Saw the 5010 again on content other than LOTR, was a bit more impressed this time. I am not going to comment on 3D, as that is Zombie's area of expertise, I did see it but have nothing much to say other than its better than the JVC in 3D as we already knew.
This time he had it hooked up to a video processor (not the lumagen but a cheaper one), but I didn't get to play with all the controls on the Epson or his VP (we had so little time again as he had to go to work soon). One thing is I think this projector will be matched up well going with a Lumagen for added noise reduction, I am betting it will help. Some Samsung Bluray players have some noise reduction filters, although they help some, but not by a huge amount.
Saw a few Game of Thrones scenes, blacks were handled very well just like the 8700ub does, but I favored the sharpness of the 5010 this time even more so. Also, the first episode of GOT (game of thrones), the snowy scene when they come out of the cave looked better on the 5010 than the 8700ub, so I could at least see some improvement here for sure. I saw a few more inherent differences to the 8700ub, first the D9 and pixel fill is helping some over the 8700ub in certain scenes, the SDE was a tiny tiny bit less apparent, but it was hard to judge at times unless you stand so close.
His convergence is better than most of the reports in here, his was only off maybe 0.7 to 0.9 total in the middle 1/3rd of the screen (divide screen by 3 parts and judge all colors), I didn't test the other sides (I really just didn't have time to note it all). It is important to make sure the projector is focused correctly for convergence, and make sure the projector is warmed up and the all controls are in neutral positions. Even with the convergence close enough to the JVC, my JVC is still sharper, but keep in mind that not only are most of the newer JVC's pretty sharp, I have one with near-perfect convergence, so that is probably why.
He works a lot of hours and lives semi-far away, so my time is still limited unless I swap it with him for the JVC.
It's so specific as to what will look better as to what you are watching. There were times I felt the Epson POPPED more but other times was flatter than the JVC too, we watched a few scenes from Hawaii: An Island Symphony (this disc heavily favors DLP and sharper projectors in general), the Epson did the best out of every LCD we've run this disc on, but it still couldn't match a DLP for this. I preferred the JVC on the disc overall, but at least a couple scenes on it favored the Epson. Overall I still favor the JVC, but the Epson has its own niche so to speak.
The Epson's real strength is complete blackouts where the Iris can slam shut, or when there is mostly neutral grays with the blacks. The Epson's slight weakness (only compared to the JVC) in blacks is when there are really a lot of mixed lighting in the black area but still mostly black (think space ship with headlights on), the IRIS on the Epson causes the scene to not look as dynamic as the JVC (whites are not as bright), but it still looks good.
I doubt most people would care about the difference in black levels compared to the JVC, a few would, to me the bigger thing with the JVC is the ability for the JVC to look better on reference level blurays like Tree of Life, other than that the Epson is pretty good. As good as the new Epson is, let me just add that I still would recommend if someone already owns the 8700ub to maybe go to a different tech just to have a new experience, but that depends how hard-core they are about 3D, as the Epson is good for that.
I am most interested to hear if some of the other members found the Epson to be a worthy replacement for the JVC.
The JVC produces a very consistent image, the Epson is more unforgiving and temperamental at times, although I think if consistency is what you are after, a DLP is probably the most consistent.