Projector Mini-Shootout Thread - Page 557 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 3820Likes
Reply
Thread Tools
post #16681 of 16704 Unread 05-23-2017, 02:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 9,008
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1882 Post(s)
Liked: 896
Are you talking about the Brightside technology that Dolby bought? I thought that was a LCD panel used somewhere in the light path to increase contrast. Is the sequential DLP panels a Dolby patent?

IIRC the use of a second panel results in a huge hit on lumens.

Current projector - JVC RS25 and Marantz VP15S1
Future projector - pre-ordered new JVC from AVScience
Ericglo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #16682 of 16704 Unread 05-23-2017, 02:34 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,195
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4605 Post(s)
Liked: 2269
Quote:
Originally Posted by biliam1982 View Post
Isn't that what the Christie sourced Dolby projectors do? If so, they must hold a patent on it. And that means it will be easily 5-10+ years to see that trickle down into <$5k machines.
The specific technology the Dolby Vision projectors use will never trickle down into the consumer segment. There might be some kind of pro-sumer model created that's essentially a rebranded commecial unit though. The Dolby Vision units use 6 DMDs, set up as two 3 chip DLP DMD engines placed in tandem. They also use a direct RGB laser light source and they're also using 4K native DMDs. Lamp driven regular 1080p 3 chip DLP projectors never came close to $5000-$10000, the closest it came down to in price was ~$20000, so I see no way ALL of this technology could come to the consumer world within 5-10 years at a price point never reached by any multi-DMD light engine projector.

I think the best we can hope in the under $10000 market at some point is for a 2 DMD solution where each one is placed in tandem with one another. This would still mean we'd need sequential color and to avoid RBE and to achieve a wide color gamut we'd need to use fast switching LEDs. This kind of light engine is also supposedly very inefficient with something like a 20-30% light loss when reflecting light to the second DMD. A high brightness light source would be needed from the beginning, so I don't know if LEDs would be able to put out enough competitive lumens compared to what Sony, Epson and JVC are currently doing (and I'm sure they'll go even brighter in the near future). It's a tall order and I don't know if it will ever happen.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #16683 of 16704 Unread 05-23-2017, 02:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,997
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 529 Post(s)
Liked: 490
It would probably require RGB lasers to get enough brightness. Or maybe it would be possible to stack 2 LED light sources?
madshi is online now  
 
post #16684 of 16704 Unread 05-23-2017, 03:27 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darinp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,873
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
And thus XPR will always be the best choice for 4K DLP unless contrast is not a priority for the application.
I think it is interesting how you made post after post pushing this point about how if you care about contrast then XPR is better than native 4K, even as by your argument if contrast is a priority in the application it would have been better if TI had followed JVC and Epson and done E-shift with 1080p chips.

It seems to me that you have gone so far down the path of telling people how much better it is that TI went with 4 million native pixels instead of only 2 million like the competition, then start pushing how much better 4 million native pixels is than 8 million for DLP that you have gotten into shill territory where you will come up with anything you can to push these new TI products, like you are trying to score points for your team, as someone else mentioned. If you care so much about contrast ratio that you wouldn't want 8 million native pixels, why would you want 4 million when they could have used 2 million pixels with a 1/2 pixel shift and gotten much better on/off CR? Do you really sit in a Goldilocks zone where 4 million native pixels with shift helps a lot compared to 2 million native pixels with shift, even at the expense of contrast ratio, but 8 million native pixels wouldn't?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
So lets say with a 4k XPR 0.95" product you can get 5000:1 contrast on/off.
Sounds like you are being generous to me thinking they would get 5k:1 on/off CR, unless it is with irises cranked down for a lot less light than they've been aiming for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
8M pix is actually 100% accurate, not a red herring.
Would you make the same claims about 100% accuracy and how important meeting standards is if JVC or Epson used the same 1080p chips they do now, but flashed them 4 times with 1/4 pixel offset each time? They would qualify as 4K using the same interpretation of the CTA rules, so would you keep repeating that they do 8 million pixels and are not faux-K?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
That is the point of XPR, by halving the mirror density you can jack up the contrast.
And by going from XPR (4 million mirrors) to 1080p you can jack up the contrast. 1080p with E-shift would have much better contrast than XPR all else being equal. If TI had gone that way they wouldn't have been able to get people like you to keep repeating that they qualify as 4K by a standard, even though the projectors would have arguably provided better images overall at a lot of viewing ratios (and maybe all normal viewing ratios since 2K with E-shift already obscures the pixel structure).

Honestly, all else being equal, which would you rather have:

1: XPR DLP with poor on/off CR?
2. 1080p E-shift DLP with somewhere between 50% to 100% more on/off CR compared to item 1?

Is contrast a priority in your application?

Thanks,
Darin
Ericglo likes this.

Last edited by darinp; 05-23-2017 at 03:40 PM.
darinp is offline  
post #16685 of 16704 Unread 05-23-2017, 04:00 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
biliam1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 1,494
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
The whole HDR display concept is relatively new, but the idea of putting 2 panels in a row (for increased contrast, not for HDR) has been around for a looong time. So any HDR related Dolby patents are unlikely to protect the general concept of daisy chaining 2 panels, IMHO.
I know it's been around a long time and I remember reading about it on here yeas ago. And I'm not necessarily talking about HDR. I didn't mention it in my post. I should have clarified it was more about on/off CR as that has always been the theory behind DMD stacking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
The specific technology the Dolby Vision projectors use will never trickle down into the consumer segment. There might be some kind of pro-sumer model created that's essentially a rebranded commecial unit though. The Dolby Vision units use 6 DMDs, set up as two 3 chip DLP DMD engines placed in tandem. They also use a direct RGB laser light source and they're also using 4K native DMDs. Lamp driven regular 1080p 3 chip DLP projectors never came close to $5000-$10000, the closest it came down to in price was ~$20000, so I see no way ALL of this technology could come to the consumer world within 5-10 years at a price point never reached by any multi-DMD light engine projector.

I think the best we can hope in the under $10000 market at some point is for a 2 DMD solution where each one is placed in tandem with one another. This would still mean we'd need sequential color and to avoid RBE and to achieve a wide color gamut we'd need to use fast switching LEDs. This kind of light engine is also supposedly very inefficient with something like a 20-30% light loss when reflecting light to the second DMD. A high brightness light source would be needed from the beginning, so I don't know if LEDs would be able to put out enough competitive lumens compared to what Sony, Epson and JVC are currently doing (and I'm sure they'll go even brighter in the near future). It's a tall order and I don't know if it will ever happen.
I was thinking more along the lines of a dual stacked DMD as well. I wouldn't expect 3 Chip to ever come down that much in price, let alone a dual stacked version. Not unless there was a significant advancement in technology and manufacturing, or TI drops their prices. None of which are happening anytime soon, though should if DLP wants to survive.

This has all been discussed before by you and others. I surmise that, like you said, all the companies who would care to try have gone out of business and the rest don't want to waste the R&D time and costs, or Dolby must hold a patent on DMD stacking that puts up almost insurmountable barriers for anyone else to try for now. That's why I said in 5-10+ years, when Dolby has advanced their own causes/technology enough to justify licensing a lower quality version of it, we may see it.

As for LED or Lasers, I don't really care. Whichever gives the better price and performance. Though Lasers seem to be the future, you never know who may come out of left field with an advancement to bring more competition, which is good for business and consumers. Which is why I keep hoping DLP makes a come back. They had some great tech and features.
biliam1982 is online now  
post #16686 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 12:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,547
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 356
I may be wrong but I thought I had read (and I can't find the link) the restriction on DMD stacking came from TI who include in their licencing agreement the requirement to sign off on the light path design of any manufacturer using their chip.

As far as I remember they have only 'authorised' Dolby/Christie to utilise the stacked DMD design in commercial theatres, and they get in the region of 1m:1 on/off CR as a result.

Again if I remember rightly, the speculated reason for this decision is that if everyone had access to DLP's with 1m:1 on/off CR, it would severely limit the sale of future generations of TI chips.

I don't know how correct this is, but that's what I recall.
Wookii is online now  
post #16687 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 03:45 AM
Member
 
AndreNewman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 101
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
keep us posted on your thoughts after the demo.
Well...

I half expected to hate everything ~LCD but I didn't... completely, that's a major revelation.

I must say that Ricky's demos were excellent, proper room, (almost) everything calibrated and I got sufficiently involved to miss lunch completely. Ricky seemed entirely happy that we were there almost all day!

We spent quite some time discussing how his room was constructed before even turning on a single projector.

The Epson LS10500:

Bright, good colo(u)r rendition, passable motion. There was always some indistinctness to detail, always some low level dodgy edges to anything moving both with and without e-shift. I always had the feeling "is it really in focus", yet on projector menus it clearly was in focus.

Tried some 60p UHD, Sky Q F1 & some BBC UHD World cup recordings I brought. Pretty good, looked like better motion than the 24p performance would suggest.

Good black levels, better than I've seen from a projector outside of a Dolby/Christie Demo movie at IBC in Amsterdam.

Bright details seemed crushed, not a miscalibration but a mushing of detail in the space suits against the sky in Gravity for example.

Tried 3D, complete non-starter, jumbled blurry mess, didn't look like 3D at all. Played the initial impact scene from Gravity as I know it very well, this scene usually makes me feel a little queasy, I never liked roller coasters, but with the Epson I didn't feel at all involved or even a little queasy.

JVC X7500:

Brighter, excellent colo(u)r rendition, amazing detail in shadow graduations but again poor detail in brighter elements a little like the Epson. Similar indistinctness to the Epson but not as bad.

Phenomenal black levels.

Some strange motion artefacts, watching Fantastic Beasts any sudden movement, like an actor shaking their head displayed multiple edges to their face for an instant, quite unpleasant. Ricky ran through all the projector settings to ensure there wasn't any motion enhancement turned on by mistake, there wasn't.

At this point we went back to Epson for a 3D test, which didn't go well.

Trying 3D on the JVC, after some delay finding all the gear for 3D, I guess not so many people are interested in 3D any more... Much better motion for 3D, quite acceptable, back to a queasy stomach with that Gravity scene also no sign of that motion artefact now.
One downside, a quite significant flicker to everything the moment you put the glasses on, not present with the Epson or my triple flash DLP. I have to check that doesn't give my girlfriend migraines!

Back to 2D with the JVC and trying to chase down that annoying artefact, seems there's no sign of it. Either I'm accustomed to it, doubtful my job involves spotting and fixing video artefacts, otherwise it's somehow gone! Ricky suggested that some say the JVC needs to warm up to be right for 3D, maybe this artefact I was seeing is also affected, strange. We went back to exact same scene, same source same settings, no sign of it.

Sim2 Nero 3:

Well it was there, why not. Actually I was keen to see it as it should give me some idea side by side as to what an expensive DLP was like. My fallback plan is to hunt down a high end DLP second hand. Lots of trouble getting it to sync, looked like everything in the path had cached some UHD settings and wasn't letting them go, got there in the end.

Gravity again, my choice. Blacks were lighting up the room, not as bad as my DLP but still pretty bad, not almost 10x the price better for sure! Dark elements were devoid of detail but the bright suits looked much better. Motion was hugely better, back to what I'm used to.

Note the Nero wasn't calibrated, we (I) checked black level with the 2.35:1 borders but that was all.

Didn't even turn on the Sony or the cheaper Epsons.


As I said to Gary (who apparently had the last or almost last LS10000 in the UK, none left) I'm a bit uncomfortable paying the price of the LS10500 or X7500 for something with LCDs in it. I'd happily find more for a DLP with good blacks, lens memories, enough zoom for CIH, 3D HDR and lasers but it doesn't exist and doesn't look like it's going to exist anytime soon if ever. Even second hand it looks like i've got to go to an A lens to do CIH with the second hand Sim2's that are around.


I'm seriously considering a JVC X5500, which is not something I thought I'd ever say before yesterday!


I need to change my projector mounting to accommodate something large and heavy but I think I have a plan.

I want to understand the differences between the X7500 I demoed and an X5500 that I am happy to afford. I have a living room with grey screen painted wall so the differences may not matter too much.

I will have to learn to live with the indistinctness, whether caused by LCD response time or convergence or whatever. I'd be swapping my current cheap fuzzy lens for a different type of fuzzyness.

I have to identify if the warming up phenomenon is real, does anyone have any comment on this?

I will need to learn some patience and not spill my drink in the dark during the JVC re-sync enforced interval between menu & Movie!

I feel that the JVC's strengths play to the nature of the majority of film and high budget drama scenes. It's weaknesses, it could be argued, are less important to the majority of content we now watch. Unfortunately the weaknesses are the areas that irritate me the most but I think they are at a level where compromise is appropriate.


Thanks to everyone who's given me advice so far.

Andre
AndreNewman is online now  
post #16688 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 10:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,499
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 652 Post(s)
Liked: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreNewman View Post
I feel that the JVC's strengths play to the nature of the majority of film and high budget drama scenes. It's weaknesses, it could be argued, are less important to the majority of content we now watch. Unfortunately the weaknesses are the areas that irritate me the most but I think they are at a level where compromise is appropriate.
I came to projection from a plasma set, and two years later, I still notice the indistinctness to motion you're referring to. That said, I've made my peace with it, and all the positives of the JVC easily outweigh the negatives. It can be a bit jarring when I'm just demoing a scene or two, but when I watch a full movie, the immersion is good enough that can overlook the blurring.
Bluescale is online now  
post #16689 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 10:51 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,195
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4605 Post(s)
Liked: 2269
@AndreNewman just be sure to know that the X5500 has dramatically less contrast and less color saturation capability as it lacks the filter the X7500 has. Personally speaking, I think if you can afford it, the X7500 is easily worth the price difference.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #16690 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 11:06 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,748
Mentioned: 77 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3209 Post(s)
Liked: 3273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluescale View Post
I came to projection from a plasma set, and two years later, I still notice the indistinctness to motion you're referring to. That said, I've made my peace with it, and all the positives of the JVC easily outweigh the negatives. It can be a bit jarring when I'm just demoing a scene or two, but when I watch a full movie, the immersion is good enough that can overlook the blurring.
did you have any other projectors in between the Epson 5025 and the JVC?
zombie10k is online now  
post #16691 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 11:34 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,748
Mentioned: 77 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3209 Post(s)
Liked: 3273
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreNewman View Post

Sim2 Nero 3:

Well it was there, why not. Actually I was keen to see it as it should give me some idea side by side as to what an expensive DLP was like. My fallback plan is to hunt down a high end DLP second hand. Lots of trouble getting it to sync, looked like everything in the path had cached some UHD settings and wasn't letting them go, got there in the end.

Gravity again, my choice. Blacks were lighting up the room, not as bad as my DLP but still pretty bad, not almost 10x the price better for sure! Dark elements were devoid of detail but the bright suits looked much better. Motion was hugely better, back to what I'm used to.

Andre


it's hard to say what is happening with Sim2 over the last few years. They went from top of the DLP charts Super Lumis to the Nero 3 and 20th edition which had very similar performance to the considerably less expensive Optoma HD91. Contrast left much to be desired, my Sharp 30K 3D DLP was better in every way in comparison.




Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreNewman View Post

I have to identify if the warming up phenomenon is real, does anyone have any comment on this?


Andre


yes, all the of the non-DLP's can benefit from a warm up time (15-20 mins recommended) for maximum stability / x-talk control.



Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreNewman View Post

The Epson LS10500:


Tried 3D, complete non-starter, jumbled blurry mess, didn't look like 3D at all. Played the initial impact scene from Gravity as I know it very well, this scene usually makes me feel a little queasy, I never liked roller coasters, but with the Epson I didn't feel at all involved or even a little queasy.


I was also a bit disappointed with the LS10K 3D once I finally had a chance to see it. There's a number of owners here but none seem to be be 3D enthusiasts so it was hard to get an idea until I saw it in person.


Was the Fantastic Beasts viewing 2D, 3D or UHD? Did you view any HDR content like Lucy or PE II?
zombie10k is online now  
post #16692 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 01:03 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Bluescale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,499
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 652 Post(s)
Liked: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
did you have any other projectors in between the Epson 5025 and the JVC?
Nope. And I didn't demo any DLP units, so I'm not sure where they fall on the motion spectrum. Before the plasma I had a couple LCOS RPTVs. While memory isn't all that trustworthy, I seem to remember their motion being ~the same as what I have now.
Bluescale is online now  
post #16693 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 01:19 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,195
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4605 Post(s)
Liked: 2269
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
it's hard to say what is happening with Sim2 over the last few years. They went from top of the DLP charts Super Lumis to the Nero 3 and 20th edition which had very similar performance to the considerably less expensive Optoma HD91. Contrast left much to be desired, my Sharp 30K 3D DLP was better in every way in comparison.
I agree. Sim2's only relatively comparable projector is the Nero 4 and it lacks wide color gamut capabilities and the level of contrast won't be anywhere near their previous cream-of-the-crop 1080p projector; the Lumis. Native contrast potential on this new .67" DMD is not of the same level as the DC4 .95" 1080p DMD. Then add in the fact that the Nero 4 lacks any kind of dynamic contrast solution and it's going to be at a huge disadvantage, even compared to something like the Lumis. Overall, I would guess that it's decent step backwards in overall image quality. Some people aren't willing to admit it, but on/off contrast performance matters and TI has really put the remaining DLP-centric manufacturers in a tight corner because this new DMD is even less competitive in this regard to the last generation 1080p DMDs. It's an unfortunate scenario for Sim2 and I think it's going to be a nail in their coffin.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #16694 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 04:42 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
biliam1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 1,494
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
I may be wrong but I thought I had read (and I can't find the link) the restriction on DMD stacking came from TI who include in their licencing agreement the requirement to sign off on the light path design of any manufacturer using their chip.

As far as I remember they have only 'authorised' Dolby/Christie to utilise the stacked DMD design in commercial theatres, and they get in the region of 1m:1 on/off CR as a result.
I do remember reading that TI must sign off on the light path design, but that wasn't the issue. I think I remember someone a while back conversing and asking questions with a TI engineer about this subject on another forum (maybe TI's own forum), and he said it's possible but hadn't been brought up yet to try. Maybe he was under NDA at the time and couldn't speak to what Christie/Dolby did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
Again if I remember rightly, the speculated reason for this decision is that if everyone had access to DLP's with 1m:1 on/off CR, it would severely limit the sale of future generations of TI chips.

I don't know how correct this is, but that's what I recall.
From a business perspective, that point doesn't make sense. They would sell double the amount of DMD's and bring DLP back into contention with LCD/LCOS/SXRD, thereby selling more DLP's. Then manufacturers could focus on other areas of improvement to edge out the competition.
biliam1982 is online now  
post #16695 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 07:41 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,550
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 412 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by biliam1982 View Post
From a business perspective, that point doesn't make sense. They would sell double the amount of DMD's and bring DLP back into contention with LCD/LCOS/SXRD, thereby selling more DLP's. Then manufacturers could focus on other areas of improvement to edge out the competition.
Who knows what their real costs are. With large companies like TI, sometimes they lose money on stuff and write it off. It is possible they could just be losing more money if they tried to make them in volume. This isn't like making hamburgers where its easy to scale production, the production is expensive and complex and risky if the sales aren't as projected.

**New Projector Calculator Released**
Access HERE from this thread

coderguy is offline  
post #16696 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 11:08 PM
Member
 
AndreNewman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 101
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
@AndreNewman just be sure to know that the X5500 has dramatically less contrast and less color saturation capability as it lacks the filter the X7500 has. Personally speaking, I think if you can afford it, the X7500 is easily worth the price difference.
Is this a "help me send my money" thread? Actually that's exactly what is is! :-)

I was a little concerned about having demoed the X7500 and then considering buying the X5500 , just how different are they? I'm not too bothered about the filter as I'm not expecting to have any UHD material for a few years. However it would be a disaster to give up DLP motion and not get DILA contrast in return!

I could afford the X7500, I was considering the LS10500 after all. The new MA center speaker upgrade and monoblocks for L&R would have to wait, also room treatments....

Just how different are they? I was banking on even the X5500 being a big step in contrast and shadow detail from a cheap DLP...
AndreNewman is online now  
post #16697 of 16704 Unread Yesterday, 11:17 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,195
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4605 Post(s)
Liked: 2269
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreNewman View Post
Is this a "help me send my money" thread? Actually that's exactly what is is! :-)

I was a little concerned about having demoed the X7500 and then considering buying the X5500 , just how different are they? I'm not too bothered about the filter as I'm not expecting to have any UHD material for a few years. However it would be a disaster to give up DLP motion and not get DILA contrast in return!

I could afford the X7500, I was considering the LS10500 after all. The new MA center speaker upgrade and monoblocks for L&R would have to wait, also room treatments....

Just how different are they? I was banking on even the X5500 being a big step in contrast and shadow detail from a cheap DLP...
It depends on how you have the iris in the lens set. The X7500, with it's iris fully open to allow for maximum brightness, will yield you 38,000:1 native on/off contrast. The X5500 will only yield you 16,000:1 contrast using the iris in the same way. Half way closed on each yields 61,000:1 vs 23,500:1 and fully closed yields 160,000:1 vs 31,000:1. So even with the iris fully closed on the X5500, it cannot reach the level of contrast the X7500 can do with it's iris fully open. Like I said, it's quite the difference and one I think is well worth the cost. I also think that the motorized lens cover and high gloss black finish in the chassis (versus matte black) on the X7500 makes the projector look immensely more attractive and high end looking.

Last edited by Seegs108; Yesterday at 11:33 PM.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #16698 of 16704 Unread Today, 12:48 AM
Member
 
AndreNewman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 101
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
it's hard to say what is happening with Sim2 over the last few years. They went from top of the DLP charts Super Lumis to the Nero 3 and 20th edition which had very similar performance to the considerably less expensive Optoma HD91. Contrast left much to be desired, my Sharp 30K 3D DLP was better in every way in comparison.
I sat by when the Sharp 30K came along, I was so fixated on LED lit and hadn't had the CIH revelation (I understood it but didn't "get it") yet that I wasn't even looking at such things properly.


I haven't seen any second hand Super Lumis around, maybe those who have them are keeping them. There's an ex Demo HT3000E on eBay that no-one seems to bid on, it's in the US so too much hassle for me but where does that sit in your opinion?

There's a Runco LS10i for sale in Ireland but the lens doesn't suit my room and no 3D.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
yes, all the of the non-DLP's can benefit from a warm up time (15-20 mins recommended) for maximum stability / x-talk control.
Ok, thanks. I'm happier if that's a plausible explanation, good to get a second opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
Was the Fantastic Beasts viewing 2D, 3D or UHD? Did you view any HDR content like Lucy or PE II?
Yes Fantastic Beasts was UHD HDR with Ricky's custom HDR curve, also Planet Earth II we compared HD & UHD WCG & HDR on various settings, even compared to an off air recording I brought of the same episode, mostly on the LS10500 as that was my primary interest, until the 3D demo anyway.

Oh and mustn't forget Fury Road, UHD WCG HDR on the JVC! Such a shame the director decided to use that awful judder effect for so much of the movie, without that I think that would a real favourite, as it is I can barely stand to watch it. Hugely impressive HDR, WCG ok but OTT, even OTT for Mad Max IMO.

Fifth Element UHD but on the Epson. Maybe if Valerian is a great movie I'll upgrade to UHD, just for that...

Fantastic Beasts was great in HDR/WCG but I wasn't so impressed by Planet Earth II. I'm not convinced that WCG particularly is working properly yet, sports demos I've seen for work seem hugely overblown, cartoonish. I didn't find the HDR very useful in PE II and the WCG seemed a little overdone.

I think it has value in reproducing the true colour of film but in a lot of cases I think it's being treated as a new toy in the special effects toybox.

Perhaps I'm affected by metmerism failure with WCG and lasers! The Christie/Dolby 6p Jungle Book screening looked great last September so hopefully not.

If I'm considering an X7500, then at that price I should also consider the Sony VW320 if the HDR update is useful, especially as motion is supposed to be the best of the LCD variants although I try to avoid Sony, professionally and privately these days. That said I've had so much grief with JVC so called "professional" equipment in my early days as a broadcast Engineer it's a struggle to pay money to them either. Never really forgave them for inventing VHS on the domestic front. ;-)
AndreNewman is online now  
post #16699 of 16704 Unread Today, 01:00 AM
Member
 
AndreNewman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 101
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
It depends on how you have the iris in the lens set. The X7500, with it's iris fully open to allow for maximum brightness, will yield you 38,000:1 native on/off contrast. The X5500 will only yield you 16,000:1 contrast using the iris in the same way. Half way closed on each yields 61,000:1 vs 23,500:1 and fully closed yields 160,000:1 vs 31,000:1. So even with the iris fully closed on the X5500, it cannot reach the level of contrast the X7500 can do with it's iris fully open. Like I said, it's quite the difference and one I think is well worth the cost. I also think that the motorized lens cover and high gloss black finish in the chassis (versus matte black) on the X7500 makes the projector look immensely more attractive and high end looking.
That's a useful benchmark as I didn't actually see the X5500, thanks, I've not seen those figures presented that way before.

I'd prefer matte black but lens cover is a valuable feature. I guess I thought the differences were along the lines of the X9500, component selection.

Well that's slowed things down a little, I was ready to order an X5500. I've tested my new mounting system, which worryingly will allow me to mount multiple projectors, oh dear. My father always had multiple film projectors in the home cinema garage, maybe it's genetic.
AndreNewman is online now  
post #16700 of 16704 Unread Today, 03:44 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,550
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 412 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
It depends on how you have the iris in the lens set. The X7500, with it's iris fully open to allow for maximum brightness, will yield you 38,000:1 native on/off contrast. The X5500 will only yield you 16,000:1 contrast using the iris in the same way. Half way closed on each yields 61,000:1 vs 23,500:1 and fully closed yields 160,000:1 vs 31,000:1. So even with the iris fully closed on the X5500, it cannot reach the level of contrast the X7500 can do with it's iris fully open. Like I said, it's quite the difference and one I think is well worth the cost. I also think that the motorized lens cover and high gloss black finish in the chassis (versus matte black) on the X7500 makes the projector look immensely more attractive and high end looking.
Did you ever measure the RS-46, just curious...

I'm thankful you and Zombie keep up with all this stuff to the degree you do, because at this point I'm still in 2013 trying to catch up

**New Projector Calculator Released**
Access HERE from this thread

coderguy is offline  
post #16701 of 16704 Unread Today, 03:49 AM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
biliam1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 1,494
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
Who knows what their real costs are. With large companies like TI, sometimes they lose money on stuff and write it off. It is possible they could just be losing more money if they tried to make them in volume. This isn't like making hamburgers where its easy to scale production, the production is expensive and complex and risky if the sales aren't as projected.
Normally, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But TI isn't a newer start up looking to expand and capitalize on economies of scale. They've been established, profitable and grew as a company in the past with such production runs and sizes. So this would be a shift back to the norm for them.

But maybe this is the case with 4K (or the newer XPR) chips. Maybe they've relegated to the business market and have no more interest in the HT sector anymore. If so, that's a bad business decision as they'll eventually get more and more competition there as well. And without any advancement in technology to remain competitive, they'll eventually die. Maybe they know this and are just riding out the rest of the wave until the shutter.

Anyways, back to your regularly scheduled programing...
biliam1982 is online now  
post #16702 of 16704 Unread Today, 05:23 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 21,689
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3024 Post(s)
Liked: 1591
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreNewman View Post
That's a useful benchmark as I didn't actually see the X5500, thanks, I've not seen those figures presented that way before.

I'd prefer matte black but lens cover is a valuable feature. I guess I thought the differences were along the lines of the X9500, component selection.
The X5500 and X7500 are really different machines. While they share the same chassis, they are "significantly" different inside. The X5500 is basically last generation's machine (actually two generations old now) with updated firmware to support HDR/WCG, and a more powerful lamp. The X7500 has dual irises, and newer wire grid polarizers. While they work together, the former is key in the much higher contrast, while the later is why the contrast is still so high, despite these machines being much brighter than their ancestors.

Now the X9500 and X7500 are basically the same machine, with the X9500 getting the "hand picked" parts and longer warranty. I like to think of the X9500 vs X7500 kind of like buying a CPU for a computer, all i7's are the same design/parts, they come off the same wafers, but the i7 7700K's are binned higher than the i7 7700's. If you buy a 7700K (ignoring locking) you're buying a guarantee of a part that will hit a certain performance, where as if you buy a 7700 the guaranteed performance is less. Of course the "lower end" part might actually perform just as well.

If you buy the X9500, you're getting the warranty, and the "guarantee" of top performance, where the X7500, you pay less, but you may or may not be getting the best performance possible from that design.

FWIW, as Craig/Mike have said, the X5500 is a fantastic machine, and a great value to be sure. But there's a more significant difference than prior generations to the X7500 and that's why (apparently) the X7500 has outsold the X5500 by quite a bit this time (usually the reverse is true).
stanger89 is online now  
post #16703 of 16704 Unread Today, 07:49 AM
Member
 
AndreNewman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 101
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
The X5500 and X7500 are really different machines. While they share the same chassis, they are "significantly" different inside. The X5500 is basically last generation's machine (actually two generations old now) with updated firmware to support HDR/WCG, and a more powerful lamp. The X7500 has dual irises, and newer wire grid polarizers. While they work together, the former is key in the much higher contrast, while the later is why the contrast is still so high, despite these machines being much brighter than their ancestors.

Now the X9500 and X7500 are basically the same machine, with the X9500 getting the "hand picked" parts and longer warranty. I like to think of the X9500 vs X7500 kind of like buying a CPU for a computer, all i7's are the same design/parts, they come off the same wafers, but the i7 7700K's are binned higher than the i7 7700's. If you buy a 7700K (ignoring locking) you're buying a guarantee of a part that will hit a certain performance, where as if you buy a 7700 the guaranteed performance is less. Of course the "lower end" part might actually perform just as well.

If you buy the X9500, you're getting the warranty, and the "guarantee" of top performance, where the X7500, you pay less, but you may or may not be getting the best performance possible from that design.

FWIW, as Craig/Mike have said, the X5500 is a fantastic machine, and a great value to be sure. But there's a more significant difference than prior generations to the X7500 and that's why (apparently) the X7500 has outsold the X5500 by quite a bit this time (usually the reverse is true).
H'mm seems I got the relationship between models wrong, thanks for the correction, could have been a costly mistake! I'm with you on the binning analogy, I just thought all three were off the same wafer apart from the P3 filter.

As I've seen an X7500 that's no indication at all of how the X5500 behaves, as I'm finding the X7500 has only just acceptable motion and sharpness. If I'm having a JVC I need to have an X7500, or at least audition an X5500 properly before ordering.

And I've just got the new projector shelf/shelves system installed and adjusted this morning.

I've dug through the specs of the Sony and no lens memories at that price is a non starter, 4k chip or no 4k chip.

Well the books are off to the accountant tomorrow, we will see what the tax man leaves me with!
AndreNewman is online now  
post #16704 of 16704 Unread Today, 08:58 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 21,689
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3024 Post(s)
Liked: 1591
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreNewman View Post
As I've seen an X7500 that's no indication at all of how the X5500 behaves, as I'm finding the X7500 has only just acceptable motion and sharpness. If I'm having a JVC I need to have an X7500, or at least audition an X5500 properly before ordering.
Motion wise, they're probably all the same. I think the chips themselves, as well as the processing (other than stuff like P3 filter support) are the same on all of them. They do all have more in common than not, but the X7500 adds some significant hardware changes, mainly for improved contrast.
stanger89 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
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



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