I am about to purchase a FP for my movie room. It is a cave (no windows). Trying to decide between the Mitsubishi HC1500 or HC4900. Is the black level on the HC1500(DLP) better than the HC4900(LCD)? I Need some Help.

HC1500 = 720p

HC4900 = 1080p

Black level or no black level I just had to make the same choice and price being an issue I decided that I was getting more bang for my buck by spending the extra $565.00 on the 4900...

I had the 1000U for 7 months before getting the 4900.

I always hesitate before I post in these kinds of threads because most of the time I haven't done direct comparisons and we often don't see the differences if we don't see them side by side. This is the case with me; I can only speak on memory/perception and those can always be clouded by big purchases. As always, YMMV.

In my experience, I think the black level for the two would be comparable with the caveat that the 4900 does have a little more haze (the dreaded LCD haze) than the 1000/1500. The addition of an ND filter pushes the 4900 ahead in black levels to my eye and does a great deal to remedy the haze problem.

The 1500 will be significantly brighter, though, especially after the ND filter placement on the 4900. I have no lumens numbers to back that up, just speaking on my own perception.

I better makes some popcorn this is going to be fun.


Murph:)

I have had the HD1000U for about a year, the 4900 will be here tomorrow.

I am planning on taking some comparison shots of both with and NFL game and a Blu Ray disc, is this a good idea or has it been done already? I figure I can do a "real world" comparison with both in the same location, same screen and same input devices...

Definitely post them as well as your thoughts. Don't forget to calibrate first or the comparison won't mean as much.

DOES THE hc4900 HAVE THAT SAME POP THAT THE HC 1500 HAS?

I thought this thread is a joke. HC4900 is better by all means. It is more expensive too.

I thought this thread is a joke. HC4900 is better by all means. It is more expensive too.

Yeah but can its black levels match the 4805??

:)Now thats a joke:)

Yeah but can its black levels match the 4805??

:)Now thats a joke:)

My eyes, my photos, and the measured native contrast numbers disagree with you :P

I didnt mean your results were a joke, I meant I was making a joke about the arguments in the other thread....

Well I followed the other thread for a while and I thought is was funny anyways.. :)

I can pipe in because I'm unbiased--I use a CRT PJ. :)

Nobody can set your priorities (what and if image quality is important to you). They sell alot of awful looking PJs to people who don't care that much about image quality, but just want a big picture. :)

One note: resolution is not everything. Its value is somewhat dependent upon viewing angle. On/off CR generally influence the "winner" of shootouts more than resolution.

But some things to consider:
1) Viewing angle - can you sit as close as you want to 720p DLP and not see pixels?
2) Do you see RBE?
3) Does the "pop" and colors of DLP look better to you?
4) Does an LCD look OK to you?
5) Does panel misalignment, dust blobs, etc worry you?

Personally, I've yet to see a 1080p LCD that looks even near the quality of a top quality 720p single chipper (think Marantz) from 1.7x viewing distance on a 16:9 screen--but I've not seen all of the latest "second generation" 1080p LCDs. When I saw the Epson Home Cinema 1080, I thought, "how are they going to sell this awful looking thing?!?!?" YMMV.

"When I saw the Epson Home Cinema 1080, I thought, "how are they going to sell this awful looking thing?!?!?"

By updating it with the 1080UB which has much better black levels.

I can pipe in because I'm unbiased--I use a CRT PJ. :)

Nobody can set your priorities (what and if image quality is important to you). They sell alot of awful looking PJs to people who don't care that much about image quality, but just want a big picture. :)

One note: resolution is not everything. Its value is somewhat dependent upon viewing angle. On/off CR generally influence the "winner" of shootouts more than resolution.

But some things to consider:
1) Viewing angle - can you sit as close as you want to 720p DLP and not see pixels?
2) Do you see RBE?
3) Does the "pop" and colors of DLP look better to you?
4) Does an LCD look OK to you?
5) Does panel misalignment, dust blobs, etc worry you?

Personally, I've yet to see a 1080p LCD that looks even near the quality of a top quality 720p single chipper (think Marantz) from 1.7x viewing distance on a 16:9 screen--but I've not seen all of the latest "second generation" 1080p LCDs. When I saw the Epson Home Cinema 1080, I thought, "how are they going to sell this awful looking thing?!?!?" YMMV.

Realize we are talking about comparing a 1080p LCD with a 720p DLP with a $565.00 price difference.

I have not seen the HC1500, but I am extremely happy with my 4900. Sure the black levels could be better, but then again I have a picture that looks positively stunning with an HD DVD player.....my word it's gorgeous...the 4900 has it in the bag on many levels....but people keep harping about black levels.

I will say this....black level issues are easier to see on 2.35 material because you have the black bars top and bottom. however, I find that when you have bright next to dark the percieved black level excedes the projector specs. I don't know if you understand what I mean but surely someone here get's it. The HC4900 is gorgeous.....I saw a Black pearl the other day....it's certainly not perfect, so it's not one of those "your projectors blacks are grey and mine are black" kinds of things......they all produce gray....so with that said.....there are bigger problems in this world without having to worry about black level. Trust me....black level is one component of pic quality, but many other aspects of PQ such as poor colors, soft picture, sde will have far more impact on PQ...again...imho.

Go to the movie theatre and check out the "grey" level they produce there.....it will make you feel really good about your projector.

Hope this helps......


BTW if you ever feel bothered for one minute about black level on your HC4900....realize that your viewing experience is being impacted far more by the percieved sharpness and massive size of your screen......trust me....it will make all your other problems go away....

feel free to dissagree with my oc

BTW if you ever feel bothered for one minute about black level on your HC4900....realize that your viewing experience is being impacted far more by the percieved sharpness and massive size of your screen......trust me....it will make all your other problems go away....

feel free to dissagree with my oc

except the dust blob issues, that is what is holding me back

3) Does the "pop" and colors of DLP look better to you?


This is one area in which I have to disagree. I know many talk about the color of DLP, but having both a 1 year old top-end 61" DLP Samsung RPTV and a 4 year old Z2 LCD, I still say the colors on the projector are richer and more natural thanks to the three chip design that has always been used by LCD. With LCD you are getting a constant blending of RBG to produce each color rather than relying on persistence of vision and a spinning wheel. That said, I am quite pleased with my DLP, but I have to give the nod for color accuracy to LCD.

except the dust blob issues, that is what is holding me back

I think I will take my chances with dust blobs in exchange for getting rid of my mind numbing color wheel noise.

Yes I know all DLP's do not have color wheel problems, just as all LCD's will not have dust blob problems....

cuttard: never met a 4805 reference he didn't like. :D

cuttard: never met a 4805 reference he didn't like. :D

My license plate is 48054LIF :P

If I'd found a Mits 3000 at Best Buy today my ol' pal would be gathering cobwebs as we speak...

I'm mostly posting because it's faster than clicking to subscribe to this thread, but the reason I want to be subscribed is because I really want to hear back from ppl making this change, as a (very happy) HD1000u owner who eyes the HC4900 but is hesitant about the change from DLP. Please give us feedback, switchers.

I'm mostly posting because it's faster than clicking to subscribe to this thread, but the reason I want to be subscribed is because I really want to hear back from ppl making this change, as a (very happy) HD1000u owner who eyes the HC4900 but is hesitant about the change from DLP. Please give us feedback, switchers.

I will have more info / screenshots over the next couple of days, been very happy with the HD1000U (other than the color wheel issue) and should have the 4900 today. I think this could be a very typical upgrade path.

My HC3000 is going back to BB, I'm keeping the HC4900! :D

except the dust blob issues, that is what is holding me back

Didn't hold me back....not an issue....put the hepa in the filter holder and you are good to go.....

If dust blob is the only thing holding you back.....hmmm...well every unit has it's problems....does not mean everyone will have them.

BTW the funny thing is that I don't think anyone has actually taken the unit apart to see if it's actually dust....I only say this because it could also be manufacturing residue in which case not everyone will have this issue....

just a thought....it has been FAR from a widespread issue!

My HC3000 is going back to BB, I'm keeping the HC4900! :D


Congrats.....

*Darth Vader* "you chose well my son.... pffffffffffffttt"

My HC3000 is going back to BB, I'm keeping the HC4900! :D

I thought that might happen.

Well my 4900 arrived yesterday, here are my thoughts after one night (I was not able to get any good screenshots with my digital camera).

First Impression
Out of the box it is much bigger than the HD1000U / HC1500. I used the PMS mount for the 1000U and it still works somewhat well for the 4900 but I think I will upgrade to something a bit more heavy duty. I am not able to get the projector perfectly perpendicular with the screen due to the hole placement being near the back, it always wants to dip forward ever so slightly. I know a heavier duty mount will correct this problem.

Setup
Setup is a breeze with the lens shift on the 4900. I was a bit concerned that I would have to change the mounting point of the PMS, but I was able to lens shift using the exact same point. It took only about 20 minutes to swap out the projectors and get setup as best as I could within the limitations of the PMS. I would bet if you have a sturdier mount to start with you will have the 4900 setup very easily.

Comparison
Note: I am not a seasoned audio / videophile, my opinions are based only on what I see and I what I think.

Used for comparison: DirecTV HR21 / PS3

Overall Picture Quality
For every source observed (SD, HD Broadcast, Blu-Ray) the 4900 looks as good or better than the 1000U. The one that stands out (obviously) is when watching a movie on Blu-Ray, the resolution of the 1080p 4900 has a very noticeable advantage over the 1000U. When watching anything other than Blu-Ray, I think the difference in the overall picture quality is much less noticeable.

Brightness
Its not really fair for me to do a comparison on this on as my 1000U has 2,200 hours on the bulb. I can say that I have no problem at all with the brightness of the 4900 in my setup (basement with controlled light). When I finished my basement I set up overhead lights dividing the room into (3) sections (front and middle of room lights are in front of projector and rear lights are behind the projector), all (3) sections are on individual dimmer switches. I did this so I can have some ambient light (behind the projector) if I don't want to watch in a totally dark room. With both projectors I am able to have these rear lights on slightly with affecting the picture quality too much.

Black Level
Again I say I am no expert here, and probably not near as picky as most here. I think the black levels of both projectors are pretty close. If I had to pick I would say the 1000U does a SLIGHTLY better job overall. I would not consider this difference at all when making a decision on one vs. the other.

Noise
This one is very important to me as I have been listening to a whining color wheel for about a month. The 4900 is silent. You cannot hear it. It is a 100% improvement over the 1000U (even without color wheel issue). This one to me would be a huge factor when deciding on a purchase. With the 1000U there is always going to be fan / color wheel noise. There is no noise at all from the 4900, it is a joy to be in the same room with.

Price
I will not discuss street pricing, but from my shopping experience the 4900 (after rebate) was $565.00 more than the HC1500. For potential buyers I think you can look at this either way. If money is a big issue for you I think the $565.00 savings could be well worth it, you would be getting a projector that is very close overall for a decent amount less. If money is not a big issue than I believe the 4900 is a great value at *ONLY* $565.00 more.

Personal Opinions
If you don't mind a little fan noise and Blu-Ray / HD-DVD is not in your near future I would go with the HC1500. I don't think there is enough of a difference in quality of everything besides 1080p source to warrant the extra money for the 4900 (unless you need LCD for setup reasons). If you are a movie buff and have or are planning to have one of the High Def movie formats I would get the 4900. Spiderman on Blu-Ray jumped out at me on the 4900 in a way it never could on the 1000U.

Problems
I have not experienced any of the problems with the 4900 as discussed here (no firing, moire, dust blob) but this is only based on a few hours of use at this point.

I think that's pretty spot on, Fenceman.

The only thing I would add is that I feel the 4900's blacks move ahead of the 1000/1500 with ND filter placement and moves closer (but probably not quite to the level of) the Mits 3000.

I'd have the same rec's as you, regardless.

My HC3000 is going back to BB, I'm keeping the HC4900! :D

I thought that might happen.

I've been able to test the 3000 and 4900 side by side using a matrix switch (The Blank Button on the 3000's remote comes in handy.. :D ). My screen's fabric is the Da-Lite Video Spectra 1.5, 106" diag (actually it's a 4:3 120").

For me, it was only an additional $407 for the 4900. Since I sold my first 3000 and just now decided to add FP again in our new house (I should of known better, once you have FP... well you know the story), I'm starting from scratch. For those that already own a 3000, I don't think there would be a need to upgrade (depending on viewing distance, sources etc.).

Concerning Black Levels, the 4900 is close or not that far from the 3000. The 3000 consistently does better (closed iris vs auto), this becomes apparent with scenes with mixed lighting. Overall, they are both close. For Sports, Local HD newscasts, the edge goes to the 4900.

As far as 'POP', I was surprised by the 4900, it does 'POP' compared to the LCD's I've seen in the past though there is still a slight (very slight) haze as some call it. My Wife thinks they are both vibrant but she also stated she doesn't see those multi-color blips here and there that she saw sometimes with the 3000 (:)). I didn't think she saw the rainbows before...

From the posts in the forum, the 3000 is better than the 1500, so the decision should be even easier IMO for those considering the 1500 and 4900.

I do believe there isn't a lot of time spent aligning the Polarizers during manufacturing, so it doesn't surprise me that there are conflicting reports concerning the 4900.

Main sources for comparison, Toshiba XA2 and a few HD-DVD's, Panasonic BD30 and Pirates BD and some D* HD.

At our 10'-13' viewing distance, the difference in resolution with HD discs is easy to see (even my Wife comments on this). This is less apparent with D* HD. Obviously, I no longer 'buy' into the 720p is just as good as 1080p claims.

I can't do a side-by-side comparison since I've sold my 4900, but I did put 10 hours on it. I now have the 1500 (though it was sold as and is labeled as a 3000, grr..)

From what I can tell, and I know this is not the common opinion and some think I may have had a bum 4900, the 1500 has significantly better blacks and contrast than the 4900. It's possible that it is more superior contrast than superior blacks that I am seeing.

All I know is that immediately on viewing the 4900, and then while watching movies, I was constantly distracted and disappointed by how flat any dark areas or scenes looked and by what I assume is the "lcd haze" everyone is referring to. It's not that I'm looking for flaws, it's that the flatness of the image actually pulled me out of what I was watching frequently.

The 1500 or 1000 or whatever it is I have right now doesn't have that problem. The blacks may not be as good as my 4805's, but that's because the projector is much brighter. I don't feel that I am missing any detail or dimensionality compared to the 4805, which was not the case with the 4900. Dark scenes and areas still have a satisfying amount of depth to them.

Color seemed better on the 4900, and of course it was sharper. I really miss the zoom. The 1500 is un-noticeably quiet for me in low mode, and still quieter than the 4805 in high mode (which I wouldn't be using anyway). The 4900 was silent.

Concerning the Fan, if the 1500 is anything like the 3000, it's not loud at all so this shouldn't be an issue for anyone.

I personally see a very slight haze over the entire color spectrum with the 4900 though the 4900 is vibrant compared to the LCD's I've seen in the past. I'm not sure I have the best screen fabric for the 4900, though I don't have the light controlled room that I want. The Video Spectra 1.5 is very good in this type of room.

When it comes to Sports, newscasts etc., the 4900 'Popped' even more than the 3000.

Concerning your 3000, 1500 or hybrid (:D), perhaps someone swapped out the guts... ?!?!!

I can't do a side-by-side comparison since I've sold my 4900, but I did put 10 hours on it. I now have the 1500 (though it was sold as and is labeled as a 3000, grr..)

From what I can tell, and I know this is not the common opinion and some think I may have had a bum 4900, the 1500 has significantly better blacks and contrast than the 4900. It's possible that it is more superior contrast than superior blacks that I am seeing.

All I know is that immediately on viewing the 4900, and then while watching movies, I was constantly distracted and disappointed by how flat any dark areas or scenes looked and by what I assume is the "lcd haze" everyone is referring to. It's not that I'm looking for flaws, it's that the flatness of the image actually pulled me out of what I was watching frequently.

The 1500 or 1000 or whatever it is I have right now doesn't have that problem. The blacks may not be as good as my 4805's, but that's because the projector is much brighter. I don't feel that I am missing any detail or dimensionality compared to the 4805, which was not the case with the 4900. Dark scenes and areas still have a satisfying amount of depth to them.

Color seemed better on the 4900, and of course it was sharper. I really miss the zoom. The 1500 is un-noticeably quiet for me in low mode, and still quieter than the 4805 in high mode (which I wouldn't be using anyway). The 4900 was silent.

Do you watch a lot of dark movies or something? You seem obsessed with contract and black level. Not saying it is a bad thing, just curious about your viewing habits. My #1 priority would be sports viewing, so I probably view things differently than you??

Do you watch a lot of dark movies or something? You seem obsessed with contract and black level. Not saying it is a bad thing, just curious about your viewing habits. My #1 priority would be sports viewing, so I probably view things differently than you??

For you, this should be an easy decision... the 4900 really excels at HD s
Sports and is a step or three above the 3000 IMO! :D

Do you watch a lot of dark movies or something? You seem obsessed with contract and black level. Not saying it is a bad thing, just curious about your viewing habits. My #1 priority would be sports viewing, so I probably view things differently than you??

It wouldn't have occurred to me to be concerned with black level/contrast, until I saw the effect they had on the picture with the 4900. Before the 4900, I had only owned CRT SDTVs, a plasma HDTV, and the 4805 projector, and "how is the black level" or "wow, look at that contrast!" would not ever have crossed my mind. I guess it was something I took for granted. With the 1500/1000, it is again something I take for granted -- you can tell by the reviews that this model is not rated particularly highly in the areas of black level and contrast, and I'm sure it could be much better, but I don't find it to detract from viewing at all.

When they've done tests to see how people rate various displays, the ones picked as having the best image quality almost invariably turned out to be the ones with the best contrast, rather than the ones with the most color accuracy or highest resolution.

There's a reason the JVC RS1 (and now it's successor the RS2) are universally regarded as producing the best picture. The RS1 has significantly inferior color accuracy compared to much of the competition (including the 4900) and is less sharp than many of them as well (including the 4900).

For sports, you're right, black level and contrast are not as big a deal and looked awesome on the 4900. Although I do have to say that the weak contrast hurt the 4900 with ambient light in my viewing, since despite it being a bright projector, there just wasn't enough contrast to keep it from washing out more than my 4805 (which is a much dimmer projector) and the 1000/1500 (which is probably brighter) did under the same lighting conditions.

Anyway, yeah, I actually do watch a lot of dark movies. The movies I was really looking forward to watching with my upgrade were Blade Runner, Pan's Labyrinth, and Alien. The one that suffered the most was Resident Evil:Extinction, which combines brights with darks in almost every scene and so can't take advantage of a dynamic iris.

Thank you guys for following up with the comparison. I just finished a 720p BRD rip on my HD1000u and I checked my hours. 206 after 11.5 months. I quickly calculated 14 more years for the lamp to hit 3000 :) I think I'll keep my HD1000u a lot longer than my last two projectors (both 4:3 business PJs).

My problem is I've invested in HD-DVD, but I think it's going down. I'm about to get an XBOX 360, also. I'm pretty pleased with HD Rips since I can't buy any real HD here (my 35 HD DVDs are all personally imported in suitcases) so I think, based on statements like 'the main marked improvement is in BRD' which makes sense, I'll just wait another couple years to go 1080p when Mits comes out with something REALLY cheap, hopefully even possibly a DC3 DLP? But I'll keep current here on AVS - thanks again.

206 hours in 11 months? Man turn that sucker on more often, I put 2200 hours in 12 months :) :)

I would suggest you sit the whole thing out for another year, your projector is barely broken in yet.

Yeah in 6-7 months I'll move into a place with a dedicated HT (and ideally a dedicated HTPC (mac) to feed it) so I'll watch more and more of my content there. Right now the PJ is in my living/dinning room and unless I'm watching my 35 HDDVDs, I have to hook up my laptop each time to watch movies, that's why I watch relatively few down there.

The notion that it's still being 'broken in' is compelling, hard to think of upgrading when the brightness is taming and the blacks will get better day by day :)

Didn't hold me back....not an issue....put the hepa in the filter holder and you are good to go.....

If dust blob is the only thing holding you back.....hmmm...well every unit has it's problems....does not mean everyone will have them.

BTW the funny thing is that I don't think anyone has actually taken the unit apart to see if it's actually dust....I only say this because it could also be manufacturing residue in which case not everyone will have this issue....

just a thought....it has been FAR from a widespread issue!


I really want to get this projector but my room is very dusty.

Some good reviews. Nice summary FenceMan.

I'm sure the 4900 is a good performer and like many here have said, the decision to 'upgrade'' truly does depend on what one currently has. Having owned and loved the HD1000u for about 8 months, what makes me get that upgraditus fever is something that will truly trump what I have now in every way. :) That might be a tall order but I think it's do-able....otherwise, why bother.

I think the issue that has kept me really considering the 4900 is price & how sharp it reportedly is. RobZ has also stated several times how great the colors are too. So there seems to be alot to like but maybe not enough in some areas for those who already have a solid projector.

Some good reviews. Nice summary FenceMan.

I'm sure the 4900 is a good performer and like many here have said, the decision to 'upgrade'' truly does depend on what one currently has. Having owned and loved the HD1000u for about 8 months, what makes me get that upgraditus fever is something that will truly trump what I have now in every way. :) That might be a tall order but I think it's do-able....otherwise, why bother.

I think the issue that has kept me really considering the 4900 is price & how sharp it reportedly is. RobZ has also stated several times how great the colors are too. So there seems to be alot to like but maybe not enough in some areas for those who already have a solid projector.

This is a perfect point, I would never have went from HD1000U --> HC4900 except for the fact that I have to send in HD1000U for color wheel repair and I can not (will not) be without my projector for an extended period of time. If the HD1000U was still working I would not have upgraded at this time...

Having owned and loved the HD1000u for about 8 months, what makes me get that upgraditus fever is something that will truly trump what I have now in every way. :) That might be a tall order but I think it's do-able....otherwise, why bother.

Exactly. The 4900 was a big step up in every way over my 4805 *except* it was actually inferior in blacks/contrast, which is a pretty significant aspect of image quality. The 1500/1000 I have now is not only half the price of the 4900, but there is no way in which it is inferior to the ol' Infocus -- and in most ways it's at least a small step up.

So I will either keep this Mits (it's not a massive upgrade, but there is obviously less screendoor and it is brighter than my aging IF), or possibly return it and stick with the 4805 awhile longer. I have no doubt that this fall/winter will see the Epson 1080UB or the Mits 6000 drop to the $1500 range (if not sooner), and either of those seems like a truly worthwhile upgrade that I will be happy with for years.

All I can say is that my wife (who is never one to notice things, and is not impressed by anything electronic) commented on how much better the picture on the new projector (HC4900) looked than the old (HD1000U). This was while watching The Truman Show on TMCHD....to me this is proof that it is a very noticeable upgrade and probably worthwhile for those that choose to do it.