Here is the deal...

103" inch vutec Pearlbrite screen (3.1 gain)
Currently using Sharp Z3000 720p rated at 1200 lumen

Ceiling mounted on 8'6" ceiling in basement from 11.5'

Used primarily for xbox 360 and HD DVD movies

Want to go 1080p.

Can get any of the three listed above for comparable pricing however do not want to give up any brightness. My room has complete light control, but I do like playing games and watching movies with kids with some non-direct to screen lighting on.

Obvisously the Infocus which is the brightest would be a no brainer but as stated above I currently throw from 11.5' for the 103" screen. Would have to relocated ceiling mount back 2+ feet and would then most likly have to relocate ceiling power outlet. More work than I want to do if one of the other more flexiable projectors work.

Lastly, would look at any of the D7 LCD but live in Colorado where we have no humidity thus dust can and will be an issue. Therefore open light path does not work or at least scares me because of the dreaded dust blob that people speak of in the panny and epson forums.

Currently have DLP so no problem with RBE.

HELP. Are either the Sony or JVC going to give me the lums to satisify my need for a bright picture??? Would rather keep my 720P with a bright/"pop" picture than get a dull/non-bright 1080P. Maybe I should just wait another year...if nothing can satisfy my needs. Price limit is the 5K mark.

Let me know if you have/like similar set up and enjoy a bright picture and let me know if I am missing any other projectors that may satisfy my needs.

I would definitely throw the Panasonic AE2000u into the consideration. You will get plenty of brightness in Normal mode for that screen size. It will also cost you approximately $1500-2000 less than a couple of your choices. Do a search here. There are a few comparisons between it and the VW60 ans RS1.

As I said above, the Panny has an open light path light all the LCD do, which invites the possibility of dust blobs. Living in colorado, with low relative humidity, we have more than our far share of dust so I am scared to go that route.

With that 3.1 gain screen you really don't have to worry. I prefer the JVC for flexibility of placement overall. The Black Pearl would do very well too.

The JVC or Black Pearl will get the job done easily... :)

I was going to say with a 3.1 gain, you should be fine with about any of them. In fact I would suspect that with the IN82 you would have to close the iris quite a bit in order to make sure you don't have too MUCH light.

I would test the gain against other screen samples. The Vutec SilverStar is well known for being about half it's 6.0 rating - comparable to a DaLite HighPower viewed near PJ lens. If it follows that their other material (I have not tested this specifically - just know tigers do not change their stripes) is only 1.5gain with current screen - you should still be OK for movie brightness using calibrated iris modes - the concern is do you want calibrated or blowout brite performance for the ambient viewing? Your Sharp is certainly not 1200 lumens calibrated.

You might just think you have a bright picture having done the math using marketed numbers - but may be surprised doing the math using realistic numbers....

Actually the Pearlbright is relatively close to the rating (unlike the SS). It's not fully 3.1, but well over 2.

Actually the Pearlbright is relatively close to the rating (unlike the SS). It's not fully 3.1, but well over 2.

I agree.

I built a torus screen with the Pearlbrite and compared it to a Silverstar. If anything the Pearlbrite was a bit brighter. Too bad they have so many manufacturing defects with the material.

No kidding. It seems the QC on their products is hit or miss sometimes. When you get one that works, it is very nice though.

Love my pearlbrite and have had no issues.

Tell me if this seems right and if it does why do manufactors even bother stating lumens in their stats. Using the projector calculator on PC I have come up with the following numbers:
Using 103" and 11.5 throw and adjusting zoom to maintain the 11.5 throw & 2.5 gain
SharpZ3000 Stated 1200 lumen = 43 fl (current brightness which I like)
JVC Stated 700 lumen = 49 fl (hurt me...I like it)
Sony Black Pearl stated 900 lumen = 33 fl (thanks but no thanks)

Looks like I am going the JVC route....Jason PM me and let me know what you guys sell it for.

Also please check my thinking...does this seem correct.????

What iris mode do you currently use for the Sharp?

PJC is often the bogus blowout marketed values provided by the manufacturer - maybe derated if PJC has reviewed it - but unlikely to be a reliable source of information for buying a PJ - as their lumens numbers have never showed any cross review consistency The calculator is good for a first cut of which PJ will physically fit your install - but I would not count on it for establishing reference screen levels you desire.

There are a number of reviewers that provide calibration data across a number of modes - Jason included. While individual lamps do vary - the reviewers use consistent measurement gear and approaches. Aside from Jason - look at Cine4Home.de translated from German, or ProjectorReviews.com. The key is to see if they measured the marketed blowout mode to confirm the lamps variance - then you take percentage drops from there.

Lumens are affected by the calibration preset used, the lens shift/zoom used, the IRIS used, the lamp mode used, post ISF calibration, lamp age (etc.) often as much as a 2x cut for each parameter.

If you are seeking a plasma torch brightness level as a decent sized screen - you will end up severly dissapointed buying something based on the marketed number - even with a 3x gain screen on your side. Either the actual pic looks horrid because of the torched mode to get that number - or the mode that looks like a movie should is way to dim for you.

PJC is often the bogus blowout marketed values provided by the manufacturer - maybe derated if PJC has reviewed it - but unlikely to be a reliable source of information for buying a PJ - as their lumens numbers have never showed any cross review consistency The calculator is good for a first cut of which PJ will physically fit your install - but I would not count on it for establishing reference screen levels you desire.

There are a number of reviewers that provide calibration data across a number of modes - Jason included. While individual lamps do vary - the reviewers use consistent measurement gear and approaches. Aside from Jason - look at Cine4Home.de translated from German, or ProjectorReviews.com. The key is to see if they measured the marketed blowout mode to confirm the lamps variance - then you take percentage drops from there.

Lumens are affected by the calibration preset used, the lens shift/zoom used, the IRIS used, the lamp mode used, post ISF calibration, lamp age (etc.) often as much as a 2x cut for each parameter.
What I was trying to do since I have not had my current projector calibrated or measured was use a site where I can put the known details of my projector and get a number that is a frame of reference. So in this case the 43 FL is my "0" value. using the same site and putting in different projectors with the same variables (screen size, throw distance & gain) I can then get a good comparsion. Which in this case the JVC would be brighter, while the sony would be dimmer. I am not looking for actual numbers since they pretty much mean jack to me.

Am I wrong with my thinking....or is their a better site, etc...

What iris mode do you currently use for the Sharp?
I utilize the high brightness iris setting, put with light on eco. Light on eco because being in Denver must use high alt fan setting. If you I use high bulb and high alt fan sounds like a jet engine.

That approach of ranking them by relative maxes - assuming your calibrated viewing follows rank - does not work either.

JVC and Infocus are noted for being fairly honest about calibrated numbers - there will be some lens zoom and lamp QA variance - and of course applying the Infocus iris cuts it down.

Sony, Panny, Sanyo - all gimmick up their numbers using the most extreme image they can come up with. You can easily hit an 80% off with some of their presets! They know they can trap a customer just like you who does not know anything but max ANSI lumens buying by the bigger number - so all try to hit higher max than the other guy.

This is why you need to seek up reviews by calibrators - not marketers. Or even dig into the AVS threads for each one you are interested and see what the AVS consensus number is...as a number of people have their own measurement gear. Just take note of which mode/iris settings they are talking about.

AFAIK nobody has a search/calculator tool that will find PJ's for you with actual rather than marketed lumens.

That approach of ranking them by relative maxes - assuming your calibrated viewing follows rank - does not work either.

JVC and Infocus are noted for being fairly honest about calibrated numbers - there will be some lens zoom and lamp QA variance - and of course applying the Infocus iris cuts it down.

Sony, Panny, Sanyo - all gimmick up their numbers using the most extreme image they can come up with. You can easily hit an 80% off with some of their presets! They know they can trap a customer just like you who does not know anything but max ANSI lumens buying by the bigger number - so all try to hit higher max than the other guy.

This is why you need to seek up reviews by calibrators - not marketers. Or even dig into the AVS threads for each one you are interested and see what the AVS consensus number is...as a number of people have their own measurement gear. Just take note of which mode/iris settings they are talking about.

AFAIK nobody has a search/calculator tool that will find PJ's for you with actual rather than marketed lumens.
Darn it...just when i thought I made headway.

My problem is that I am not a nit picker in terms of needing my projector calibrated. So I want to compare out of box vs. out of box. Just want someone to be able to tell me that the JVC RS-1 will be similar in terms of briteness compared to my current Sharp Z3000 using only the basic of adjustments (high lamp, briteness, contrast, etc).

I would agree with Kras...the PJC calculator is not accurate. I actually measure all the projectors I play with, after calibration, so that I get a read-world number to work off. Rarely does it coincide with PJC. Now of course, it is me doing it, so I trust myself. For you out there who don't measure, you have to choose who to believe.

But you have adjusted the presets even though you have not calibrated it - and there is a big swing on available presets on all PJs so you can get a wide range of brightness and extremes of calibrated performance.

Your best bet is to call up Jason and have him help you with your research (no doubt somewhere buried in the AVS archives is your Sharp with someone putting decent numbers on it) - and they will take care of you if they recommend something that you decide just was not brite enough or the image was too warped to watch when it was brite enough. I would go buy a cheap ND2 filter at the camera store that you can use to simulate a faded lamp since you want something that briteness will last - and will enable your side by side comparisons - since anything you get new will appear brighter simply because it has a new lamp - but that joy does not last very long...

You want something bright and something that will fit your constrained install - and that requires someone experienced to judge it fairly. It maybe that realizing moving the mount simplifies your search, or you may relax your brightness requirements if you get one with the same throw.

Now if you did call AVS up and they help you - it is only fair of you to pay their fair price - and not go off and search the cheapest price on the net - considering the cheapest price would just as soon sell you the hot mover of the month that does not fit your needs.

Thanks for the input. Like everything else their just is not a simple answer. I am not one to search the net for the cheapest deal....did it once and ended up stuck with a product that did not meet my standards and could not return it. Learned the hard way that it pays to use a reputable company.

Indeed...price should be considered of course, but I would never just shop on price alone.

Sony is better than jvc. Although the rs1 does do some things better, static contrast-probably brighter- it's still a JVC..:mad:

Blanket declarative statements on a manufacturer are close to meaningless when you are evaluating two of their competing products.

Having had both the Pearl and the RS1, the JVC's dynamic range and blacks are superior and enjoyable in the vast majority of viewing. Sony made some improvements but I don't hear that they've caught up to the RS1 although the gap has been closed.

Seeing them is always the best remedy to any model comparison.

Local store in boulder had both the RS1 and the Pearl on display in a cave. RSA beat it..IMO. Since I like a bright picture...Even though the overall briteness was only slightly in favor of the RS1, when compined with its blacks made the pic much brighter/mpre contrastie (I know no such word but the darker darks made the lighter parts seem to have much more POP). Both projectors had around 500 h on bulb. Will be goin with the Rs1, just waiting to hear more reviews on the RS2 since 2K to 3K is not too big of a deal and figuire the longer I wait on this the lower the price will fall on the RS1.

I find that it really is subjective. I personally like the Sony because I like to tweak my units to no end and unfortunately you can't do that with the JVC. But there are some things the JVC does better, such as it is brighter and has ultimately better black levels, so really there are pros to each.
You did the right thing by viewing both.

Jason,
What do you think which one is brighter:
InFocus IN82 or The new EPSON EMP-TW2000 ? To bright up Carada 134" 1.3 gain screen?
Thanks

I have not tested the Epson unfortunately so I would merely be guessing. I can say that the IN82 is the brightest 1080p I have seen to date, barring the 3-chip DLP's.

So, we have claims of brightness not calibrated to D65 which renders manufacturing specs complete hype and entirely unreliable.

Then, there is calibrated measured brightness, giving you a genuine sense of output.

Then, by the 100 hour mark of so you are at half of calibrated brightness.

Kind of a bummer. There are extremely few pj's that will have 500 lumens of output post 100 hrs in watchable modes. Besides the Sim2 C3X line and IN82 is there anything worth considering that can deliver viewable brightness (obvious sacrifices understood) for the large majority of the bulb life?

The IN82's offset is a deal breaker for many and the C3X line are 10k and North, which is outside many budgetary ranges. (mine included)

Dino

I would agree with Kras...the PJC calculator is not accurate. I actually measure all the projectors I play with, after calibration, so that I get a read-world number to work off. Rarely does it coincide with PJC. Now of course, it is me doing it, so I trust myself. For you out there who don't measure, you have to choose who to believe.

Being I am just now looking for the perfect projector what other location do I have a choice on figuring the throw, size of screen and best seating distances calculations?

My seating will be about 18' from the screen and I only want 1080p.
The Sony and the JVC are 2 of the ones I am looking at. I currently have 3 Sony HDTV's now.

Save some real cash and consider the infocus 82. This projector has some excellent reviews. A beautiful 1080p dlp image.

One of my favorites.

I have the IN82 and have seen the JVC in action. Based on my experience I can recommend the in82. (despite this being my first post...)

This calculator will allow you to insert actual lumens from trustworthy reviews.

http://www.carltonbale.com/home-theater/home-theater-calculator/