Just looking for some feedback. Please rank these four 720P PJ's in your opinion of BEST PQ in a 'controlled light' enviroment.
**Please also note whether you feel each PJ can individually be viewed in some afternoon ambient light. not how good the PQ is with ambient light, but whether it is 'watchable' or not.

-Mitsubishi HC3000U
-Mitsubishi HC1500
-Optoma HD72
-Sharp DT500(same as XV-Z3000?)

1. -Mitsubishi HC3000U
3. -Mitsubishi HC1500
2. -Optoma HD72
1. -Sharp DT500(same as XV-Z3000?)

The sharp and the 3000 are a tie for first.

I'd put the Maranz vp4001 ahead of all of them

the acer ph530 is better than all of them... check out the thread about it...its only 600 and its 720p better picture than my 40" 2 thousand dollar samsung lcd.....check it out...badass

the acer ph530 is better than all of them... check out the thread about it...its only 600 and its 720p better picture than my 40" 2 thousand dollar samsung lcd.....check it out...badass


so your professional opinion states the acre's ph530 over all projection quality out performs
ALL

Mitsubishi HC3000U -Mitsubishi HC1500 -Optoma HD72 -Sharp DT500 XV-Z3000 vp4001

I realy don't know how to respond to this ,,,UM ..
WOW..Um,,,,,gee.:confused:

thank God the ZOOM box isn't 720.:D


Murphy:)

gwlaw...If you would, please tell me what you like about the OptomaHD72 over the Mitsu HC1500? And are the DT-500 and Z3000 the same PJ?

....unfortunately the Marantz is not an option for this purchase as I am returning a malfunctioning HC1500 and choosing a replacement for it. I really like it besides the issue it has, but wondering if the PQ is better on anyother ~1K 720P 'DLP' PJ's.

i would get a new hc1500.


Projectorreviews.com : "In the HD1000u's best mode, though, not even the exceptionally bright Panasonic PT-AX100U can beat it. Without a doubt, the Mitsubishi has a slight edge in detail, over the Panasonic, despite the much lower spec'd contrast levels."

--> same thing for hc1500. i would definitely get the hc1500. color reproduction is just outstanding!

Just looking for some feedback. Please rank these four 720P PJ's in your opinion of BEST PQ in a 'controlled light' enviroment.
**Please also note whether you feel each PJ can individually be viewed in some afternoon ambient light. not how good the PQ is with ambient light, but whether it is 'watchable' or not.

-Mitsubishi HC3000U
-Mitsubishi HC1500
-Optoma HD72
-Sharp DT500(same as XV-Z3000?)

Just to let you guys know the Sharp XV-Z3000 = Marantz VP4001 Rebaged

http://www.projectorcentral.com/SharpVision-XV-Z3000.htm

if the Sharp DT500 = XV-Z3000 = Marantz VP4001 then it would be ur best choice

The Sharp DT500 Only shows 4000 : 1 compared to the 6500:1 you get from Marantz so im not sure...

HC3000U would be the second best choice.

Thanks for the thoughts guys....keep 'em coming. If anyone owned or owns any or all of these please let me know.

the dt500 is an xv-z3000 / vp4001 with only one iris. the dt500 is a better pj than your current hc1500 though not by massive amounts.

the dt500 is similar in performance to the hd72 and hc3000.

i own an xv-z3000 but if i had to buy one today i'd get the vp4001 - better warranty.

....and daytime viewing on it-IYO?

I have an Eiki 1600T on order and will be posting a review soon. Although it's not on your list, it has identicle specs to the z3000 and has a 3 year warranty. 1K gets you a new unit with screen and mount. It is produced by Sharpvision and originally retailed for 2995.

The HC1500 has a white segment for extra brightness, but it also reduces contrast. If you need extra brightness thats good, but contrast is what makes a picture look its best.

I will have the Acer in hand on Monday or Tuesday and can compare with my past projectors including the Sony VW50. I may also have the HC1500 within a week to compare. I'm looking for a good sub $1k projector to bridge my purchasing another 1080p.

Without direct viewing. Seems like the Marantz is the best bang for the buck if you find a refurb model. Also, most will prefer the Mits 3000 DC3 contrast.

I will have the Acer in hand on Monday or Tuesday

I'm looking for a good sub $1k projector to bridge my purchasing another 1080p.

Also, most will prefer the Mits 3000 DC3 contrast.



I have a hard time believing something so inexpensive would result in a comparable PQ....

Same as me.

I think that is my choice since the marantz is not an option, just hope it's bright enough.

....and daytime viewing on it-IYO?

I have the Marantz. With the bulb on eco , the iris wide open, and the setting on theater 1 we watched some TV in the day with no problem. This is in Hawaii by the way, where it tends to be a bit bright out during the day!!! If you upped it to some of the brighter settings like dynamic mode it would be even, well, er, brighter!

Pretty impressive.

bdbaba

I doubt it would be comparable. It will be interesting to see the true capability of such a bargain priced unit after living with the VW50 for so long.

Do those Sharps have the same optics as the Marantz?

Dt-500 = #1.

I will have the Acer in hand on Monday or Tuesday and can compare with my past projectors including the Sony VW50. I may also have the HC1500 within a week to compare. I'm looking for a good sub $1k projector to bridge my purchasing another 1080p.

Without direct viewing. Seems like the Marantz is the best bang for the buck if you find a refurb model. Also, most will prefer the Mits 3000 DC3 contrast.

The HC3000U isn't DC3.

the acer ph530 is better than all of them... check out the thread about it...its only 600 and its 720p better picture than my 40" 2 thousand dollar samsung lcd.....check it out...badass

Sorry, but it isn't better than the DT-500; maybe bang for you buck wise if you have to pay alot more, but not if you can get the DT-500 as cheaply as I did. My DT-500 beats an LCD too. No shocker there. DLP is better. :D

Just looking for some feedback. Please rank these four 720P PJ's in your opinion of BEST PQ in a 'controlled light' enviroment.
**Please also note whether you feel each PJ can individually be viewed in some afternoon ambient light. not how good the PQ is with ambient light, but whether it is 'watchable' or not.


IMHO of course:

-Sharp DT500(same as XV-Z3000?)
-Mitsubishi HC3000U
-Optoma HD72
-Mitsubishi HC1500

And the Mits has a DC2, but it has a manual IRIS which is how it got such phenominal black levels.....this is the same as in the SHARP and MARANTZ models (the DT-500 I don't believe has the IRIS, but the 3000 I believe does).

IMHO of course:

-Sharp DT500(same as XV-Z3000?)
-Mitsubishi HC3000U
-Optoma HD72
-Mitsubishi HC1500

And the Mits has a DC2, but it has a manual IRIS which is how it got such phenominal black levels.....this is the same as in the SHARP and MARANTZ models (the DT-500 I don't believe has the IRIS, but the 3000 I believe does).


The DT-500 has an adjustable iris and it's brighter than the HC3000U. It's a light canon. The Marantz has a second iris like the Z3000, but I've read that most prefer not to use both, because the second iris takes away too much brigihtness.

The DT-500 has an adjustable iris and it's brighter than the HC3000U. It's a light canon. The Marantz has a second iris like the Z3000, but I've read that most prefer not to use both, because the second iris takes away too much brigihtness.

Well there you go then. I just picked up the Marantz myself, couldn't find any deals on DT-500's but that Marantz deal was too good to pass up. Always wondered how the $3000+ DLP's worked....having resigned myself to more budget models in the past, now I'll find out :)

One last question for you guys...what effect does the zoom have on the PQ? I ask because I need to have my zoom all the way up to get the size screen I want from its' throwing distance and I'm wondering If the PQ is suffering as a result at all?

Generally the more you zoom in (make the image smaller) you get a brighter image, the further you zoom out (make the image bigger) you get a dimmer image. Also any focus issues may be more apparrant at either extreme of the zoom dial, but those are rare occurances.

Given a choice, its better to be using more zoom (put the PJ closer to the screen and zoom in to make the image smaller) rather than having it far away and using the zoom to make the image bigger, because as the bulb ages and dims you'll want the extra brightness.

So then me having the Mitsu HC1500 zoomed out all the way for the biggest picture it can do from the 13.5' away is not a good idea.

So since I want a 106"+ screen and only have 13.5' to work with what do I need to look for or at?

So then me having the Mitsu HC1500 zoomed out all the way for the biggest picture it can do from the 13.5' away is not a good idea.

So since I want a 106"+ screen and only have 13.5' to work with what do I need to look for or at?

It's not that big a deal and not something the average viewer will notice. You should be fine with an HC1500 and a 106" screen. If you truly have 13.5 feet of throw from the front of the PJ to the screen, you are barely past halfway on the zoom anyway.

Relax and setup your home theater!

My zoom was/is all the way to the max. I had/have a 110.5" screen though.
That's why I said I want at least a 106"+ screen...but was afraid I was losing PQ by having it like this as opposed to a PJ designed to throw that 110" image from this distance(13.5') 'without' having to zoom much if at all.

Generally the more you zoom in (make the image smaller) you get a brighter image, the further you zoom out (make the image bigger) you get a dimmer image. Also any focus issues may be more apparrant at either extreme of the zoom dial, but those are rare occurances.

Given a choice, its better to be using more zoom (put the PJ closer to the screen and zoom in to make the image smaller) rather than having it far away and using the zoom to make the image bigger, because as the bulb ages and dims you'll want the extra brightness.

Actually.....

Zooming out (making the image bigger) gives you maximum brightness and zooming in (making smaller) gives you maximum contrast. Of course I'm talking about if they're both displaying the same image size. So, you get a brighter image with zooming out (biggest image) if the projected size of both zoomed out vs zoomed in are the same.

Well taking into account that this is a fixed position(both PJ and screen) does that still hold true? While keeping PJ at same position and enlarging the pic adds brightness but reduces contrast, whereas having it put out its smallest image size increases contrast but decreases brightness?
Is the brightness needed if going smaller though, i would think not?

So then best PQ is putting the PJ in a position where it projects the size screen I want at it's lowest zoom level(smallest pic)......correct?

I have an Eiki 1600T on order and will be posting a review soon. Although it's not on your list, it has identicle specs to the z3000 and has a 3 year warranty. 1K gets you a new unit with screen and mount. It is produced by Sharpvision and originally retailed for 2995.

Where'd you find an Eiki 1600T packaged like that? How loud is it?

Thanks.

If you keep the PJ and screen in the same position then you have changed the results.

Making the zoom less will give you a smaller picture which means more light in a smaller area. You will increase the brightness. If you make the picture larger, you spread the light out and reduce brightness.

If you move the PJ closer, you will increase brightness and if you move the PJ back, you will decrease brightness.

However, these changes are not all that noticeable visually because your eye is able to adjust so that you will not really notice until you reach great extremes.

You are amplifying subtle differences well beyond what you will actually notice.

Where'd you find an Eiki 1600T packaged like that? How loud is it?

Thanks.

It is a STARTING BID on ebay. Someone sure is trying to move that PJ!

If you keep the PJ and screen in the same position then you have changed the results.

Making the zoom less will give you a smaller picture which means more light in a smaller area. You will increase the brightness. If you make the picture larger, you spread the light out and reduce brightness.

If you move the PJ closer, you will increase brightness and if you move the PJ back, you will decrease brightness.

However, these changes are not all that noticeable visually because your eye is able to adjust so that you will not really notice until you reach great extremes.

You are amplifying subtle differences well beyond what you will actually notice.


That is what I've been searching for, thanks!( I always thought it seemed brighter and better PQ at its smallest)
I just now moved it back as far as it can go with still a 4" gap behind for all around air circulation. This ~5" move back from screen, allowed me to unzoom about 15%. It is noticeable, not much, but noticeable nontheless. Taking it down to about 25% of zoom it's just a little too small for me.

*Now I know for future 1080p PJ that I need to figure in the zoom level more when calculating whether a pj fits my needs, instead of just stretching any pj to it's max.