Official Owners' Thread, Panasonic PT-AE8000U (US version) PT-AT6000E (European version) - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 3508 Old 12-02-2012, 04:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
purbeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 858
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Heh today I cleaned up my HT area since my furniture is coming tomorrow, and I realized that I had never tried my 3D glasses for my ST50 plasma with the 8000.

Figured maybe because they are both Panasonic it would work.

I came away disappointed frown.gif
purbeast is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 3508 Old 12-02-2012, 04:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
purbeast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rockville, MD
Posts: 858
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarangiman View Post

Are you saying you'd rather have the 2.35:1 screen, & then 'zoom out' (shrink the image) for 16:9 content? I guess this is better than the other way around, since 16:9 content tends to look bigger than 2.35:1 content...

I was going to do this initially myself, but I went to someone's house who had a 2.35:1 screen and saw it in action. I was talking to him about it as well and we were demo'ing 2.35:1 content and he said if he could do it again he would get a 16:9 screen. I was asking him why and he just said for 16:9 content it just is odd with the bars on the side.

So when we put on Saving Private Ryan to demo his sound and it was a 16:9 movie, I immediately know what he meant. The bars on the side almost made it feel like it was squishing the image. It's hard to explain but it was kind of messing with my head lol.

Definitely just a personal preference.

But the full 2.35:1 content on that screen looked REALLY awesome!
purbeast is offline  
post #633 of 3508 Old 12-02-2012, 05:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cr136124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMenke View Post

I would reconsider the multi-format screen if I were you. Have a smaller vertical sized 2.35:1 image will just seem...non-impactful. The first time I zoomed to fill a 2.35:1 screen, my family was blown away by the pure cinematic effect of a giant widescreen movie in our home.

So, how do you handle the 16:9 material? I'm thinking going with the bigger multi-format screen. So, I'll be able to manually change formats while keeping a good size on the 2.35:1

Due to my room, I have a limitation on how big the screen can be. So, even if I try to install a 2.35:1 screen there is a limit that I must keep in consideration and that is what I was just thinking on buying the multi-purpose.

Of course, the other way is to basically buy a 16:9 screen and do the masking, but that looks like a cumbersome procedure and I'm not even sure how to do it.

What kind of screen are you using. Any chance to post some pics? Even better how about a video of the way you handle memory lens switching from 2.35:1 to 16:9 formats?

Sorry if I'm asking too much from you. But, it is really difficult to find videos on the web from these new projector running on a 2.35:1 screen and using the memory lens for those two formats.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purbeast View Post

Heh today I cleaned up my HT area since my furniture is coming tomorrow, and I realized that I had never tried my 3D glasses for my ST50 plasma with the 8000.
Figured maybe because they are both Panasonic it would work.
I came away disappointed frown.gif

Well, I have a PS3 3D display at home and I use the 3D glasses that are included for that display and amazingly they work pretty well. I was able to grab a second pair few days ago from Amazon at $19.99

I don't have the Panasonic glasses yet, so I'm not sure if there is a big difference in terms of picture quality between them. But, hey they are chip and it seems they are able to do the work just fine........wink.gif

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00562O8U0/ref=ox_ya_os_product
Quote:
Originally Posted by purbeast View Post

I was going to do this initially myself, but I went to someone's house who had a 2.35:1 screen and saw it in action. I was talking to him about it as well and we were demo'ing 2.35:1 content and he said if he could do it again he would get a 16:9 screen. I was asking him why and he just said for 16:9 content it just is odd with the bars on the side.
So when we put on Saving Private Ryan to demo his sound and it was a 16:9 movie, I immediately know what he meant. The bars on the side almost made it feel like it was squishing the image. It's hard to explain but it was kind of messing with my head lol.
Definitely just a personal preference.
But the full 2.35:1 content on that screen looked REALLY awesome!

I totally agree with you comment. As I mentioned before, I simulated a 2.35:1 screen just using blue tape and then I tried to fit the 16:9 image on that screen. I didn't really like the fact of having those black bars on the side of the screen. I did call my wife to check that out and she did also agree that it looked weird (for us at least!).

So, next step was to simulate a 16:9 image by using all the space available in my wall. Next, I did use memory lens to fit 2.35:1 image on the 16:9 simulated screen, and the result was much more better. I mean, I can have a huge 16:9 screen to play movies (on that particular format), and (really important for us) I can actually project 2.35:1 material "again" using all the space available (wide of the wall).

Does this make sense?
cr136124 is offline  
post #634 of 3508 Old 12-02-2012, 06:17 PM
Senior Member
 
azula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by cr136124 View Post

So, how do you handle the 16:9 material? I'm thinking going with the bigger multi-format screen. So, I'll be able to manually change formats while keeping a good size on the 2.35:1
Due to my room, I have a limitation on how big the screen can be. So, even if I try to install a 2.35:1 screen there is a limit that I must keep in consideration and that is what I was just thinking on buying the multi-purpose.
Of course, the other way is to basically buy a 16:9 screen and do the masking, but that looks like a cumbersome procedure and I'm not even sure how to do it.
What kind of screen are you using. Any chance to post some pics? Even better how about a video of the way you handle memory lens switching from 2.35:1 to 16:9 formats?
Sorry if I'm asking too much from you. But, it is really difficult to find videos on the web from these new projector running on a 2.35:1 screen and using the memory lens for those two formats.
Well, I have a PS3 3D display at home and I use the 3D glasses that are included for that display and amazingly they work pretty well. I was able to grab a second pair few days ago from Amazon at $19.99
I don't have the Panasonic glasses yet, so I'm not sure if there is a big difference in terms of picture quality between them. But, hey they are chip and it seems they are able to do the work just fine........wink.gif
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00562O8U0/ref=ox_ya_os_product
I totally agree with you comment. As I mentioned before, I simulated a 2.35:1 screen just using blue tape and then I tried to fit the 16:9 image on that screen. I didn't really like the fact of having those black bars on the side of the screen. I did call my wife to check that out and she did also agree that it looked weird (for us at least!).
So, next step was to simulate a 16:9 image by using all the space available in my wall. Next, I did use memory lens to fit 2.35:1 image on the 16:9 simulated screen, and the result was much more better. I mean, I can have a huge 16:9 screen to play movies (on that particular format), and (really important for us) I can actually project 2.35:1 material "again" using all the space available (wide of the wall).
Does this make sense?

Yea that makes sense. I too had the same dilemma and chose to go with a 2.35 CIH screen. Honestly, it is purely down to your personal taste and there is no "right way" to do it. The reason why I chose 2.35 is because my theater is purely for watching movies. Furthermore, I find that conservatively 75% of my movies are shot in either 2.35 or 2.39 format. However, watching an occasional 16:9 movie is inevitable. The black bars on either side are there but it is completely unnoticeable because my theater is 100% light controlled. So basically, it is all about what is more important to you.....a larger 16:9 picture or a wider 2.35 picture.....good luck!
azula is offline  
post #635 of 3508 Old 12-02-2012, 06:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
sarangiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 542
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by purbeast View Post

I was going to do this initially myself, but I went to someone's house who had a 2.35:1 screen and saw it in action. I was talking to him about it as well and we were demo'ing 2.35:1 content and he said if he could do it again he would get a 16:9 screen. I was asking him why and he just said for 16:9 content it just is odd with the bars on the side.
So when we put on Saving Private Ryan to demo his sound and it was a 16:9 movie, I immediately know what he meant. The bars on the side almost made it feel like it was squishing the image. It's hard to explain but it was kind of messing with my head lol.
Definitely just a personal preference.
But the full 2.35:1 content on that screen looked REALLY awesome!

Thanks for the input! I see what you're saying; after all, 4:3 content looks horrid on a 16:9 screen. Whereas 2.35:1 content doesn't look bad to me on my 16:9 screen... I just wish it were a little bigger. Definitely don't want my 16:9 content any bigger... in fact, I want it smaller than in my current 120" setup (hence considering getting a new 110" HCHP screen).
sarangiman is offline  
post #636 of 3508 Old 12-02-2012, 07:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cr136124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by azula View Post

Yea that makes sense. I too had the same dilemma and chose to go with a 2.35 CIH screen. Honestly, it is purely down to your personal taste and there is no "right way" to do it. The reason why I chose 2.35 is because my theater is purely for watching movies. Furthermore, I find that conservatively 75% of my movies are shot in either 2.35 or 2.39 format. However, watching an occasional 16:9 movie is inevitable. The black bars on either side are there but it is completely unnoticeable because my theater is 100% light controlled. So basically, it is all about what is more important to you.....a larger 16:9 picture or a wider 2.35 picture.....good luck!

I will have to go back and decide which screen works best for us. Traditionally we were using this room for movies, however we were watching this afternoon a football game and my wife was really enjoying the experience of having this huge projection on the wall. So, it seems we are going to have a bit more TV watching at our HT.

I took a couple of pics of the room (cell phone pics, so please excuse me about the low resolution), so you guys can have a reference of the size projected in the two different formats:

Here is a pic of the 16:9 format:

"No lights"



And, here is one with lights on



Here is a pic of the 2.39:1 format:

"No lights"



And this one with lights on




For you reference the measurements of the 16:9 projection are: 118" X 67" or 138" diagonally. I would said is a nice improvement coming from a 51" plasma TV......I think........wink.gif
cr136124 is offline  
post #637 of 3508 Old 12-02-2012, 07:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cr136124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaTheater View Post

So I have another fan question. I am watching a 3D movie, and was using ECO more for the lamp. I wanted to brighten it up a bit, so I switched the lamp to NORMAL. As soon as I did, the fan kicked in and became pretty audible. It is not a mechanical noise, just moving air. It seems that in NORMAL, the fan is on high gear, but on ECO it is hardly noticable.
Is this working like everyone elses?

Have you tried to change the darkness of the 3D glasses? There are 3 levels (if I remember correctly) Dark (that was the default on my PJ), Medium and Light. If you don't want to increase the noise level on the fan, keep it on ECO, but changes the glasses to Medium or Light.

I watched like 5 minutes of Prometheus using Light and it looks much better (specially due to this movie has several low light scenes).

Cheers!
cr136124 is offline  
post #638 of 3508 Old 12-02-2012, 09:04 PM
Advanced Member
 
BartMan01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 512
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by azula View Post

So basically, it is all about what is more important to you.....a larger 16:9 picture or a wider 2.35 picture.....good luck!

I disagree with the choice being between larger 16:9 or wider 2.35. I say fill your wall with as wide of a screen as possible, then the decision comes down to how much height you have to work with. If you have enough, go 16:9, otherwise go 2.35. In either case, your 2.35 movies are the same width, and 16:9 can take full advantage of the wall space too if you have it. If you have the space for 16:9 once you max out your usable width and decide to go 2.35 for aesthetics or just because you want 16:9 to be smaller, then that is a personal choice limiting the size of your 16:9 viewing not a necessary trade off. Personally I would always go for maximum size screen in a standard format based on the room.

Back to the topic - my ae8000 will be here just before Christmas (waiting to place the order until I will actually have time to set it up and actually use it when it arrives). Any suggestions for a first time LCD projector owner on what to look for during the short window for hassle free returns of a lemon? Anything besides the obvious of making sure that focus and uniformity are reasonable?
BartMan01 is offline  
post #639 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 06:04 AM
Senior Member
 
fcaico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
My feeling is that I want that cinemascope content to *feel* bigger than the 16:9 content. That in mind, I finally got my theater up and running this weekend -- I decided to go CIH (which was one of the largest reasons I went with this projector) and I'm super glad I did. I have a 10' wide 2.35:1 AT screen and Its so great zooming to fill it.
You put in the disk and the menu comes up in 16:9. It looks great. then the movie starts and it zooms to fill that screen --- WOW.

Frankly, with the contrast of this image, I don't even see the black bars on the sides of the image.
fcaico is offline  
post #640 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 07:01 AM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 12,964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 410
Quote:
Originally Posted by fcaico View Post

My feeling is that I want that cinemascope content to *feel* bigger than the 16:9 content. That in mind, I finally got my theater up and running this weekend -- I decided to go CIH (which was one of the largest reasons I went with this projector) and I'm super glad I did. I have a 10' wide 2.35:1 AT screen and Its so great zooming to fill it.
You put in the disk and the menu comes up in 16:9. It looks great. then the movie starts and it zooms to fill that screen --- WOW.
Frankly, with the contrast of this image, I don't even see the black bars on the sides of the image.

One of the key differences between the bars on the side with a 2.35 screen vs the bars top/bottom on a 1.78 screen is the side bars on the 2.35 screen are not projected light and if you have solid light control they will be darker because of this. I moved from a 1.78 screen to a 2.35 and I find the side bars to be much less noticeable to the point that I feel no need for masking. The top/bottom bars on my old 1.78 screen when watching scope content were noticeable and would catch your eye at times.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #641 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 08:18 AM
Member
 
jstoddard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by fcaico View Post

My feeling is that I want that cinemascope content to *feel* bigger than the 16:9 content. That in mind, I finally got my theater up and running this weekend -- I decided to go CIH (which was one of the largest reasons I went with this projector) and I'm super glad I did. I have a 10' wide 2.35:1 AT screen and Its so great zooming to fill it.
You put in the disk and the menu comes up in 16:9. It looks great. then the movie starts and it zooms to fill that screen --- WOW.
Frankly, with the contrast of this image, I don't even see the black bars on the sides of the image.

fcaico - what screen did you use? I'm looking at having a similar 10' 2.35 AT screen. Currently projecting on a beige wall - which still looks great.

Thanks,
Jeff
jstoddard is offline  
post #642 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 08:32 AM
Member
 
Boiler Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lebanon, Oh and Midland, Mi
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just replaced my Panasonic AE-4000U with the AE-8000u. A lot brighter, and surprisingly to me, it seems a lot sharper as well even though both projectors have the same resolution. I have not noticed the difference in black levels, but there is a lot of ambient light in the room until the sun goes down and the kitchen, which is not separated by a wall, is vacated.

Have only watched a small sample of 3D as my receiver is not 3D compatible and so used the 2D => 3D conversion in the projector for simulated 3D. I was really surprised by how very good the simulated 3D image looks! I saw no problems with it the 10 minutes I watched. I was watching a DVD (not even a Blu ray) of the Canadian TV show Heartland and there was excellent depth projected throughout the image for the 10 minutes of the show I watched. On the other hand, there is a marked reduction in brightness when you switch to 3D (not surprising since each eye gets half the light instead of each eye getting all the light from the projector). I doubt I'll be watching all that many 2D shows in simulated 3D just due to the brightness. I got the projector for the increased brightness rather than the 3D, anyway.

We do watch a lot of movies on the projector, and I am surprised at the discussion on screen size/aspect. The first theater I built (in a house we no longer live in) had a 10 foot wide 16X9 Firehawk screen. I liked that but hated the bars at the top and bottom of CinemaScope pictures, With the AE-4000 (and now with the AE=8000) I love the ability to automatically shift to the wider format at CIH. 18 months ago I replaced a 16X9 screen in our newer house with a 2.35:1 Da-lite High Power screen. I love it. I find I am NOT bothered by the dark sidebars on 16X9 images nearly as much as I am bothered by the dark bar at the top of an image. I realize that with the features of the Panasonic projectors you could set them up to automatically shift a CinemaScope image to the top of the screen, which for me would be much better than having it in the middle, but I really like the stretching effect that you get as you expand out to the edge of a 2.35:1 screen -- and like the AT&T commercial for 4G with the kids says, "Larger is better."

Jim
Boiler Jim is offline  
post #643 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cr136124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boiler Jim View Post

Just replaced my Panasonic AE-4000U with the AE-8000u. A lot brighter, and surprisingly to me, it seems a lot sharper as well even though both projectors have the same resolution. I have not noticed the difference in black levels, but there is a lot of ambient light in the room until the sun goes down and the kitchen, which is not separated by a wall, is vacated.
Have only watched a small sample of 3D as my receiver is not 3D compatible and so used the 2D => 3D conversion in the projector for simulated 3D. I was really surprised by how very good the simulated 3D image looks! I saw no problems with it the 10 minutes I watched. I was watching a DVD (not even a Blu ray) of the Canadian TV show Heartland and there was excellent depth projected throughout the image for the 10 minutes of the show I watched. On the other hand, there is a marked reduction in brightness when you switch to 3D (not surprising since each eye gets half the light instead of each eye getting all the light from the projector). I doubt I'll be watching all that many 2D shows in simulated 3D just due to the brightness. I got the projector for the increased brightness rather than the 3D, anyway.
We do watch a lot of movies on the projector, and I am surprised at the discussion on screen size/aspect. The first theater I built (in a house we no longer live in) had a 10 foot wide 16X9 Firehawk screen. I liked that but hated the bars at the top and bottom of CinemaScope pictures, With the AE-4000 (and now with the AE=8000) I love the ability to automatically shift to the wider format at CIH. 18 months ago I replaced a 16X9 screen in our newer house with a 2.35:1 Da-lite High Power screen. I love it. I find I am NOT bothered by the dark sidebars on 16X9 images nearly as much as I am bothered by the dark bar at the top of an image. I realize that with the features of the Panasonic projectors you could set them up to automatically shift a CinemaScope image to the top of the screen, which for me would be much better than having it in the middle, but I really like the stretching effect that you get as you expand out to the edge of a 2.35:1 screen -- and like the AT&T commercial for 4G with the kids says, "Larger is better."

Congrats on the upgrade!

Sorry for been asking about the different types of screen. In your case, you already have the experience of using projectors/screen for years. This is my first projector and hence, the noob questions.......tongue.gif

So, do you mind to share some pics of the screen while playing 16:9 and 2:35.1 material?
cr136124 is offline  
post #644 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 10:11 AM
Senior Member
 
5mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by cr136124 View Post

And this one with lights on

For you reference the measurements of the 16:9 projection are: 118" X 67" or 138" diagonally. I would said is a nice improvement coming from a 51" plasma TV......I think........wink.gif

I'm a huge fan of 2.35:1 screens, especially in a dedicated room with seating close enough that all ARs are a good size. This looks more like a family room situation where your seating is a ways back and set in stone as far as distance. In that case I would probably stick with a 16:9 screen. How far back is the seating?
5mark is offline  
post #645 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 10:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cr136124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5mark View Post

I'm a huge fan of 2.35:1 screens, especially in a dedicated room with seating close enough that all ARs are a good size. This looks more like a family room situation where your seating is a ways back and set in stone as far as distance. In that case I would probably stick with a 16:9 screen. How far back is the seating?

I'm with you on this comment and based on what you can see in the picture, there is no much room to increase the size of a 2:35.1 screen. So, it seems based on my particular situation a 16:9 screen will work pretty well for cinemascope movies.

About your question, my couch is about 13' back from the projection wall.
cr136124 is offline  
post #646 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 11:09 AM
Senior Member
 
azula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by BartMan01 View Post

I disagree with the choice being between larger 16:9 or wider 2.35. I say fill your wall with as wide of a screen as possible, then the decision comes down to how much height you have to work with. If you have enough, go 16:9, otherwise go 2.35. In either case, your 2.35 movies are the same width, and 16:9 can take full advantage of the wall space too if you have it. If you have the space for 16:9 once you max out your usable width and decide to go 2.35 for aesthetics or just because you want 16:9 to be smaller, then that is a personal choice limiting the size of your 16:9 viewing not a necessary trade off. Personally I would always go for maximum size screen in a standard format based on the room.
Back to the topic - my ae8000 will be here just before Christmas (waiting to place the order until I will actually have time to set it up and actually use it when it arrives). Any suggestions for a first time LCD projector owner on what to look for during the short window for hassle free returns of a lemon? Anything besides the obvious of making sure that focus and uniformity are reasonable?


I agree with you. The only reason why I stated having a larger 16:9 or wider 2.35 is because he previously stated that size was limited.


My 8k arrives today, upgrading from a 7k. Plan on setting everything up and getting some pics ASAP!
azula is offline  
post #647 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 11:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
enricoclaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 165
cr136124, glad you finally got the 8000!!! Like I told you it's in my short upgrade list smile.gif

As for the screen. You may take a look at Carada. You can get a Carada Criterion Series 118" 16:9 ($940) and then when you have the money get the Masquerade System ($2864). That's my plan after the projector upgrade smile.gif

That projector deserve a good screen!!!

Best Regards,

Enrico Castagnetti
Rythmik Audio

 

My Multimedia Room Gallery

enricoclaudio is offline  
post #648 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 11:16 AM
Senior Member
 
5mark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by cr136124 View Post

I'm with you on this comment and based on what you can see in the picture, there is no much room to increase the size of a 2:35.1 screen. So, it seems based on my particular situation a 16:9 screen will work pretty well for cinemascope movies.
About your question, my couch is about 13' back from the projection wall.

That would put you at about 1.3sw which some people might think is a little big when watching 16:9. But if your wife was liking the size, I think you're good. wink.gif You are also in the range where the Panny's smoothscreen will produce a more filmlike image than say an Epson.
5mark is offline  
post #649 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 12:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jamis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,919
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Just ordered mine. Upgrading from my four year old AE3000.

Regarding some of the recent comments and having a CIH screen myself, I have to say that bars on the sides don't bother me nearly much at all compared to bars on the top and bottom. I love my 2.35 screen. Considering the fact that we watch most of our TV in the theater as well, most of our material is in 16:9.... and I have yet to order the SMX masking panels. Side bars are not a problem for me.

When I planned my theater, I figured out the tallest 16:9 my room would support, then added on the width to make it 2.35 and have absolutely no regrets over the last 4 years.
jamis is offline  
post #650 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 01:48 PM
Newbie
 
Envikx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I see everyone is very pleased with their new Projectors! I had a question about screens for this projector? I wanted to stay between the $200-600 screens, I want a 130-150" screen? My projector would be eventually mounted to the ceiling. I was tossing between a grey screen and a high gain screen. Im not sure what to get, im very new to projectors. I like having the projector bright, and to watch it with the lights on, or to put it in the living room where sunlight may be a problem. I also was looking for the screen to enhance the 3d brightness. There are no speakers behind the screen, so there is no need for it to be acoustically sound. Any suggestions for a screen? I like bright, popping pictures the projector can produce. Is there any material that would raise contrast and also retain alot of light?

Thank you,
Envikx
Envikx is offline  
post #651 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 03:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
Daniel Chaves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: LA (Valley Village)
Posts: 705
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 58
well my choice was coming down to this or the 7000 but it looks like the 8000 correct a lot of the issues of the 7000 so guess Im going to be saving a bit longer so I can get this projector instead smile.gif

Daniel Chaves is offline  
post #652 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 05:02 PM
Member
 
rstahl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wyckoff, NJ
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I also like a lot of 8k owners and lurkers researched the death out of a new unit to replace the 2000k I've had for four years. Spent quite a bit of time here and over at the shootout thread including a week without power pondering which way to go?

My new 8000 arrived last week and its time to give back to the thread as I'm sure there could be some undecided people here.I wanted to spend a few hours before posting anything.

My set up. I have a 2.35 DIY screen 100 inches wide. If I had to guess the gain is 1.3 to 1.5 I watch a lot of TV on the projector so I started there. In my case I've always shot a 16.9 image on the 2.35 screen and after the first two minutes never noticed the right and left sides of the screen as they were never used. My fear as the brighter projector might change this. It didn't just the opposite the 8000 is not only brighter but has in my opinion much better blacks. Again I can only compare to my pani 2000.

Jumping over to some regular channels it was obvious the focus and sharpness were almost too good! I began to wonder if this unit would have the same film like image I liked about the old one. Now I'm second guessing myself. As many of you already know the red engine was improved in the 4000 and I could clearly see that deference. As far as regular TV this a huge upgrade. Now lets move onto a 2.35 movie. I'm pretty sure a watched Dead Man Chest before but like three years ago, so zoomed the picture and filled my wall with eight feet of picture. This was a closer match as I must of had a pretty good 2000 although it did have some minor missed convergence on the left side. Owe yea I would have sworn the new projector had perfect convergence after watching TV bright letters and numbers so sharp and clear,but the test disc showed the same actually less mis-convergence on that same left side. This one is a keeper for me.

Last night was my first 3D event. And all I can say is I'll be watching a lot less TV. Now I know why many owners here have posted minimum stuff as were addicted fast. All I can think of is how can is how can I get a bigger screen and make it fit with my speakers??

One last thing. I considered the Epson as I liked the idea if the RF controlled goggles, but these 3rd generation pani glasses work flawless for me with no ghosting. Rob
rstahl is offline  
post #653 of 3508 Old 12-03-2012, 05:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cr136124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by azula View Post

I agree with you. The only reason why I stated having a larger 16:9 or wider 2.35 is because he previously stated that size was limited.
My 8k arrives today, upgrading from a 7k. Plan on setting everything up and getting some pics ASAP!

Correct, the width of my wall is limited to 118", so after all the input received here and in other threads, I decided to buy a 16:9 screen that should fills that width no matter I'm projecting 16:9 or 2:35.1 content. Yes, I'll have to report back about the black bars on top and bottom while watching 2:35.1 material. But, it couldn't be worst that my 51" plasma TV........wink.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post

cr136124, glad you finally got the 8000!!! Like I told you it's in my short upgrade list smile.gif
As for the screen. You may take a look at Carada. You can get a Carada Criterion Series 118" 16:9 ($940) and then when you have the money get the Masquerade System ($2864). That's my plan after the projector upgrade smile.gif
That projector deserve a good screen!!!

Thanks enrico! Deal that I found was really hard to pass.

I do agree with you that my Panny deserves a really good screen. But, my wallet says something completely different.....LOL.

As my comment above, I just pull the trigger on a 16:9 screen (very wallet friendly) and I'm willing to live with that screen for a while until I'm more familiar with the projector and after I'm able to have first hand experience projecting different type of formats on this screen.

I'll try to post some pics as soon the screen arrives, is mounted on the wall and the 8000 is doing its magic!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5mark View Post

That would put you at about 1.3sw which some people might think is a little big when watching 16:9. But if your wife was liking the size, I think you're good. wink.gif You are also in the range where the Panny's smoothscreen will produce a more filmlike image than say an Epson.

Yep, I know I'm right there pushing things a bit. But, I think the 16:9 screen is the best solution at the moment for me. In a couple of months with more experience, I might change my opinion and do something different, but I have to start somewhere, so here I go with this big screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Chaves View Post

well my choice was coming down to this or the 7000 but it looks like the 8000 correct a lot of the issues of the 7000 so guess Im going to be saving a bit longer so I can get this projector instead smile.gif

I was looking also to buy the 7000 originally. But, I'm really happy I finally decided to wait a bit and purchase the 8000. If you really can wait a bit more in order to grab one of this......do it! You will not be disappointed with the performance of this projector.
cr136124 is offline  
post #654 of 3508 Old 12-04-2012, 05:53 AM
Member
 
blizaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
For those interested, I've been looking for a way to discreetly select between, HDMI 1, 2, 3, turn 3D (SBS) On/Off, Power On/Off, lens memory, and ECO on/off from my Harmony remote with out going through menus. I finally settled on using software on an old PC. It's called Intelliremote and it lets you learn IR commands in, and then send out RS-232 commands to the projector. I got it all set up last night and it works great with my AE8000.
blizaine is offline  
post #655 of 3508 Old 12-04-2012, 06:32 AM
Advanced Member
 
GWCR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids, IA
Posts: 790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Looks like I can officially post in this thread now. My 8000 arrived last week, and I finally had a chance to test it out last night. I was extremely impressed! Straight out of the box, no adjustments/calibration, shooting on primed drywall (screen isn't in yet) and it was fantastic. Can't wait to see it on the screen and calibrated. I watched about 15 minutes of Rio as a test. Colors were fantastic, great contrast and sharp as a tack. For my first PJ, I couldn't be happier. Now to work on that rebate...tongue.gif
GWCR is offline  
post #656 of 3508 Old 12-04-2012, 07:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cr136124's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,490
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWCR View Post

Looks like I can officially post in this thread now. My 8000 arrived last week, and I finally had a chance to test it out last night. I was extremely impressed! Straight out of the box, no adjustments/calibration, shooting on primed drywall (screen isn't in yet) and it was fantastic. Can't wait to see it on the screen and calibrated. I watched about 15 minutes of Rio as a test. Colors were fantastic, great contrast and sharp as a tack. For my first PJ, I couldn't be happier. Now to work on that rebate...tongue.gif

Well, welcome to the club!!!

I'm also a first time owner of a projector and so far the expectations have been far exceeded. So, I think we did good on picking this product.

About the Panasonic's rebate, we need to hurry. As per my vendor, we only have 30 days after purchase date to submit the rebate. So, for the other ones that purchase this unit recently, better hurry on sending the rebate form to Panny ASAP.

Cheers!
cr136124 is offline  
post #657 of 3508 Old 12-04-2012, 07:47 AM
Senior Member
 
fcaico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I'm up to about 50 hours on my projector and for the most part, I love it. I have it projected onto a 120" wide 2.35:1 AT screen (1.2 gain) screen from about 15 feet back. For 2D it looks fantastic - I run it in "best" mode - rec709 ECO - and its bright, sharp and has good contrast. Games seem to work and look great too.

3D is a little disappointing though. Its definitely dim ( I have the 3rd Gen Panasonic glasses in normal mode), and the IR sync with the glasses interferes with my ability to use my remote. As for ghosting - well I'm not overly sensitive to it, but I can see that it exists. Thats the least of my issue with the 3D though - the image is just too dim to truly enjoy it.
fcaico is offline  
post #658 of 3508 Old 12-04-2012, 08:30 AM
Senior Member
 
azula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by fcaico View Post

I'm up to about 50 hours on my projector and for the most part, I love it. I have it projected onto a 120" wide 2.35:1 AT screen (1.2 gain) screen from about 15 feet back. For 2D it looks fantastic - I run it in "best" mode - rec709 ECO - and its bright, sharp and has good contrast. Games seem to work and look great too.
3D is a little disappointing though. Its definitely dim ( I have the 3rd Gen Panasonic glasses in normal mode), and the IR sync with the glasses interferes with my ability to use my remote. As for ghosting - well I'm not overly sensitive to it, but I can see that it exists. Thats the least of my issue with the 3D though - the image is just too dim to truly enjoy it.


Try normal or dynamic mode for 3d if you haven't. Also try your glasses on "light mode". the image will definitely be brighter but this might also create more ghosting. worth a try though cool.gif
azula is offline  
post #659 of 3508 Old 12-04-2012, 08:34 AM
Senior Member
 
SteveCoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I got my AE8000 last night and set it up and played with it a little.

Big upgrade from my old AE1000!

I fiddled with 3D a little and tried to figure out what 3D glasses setting looked best.
I have the Panasonic 3rd gen glasses.

Those of you with several hours of 3D watching experience, what glasses setting
seems to look the best? Normal, light or dark?
SteveCoug is offline  
post #660 of 3508 Old 12-04-2012, 08:42 AM
Senior Member
 
fcaico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by azula View Post

Try normal or dynamic mode for 3d if you haven't. Also try your glasses on "light mode". the image will definitely be brighter but this might also create more ghosting. worth a try though cool.gif

Yeah. I've tried Dynamic mode with the projector lamp set to Normal. I even tried setting the glasses to light, but it didnt help enough to offset the additional ghosting (which became very obvious). Still quite dim. The colors on screen just become so muted and dim!
fcaico is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Epson 5020ub Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector , Jvc Dla X35 3d Hd Front Projector , Panasonic Pt Ae7000u 1080p Full Hd Projector , Panasonic Pt Ae4000u 1600 Lumen Lcd Home Theater Projector , Sony Vpl Hw50es 3d Projector , Darbeevision Darblet Hdmi Video Processor , Panasonic Ptae8000u Hd Projector
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