OK, I have not seen any direct comparisons between these two projectors.
Has anyone seen these two head to head?
What are your opinions?
Is the Sony worth the extra price??
This review from Projector Central basically says overall there is not much of a difference between the two projectors.

http://www.projectorcentral.com/sony_vw60_home_theater_projector.htm

“Another highly competitive unit will be the Panasonic AE2000, which will hit the market momentarily. Like the RS1, this projector outperforms the VW60 in actual image quality. Its advantages over the VW60 are similar to those of the RS1—better color accuracy, deeper blacks and overall longer dynamic range in any given scene.”
This review was done some time ago. I wanna know if this is still the consensus.

Craig

I compared them: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12388349#post12388349

I compared them: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12388349#post12388349

Interesting perspective.
It really sounds like you had the same opinion as Projector Central.
I have to say that from looking at the pictures of the two, the Sony looks far better cosmetically, but my projector will be in a hush box so looks means nothing for me. What I care about is the image. I am also a sticker for contrast.

So, you would say that the Sony's build quality was better, but the projected image was the same?
Is the Sony $1300 better than the Panny??

Craig

The Sony is much more tweakable and the iris is better. It has deeper blacks. I would say it is $1300 better unless you are on a budget. The build of the VW60 is what would be expected from a higher cost projector. Consider reliability as well.

The Sony is much more tweakable and the iris is better. It has deeper blacks. I would say it is $1300 better unless you are on a budget. The build of the VW60 is what would be expected from a higher cost projector. Consider reliability as well.

OK, I read your entire thread...
Nice room by the way. ;)
So did you send back the AE-2000?
In your thread, you seemed so happy with the Panny. But seemed very hesitant about its cosmetics. I now get the impression that is why you seem to favor the Pearl.
Here is my question. I am only concerned with picture quality... if you had a hush box and the projector would not be hidden and not exposed in the room, what unit would you go with.

Craig

The Sony is much more tweakable and the iris is better. It has deeper blacks. I would say it is $1300 better unless you are on a budget. The build of the VW60 is what would be expected from a higher cost projector. Consider reliability as well.

off topic, but did you end up selling the BP? i see you had it listed in the AVS Classifieds. what is next up for you? later.

I also had both. I prefer the 60 because of the build quality and no worries for dust issues. Picture quality was almost identical. I give a slight edge to the 60, but it was much closer than I anticipated.

If you are on a budget get the 2000 and spend the $1,300 on a screen, etc. If money doesnt matter as much the 60 is a great projector.

I am in this exact situation having narrowed it to these two because of the anamorphic modes I require for my setup (I've a U380 Panamorph). Since I tend to be someone who hangs onto my boxes (unlike Andrew or Rob :)) build quality and long term viability/livability is a prime concern. In this context SXRD just seems to be more complete considering the sealed light path and image consistency over time. Has this generation of LCD's *really* solved the polarizer issues?

I've not seen the AE2000 yet, but I've spent some time with the VW60 with a variety of optical disc material. It provides a pleasing, detailed image that I feel I could live with for a few years as is my wont.

Here in Canada the price is closer (list delta of $1K) so that factors into it, but for me the thoughts mentioned above seem to be worth the difference when I consider the long term.

ted

I have a feeling we are going to get to closer CRT level blacks within the coming years. I ended up selling both and was planning on picking up a 720P unit like AX200 to hold me over for a while (maybe a couple of years). I ended up grabbing a Mitsubishi HC4900 at the same price. From what I hear, it's sharpness and colors are excellent but it does not match the black levels of the current crop of projectors. Considering I have a non-dedicated room and a high power screen (not optimal for black level), I can't imagine I will be too bothered by the difference in black level.

I have had the opportunity to see the Panny AE-2000 a few times and will be seeing it again soon. Without having the Sony next to it as a direct comparison, I think the Panny seems to be built quite well. I know there have been some issues reported with dust blobs with the AE-2000. On the other hand, I have the Panasonic AE-700 right now and it has been a good projector for me. Especially considering the price I paid for it a few years ago. Thank you AVS. :) So my positive past experience with a Panasonic product is one reason why I am leaning so hard towards the AE-2000.
I remember when everyone was saying the AE-700 suffered from vertical banding. I have never saw it on mine.
So without seeing the Sony, but considering what all the reviews and people on the forum are saying, I am having a hard time getting my self to spend an extra $1300 on the Sony. Don’t get me wrong. If I could see $1300 difference between the two, I would seriously consider it. I guess I need to find a showroom that carry’s the VW60.

Craig

I have a feeling we are going to get to closer CRT level blacks within the coming years. I ended up selling both and was planning on picking up a 720P unit like AX200 to hold me over for a while (maybe a couple of years). I ended up grabbing a Mitsubishi HC4900 at the same price. From what I hear, it's sharpness and colors are excellent but it does not match the black levels of the current crop of projectors. Considering I have a non-dedicated room and a high power screen (not optimal for black level), I can't imagine I will be too bothered by the difference in black level.

I am running with a W9000 on a 119" Da-Lite hi-power. I have to close the iris almost all the way down due to brightness. I too would like better black level ... I read here you think the hi-power is the cause but I think if there is no light in the first place than black would be black. The hi-power sure amplifies any light. It really makes for bright colors .... maybe too bright on a dark and snowy night.

II remember when everyone was saying the AE-700 suffered from vertical banding. I have never saw it on mine.
So without seeing the Sony, but considering what all the reviews and people on the forum are saying, I am having a hard time getting my self to spend an extra $1300 on the Sony. Don’t get me wrong. If I could see $1300 difference between the two, I would seriously consider it. I guess I need to find a showroom that carry’s the VW60.

Craig

Craig,

We are of the same 700 generation I believe. I've replaced a PS - didn't bother me much other than the inconvenience. I was able to tune my unit so that I could see vertical banding so that was definitely a unit by unit problem. Over time the individual channels have be infested with dust bunnies and the polarizers have lost their uniformity (it was never perfect to begin with) and the blue panel now exhibits image retention though this is not a permanent burn. Now the 2000 is outfitted with inorganic panels, so much of the earlier issues should have disappeared - I've asked but never been given clear opinions.

For me, since I plan to live with it until either new light sources become available or a trebling of JVC type panel contrast is available (might be a longish wait), the sealed optics is a strong selling point, though I realize the 2000 is easy to clean.

Being here in Canada where the price differential is not as great certainly makes for an easier decision for me. Good luck and ejoy your choice whatever it might be.

ted

I had the opportunity to see the VW60 today and I viewed the AE-2000 last night so I thought I would post some comments.
Unfortunately they were in different environments with different screens so it is really hard to say. The Panny was shining on an 11' wide scope screen and the Sony was on a small 7 foot wide 16X9 screen.
But my impressions are this. The Sony did seem to have a bit more contrast. It also seemed a bit brighter. But, I could see more pixilation with the Sony. Even at 1.5 times the screen width. Don't get me wrong, the image was great, but I think videofiles would get a bit annoyed.
So I am still just as confused as I ever was.
My current plan is to sit back and think about it for a few weeks as I will have the opportunity to spend more time with the Panny in the coming weeks.