Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014 - Page 101 - AVS Forum
First ... 99  100  101 102  103  ... Last
Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP > Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014
zombie10k's Avatar zombie10k 07:25 AM 01-15-2013
I use one of the rubbermaid 4 post stands from lowes/depot for the comparisons between 2 projectors. The top position should be fine for this comparison.

please post your feedback in the thread once you get a chance to compare them, I don't think we've had anyone with a 90 go to the 50 and discuss it in detail. thx!

A.West's Avatar A.West 08:08 AM 01-15-2013
Sarangiman, look up discussions of lens sharpness varying with aperture. An iris in a projector is similar to the aperture of a camera lens. Photgraphers know very well that sharpness varies as aperture changes in a lens. "Wide open", (similar to iris off) is almost always less sharp than a moderately closed aperture in a camera lens. (google search "lens sharpness and aperture" for more) I think that's what you see when you close the iris some. Photographers also know that the center of the lens is sharper than corners. It should work the same for projectors. Sharpness and perceived contrast should correlate. Zoom lenses are also sharper at certain portions of their zoom range than others. Where that is varies by design - there's no general rule. Some lenses are sharper at extremes, some in the middle.

Photgrapher pixel-peepers can be even worse than projector pixel-peepers. Projectors have a lot of optical compromizes to make them easier to use. For the ultimate image sharpness, you would use a lens without zoom (a prime), without image shift, and moderately stopped down aperture (iris). But that would require a very expensive custom install product whose lens would also reduce light potential.

Everything is a tradeoff. Brightness and sharpness, mounting flexibility vs brightness and sharpness. There is no perfect lens. If a real life image looks good at your seating distance, thank the designers of these brilliant and now shockingly affordable products, and stop looking at test patterns and dark screens.
buckley44's Avatar buckley44 09:10 AM 01-15-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I use one of the rubbermaid 4 post stands from lowes/depot for the comparisons between 2 projectors. The top position should be fine for this comparison.

please post your feedback in the thread once you get a chance to compare them, I don't think we've had anyone with a 90 go to the 50 and discuss it in detail. thx!

I don't think i can do it in detail but i can give you my thoughts after viewing the 2 projectors, I've read every thread on this forum and I'm amazed at the knowledge yourself and others have.
If i like the 90es better in 2d , i might get the benq7000 for a second 3d projector. i know the 90es has the better lens with shift and memory settings.Although i'm thinking the 50es with the RC & the extra Lumens will make me happy all around.
I actually bought a new bulb for the 90es just to compare with the 50es,my 90 has 1800 hr's on it so i thought it would not be a fair comparison and also if i try to sell it i should have a new bulb with it.
If anyone has any input or experience with the 2 projectors i would appreciate it.
sarangiman's Avatar sarangiman 12:22 PM 01-15-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by A.West View Post

Sarangiman, look up discussions of lens sharpness varying with aperture. An iris in a projector is similar to the aperture of a camera lens. Photgraphers know very well that sharpness varies as aperture changes in a lens. "Wide open", (similar to iris off) is almost always less sharp than a moderately closed aperture in a camera lens. (google search "lens sharpness and aperture" for more) I think that's what you see when you close the iris some. Photographers also know that the center of the lens is sharper than corners. It should work the same for projectors. Sharpness and perceived contrast should correlate. Zoom lenses are also sharper at certain portions of their zoom range than others. Where that is varies by design - there's no general rule. Some lenses are sharper at extremes, some in the middle.

Photgrapher pixel-peepers can be even worse than projector pixel-peepers. Projectors have a lot of optical compromizes to make them easier to use. For the ultimate image sharpness, you would use a lens without zoom (a prime), without image shift, and moderately stopped down aperture (iris). But that would require a very expensive custom install product whose lens would also reduce light potential.

Everything is a tradeoff. Brightness and sharpness, mounting flexibility vs brightness and sharpness. There is no perfect lens. If a real life image looks good at your seating distance, thank the designers of these brilliant and now shockingly affordable products, and stop looking at test patterns and dark screens.

Right; everything you said is what I said in my post. I'm a photographer, & projector owner, so admittedly quite possibly the worst kind of pixel peeper smile.gif

Just was surprised that no one else had mentioned the reason for the increased contrast when stopping down, just like increased MTF when stopping down a lens in photography. I didn't know it'd have that much of an effect on a projector (figured they wouldn't behave like poorly designed wide-aperture primes), but seeing how much stopping down the iris even 2/3 of a stop sharpens up my HW50 (mainly increases focus uniformity), it all makes sense now.

Thanks for the confirmation.
jkasanic's Avatar jkasanic 12:37 PM 01-15-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarangiman View Post

Right; everything you said is what I said in my post. I'm a photographer, & projector owner, so admittedly quite possibly the worst kind of pixel peeper smile.gif

Just was surprised that no one else had mentioned the reason for the increased contrast when stopping down, just like increased MTF when stopping down a lens in photography. I didn't know it'd have that much of an effect on a projector (figured they wouldn't behave like poorly designed wide-aperture primes), but seeing how much stopping down the iris even 2/3 of a stop sharpens up my HW50 (mainly increases focus uniformity), it all makes sense now.

Thanks for the confirmation.

So what does this mean to the layman in terms of settings on the projector (in my case the HW50)? How does one determine the "optimal" setting for his/her environment?
Drexler's Avatar Drexler 02:15 PM 01-15-2013
Contrast increases due to a narrower iris cuts down stray light bouncing about in the light path more than the projected light.
dougri's Avatar dougri 02:26 PM 01-15-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarangiman View Post

Right; everything you said is what I said in my post. I'm a photographer, & projector owner, so admittedly quite possibly the worst kind of pixel peeper smile.gif

Just was surprised that no one else had mentioned the reason for the increased contrast when stopping down, just like increased MTF when stopping down a lens in photography. I didn't know it'd have that much of an effect on a projector (figured they wouldn't behave like poorly designed wide-aperture primes), but seeing how much stopping down the iris even 2/3 of a stop sharpens up my HW50 (mainly increases focus uniformity), it all makes sense now.

Thanks for the confirmation.

DLP additionally improves in contrast because the distance between the on-state pupil and the off-state pupil increases, reducing the amount of off-state scatter entering the lens.

edit: DLP tech docs (lots of interesting info and system design trades):

http://focus.ti.com/pdfs/dlpdmd/Discoverydlpa002.pdf

http://www.ti.com/lit/an/dlpa022/dlpa022.pdf
sarangiman's Avatar sarangiman 04:16 PM 01-15-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Contrast increases due to a narrower iris cuts down stray light bouncing about in the light path more than the projected light.

Ok, if elements within the lens aren't multicoated properly to avoid internal reflections, then I can buy this argument. I'm guessing it's a combination of that & of selectively using more of the center of the lens. The latter likely has a good deal of impact, given how out of focus a good portion of my image becomes when I open up the iris (i.e. lens performance is quite poor).
sarangiman's Avatar sarangiman 05:20 PM 01-15-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geof View Post

This is OT but opening the lens also lessens DOF and that magnifies any focus errors...try setting focus with the Iris open...it should get better as the lens is stopped down (as the iris is closed).

I know. But setting focus is actually not as easy as the method you suggested (albeit, it's a theoretically sound method!).

The thing is, some of the softness is due to:
  1. Different areas of the image having different effective focal planes, possibly due to patches of the lens having different effective focal lengths or due to the chip not being perfectly flat or due to the lens being decentered (latter is not the case for me, since random patches go out of focus, not one side compared to the other)
  2. Optical aberrations in the lens that lead to sides/corners being soft

Those two are affected differently by stopping down the lens. The latter responds very well to stopping down the iris, even just 1/3 to 2/3 stop (I measure with a meter). The former, for my unit, does not... probably b/c the effective focal planes/focal length of different patches of the lens are so off that stopping down the iris doesn't do enough. This is not surprising, b/c I have to turn the focus ring on the lens quite a bit from where it's set for maximal center sharpness to get the right side of the image in perfect focus.

If, however, I focus such that the center is *almost* in focus & the right side is also *almost* in focus (but the left side of the image is rather soft), and then activate 'Auto Limited', which stops down the iris ~2/3 of a stop for my Iris Open Reg setting, then suddenly the entire frame comes into such good focus that you cannot tell any regions is less sharp from my 1.25x screen-width seating distance.

If, instead, I'd just gone with the method of opening up the iris & selecting the focus such that *most* of the screen is in focus, I would've settled on the center/left being in focus, and the right being out of focus. But this would've been suboptimal, b/c in this scenario, stopping down the lens really doesn't help the right side much at all. But getting the right side more in focus, then stopping down the lens, leads to a relatively perfectly focused image.

Of course, switching to 3D, all this goes out the window since the iris opens all the way up.

Also, I think this discussion is relevant to this thread, since focus definitely appears to be an issue with a lot of HW50 units... but less so for JVC/Epson, since they likely use much better lenses.
zombie10k's Avatar zombie10k 06:23 PM 01-15-2013
I think if we put any of the models under a microscope, you are going to find variances between copies. Otherwise, how can a non QA'd RS55 look better than a QA' 4810?

Other factors have to be included as well. I thought the HC800 had a good bit of CA that would have likely been more distracting than a slight variance in focus (at least watching movies).

e-shift3.jpg


It reminds me of the Nikon and Canon guys bugging the heck out of their dealer returning 2k+ lenses because of back-focus and front-focus issues. Good luck finding one that is dead on. My RS55's near perfect focus is more likely a fluke vs. the norm.
sarangiman's Avatar sarangiman 07:31 PM 01-15-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I think if we put any of the models under a microscope, you are going to find variances between copies. Otherwise, how can a non QA'd RS55 look better than a QA' 4810?

Other factors have to be included as well. I thought the HC800 had a good bit of CA that would have likely been more distracting than a slight variance in focus (at least watching movies).

It reminds me of the Nikon and Canon guys bugging the heck out of their dealer returning 2k+ lenses because of back-focus and front-focus issues. Good luck finding one that is dead on. My RS55's near perfect focus is more likely a fluke vs. the norm.

All fair points. But my knowing some of these things, one can can pump the last bit of performance out of their machines. For example, knowing all that I know about my HW50ES that I posted above, I know I can get a good deal of sharpness just by going with a high gain screen & limiting my Iris Open Reg. That's pretty cool.

As for Nikon/Canon 2k+ lenses... you spend that much money on a lens, and if you're a professional, you need a lens that'll perform. So it's absolutely valid to test your copy for focus/decentering issues. As for back/front-focus... yeah, good luck. But that's also why AF microadjustment was invented smile.gif AFMA allows me to shoot at f/1.2-f/1.8 & still get an 80% or so hit rate. Game changing.

Sometimes it's about ignoring issues, sure. But other times it's about working around them smile.gif
zombie10k's Avatar zombie10k 07:57 PM 01-15-2013
being into photography and home theater projectors is definitely a formula for analysis paralysis... cool.gif

are you sending back the HCHP for another screen? I think you should give the regular HP 2.4 a shot, I've installed a few and didn't see anything like those shots of the HCHP.
SteveR1952's Avatar SteveR1952 08:27 PM 01-15-2013
Long time lurker on many of these shoot out threads. Still undecided on what I will purchase once my theater is done in a few months.

One major item for me is 2.4 or 1.78. The Epson and Sony are at the top of my list but doing multiple aspect ratios without an anomorphic lens seems like a real pain with a ceiling mounted unit (which I will have due to room constraints).

Do you folks with the Sony or Epson projectors just stay with one aspect or the other rather than getting out the ladder to change?
I realize the Panasonic 8000 and most of the JVC models have remote control of the lens and lens memory functions but the Panny is too flaky from what I have read so far. So that leaves the JVCs but I may someday want 3D and it appears the JVC models in my price range would not be all that great for 3D.

Anyway, just wondering what you all in relation to aspects if you are ceiling mounted.

Thanks and I continue to learn from the Masters here on this thread.
sarangiman's Avatar sarangiman 12:44 AM 01-16-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

being into photography and home theater projectors is definitely a formula for analysis paralysis... cool.gif

are you sending back the HCHP for another screen? I think you should give the regular HP 2.4 a shot, I've installed a few and didn't see anything like those shots of the HCHP.

Haha, Zombie, word.

The Da-Lite HCHP is going back & I'm getting a Draper Contrast Radiant ('Onyx' fixed frame) 110". I still believe in the grey screen b/c they amplify reflections from scattered light less than white screens.

If the Draper is also dirty or has a texture, I'll probably just go for the Draper Radiant (Draper's version of the HP). I'm fairly certain I'll prefer Draper's method of tensioning the screen anyway compared to Da-Lite's snaps. The snaps led to ripples on two of my corners; the Draper uses a tension rod that spans the entire width of the screen.

The Draper material looks suspiciously similar to the Da-Lite material (close up texture of sample patches look the same), so I don't know if I should expect anything different with the Contrast Radiant vs. the HCHP.

I did do a bunch of gain measurements at different angles between the HP, HCHP, Draper CR & Draper Radiant. Need to post those graphs. Though, those graphs/numbers were a bit messed up due to the dirtiness of the HCHP screen; in other words, if I quantitate the gain of a HCHP sample patch taped on top of my 110" HCHP screen, the numbers come out different b/c the sample patch is clean but my NEW 110" HCHP screen is dirty as all heck (makes it dimmer). *Sigh*

I hear of texture/dirtiness of HP screens as well... which is why I'm giving Draper a chance. Will keep one or more of my/related threads updated on this.

Thanks for your input!
Seegs108's Avatar Seegs108 01:25 AM 01-16-2013
Let me know how the Draper material works out. My Da-Lite dealer has sent me screen material samples for me to choose a new screen from. Da-Lite has already given me a green light on replacement. I just need to choose which material I want.
sarangiman's Avatar sarangiman 01:32 AM 01-16-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

Let me know how the Draper material works out. My Da-Lite dealer has sent me screen material samples for me to choose a new screen from. Da-Lite has already given me a green light on replacement. I just need to choose which material I want.

Sure. Too bad my actual HCHP screen had considerably less gain than the HCHP sample patches Da-Lite sent me. Because it was dirty... some dark residue all over. Curious to see how the Draper will turn out.

But definitely want a high gain screen now... all the more given how much the sharpness increases with smaller iris (didn't pay close attention to just how much sharpness was affected previously).
Stuntman_Mike's Avatar Stuntman_Mike 08:02 AM 01-16-2013
I haven't seen this mentioned in the thread as far as a resolution.

From any of the HW50ES owners, have you gotten your extra lamp, and if so, what steps did you have to go through to get it?
Frohlich's Avatar Frohlich 08:13 AM 01-16-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuntman_Mike View Post

I haven't seen this mentioned in the thread as far as a resolution.

From any of the HW50ES owners, have you gotten your extra lamp, and if so, what steps did you have to go through to get it?

I ordered through AVS and received my lamp a couple of weeks after I ordered my projector. I didn't have to do anything...it just showed up at my doorstep.
Stuntman_Mike's Avatar Stuntman_Mike 08:43 AM 01-16-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frohlich View Post

I ordered through AVS and received my lamp a couple of weeks after I ordered my projector. I didn't have to do anything...it just showed up at my doorstep.

Cool. Thanks for the reply.

Just curious if this was something that AVS did to go the extra mile, or did it come from Sony after filling out a warranty online or something? Just trying to gauge if the experience is different if ordered from another dealer.
Gagorian's Avatar Gagorian 11:39 AM 01-16-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

being into photography and home theater projectors is definitely a formula for analysis paralysis... cool.gif

are you sending back the HCHP for another screen? I think you should give the regular HP 2.4 a shot, I've installed a few and didn't see anything like those shots of the HCHP.

I have recently received a HP 2.4 and there seems to be a few dark horizontal bands that show up particularily on vertical pans with bright content, it isn't very easily visible in regular movie content but in animation it's distracting. I've already been instructed by Da-Lite to try to get a picture of the banding for a possible replacement. If I manage to get a good picture of it, I'll post it here on the forums.

It's not as bad as the HCHP pictures I saw in the other thread though.
zombie10k's Avatar zombie10k 12:02 PM 01-16-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gagorian View Post

I have recently received a HP 2.4 and there seems to be a few dark horizontal bands that show up particularily on vertical pans with bright content, it isn't very easily visible in regular movie content but in animation it's distracting. I've already been instructed by Da-Lite to try to get a picture of the banding for a possible replacement. If I manage to get a good picture of it, I'll post it here on the forums.

It's not as bad as the HCHP pictures I saw in the other thread though.

thanks for the info, please keep us updated. I told a Dalite VP 2 years ago they were making a mistake getting rid of the 2.8 material. The 2.8 is very smooth and the 2.4 has a noticeable texture (when looking at it close up). Perhaps this has something to do with it. The last 2.4 I installed was about a year ago and it looked ok, maybe something changed with the manufacturing process.

When I watch 'The Art of Flight' on the 142" 2.8, I don't see any banding at all. It would be obvious as day with this documentary.
rwestley's Avatar rwestley 02:42 PM 01-16-2013
It seems that the new JVC emitter gives users more options for 3D glasses. The emitter uses the new universal 2012 glasses that Samsung, Panasonic and I believe Epson now uses. I have tried the emitter on the RS 45 with the $20 Samsung glasses and they work. I would assume that other brands of the 2012 universal glasses should also work. Hope someone can try them and report back. I have also tried the MV glasses using the Zombie's dual cable.
soupdragon's Avatar soupdragon 04:45 PM 01-16-2013
Hi guys

I'm doing a blog on my journey which hopefully ends up in me having a 4k home cinema. Not quite relevant to the projectors in this thread but I've been through some top spec PJ's lately and I've detailed my findings (Sony VW85 - JVC X70 (RS55) JVCX90 (RS65) We all love projectors here so some of you may find it interesting!

You can see it here:

http://www.avforums.com/forums/members-home-cinema-gallery/1721529-building-4k-ultra-hd-multi-masking-cinema-lets-get-work.html

This is my latest post when I've just opened up the X70 and compared it to the X90:

Ladies and gentlemen, may I have your attention please!
In the red corner, weighing it at 35lbs, we have the JVC X70!!!
In the blue corner, weighing in at 35lbs, we have the JVC X90!!!
In the green corner, weighing it at 32lbs, we have the Sony VW85!!!

X70 right, Sony VW85 middle, X90 left:


X70 closeup:


X70 showing off its fresh out of the box high gloss finish:


1st thing was to set it up the X70 just like my X90. Throw distance the same, aperture at -15 and then into the AVS test disk. The basic brightness and contrast in THX mode was identical to the X90, just 17 black flashing and clipping white at about 237:



Next up was convergence. From the seating position, the X70 and X90 look identical - i.e, fantastic! Not a hint of colour in sight.



But we don't leave it at that, we stick our nose up to the screen to find out exactly how good it really is. This is where the X90 has the edge out of the box, convergence was excellent both seated and nose touching the screen. Here you can see that the x70 looks really good vertically, but you can see blue on the horizontal lines, with it being a little high above the white, and then at the bottom of pixel 2, we can see the white is a little yellow:



So I looked the whole way across the pattern and I was pleased to see the misconvergence was uniform the whole way across the screen. The blue stayed high on the line at the left, right, centre, top and bottom of the screen. This is a good thing. Likewise, the vertical lines were uniformly white everywhere too.
So into the menu I went, and moved blue down a FULL pixel horizontally and voila, a great result!



Now look at it!


So you can ever so slightly see a little colour here in the pic but its tiny. What you see is a combination of chromatic aberration from both my camera lens and the projector lens. In minimal. The X90 is slightly better again but we're splitting hairs now - very little in it.
The 1:1 pixel mapping shows sharpness between X70 and X90 is both great. Obviously this was done with e-shift turned off so I can see the pixels but nice and uniform all the way across the screen.

I also measured light output and both were almost identical here too, 1 to 2 lux difference at 100IRE white screen with zero hrs on bulb and because I measured on different days with the sensor not exactly in the same spot (close but I can't say for sure) I'll say that brightness was the same too.

This pic shows low lamp mode at aperture fully shut and my ambient lights are on and 106" screen size. This is about as dull as it can be made at zero hrs and you can see its still able to throw out a bright image:




soupdragon's Avatar soupdragon 04:46 PM 01-16-2013
By the way, all these shots are hand held, couldn't be bothered to dig out the tripod so bear in mind it will look better in real life.

Reduced ambient light a little and bumped screen size up to 132":


So the million dollar question on everyones lips is can you see the benefit in the extra contrast ratio of the X90. Answer? I'm not sure yet. Haven't tested my reference black scenes yet but one thing I can clearly say is that black levels are stunning!

Here's a rough idea of what it looks like:


Zoomed in and showing about 60% of the actual shot here (handheld remember so not so sharp):


And then holding the camera right at the screen - notice how solid the image looks with no digital pixels in sight, just some natural film grain and that lack of digital look is due to the e-shift:


Thats it for now, I'll write a little more in depth about my findings later, along with doing the 3D glasses test I mentioned previously.
mbw23air's Avatar mbw23air 05:18 PM 01-16-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by soupdragon View Post


So the million dollar question on everyones lips is can you see the benefit in the extra contrast ratio of the X90. Answer? I'm not sure yet. Haven't tested my reference black scenes yet but one thing I can clearly say is that black levels are stunning!

I will be interested to hear your feelings about the X70 vs. X90 black level differences. I would hope there would be a visible difference but depending on your luck of the draw on the X70 it might not be much at all.

Mike
Elix's Avatar Elix 08:52 PM 01-16-2013
Santa came out of nowhere! Thanks, soupdragon!
SED <--- Rules's Avatar SED <--- Rules 09:03 PM 01-16-2013
Hi soupdragon,

The black levels look nice, but still not the level I would like them. Maybe in a few years or so JVC can make it happen. I have the RS35, and while everything else is excellent about it, the blacks could be blacker. I'm thinking around native 250,000:1 I would be satisfied. I know this will happen, but we have to wait. In the meantime, I am definitely loving my RS35 (my first projector).
zombie10k's Avatar zombie10k 09:07 PM 01-16-2013
thanks for adding your info to the thread. It's good to have another perspective of e-shift 1st gen. I personally like it better than the e-shift 2. Movies like TDKR's look amazing on my RS55.

the room looks great. That door is begging for some of this:

http://www.protostar.biz/flock.htm

I have a ton of this stuff and just blacked out my ceiling and a good part of my floor. Now it's like looking into a tunnel with no distractions outside the border of the screen.

let us know what you think about the 70 vs 90 contrast. Do both lamps have a similar #'s of hours? they should ideally match in lumen output to be fair when comparing. have fun.
SED <--- Rules's Avatar SED <--- Rules 09:11 PM 01-16-2013
Zombie,

Please let me know what you think of my post above yours. Do you think JVC will be able to reach my lofty black level standards? smile.gif
zombie10k's Avatar zombie10k 09:25 PM 01-16-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by SED <--- Rules View Post

Zombie,

Please let me know what you think of my post above yours. Do you think JVC will be able to reach my lofty black level standards? smile.gif

it's a good question. the increase in native contrast hasn't been significant over the last few years. there must be a limitation of the panel design where the maximum possible contrast is being achieved with the current technology.

it's interesting to see the different projectors now with my room that I turned it into a bat cave over the last few weeks. It makes you appreciate just how good the JVC performs in dark scenes. The first 10 minutes of Underworld Evolution cannot be replicated by the other models as convincing as the RS55 @ -11. Dark blacks with intense white/blue light cutting through the background, it looks amazing.

all the projectors look better with a dark ceiling and floor. The Epson 5020 was impressive, but I started to see the iris at work. I didn't notice this before, but with the TDKR's going quickly from dark to lights scene and vice versa, I could see the iris pumping a bit.

I'm pretty happy right now with the RS55. This is a really good sample with low hours and the Lumagen + 125 auto cal breathed new life into it since I never had the patience to give this a proper calibration with the built in CMS and twitchy gamma controls. With the dark room, it's looks better than I could have imagined before. MPC @ 2 + Darbee @25 % for most of my content which is mainly 2D BD.

enjoy the RS35, that was the model of AV kings just a few short years ago and is still considered one of the best.
Tags: Benq W7000 Home Projection System , Jvc Dla Rs55 Bundle , Jvc Dla Rs45 Home Theater Projector 1080p Hdmi , Epson V11h502020 Powerlite Home Cinema 3020e 2d And 3d 1080p Wireless Home Theater Projector , Sony Vpl Hw50es 3d Projector , Epson 5010 Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector , Epson Powerlite Home Cinema 3010 2d And 3d Projector V11h421020 , Panasonic Ptae8000u Hd Projector , Mitsubishi Hc7900dw Home Theater 3d Projector , Mitsubishi Hc8000dbl Dlp 3d Home Theater Projector With Spare Lamp 1300 Ansi 12 6 Lbs , Darbeevision Darblet Hdmi Video Processor , Epson 5020ub Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector
First ... 99  100  101 102  103  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop