2.35:1 PC Gaming - Powered by Lumagen - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!



Forum Jump: 
 4Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 75 Old 07-31-2015, 04:06 PM
Senior Member
 
jdwk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I might need to shoot this over to the HTPC forum, but I am wondering if anyone with a 2.35 screen has foregone the anamorphic lens, and just fit 1920x810 inside 1920x1080 timings.

That's a lot of porch, but if you've gone with a scope screen already, you aren't gaining any image information by stretching. Seems like the only benefit is you don't waste the potential light output of the top and bottom bars.

I've actually just started my serious research as I am getting my first house with a dedicated media room in a couple weeks, but I was putting 1080i and 540p desktops on my parents' Toshiba 60" "HD" RPTV back in the last century. In fact, I still have a Mits RP DLP that requires a 1028p desktop to eliminate the overscan.

I was planning on going with a lens or just getting a 4k projector and zooming until I discovered today that BluRays are not anamorphic. So I would not be gaining any image quality over a 1080p zoomed setup other than the light output.

I know the OP has a lens, but curious if he's tried custom timings and compared the results.
jdwk is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 75 Old 08-01-2015, 05:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 20,458
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1987 Post(s)
Liked: 874
stanger89 is online now  
post #63 of 75 Old 08-01-2015, 06:31 PM
Senior Member
 
jdwk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Thanks. I'll hunt it down.
jdwk is offline  
post #64 of 75 Old 10-19-2015, 08:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,682
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1203 Post(s)
Liked: 930
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdwk View Post
That's a lot of porch, but if you've gone with a scope screen already, you aren't gaining any image information by stretching. Seems like the only benefit is you don't waste the potential light output of the top and bottom bars.
Not strictly true. It depends on the resolution and aspect ratio of your source video.

In the UHD Bluray era, you will definitely gain additional (33% more) image information when displaying 2160p letterbox fullscreen on a 1080p projector with an anamorphic lens, not just brightness and pixel grid density.

If anything, UHD Blurays will give a bit of extra life and utility to these lenses while UHD projectors are unaffordable for the next few years but UHD Blurays become commonplace.

And even with native 4K / UHD projectors, if you have support for HDR, you need the best peak white you can get, regardless of your current lumens you can always use 33% more to get more pop out of the HDR and cover more of the luminance range baked into the signal.

Projectors are going to have a hard time for a while until they get up there with the luminance range thanks to lasers. So I think anamorphic lenses will still provide some value even when the inherent resolution isn't boosted through stretching (instead of downscaling vertically by less, in the case of 3840x1620 letterbox -> 1920 x 1080 anamorphic rather than to 1920x810).
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #65 of 75 Old 10-19-2015, 12:17 PM
Senior Member
 
jdwk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Yeah that is true for UHD, but not for gaming.

Just spent two days at CEDIA. I saw a good mix of 2.35 and 16:9 screens, but didn't see a single demo use a lens. I think the newer projectors have become bright enough, the reduction in light loss from a lens isn't necessary. Also a lens would be a huge hassle since nearly every demo had a mixture of content.

There is a substantial premium for zoom memory though. It pretty much makes the only option the JVC RS400 (49 replacement), before you step up to lasers in the LS10000, or the true 4k of the 665ES (600 replacement). Since that is basically a software implementation on any projector that already has motorized zoom and shift, I was hoping to see it trickle down to the cheaper projectors this year. That doesn't seem to be the case.
jdwk is offline  
post #66 of 75 Old 10-19-2015, 02:35 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 20,458
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1987 Post(s)
Liked: 874
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdwk View Post
Also a lens would be a huge hassle since nearly every demo had a mixture of content.
I don't think I've ever heard this sentiment from anyone who actually owns and uses a lens. Outside of initial setup (which is a bit more involved), lenses are simpler, quicker, and easier than lens memory. I've got an RS4910 but I still use my lens since it's easier.

Quote:
Since that is basically a software implementation on any projector that already has motorized zoom and shift, I was hoping to see it trickle down to the cheaper projectors this year. That doesn't seem to be the case.
It's not quite that easy, you have to ensure that the mechanicals are robust enough for an order of magnitude more operation.
stanger89 is online now  
post #67 of 75 Old 10-19-2015, 03:59 PM
Senior Member
 
jdwk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I watched the LS10000 change from 16:9 to 2.35 in under 4 seconds from a single button press. Is your lens setup really simpler and easier than that? I am not trying to argue since I've yet to even own a projector, let alone a lens, but at least the idea of moving a lens back and forth in front of the projector with a mechanical sled seems more complicated.

I really just wish they would make a native 5k 2.4 AR projector. Then you don't have to switch anything at all. 0 seconds. 16:9 content will be full resolution and 2.35 or 2.4 will just get cropped and upscaled in software.
jdwk is offline  
post #68 of 75 Old 10-19-2015, 04:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
blastermaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunny Okanagan
Posts: 1,700
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 389 Post(s)
Liked: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdwk View Post
I watched the LS10000 change from 16:9 to 2.35 in under 4 seconds from a single button press. Is your lens setup really simpler and easier than that? I am not trying to argue since I've yet to even own a projector, let alone a lens, but at least the idea of moving a lens back and forth in front of the projector with a mechanical sled seems more complicated.

I really just wish they would make a native 5k 2.4 AR projector. Then you don't have to switch anything at all. 0 seconds. 16:9 content will be full resolution and 2.35 or 2.4 will just get cropped and upscaled in software.
Umm, I have a lens and I do have it on a slide mechanism which I built. I'll be honest with you, though, the image is so damn crisp with the lens in place I just leave it there all the time. It takes less than 4 seconds for my projector to switch to 4:3 mode for 16:9 content. So, yes, it is just as easy as a button press. And I get the extra brightness.
blastermaster is offline  
post #69 of 75 Old 10-19-2015, 04:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,682
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1203 Post(s)
Liked: 930
Quote:
Originally Posted by blastermaster View Post
Umm, I have a lens and I do have it on a slide mechanism which I built. I'll be honest with you, though, the image is so damn crisp with the lens in place I just leave it there all the time. It takes less than 4 seconds for my projector to switch to 4:3 mode for 16:9 content. So, yes, it is just as easy as a button press. And I get the extra brightness.
Not to mention, let's face it, that most 2160p content for the next several years is going to be either UHD Blurays, which are usually letterbox, or porn, where..so what, 1080p is already enough. Leaving the lens in place with a 2160p 16:9 projector will still leave plenty of resolution even in 3:4 mode to 16:9 content.

My main beef with lenses is the hassle, obviously. If you have higher ceilings than wide, then you are better off with a 16:9 screen and no lens, and if you have lower ceilings and a wider screen, then you are better off (more surface area) with a Scope screen and an A-lens.

An A-Lens makes sense for HDR content+projectors too, 33% higher peak white is nothing to sneeze at. And at 2160p the sharpness loss due to ECC should be minimal. Actually the higher the base res the lower the impact of a mild scale factor, even an anamorphic or a non-affice skew matrix. (such as correcting for geometric distortion in the case of a flat screen in Scope format, or a VC lens where there is no easy way to correct geometric barrel distortion through convex screens)
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #70 of 75 Old 10-19-2015, 05:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 20,458
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1987 Post(s)
Liked: 874
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdwk View Post
I watched the LS10000 change from 16:9 to 2.35 in under 4 seconds from a single button press. Is your lens setup really simpler and easier than that? I am not trying to argue since I've yet to even own a projector, let alone a lens, but at least the idea of moving a lens back and forth in front of the projector with a mechanical sled seems more complicated.
Don't confuse mechanical complexity with operational complexity. On a lens with a sled, you just hit a button and whatever needs to happen, happens. The Cineslide for example transits in about a second. I don't know about the Epson, but my RS4910 takes more like 15 seconds to switch between scope and 16:9 via lens memory, and the whole time it has a message on the screen. Also on my RS4910 you have to go into the menu (at least I haven't programmed my remote better) to pick a lens memory.

For my part, I don't remove the lens, I just hit a button and my Lumagen changes ARs instantaneously.
stanger89 is online now  
post #71 of 75 Old 10-22-2015, 03:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kelvin1965S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Berkshire, UK
Posts: 3,713
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 238 Post(s)
Liked: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
An A-Lens makes sense for HDR content+projectors too, 33% higher peak white is nothing to sneeze at.
Just to reitterate that 33% is a theoretical maximum brightness gain and in practice can often be much less. In fact in my previous lens set up (Isco II lens and JVC X35) there was only 1% gain using my lens. This was measured, using a fully calibrated projector (by Lumagen naturally).

The reason being that my X35 was at minimum zoom when using the lens. Due to the projector's changing aperture as it is zoomed, you get less light output at minimum zoom (maximum contrast) and as you move towards maximum zoom you get maximum light output (and reduced contrast). In my case zooming the 1.33 required to fill my 2.35:1 screen gained nearly all the light back that the lens gained. I measured 100 Lux at the screen using zoom and 101 Lux using my lens.

I still use my Lumagen for aspect ratio changes, but only to 'shrink' 16:9 down after I've zoomed to 2.35:1 in order to view 16:9 disc menus and trailers. If I watch a whole 16:9 film, then I use the X500 lens memory (I upgraded as I sold the Isco II and X35 for nearly as much as the used X500 cost ) and then watch with the Lumagen set to 1:1 pixel mapped.

Lenses do NOT guarantee a big/worthwhile brightness gain, especially if set up to minimise pincushion, ie with a long throw/minimum zoom in the projector.
turls likes this.

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet". William Shakespeare 1615
Kelvin1965S is offline  
post #72 of 75 Old 10-22-2015, 09:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,682
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1203 Post(s)
Liked: 930
Darn, I just checked the calculator for my benq w1070 and found out how right you are about the zoom.

At max zoom, 1.3, I get 18 fl at 138 inch 16:9 screen size (181 inches throw distance) without the lens.
At min zoom, 1.0, I get 14 fl at 138 inch 16:9 screen size (138 inches throw distance) without the lens.

I moved my projector back by a few feet so that I could use the minimum zoom with my VC lens, to avoid vignetting. Now I find out that I'm not gaining any brightness by using a lens, however the image is less crisp and the entire setup more complicated, basically for nothing.

I think H-E lenses make much more sense if you can still keep your max zoom setting. Maybe I can try to use somewhere between 1.0 and 1.3 to get right to the limit of the vignetting zone, and get some kind of brightness gain. I will have to calculate it, or maybe sell my lens. I was thinking of getting my next projector with a greater throw ratio, so that I could get more of a benefit, but I like the idea of the projector at the back of the room and this makes that a low-performance option. I really like more brightness for pop, especially in 3D, in fact that's why I bought my projector.

I wonder if I replace the lens on my w1070 if I can get a longer throw ratio with less brightness loss, and perhaps crisper optics in the bargain. Then maybe I can some kind of benefit to using my VC lens because as of right now, when used with a short throw projector like the w1070 that requires me to use the minimum zoom to avoid vignetting, it's basically a downgrade.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #73 of 75 Old 10-24-2015, 04:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,682
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1203 Post(s)
Liked: 930
Kelvin, or anyone else who might know, if you change the lens on your projector to alter the throw ratio, does the max zoom setting still provide more light?

Or is that just fundamentally misunderstanding this. If a new lens has twice the throw ratio as the old one, thereby reducing your image size by 50% at the same zoom setting, could I then increase from 1x zoom to 2x zoom to get back my original screen size that I previously had at 1x zoom, but with the higher lumens from the 2x zoom setting?

I think I may have made a mistake buying a VC lens and then having to move my projector back and use the lowest zoom because my projector is such a short-throw projector. I just want to know if I bother swapping out the lens myself if that's a dumb move or a good one. My projector is nearing the end of its useful lifespan (I plan on getting one of the new "affordable" TI 4K DLP chip models next year) so I don't mind hacking it a bit. I've opened the optical cavity (to remove dust blobs) and removed the original lens and it's really nothing special. I have a used lens store beneath my apt so I might be able to find something.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #74 of 75 Old 10-26-2015, 04:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 20,458
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1987 Post(s)
Liked: 874
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
Kelvin, or anyone else who might know, if you change the lens on your projector to alter the throw ratio, does the max zoom setting still provide more light?

Or is that just fundamentally misunderstanding this. If a new lens has twice the throw ratio as the old one, thereby reducing your image size by 50% at the same zoom setting, could I then increase from 1x zoom to 2x zoom to get back my original screen size that I previously had at 1x zoom, but with the higher lumens from the 2x zoom setting?
I think there are too many variables to say. Yes short throw usually has a larger aperture than long throw, thus resulting in more light, but there's no way to know if a longer throw lens at it's shortest throw would be brighter than a short throw lens at it's longest throw. For example it could be that the longer throw lens' aperture just continues getting smaller (though it's probably unlikely).

Quote:
I think I may have made a mistake buying a VC lens and then having to move my projector back and use the lowest zoom because my projector is such a short-throw projector. I just want to know if I bother swapping out the lens myself if that's a dumb move or a good one. My projector is nearing the end of its useful lifespan (I plan on getting one of the new "affordable" TI 4K DLP chip models next year) so I don't mind hacking it a bit. I've opened the optical cavity (to remove dust blobs) and removed the original lens and it's really nothing special. I have a used lens store beneath my apt so I might be able to find something.
BenQ 1080ST? I'd be amazed if you actually found a lens. Camera lenses will not work they are an entirely different design/system. About the only hope I can think of for you, regarding swapping lenses, is maybe a BenQ 1070/1075 Lens will fit, assuming the 1070/1080 are the same chassis.
stanger89 is online now  
post #75 of 75 Old 10-28-2015, 05:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,682
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1203 Post(s)
Liked: 930
My PJ is the w1070, and I did think of looking for space parts of other BenQ projectors, but didn't find one that's for sure suitable yet. (in terms of fittings).

I'll try emailing BenQ support to see if the lens from an HC1200 would fit, since it has a 1.5 zoom ratio and it looks like at 1.4x zoom (close enough to the max), I would get the picture size I want:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/BenQ...ulator-pro.htm

My other option as someone else pointed out is buying a lens from another used projector with better glass.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off