Should I get the Epson 5030 for $2600 or spend a little more and get something else? - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 56 Old 12-26-2013, 01:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,611
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blindsay08 View Post

woah, thread has been going crazy while ive been gone lol.


update though, I think I am actually going to spring for one of the new JVC RS4910's - good choice?

it's a great choice if you like the jvc look(I do). it's hard to predict what changes will be significant if any, but the 4810 was a very well reviewed model, so hopefully they kept everything that was good about it, and the DI just improves the whole experience.

I still don't think you can really go wrong with either, but for me the jvc just looks so film-like.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 56 Old 12-26-2013, 11:27 AM
Super Moderator
 
Bob Sorel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 8,466
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
Yep, that's me. Although I should say that the image was still unacceptable to me even in 16:9 mode, and for that my viewing distance ratio was less extreme: about 95" away for an image about 81" wide.

That is still much closer than the "normal" 1.5X screen widths back...eek.gif
Quote:
This is actually quite surprising to me, as a years' old RS35 impressed (and continues to impress) me much more than the brand new 5030.

Did you see them side by side under level playing conditions or at completely different locations under completely different circumstances? If I wanted to sell you either projector, I know exactly how to make one look vastly superior to the other, depending on which one I wanted to sell to you...wink.gif
Quote:
trust me, I would have much preferred a shot of the x35's '1300 lumens' next to the 5020's '2400 lumens' to show that they actually look basically the same.

I'm glad that you brought that up, as you are very correct! The eye's response to brightness is logarithmic, much like our ear's response to volume, so in much the same way that twice as much power does not sound twice as loud, neither does twice as much light output appear twice as bright. So 2400 lumens, being almost double the brightness of 1300 lumens (not even accounting for color accuracy), looks only marginally brighter, and is not anywhere near as bright as most people expect. Of course, being a logarithmic response, down at the lower end of brightness (but not the extreme low end), small differences in light output appear more significant to our eyes. And then once again, at the extreme low end of brightness, very dark levels are difficult to differentiate, as it takes a few seconds for our eyes to adjust to the darkness - the longer the pure blackout, the more our eyes are able to see the differences, and conversely, the shorter the blackout, the less we are able to differentiate black levels. Since pure black scenes are actually quite rare, I personally am more interested in ANSI contrast, where black needs to be held in the same frame as white, and not washed out by light scatter. This is where midrange and high end DLP machines really shine, and look, IMHO, considerably better than any of the other technologies.
Quote:
the truth is, the x35 made some major leaps over even just the previous year's models. the only two areas I see where another projector in its price range could be better is input lag and motion resolution. neither is particularly terrible, but they aren't class leading.

JVC is also not class leading in ANSI contrast and in 3D presentation, both in terms of crosstalk and brightness. Oh, and let's not forget customer service and price!
Quote:
I'm absolutely thrilled with it's native on/off contrast, color reproduction, lens memory, black levels, brightness, uniformity, clarity, super quiet operation and so far bulb life(both from what I've read from other experiences, and my own at now 373h).

Those were all very strong with my RS35 as well, except for the bulb life, of course. As far as uniformity, does your x35 suffer from the famous "bright corners" on a 0% IRE field?
Quote:
the 5020, x35, 50/55ES are all awesome projectors for the money. most ppl will love everything about them, and it's only when ppl are sensitive to one of their flaws that one would become 'unsuitable' for somebody.

Absolutely agree with you 100%! Most anybody would be thrilled with ANY of these projectors...It is just the "lunatic fringe" (us) that nit pick over tiny details...smile.gif
Bob Sorel is offline  
post #33 of 56 Old 12-26-2013, 12:09 PM
Super Moderator
 
Bob Sorel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 8,466
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
Fair enough. In my comparison between the RS35 and the 5010, I had both machines setup side by side, using identical room and lighting conditions, identical sources, the same screen and size, and I even adjusted light output levels to match as closely as possible in order to compare the 2 projectors in a fair and impartial manner. Use that info for what it is worth to you. In order to say anything of meaning about the x35, I would have to buy one, use it in my theater for awhile, and then directly compare it to an Epson (or any other projector) in much the same manner, something that is not likely to happen. So I have contributed to the best of my ability by at least offering comparisons of 2 products that I am intimately familiar with. That is one of the problems we face in this forum. Other than Zombie and very few others, most people have not had the opportunity to do these level field comparisons, so we must depend on these people, or buy the projectors ourselves, to get truly meaningful information.

Someone posted a counterpoint to my earlier post about "level field comparisons", but I can't seem to find the post now...confused.gif

Anyway, the gist of it was that level field comparisons are not necessarily the right way to do things because it may cripple what one projector does better than another. For example, if one actually is twice as bright as another, then both projectors should be allowed to present the best picture possible.

I agree with this. In the end, you want to allow both projectors in a comparison to present the best picture that each is capable of producing. BUT, in order to fairly compare certain characteristics, a level playing field is necessary in order to obtain accurate results. For example, if we want to compare black levels of 2 projectors, if I present the JVC on a small screen with high gain and a fair amount of ambient light and I present a DLP with MUCH lower contrast on a much larger screen, with very low gain in a total batcave, then the DLP will most certainly appear to have the better black level, and that just would not be true, and would in fact do the JVC a terrible injustice. The same can be said for many of the parameters that we compare from one projector to the other. In that light, auditioning one projector in environment A and another projector in environment B has no significance at all, and you are just fooling yourself if you choose one projector over another under these conditions. You MAY still make the right choice, but it would be just by luck and not based on any sort of scientific method.

Light output needs to be leveled as well for these comparisons. Much like a louder speaker always sounds better than a softer one, a brighter projector always looks better than a dimmer one (within reason, of course). But people will say "in the end, I want the picture to look as good as the projector is capable of looking, so why should I cripple its brightness?" The answer is...just to compare the other parameters. Remember, we can affect light output coming off of the screen in a number of ways - we can make it brighter by using a smaller screen, or a screen with higher gain - we can reject ambient light with a "black" screen - we can make the image dimmer by use of a manual iris or the addition of neutral density filters. Basically, we can manipulate the screen and lighting conditions to obtain the best picture we can from any projector. If we can not manipulate these other factors, THEN that is when light output level will become an important factor in your decision. Like I said before, I could sell you whichever projector I wanted to sell you by simply manipulating other factors in the room to maximize the picture quality of the one I wanted to sell you...to a point, of course.

In the end, in both audio and video, the ROOM and the conditions within are more important than the choice of speakers and projector. My room is virtually perfect for both audio and video, but not everybody has the luxury of building such a room. Choose your projector based on your screen, room, and lighting conditions first, and temper that decision with your needs and desires in picture quality. Just don't make the mistake of viewing one projector at one location and then viewing another projector at an entirely different location and then making a decision based on your "impressions" and memory of what you saw at the other location.

Sorry for the rant...
Bob Sorel is offline  
post #34 of 56 Old 12-26-2013, 02:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
curttard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Did you see them side by side under level playing conditions or at completely different locations under completely different circumstances? If I wanted to sell you either projector, I know exactly how to make one look vastly superior to the other, depending on which one I wanted to sell to you..

Not side by side, but the conditions in which I saw the 5030 should have favored it. Complete bat cave, zero light, velveted walls.
Quote:
Much like a louder speaker always sounds better than a softer one, a brighter projector always looks better than a dimmer one (within reason, of course).

I'm returning my 5030 because I didn't think it looked significantly better than my 1900 hours Mits HC4000 despite being significantly brighter ;P
curttard is offline  
post #35 of 56 Old 12-26-2013, 03:45 PM
Super Moderator
 
Bob Sorel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 8,466
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
Not side by side, but the conditions in which I saw the 5030 should have favored it. Complete bat cave, zero light, velveted walls.

Projector settings and calibration, screen size, gain, and material, and source gear and content - all come into play as well. Side by side, with the playing field leveled, tells the story.
Quote:
I'm returning my 5030 because I didn't think it looked significantly better than my 1900 hours Mits HC4000 despite being significantly brighter ;P

Right, because you sit very close to the screen and you could see the screen door. That's why I qualified my statement with "within reason, of course". Once you object to a certain characteristic, it really won't matter how bright the projector is, just like when you hear something you don't like in a speaker, the volume no longer matters. Without doubt, no Epson projector will work for you because of your particular requirements/needs/desires, regardless of how bright it is.

I'll bet you would really like Sony, though...smile.gif
Bob Sorel is offline  
post #36 of 56 Old 12-26-2013, 09:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
curttard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 27
I'm not sure I would have kept the Epson even without the SDE. It's hard to say. I absolutely don't feel like the other aspects of the image justified it costing $2300 (which was $300 below the going rate due to Discover cashback) vs the $850 the HC4000 is currently going for at Newegg -- talk about diminishing returns!
curttard is offline  
post #37 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 08:57 AM
Member
 
jkenned70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I was looking into an epson 5030 and stumped upon this thread. Very insightful, thanks gentlemen. Regardless, I own a long since discontinued mits hc4900. It's not bright enough with my ambient lit room and 1.0 gain screen. The mount is about 15-16' from the 106" diagonal screen. Do you believe the epson would be a NOTICEABLE upgrade in 2D in terms of brightness and overall image quality???
jkenned70 is offline  
post #38 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 11:27 AM
Member
 
State guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkenned70 View Post

I was looking into an epson 5030 and stumped upon this thread. Very insightful, thanks gentlemen. Regardless, I own a long since discontinued mits hc4900. It's not bright enough with my ambient lit room and 1.0 gain screen. The mount is about 15-16' from the 106" diagonal screen. Do you believe the epson would be a NOTICEABLE upgrade in 2D in terms of brightness and overall image quality???


I can't speak for the 5030, but I just migrated from the HC4900 to the 6030 and the difference is monumental. Much brighter (and I had no issues w/ the HC4900 brightness) and the picture is dramatically better.
jkenned70 likes this.
State guy is offline  
post #39 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 12:19 PM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 7,045
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View PostI forgot to mention a couple of things:

1. Convergence and color uniformity: I group these together even though they are not always related. The RS1 was pretty terrible, but the RS35 was excellent. The 5010 was just a hair worse than the RS35, BUT the 5010 has an excellent convergence tool that allows me to dial it in perfectly, even better than the RS35. JVC's convergence tool used to be in single pixel adjustments, not on the sub pixel level like the Epson. Has JVC improved this?
2. Focus: Virtually a tie here. Both the RS35 and the 5010 have/had very good corner to corner focus, or at least on my particular samples.
3. Lag time: I am not a big screen gamer, so I don't know for sure how they compare, but from what I have read, the Epson beats the JVC, but Sony beats both of them.

Unit to unit variation will effect both company's products. In my case, my RS1 was quite poor in all regards, while my RS35 was pretty much as good as a JVC got at that time. My particular Epson is also very good, though I have heard of quite a few people getting less than spectacular units. The good news is that Epson is very accommodating in replacing a sub par unit...I don't know how quick JVC is to give you a new unit if you are not happy.

I have also owned a few Sony projectors. If I were looking for an alternative to the 5030, the HW50/55 would be the next units I would consider, but that is just because I have had better luck with Sony in the past than I have had with JVC...YMMV.

Would you upgrade you RS35U to an RS57?

wse is offline  
post #40 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 12:20 PM
Member
 
jkenned70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thank you sir! Appreciated, I may be getting my hands on one soon. Drooling
jkenned70 is offline  
post #41 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 12:27 PM
Senior Member
 
raminolta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canada, Montreal
Posts: 255
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkenned70 View Post

I was looking into an epson 5030 and stumped upon this thread. Very insightful, thanks gentlemen. Regardless, I own a long since discontinued mits hc4900. It's not bright enough with my ambient lit room and 1.0 gain screen. The mount is about 15-16' from the 106" diagonal screen. Do you believe the epson would be a NOTICEABLE upgrade in 2D in terms of brightness and overall image quality???

If you had read this thread, I assume you must already have the answer to your question, no? Some people explained, you can only compare two projectors in exact same room and exact same conditions, side by sid to make a sensible conclusion. Moreover, from some posts here, you can read conflicting messages:

One guy moved from HC4000 to an Epson and realized the difference is insignificant (except for the brightness) to the extent that he is planning to return his Epson.

Then another guy come and says he moved from HC4900 to an Epson and 'the difference is monumental". So go figure for yourself if you can really trust what you read on forums from people you don't know. You will end up believing black is white, and white is black and black is occasionally black while white is also occasionally white and, the story of conflicting opinions go on and on. Isn't it true that what we believe is probably just what we want to convince ourselves to.

At the end, the important point is to be satisfied with your choice no matter what. wink.gif

raminolta is offline  
post #42 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 02:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,611
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post


I'm glad that you brought that up, as you are very correct! The eye's response to brightness is logarithmic, much like our ear's response to volume, so in much the same way that twice as much power does not sound twice as loud, neither does twice as much light output appear twice as bright. So 2400 lumens, being almost double the brightness of 1300 lumens (not even accounting for color accuracy), looks only marginally brighter, and is not anywhere near as bright as most people expect. Of course, being a logarithmic response, down at the lower end of brightness (but not the extreme low end), small differences in light output appear more significant to our eyes. And then once again, at the extreme low end of brightness, very dark levels are difficult to differentiate, as it takes a few seconds for our eyes to adjust to the darkness - the longer the pure blackout, the more our eyes are able to see the differences, and conversely, the shorter the blackout, the less we are able to differentiate black levels. Since pure black scenes are actually quite rare, I personally am more interested in ANSI contrast, where black needs to be held in the same frame as white, and not washed out by light scatter. This is where midrange and high end DLP machines really shine, and look, IMHO, considerably better than any of the other technologies.
that wasn't what I meant. what I meant was that neither the 1300 nor 2400 lumen rating really mean anything, since bother projectors end up around 780-790lumens when in their best calibrated modes.
Quote:
JVC is also not class leading in ANSI contrast and in 3D presentation, both in terms of crosstalk and brightness.
yes, i'm told DLP is the undisputed king of 3D. i'm not a fan of 3d, but the movies i've watched on the x35 are virtually crosstalk free for me. brightness depends on screen size, for my 100" grey screen, it's fine.
Quote:
Oh, and let's not forget customer service and price!
haven't had a problem with either my old Epson or new jvc, so no idea on CS. I bought the x35 because it was a better price than the 5020 though, well, ok, it was basically the same price. x35 was 'more money' because it came with an extra bulb. the 'best' quotes I got were 2500 for the 5020(which came with 3d glasses), 3000 for the x35(which came with 3d emitter, glasses, bulb and mount). it was close enough for me that I called it a draw when weighing the pros and cons of each.
Quote:
Those were all very strong with my RS35 as well, except for the bulb life, of course. As far as uniformity, does your x35 suffer from the famous "bright corners" on a 0% IRE field?
Absolutely agree with you 100%! Most anybody would be thrilled with ANY of these projectors...It is just the "lunatic fringe" (us) that nit pick over tiny details...smile.gif

no, but maybe. there was a person a few weeks ago that pm'd me because his had some uniformity issues. I told him mine was fine, but then tried to duplicate his results. if I put up a black screen and wait several minutes for my eyes to adjust, it does appear as though one of my corners might be brighter than the rest. it's very faint. I've never tried that hard to see such a flaw before, so I don't really know if it's good that there's only a little, or bad that there's any at all. with normal use it's not at all visible. watching something like credits for example, it looks totally uniform.

some days I do wonder what the 5020 would have been like. not that I'm in any way disappointed with the jvc. I just wonder how close it really is, how good the DI is now, how good/bad is the SDE(my old 720p projector was bad for this, but it was 720p afterall). I mean, when I buy a tv, I've viewed them ALL, and for many hours under realistic conditions and I walk away with absolute confidence. with a projector, I've literally never been able to demo one before I bought it, so I always have that question. I have to rely on opinions from those like they guys on here that review dozens of projectors every year

what I can say though, is that ever since getting the jvc I've been upset with my screen. cheap grey screen with the cheap HC720 was actually a good fit. that screen with the jvc drives me nuts, so much texture and sparklies. it's super distracting, and I hate watching bright images because it makes the texture that much more obvious. I'm too close to moving to justify buying a screen right now. but it'll be the first thing I buy when I do move.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #43 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 02:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,611
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Someone posted a counterpoint to my earlier post about "level field comparisons", but I can't seem to find the post now...confused.gif

Anyway, the gist of it was that level field comparisons are not necessarily the right way to do things because it may cripple what one projector does better than another. For example, if one actually is twice as bright as another, then both projectors should be allowed to present the best picture possible.

I agree with this. In the end, you want to allow both projectors in a comparison to present the best picture that each is capable of producing. BUT, in order to fairly compare certain characteristics, a level playing field is necessary in order to obtain accurate results. For example, if we want to compare black levels of 2 projectors, if I present the JVC on a small screen with high gain and a fair amount of ambient light and I present a DLP with MUCH lower contrast on a much larger screen, with very low gain in a total batcave, then the DLP will most certainly appear to have the better black level, and that just would not be true, and would in fact do the JVC a terrible injustice. The same can be said for many of the parameters that we compare from one projector to the other. In that light, auditioning one projector in environment A and another projector in environment B has no significance at all, and you are just fooling yourself if you choose one projector over another under these conditions. You MAY still make the right choice, but it would be just by luck and not based on any sort of scientific method.

...

I agree with this totally! I may have even been the one who made the comment you were looking for.

it's like if I'm comparing two basketball players and one is 7feet tall and the other is only 5'8". I'm not going to raise the rim for the 7footer to level out the playing field. if his extra height(or brightness, or contrast, or whatever) is what makes him better at blocking, dunking, defence etc then that shouldn't be taken away from him. if I just want to measure vertical leap, or shooting, then yes, we would level the playing field between the two. but ultimately, even if the short guy has a better vertical, that doesn't mean he's the better athlete. and even if he's a better shooter, that doesn't mean much if he's too short to avoid getting blocked. at the end of all the testing, you need to look at the whole picture, not just the sum of its parts.

so yeah, at some point you should audition each projector at it's brightest calibrated mode, and further more I don't think it should NOT be done side by side. it should be done one after the other, with suitable time in between to allow our eyes to adjust. I would say it should be done in the same room with the same screen, but I wouldn't think it crazy to switch screens if it benefited both projectors. ie, maybe you've got one that's 'too bright' so you pair it with a lower gain screen to improve the black levels, and the other is paired with a higher gain screen to improve it's brightness. I mean, at the end of the day the only thing I care about is the end result, not how it gets achieved(bright projector with low gain, or dim with high gain, or whatever)

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #44 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 02:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
curttard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by raminolta View Post

If you had read this thread, I assume you must already have the answer to your question, no? Some people explained, you can only compare two projectors in exact same room and exact same conditions, side by sid to make a sensible conclusion. Moreover, from some posts here, you can read conflicting messages:

One guy moved from HC4000 to an Epson and realized the difference is insignificant (except for the brightness) to the extent that he is planning to return his Epson.

Then another guy come and says he moved from HC4900 to an Epson and 'the difference is monumental". So go figure for yourself if you can really trust what you read on forums from people you don't know. You will end up believing black is white, and white is black and black is occasionally black while white is also occasionally white and, the story of conflicting opinions go on and on. Isn't it true that what we believe is probably just what we want to convince ourselves to.

At the end, the important point is to be satisfied with your choice no matter what. wink.gif

To clarify, as the guy who moved from the HC4000 to the Epson and didn't see enough improvement to justify the cost -- I actually had the HC4900 briefly and returned that as well because I didn't like the picture, the grey blacks, etc. At that time I switched to the Mits HC3000 and greatly preferred it. Then to the HC4000. So I have little difficulty in seeing the Epson as a huge upgrade from the HC4900, because I saw even the 720p HC3000 as an upgrade over that one in terms of making me happy with its picture.

I currently have a JVC RS4810 on the way, and hope it scratches that itch!

Saying you can only compare two projectors side by side, while true enough, is also so impractical for most of us that it's almost pointless to even bring it up. Most retailers won't take projectors back at all, or hit you with a 15% restocking fee (which is hundreds of dollars) in addition to return shipping cost (another 100 or so); or they have such absurdly small windows (4 hours on the lamp) that you don't even have time to calibrate before you have to shut it down and make your decision.

The OP is looking for a dramatic upgrade from his Epson 8350 and says 2D is his top priority, and 3D -- while "nice" -- is not even required at all; nor did he mention gaming. With that criteria, I think a JVC sounds like the safest bet for him. I don't think I've ever heard anyone seriously claim the Epson -- or any LCD -- has a better 2D picture than a JVC. The JVC would win hands down in contrast and blacks, and is brighter in calibrated modes besides. Add in powered lens memory. I got my B-stock 4810 from AVS with 3 year warranty for $2750, just $150 more than you can find the Epson for. Other JVC models can be found for cheaper.
curttard is offline  
post #45 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 04:03 PM
Senior Member
 
raminolta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canada, Montreal
Posts: 255
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Sorry, I didn't mean to say people are wrong in their personal assertions. I hope my previous message isn't misleading in this regard. I just wanted to say preferences are absolutely subjective and one can not easily come to a conclusion because somebody else liked something better because each person may perceives things differently. There are a lot of parameters involved (psychological, etc.) which obviously vary person by person.

I also add, for the same price, I would personally pick the JVC over Epson any day. But behold people are going to show up soon saying how much they preferred Epson over JVC! wink.gif

raminolta is offline  
post #46 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 04:42 PM
Super Moderator
 
Bob Sorel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 8,466
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
Would you upgrade you RS35U to an RS57?

Me personally...no, but that is simply because I have had 2 bad (well, not really bad, but let's call it "sub par") experiences with JVC and am not willing to take a risk a third time. As others have testified, the newer JVC models are getting better, so don't go by my decision. Everything I have posted about JVC in this thread pertains to the very old RS1 and direct comparison of an RS35 to an Epson 5010. If I had one of the newer JVC models, then I could give you meaningful input, but not as things stand. Your best source of balanced, unbiased, level field comparisons of the JVC and Epson models is in Zombie's "Mini Shootout" thread.
Quote:
that wasn't what I meant. what I meant was that neither the 1300 nor 2400 lumen rating really mean anything, since bother projectors end up around 780-790lumens when in their best calibrated modes.

Yes, I know that wasn't what you meant, but I used your statement to go off on a short lecture about brightness and how the eye perceives it...smile.gif Even if the numbers were accurate, the perceived difference in brightness would be far less than the huge difference the numbers might indicate.
Quote:
I've never tried that hard to see such a flaw before, so I don't really know if it's good that there's only a little, or bad that there's any at all.

It sounds like you got a good one...The "bright corners" issue was pretty easy to see with the projectors that I owned.
Quote:
and further more I don't think it should NOT be done side by side. it should be done one after the other

The projectors are just mounted side by side, but played sequentially. If both projectors were actually on at the same time, there would be light scatter taking place that would infect the results regardless of how careful you were to insure that it didn't.
Quote:
I would say it should be done in the same room with the same screen, but I wouldn't think it crazy to switch screens if it benefited both projectors. ie, maybe you've got one that's 'too bright' so you pair it with a lower gain screen to improve the black levels, and the other is paired with a higher gain screen to improve it's brightness.

No...don't manipulate other factors....keep the playing field level. Remember, this is just for the sake of comparing individual characteristics, not for a final presentation. You can (and should) manipulate all other parameters to get the most performance in your own theater once you have made a decision.
Quote:
Saying you can only compare two projectors side by side, while true enough, is also so impractical for most of us that it's almost pointless to even bring it up. Most retailers won't take projectors back at all, or hit you with a 15% restocking fee (which is hundreds of dollars) in addition to return shipping cost (another 100 or so); or they have such absurdly small windows (4 hours on the lamp) that you don't even have time to calibrate before you have to shut it down and make your decision.

Right...there's the rub. That is why Zombie's "Mini Shootout" thread is such a precious asset. He either buys all of these projectors eek.gif , or people send him their projectors so that he can make these types of comparisons. He is also very competent, understands how to calibrate properly, is very unbiased (as neutral as anyone I have ever known), and has the energy and drive to do these comparisons over and over again. It is not as perfect as being able to do it yourself, but it is the next best thing! I nominate Zombie for Sainthood! tongue.gif
Bob Sorel is offline  
post #47 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 05:01 PM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 7,045
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post

Me personally...no, That is why Zombie's "Mini Shootout" thread is such a precious asset. He either buys all of these projectors eek.gif , or people send him their projectors so that he can make these types of comparisons. He is also very competent, understands how to calibrate properly, is very unbiased (as neutral as anyone I have ever known), and has the energy and drive to do these comparisons over and over again. It is not as perfect as being able to do it yourself, but it is the next best thing! I nominate Zombie for Sainthood! tongue.gif

Do you have a link to the thread? I read that they are having problems with HDMi switching !
wse is offline  
post #48 of 56 Old 12-28-2013, 09:29 PM
Super Moderator
 
Bob Sorel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 8,466
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
Do you have a link to the thread?

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1434826/projector-mini-shootout-thread-2013-2014

189 pages so far. I would recommend reading the first page or so, and then jumping to around page 180-ish to get up to date.
Quote:
I read that they are having problems with HDMi switching !

Who or what is having a problem with HDMI switching? confused.gif
Bob Sorel is offline  
post #49 of 56 Old 12-29-2013, 03:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,611
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Sorel View Post


No...don't manipulate other factors....keep the playing field level. Remember, this is just for the sake of comparing individual characteristics, not for a final presentation. You can (and should) manipulate all other parameters to get the most performance in your own theater once you have made a decision.

ok, so, now we're debating the PURPOSE of the comparison i guess. i would agree, for reviewing projectors, as much as possible should be kept the same. if you want to rank projectors, this is super key, and any direct comparison of projectors should be done this way.

but I'm not interested in a projector, I'm interested a projector system. so i want the best image possible, and that comes from both screen and projector. pairing the 'best' projector with the 'best' screen doesn't always give you the 'best' image(say you bought the brightest projector and the highest gain screen because you were concerned about ambient light). so when deciding what to BUY, i do believe changing things is valid, if not necessary.

here's my personal example, i bought a cheap grey screen for my hc720. it made the picture worlds better, loved it. then i bought the jvc. now i greatly prefer the old white screen because the blacks are just as dark, but the whites are brighter, and further more, there's way less screen texture. not that i wouldn't have picked the jvc over my old projector anyway, but i feel the real comparison should be the hc720 with the grey screen(best performance for it) vs. the jvc on the white screen(best performance for it), since those are the two systems I'd be using.

i will agree, that basically everything else should remain constant though, ambient lighting, wall paint, screen size, seating location, etc should be equal. and if you have restrictions on throw distance, then that should be accounted for in testing as well. no point having a projector mounted at full throw if you intend to mount it as close to the screen as possible,

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #50 of 56 Old 12-29-2013, 04:43 PM
Super Moderator
 
Bob Sorel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 8,466
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 121
Quote:
but I'm not interested in a projector, I'm interested a projector system. so i want the best image possible, and that comes from both screen and projector. pairing the 'best' projector with the 'best' screen doesn't always give you the 'best' image(say you bought the brightest projector and the highest gain screen because you were concerned about ambient light). so when deciding what to BUY, i do believe changing things is valid, if not necessary.

I think we agree for the most part. You said "pairing the 'best' projector with the 'best' screen doesn't always give you the 'best' image". Pairing the BEST screen with the BEST projector will indeed provide you with the BEST image. As you said, the "BEST screen is the screen that provides the proper size, the proper gain, the proper surface, the proper viewing cone, the proper ambient light rejection, etc. for YOUR needs and desires. There is no BEST screen for ANY projector in ANY room under ALL ambient light conditions. Each room is different, so if you choose what you consider the BEST screen for one room with one projector, it may or may not be the BEST screen for a different projector in a different room. Choosing the right screen is something you do BEFORE or AFTER choosing a projector and is not something you do while comparing projectors, as you are affecting the results by changing the performance of the projector itself by using a different screen. For example, when auditioning speakers, you don't connect an equalizer in the audio path and change the setting from one speaker to the next when comparing speakers, though you may want to correct some aspect of a speaker's sound using an EQ after you have made your decision. The point is, that by adding an EQ in the mix and changing the settings from one speaker to the next (much like changing screens while comparing projectors), you are not obtaining an accurate representation of the speaker's performance, but instead are enhancing its performance to reflect the sound you wish to hear. Changing the screen enhances the performance of the projector to bring it closer to what you want to see.

The idea behind comparisons is to isolate the performance of one unit versus another. Anything else you change during the comparison then taints the comparison. Once you make a decision as to which projector performs best, THEN is the time to maximize its performance with the treatments in your room, the choice of screen, the choice of video enhancing components (like video processor and/or Darbee-vision), and the choice of source components (Blu-ray player, DVD player, FiOS, etc.). If you want to match your projector to an existing screen, then you must take that into consideration when choosing a projector, so use THAT screen when making the comparison between projector A and projector B.

Comparing projectors and choosing a video system are two different tasks. The former is a way of distinguishing differences and similarities in performance, while the latter is assembling individual components that will work "best" together in my theater. When I assemble a video system for a particular room, I start out by deciding how big and what aspect ratio will the screen be. Where will people be sitting to view this screen? This gives me a good idea where I am going with my project.

Then I have to analyze the room lighting - Is this a bat cave? Will there be ambient light? How bright of an image do I wish to look at? Will I be watching 3D or 2D only? The answers to these questions help me narrow down my choice of screen materials.

Then I decide on a price range for my projector. Assuming that there is more than one projector that meets my needs to this point, then I will compare projectors on a level playing field (or read Zombie's comparisons) so that I can determine which one will be "best" in my theater. If I am truly open minded and want to know the truth, then I will compare them on the same screen, as the effects of the screen will be the same on both projectors. For example, if I use a High Power, then it will raise the black level and brightness of both projectors, so I am able to compare one against the other honestly. If I change screens during the comparison, I am not learning which one really has the better black level and which one is really brighter, because the different screens will taint the results. Sure, when I buy my entire system, I will match the screen to the projector (or vice-versa), but I don't want to change ANY variables when I am comparing projectors, assuming that I am genuinely interested in knowing how the 2 projectors compare, and not merely trying to convince myself that one is better than the other.

If you have chosen a final screen before choosing a projector, then the ideal situation would be to compare projectors on the EXACT screen you intend on using, but unfortunately this will probably be next to impossible to accomplish. For example again, in my theater I have decided on a 144" 2.35:1 screen. Since I like to watch a lot of 3D, and I can shelf mount my projector, I have chosen a Dalite High Power 2.8 screen for the job, as it provides me with the gain I need for decent 3D playback. However, the problem is that it also raises the black level, so I need a projector that can attain low black levels. When comparing a JVC to an Epson on a large HP (lucky for me Zombie has the same screen smile.gif ), I discovered that the JVC can do black better, but the 3D from the Epson is much brighter and ghost free, so I have to decide, which is more important to me, the deeper black level, or the brighter, more ghost free 3D presentation. Each person needs to answer that question for himself, as there is no right answer, nor is there any "best" projector - it all depends on YOUR needs and desires. But if you change screens while comparing the JVC against the Epson, then you learn very little to nothing about how the projectors actually compare to each other.

If you wish to change screens during projector comparisons, by all means do it - there is no law against it. You just need to understand that when you do that, you are NOT comparing *projectors*, but rather comparing *video systems*. Doing it this way may well yield very good results, but my position is that even better results can be obtained by following the method I have outlined above.
Bob Sorel is offline  
post #51 of 56 Old 12-29-2013, 07:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,611
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 972
I feel like no matter what I say, you'll find a way to twist it.

'best' is in quotes because I know there's different ways to interpret best. you are interpreting it as the best screen for the applications, where I was using it as the screen that gets rated highest.

nevertheless i'll try one more time.

when RATING projectors, it's important to keep everything the same

when CHOOSING a projector(and screen), it's important to factor in all aspects that affect image quality and only limit yourself to what is possible in your room at home.

I COMPLETELY disagree that choosing a screen and projector are independent of each other. you SHOULD choose a screen and projector combo that works well with each other and your room.

I've already provided one example where a screen worked very well in my room with one projector, and not very well in the exact same room with another projector. and the solution is to get a screen that works better with my new projector, not to have bought a different projector that worked with the old screen(because that screen really only works for projectors with poor black performance, so a downgrade)

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #52 of 56 Old 12-29-2013, 08:32 PM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 7,045
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 376

When I first started in the front projection business over 15 years ago, a very shrud pro told me buy the best screen you can get because your projector will change at least three times before you change your screen again!

 

Boy was he right I bought a StewartFilmScreen FireHawk and changed projectors three times Sim2 HT300, JVC DLA RS1, JVC-DLARS2, about five years ago I got a new FireHawk G3 and now that 4K is here I might wait a few more years and get a G4 :)

wse is offline  
post #53 of 56 Old 12-30-2013, 03:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,611
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 972
^^^ that I do agree with. but that's a budget decision as much as anything. I'm due for a 'good' screen now, and that will be my next purchase for sure. and since I'm not made of money, I would assume any future projector purchases will be made with that screen in mind, but...

I like to hear ALL the options, and then decide from there. if a projector that's 'dim' paired with a HP screen can look better than a brighter projector paired with a matte screen, I want to know about that. cause MAYBE that brighter projector is a grand or two more expensive, and buying a new screen is actually going to be the better option

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #54 of 56 Old 12-31-2013, 08:29 AM
Member
 
jkenned70's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I did read the thread. I read that the point of the thread was to discuss options in the $2600 range. So, I thought it would only make sense to ask for input as the avsforum would imply. However, if I read your post, it makes it seem as though there's no point in this thread or the forum for that matter... For example, " So go figure for yourself if you can really trust what you read on forums from people you don't know." This makes it seem as though this thread is pointless. I was just seeking input from people who have been researching the topic as I have.
jkenned70 is offline  
post #55 of 56 Old 12-31-2013, 05:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,611
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkenned70 View Post

I did read the thread. I read that the point of the thread was to discuss options in the $2600 range. So, I thought it would only make sense to ask for input as the avsforum would imply. However, if I read your post, it makes it seem as though there's no point in this thread or the forum for that matter... For example, " So go figure for yourself if you can really trust what you read on forums from people you don't know." This makes it seem as though this thread is pointless. I was just seeking input from people who have been researching the topic as I have.

the way I see it, one opinion is worthless, but 100's of opinions are invaluable.

and make sure you pay attention to the details, because one person's 'amazing' is barely acceptable to another.

reminds me of the last time I bought a car and I was reading reviews. considering a non-domestic for the first time, so I was grouping options into American made, german, and Japanese. seem like they were all getting reviews around 4/5 stars for reliability, then I read the comments. To paraphrase, the comments went something like this:
American:
-car's been excellent, runs awesome. Only left me stranded twice, once when the starter went, and we could diagnose the second, but it started right up with a boost.
German:
-reliability's been a little spotty. My power seat stopped working after 8months, and the rear passenger side power window sticks when it's cold.
Japanese:
-super disappointed with this car. I've had it into the shop 4 times trying to diagnose and the mechanics just can't figure it out. replaced air filters, plugs and wires, always run good gas, but no matter what I never get more than 40mpg. it's supposed to get 43mpg, but I've never even been close.

I thought it was a bit humorous when I started reading...

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is online now  
post #56 of 56 Old 01-01-2014, 11:34 PM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 7,045
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Epsom is launching a 4K projector at CES Next week wink.gif
wse is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Epson 5030ub 2d 3d 1080p 3lcd Projector , Epson Powerlite Home Cinema 8350
Gear in this thread - 5030ub 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