AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

JVC 2011 models & MSRP: RS40 50 60 & HD250.

724K views 9K replies 362 participants last post by  AVS Forum Notice 
#1 ·
#1,128 ·
I am giving 3 to 1 odds to anyone betting that the 40 will have a CMS.



Rogo. Why don`t they just MSRP the 60 for say $5500 and not even bother with the other two models. How can the be so stupid. How Its business. And people here are so frugal or limited in what they can spend the 40 will sell like hotcakes even with its omissions. Smart boys will add a CMS that corrects the fleshtones to for a fraction of the cost difference between the 40 and the 50. Many will spend the difference between the 40and the 50, wanting the extra on off and the omitted features. Sounds like a great plan to me. The only thing they will have to do is lower the MSRP on the 60 to justify the street difference. Yep. JVC is as dumb as a fox.


As to stupidity, that is something I am an unchallenged expert on from many many years pf personal experience.
 
#1,129 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich /forum/post/19278293


Geof. I was talking about contrast and not sharpness. Mark Peterson made some findings in his blog VideoVantage re sharpness and iris use on the Samsung SP-A900B and JVC RS35. I think its is fair to say that iris use changes the focus and requires the lens to be refocused for maximum sharpness. I believe maximum sharpness would be with the iris fully open given that iris are exactly round and don`t have aerospace precision edges. On the JVC he found that when the iris was changed the lens could be refocused to gain the sharpness back. On the Samsung it couldn`t be done. We are talking MTF here and relatively small gains but noticeable. On my Samsung being a sharpness freak I run the iris wide open.


Now I think closing down an iris would improve the depth of field. Obviously, in photography increasing the F stop which of course is decreasing the size of the iris opening increases the depth of field and I suspect the same is the case with a lens emitting light rather than collecting it. Your thoughts?

If the Iris has sharp edges and is properly blackened and the lens baffling system has been properly designed and the lens is not diffraction limited, which all projector lenses are not, then stopping down the Iris will improve both the contrast and the sharpness. The lens will have to be re focused to get the best focus at the particular stop position. Remember the aberrations of a lens go as the 3rd ,5th and 7th power of the stop in a low fnumber system. The projectors are f2.5 on the object side and f150 or higher on the image side
 
#1,130 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich /forum/post/19278954


I am giving 3 to 1 odds to anyone betting that the 40 will have a CMS.



Rogo. Why don`t they just MSRP the 60 for say $5500 and not even bother with the other two models. How can the be so stupid. How Its business. And people here are so frugal or limited in what they can spend the 40 will sell like hotcakes even with its omissions. Smart boys will add a CMS that corrects the fleshtones to for a fraction of the cost difference between the 40 and the 50. Many will spend the difference between the 40and the 50, wanting the extra on off and the omitted features. Sounds like a great plan to me. The only thing they will have to do is lower the MSRP on the 60 to justify the street difference. Yep. JVC is as dumb as a fox.


As to stupidity, that is something I am an unchallenged expert on from many many years pf personal experience.

So, Mark, you believe that the RS40 plus the EE color box, say, would be as good CMS-wise as the RS50?
 
#1,131 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich /forum/post/19275972


William. At the show, the image appeared to have more ANSI CR than previous models but without measurement we don`t know. Other things not ANSI CR could be causing the mid APL improvement we thought we saw.


All in all what causes improvement is really not that important. All that counts is PQ improvement. Not necessarily some invented thing to measure such as ANSI CR. Their is much more to contrast than just on off and ANSI, is there not.

True but the major weakness in the JVC projectors comes form the high scatter at the high to mid APl scenes and the improvement in that region would be reflected in the ANSI contrast. Form you observations, It looks promising.


In my opinion, doubling the ANSI contrast from 300 to 600 would do more to improve that projectors performance than all the other improvements combine and certainly more than going form a 50,000 to one to 100,000 to 1 contrast ratio


Has JVC addressed the out gassing problem which caused a premature drop in the lamps output?
 
#1,132 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mlang46 /forum/post/19278969


If the Iris has sharp edges and is properly blackened and the lens baffling system has been properly designed and the lens is not diffraction limited, which all projector lenses are not, then stopping down the Iris will improve both the contrast and the sharpness. The lens will have to be re focused to get the best focus at the particular stop position. Remember the aberrations of a lens go as the 3rd ,5th and 7th power of the stop in a low fnumber system. The projectors are f2.5 on the object side and f150 or higher on the image side

I wasn't aware projection lenses are not diffraction limited. Thanks.
 
#1,133 ·
Thanks for being here Mlang46. Mark and I learned about the need to refocus when changing iris settings. But I believe Mark`s data didn`t show any improvement in MTF when decreasing the iris`s opening and refocusing and at least in the case of the Samsung, if I remember correctly, the MTF decreased when decreasing the iris opening and it couldn`t be reinstated by refocusing.


In your scenario there are a lot of ifs and I suspect but don`t know that in many cases not all the ifs will be properly fulfilled especially at lower price points. Only so much money can be thrown at the lens and improving the lens does not lead to bigger on off numbers etc in the war of specs.
 
#1,134 ·
William. A CMS is a proper CMS if it allows the xyY of the primaries to be adjusted to their correct locations and if the correct formulas are used to derive the secondaries. A CMS that allows the secondaries to be adjusted is not needed for the most accurate calibration IF the correct formulas as used. This is text book and the eecolor box uses the correct formulas. The JVC CMS allows the primaries and secondaries to be adjusted. I have no idea if the right secondary formulas are used but it doesn`t matter if the CMS allows the secondaries to be adjusted. Adding yellow correction by the new CMS is another thing. Probably needed for the 3D goosed up color temperature and the eecolor box CMS can`t do that. But the correct LUT should be made available and once downloaded the yellow and bluish areas could be corrected according the the expertise in generating a corrective LUT.
 
#1,135 ·
Geof. I have no clue about why the fabric compensation presets are there. Maybe without a CMS they can`t work. Or maybe its just a marketing difference, more is better. Obviously if one is not going to do a calibration have more screen material color corrections would be a good thing. But unless I am wrong, I would think a calibration of the screen using the CMS would correct for the same things. I could be wrong. That`s the beauty here. People more knowledgeable jump in and all benefit.
 
#1,136 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich /forum/post/19279252


Obviously if one is not going to do a calibration have more screen material color corrections would be a good thing. But unless I am wrong, I would thing a calibration of the screen using the CMS would correct for the same things.

Well that's my thinking as well. It would seem that fabric compensation presets would be more beneficial in a machine lacking CMS than one that has it. Perhaps the compensation presets work best in conjunction with a proper cal tho. And, just about everyone here is smarter than me when it comes to the JVCs......
 
#1,137 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pologuy /forum/post/19276655


But there are still some questions as to the specs of these and whether the 50 is "better" than the 990/RS35, correct?

I'm pretty sure it's better, considering it seems sharper, and is 40% brighter. Especially when you consider the new 7 color CMS, and the 3D, and the FI supposedly fixed.


If I can just get some confirmation on the FI, that 50 is as good as SOLD!
 
#1,138 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geof /forum/post/19279286


Well that's my thinking as well. It would seem that fabric compensation presets would be more beneficial in a machine lacking CMS than one that has it. Perhaps the compensation presets work best in conjunction with a proper cal tho. And, just about everyone here is smarter than me when it comes to the JVCs......

Would be great of they had presets for the BD II 1.4
 
#1,139 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam /forum/post/19279349


I'm pretty sure it's better, considering it seems sharper, and is 40% brighter. Especially when you consider the new 7 color CMS, and the 3D, and the FI supposedly fixed.


If I can just get some confirmation on the FI, that 50 is as good as SOLD!

Yes, I too am VERY interested in the 50...
 
#1,141 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich /forum/post/19278954


I am giving 3 to 1 odds to anyone betting that the 40 will have a CMS.



Rogo. Why don`t they just MSRP the 60 for say $5500 and not even bother with the other two models. How can the be so stupid. How Its business. And people here are so frugal or limited in what they can spend the 40 will sell like hotcakes even with its omissions. Smart boys will add a CMS that corrects the fleshtones to for a fraction of the cost difference between the 40 and the 50. Many will spend the difference between the 40and the 50, wanting the extra on off and the omitted features. Sounds like a great plan to me. The only thing they will have to do is lower the MSRP on the 60 to justify the street difference. Yep. JVC is as dumb as a fox.


As to stupidity, that is something I am an unchallenged expert on from many many years pf personal experience.

Mark H., I just don't get how a $4000 projection can lack controls to be calibrated is what I'm setting.


You want to put better controls in the more expensive one? Fine, do that.


But I think given that ridiculously inexpensive displays have been able to calibrated for years, it's arguably a feature that is just supposed to be there.


Also, I know you are not arguing this, but let's just agree that JVC and consumer-products marketing is not demonstrably good at what they do. They've disappeared from nearly every category and have a brand awareness lower than Vizio by quite a bit.


So perhaps they should've just built one model at $5K and one model at $10k that is the "hand picked" one and sells to the AVS types. But this three models where one is a flat out bargain (yet missing an arguably essential feature to many) and the other two are just flat out much more expensive is weird anyway.


We should not pretend that somehow they picked the sweet spots of price and performance -- they didn't. What they did was deny a lot of potential business to ISF types and a lot of opportunity for the frugal tweaker. I just don't see what they did selling more RS50s for twice the price. Do you?
 
#1,144 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark /forum/post/19278412


The reason I'm most interested in the RS-40 is that I want 3D on as large a screen as possible, but any 120hz projector is going to introduce 3:2 pulldown judder - making any of the JVCs compromises for 3D viewing (just like all the current flat panel displays).

Actually, 120hz is a multiple of 24p, so there fore you will see no frame rate conversion judder, like you would at 60p. 3:2 refers to the conversion of 24p to 60p, which introduces stop-start conoversion judder.


On 96hz or 120hz displays, the worst case is that they simply double/quadruple-flash the 24p frames multiple times, so you might notice regular 24p judder (because 24p is so damned old and slow).


But most modern projectors now do frame rate interpolation and create in-between frames so that the move,ment is much smoother.


In the case of JVC, they create one new interpolated frame between each 24p original frame, for a 48p output, which is then flashed twice at 96 hz. At least LAST year's model handled it this way - we are waiting for confirmation on this year's lineup...
 
#1,145 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by toe /forum/post/19278764


i say leave the cms off on the entry level hd250 (if they feel the need to leave it off on the low end model) and give the whole rs line a cms with the 50/60 getting the upgraded version

+1
 
#1,146 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam /forum/post/19279393


Actually, 120hz is a multiple of 24p, so there fore you will see no frame rate conversion judder, like you would at 60p. 3:2 refers to the conversion of 24p to 60p, which introduces stop-start conoversion judder.


On 96hz or 120hz displays, the worst case is that they simply double/quadruple-flash the 24p frames multiple times, so you might notice regular 24p judder (because 24p is so damned old and slow).


But most modern projectors now do frame rate interpolation and create in-between frames so that the move,ment is much smoother.


In the case of JVC, they create one new interpolated frame between each 24p original frame, for a 48p output, which is then flashed twice at 96 hz. At least LAST year's model handled it this way - we are waiting for confirmation on this year's lineup...

So if this is true it would seem 240 would be better. no?
 
#1,148 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam /forum/post/19279393


Actually, 120hz is a multiple of 24p, so there fore you will see no frame rate conversion judder, like you would at 60p. 3:2 refers to the conversion of 24p to 60p, which introduces stop-start conoversion judder.

Yes but what you don't realize is that 120Hz has to be split in two, alternating 60Hz for each eye. 60 is not a multiple of 24. This is why JVC does 48Hz per eye, and is also why Sony does 240Hz (120Hz per eye). I really wish JVC would have increase the panel rate to 144Hz, allowing a triple flash of 72Hz per eye. That is probably the best compromize between light output and flicker. They couldn't squeeze out another 24Hz???
 
#1,150 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogone /forum/post/19279391


Well, it's taken a while to get here, but it looks like we're down to the RS-50 or the Sony VPL-VW90ES for 3D this year...At least for under 10K ...
At least this is my opinion...

For 3d purposes, you can throw the 40 in that list as well since there will be very little real world differences between it and the 50 as far as 3d goes.......in fact, one could argue that the 40 is the best bet if you want a entry level ticket for 3d since it will be relatively cheap, and you can take the extra cash you save (significantly more considering the Sony $$$!
) and put it toward a 2nd, 3rd or 4th gen 3d machine which will no doubt be significantly better than any of these 1st gen models.
 
#1,151 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 /forum/post/19279461


Yes but what you don't realize is that 120Hz has to be split in two, alternating 60Hz for each eye. 60 is not a multiple of 24. This is why JVC does 48Hz per eye, and is also why Sony does 240Hz (120Hz per eye). I really wish JVC would have increase the panel rate to 144Hz, allowing a triple flash of 72Hz per eye. That is probably the best compromize between light output and flicker. They couldn't squeeze out another 24Hz???

JVC does 48hz/eye in 3D? That could easily be a deal killer for me. I tried Panasonic's 96hz mode on their 3D plasmas and the flicker made it unwatchable.


LCOS is capable of much faster switching. HDI is doing 1080 frames/sec in their LCOS-based 3D rear projection system. That's 360 frames each for red, green and blue (ala DLP). Of course, 360 is equally divisible by 24 and 30/60, so no need for 3:2 pulldown. I'm fuzzy on exactly how they're implementing it in their design, but the point is that LCOS can switch extremely fast. 144hz shouldn't be that much of a stretch for a D-ILA machine. At 72 fps per eye, I don't see any flicker. That's why the extra money for an RS-50 or 60 isn't worth it to me at this point in 3D projection. I'll definitely need confirmation that 3D on the JVC can operate without flicker, or my interest is dead.
 
#1,152 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 /forum/post/19279468


The RS40 does have an "ANSI" increase. ANSI Lumens. if there is an ANSI contrast increase, it is probably because of the new "pure wire grid", which the RS40 does not have unfortunately.

Oops, I should have stated Contrast. I'll go fix that. But, you cleared it up for me now. Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top