Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014 - Page 294 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #8791 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 01:24 AM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
What's interesting is Cine4home measured only 14000:1 on the 3D-S they had in for review. I'm wondering if they made a few changes to the dynamic iris on the 3D-S? Every measurement on the original lumis that I saw in the owners thread has been around 24000:1 or higher and these are measurements from well known and respected reviewers. Unless there's a huge difference between most units, something doesn't seem to add up. Numbers from these Lumis units (new or older models) seem all over the place.
I do not know if changes on newer sim PJ
But out of my reach to buy to expensive.
But I know the guy that have the brand new Sim, do not remember the name. Then better than the lumis 3ds. Maybe I take a look one day.
My x500 was mesured to native 39000:1 with iris wide open. And a friend with the JVC x700 mesured native 30000:1 wide open iris, so different. But difficult to say when not mesured in the same room. And I think that is the thing.
The lumis is fantastic in 3D, but in my head you pay to much for the total picture. And can get something better for less money.
But people look on things different and also see things different.
Dj Dee is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #8792 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 01:31 AM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post
My calibrator measured my RS4810 at 46,000:1 for native contrast (not sure where iris, etc, was set at).
On my x500 from full measures 39000:1 and just 2 step down on the iris almost 47000:1 so setting on the iris have a big influence. But you loose dynamic and punch.
Dj Dee is offline  
post #8793 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 01:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post
This is what I have always said, and when I say it on this forum most members don´t agree. The on/off and very low blacklevel of the JVC is only shown in very low APL scenes that is very very few in normal movies. And the high ansi/silmontanious contrast of for example the Sony VW1100 matters more in most scenes. And the combination of high on/off and ansi/silmontanious contrast of the Sony makes it more dynamic over all than the Sim2 Lumis 3DS that has lover on/off and higer ansi/silmontanious contrast, so a combination is what matters most for a nice dynamic picture in most scenes. For the most dynamic and depth og field picture in very low APL scenes it is high on off that matters most and this is where the JVC´s shine.
I think I really need to see a 1000ES in action. I think unfortunately the Lumis is the pinnacle of DLP performance. It seems it's just a little behind the Sony machines for on/off contrast. But from what I've read the Lumis still has higher ANSI. Most measurements say the difference is ~650:1 vs 1000:1 with about a 25% difference in on/off contrast performance. From what you're saying the 1000ES's higher on/off makes more of a difference in creating a dynamic looking image. I wonder how much better low APL scenes look on the Sony? Though the Lumis is brighter so I guess it would be better suited for larger screens.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Seegs108 is online now  
post #8794 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 01:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post
Quote:Originally Posted by Deja Vu

I have no interest in this projector but I suspect a lot of members on this forum will be interested. This projector sounds like a real bargain if the AVForums review is to be believed. I've posted it here since some might not see it in the under $3,000 section and it apparently competes very well against many of the over $3,000 projectors. Has Sony undercut everyone else? Will this be a game changer or has AVForums gone a little overboard (like they did, IMO, with the HD91)?

http://www.avforums.com/review/sony-...r-review.10331

Here's another look:

https://translate.google.com/transla...htm&edit-text=


If you compare the HW55 and HW40 tests it is hard to understand why he gives the HW40 better score in many of the different categories, and this just shows how inconsistent this site is when they test different projectors. To give it better score in color accuracy and so on is ok, but to give it better score in build quality, contrast, ease of use and 3D quality I find very strange.

The HW40 is for sure a very good projector as it is simply a HW55 without the iris.
Sorry, just read this.


There's a simple reason for this - they take price into account.


So if the build quality on a £1,850 projector is the same as on a £2,800 projector, the former will score better.


This makes a lot of sense. Look at the build quality on some ultra high end models - they're like tanks. You'd have to give the Sony 4K model 3/10 on build quality if you weren't taking price into account!


Steve W
Pecker is offline  
post #8795 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 01:55 AM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post
This is what I have always said, and when I say it on this forum most members don´t agree. The on/off and very low blacklevel of the JVC is only shown in very low APL scenes that is very very few in normal movies. And the high ansi/silmontanious contrast of for example the Sony VW1100 matters more in most scenes. And the combination of high on/off and ansi/silmontanious contrast of the Sony makes it more dynamic over all than the Sim2 Lumis 3DS that has lover on/off and higer ansi/silmontanious contrast, so a combination is what matters most for a nice dynamic picture in most scenes. For the most dynamic and depth og field picture in very low APL scenes it is high on off that matters most and this is where the JVC´s shine.
How many times have we tried to say this before ☺
RickAVManiac and d.j. like this.
Dj Dee is offline  
post #8796 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 01:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecker View Post
Sorry, just read this.


There's a simple reason for this - they take price into account.


So if the build quality on a £1,850 projector is the same as on a £2,800 projector, the former will score better.


This makes a lot of sense. Look at the build quality on some ultra high end models - they're like tanks. You'd have to give the Sony 4K model 3/10 on build quality if you weren't taking price into account!


Steve W
The problem with doing this is that they don't explain that in the review. The score should be based solely on picture quality within it's price class and then if there is an issue with build quality or another aspect that they think should bring it's score down they should explicitly state that in the review. It just seems the way they score their projector reviews is a bit too ambiguous I understand reviewing based upon "value" but I think the way AVForum's breaks down their scoring is a bit confusing which is why there's usually a lot of argument based around their final score. I just think they need to re-evaluate how they do reviews.
Andreas21 likes this.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Seegs108 is online now  
post #8797 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 02:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I think I really need to see a 1000ES in action. I think unfortunately the Lumis is the pinnacle of DLP performance. It seems it's just a little behind the Sony machines for on/off contrast. But from what I've read the Lumis still has higher ANSI. Most measurements say the difference is ~650:1 vs 1000:1 with about a 25% difference in on/off contrast performance. From what you're saying the 1000ES's higher on/off makes more of a difference in creating a dynamic looking image. I wonder how much better low APL scenes look on the Sony? Though the Lumis is brighter so I guess it would be better suited for larger screens.
The Sony VW1000/1100 ANSI contrast is measuread at around 600:1 and from what I saw on the Lumis 3DS I dont think it is 1000:1, I think it is more like around 600:1. And when we side by side tested the Lumis 3DS and the VW1000 the VW1000 had a more dynamic, sharper, better clarity, better depth of field, better blacklevel ++ than the Lumis 3DS. So I think the better on/off of the VW1000 played a role in why it was more dynamic in most scenes. The only thing the Lumis was better at was 3D, and of corse it has the ability to light up a bigger screen. I think the Lumis 3DS and now the Super Lumis is a overpriced product compared to performance when it costs a little over 2 times as much (Super Lumis) as the VW1000/1100 here in Norway, but also the VW1000 is overpriced compared to the JVC X500 when it comes to performance.

Regards
Andreas


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

Andreas21 is offline  
post #8798 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 02:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
The problem with doing this is that they don't explain that in the review. The score should be based solely on picture quality within it's price class and then if there is an issue with build quality or another aspect that they think should bring it's score down they should explicitly state that in the review. It just seems the way they score their projector reviews is a bit too ambiguous I understand reviewing based upon "value" but I think the way AVForum's breaks down their scoring is a bit confusing which is why there's usually a lot of argument based around their final score. I just think they need to re-evaluate how they do reviews.
I suppose there are a few of reasons they don't mention it in the review.


One of those reasons is that it's blindingly obvious. There are some astonishing £1k (and sub-£1k) projectors out there at the moment, but if the price were to be ignored, then compared to some £20k+ models they'd have to score them 1/10 or 2/10, which would make them look pants. Only an idiot would see a score of 7/10 on a £1k projector and a score of 7/10 on a £20k projector and think it meant they were of the same quality.


Another is that this is something that's occasionally come up before, and they've explained it before. On the odd occasion anyone asks why a cheaper projector has the same score as a more expensive and better model, they note that price is taken into account.


Steve W
Pecker is offline  
post #8799 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 02:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecker View Post
I suppose there are a few of reasons they don't mention it in the review.


One of those reasons is that it's blindingly obvious. There are some astonishing £1k (and sub-£1k) projectors out there at the moment, but if the price were to be ignored, then compared to some £20k+ models they'd have to score them 1/10 or 2/10, which would make them look pants. Only an idiot would see a score of 7/10 on a £1k projector and a score of 7/10 on a £20k projector and think it meant they were of the same quality.


Another is that this is something that's occasionally come up before, and they've explained it before. On the odd occasion anyone asks why a cheaper projector has the same score as a more expensive and better model, they note that price is taken into account.


Steve W
The biggest problem AVForums has is that their reviewers admit they are JVC fanboys and it shines throug all their reviews of JVC´s they all get a 9 or 10/10 and they leave out all the negatives. The only negative is the DI of the new JVC line witch in fact is a great positive. They admitted to be fans of JVC and when I pointed that out I was banned from the forum.

Also I think they are way to positive in most reviews and give almost every projector 8 or higher. And when you talk price, why did they give the Optoma HD91 9/10 and the Sony HW50 8/10 and JVC X35 9/10 when they are in the same price point and the Sony and JVC totally destroys the HD91 when it comes to all aspects of a good projector?? I find them to be inconcistent and they lost all their credibility when they admitted to be JVC fanboys as both Steve Withers and Phil Hinton did in one thread at AVForums, but I guess all that was deleated when they banned me from the forum.

Regards
Andreas


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


Last edited by Andreas21; 08-14-2014 at 02:50 AM.
Andreas21 is offline  
post #8800 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 02:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Whatever the pros and cons, I'm heartily sick of the success the JVC marketing department has had with the phrase 'film like' when discussing black levels.


Whenever I go to the cinema (digital or, rarely these days, 35mm) black levels are rarely better than 'okay'. 35mm film, as projected in a cinema (and let's face it, that's what 'film-like' means in one's head when discussing a home cinema projector) does not have JVC's jaw-dropping, inky blacks.


I'm not saying there's anything wrong with improving black levels beyond what we see at the cinema. But there are other aspects of film-viewing, and motion is one of them. The motion handling on JVCs is sub-par when compared to film, and yet the continue to improve in black levels, whilst sill falling short of far cheaper DLP models on motion, and yet continue to trumpet that their image is 'film-like'.


If a DLP projector was trumpeted as being 'film-like' we'd never hear the last of the guffawing, despite the fact that it had black levels on a par with film, and similar motion handling.


Steve W
Elix likes this.
Pecker is offline  
post #8801 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 02:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post
And when you talk price, why did they give the Optoma HD91 9/10 and the Sony HW50 8/10 and JVC X35 9/10 when they are in the same price point and the Sony and JVC totally destroys the HD91 when it comes to all aspects of a good projector??
That's simply not true.


Colour?


Motion handling?


On brightness, the HD91 is probably bright enough for smaller screens, and should remain so for much of its life. The Sony will beat the 91 for brightness, but this will fade. Of course, you can buy new lamps, but this brings in factors of extra cost and inconvenience, as well as re-calibration.


BTW, my next projector will be the Sony HW40, as the Optoma will not be quite bright enough for my larger screen, which is a shame. But if I could only afford a smaller screen, I might have gone for the Opyoma.


This really is internet-speak. It doesn't 'destroy' anything. We really should get beyond this adolescent idea that we can prove a point by using hyperbole, or that we need to use such extreme language just because a projector doesn't meet our personal needs and tastes.


Steve W
Willie likes this.
Pecker is offline  
post #8802 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 02:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecker View Post
Whatever the pros and cons, I'm heartily sick of the success the JVC marketing department has had with the phrase 'film like' when discussing black levels.


Whenever I go to the cinema (digital or, rarely these days, 35mm) black levels are rarely better than 'okay'. 35mm film, as projected in a cinema (and let's face it, that's what 'film-like' means in one's head when discussing a home cinema projector) does not have JVC's jaw-dropping, inky blacks.


I'm not saying there's anything wrong with improving black levels beyond what we see at the cinema. But there are other aspects of film-viewing, and motion is one of them. The motion handling on JVCs is sub-par when compared to film, and yet the continue to improve in black levels, whilst sill falling short of far cheaper DLP models on motion, and yet continue to trumpet that their image is 'film-like'.


If a DLP projector was trumpeted as being 'film-like' we'd never hear the last of the guffawing, despite the fact that it had black levels on a par with film, and similar motion handling.


Steve W
The new JVC X500/700/900 is on par with DLP on motion when you look at 24hz material, if you look at test images for motion resolution the DLP is better and the old CRT tech even better, but who uses their projectors to look at test images? The older JVC´I foud motion to be one of their negative aspects. I find blacklevel to be only one of the many important aspects of picturequality. The most filmlike digital projector on the market right now is the VW1000/1100 in my eyes.

Regards
Andreas


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

Andreas21 is offline  
post #8803 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 03:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecker View Post
That's simply not true.


Colour?


Motion handling?


On brightness, the HD91 is probably bright enough for smaller screens, and should remain so for much of its life. The Sony will beat the 91 for brightness, but this will fade. Of course, you can buy new lamps, but this brings in factors of extra cost and inconvenience, as well as re-calibration.


BTW, my next projector will be the Sony HW40, as the Optoma will not be quite bright enough for my larger screen, which is a shame. But if I could only afford a smaller screen, I might have gone for the Opyoma.


This really is internet-speak. It doesn't 'destroy' anything. We really should get beyond this adolescent idea that we can prove a point by using hyperbole, or that we need to use such extreme language just because a projector doesn't meet our personal needs and tastes.


Steve W
The Optoma does not have better colour when calibrated to D65 and Rec 709. And motion when looking at 24Hz material is on par when looking at the HW50. And yes the X35 and HW50 totally destroys the HD91 when it comes to picturequality, and I am sure many here agree with me on that. And yes I have seen the HD91 and it did not impress me at all if you wonder.

Hope you find the HW40 to meet your expectations, I have not seen it but I own the HW55 (and had the HW50 earlier) and it is basicly the same projector minus the DI, and to me the HW55 is the best all round projector in it´s class due to the very good picturequality and low inputlag as I use it for TV series, sports and gaming. If I was to use it with movies only I would have chosen the JVC X500 even if it a little more expensive.

Regards
Andreas


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


Last edited by Andreas21; 08-14-2014 at 03:10 AM.
Andreas21 is offline  
post #8804 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 06:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Pecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post
The Optoma does not have better colour when calibrated to D65 and Rec 709. And motion when looking at 24Hz material is on par when looking at the HW50. And yes the X35 and HW50 totally destroys the HD91 when it comes to picturequality, and I am sure many here agree with me on that. And yes I have seen the HD91 and it did not impress me at all if you wonder.
But here's the problem. You said "...why did they give the Optoma HD91 9/10 and the Sony HW50 8/10 and JVC X35 9/10 when they are in the same price point and the Sony and JVC totally destroys the HD91 when it comes to all aspects of a good projector??"


You're now saying the Optoma is as good as the Sony & JVC on colour and motion handling.


Are colour and motion handling not aspects of picture quality?


The Optoma's weaknesses are black levels and brightness. Given a small enough screen it'll be bright enough, and remain so over time. As for black levels, this an issue for DLP in general, and whilst the HD91 is not as good as it could be, it's not a lot worse than many other DLPs in the price range.


And you use that term 'destroy' again. Why is such language necessary? What ever happened to 'better than'. And why, on t'internet, is nothing ever said to be slightly better or worse than something else.


Steve W
Pecker is offline  
post #8805 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 07:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 4,422
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 107 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
This is the classic photo Wolfgang (W.Mayer) took of the JVC RS20 (26000:1 contrast, which is where the current low end JVCs are for native contrast) vs the Lumis with it's DI engaged:

Lumis on Left and JVC on Right



Obviously this has changed now that the JVC has a DI. With the JVC's you can now have max brightness AND extremely good black levels. But this shows you that up until this year the Lumis could walk all over a JVC at full brightness.
The black level of the Lumis with DI engaged (and with white lettering on the screen) is very impressive. Too bad the high end 3D DLPs haven't hit the used market yet -- let's hope 4K gets moving and the 1080p 3D Sim2 projector owners feel the need to upgrade.
Deja Vu is online now  
post #8806 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 07:31 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,384
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecker View Post
Whatever the pros and cons, I'm heartily sick of the success the JVC marketing department has had with the phrase 'film like' when discussing black levels.


Whenever I go to the cinema (digital or, rarely these days, 35mm) black levels are rarely better than 'okay'. 35mm film, as projected in a cinema (and let's face it, that's what 'film-like' means in one's head when discussing a home cinema projector) does not have JVC's jaw-dropping, inky blacks.



Steve W
And to me, that is one of the major disappointments about going to the theater. The blacks are generally terrible. Theaters have compromises which affect black levels, but that doesn't mean the filmmaker intended the movie not to have 'real' blacks. Blacks are an extremely important aspect to image quality, but I realize everyone has their preferences.

DavidHir is online now  
post #8807 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 08:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 4,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Liked: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post
The black level of the Lumis with DI engaged (and with white lettering on the screen) is very impressive. Too bad the high end 3D DLPs haven't hit the used market yet -- let's hope 4K gets moving and the 1080p 3D Sim2 projector owners feel the need to upgrade.

HA ! I've decided that the VW600 and the Lumis Host compliment each other. And I've devised an easy way to have both installed so I can pick which one to watch - and also run both for a comparison test too. Getting rid of one for the other would be like trying to decide which of your children to get rid of - nooo, nooo !

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Direct Line - 585-671-2972
I'm available 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday Email me at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


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

Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, Klipsch, and many more!
Craig Peer is online now  
post #8808 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 08:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecker View Post
But here's the problem. You said "...why did they give the Optoma HD91 9/10 and the Sony HW50 8/10 and JVC X35 9/10 when they are in the same price point and the Sony and JVC totally destroys the HD91 when it comes to all aspects of a good projector??"


You're now saying the Optoma is as good as the Sony & JVC on colour and motion handling.


Are colour and motion handling not aspects of picture quality?


The Optoma's weaknesses are black levels and brightness. Given a small enough screen it'll be bright enough, and remain so over time. As for black levels, this an issue for DLP in general, and whilst the HD91 is not as good as it could be, it's not a lot worse than many other DLPs in the price range.


And you use that term 'destroy' again. Why is such language necessary? What ever happened to 'better than'. And why, on t'internet, is nothing ever said to be slightly better or worse than something else.


Steve W
Ok, not all aspects, but in total picturequality the HW55 and X35 "destroys" the HD91 and they are in a totally different league and it is not just slightly better. The Optoma has other weaknesses than brighness and blacklevel, it has a generally dull and flat picture. But one thing Optoma shuld have is applause to come up with a LED projector in this pricerange. I also found the Sim2 M.150 to have a dull and flat picture and it is in a totally different pricerange.

Regards
Andreas


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

Andreas21 is offline  
post #8809 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 08:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post
The black level of the Lumis with DI engaged (and with white lettering on the screen) is very impressive. Too bad the high end 3D DLPs haven't hit the used market yet -- let's hope 4K gets moving and the 1080p 3D Sim2 projector owners feel the need to upgrade.
This picture is not what is seen on screen, if it is the JVC is seriously broken and the Sim2 does not show this black when there is white letters on screen...

Regards
Andreas


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

Andreas21 is offline  
post #8810 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 10:24 AM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post
This picture is not what is seen on screen, if it is the JVC is seriously broken and the Sim2 does not show this black when there is white letters on screen...
IT would be the total oposite of that picture trust me hehe
Dj Dee is offline  
post #8811 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 10:31 AM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
HA ! I've decided that the VW600 and the Lumis Host compliment each other. And I've devised an easy way to have both installed so I can pick which one to watch - and also run both for a comparison test too. Getting rid of one for the other would be like trying to decide which of your children to get rid of - nooo, nooo !
I have both the VW1100 for me and the JVC X500 for the children.
And do side by side show when I get bored hehe.
Maybe sell the car or the wife and buy the new sim for 3D hehe
Dj Dee is offline  
post #8812 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 10:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post
This picture is not what is seen on screen, if it is the JVC is seriously broken and the Sim2 does not show this black when there is white letters on screen...
What you need to remember is that picture is against the RS20, not a current generation JVC with a DI. That picture is accurate, not fake.

Please refer to the original post. Wolfgang doesn't lie or make things up. My Lumis has a deeper black level (with it's DI engaged) than my X500 had at full brightness and iris open (no DI). If you want to come close to the Lumis in brightness these are the steps you'd need to take on any previous generation JVC. It's only now that you can have a JVC at full brightness and still have a darker black level thanks to the new DI. But in high lamp mode, iris open, and DI off (to simulate what an older model would look like) on the X500, the black level is still better on the Lumis. I personally tested this out last night.

Here's the original post:
Sim2 Lumis 3 Chip DLP little Test

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Last edited by Seegs108; 08-14-2014 at 10:36 AM.
Seegs108 is online now  
post #8813 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 10:37 AM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
What you need to remember is that picture is against the RS20, not a current generation JVC with a DI. That picture is accurate, not fake.

Please refer to the original post. Wolfgang doesn't lie or make things up. My Lumis has a deeper black level (with it's DI engaged) than my X500 had at full brightness and iris open (no DI). If you want to come close to the Lumis in brightness these are the steps you'd need to take on any previous generation JVC. It's only now that you can have a JVC at full brightness and still have a darker black level thanks to the new DI. But in high lamp, mode iris open, and DI off (to simulate what an older model would look like) on the X500, the black level is still better on the Lumis.

Sim2 Lumis 3 Chip DLP little Test
Then that rs20 have some serious errors but ok. That's what I think.
Dj Dee is offline  
post #8814 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 10:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dj Dee View Post
Then that rs20 have some serious errors but ok.
No, I've owned an RS20. Actually I've owned 7 JVC's now, (RS10, RS20, X3, X30, X90, X55, X500) and this is and will be the case. The only "errors" that specific RS20 has is particularly bad uniformity. But that shouldn't make it's black level dramatically worse. Like I said, please read the original thread before you make judgement.

You guys need to remember that the JVC's only do ~25000-30000:1 native contrast at full brightness (iris open). So why wouldn't it make sense that a DI that brings the dynamic contrast to a higher level, with similar brightness, a darker black level?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Last edited by Seegs108; 08-14-2014 at 10:45 AM.
Seegs108 is online now  
post #8815 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 11:00 AM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
No, I've owned an RS20. Actually I've owned 7 JVC's now, (RS10, RS20, X3, X30, X90, X55, X500) and this is and will be the case. The only "errors" that specific RS20 has is particularly bad uniformity. But that shouldn't make it's black level dramatically worse. Like I said, please read the original thread before you make judgement.

You guys need to remember that the JVC's only do ~25000-30000:1 native contrast at full brightness (iris open). So why wouldn't it make sense that a DI that brings the dynamic contrast to a higher level and at a similar brightness level a darker black level?
Same here just not the x90 and the HD1 and a hole bunch of other brands.
So what you say is that the jvc on full iris and the sim with iris?
The sim lumis 3Ds I saw was Grey with iris.
But if you have a Sim with higher native contrast like 25000-30000 on your lumis I rest my case. With just some light even the lumis will get grey. But maybe in no info scenes with iris on the lumis yes.
Or we misunderstand each other.
And you also say that your lumis is better than the x500 on this that's over 30000-40000:1 native with open iris. You do not have that native on your lumis. Maybe dynamic contrast. Do not add up for me. But if you say so. I will have a look at it. But I do not think I'm allowed to do a side by side test again after what happend the last time. It was out for sale after the test.
Dj Dee is offline  
post #8816 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 11:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
No, I've owned an RS20. Actually I've owned 7 JVC's now, (RS10, RS20, X3, X30, X90, X55, X500) and this is and will be the case. The only "errors" that specific RS20 has is particularly bad uniformity. But that shouldn't make it's black level dramatically worse. Like I said, please read the original thread before you make judgement.

You guys need to remember that the JVC's only do ~25000-30000:1 native contrast at full brightness (iris open). So why wouldn't it make sense that a DI that brings the dynamic contrast to a higher level, with similar brightness, a darker black level?
I have also owned a RS20 (I owned 4 different JVCs in my PJ life and maby more in the future) and it did not have that bad uniformity, and I am positive the Lumis does not look so black in real life with the Pioneer logo displayed. I am not saying W. Mayer is lying as I am sure he is not, I am just saying the screenshot is not accurate like most screenshots.

And one very positive thing with DLP is the very very good uniformity among other things.

Regards
Andreas


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


Last edited by Andreas21; 08-14-2014 at 11:12 AM.
Andreas21 is offline  
post #8817 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 11:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 222
If you take a closer look at those images again, you'll see they're being fed the same source and there's a bright white Pioneer logo on screen and the black in the background is darker on the lumis, not grey. What's interesting about the dynamic iris on the Lumis is that with a full black background it doesn't close all the way. It does close down a but but it only closes all the way when there's actual content on screen. It isn't programmed like a normal dynamic iris. This and the far higher ANSI contrast really helps give the Lumis a more dynamic look and explains the image and why black bars are darker on other content compared to the JVCs.

If you aren't seeing a JVC without the help from it's dynamic iris, with high lamp mode engaged and the iris fully open having a lighter black level compared to the 3D-S, then Sim2 has changed the way it's dynamic iris works on the 3D-S because this isn't what I'm seeing on the original Lumis.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Last edited by Seegs108; 08-14-2014 at 11:20 AM.
Seegs108 is online now  
post #8818 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 11:33 AM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 833
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 76
And this picture also shows one of the really bad parts of the RS20 namely silmontanious contrast (my RS 20 measured 219:1 in Ansi Contrast), but if my RS20 had such bad uniformity I would have returned it as this is one of the first things I check when I buy a new projector. But let´s forget about these pictures and the old RS20, what I and also diddern saw when we side by side tested the Lumis 3DS and the VW1000 was that the VW1000 is quite a bit better in dark scenes with blacker blacks and more dynamic and more detail. And this is also what happens when comparing with the X500 it is only when displaying very low APL scenes the JVC gets blacker.

Regards
Andreas


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

Andreas21 is offline  
post #8819 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 12:03 PM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post
And this picture also shows one of the really bad parts of the RS20 namely silmontanious contrast (my RS 20 measured 219:1 in Ansi Contrast), but if my RS20 had such bad uniformity I would have returned it as this is one of the first things I check when I buy a new projector. But let´s forget about these pictures and the old RS20, what I and also diddern saw when we side by side tested the Lumis 3DS and the VW1000 was that the VW1000 is quite a bit better in dark scenes with blacker blacks and more dynamic and more detail. And this is also what happens when comparing with the X500 it is only when displaying very low APL scenes the JVC gets blacker.
I think so to, if I take a wild guess the sim that seegs108 have will be around 7000:1 native mechured. The sim lumis 3ds about the same. Maybe some more or less. But do not know the figures, they always lye.
So not even close to a x500. But again depends on what you look at and settings. But again more than enough on the sim together with extreme ANSI picture looks greater in many scenes. And in brighter scenes even better than the jvc because of more dynamic.
Dj Dee is offline  
post #8820 of 9087 Old 08-14-2014, 12:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,083
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 295 Post(s)
Liked: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dj Dee View Post
I think so to, if I take a wild guess the sim that seegs108 have will be around 7000:1 native mechured. The sim lumis 3ds about the same. Maybe some more or less. But do not know the figures, they always lye.
So not even close to a x500. But again depends on what you look at and settings. But again more than enough on the sim together with extreme ANSI picture looks greater in many scenes. And in brighter scenes even better than the jvc because of more dynamic.
The Sim2 would have its dynamic iris engaged. That's how we get a better black level over the older (ones without the DI) JVCs at full brightness. No one is saying the Sim2 or any other projector has a higher native on off contrast ratio.

Last edited by Seegs108; 08-14-2014 at 12:36 PM.
Seegs108 is online now  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

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
Gear in this thread - V11h421020 by PriceGrabber.com

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