Since my DIY a-lens slide is finished I was always curious to the PQ of "Native 16:9" vs thru the combo "a-Lens expansion/PJ compression Scaler".
(main reason for having a a-lens slide)
I've not seen this study done here before - did I miss it?
This is purely a subjective visual study at this time, I'm no expert and w/o "real" tools to capture objective data (besides a basic / decent camera).
PJ: Sony VPL-VW60 (12 months old, less than 500 hours total on it)
a-Lens: Panamorph UH380 (b-stock avs power buy 10 months ago, hopefully PQ does not suffer because it's a b-stock unit)
Canon SD880 IS mounted on tripod, at center screen height/width 10' from screen.
Camera/Tripod of course not moved/zoom stayed same for all shots for relative comparision purposes.
Camera in program mode, flash off, ISO set to 100.
If I had a D-SLR could have totally fixed it's settings and seen a vs b comparision, but this should still capture any major diff's.
Had "Old School" on DVR, HD with some decent shots in it, so watched it tonight after the kids went to bed and put my just finished manual slide to use.
Back and forth, back and forth, cycle testing it....
The first thing I immediately noticed is the "a-Lens/PJ Scaler" image is about 3" skinner than the "native" image.
I put blue painters tape on the screen for the skinner image (a-Lens/PJ Scaler image), you can see that in most of the "native" shots.
Not sure why that's happening, according to what I've read and understood in the Sony manual the "normal" mode compresses 16:9 into 4:3, correct?
This should exactly counteract the a-lens 4/3 expansion ratio to give a net result of 16:9
Besides that look at the picts and make your own subjective visual observations:
Honestly, I was expecting more difference, like the native was obviously sharper/clearer, but I'm pleasantly surprised.
Looks like the "a-lens/PJ scaler" combo does a decent job.
Since this is a $3k lens and a +$4k PJ I'd expect this level of capability.
I'll have to dig into what's going on with the "squeeze" image I'm getting with the a-Lens/PJ Scaler doing their thing.
At this time I have absolutely NO plan to buy a separate scaler box.
Here are 5 comparison series of pictures.
1a native 16:9:
1b a-Lens/PJ Scaler:
2a native 16:9:
2b a-Lens/PJ Scaler:
3a native 16:9:
3b a-Lens/PJ Scaler:
These next two series has "hair detail
", which I thought looked fine in both.
4a native 16:9:
4b a-Lens/PJ Scaler:
5a native 16:9:
5b a-Lens/PJ Scaler:
Next, I'll go back to the original pictures and blow them up and look at detail to see if any loss.