Art's review seemed a little schizophrenic. At the beginning there's a bit of negative tone and spin, building up to saying its maybe about like last years Epson 6500UB but not quite. People have said Art used to work for Epson and doesnt like Sony but I haven't confirmed that. I quoted him above saying something positive about the Sony, though even there it comes across as a bit of a left-handed compliment. Then in the middle there are a bunch of typos. And at the end of the review he seems to say a lot of good things about the HW15.
When will a different website review the HW15 and when will we get some more solid numbers. Like I said, science, I want numbers not words that sound like the back of a wine bottle.
The Sony can do 8000 to 12000 without using the DI. Same panel as last year, same sealed light path. The Epsons also use the same panels as last year (D7) and same unsealed light path. Epson is not really an option for me because of their poor track record on reliability and I live in a remote place. Also I'm not going to wait around until December for them to ship it, or March for them to fix the FI firmware, or April for the special German version that costs more and you pay in Euros, if last year is any guide.
We need scientific reasons on how a given contrast ratio is obtained. Epson did not change their panel nor their optics. I guess they cranked their sharpness filter and put in a second iris. Sony also did not change their panel. Did they change their wire grid or glass? They did change their DI.