From what I can tell the xvz3000 is the better choice. It appears to have the same contrast with better light output. Since I think I need the extra light output maybe the DT-500 is all I need? I have an Optoma HD72 now and would like to get better black levels. Also anyone using a xv-Z3100? It has a .62" 1280x720 DMD and uses a 220w bulb, not the 275w that the 3000 and DT-500 has or 270w that the 12000 mkII has. The xv-z12000 mkII seems to be going on the cheap lately... :rolleyes:

Thanks Guys

I have a 96" white screen 1.4 gain, viewing from about 11 feet.

From what I can tell the DT-500 can achieve nearly 3600 to 1 contrast with 500 lumens :)

The xv-z12000 mkII can 3600 to 1 contrast with 330 lumens

From what I can tell the xvz3000 is the better choice. It appears to have the same contrast with better light output. Since I think I need the extra light output maybe the DT-500 is all I need? I have an Optoma HD72 now and would like to get better black levels. Also anyone using a xv-Z3100? It has a .62" 1280x720 DMD and uses a 220w bulb, not the 275w that the 3000 and DT-500 has or 270w that the 12000 mkII has. The xv-z12000 mkII seems to be going on the cheap lately... :rolleyes:

Thanks Guys

I have a 96" white screen 1.4 gain, viewing from about 11 feet.

From what I can tell the DT-500 can achieve nearly 3600 to 1 contrast with 500 lumens :)

The xv-z12000 mkII can 3600 to 1 contrast with 330 lumens

I don't know where you're getting contrast numbers from, but in best contrast mode, the z12000mkII will go > 5000:1 contrast.

Per Home Theater test - vx-z12000 mark II:

After calibration and using a full-field 100-IRE white (7.263 foot-lamberts) and a full-field 0-IRE black (0.002 ft-L), the contrast ratio was 3,632:1. Using a 16-box checkerboard pattern (ANSI contrast), the contrast ratio was 525:1. The best contrast ratio was achieved in the High contrast mode with the Power Save mode on. The brightest image was achieved in the High brightness mode with Power Save off and produced 22.09 ft-L with a 100-IRE field and 0.016 ft-L with 0-IRE (on an 87-inch-wide, 1.0-gain Da-Lite Da-Mat screen).—GM

This works to about 225 lumens or so...

Now the same Magazine Theater and test person for the vx-z3000:

After calibration, and using a full-field 100-IRE white (6.095 foot-lamberts) and a full-field 0-IRE black (0.001 ft-L), the contrast ratio was 6095:1. Using a 16-box checkerboard pattern (ANSI contrast), the contrast ratio was 396:1. The best contrast ratio was achieved in the High Contrast mode with the bulb set on Eco+Quiet and BrilliantColor set to 2. The brightest image was achieved in the High Brightness mode with the bulb set to Bright and BrilliantColor set to 2. This mode produced 0.013 ft-L on a full-field 0-IRE black which makes for a contrast ratio of 2085:1. (on an 87-inch-wide, 1.0-gain Da-Lite Da-Mat screen). —GM

This works out to about 187 lumens

The ANSI contrast is better on the 12000, and I'm sure that the lens is better also. Processing looks to be about the same. Home Theater actually rates the vx-z3000 ( 94 ) higher than the vx-z12000 mkII ( 91 ).

The 12K II is a nicer machine with better PQ. For near the same price I'd take the 12K II.

Bob

The ANSI contrast is better on the 12000, and I'm sure that the lens is better also. Processing looks to be about the same. Home Theater actually rates the vx-z3000 ( 94 ) higher than the vx-z12000 mkII ( 91 ).

The ratings also take into account overall value (i'd assume).
If that's the case, they were rating the 12000mkII based on a list price of 10K with a street price of 6-8k. They gave it an overall 91 rating based on that.

The Z3000 at a list price of closer to 2k may have represented a better value.

But take the 12000mkii at a price of 2K and they could definitely skew the results in favor of the mkII. The overall value of the mkII at 2k is probably closer to a 99.

Does that make sense?

There is a forum member, bdbada, I believe, that has owned both. You might want to PM to see what his thoughts are.

Have full light control and room for long throw - 12k.
Have decent light control and room for short throw - 3k.

I think the 12k, though less bright, will have a better overall picture.
I think it will be close though, close enough that room factors might negate the difference.

I own a 3k.

I have owned both and share the thoughts of most here. A lot really depends on where you want to mount your pj. The Z3K is a short throw and the Z12K is long throw. As for brightness and such the Z3000 is brighter than the Z12K in high brightness and medium mode and about the same in high contrast mode. I've calibrated both of these machines and after D65 calibration the contrast ratios are almost identical between models, which is to say about 2600:1 in Medium mode and 4200:1 in high contrast. The one advantage I found for the Z3K is that its Medium Mode is brighter than the Z12K which a lot of people will end up using. IMO the Z12K's Medium mode is almost a complete waste of time as it is barely brighter than the high contrast mode. Both of these pjs are on the loud side but I found the Z12K to be just a little less so. They both have the same complete and functional CMS that lets you dial in precise color gamuts and decoder levels. Perhaps the biggest difference I found betwen the units I had is that the lens focus and sharpness was better with the Z12K, appreciably so. I had a Z3000 and DT-500 and found the focus to be a touch soft on both models. One last thing is that if you crave a pj that has good performace with high brightness output, these Sharps can deliver but the value quotient for me goes way down when run this way. These pjs are meant to be run in high contrast mode with either a very small or high gain screen. If you buy one of these Sharps and run it in high brightness mode to get a bright image or if you have a room that is not dark IMO you might as well save some scratch and buy a Infocus IN76, Mits HD1000 or some such.

Moe

Thanks guys, I think the low throw is going to kill it for me. Would the xv-z3000 or 3100 be an upgrade over the Optoma HD72? It has a really vivid picture with lots of pop and Depth - it is also pretty sharp - as in not soft... I would like the get better contrast and black level...