Official InFocus Sp8602 owners thread. - Page 13 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #361 of 1994 Old 03-28-2010, 09:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
John Schneider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of California
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by avmjt View Post

I agree, most of the issues he has are of no concern to me. I have to say though, I'm still just as unsure about overall performance as before I had read the review. I'm waiting to see the "competitors" section to be completed. That's where I expect to find some final conclusions about how he feels it compares to the others.

What I didn't find that I was waiting for is, does the DLP "pop and wow" finally overcome the black level deficiencies compared to LCOS and LCD??? That is after all the typical reason why DLP is liked, but not much was said in this area. And with LCOS and LCD quickly catching up in this area lately, like the 8500UB, how much advantage, if any, does the SP8602 still have over these latest others in pop and wow, and again is the advantage worth the difference in black levels?

What really had struck me is that he said the 8500UB had blacker blacks *AND* lighter brights in a particular scene!!! That would mean it had more ANSI contrast, which is a critical component for "pop and wow". Now I'm just really confused

I think that unless you are willing to pay top dollar for a FP, you have to accept the tradeoffs of the various technologies and brands. I happen to like the "pop/wow" factor that is often associated with DLP technology, along with a sharp picture. After reviewing the articles linked on the previous page (http://www.videovantage.com/), I believe that DLP is currently the best (for the dollar amount spent) at producing the type of picture that I like, provided that the projector is of sufficient quality (lens, etc).

While I do love a good black level (there are so many movies that I love that are dark), it is slightly lower than pop/wow and sharpness in my list of priorities.

It's all about what you value most in a FP.
John Schneider is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #362 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 12:26 AM
Member
 
UglyBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by luelf21 View Post

I really wouldnt worry about it. It is most likely the firmware. If you are really worried about it, give your dealer a call and see what he/she thinks. Or call infocus directly.

I contacted a local InFocus support guy here in Sweden and got the response that they will release a new firmware this week that will take care of the problems. Hopefully it does...
UglyBob is offline  
post #363 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 12:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Canary_Jules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 1,139
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schneider View Post

I think that unless you are willing to pay top dollar for a FP, you have to accept the tradeoffs of the various technologies and brands. I happen to like the "pop/wow" factor that is often associated with DLP technology, along with a sharp picture. After reviewing the articles linked on the previous page (http://www.videovantage.com/), I believe that DLP is currently the best (for the dollar amount spent) at producing the type of picture that I like, provided that the projector is of sufficient quality (lens, etc).

While I do love a good black level (there are so many movies that I love that are dark), it is slightly lower than pop/wow and sharpness in my list of priorities.

It's all about what you value most in a FP.

I agree. I've always been a DLP man. I love the pop/wow factor and the sharpness. I'd have one now if it weren't for the fact that I have issues with dynamic irises - which, sadly, most pjs (including DLPs) now rely on. DLPs are also a tad more difficult to place because of more limited lens shift and zoom. So I presently have a JVC RS2 and am expecting delivery of an RS20 tomorrow.
Canary_Jules is offline  
post #364 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 08:05 AM
Advanced Member
 
avmjt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schneider View Post

I think that unless you are willing to pay top dollar for a FP, you have to accept the tradeoffs of the various technologies and brands. I happen to like the "pop/wow" factor that is often associated with DLP technology, along with a sharp picture. After reviewing the articles linked on the previous page (http://www.videovantage.com/), I believe that DLP is currently the best (for the dollar amount spent) at producing the type of picture that I like, provided that the projector is of sufficient quality (lens, etc).

While I do love a good black level (there are so many movies that I love that are dark), it is slightly lower than pop/wow and sharpness in my list of priorities.

It's all about what you value most in a FP.

I very much value pop and wow over most other factors, which most definitely makes me a DLP guy. It's what really makes for that 3D effect that people describe. The problem is that none of this had been discussed in the review. Let me re-state my concern here:

What really had struck me is that he said the 8500UB had blacker blacks *AND* lighter brights in a particular scene!!! That would mean it had more ANSI contrast, which is a critical component for "pop and wow". Now I'm just really confused
avmjt is offline  
post #365 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 09:21 AM
Newbie
 
InFocus-Ben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello

Thank you for your support of InFocus Products. We are a very different company today than we were just 2 or 3 years ago. We are focused on CEDIA and high value add resellers. Our retail days are behind us. The SP8602 was tested before release, but I few bugs surfaced when put out in various installations. We are almost complete with a new firmware load that addresses issues discussed a couple pages back.

When the new code is completely tested, I will post a link so you or your reseller can update your projector.

Again, Thank you for your patience and Support.

Ben
InFocus-Ben is offline  
post #366 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 09:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
John Schneider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of California
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by avmjt View Post

I very much value pop and wow over most other factors, which most definitely makes me a DLP guy. It's what really makes for that 3D effect that people describe. The problem is that none of this had been discussed in the review. Let me re-state my concern here:

What really had struck me is that he said the 8500UB had blacker blacks *AND* lighter brights in a particular scene!!! That would mean it had more ANSI contrast, which is a critical component for "pop and wow". Now I'm just really confused

I think I found the section you are refering to, but I dont want to cut n paste his review. I am refering to this page: http://www.projectorreviews.com/info...8602/image.php - about a third of the way down.

Art states that in an effort to match output, the Epson is in high lamp mode while the InFocus is in low, and while close, the Epson was still slightly brighter. This would help to explain the higher ANSI on the Epson. I think that based on what has been posted, the Epson does have blacker blacks, but in Art's review, at the point referenced above, it's not a level playing field.

Is this the portion of Art's review that you are referencing?
John Schneider is offline  
post #367 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 10:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Murilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 4,675
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Can someone explain the lens shift and offset art described that i pasted earlier in the thread?

Is it safe to assume if you have a highpower and a ceiling mount large drop thats just above center of your screen this projector will not work? From what art says it needs to be mounted at the top of your screen or higher?


But then he said top of the screen is 0 offset, and if you mount it higher above the screen the lens shift can go higher. Doesnt he mean lower?
Murilo is offline  
post #368 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 10:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Murilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 4,675
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Also i was looking back at someone reviewing the 83 and 8602 pros and cons, he said the infocus 83 had 300 more lumens? Is this just in specs, or at max brightness?

I believe calibrated according to arts review the infocus 8602 was brighter even.
Murilo is offline  
post #369 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 11:55 AM
Member
 
Duddits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Once again I could not shut down my 8602 with the remote or the buttons on the unit itself.
Tried everything and the picture this time was also weird looking.
I took a picture with my mobilphone.
I am going to return this unit.
This is not good for the lamp
Duddits is offline  
post #370 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 12:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
avmjt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schneider View Post

Is this the portion of Art's review that you are referencing?

I went back and looked, and I think we are talking about the same thing... the paragraphs immediately following the two side-by-side space shuttle pics. Art did say that he set the Infocus to low power, and I really hope that makes up for the difference; but my guess is that on high power, the darks may not be as deep either.

I think he should have just set both of the projectors to the best they each were able to produce the image and then compare them that way. That's how we can see how full potential compares.
avmjt is offline  
post #371 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 12:21 PM
 
LilGator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 1,823
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Almost60 View Post

I have news

The InFocus SP8602 before summer will receive an update of firmware , and will become a 3D projector.

Has this ever been confirmed?
LilGator is offline  
post #372 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 01:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 134
"Art states that in an effort to match output, the Epson is in high lamp mode while the InFocus is in low, and while close, the Epson was still slightly brighter. This would help to explain the higher ANSI on the Epson."

I believe that would be the case only if there was ambient light in the room.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
post #373 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 01:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
John Schneider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of California
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by avmjt View Post

I went back and looked, and I think we are talking about the same thing... the paragraphs immediately following the two side-by-side space shuttle pics. Art did say that he set the Infocus to low power, and I really hope that makes up for the difference; but my guess is that on high power, the darks may not be as deep either.

I think he should have just set both of the projectors to the best they each were able to produce the image and then compare them that way. That's how we can see how full potential compares.

Yeah, that's the part.

Don't know - would using high power lamp mode combined with a gray screen would make it comparable?
John Schneider is offline  
post #374 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 01:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murilo View Post

Can someone explain this with arts explanation of lens shift?


"I started our conversation about the lens shift on the first page. There I pointed out that it significantly affected brightness (by 15%). As stated there, if you are ceiling mounting, (the projector must be inverted if up high), the projector can be placed so the lens is not far above the top of the screen surface. When it's even with the top, that's called 0 offset. From there you can move it higher, but not lower. The higher you go, the brighter it gets (very strange).

The low point is defined as 105% of screen height, and in the manner they describe it, for a 100" diagonal 16:9 screen that would be just shy of a 50 inches high, so about 2.5 inches above the screen. Or any where up to 130%, which would be just a tad shy of 15 inches above the screen top."

I have a highpower so my projector is about in the middle of the my screen (or just slightly above the middle (celing mounted with a large drop mount) so basically this thing wont work with my setup?

From what hes saying though mounting it at the top of the screen is 0 offset and then you can go higher? I cant quite understand that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murilo View Post

Can someone explain the lens shift and offset art described that i pasted earlier in the thread?

Is it safe to assume if you have a highpower and a ceiling mount large drop thats just above center of your screen this projector will not work? From what art says it needs to be mounted at the top of your screen or higher?


But then he said top of the screen is 0 offset, and if you mount it higher above the screen the lens shift can go higher. Doesnt he mean lower?

Hi Murilo,

This projector has a vertical offset that is a minimum of 105% and a maximum of about 130%. So for a ceiling mounted projector the center of the lens must be mounted between 5% and 30% over the top of the screen. A 100" diagonal screen has a height of 49", so the minimum vertical offset is 2.45" and the maximum offset is 14.7" above the top of the screen.

To answer your question if the center of the lens is just above the center of the screen, then this projector won't work for you.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #375 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 01:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
John Schneider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Peoples Democratic Republic of California
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by InFocus-Ben View Post

Hello

Thank you for your support of InFocus Products. We are a very different company today than we were just 2 or 3 years ago. We are focused on CEDIA and high value add resellers. Our retail days are behind us. The SP8602 was tested before release, but I few bugs surfaced when put out in various installations. We are almost complete with a new firmware load that addresses issues discussed a couple pages back.

When the new code is completely tested, I will post a link so you or your reseller can update your projector.

Again, Thank you for your patience and Support.

Ben

Thank you and welcome to the forum!

Any chance you can provide a list of what issues the update will address?
John Schneider is offline  
post #376 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 02:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Murilo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 4,675
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Ouch i rarely have to cancel out projectors these days due to lens shift limitations. Looks like they will miss a sale from me now due to a limited lens shift, i was really hoping this would be the one.

Please keep in mind infocus the highpower is a very famous projector screen, being retroreflective you cant mount this at the top of the screen, or you loose the benefit of the highpower itself.
Murilo is offline  
post #377 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 02:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
avmjt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I prefer a high-contrast angular-reflective screen, a bit on the gray side should be the perfect touch for this projector.

I noticed something very revealing on the comparison between the SP8602 and the RS15 in the Space Cowboys "shuttle" comparison...

http://www.projectorreviews.com/imag...s_shuttle2.jpg

...As you darken the image, the SP8602 makes a better image with much more detail in the stars. I inadvertently noticed this by moving my head up and my LCD screen began to darken. The black levels then matched the RS15, but with much better shadow detail and while still seeing all of the stars in the background that are not visible at all on the RS15. I think this would be like having a bit of a high contrast gray screen, to possibly best the RS15 here.
avmjt is offline  
post #378 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 02:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murilo View Post

Also i was looking back at someone reviewing the 83 and 8602 pros and cons, he said the infocus 83 had 300 more lumens? Is this just in specs, or at max brightness?

I believe calibrated according to arts review the infocus 8602 was brighter even.

Hi Murilo,

It varies significantly according to which settings you are using.

According to Art the 83 measured 1093 lumens in best mode with the lamp set for high power and gamma set for Film. In low lamp mode it put out 870 lumens, or about 20% lower.

In "brightest" mode with the gamma set for PC the 83 put out an incredible 1920 lumens, and with Brilliant Color turned on it put out an additional 50 lumens.



The 8602 measured 1059 lumens in best mode and 1110 lumens in the brightest mode. These measurements were taken with maximum vertical offset and with the lamp set for high power. These results would be about 15% lower in low lamp mode, or 900 lumens and 943 lumens for best and brightest modes respectively.

If I understand correctly, with Brilliant Color turned on Art measured a 35% increase in lumens over Normal settings. So that would be an impressive 1215 lumens and 1273 lumens for best and brightness in low lamp mode.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #379 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 03:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
avmjt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

In "brightest" mode with the gamma set for PC the 83 put out an incredible 1920 lumens, and with Brilliant Color turned on it put out an additional 50 lumens.
...

If I understand correctly, with Brilliant Color turned on Art measured a 35% increase in lumens over Normal settings. So that would be an impressive 1215 lumens and 1273 lumens for best and brightness in low lamp mode.

So I was using my IN83 with around 50% more brightness than I could get out of the SP8602! That means the black level difference had better be at least 50% improvement to make up for the difference, and I'll have to take other people's word here that it does.

I've spent a *LOT* of time closely comparing every single large photo in art's review next to the RS25, RS35, and 8500UB using a tabbed window. If I hadn't read anything in the review, and going by the photos, I easily prefer the SP8602 overall. Easily.
avmjt is offline  
post #380 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 04:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by avmjt View Post

So I was using my IN83 with around 50% more brightness than I could get out of the SP8602! That means the black level difference had better be at least 50% improvement to make up for the difference, and I'll have to take other people's word here that it does.

Hi,

Based on the portion of my posting that you quoted, I believe you may be comparing the 83 with brightest gamma setting on high lamp power to the 8602 in the best and brightness gamma settings in low lamp power mode.

If we compare the best gammas settings in low lamp power mode the results are about the same, 870 to 900 lumens for the 83 and 8602 respectively without Brilliant Color. When Brilliant Color is turned on it should be about 920 lumens for the 83 to 1215 lumens for the 8602 for the best gamma setting on low lamp power mode.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #381 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 07:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
avmjt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I must be confused. How about both on high lamp mode with Brilliant Color on?
avmjt is offline  
post #382 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 07:44 PM
Member
 
thenorthlander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Milton, Wisconsin
Posts: 128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by avmjt View Post

I must be confused. How about both on high lamp mode with Brilliant Color on?

Hi
i beleave for the 8602 it would be plus 35% for best 1059 = 1429 and for brighest 1110 = 1498
Thanks Ken
thenorthlander is offline  
post #383 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 08:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
avmjt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by thenorthlander View Post

Hi
i beleave for the 8602 it would be plus 35% for best 1059 = 1429 and for brighest 1110 = 1498
Thanks Ken

After reading the review again, that's what I'm gathering as well. That's very good indeed. The IN83 is then only 28% brighter. I'm sure the improvement in black levels more than makes up for the brightness difference, well at least when assisted with the auto iris. ANSI contrast is a whole nother question.

I know the Darkchip4 of the IN83 gave a marginal improvement in ANSI contrast over the Darkchip3 of the SP8602, but I wonder if there are any tricks up the sleeve of the SP8602 that would at least make ANSI contrast the same. I'm just trying to get a feel for the difference in "pop and wow" as affected by ANSI contrast, so the auto iris doesn't apply.
avmjt is offline  
post #384 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 10:06 PM
Member
 
thenorthlander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Milton, Wisconsin
Posts: 128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I asked Art if his readings taken in best mode 1059 and brightest mode 1110 were done with brilliant color off, we'll see what he says. Also i found something odd when viewing some of the screenshots in his review I checked the properties of the files, (photography being another hobby of mine), the file names indicated they weren't actually of the sp8602. I asked him to please look into this and replace them with the correct pics if this is the case. All in all i thought it was a very detailed review. Looks like the 8602 matches but falls short sometimes in black levels compared to the epson 8500. good sharpness with great shadow detail, plenty of PoP and very good color handling which is everything i had hoped it would be. So i ordered mine tonight should be a worthy upgarde from my 7210. I've been lurking around these forums for a few years and finally decided to get my feet wet. I just wanted to thank everyone for all thier input in these forums it has helped me great deal.
Ken
thenorthlander is offline  
post #385 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 10:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
avmjt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You don't need to look at the EXIF properties to see that some of the images are incorrect. Many of them simply have filenames of other projectors and you can see that just by looking at the links. I noticed that it's fairly common among the reviews there, so you just have to watch the image links to make sure that what you are looking at is what you are expecting to be looking at.

EDIT: Thanks for asking Art for clarification about the brightness with Brilliant Color on Normal Mode vs Bright Mode. Although logically we may be correctly deducing from what he wrote, I tend to think that is not what he meant. Please let us know what he says.
avmjt is offline  
post #386 of 1994 Old 03-29-2010, 11:40 PM
Senior Member
 
tibia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 292
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 18
I have been reading this thread with interest. Not because I am in the market for a new projector but rather because I was Product Engineer for the SP8602 until I left InFocus last October after 13 years working there. Now with Art Feierman's review just published I would like to share with you how some things got the way they are. I've got to hand it to Art. Some of his comments are spot on. Like he knew what we were thinking. I've never met Art but did have some correspondence with him after he received an early pre-production unit for his initial evaluation.

SP8602 was intended to be every bit as bright as IN83 but with SP8602's smaller 0.65 inch DMD compared to the 0.95 inch device in IN83 we knew that goal was probably not going to be achieved. Furthermore IN83 allowed a little more yellow to sneak into its Rec. 709 green in its quest for maximum lumens which was noted by some reviewers.

As a young school boy I developed an interest in motion picture projection and, for a time as a young adult, operated two movie theaters and designed the projection booth in one of them. Long before the term home theater was coined I was working with CRT projectors fitted with 3 tubes, barely able to make 100 lumens on a good day, in my home and disco night club starting around 1977. Movies and the projection of them have always been of great interest to me since I saw my first projection booth in 1947. To be able to faithfully reproduce the vivid colors of three -strip Technicolor movies is the cat's meow I thought.

I took a stubborn, single minded approach to SP8602 in that at all costs it must deliver the best possible color fidelity and image quality from a bluray 1080p24 film based HDMI source when installed in a well designed, light controlled environment. Video based material and sporting events had to also look good, but for me it was always about movies. I love movies.

With this background I jumped when given the chance to have an influence on the design of SP8602. My goal was first and foremost to get the color right. The eye is far more sensitive to color variation than lumens variation. Even at the cost of losing lumens color had to be right. Furthermore it had to be right across the entire dynamic range to the full extent afforded by DLP technology. I drove the SP8602 designers in Taiwan and China to the point of being a royal p.i.t.a. in an effort to get the sequence code right followed by lamp pulse to get the good dynamic gray scale tracking and lifelike color Art liked.

There are two critical design parameters in DLP projectors that aren't often mentioned or even well understood by most people outside of projector design and manufacturing. They are sequence, or sequence code, and lamp pulsing. This is the root code that determines how DMD mirrors will flip their on/off states based on color wheel segment size in conjunction with lamp spectral power distribution referenced to a certain RGB bit level.

Art mentioned some SP8602 gammas seemed a little unusual. Maybe it is because we placed so much emphasis on getting the sequence code right and let gamma fall where it may.

In its original design SP8602 would have been a little brighter when the lamp was in high power mode compared to the default low power mode. It seems the lamp's manufacturer was having some life and thermal problems when running the lamp at its specified full 280W power. In order to avoid another huge production delay waiting for a new lamp design we agreed to slightly reduce the lamp's power to 260W when in the high power mode. This is why there is not a great lumens difference between default normal 230W power and high power lamp modes.

Yes, SP8602's case is rather large and boxy. Part of this is a result of InFocus's new design language but does allow for better air circulation using a larger size lamp cooling fan but spinning at slower speeds. Another factor is that we said there could be no light leakage or venting from the projector's front surface. Everything is vented out the side and rear with extra baffles to prevent any direct light escapement.

SP8602 was supposed to have been released last summer. Its electrical, mechanical and optical designs were complete by that time but its firmware has been huge undertaking because InFocus' manufacturing partner for this product didn't have much experience in going beyond standard Texas Instruments reference designs. Such are the perils when dealing with the Chinese. SP8602 makes extensive use of Pixelworks devices for front end processing as well as image enhancement and motion smoothing, frame interpolation.

Although I am no longer with the company I still maintain close ties, do occasional contract work and have been kept current with firmware. The unit I have is pre-production and has the 68th version of firmware which is two weeks old. I suspect there are even newer versions now. So you see this has been a long struggle and, at times, frustrating for everyone.

InFocus has tried very hard to fully test SP8602 firmware to confirm it meets all design goals and features offered before releasing it to full manufacturing status. There are many more features than Art mentioned in his review. So many times it was one step forward and two backwards. This is why it has taken so long to bring this product to market but the delays have surely resulted in a better product.

As I read Art Feierman's review I picked up on his not too favorable impression of SP8602's dynamic aperture. There are two ways to activate a dynamic aperture, stepper motor or voice coil. Each method has their pros and cons. SP8602 uses a stepper motor. Perhaps more and smaller steps could be incorporated at the low end of the aperture's range.

Another thing is the color temperatures Art measured. Every SP8602 is supposed to be individually color calibrated to D65 in Video mode with a Minolta CL-200 chroma meter but Art's out-of-the-box measurements were slightly higher. The algorithm that does this is normally quite accurate so I am a bit puzzled. Knowing InFocus as I do I am sure there will be much discussion about this.

I wrote this post in an effort to give SP8602 owners and potential owners some idea of how much effort and thought has gone into this product. I am not a spokesman for InFocus so what I've written are my own recollections of events. I don't think it appropriate for me to say anything more but I'm sure SP8605's project manager, Ben Joy, who just joined AVS Forum as InFocus-Ben will keep you all informed.

Dennis
tibia is offline  
post #387 of 1994 Old 03-30-2010, 05:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
f300v10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 969
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Dennis,

Thank you for posting, very informative. I was most disappointed to read Art's comments about the iris action on the SP8602. I currently own a Benq W5000, and it has the same issues with the 'intimate conversation' type scenes as Art noted with the 8602. On quick cuts back and forth between two frames with different overall brightness, the iris is slow to close down when going from the brighter frame to the darker frame. It is very noticeable as the iris stops down and the contrast improves. I was hoping the SP8602 would have an iris similar to the Planar 8150/30. Based on your description I am guessing the Planar uses a voice coil implementation vs. the stepper motor on the 8602 and my W5000. I also own a Toshiba rear projection DLP that uses Dynamic Black/dynamic iris. In the 3 years I have owned it, I have never noticed the iris working and am pretty sure it uses a voice coil as well. It appears to me the voice coil must allow for faster response times than the stepper motor, and can therefore be more transparent in its function. Can you give more info on the pros and cons of the stepper vs. voice coil designs? I'm trying to figure out why most designs seem to use the stepper motor approach.
f300v10 is offline  
post #388 of 1994 Old 03-30-2010, 06:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by tibia View Post

I have been reading this thread with interest. Not because I am in the market for a new projector but rather because I was Product Engineer for the SP8602 until I left InFocus last October after 13 years working there. Now with Art Feierman's review just published I would like to share with you how some things got the way they are. I've got to hand it to Art. Some of his comments are spot on. Like he knew what we were thinking. I've never met Art but did have some correspondence with him after he received an early pre-production unit for his initial evaluation.

SP8602 was intended to be every bit as bright as IN83 but with SP8602's smaller 0.65 inch DMD compared to the 0.95 inch device in IN83 we knew that goal was probably not going to be achieved. Furthermore IN83 allowed a little more yellow to sneak into its Rec. 709 green in its quest for maximum lumens which was noted by some reviewers.

As a young school boy I developed an interest in motion picture projection and, for a time as a young adult, operated two movie theaters and designed the projection booth in one of them. Long before the term home theater was coined I was working with CRT projectors fitted with 3 tubes, barely able to make 100 lumens on a good day, in my home and disco night club starting around 1977. Movies and the projection of them have always been of great interest to me since I saw my first projection booth in 1947. To be able to faithfully reproduce the vivid colors of three -strip Technicolor movies is the cat's meow I thought.

I took a stubborn, single minded approach to SP8602 in that at all costs it must deliver the best possible color fidelity and image quality from a bluray 1080p24 film based HDMI source when installed in a well designed, light controlled environment. Video based material and sporting events had to also look good, but for me it was always about movies. I love movies.

With this background I jumped when given the chance to have an influence on the design of SP8602. My goal was first and foremost to get the color right. The eye is far more sensitive to color variation than lumens variation. Even at the cost of losing lumens color had to be right. Furthermore it had to be right across the entire dynamic range to the full extent afforded by DLP technology. I drove the SP8602 designers in Taiwan and China to the point of being a royal p.i.t.a. in an effort to get the sequence code right followed by lamp pulse to get the good dynamic gray scale tracking and lifelike color Art liked.

There are two critical design parameters in DLP projectors that aren't often mentioned or even well understood by most people outside of projector design and manufacturing. They are sequence, or sequence code, and lamp pulsing. This is the root code that determines how DMD mirrors will flip their on/off states based on color wheel segment size in conjunction with lamp spectral power distribution referenced to a certain RGB bit level.

Art mentioned some SP8602 gammas seemed a little unusual. Maybe it is because we placed so much emphasis on getting the sequence code right and let gamma fall where it may.

In its original design SP8602 would have been a little brighter when the lamp was in high power mode compared to the default low power mode. It seems the lamp's manufacturer was having some life and thermal problems when running the lamp at its specified full 280W power. In order to avoid another huge production delay waiting for a new lamp design we agreed to slightly reduce the lamp's power to 260W when in the high power mode. This is why there is not a great lumens difference between default normal 230W power and high power lamp modes.

Yes, SP8602's case is rather large and boxy. Part of this is a result of InFocus's new design language but does allow for better air circulation using a larger size lamp cooling fan but spinning at slower speeds. Another factor is that we said there could be no light leakage or venting from the projector's front surface. Everything is vented out the side and rear with extra baffles to prevent any direct light escapement.

SP8602 was supposed to have been released last summer. Its electrical, mechanical and optical designs were complete by that time but its firmware has been huge undertaking because InFocus' manufacturing partner for this product didn't have much experience in going beyond standard Texas Instruments reference designs. Such are the perils when dealing with the Chinese. SP8602 makes extensive use of Pixelworks devices for front end processing as well as image enhancement and motion smoothing, frame interpolation.

Although I am no longer with the company I still maintain close ties, do occasional contract work and have been kept current with firmware. The unit I have is pre-production and has the 68th version of firmware which is two weeks old. I suspect there are even newer versions now. So you see this has been a long struggle and, at times, frustrating for everyone.

InFocus has tried very hard to fully test SP8602 firmware to confirm it meets all design goals and features offered before releasing it to full manufacturing status. There are many more features than Art mentioned in his review. So many times it was one step forward and two backwards. This is why it has taken so long to bring this product to market but the delays have surely resulted in a better product.

As I read Art Feierman's review I picked up on his not too favorable impression of SP8602's dynamic aperture. There are two ways to activate a dynamic aperture, stepper motor or voice coil. Each method has their pros and cons. SP8602 uses a stepper motor. Perhaps more and smaller steps could be incorporated at the low end of the aperture's range.

Another thing is the color temperatures Art measured. Every SP8602 is supposed to be individually color calibrated to D65 in Video mode with a Minolta CL-200 chroma meter but Art's out-of-the-box measurements were slightly higher. The algorithm that does this is normally quite accurate so I am a bit puzzled. Knowing InFocus as I do I am sure there will be much discussion about this.

I wrote this post in an effort to give SP8602 owners and potential owners some idea of how much effort and thought has gone into this product. I am not a spokesman for InFocus so what I've written are my own recollections of events. I don't think it appropriate for me to say anything more but I'm sure SP8605's project manager, Ben Joy, who just joined AVS Forum as InFocus-Ben will keep you all informed.

Hi Dennis,

Thanks for your insights.

I was wondering if you and Ben might discuss the rather significant relationship between lumen output and vertical offset?

Thanks.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #389 of 1994 Old 03-30-2010, 06:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Liked: 312
Dennis. I assume you referring to Ben Joy as the SP8605 projector manager was a typo and that you really meant to type SP8602?

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #390 of 1994 Old 03-30-2010, 06:56 AM
Senior Member
 
tibia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 292
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Mark, you are correct. I actually made two typos. Ben is not Project Manager for SP8602 which I errored by writing SP8605. Ben is a top marketing guy.

Dennis
tibia is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Infocus , In Focus

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