OWNERS Thread for the Panasonic PT-AE7000U 3D Projector - Page 37 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1081 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 11:48 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
mrlittlejeans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joesyah View Post

Not sure of that ..possibly..going by the owners that have had several Infocus models, the SP8602 isn't any less sharp than the others, with a cleaner and more dynamic image to boot. The SP8602 is sharper than any LCOS or LCD I've seen..so it is sharp enough. Making sharpness a non issue when looking for a weakness.

Here's a pic of a single alternating one pixel pattern with a cheapo camera. It is more defined in person.

It looks more like this in person. This is planar pic.

Try that on most LCD or LCOS projectors.

There's no question that a single chip DLP, be it the .65" DMD or the .95" DMD, will be sharper than LCD or LCOS projectors. However, all things equal, the .95" DMD's will be sharper than the .65" DMD's. Check out Mark Peterson's blog for a comparison of the two. Basically, for a .65" DMD to approach the MTF and sharpness levels of a .95" DMD, you'll need a much better lens than you would for a .95" DMD. The Planar uses the .95" DMD. Mark's blog has some good comparisons of sharpness between the two chips.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

mrlittlejeans is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1082 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 04:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joesyah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: GA
Posts: 2,174
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans View Post

There's no question that a single chip DLP, be it the .65" DMD or the .95" DMD, will be sharper than LCD or LCOS projectors. However, all things equal, the .95" DMD's will be sharper than the .65" DMD's. Check out Mark Peterson's blog for a comparison of the two. Basically, for a .65" DMD to approach the MTF and sharpness levels of a .95" DMD, you'll need a much better lens than you would for a .95" DMD. The Planar uses the .95" DMD. Mark's blog has some good comparisons of sharpness between the two chips.

I've looked over the MTF study. I remember reading some of what you state in the study. It is very interesting stuff! My point is, once you get the a certain sharpness, it isn't enough difference for most to even care.

Comparing LCOS or LCD to DLP makes more sense than comparing a decent DLP to another. Basically it would be tough to look at any modern DLP and think.."Man that picture looks soft!"
There's a point when other factors such as contrast and image noise become more important.
Joesyah is offline  
post #1083 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 05:48 PM
Member
 
emilysona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Need some help.. I have my PT-AE7000 hooked up to a Oppo-93 and my 3D image is not as good as everyone says.. 80% of my 3D view results in ghosting. Can it be the 3D glasses? I am still wating for my Panasonic Generation 3 3D glasses, in the mean while I am using X-Pand universal 3D glasses..

Also, if both the Oppo and the projector have a setting in the 3D menu for screen size, Should I put 100" on both the Oppo and Projector 3D menu, or just the projector?

What should I do when I use the lens memory and fill in my 130" 2.35:1 screen. Do I have to change the screen size to about 200"??

I am sorry if these issues were already discussed, but I searched the thread and could not find anything..

Thanks
emilysona is offline  
post #1084 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 06:15 PM
Member
 
scoochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: California
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Just a general suggestion to those viewing 3D. Make sure you don't have detail clarity in the advanced menu set too high. It can make the 3D images look ghosted and pretty much terrible. The default "2" or "3" in normal mode is what looks best with 3D. For 2D viewing though I use Cinema1 and set my detail clarity to "4". Also for 3D make sure the noise filters are also both set to "0".

this is what has worked best for me and the 3D is stunning! No perceivable ghosting or flickering at all.
scoochie is offline  
post #1085 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 06:20 PM
Senior Member
 
inefekt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 234
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilysona View Post

Need some help.. I have my PT-AE7000 hooked up to a Oppo-93 and my 3D image is not as good as everyone says.. 80% of my 3D view results in ghosting. Can it be the 3D glasses? I am still wating for my Panasonic Generation 3 3D glasses, in the mean while I am using X-Pand universal 3D glasses..

Also, if both the Oppo and the projector have a setting in the 3D menu for screen size, Should I put 100" on both the Oppo and Projector 3D menu, or just the projector?

What should I do when I use the lens memory and fill in my 130" 2.35:1 screen. Do I have to change the screen size to about 200"??

I am sorry if these issues were already discussed, but I searched the thread and could not find anything..

Thanks

xpand's do not work, or at least are very problematic, with this projector...it's been discussed quite widely in this thread
inefekt is offline  
post #1086 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 06:30 PM
Member
 
emilysona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by inefekt View Post

xpand's do not work, or at least are very problematic, with this projector...it's been discussed quite widely in this thread

Thanks Scoochie & Iinefekt for the quick response, now I am happy to know that my Panasonic is fine and that the problem is the Xpand glasses. I should be getting my Gen 3 glasses on Tuesday.

What about screen size, will that affect the image if both the Oppo and the projector are adjusting for size? What would be your recommendation on this issue.

Thanks
emilysona is offline  
post #1087 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 06:47 PM
Senior Member
 
widerscreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hollywood fla
Posts: 279
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The images and 3-d images are purrrrrfect!

curtis smith


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

widerscreen is offline  
post #1088 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 07:55 PM
Senior Member
 
440forpower's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
More pics or videos? Please !!! Also any gamers using the 7000? How is the lag in or out of game mode? Thanks
440forpower is offline  
post #1089 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 08:19 PM
Senior Member
 
Elkhunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
plasmaowner:

Thanks for your review of the Panny with a 159" HP screen. I also have a 159" 2.8 HP in a true batcave - currently paired with an Epson 8500UB.

After reading your review, I've decided that the Panny isn't for me. I was hoping that the Mits HC7800 would have lens shift for my HP. Sadly, thats not the case. Note that my first projector was a Panny PT-700.

It looks like the BenQ W7000 would be the best bet for me - for a super sharp, bright (lens shift for the HP), no ghosting 3D projector.

OT:

As a 'plasmaowner' with a 159" HP, and having seen the Panny, the Acer, and the X10 DLP in 3D on this screen, I'd like your opinion on the following:

Two weeks ago, I purchased a Panny TC-P42ST30 3D plasma for my granddaughter's birthday. Before giving it to her, I set it up to check-out the set's IQ. This was my first up close look at a plasma.

The IQ stunned me. I'm thinking about purchasing a Panny TC-P65VT30 instead of a 3D projector. For I can't afford a $30+K 3D DLP projector. My cash toy limit is $7K. Sadly, I'm a 99%er.

In your opinion, how would the 65"VT30 with a 6'-9' view, compare to a $3K-$7K DLP 3D projector with a 159" HP at 11' 4" for 3D???

While I love the huge image of my 159" HP, I'm thinking that I'd love the IQ of a 65" 3D plasma (at 6'-9') even more.

TIA
Elkhunter is offline  
post #1090 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 08:42 PM
Member
 
NetViper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. Augustine, FL
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post

I've been playing a lot of online NHL 12 on my 360 with the 7000. Man o Man, it's so much smoother than the 4000 and the 40 was, just fantastic! I still haven't had a chance to try out the 3D in my own home, as I'm still waiting for my panny 3'rd gen glasses to arrive and am getting a bit impatient lol.

Gaming though in general, has been a real treat! Forza 4 with my full fantec wheel setup, looks amazing to say the least! there really is a BIG jump in PQ vs the 4000.

Lets see some pix of forza 4 on the ae7000. That is what I want to do.
NetViper is offline  
post #1091 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 09:31 PM
Member
 
KallanOz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 73
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesN View Post

Panasonic PT-AE7000U

I'm using the same Chief RPA mount and interface bracket from from my 4000. I added Chief's Lateral Shift Bracket, which allows me to center the offset lens without having to change the mount location.

The device with the reddish eye sitting to the left of the lens in the IndustroLogic IR232 IR-to-RS232 converter. AS you can see it has a very small footprint.

Planet Earth

How The West Was Won

Blade Runner

All screencaps were taken in Cinema1 Picture Mode, Eco Lamp. Screen is 1.4 gain Carada 125" 2.35:1. Throw is approximately 13.5 ft.

Looks fantastic,very bright. Are you using min throw to gets such a strong picture?
KallanOz is offline  
post #1092 of 4449 Old 10-23-2011, 09:34 PM
Member
 
KallanOz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 73
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilysona View Post

Need some help.. I have my PT-AE7000 hooked up to a Oppo-93 and my 3D image is not as good as everyone says.. 80% of my 3D view results in ghosting. Can it be the 3D glasses? I am still wating for my Panasonic Generation 3 3D glasses, in the mean while I am using X-Pand universal 3D glasses..

Also, if both the Oppo and the projector have a setting in the 3D menu for screen size, Should I put 100" on both the Oppo and Projector 3D menu, or just the projector?

What should I do when I use the lens memory and fill in my 130" 2.35:1 screen. Do I have to change the screen size to about 200"??

I am sorry if these issues were already discussed, but I searched the thread and could not find anything..

Thanks

May need more info eg throw distance, mode?
KallanOz is offline  
post #1093 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 01:44 AM
Member
 
johnddx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by xamphear View Post

I took these measurements over HDMI while bypassing my receiver, so this lag is the just the lag inside the AE7000. 2D, Cinema 1, Frame Creation OFF.

Frame Response set to Normal: 91ms
Frame Response set to Fast: 81ms

This is actually a fair bit laggier than my AE4000, but still acceptable. Also, the difference between Normal and Fast is pretty pointless. 10ms? That's well below the threshold of what a human can notice. Maybe there's some advanced setting that really turns up the lag and setting it to Fast counters it, but for now it's a mystery why they bother adding in an option with an unnoticeable effect.

For giggles, I turned 2D->3D conversion on and measured the video lag. I was expecting seriously bad results, but here's what I got:

Frame Response set to Normal: 120ms
Frame Response set to Fast: 113ms

Same ~10ms difference between Fast and Normal. Again, rather pointless. Either way, 2D-3D conversion doesn't add as much lag as I suspected it might. There also is no difference in the lag between the various modes of 3D upconversion. They all registered the same.

Now, what about frame creation?

Frame Creation Mode 1: 89ms
Frame Creation Mode 2: 89ms
Frame Creation Mode 3: 89ms

Interestingly it appears frame creation is always on, even when set to off. I don't think this was the case with the AE4000. Probably has something to do with having to run the panels at 240hz or 480hz constantly. So some level of frame creation is always there, even if it's just repeating frames as-is and not doing any sort of tweening or interpolation. The shock is that the modes don't add any lag. With the AE4000, mode 1 added about 75ms of lag and modes 2 and 3 got worse, with mode 3 adding something like 250ms of lag. Whatever image processor chip they're using in the AE7000 is orders of magnitude faster.

One thing to remember about this is that there's additional lag being added by the round-trip wireless signal to the controller that's doing the measurement. However, because that stays the same during all the tests, the numbers are a good reference against each other. The actual raw latency numbers are probably 15ms to 20ms lower than these here, though, because of this effect.

I hope these numbers will be of use to someone.

xamphear,

You're estimating 15-20ms latency added on by the measurement process, this could bring an 81ms lag down to an actual 61ms. That's the difference between 2 frames of latency and 2.6 frames. Whether discretely noticable or not in part, I have to think when you look at it in context it can have a meaningful impact. This makes me curious enough to know what the actual latency is. Can you share some details about your measurement technique? Why is wireless a factor?

In a later post you observe that Game mode reduces lag by 20ms. Does that mean that with Fast Frame mode and Frame Creation off, you would see a measurement of 61ms? Considering measurement error, that could mean actual latency is well below 2 frames.

Thanks,
John
johnddx is offline  
post #1094 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 01:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,983
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkhunter View Post

plasmaowner:

Thanks for your review of the Panny with a 159" HP screen. I also have a 159" 2.8 HP in a true batcave - currently paired with an Epson 8500UB.

Unless the Benq uses similar 3D technology (it might), the Mits is likely to be brighter in 3D.

I'm not sure what the basis is, but you do know that you lose much much fewer lumens with the Mits glasses on the Mits than you do with other projectors.

The Mits starts out even brighter than the Epson 5010 (which is a 2000 max lumen PJ at 1500 dynamic mode). So if you can even get 1.5 gain out of the HP with the Mits, you will already be brighter than every other projector there is for 3D even at center point, except for a couple of exceptions.

The Mits is 2-2.5 times brighter in 3D mode because of a different method they use in the way the glasses work, so that is much brighter than MOST other projectors tested so far. An additional 100% gain won't even make up that full difference.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

**Current Projector Calculator** --
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

coderguy is offline  
post #1095 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 05:35 AM
 
streamerlover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilysona View Post

Need some help.. I have my PT-AE7000 hooked up to a Oppo-93 and my 3D image is not as good as everyone says.. 80% of my 3D view results in ghosting. Can it be the 3D glasses? I am still wating for my Panasonic Generation 3 3D glasses, in the mean while I am using X-Pand universal 3D glasses..

Also, if both the Oppo and the projector have a setting in the 3D menu for screen size, Should I put 100" on both the Oppo and Projector 3D menu, or just the projector?

What should I do when I use the lens memory and fill in my 130" 2.35:1 screen. Do I have to change the screen size to about 200"??

I am sorry if these issues were already discussed, but I searched the thread and could not find anything..

Thanks

it's your glasses. no ifs ands or buts...
streamerlover is offline  
post #1096 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 06:12 AM
Advanced Member
 
JamesN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by KallanOz View Post

Looks fantastic,very bright. Are you using min throw to gets such a strong picture?

My throw distance is dictated by the physical constraints of my HT space (water pipes, ductwork, etc. above the drop ceiling).
JamesN is offline  
post #1097 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 07:07 AM
Senior Member
 
wgf_bean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Westport, MA, USA
Posts: 314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkhunter View Post

plasmaowner:

Thanks for your review of the Panny with a 159" HP screen. I also have a 159" 2.8 HP in a true batcave - currently paired with an Epson 8500UB.

After reading your review, I've decided that the Panny isn't for me. I was hoping that the Mits HC7800 would have lens shift for my HP. Sadly, thats not the case. Note that my first projector was a Panny PT-700.

It looks like the BenQ W7000 would be the best bet for me - for a super sharp, bright (lens shift for the HP), no ghosting 3D projector.

OT:

As a 'plasmaowner' with a 159" HP, and having seen the Panny, the Acer, and the X10 DLP in 3D on this screen, I'd like your opinion on the following:

Two weeks ago, I purchased a Panny TC-P42ST30 3D plasma for my granddaughter's birthday. Before giving it to her, I set it up to check-out the set's IQ. This was my first up close look at a plasma.

The IQ stunned me. I'm thinking about purchasing a Panny TC-P65VT30 instead of a 3D projector. For I can't afford a $30+K 3D DLP projector. My cash toy limit is $7K. Sadly, I'm a 99%er.

In your opinion, how would the 65"VT30 with a 6'-9' view, compare to a $3K-$7K DLP 3D projector with a 159" HP at 11' 4" for 3D???

While I love the huge image of my 159" HP, I'm thinking that I'd love the IQ of a 65" 3D plasma (at 6'-9') even more.

TIA

Based on my questions to plasmaowner and his answers I'm not sure he properly adjusted his projector so his picture may have suffered. I suggested he reset the menu positions all to zero and adjust optically but he never replied.

I'm not suggesting you wouldn't be more happy with a plasma, but I think forum readers are getting wrong impressions about the projector if he in fact adjusted it incorrectly.
wgf_bean is offline  
post #1098 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 07:13 AM
Senior Member
 
wgf_bean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Westport, MA, USA
Posts: 314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

The Mits is 2-2.5 times brighter in 3D mode because of a different method they use in the way the glasses work, so that is much brighter than MOST other projectors tested so far. An additional 100% gain won't even make up that full difference.

Do you have a link to a trustworthy article that explains how the Mits glasses are 2-2.5 times brighter in 3D? Perhaps something directly from Mits? I'd be most interested in reading how they work.
wgf_bean is offline  
post #1099 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 07:33 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
mrlittlejeans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 192
Here you go:

http://translate.google.com/translat...ew.htm&act=url

For 3D, the Mits looks like the projector to beat. The only negatives it has against the Panny are lens memory and placement. It should beat it on most everything else, ridiculous contrast claims aside.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

mrlittlejeans is offline  
post #1100 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 07:55 AM
Senior Member
 
Randito3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Des Allemands, La
Posts: 250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans View Post

Here you go:

http://translate.google.com/translat...ew.htm&act=url

For 3D, the Mits looks like the projector to beat. The only negatives it has against the Panny are lens memory and placement. It should beat it on most everything else, ridiculous contrast claims aside.

How about you wait until a test unit is reviewed. I dont really care about the tech babble, the final picture result is what matters to me.

Also, why are you guys posting this crap in the Panasonic AE7000 owners thread? Start a new thread and talk away.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Randito3 is offline  
post #1101 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 08:11 AM
Senior Member
 
dukedallas2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newburgh, NY
Posts: 324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randito3 View Post

How about you wait until a test unit is reviewed. I dont really care about the tech babble, the final picture result is what matters to me.

Also, why are you guys posting this crap in the Panasonic AE7000 owners thread? Start a new thread and talk away.

LOL i was thinking the same thing!
dukedallas2005 is offline  
post #1102 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 08:28 AM
Member
 
Mark Basile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Has anyone calibrated the grayscale in Cinema 2 mode yet?
Mark Basile is offline  
post #1103 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 08:42 AM
Senior Member
 
plasmaowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arlington, Texas
Posts: 339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Just wanted to update everyone. I connected the Panny back up to give it one last try. I reset everything and started from scratch. I had it set up in no time (the lens shift gave me no trouble for some reason). The ONLY mistake I made was not setting the projector up for RGB. It was set to auto and that small change made a HUGE difference in overall picture quality. In fact, that simple adjustment alone made it a MUCH closer match against my X10. Colors are deeper, richer, and have more pop. Black level, sharpness, depth, shadow detail, and overall picture detail dramatically improved. Now this is what I was expecting the first time! Checked out all the previous titles mentioned in my earlier review and man what a difference! With all things considered, I would be happy extremely happy with the Panny as an upgrade over my X10 now. Disclaimer to current DLP owners! Even with these improvements, the X10 is still MUCH sharper and has more detail and pop. Other then that, the Panny wipes the floor in every other aspect! So if you're coming from an N82, Benq 6000, Mits 4000, or SP8602, you may not see the dramatic improvements I'm seeing.

The same improvements I saw in 2D faithfully translated over to 3D. Its beautiful in 3D and just annihilates the Acer in this regard! Its just TOO dark dammit! After playing with the modes some more I actually like cinema 1 the best but again its just too dark even on my HP screen. With the Acer, I'm using the nvidia 3d glasses and its MUCH brighter then the Panny in all modes except for dynamic. Also the colors are MUCH more natural on the Acer then the Panny. Because of it being so much brighter and having much better colors I just could never be satisfied with the 3D on the Panny.

Crosstalk:
I'm now seeing crosstalk that I didn't see before. I see it in all the titles that I mentioned before, and I'm using cinama 1, light, FI set to 1, lamp on normal. Please don't flame me, I'm not sure why it wasn't there the first time but is now. It's not distracting (most of the time) but it doesn't affect the overall picture quality. I see it most in the background images when the lens is focused on something close. I'm see it on images that come out of the screen also. Its very minimal but when I do see, sorry to say, it is distracting. I connected the panny and acer back and forth to make comparisons and I can HONESTLY say that I prefer the Acer due to the fact that there is simply NO GHOSTING PERIOD and its SO MUCH BRIGHTER! Also, I forgot to mention this before but I feel a little discomfort when watching anything on the Panny that I just don't feel on the Acer. Even tho I have a 159" screen, setting the Panny to 60" feels best to my eyes. But even then there is minimum discomfort. Again I feel no discomfort with the Acer.

All said and done I'm afraid the Panny is still going back. As much as I like the 2D it produces I just can't live with a dark 3d image with minor ghosting. Again please be nice as I'm just giving my honest opinion after this second and final observation in comparing of the Panny, X10 and Acer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by inefekt View Post

Thanks for the informative review, nice work. You are obviously someone who does not see rainbows when viewing DLP projectors. Unfortunately for others, they're just too distracting.
The X10 was reviewed back in 2008 as having close to the best sharpness levels and colour accuracy at the time so obviously it still stacks up very well!

I don't see any rainbows on my X10 but do notice them time to time on the Acer in 2D only.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wgf_bean View Post

That's what I thought.

I would suggest you go back to the position menu and reset them all to 0. When you touch these settings the projector doesn't use the optics to change the position. Instead it changes what to display on each pixel so you are no longer projecting the picture 1:1 on the LCD matrix. This results in a less than optimal picture. The display will not be as sharp. This is not unique to LCD.

Use the lens shift, focus and zoom to adjust picture position. If the picture is not projecting level then physically move the projector until it is level. If you need keystone correction don't use the projectors keystone menu to fix it. This generally means your projector isn't level and projecting perpendicular to the screen. For example if your projector is mounted way to the left or right side, don't aim the projector at the center of the screen. Doing so will result in keystone issues. Instead use the lens shift to correct. If the lens shift isn't enough then you need to move the center line of the projector closer to the center line of the screen. The imaginary plane at the face of the lens should be parallel to your screen.

Another issue you may be seeing is convergence. All projectors with 3 panels tend to have some convergence issues. Getting the pixels from 3 different panels to line up exactly with each other is nearly impossible. If you have a single panel system like a DLP with a color wheel or a DLP with LED lamp, then the convergence is always perfect since all 3 colors hit the screen from the same panel. Convergence issues are particularly noticeable when you connect the projector to a PC and observe text with small fonts.

So reset the position settings to 0, adjust using the lens shift, focus, zoom, and physical position of the projector if necessary then let us know if it improved sharpness any.

Please see my post above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joesyah View Post

Thanks for the honest review! Now you have me worried even more about my decision to try a LCOS over my Infocus SP8602. I also use an HTPC and like it SHARP and well defined.You've confirmed what has been lounged in the back of my mind since demoing the newer LCOS projectors. I may have made a Boo Boo! lol

I've considered suggesting/installing the AE7000 in a friend's new entertainment room. Being they're not familiar with the other techs, they'll probably love it!

I would think your SP8602 is a much better projector then my X10 so you make not see the improvements I'm seeing now after adjusting the Panny to RGB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkhunter View Post

plasmaowner:

Thanks for your review of the Panny with a 159" HP screen. I also have a 159" 2.8 HP in a true batcave - currently paired with an Epson 8500UB.

After reading your review, I've decided that the Panny isn't for me. I was hoping that the Mits HC7800 would have lens shift for my HP. Sadly, thats not the case. Note that my first projector was a Panny PT-700.

It looks like the BenQ W7000 would be the best bet for me - for a super sharp, bright (lens shift for the HP), no ghosting 3D projector.

OT:

As a 'plasmaowner' with a 159" HP, and having seen the Panny, the Acer, and the X10 DLP in 3D on this screen, I'd like your opinion on the following:

Two weeks ago, I purchased a Panny TC-P42ST30 3D plasma for my granddaughter's birthday. Before giving it to her, I set it up to check-out the set's IQ. This was my first up close look at a plasma.

The IQ stunned me. I'm thinking about purchasing a Panny TC-P65VT30 instead of a 3D projector. For I can't afford a $30+K 3D DLP projector. My cash toy limit is $7K. Sadly, I'm a 99%er.

In your opinion, how would the 65"VT30 with a 6'-9' view, compare to a $3K-$7K DLP 3D projector with a 159" HP at 11' 4" for 3D???

While I love the huge image of my 159" HP, I'm thinking that I'd love the IQ of a 65" 3D plasma (at 6'-9') even more.

TIA

I'm very exciting about the mits7800 and benq8000. My good friend as a 65"VT30 and while the PQ is indeed phenomenal, there just is no comparing 3D on a 159" HP screen to a 65"!
plasmaowner is offline  
post #1104 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 09:17 AM
Member
 
natedogg661's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Peoria, IL
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilysona View Post

Also, if both the Oppo and the projector have a setting in the 3D menu for screen size, Should I put 100" on both the Oppo and Projector 3D menu, or just the projector?

What should I do when I use the lens memory and fill in my 130" 2.35:1 screen. Do I have to change the screen size to about 200"??

I am sorry if these issues were already discussed, but I searched the thread and could not find anything..

Thanks

I would like to echo these questions as I have a similar setup. Anyone know what the optimal setup would be for screen size for 3D with the Oppo and projector? Should it be changed depending on aspect ratio of content? Currently I have a 2.35:1 screen that is 96" diag. I have the Oppo set to smallest possible 46" and projector set to 100". Seems to be working well, but I admittedly haven't played with it a whole lot.
natedogg661 is online now  
post #1105 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 09:35 AM
Advanced Member
 
JamesN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by natedogg661 View Post

I would like to echo these questions as I have a similar setup. Anyone know what the optimal setup would be for screen size for 3D with the Oppo and projector? Should it be changed depending on aspect ratio of content? Currently I have a 2.35:1 screen that is 96" diag. I have the Oppo set to smallest possible 46" and projector set to 100". Seems to be working well, but I admittedly haven't played with it a whole lot.

I have the OPPO 93 and I wasn't even aware that there were screen-size settings related to 3-D that could be tweaked. I will have to experiment with those.

I did experiment with the screen-size settings in the 7000's 3-D menu and I could honestly not see any difference. I expected the different settings to alter the horizontal parallax, but I'm just not seeing that. If it is happening, it's very subtle...certainly much more subtle than changing parallax via the 3D VIEWING MONITOR function.
JamesN is offline  
post #1106 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 10:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wolfie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Madison, Alabama
Posts: 2,093
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 11
If anybody out there is waiting to get a 7000, then be aware. DO NOT use keystone in any fashion here. PJ has to be perfectly level. Any keystoneing is reverted back to zero when viewing 3D. I learned that the hard way and now I will have to lower the 7000 to accomodate the lens position. Not a big deal, just a pain-in-the-butt to have to do this.

Wolfie
Wolfie is offline  
post #1107 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 10:41 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by plasmaowner View Post

Just wanted to update everyone. I connected the Panny back up to give it one last try. I reset everything and started from scratch. I had it set up in no time (the lens shift gave me no trouble for some reason). The ONLY mistake I made was not setting the projector up for RGB. It was set to auto and that small change made a HUGE difference in overall picture quality. In fact, that simple adjustment alone made it a MUCH closer match against my X10. Colors are deeper, richer, and have more pop. Black level, sharpness, depth, shadow detail, and overall picture detail dramatically improved.

Did you set the black level (make sure that the Brightness setting is right) in both cases? It sounds like the Brightness setting may have been too high or too low for one of the cases resulting in either crushed low level detail in one case or too high of a black level (too low an on/off CR) in the other case, but I'm not sure based on the description.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #1108 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 10:53 AM
Member
 
ekscden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Perhaps a dumb question, but in the examples of 3D I've seen on projector demos, nothing really comes out from the screen toward me. It's as though I'm looking through a window into the action happening on the other side of the screen. Is this the limit of 3D or have I just not seen the right demos?
ekscden is offline  
post #1109 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 11:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,170
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by ekscden View Post

Perhaps a dumb question, but in the examples of 3D I've seen on projector demos, nothing really comes out from the screen toward me. It's as though I'm looking through a window into the action happening on the other side of the screen. Is this the limit of 3D or have I just not seen the right demos?

If you get to see the cod fish scene from Under the Sea and the setup is right and your eyes can see 3D well enough you should be able to hold your hand out under the fish and the front of the fish should look closer to you than your hand. Some projectors and setups do this better than others though.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #1110 of 4449 Old 10-24-2011, 11:18 AM
 
AV Science Sales 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,440
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
As I understand it, a scene can not be captured with the object floatig in space off of the screen or panel. however, a scene can be processed to make it appear to be floating. Examples of real life scenes include the fish a certain frames from intro and end of like the grand Canyon. Natural scenes have near field depth, got to do with how far the two lenses are spaced apart just like your eyes are spaced apart. mid depth scenes viewed by you eyes will not be in 3D. Look at something say 50 ft away and cover one eye. No difference to your eyes except in the total brightness registerd by your brain. avatar has a great deal of depth in mid range or even distant scenes, but that is a processed effect, not how the camera recorded it.. Most of avatar is not real scenes anyway, pretty much computer generasted blue screen.
AV Science Sales 4 is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Panasonic , Panasonic Pt Ae7000u 1080p Full Hd Projector , Projectors , Blu Ray Players
Gear in this thread

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