Has anyone gone from "zoom" method to "lens" method on the same screen/1080p setup? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 7 Old 02-16-2007, 07:20 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Tom Monahan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Butte, Montana Hometown of the late Evel Knievel
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Just curious if anyone has gone from using the "zoom method" to the "lens method" using the same screen and 1080p projector. If yes, did you notice a substantial improvement in picture quality other than the extra light output from the lens method?

I own a Sony Pearl 1080p and ordered a UH380 lens, Lumagen HDP scaler and 45x106 screen yesterday. Viewing distance for me will be a little over 10'4". After reading some of the CIH on the cheap thread tonight I am concerned that my setup won't be significantly better than the zoom metod after spending a lot of money.

Thanks for any input guys!!!!!!!!!!!

Tom

My equipment: JVC RS55 for 2D, BenQ W7000 for 3D, Carada 40x117 2.925:1 AR BW Criterion screen, Navatar .8 HD conversion lens, Darbee Darblet, region free Oppo BP93, Toshiba HD-A35 HD-DVD, JVC HD-DH5U D-Theater, Mitsubishi HS-HD 20000 DVHS, Pioneer CLD-97 LD player/AC-3 mod, B&K AC3 Demodulator
Tom Monahan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 7 Old 02-16-2007, 07:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
usualsuspects's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,935
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 20
I have a Pearl, 51 x 120 screen, Lumagen HDQ, Panamorph UH380 and M380 sled. While I was waiting for the UH380/M380 to arrive, I used the zoom method. I like the lens better than zoom It's not just the brightness, its the image density that increases with the lens. It was worth it to me It's hard to explain to the non-believers who say that it is not worth it to use a lens on 1080p projectors... Interesting that virtually none of these people actually have used a 1080p projector + high quality lens and scaler, the ones that have are not singing the "it's not worth it" song....
usualsuspects is online now  
post #3 of 7 Old 02-16-2007, 11:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CAVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 8,384
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by usualsuspects View Post

It's not just the brightness, its the image density that increases with the lens. It was worth it to me

Well said...Image density. This could just be the next best "catch fraise" to describe a picture...

Mark

Mark Techer

I love my Constant Image Height system!
CAVX is offline  
post #4 of 7 Old 02-17-2007, 04:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Tukkis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 1,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Image density is what gives you the smoother look. Kinda like not seeing the screen door effect with projectors. Its smoother more film like and less digital. It's due to the fact that you have more pixels in the same size screen area with a lens compared to the zoom method.

Check out this post and look at the picture: http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/...&&#post5891774

James


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Tukkis is offline  
post #5 of 7 Old 02-17-2007, 12:49 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Tom Monahan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Butte, Montana Hometown of the late Evel Knievel
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Thanks for the help guys

Do you guys find that scope HD movies look noticeably softer than 16x9 HD movies on a constant height setup? I will be moving the UH380 lens out of the way when viewing 16x9 HD content. Also, do you think that viewing a 45x106 HD image is too big for my 10"4" viewing distance? I am not refering to immersion but will picture quality be negatively affected. My current 16x9 screen is also 45" tall and I love the pictue quality. I only use the Pearl to watch HD movies by the way.

Thanks again!

Tom

My equipment: JVC RS55 for 2D, BenQ W7000 for 3D, Carada 40x117 2.925:1 AR BW Criterion screen, Navatar .8 HD conversion lens, Darbee Darblet, region free Oppo BP93, Toshiba HD-A35 HD-DVD, JVC HD-DH5U D-Theater, Mitsubishi HS-HD 20000 DVHS, Pioneer CLD-97 LD player/AC-3 mod, B&K AC3 Demodulator
Tom Monahan is offline  
post #6 of 7 Old 02-17-2007, 03:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tukkis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 1,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Tom,

Since you have a 1080 projector I would be aiming to sit around 2-2.5x screen heights from the screen. So at 10'4" from a 45" high screen you should be very close. I guarentee you'll love the extra width. It's funny how much more immersive and more cinematic adding the extra side portions going 16x9 to a 2.35 screen.

James


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Tukkis is offline  
post #7 of 7 Old 02-18-2007, 07:08 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Tom Monahan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Butte, Montana Hometown of the late Evel Knievel
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I did a little experiment today and would appreciate input on it's possible accuracy. My current 16x9 screen and ordered 2.35 screen both are 45" high. The viewing distance is 10'4". This means that I sit 2.755 screen heights away. Today, I put on some scope yd disc movies along with my homemade masking panels. The screen height was 33" high so I multiplied this figure by 2.755 and got a little over 93.5". So, I moved my chair closer to the screen with a viewing distance of 93". I was VERY impressed with the picture quality. Even at this close distance, picture quality looked pretty much as good as it did from my usual 10'4" viewing distance. The immersion was great also so I think I will be happy with the screen size I ordered. Do you guys think the pq using the UH380 lens, Lumagen scaler and 45"x106" screen viewed from 10'4" will be very similar to the great pq I saw will be similar to my experimental setup I did today? I didn't see any pixel structure. I'm sure it is hard to say but any opinions or guesses would be GREATLY appreciated.

Thanks,
Tom

My equipment: JVC RS55 for 2D, BenQ W7000 for 3D, Carada 40x117 2.925:1 AR BW Criterion screen, Navatar .8 HD conversion lens, Darbee Darblet, region free Oppo BP93, Toshiba HD-A35 HD-DVD, JVC HD-DH5U D-Theater, Mitsubishi HS-HD 20000 DVHS, Pioneer CLD-97 LD player/AC-3 mod, B&K AC3 Demodulator
Tom Monahan is offline  
Reply 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat

User Tag List

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