns out, having accurate colors really is more important to me than a bright image. I never would have believed that if someone would have told me. Granted, I have dedicated theater room with black walls and no windows, so ambient light isn't a big issue.

The Ax100 has been very good to me. I bought it for the bright mode, but it turned out that it was a relatively cheap way of finding out that I can go way under the recommended ftl and not really care. I much prefer accurate colors and a sharp picture. Contrast is nice, but I don't need super contrast.

I bought the pj as a stop gap until good 1080P's become affordable, but now I'm not so sure there's any reason to switch.

Regarding high lumens...

I've been a flat panel fan for many years, much preferring plasma over LCD. .

As you may have read in my post I hate screen door - even when you sit back far enough not to actually "see" it. In looking at Plasma sets I find that they tend to have way thicker lines between the pixels than LCD sets and that is why they may appear to have even darker blacks. If you consider that a screen door is opaque black lines that are always present in an image, it is precisely like having a fish net of black threads (or screen) suspended in front of a film-like image. Regardless of how far back you sit that "net" is always there and it affects the look of the image even if you are sitting far enough back so you don't actually discern the threads in the "net." In effect the screen lines cast a blackening or image dulling effect over the image (just like looking at the back yard through your screen door) plus in the case of Plasme it even looks more digital since the lines are so prevalent.

The screen door, pixel lines, are measured by the transmissive factor. Last time I saw the specs published here LCOS had a 93% transmissive factor and LCD and DLP were around 82% (that will change from mfg to mfg). Don't know the plasma number but ir is likely 80% or less. Now think inversely. In an LCOS/SXRD image only 7% of your image is black all the time. In the case of LCD/DLP 15% plus of the image is black all the time and even more for plasma. Many get used to that fish net/screen hanging there over the (what should be) film image and so they have a tough time adapting to LCOS or even the Panasonic that hides the screen door lines somehow. So it is what we are used to that many here are bucking but once I saw LCOS (Canon) there was no going back to normal LCD or DLP for me.

The alleged premier projectors by Sony and JVC are LCOS. The issue for me with them as agreed upon by many in this thread is lumens. Sony and JVC don't get it and the 1080p crowd is stumbling over themselves to get 1080p lumens be darned and that will hurt the chance of us big and bright fans living to see 2000 lumen 1080p projectors unless my pleading with Panasonic and/or Canon eventually gets through to someone.

If you go to trade show where these guys show there wares make your lumen needs be known!

Icon Master

After having used it for over 1200 hours now, I find that I never watch it in the bright "normal" mode. Instead, I watch it in the cinema 1 and in econ mode. It turns out, having accurate colors really is more important to me than a bright image. I never would have believed that if someone would have told me. Granted, I have dedicated theater room with black walls and no windows, so ambient light isn't a big issue.

I bought the pj as a stop gap until good 1080P's become affordable, but now I'm not so sure there's any reason to switch.

Everyone's eyes/brain are different. I can see at times where in some flicks that are bright and even in sports like hockey with lots of white on the screen where turning down the image to Cinema 1 might be easier on the eyes. But as you get older in general eyes become less sensitive and brighter is better - especially if you want a 120" or larger image on a standard (not high power) screen.

I don't think these AX100u's are made to last that long so don't count on it being your last projector for a long time. Just enjoy it while it lasts until you have to replace the LCD panels and/or polarizers on your "dime." It will likely be cheaper to buy a new AX100u or whatever is out there a year or two from now than pay for the repair.

Icon Master

If anyone ever put a bright WXGA pj in a commercial viewing room, they wouldn't be able to sell the rest of their inventory (unless it was waaaaay cheaper).

I've yet to hear anyone fail to slobber all over a 2000 lumen 3 chip DLP. They just cost a lot.

Which 2000 lumen DLP was this ?

Art

Which 2000 lumen DLP was this ?

Art

None in particular but I have read the reviews on the Infocus 777

The truth is I've only had a few projector savy people over, and they love the picture. How can you not like a 10" diagonal LCD flat panel?

But it's like porche guys making fun of corvette guys (while getting their butts kicked). I'm so unsophisticated. But it rips.


Porsche guys getting their butts kicked by Corvette guys? Obviously you aren't aware that Porsche's such as mine exist... :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7WiNcBVMlA

I have probably raced more MOTORCYCLES than cars, and have yet to be beat in a street race. 0 to 100 MPH in 7 seconds flat on 205/60 street radials. 300 HP in a 1,400 lb MID ENGINE package will get moving in a HURRY...

Lee

Porsche guys getting their butts kicked by Corvette guys? Obviously you aren't aware that Porsche's such as mine exist... :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7WiNcBVMlA

I have probably raced more MOTORCYCLES than cars, and have yet to be beat in a street race. 0 to 100 MPH in 7 seconds flat on 205/60 street radials. 300 HP in a 1,400 lb MID ENGINE package will get moving in a HURRY...

Lee

I was thinking of a bunch of Porche Club guys up at the Texas World Speedway in 1985 who had to find a way to justify losing to the 85 Corvettes driven by rank amatures.

I'm just messin' with ya... I was a professional drag racer in the mid 90's, so I'm not your "typical" Porsche owner. NOBODY would ever suspect that a 1955 Porsche Spyder should be that fast...

Lee

Two questions: Is it a "real" 550?(and if it is, why on earth were you tearing it up?) and What kind of engine fits in it to get to 300 bhp?

the video part of this thread is as good as it gets...brief and informative and honest. Keep it up.

None in particular but I have read the reviews on the Infocus 777

I was wondering since thgere are few projectors with that kind of lumens at D6500. The SIM HT 5000 really only gets about 1100 lumens.

Art

The issue for me with them as agreed upon by many in this thread is lumens. Sony and JVC don't get it and the 1080p crowd is stumbling over themselves to get 1080p lumens be darned and that will hurt the chance of us big and bright fans living to see 2000 lumen 1080p projectors unless my pleading with Panasonic and/or Canon eventually gets through to someone.
If you go to trade show where these guys show there wares make your lumen needs be known!
Icon Master

EGADS!!!!!! I have to eat my own words. While it isn't LCOS I just stumbled across the following announcment coming out of the Home Entertainment Show and will start a new thread to taunt the low lumen 1080p fans. Feel free to go after those cave dwellers with me.

...Optoma's demo, however, featured another new model, the HD81-LV, a higher output version of the current HD81, 1920x1080p design. First shown at CES 2007, the basic HD81-LV (estimated street price: $7999) features a specified light output of 2500 lumens, a peak contrast ratio of 10,000:1, a DarkChip3 TI digital micromirror device (DVD), and an external video processor with a full complement of inputs, including three HDMI 1.2a connections. The HD81-LV also has the same iris features as the HD81 and HD80....

Thiis will also give us "fuel" to push the other manufacturers to follow suit in the higher lumen arena. I see this as a start! Thank you Optoma!!!!

Icon Master

Just pick up one of these (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/panasonic-1080p-projector-visions-of-heaven-stratospheric-price-244863.php) and a bottle of suntan lotion.
You're all set. :p

Wow, it looks like they are getting there. Just a matter of time for more manufacturers, more comptetition and the natural result of affordability. Very good news.