Jvc dla-hd990/950/550 - Page 4 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
First ... 2  3  4 5  6  ... Last
Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP > Jvc dla-hd990/950/550
madshi's Avatar madshi 12:21 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

What is really new on the HD950/550, only frame interpolation, it's all (if there are no mistake in the first new from C4H and Cinemotion).

Huh?

cine4home: "So ist es JVC gelungen, die beiden wichtigsten Eckdaten - das Kontrastverhältnis und die Projektionshelligkeit - deutlich zu steigern."
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Thebes's Avatar Thebes 03:11 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post

Huh?

cine4home: "So ist es JVC gelungen, die beiden wichtigsten Eckdaten - das Kontrastverhältnis und die Projektionshelligkeit - deutlich zu steigern."


Hi,

I agree, but IMO this is not a modification, only one improvement. It will be necessary moreover check with measurements (there already was many difference for contrast ratio measures, especially on the 350 (RS10).
madshi's Avatar madshi 03:30 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

I agree, but IMO this is not a modification, only one improvement.

Why do you feel a need to differ between "modification" and "improvement"? Any positive change is welcome, it doesn't matter if it's a new feature or improved image quality or whatever. And it's just not right to say that FI is the only difference between HD750 and HD950, if contrast and brightness have improved, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

It will be necessary moreover check with measurements (there already was many difference for contrast ratio measures, especially on the 350 (RS10).

Yes, of course. I fully agree that we need to wait for reviews before we can really judge the new models...
Thebes's Avatar Thebes 03:44 AM 08-08-2009
Hi,

I think you don't read exactly what I wrote before :


Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

[...]

What is really new on the HD950/550, only frame interpolation, it's all (if there are no mistake in the first new from C4H and Cinemotion).


Cine4Home's Avatar Cine4Home 04:39 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

Hi,

IMO, it's not the same thing.

What is really new on the HD950/550, only frame interpolation, it's all (if there are no mistake in the first new from C4H and Cinemotion).

The HD1 was a real new projector and a little less the HD750/350. Here it's only slightly modification, no ?


The chassis of the HD350 / 750 is still "new". It is common practice, that a chassis is used for at least two generations before it gets replaced by a new one. Just remember Sanyo Z2 / Z3 or Z4 / Z5 or Z2000 / Z3000, or Panasonic PT-700 / 900, or PT 1000 / 2000 / 3000 or Mitsubishi HC 5000 / 6000 or JVC HD1 / 100 and so on, and so on....

If manufacturors wouldn't do that, the projectors would easily cost twice or triple as much. Besides, there is simply no way to develop a whole new chassis in just like 10 months of time.

And afterall, just look at the inside-pictures we took of the HD350, this chassis is built like a tank. To be honest, we have seldom seen a better construction than the current JVC chassis and the actual prices are really fair for what you get. Hardly any other manufacturer matches that ratio of built quality / price. So, there is not much to improve with the current chassis.

Soon, we will offer a first coverage...

Regards,
Ekkehart
madshi's Avatar madshi 04:43 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

I think you don't read exactly what I wrote before :

I don't understand what you mean. Does your interpretation of "new" exclude improvements in contrast and brightness? If so, looking only at "new" things IMO paints an incomplete picture. But maybe we're just splitting hairs over semantics here. My point is that FI is (according to the cine4home news) not the only thing that is different between HD750 and HD950. Actually I find contrast and brightness improvements more important than the added FI.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cine4Home View Post

Soon, we will offer a first coverage...


Thebes's Avatar Thebes 05:05 AM 08-08-2009
Hi,

because, (IMHO) improvement of contrast ratio could'nt be useful if you haven't a real batcave.

The same thing for brightness, if you don't use a screen at 3,5 meters wide (16/9eme) where is the interest to have a projector with 1 000 lumens ?

It's the reason why it's only improvement ( because, always IMO in many many case, it couldn't be useful). Frame Interpolation, maybe, or we can assume we'll see the difference .
mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich 05:29 AM 08-08-2009
Its all semantics. Suppose a part of the optical light engine is changed. Three new polarizers. Just an example. For a DLP, a different color wheel. Same chassis, but diiferent parts.
madshi's Avatar madshi 05:42 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

because, (IMHO) improvement of contrast ratio could'nt be useful if you haven't a real batcave.

Well, I have a real batcave... But on/off improvements also help in a non-batcave (as long as there's no light source other than the projector).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

The same thing for brightness, if you don't use a screen at 3,5 meters wide (16/9eme) where is the interest to have a projector with 1 000 lumens ?

(1) A projector which is specced to 1000 lumens usually has quite a bit less than that at D65.
(2) Lamps get dimmer with age.
(3) If there's any ambient light (not in my case), every bit of added brightness helps.
(4) With a brighter projector you can close the manual iris down a bit further to get increased native contrast (see cine4home HD750 review).
(5) You can put a real bright projector to ECO mode first and later switch to HIGH mode once the lamp has dimmed a lot. This allows you to use the lamp much longer with adequate brightness...
Thebes's Avatar Thebes 05:56 AM 08-08-2009


But, in many many case, you can use an HD 750 (except if you have a real batcave or a screen 3,5 meter wide) and in this case, at the end of the day, where is the difference : "Frame Interpolation".
Highlander_AVS's Avatar Highlander_AVS 08:21 AM 08-08-2009
Anyone, already knows how will be named the models form the PRO division ??
Will we have RS30 (HD950) and RS15 (HD550) ???
coldmachine's Avatar coldmachine 08:56 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post


improvement of contrast ratio could'nt be useful if you haven't a real batcave.

Thats simply wrong. A batcave is not needed to appreciate high CR.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

The same thing for brightness, if you don't use a screen at 3,5 meters wide (16/9eme) where is the interest to have a projector with 1 000 lumens ?

Also wrong. 1000 lumen is not a number for large screens at all.

A 3.5m 16:9 image is quite large. My 2 small screens are 3.5m @ 2.35, which is a good deal smaller. Their gain is a standard 1.3 perf, which is 1.15 final gain. With 1000 D65 lumen that will yield 20.5 fl. The way JVCs fade, that will rapidly drop to around 13fl. That is nowhere near bright enough.

I currently view at 25fl, so need a PJ that will deliver this after fading as I have yet to see a high gain screen I consider acceptable. 20fl is now rapidly becoming the De facto standard.

I think most people will be glad that JVC are improving the capability of their machines, in areas where its currently possible. I certainly am.
Thebes's Avatar Thebes 09:07 AM 08-08-2009
Hi,

can you see a difference between these black level anywhere out a batcave ? :

- 0.0125 lumens
- 0.018 lumens
- 0.024 lumens
- 0.0333 lumens

and for Brightness, SMPTE Reference is 14 fL (or 16 fL open air). If you prefer more bright, it's your taste, but 14 fL are sufficient IMO .
Free's Avatar Free 09:16 AM 08-08-2009
I agree, the smaller improvements are welcome, and speak to the fact that this is already a really great projector. I will probably buy a new one, as the combination of features and performance, and price on the RS20, as well as the reliability of this projector make me happy to pick up another one with incremental improvements.

I don't understand why Thebes is arguing against anyone buying a new model, based on HIS preferences. You know it wouldn't be an observable improvement if you were using the projector outside, on a bed sheet either, but that is not a reasonable argument.
clehner's Avatar clehner 09:29 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldmachine View Post

Thats simply wrong. A batcave is not needed to appreciate high CR.

This fact should be well know by now. Thanks for repeating it.

However, you can repeat that another 100 times, it will come up again and again.
Thebes's Avatar Thebes 09:31 AM 08-08-2009
Hi,

I don't argue against I,m trying to explain why improvement between the HD 750 and the 950 are not so important. For memory only 100 lumens (1000 lumens against 900 lumens) and they are not useful in many case.

And, IMO, it's the same problem for constrast.

So as I said, the real new thing (for common people) is FI, it's all.
Free's Avatar Free 09:36 AM 08-08-2009
I think, by now, it is obvious that most of us around here, when it comes to A/V gear are not "common" people. All my Wife notices, is that the image is big, but I am not buying projectors for her.
darinp2's Avatar darinp2 09:45 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

and for Brightness, SMPTE Reference is 14 fL (or 16 fL open air). If you prefer more bright, it's your taste, but 14 fL are sufficient IMO .

You are arguing for non-batcaves, but in that case more lumens can mean that a person can use a darker screen and fight reflections better.

If you are arguing that the increases are small enough to not matter I can understand that, but if you are arguing that no amount of increase would matter unless a person has a batcave then I don't think that makes sense.

I am a big fan of higher on/off CR, but 50k:1 to 80k:1 isn't that big a leap. Smaller than 2k:1 to 3k:1 IMO even though it is a higher percentage.

--Darin
YetAnotherNewbie's Avatar YetAnotherNewbie 09:50 AM 08-08-2009
I, for one, will wait and get the 550 (as my first projector!). First I looked at the AE3000, but then read all the good things about the HD350. However, not having the FI on the JVC was a negative, even if I was not going to use it for movies. Now with the 550, I feel it hits the sweet spot for me. I'm glad about any marginal increase in brightness, as I do want a 10-foot wide 2.35 screen, and my wife already objected to turning the basement into a batcave... In fact, I think I'll go for a Silverstar screen to get plasma-like picture, maximum quietness and longest bulb life.

Could someone @ AVS quote me that package?
clehner's Avatar clehner 09:53 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

So as I said, the real new thing (for common people) is FI, it's all.

Thanks, that is correct, of course. The improvement is only incremental. Some people will even upgrade for increments, though.

OTOH: Nobody currently owning or planning to buy a RS20/HD750 has to worry about anything.
dbbarron's Avatar dbbarron 09:58 AM 08-08-2009
Can anyone specular what the selling price for the 550 will be in the US relative to the 350?
YetAnotherNewbie's Avatar YetAnotherNewbie 10:18 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbbarron View Post

Can anyone specular what the selling price for the 550 will be in the US relative to the 350?

I would speculate $500 ~ $1000 more for the 550... Pure speculation though, per your request.
madshi's Avatar madshi 10:29 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebes View Post

can you see a difference between these black level anywhere out a batcave ? :

- 0.0125 lumens
- 0.018 lumens
- 0.024 lumens
- 0.0333 lumens

If there's no other light source than the projector then you can see the difference between the black levels in a room with white walls/ceiling just as fine as in a batcave. Think about it: If the projector is the only light source and if there's a really dark scene (e.g. a full blackout), then there's simply no light that could be reflected by the white walls/ceiling. So any difference in black level is just as visible in a white colored room compared to a batcave.

Obviously as soon as the image content gets bright, the light colored wall/ceiling reflections will destroy ANSI and intra scene contrast. So: Light colored walls destroy ANSI and intra scene contrast, but they don't affect on/off contrast.
martinfarinha's Avatar martinfarinha 10:48 AM 08-08-2009
Coldmachine,
Please don't blow a gasket but can you please explain why you say 20fl is becoming the standard in home theatre when from what I have read the SMPTE standard for movie theatre's is 16fl with no film in the gate? (Martin run's for cover and duck's)
Thanks in advance,
Martin.
coldmachine's Avatar coldmachine 11:06 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by martinfarinha View Post

Coldmachine,
Please don't blow a gasket but can you please explain why you say 20fl is becoming the standard in home theatre when from what I have read the SMPTE standard for movie theatre's is 16fl with no film in the gate? (Martin run's for cover and duck's)
Thanks in advance,
Martin.

Its what the ISF in general, and Joel Silver in particular, is putting forward as a desirable level for commercial digital cinema. Its also what an ever increasing number of AVS members see as an absolute minimum. Personally, Ive been at 25fl or over for a couple of years now and only see that increasing. Ive been shooting 2 Lumis units at over 30fl and loving it.

Also, when people quote the 16fl number, they should look into why that number was arrived at. It is related to equipment limitation that has no relevance to digital PJs. Ive seen absolutely pristine images projected at over 50fl with no issues whatsoever.
Lawguy's Avatar Lawguy 11:08 AM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by martinfarinha View Post

Coldmachine,
Please don't blow a gasket but can you please explain why you say 20fl is becoming the standard in home theatre when from what I have read the SMPTE standard for movie theatre's is 16fl with no film in the gate? (Martin run's for cover and duck's)
Thanks in advance,
Martin.

No harm in liking a brighter pic.
martinfarinha's Avatar martinfarinha 11:45 AM 08-08-2009
Thank's for that speedy reply! Please forgive my quoting of the 16fl number but if a person looks into this issue then that is the number that is quoted by SMPTE and to most people that would be as far as they would look.
I do however have one small issue with what you are saying and that is regarding cinema equipment limitations, are you saying that every movie since the begining of cinema has been screened and viewed incorectly because the lamps were not bright enough?
I'm really not trying to be fecitious but just trying to get an idea of what would be correct in terms of the presentation of films.
That is kind of like saying that everyone who ever made or watched a movie has done so by an incorrect yardstick isn't it and only now with the advent of digital can we see it correctly?
RonF's Avatar RonF 12:01 PM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldmachine View Post

Thats simply wrong. A batcave is not needed to appreciate high CR.



Also wrong. 1000 lumen is not a number for large screens at all.

A 3.5m 16:9 image is quite large. My 2 small screens are 3.5m @ 2.35, which is a good deal smaller. Their gain is a standard 1.3 perf, which is 1.15 final gain. With 1000 D65 lumen that will yield 20.5 fl. The way JVCs fade, that will rapidly drop to around 13fl. That is nowhere near bright enough.

I currently view at 25fl, so need a PJ that will deliver this after fading as I have yet to see a high gain screen I consider acceptable. 20fl is now rapidly becoming the De facto standard.

I think most people will be glad that JVC are improving the capability of their machines, in areas where its currently possible. I certainly am.

Thank you. I had begun to think my own preference for much higher than "spec" images was unnatural.

CM
I was going to PM you because I wanted your specific take, and if you know anyone who knows anyone who knows anything about the DMX video imaging process, that utilizes existing 2K Industrial DLP equipment? The link is in the "Better Than Imax?" thread dropping off the front page soon. But apparently you're not PM-able at present. What to do?

I would love your impressions. This has amazing implications and possibilities....but no one other than Blasst, who first posted about the film technology years ago and I now seem to want to comment.
madshi's Avatar madshi 12:04 PM 08-08-2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by martinfarinha View Post

are you saying that every movie since the begining of cinema has been screened and viewed incorectly because the lamps were not bright enough?

This is not a matter of "correct" or "incorrect". It's only a matter of different levels of image quality.
Chuck Anstey's Avatar Chuck Anstey 12:39 PM 08-08-2009
With this FtL discussion, I wonder if the experts who are pushing for 20+ FtL have been experts for quite a while? The reason I bring it up is that if they are personally recommending brighter pictures then could it be because of their own aging eyes, which require a progressively brighter picture as they age? The SMPTE recommendation was based upon a scientific study of a broad range of people. It would seem that we need a new study to determine what the new brightness should be and not just personal expert recommendation.

The only issue I could see for a brighter picture is that even with my relatively low light output G70, after a several minute dark scene and then switching to a daylight scene is a little blinding. If a projector went from several minutes of <1 FtL and then instantly to over 30+ FtL it would be truly blinding and annoying. Also the reverse would be an issue when going from daytime to a nighttime scene and no one can see any details for a few minutes as the eyes adjust. Filmmakers would have to take that into account when making their movies and adjust accordingly. I guess one thing to do is always keep the picture bright enough to prevent the eyes from going towards nighttime vision mode. That could be done by having movie theaters no longer be dark but have a fair amount of ambient light like most people have when watching TV. Not sure I would like that. The point is there are penalties to be paid for having 100 IRE output higher and higher FtLamberts while still trying to have 0 IRE be truly black.
First ... 2  3  4 5  6  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop