Official Owners' Thread, Panasonic PT-AE8000U (US version) PT-AT6000E (European version) - Page 91 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2701 of 3548 Old 12-11-2013, 02:32 PM
Member
 
Viipottaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by kendo70433 View Post

As I mentioned, I haven't used one in a while. But here is the AVS Forum thread. http://www.avsforum.com/f/25/hdtv-technical And they have a sticky on STB recommendations. The top recommendation was originally posted in 2011. So apw2607 might have a better lead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apw2607 View Post

For OTA ... HomeWorx HW180STB
For CTV (clear QAM) with or without cablecard samsung smart media player

Thank you both!
Viipottaja is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2702 of 3548 Old 12-11-2013, 06:04 PM
Senior Member
 
Hyper_Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Madison, AL
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by apw2607 View Post

Yes, that could be it. Again the problem (I think) is 24p film based material that's broadcast at 1080i/60 as with broadcast or cable tv.

I think apw2607 is on to the problem here. We were communicating through private message as I have been complaining about the same problem with my PT-AE7000U for a long time. When he mentioned his suspicion that it could be related to 24p material being sent to the pj as 1080p60 I realized it could answer the question Panasonic has been asking me the whole time. They kept saying it couldn't be the pj because I could not reproduce the problem when watching Blu-ray on my PS3 but it always happens when watching HD-DVD with the 360. Well the PS3 supports 1080p24 and switches to it automatically. The 360 does not support 1080p24 and transmits HD-DVD as 1080p60. I am going to test some Blu-ray movies and see if I can reproduce the issue by disabling 1080p24 on the PS3. For those that are experiencing this issue it is unacceptable and it is clearly NOT standard judder.
Hyper_Eye is offline  
post #2703 of 3548 Old 12-11-2013, 06:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
StevenC56's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,684
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by booknut View Post

I've pretty well decided on buying the 8000, but I missed out on the black friday deals (didn't have permission from the boss). Now they have a $350 MIR, but that is it. Anybody know if there might be better deals coming up at new year's?

I'd like to know the answer to that myself. Maybe after the first they will have a Superbowl special?
StevenC56 is offline  
post #2704 of 3548 Old 12-11-2013, 07:35 PM
Newbie
 
kasperek04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Below are some pictures of the convergence on my projector, is this to be expected of the PT-AE8000U or do I have a bad unit?

 

 

 

 

 

The last picture is of the far right side where the convergence is at it's worst, most of it is like pictures 1 and 3, this being my first projector I'm not really sure if this is normal or if I should try getting a replacement from audio general.

kasperek04 is offline  
post #2705 of 3548 Old 12-11-2013, 08:39 PM
Senior Member
 
Dreamliner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 363
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by kasperek04 View Post

The last picture is of the far right side where the convergence is at it's worst, most of it is like pictures 1 and 3, this being my first projector I'm not really sure if this is normal or if I should try getting a replacement from audio general.
Typical. I had the same issue and a few other people noted similar issues with convergence uniformity. You may get lucky with a replacement. I sent mine back and bought a JVC RS46, so glad I did.

RS46 vs AE8000 comparison (Click)
dj41 had the same issues as me (Click)
jokercard had the same issue...too (Click)
Dreamliner is offline  
post #2706 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 03:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nezff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cajun Country
Posts: 4,277
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Convergence is off if it has that reddish line next to the white one?
nezff is offline  
post #2707 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 06:03 AM
Member
 
booknut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hoping somebody can confirm something for me. One of the reasons I am leaning towards the AE8000 was for the lens shift memory, however I have decided to go with a CIW setup to maximize my 16:9 content (I watch a fare amount of TV). If I am going with CIW then I don't really need lens shift memory do I?
booknut is offline  
post #2708 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 07:35 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
Quote:
Originally Posted by booknut View Post

Hoping somebody can confirm something for me. One of the reasons I am leaning towards the AE8000 was for the lens shift memory, however I have decided to go with a CIW setup to maximize my 16:9 content (I watch a fare amount of TV). If I am going with CIW then I don't really need lens shift memory do I?
Nope. Then it's just like watching your 16:9 TV. 2.35 movies will be letterboxed, and 16:9 will fill the screen.

Now, if you want the 2.35 content to shift to the top or bottom of the screen, then it could still come in handy...
GWCR is offline  
post #2709 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 07:40 AM
Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 101
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
When I play movies from my PC to my Panasonic 8000 I have to select either 23Hz or 59Hz in Windows. Because these are actually 23.976Hz and 59.94Hz respectively. Windows actually truncates Hz numbers when it displays them in the menu. If I select the 24Hz or 60Hz modes I do get a weird motion stutter every 30 seconds or so. But with 23Hz or 59Hz selected everything is buttery smooth on 24fps an 60fps video.
SirMaster is offline  
post #2710 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 08:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
apw2607's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by kasperek04 View Post


The last picture is of the far right side where the convergence is at it's worst, most of it is like pictures 1 and 3, this being my first projector I'm not really sure if this is normal or if I should try getting a replacement from audio general.

Think it depends ... you can't expect perfect convergence ... however it can't effect video quality. So although the white lines maybe a bit off zoomed in on a digital camera ..... walking back a couple of feet and now look at the screen. Then look at some video and see what you think ....

There no perfect science here. If it looks acceptable to you , then thats all that matters. THey may send you a replacement thats worse, or has other issues relating to color uniformity or focus.

I would have kept mine if it had not being for the judder issue described a few posts back. I really liked the projector and felt it was a decent upgrade over my 4000 for the price ... especially the back friday price.
apw2607 is offline  
post #2711 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 09:43 AM
Member
 
booknut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWCR View Post

Nope. Then it's just like watching your 16:9 TV. 2.35 movies will be letterboxed, and 16:9 will fill the screen.

Now, if you want the 2.35 content to shift to the top or bottom of the screen, then it could still come in handy...

That's what I thought, thanks.
booknut is offline  
post #2712 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 10:50 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,825
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 213
I have been using the Panny 8K almost exclusively for over a year now, and I recently completed a Theater for a major Home Show and employed the lens memory feature for CIH.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1491572/128-2-35-1-theater-project-w-3-week-time-limit-warp-factor-9-5-engage/60#post_24066096

My results onto a 143" diagonal 2.39:1 painted SF v2.5 4.0 Drywall screen were phenomenal.

As far as optimizing 16:9 content, I found that with the Memory I could zoom and then shift and Mask a very small portion of the top of a 16:9 Image, and that would significantly reduce the width of my "Pillars" without affecting any really noticeable amount of content.

That procedure was used initially because of 16:9 formatting variables & variances that would send the "ticker info" at the bottom of the broadcast Image (sports primarily) either off the screen or be bisected by the Screen trim. I was pleased to then see the sides of my 16:9 image expand proportionately.

By my reasoning...and most other Panny 8K owners I'm reasonably certain...the amount of screen real estate lost to CIH is far less annoying than the degree of screen wasted by Letter Boxing.

BTW, I employed a Darbee processor and a OPPO 103 DVD, and I'm not kidding in the least when I state that it was mentioned over and over again that the 143" image put up was comparable to the much smaller 4K Direct Display sets seen in the show (Sharp & Sony)

I was a Epson Fanboy for at least 3 years straight, but since the 8K came out...it's become my steadfast "Go To" choice.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #2713 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 11:38 AM
Senior Member
 
ch1sox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post

I have been using the Panny 8K almost exclusively for over a year now, and I recently completed a Theater for a major Home Show and employed the lens memory feature for CIH.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1491572/128-2-35-1-theater-project-w-3-week-time-limit-warp-factor-9-5-engage/60#post_24066096

My results onto a 143" diagonal 2.39:1 painted SF v2.5 4.0 Drywall screen were phenomenal.

As far as optimizing 16:9 content, I found that with the Memory I could zoom and then shift and Mask a very small portion of the top of a 16:9 Image, and that would significantly reduce the width of my "Pillars" without affecting any really noticeable amount of content.

That procedure was used initially because of 16:9 formatting variables & variances that would send the "ticker info" at the bottom of the broadcast Image (sports primarily) either off the screen or be bisected by the Screen trim. I was pleased to then see the sides of my 16:9 image expand proportionately.

By my reasoning...and most other Panny 8K owners I'm reasonably certain...the amount of screen real estate lost to CIH is far less annoying than the degree of screen wasted by Letter Boxing.

BTW, I employed a Darbee processor and a OPPO 103 DVD, and I'm not kidding in the least when I state that it was mentioned over and over again that the 143" image put up was comparable to the much smaller 4K Direct Display sets seen in the show (Sharp & Sony)

I was a Epson Fanboy for at least 3 years straight, but since the 8K came out...it's become my steadfast "Go To" choice.
That looks awesome. I'm getting my 133" 2.35 screen in a couple weeks so I'm looking forward to using CIH with the Panny 8000 like you did. I got the Darbee, too!
ch1sox is offline  
post #2714 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 01:43 PM
Newbie
 
kasperek04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by apw2607 View Post


Think it depends ... you can't expect perfect convergence ... however it can't effect video quality. So although the white lines maybe a bit off zoomed in on a digital camera ..... walking back a couple of feet and now look at the screen. Then look at some video and see what you think ....

There no perfect science here. If it looks acceptable to you , then thats all that matters. THey may send you a replacement thats worse, or has other issues relating to color uniformity or focus.

I would have kept mine if it had not being for the judder issue described a few posts back. I really liked the projector and felt it was a decent upgrade over my 4000 for the price ... especially the back friday price.

 

I'm not by any means expecting perfect, I'm more concerned with whether or not mine is subpar. I think if that is the case I'll end up going the warranty repair route just so it "hopefully" will only get better rather than worse. I also did notice focus irregularity throughout but I will look into that more tonight.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nezff View Post

Convergence is off if it has that reddish line next to the white one?

 

I believe so yes, perfect convergence would be the three colors, red, green, and blue all displayed on top of each other displaying white

kasperek04 is offline  
post #2715 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 03:24 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 MississippiMan View Post

I have been using the Panny 8K almost exclusively for over a year now, and I recently completed a Theater for a major Home Show and employed the lens memory feature for CIH.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1491572/128-2-35-1-theater-project-w-3-week-time-limit-warp-factor-9-5-engage/60#post_24066096

My results onto a 143" diagonal 2.39:1 painted SF v2.5 4.0 Drywall screen were phenomenal.

As far as optimizing 16:9 content, I found that with the Memory I could zoom and then shift and Mask a very small portion of the top of a 16:9 Image, and that would significantly reduce the width of my "Pillars" without affecting any really noticeable amount of content.

That procedure was used initially because of 16:9 formatting variables & variances that would send the "ticker info" at the bottom of the broadcast Image (sports primarily) either off the screen or be bisected by the Screen trim. I was pleased to then see the sides of my 16:9 image expand proportionately.

By my reasoning...and most other Panny 8K owners I'm reasonably certain...the amount of screen real estate lost to CIH is far less annoying than the degree of screen wasted by Letter Boxing.

BTW, I employed a Darbee processor and a OPPO 103 DVD, and I'm not kidding in the least when I state that it was mentioned over and over again that the 143" image put up was comparable to the much smaller 4K Direct Display sets seen in the show (Sharp & Sony)

I was a Epson Fanboy for at least 3 years straight, but since the 8K came out...it's become my steadfast "Go To" choice.

Thanks for taking the time of sharing this information.............pretty cool installation.......congrats!
cr136124 is offline  
post #2716 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 08:32 PM
Member
 
Dr.Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWCR View Post

Nope. Then it's just like watching your 16:9 TV. 2.35 movies will be letterboxed, and 16:9 will fill the screen.

Now, if you want the 2.35 content to shift to the top or bottom of the screen, then it could still come in handy...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjcook View Post

Any feedback on if my assumption above is correct that the 8000 can be used at maximum vertical lens shift for a CIH setup?


Convoluted question incoming and you two above may be hinting at the info I seek. I currently have the ae4000u and I am prevented from flush mounting it due to using lens memory since I have to have the lens of the projector in the boundary of the top of the screen so it shifts correctly. I know there is a few inches of leeway (due to lens shift in ae4000u menu but too much cuts off picture) but my screen frame is 22" from ceiling and projector lens is 20". Does ae8000u solve this restriction? Would love to flush mount a new ae8000u and still have 2.35:1 and 16:9 CIH setup. But that dang nuance of lens height to frame height makes my big head visible every time I get up. tongue.gif
Dr.Savage is offline  
post #2717 of 3548 Old 12-12-2013, 09:05 PM
Member
 
jjcook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 181
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Savage View Post


Convoluted question incoming and you two above may be hinting at the info I seek. I currently have the ae4000u and I am prevented from flush mounting it due to using lens memory since I have to have the lens of the projector in the boundary of the top of the screen so it shifts correctly. I know there is a few inches of leeway (due to lens shift in ae4000u menu but too much cuts off picture) but my screen frame is 22" from ceiling and projector lens is 20". Does ae8000u solve this restriction? Would love to flush mount a new ae8000u and still have 2.35:1 and 16:9 CIH setup. But that dang nuance of lens height to frame height makes my big head visible every time I get up. tongue.gif

Never figured out if there was some restriction that I wasn't aware of. My math was sound. Ended up bailing on the 8000 for a JVC 4910.

- Jeff
jjcook is online now  
post #2718 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 12:49 AM
Newbie
 
tshot07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Has anyone have used the iogear wireless hdmi withe the 8k? Not sure if IR 3d will. Interfere withe IR signal from the iogear.
tshot07 is offline  
post #2719 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 12:49 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,825
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Savage View Post


Convoluted question incoming and you two above may be hinting at the info I seek. I currently have the ae4000u and I am prevented from flush mounting it due to using lens memory since I have to have the lens of the projector in the boundary of the top of the screen so it shifts correctly. I know there is a few inches of leeway (due to lens shift in ae4000u menu but too much cuts off picture) but my screen frame is 22" from ceiling and projector lens is 20". Does ae8000u solve this restriction? Would love to flush mount a new ae8000u and still have 2.35:1 and 16:9 CIH setup. But that dang nuance of lens height to frame height makes my big head visible every time I get up. tongue.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjcook View Post

Never figured out if there was some restriction that I wasn't aware of. My math was sound. Ended up bailing on the 8000 for a JVC 4910.

Sad thing....and a poor substitute IMO if CIH is desired.

I myself asked this question before (2x) and received no response...ever. Contacted Panasonic Tech Support for the answer.

The answer is yes, you can place the Lens of the 8000 at / above the top of the Screen. The older Model 4000 you could not. However placing it so far above as to have to use maximum Lens shift....that is not a reasonable expectation. You must retain some needed adjustment to allow a degree of Image repositioning via Lens shift.

Too bad you went unanswered, but if you can still return the JVC, you'll gain Lumens as well as the desired functionality
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Savage View Post


Convoluted question incoming and you two above may be hinting at the info I seek. I currently have the ae4000u and I am prevented from flush mounting it due to using lens memory since I have to have the lens of the projector in the boundary of the top of the screen so it shifts correctly. I know there is a few inches of leeway (due to lens shift in ae4000u menu but too much cuts off picture) but my screen frame is 22" from ceiling and projector lens is 20". Does ae8000u solve this restriction? Would love to flush mount a new ae8000u and still have 2.35:1 and 16:9 CIH setup. But that dang nuance of lens height to frame height makes my big head visible every time I get up. tongue.gif

2" is no problem. The limiting factor being that you do have to work within the restraining boundaries of available lens shift. The Panny 8k also has a feature called Vertical Image Position that is active within the Lens Memory function. You then have to work with your Zoom / Masking parameters.

In my recent build, I had the PJ set to just within the Screens upper Boarder (15" from ceiling) but with a 9' ceiling, and the PJ set above a 8" Riser, I was not at all happy with the fact that several thousand people could simply reach up and manhandle the PJ's casing, or worse, put their hand on the Lens. Raising the PJ up 8" made a huge difference as evidenced in the 1st image below. You can easily ascertain that the Screen's top edge resides below the lens height by comparing the two images..




To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #2720 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 04:06 AM
Member
 
Dr.Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Thank you for the reply. My setup would need the PJ to be about 16" above the top of the screen (although I could adjust a few things such as moving screen up a few inches and not going flush mount but maybe 6 or 8 inch telescope drop from ceiling). My current setup is 2" above screen border with the ae4000u and that is about the limit for that PJ".

Do you know if you still have additional range past 8" above screen without masking away image?

Sounds like 8000 might be a decent upgrade for me because like you, I am always worried about someone's flailing arm whacking the hell out of my PJ by mistake.
Dr.Savage is offline  
post #2721 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 11:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nezff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cajun Country
Posts: 4,277
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Is there a rule of thumb (min/max) where the projector should be mounted in relation to the screen?
nezff is offline  
post #2722 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 01:55 PM
Member
 
Dr.Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by nezff View Post

Is there a rule of thumb (min/max) where the projector should be mounted in relation to the screen?

Generally speaking, I guess rule of thumb is out of arms length, and maybe out of the way of big heads and flailing arms, but sometimes we can't avoid that based on our rooms. I don't think there is really a rule of thumb. I guess, as long as PJ can do the necessary shifting. However, the Panny 4000's have this issue where you almost have to be in the boundaries of the frame to successfully have the CIH 2.35:1 and 16:9 images displayed correctly via the memory shift functionality. If you are running a 16:9 screen only and had that same PJ flush mounted and you could probably display the full image on the floor as far as the shifting via both shifting methods...okay that was more of a joke, cause you wouldn't want to do that, but just showing that the 4000 and 8000 have a hugh range they can adjust for....just too bad that the 4000 has that limitation I mentioned earlier...since it impacts a few of us based on how we have our theaters confirgured or more importantly how we want to have them configured.
Dr.Savage is offline  
post #2723 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 03:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nezff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cajun Country
Posts: 4,277
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Savage View Post

Generally speaking, I guess rule of thumb is out of arms length, and maybe out of the way of big heads and flailing arms, but sometimes we can't avoid that based on our rooms. I don't think there is really a rule of thumb. I guess, as long as PJ can do the necessary shifting. However, the Panny 4000's have this issue where you almost have to be in the boundaries of the frame to successfully have the CIH 2.35:1 and 16:9 images displayed correctly via the memory shift functionality. If you are running a 16:9 screen only and had that same PJ flush mounted and you could probably display the full image on the floor as far as the shifting via both shifting methods...okay that was more of a joke, cause you wouldn't want to do that, but just showing that the 4000 and 8000 have a hugh range they can adjust for....just too bad that the 4000 has that limitation I mentioned earlier...since it impacts a few of us based on how we have our theaters confirgured or more importantly how we want to have them configured.

This is my first pj so I'm not familiar with the 4000 model and it's limitations.

I just wondered if Panasonic recommends you hang the pj low enough or high enough compared to the screen.
nezff is offline  
post #2724 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 03:53 PM
Senior Member
 
kendo70433's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sebastopol, CA
Posts: 431
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by nezff View Post

This is my first pj so I'm not familiar with the 4000 model and it's limitations.

I just wondered if Panasonic recommends you hang the pj low enough or high enough compared to the screen.

You can find the manual fairly easily using a Google search. The charts in it suggest keeping the projector within the frame of the screen. But people here have reported successfully mounting it a bit outside of the screen area for 2.35:1 screens.
kendo70433 is offline  
post #2725 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 07:56 PM
Member
 
Dr.Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by kendo70433 View Post

You can find the manual fairly easily using a Google search. The charts in it suggest keeping the projector within the frame of the screen. But people here have reported successfully mounting it a bit outside of the screen area for 2.35:1 screens.

Hey Kendo,

I have looked at the manuals and I am not seeing reference on height placement other than the following:

For 120" screen broadcasting both 2.35:1 and 16:9 the height position is -0.60 to 1.79 m

The translation for height position is the following: Distance from the center of the lens to the image lower end (m).

So if flush mounted does this mean I have .6m or 1.79m of height above the screen to work with? 1.79m seems to good to be true especially after my current 4000u and its 2" freedom.

This is from 8000 manual, don't see the same in 4000 manual.

Honestly I don't think these equations in manual answer the riddle of what range we have above screen, but may be mistaken????

Unless it is the difference between half the screen height and the 1.79m?

-23" or 66.9"

Aargghhhhh. :/
Dr.Savage is offline  
post #2726 of 3548 Old 12-13-2013, 09:06 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
MississippiMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Byhalia, Mississippi. Waaaay down in the Bottoms
Posts: 14,825
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 213
Aargghhhhh. indeed

I kinda thoughta I hada answered that question.

Simple enough...if you hang the screen at a given height, I have found that you can place the PJ up to 8" inches above the screen's topmost edge, and shift a 2.39:1 image into place without losing squat i your adjusted 16:9 CHI. For every inch above that you will have to use the Vertical Image Position feature to move the image into place when you shift to 16:9 (after zooming in to match the Bottom edge...) and mask the Screen's Top edge's light spill.

Of course you have to save each completed screen format to Memory, Name it, and then activate the Auto Processing.

The greater the difference in Lens Height to Screen's top edge, the more effort it is to make the needed adjustments. That is why even with the ability to do such manipulations, the Manual and Tech support are gonna tell you to keep the difference as small as possible, or better still, within the Screen's perimeter.*** ***Do the latter and making any CHI adjustments are extremely easy...

Neither the Manual nor Tech Support can second guess the many varied different situations people will present to the equation....but I can assure you you cannot place the PJ 66" above the top of the Screen.

There is no substitute for proper placement within normal and prescribed boundaries. Beyond that, you simply have to do whatever you can and live with whatever you get. At least the 8K gives you a feature set that can help mitigate most all but the most extreme circumstances.
tsteele93 likes this.

To quote James T. Kirk;
"I'm laughing at the superior intellect"
MississippiMan is offline  
post #2727 of 3548 Old 12-14-2013, 07:01 AM
Member
 
Dr.Savage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by MississippiMan View Post


Simple enough...if you hang the screen at a given height, I have found that you can place the PJ up to 8" inches above the screen's topmost edge, and shift a 2.39:1 image into place without losing squat i your adjusted 16:9 CHI. For every inch above that you will have to use the Vertical Image Position feature to move the image into place when you shift to 16:9 (after zooming in to match the Bottom edge...) and mask the Screen's Top edge's light spill.

Ahh okay. Didn't know 8" was limit after reading your earlier post. Thank you:)
Dr.Savage is offline  
post #2728 of 3548 Old 12-14-2013, 08:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
jsm88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 871
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This is not the first time B&H has pulled some shady business practices with very short term rebates. This is not just a stock issue as I know two folks, one locally, who ordered with the lesser rebate after the second and already have their projectors. B&H is trying to get you to cancel your order out of fear that you won't be able to submit the rebate on time (or that the typical game will be played and the rebate processor will say they didn't get it on time too late for you to do anything about it). They've been pretty consistent about playing this game for a long time now, the NY AG actually looked at them about this behavior. Best you can do is tough it out on this game of consumer chicken and be ready to take it out of their hide in other ways should they succeed in screwing you over. Between newegg and B&H it seems that competing with amazon has taken its toll, now the consumer is always wrong
jsm88 is offline  
post #2729 of 3548 Old 12-14-2013, 08:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
apw2607's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsm88 View Post

This is not the first time B&H has pulled some shady business practices with very short term rebates. This is not just a stock issue as I know two folks, one locally, who ordered with the lesser rebate after the second and already have their projectors. B&H is trying to get you to cancel your order out of fear that you won't be able to submit the rebate on time (or that the typical game will be played and the rebate processor will say they didn't get it on time too late for you to do anything about it). They've been pretty consistent about playing this game for a long time now, the NY AG actually looked at them about this behavior. Best you can do is tough it out on this game of consumer chicken and be ready to take it out of their hide in other ways should they succeed in screwing you over. Between newegg and B&H it seems that competing with amazon has taken its toll, now the consumer is always wrong

I had zero issues with the order and the projector arrived on time. They simply sold out of the stock and are waiting for replacement stock direct from Panasonic. I don't follow your logic about rebates. It's got nothing to do with the retailer. The rebate is through Panasonic.
mtmason likes this.
apw2607 is offline  
post #2730 of 3548 Old 12-15-2013, 08:05 AM
Member
 
MadHookUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Looking for some help with 3D. I just bought this projector and wanted to test out 3D to make sure it works correctly before investing in many pairs of glasses.

The issue I am having is that the projector displays 2 images of the movie, and they are not lining up correctly. When I go to play a SBS Movie, I go into my projector settings and set it to Side by Side. The 3D appears to be working, but there are 2 copies of the movie running, and they are offset from each other. Right now I am trying to view SBS 3D MKV files using a HTPC.

I have never used 3D before, but I am assuming that these images should be overlapping each other. So if someone were watching the movie without glasses, it would still look somewhat normal. I do not have a Bluray player to test out with. While searching the internet, people said this was an overscan issue within Windows, but that change did not fix my problem. Was curious if anyone could help me with this issue.
MadHookUp 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