Official Sony VPL-VW500ES / VW600ES 4K Projector Thread - Page 109 - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > Display Devices > Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP > Official Sony VPL-VW500ES / VW600ES 4K Projector Thread

Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich
08:22 PM Liked: 600
post #3241 of 4169
06-23-2014 | Posts: 20,277
Joined: Dec 2000
Sony claims a wider color space for its mastered in 4K 1090 Bluerays. They claim to be using xv color which uses the same primaries as rec 709 but adds more colors by using 0 to 15 and 236-255 which are normally not used. Something like that. But if they are actually using xv color the bluray player must be able to play it and xv must be switched on. I have no clue whether the Oppo has this.
Seegs108's Avatar Seegs108
08:51 PM Liked: 327
post #3242 of 4169
06-23-2014 | Posts: 4,639
Joined: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
Sony claims a wider color space for its mastered in 4K 1090 Bluerays. They claim to be using xv color which uses the same primaries as rec 709 but adds more colors by using 0 to 15 and 236-255 which are normally not used. Something like that. Buy if they are actually using xv color the bluray player must be able to play it and xv must be switched on. I have no clue whether the oppo has this.u
I think XV color has the same D65 white point but offers more saturation because the triangle is wider. I'm not sure about the RGB levels and if they come into play.
mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich
01:27 AM Liked: 600
post #3243 of 4169
06-24-2014 | Posts: 20,277
Joined: Dec 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I think XV color has the same D65 white point but offers more saturation because the triangle is wider. I'm not sure about the RGB levels and if they come into play.
You are correct, the gray scale color temperature would be the same. One calibrates for it by calibrating to rec 709.
Tnedator's Avatar Tnedator
08:49 PM Liked: 37
post #3244 of 4169
06-26-2014 | Posts: 705
Joined: Jul 2001
Anyone using a 132" wide 2.35 screen with the 600? I'm going to have a 11' wide screen (almost certainly Studiotek 130 perfed), and am wondering if the 600 is going to be bright enough using zoom mode vs. an anamorphic lens. One note, I will be near the end of the throw limit, as the lens will be about 22' from the screen (soon to be newly constructed Erskine designed/built HT).

One of the ways to help talk myself into the 600 is not having the need for the anamorphic lens (saving $4-10k depending on make, model, sled, etc), but at least based on the calculator at projector central, it's showing I would be down to about 10 fl using the zoom method on a 1.2 gain screen (left calculator set to 16:9 and changed the width to 132", which is what would happen if I used zoom to fill 2.35 screen). It is showing that it would be 15fl when I'm masked down to 1.78 (115" diagonal). 15fl is fine, 10fl seems a bit weak (even though for years I was using an IN76 in moderately light controlled living room and when I finally got a light meter, I think I was down around 8fl with a new bulb and it always seemed "bright" when new).

I know that calculator doesn't always get it right, so I'm curious if anyone else is using a similar size screen/throw distance while using zoom vs. anamorphic.

My other options are to go with an anamorphic lens and remove it when playing any native 4k content.

Or, possibly get a cheaper projector (Epson 6030 or similar) with an anamorphic lens as a placeholder for a few years until the 4k market settles out.
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar AV Science Sales 5
07:56 AM Liked: 567
post #3245 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 8,533
Joined: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tnedator View Post
Anyone using a 132" wide 2.35 screen with the 600? I'm going to have a 11' wide screen (almost certainly Studiotek 130 perfed), and am wondering if the 600 is going to be bright enough using zoom mode vs. an anamorphic lens. One note, I will be near the end of the throw limit, as the lens will be about 22' from the screen (soon to be newly constructed Erskine designed/built HT).

One of the ways to help talk myself into the 600 is not having the need for the anamorphic lens (saving $4-10k depending on make, model, sled, etc), but at least based on the calculator at projector central, it's showing I would be down to about 10 fl using the zoom method on a 1.2 gain screen (left calculator set to 16:9 and changed the width to 132", which is what would happen if I used zoom to fill 2.35 screen). It is showing that it would be 15fl when I'm masked down to 1.78 (115" diagonal). 15fl is fine, 10fl seems a bit weak (even though for years I was using an IN76 in moderately light controlled living room and when I finally got a light meter, I think I was down around 8fl with a new bulb and it always seemed "bright" when new).

I know that calculator doesn't always get it right, so I'm curious if anyone else is using a similar size screen/throw distance while using zoom vs. anamorphic.

My other options are to go with an anamorphic lens and remove it when playing any native 4k content.

Or, possibly get a cheaper projector (Epson 6030 or similar) with an anamorphic lens as a placeholder for a few years until the 4k market settles out.
The calculator that you are using is wrong. A 115" diagonal is around 100" x 57" which is 39.58SF. L (lumens) x 1.3/39.58SF=15FL L=457. So anybody believe the VW600ES in high lamp only has 457 lumens? On the 132" wide 2.35, 1.3 gain screen, I would guess with a new lamp you would be around 26FL and low lamp would be around 18FL. You should be fine. Billy, for the size screen you are talking about, the 600 would be a better choice over what I priced to you earlier. I really like my 600 and more lumens was one of the main reasons, I went with it. If you would like to discuss this more in depth, give me a call.
Tnedator's Avatar Tnedator
09:26 AM Liked: 37
post #3246 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 705
Joined: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
The calculator that you are using is wrong. A 115" diagonal is around 100" x 57" which is 39.58SF. L (lumens) x 1.3/39.58SF=15FL L=457. So anybody believe the VW600ES in high lamp only has 457 lumens? On the 132" wide 2.35, 1.3 gain screen, I would guess with a new lamp you would be around 26FL and low lamp would be around 18FL. You should be fine. Billy, for the size screen you are talking about, the 600 would be a better choice over what I priced to you earlier. I really like my 600 and more lumens was one of the main reasons, I went with it. If you would like to discuss this more in depth, give me a call.
Mike,

Thanks, I was just talking this through with a friend this morning, and was telling him that I thought the issue might be projector central using a "rule of thumb" post calibration factor that must be much lower than the 1100-1300 lumens post calibration that I'm seeing in most reviews.

I plan to give you a call soon to talk this through. I'm also trying to figure out my timing for now vs. waiting until after Cedia. While I think zoom works, I hate the fact that an anamorph lens can't be used with 4k material for going forward.
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar AV Science Sales 5
09:32 AM Liked: 567
post #3247 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 8,533
Joined: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tnedator View Post
Mike,

Thanks, I was just talking this through with a friend this morning, and was telling him that I thought the issue might be projector central using a "rule of thumb" post calibration factor that must be much lower than the 1100-1300 lumens post calibration that I'm seeing in most reviews.

I plan to give you a call soon to talk this through. I'm also trying to figure out my timing for now vs. waiting until after Cedia. While I think zoom works, I hate the fact that an anamorph lens can't be used with 4k material for going forward.
Once a video processor is available for 4K, then that problem is solved. I use an A-lens with my 600. I am just waiting on a new Lumagen. Since this is a scaling function, a Lumagen will do a better with vertical stretch than a projector.
Tnedator's Avatar Tnedator
09:58 AM Liked: 37
post #3248 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 705
Joined: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
Once a video processor is available for 4K, then that problem is solved. I use an A-lens with my 600. I am just waiting on a new Lumagen. Since this is a scaling function, a Lumagen will do a better with vertical stretch than a projector.
Yea, trying to do everything on the cheap (although I guess that went out the window since I'm having Dennis/Steve build my theater), I liked the idea of the onboard vertical stretch (especially since the reviews of the onboard 600 scaler seem great). But, you are right, going with an outboard scaler isn't a major issue.
Craig Peer's Avatar Craig Peer
10:21 AM Liked: 352
post #3249 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 5,567
Joined: Aug 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tnedator View Post
Anyone using a 132" wide 2.35 screen with the 600? I'm going to have a 11' wide screen (almost certainly Studiotek 130 perfed), and am wondering if the 600 is going to be bright enough using zoom mode vs. an anamorphic lens. One note, I will be near the end of the throw limit, as the lens will be about 22' from the screen (soon to be newly constructed Erskine designed/built HT).

One of the ways to help talk myself into the 600 is not having the need for the anamorphic lens (saving $4-10k depending on make, model, sled, etc), but at least based on the calculator at projector central, it's showing I would be down to about 10 fl using the zoom method on a 1.2 gain screen (left calculator set to 16:9 and changed the width to 132", which is what would happen if I used zoom to fill 2.35 screen). It is showing that it would be 15fl when I'm masked down to 1.78 (115" diagonal). 15fl is fine, 10fl seems a bit weak (even though for years I was using an IN76 in moderately light controlled living room and when I finally got a light meter, I think I was down around 8fl with a new bulb and it always seemed "bright" when new).

I know that calculator doesn't always get it right, so I'm curious if anyone else is using a similar size screen/throw distance while using zoom vs. anamorphic.

My other options are to go with an anamorphic lens and remove it when playing any native 4k content.

Or, possibly get a cheaper projector (Epson 6030 or similar) with an anamorphic lens as a placeholder for a few years until the 4k market settles out.

The Projector Central calculator, while apparently fine for throw distance / mounting info, is notoriously bad with the lumen calculations.
billqs's Avatar billqs
11:07 AM Liked: 19
post #3250 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 338
Joined: Jan 2003
Just got my 500ES in and noticed that to zoom in the right size for the picture from the source I had a good bit of projector generated black bleeding out from the screen. Is that just the normal difference between the native chip's 4096 width versus the 3840 width that UHD is using?
BrolicBeast's Avatar BrolicBeast
12:01 PM Liked: 363
post #3251 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 3,068
Joined: Sep 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by billqs View Post
Just got my 500ES in and noticed that to zoom in the right size for the picture from the source I had a good bit of projector generated black bleeding out from the screen. Is that just the normal difference between the native chip's 4096 width versus the 3840 width that UHD is using?
The native aspect ratio of Sony's 4k offerings are a tad wider than 16:9. You're seeing the unused sections of the native aspect ratio.
jlohojo7's Avatar jlohojo7
08:42 PM Liked: 18
post #3252 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 174
Joined: Jun 2008
So I have this problem with my 600. The blue is shifted about 20% off of where it should be. There is a blue outline around everything, and the lettering on the menu is a yellow tint instead of white. Also its not 100% focused. I called sony and they had me ship it back for them to look at it but I was wondering what you guys thought. They think its a factory defect in the PJ. Also had an ISF calibrator I know look at it and he thought something was wrong also. Like I said Ive already sent it back but just curios to see what you guys thought.
billqs's Avatar billqs
09:55 PM Liked: 19
post #3253 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 338
Joined: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlohojo7 View Post
So I have this problem with my 600. The blue is shifted about 20% off of where it should be. There is a blue outline around everything, and the lettering on the menu is a yellow tint instead of white. Also its not 100% focused. I called sony and they had me ship it back for them to look at it but I was wondering what you guys thought. They think its a factory defect in the PJ. Also had an ISF calibrator I know look at it and he thought something was wrong also. Like I said Ive already sent it back but just curios to see what you guys thought.
It obviously had really bad convergence. I've heard of "golden samples" before sounds like you ended up with a lead sample. I'm glad Sony is looking at it.
jlohojo7's Avatar jlohojo7
10:13 PM Liked: 18
post #3254 of 4169
06-27-2014 | Posts: 174
Joined: Jun 2008
well thats special. How do I always end up being so lucky? I would like for them to just replace it bc I never really have liked the idea of any kind of broken electronics equipment being repaired. Especially something of that magnitude. However im sure they will just patch it up and send it back.
magicj1's Avatar magicj1
09:14 AM Liked: 12
post #3255 of 4169
06-28-2014 | Posts: 599
Joined: Nov 2009
Anyone using the 'Remote' input RS232 to control the Sony?
mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich
09:19 AM Liked: 600
post #3256 of 4169
06-28-2014 | Posts: 20,277
Joined: Dec 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlohojo7 View Post
well thats special. How do I always end up being so lucky? I would like for them to just replace it bc I never really have liked the idea of any kind of broken electronics equipment being repaired. Especially something of that magnitude. However im sure they will just patch it up and send it back.
It hard to speculate as to why. Maybe its an issue of clean living or not repainting your mother's closet enough.
Tnedator's Avatar Tnedator
09:03 AM Liked: 37
post #3257 of 4169
06-29-2014 | Posts: 705
Joined: Jul 2001
I have a question for those of you using the zoom method to change between 1.78/1.85 to 2.35/2.40 on a CIH screen.

Let's take a 10' wide 2.37 screen. When you zoom up from 1.78 to fill the 2.37 screen, the "letter boxed" area of the screen will fall off the top/bottom of the screen. On a 10' wide screen, that would be about 8.5" above and below the screen material. So, that would be on the masking and then whatever objects/material you have 5" or so above/below your screen.

How noticeable is the letterboxed area being displayed outside the screen surface area? If you have black fabric (screen mounted in screen wall with black GOM AT fabric, should I expect it to just disappear or am I going to notice some light spill from the "letterboxed" area being displayed outside the screen area?
mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich
09:21 AM Liked: 600
post #3258 of 4169
06-29-2014 | Posts: 20,277
Joined: Dec 2000
It should pretty much not be noticeable,
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar AV Science Sales 5
01:26 PM Liked: 567
post #3259 of 4169
06-29-2014 | Posts: 8,533
Joined: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tnedator View Post
I have a question for those of you using the zoom method to change between 1.78/1.85 to 2.35/2.40 on a CIH screen.

Let's take a 10' wide 2.37 screen. When you zoom up from 1.78 to fill the 2.37 screen, the "letter boxed" area of the screen will fall off the top/bottom of the screen. On a 10' wide screen, that would be about 8.5" above and below the screen material. So, that would be on the masking and then whatever objects/material you have 5" or so above/below your screen.

How noticeable is the letterboxed area being displayed outside the screen surface area? If you have black fabric (screen mounted in screen wall with black GOM AT fabric, should I expect it to just disappear or am I going to notice some light spill from the "letterboxed" area being displayed outside the screen area?
With black GOM, you will not see it. It is a non issue.
Tnedator's Avatar Tnedator
05:33 PM Liked: 37
post #3260 of 4169
06-29-2014 | Posts: 705
Joined: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post
With black GOM, you will not see it. It is a non issue.
That's what I figured, but forgot to ask you when talking on the phone the other day. I'm assuming as long as I don't have anything glossy or reflective between the Stewart masking and black GOM than I'll be ok.
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar AV Science Sales 5
08:02 PM Liked: 567
post #3261 of 4169
06-29-2014 | Posts: 8,533
Joined: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tnedator View Post
That's what I figured, but forgot to ask you when talking on the phone the other day. I'm assuming as long as I don't have anything glossy or reflective between the Stewart masking and black GOM than I'll be ok.
Yes, correct.
billqs's Avatar billqs
10:03 AM Liked: 19
post #3262 of 4169
06-30-2014 | Posts: 338
Joined: Jan 2003
What's the last date to get in on the preorder price for the new Sony server FMP-x10?
ralphcowaniii
07:07 PM Liked: 0
post #3263 of 4169
06-30-2014 | Posts: 16
Joined: Jun 2014
I was hoping to get a little advice on my upcoming purchase. I currently have a Sony VW60 1080 projector and a 110 inch Stewart Firehawk screen. I want to upgrade to the Sony VW600ES projector. I was wondering if I purchased the 600 if my current screen would do it justice? Anyone have any thoughts on this? I would really appreciate any advice. Thanks!
mark haflich's Avatar mark haflich
07:37 PM Liked: 600
post #3264 of 4169
06-30-2014 | Posts: 20,277
Joined: Dec 2000
Your question is unanswerable without further information. Your screen is only 30 sq ft in area. The gain of your screen is about 1.25. With the lumens power of your coming projector, you do not need any positive gain. A gain of 1.0 will be more than enough for a great 2D picture. For 3D, a gain of 1.0 would be adequate but ideally the picture could be made better by having a positive gain screen. The main issues are what is your throw distance, what is the ambient light situation, and what are your screen surrounding walls, floor and ceiling like? Color and reflectivity? More after you answer my questions..
ralphcowaniii
08:35 PM Liked: 0
post #3265 of 4169
06-30-2014 | Posts: 16
Joined: Jun 2014
I was hoping to get a little advice on my upcoming purchase. I currently have a Sony VW60 1080 projector and a 110 inch Stewart Firehawk screen. I want to upgrade to the Sony VW600ES projector. I was wondering if I purchased the 600 if my current screen would do it justice? Anyone have any thoughts on this? I would really appreciate any advice. Thanks!
ralphcowaniii
08:42 PM Liked: 0
post #3266 of 4169
06-30-2014 | Posts: 16
Joined: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
Your question is unanswerable without further information. Your screen is only 30 sq ft in area. The gain of your screen is about 1.25. With the lumens power of your coming projector, you do not need any positive gain. A gain of 1.0 will be more than enough for a great 2D picture. For 3D, a gain of 1.0 would be adequate but ideally the picture could be made better by having a positive gain screen. The main issues are what is your throw distance, what is the ambient light situation, and what are your screen surrounding walls, floor and ceiling like? Color and reflectivity? More after you answer my questions..
Thanks for the response Mark. Sorry I was so vague. Sort of a newbie here. My throw distance (I assume how far back i sit from the screen) is about 14 feet. My walls are light tan (not very reflective), room gets very dark and the ceiling is white. The projector is a ceiling mount. Thanks!
ralphcowaniii
08:45 PM Liked: 0
post #3267 of 4169
06-30-2014 | Posts: 16
Joined: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by billqs View Post
What's the last date to get in on the preorder price for the new Sony server FMP-x10?
July 15th
gdfein's Avatar gdfein
08:56 PM Liked: 16
post #3268 of 4169
06-30-2014 | Posts: 129
Joined: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralphcowaniii View Post
July 15th
I thought July 15th was the ship date, no?
ralphcowaniii
09:06 PM Liked: 0
post #3269 of 4169
06-30-2014 | Posts: 16
Joined: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdfein View Post
I thought July 15th was the ship date, no?
My understanding from someone I know that deals with Sony on a wholesale level said it was 7/15. Im hoping that is correct.
mankite's Avatar mankite
05:44 AM Liked: 18
post #3270 of 4169
07-01-2014 | Posts: 664
Joined: Jul 2007
Man the screw holes used to mount projector on the ceiling aren't very deep. My Jvc holds a lot of screw. The Sony is like less then 1/2 inch. What ceiling mounts are you guys using?
Tags: Sony Vpl Vw500es , Sony Vpl Vw1000es Projector , Sony Fmp X1 4k Ultra Hd Media Player

Gear in this thread
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3