AVS Forum banner

Epson LS10000 Vs Sony ES350

13K views 217 replies 36 participants last post by  SoulOfUniverse 
#1 ·
Time is running out. My local dealer got 2 Epson LS10000 laser projector and I am debating bewteen Epson Vs Sony ES350. The sony $2K rebate ends in three days. This is going to be my first projector so please advice. Will be watching 50:50 TV channels and movies, no gaming. I could not even decide on 16:9 Vs 2:35:1 screen. The only thing I could decide was the screen size. If its 16:9 max I can go is 170" diagonal and for 2:35:1 - 175" diagonal. Decision ! Decision. I can't sleep....LOL
 
#8 ·
Wow ! just saw the LS10000 demo for an hour....and what an amazing picture and black level plus so many cool stuff Vs 350ES. The Lens memory is such a cool / nice feature for scope screen. What a shame Sony left this feature out of 350ES. LS also have the wider color gamut or whatever for future BD :), hdmi 2.0 and hdcp 2.2 power lens shift, power zoom and focus. Best part its whisper quiet even at dynamic mode. Epson 3 years warranty with replacement , 4K upscaling and input, no bulb replacement, we have a winner. So far looks like it smokes the 350ES and even though I have decided on 170 " 16:9 screen Vs 175" 2:35:1 overall I think 16:9 screen will have a more wow effect with almost floor to ceiling height and enjoy all kinds of broadcast and movies , I'll go with the feature rich Epson LS. Getting it installed on Monday. Time to order the screen.
 
#10 · (Edited)
What gain is the screen you're buying? This is a huge screen that neither projector can fill comfortably unless you have a higher gain screen.

It should be noted that calibrated with a new bulb the Sony is many hundreds of lumens brighter. It also has higher ANSI contrast. While it lacks the on/off contrast performance the LS10000 offers these two factors may be more appealing for a screen this size.

For reference we're talking 1100 vs 1400 lumens. On a unity screen this large that's 13ftL vs 16.5ftL. This can make a pretty decent difference in overall PQ. Brighter = better in terms of subjective sharpness, color, and contrast performance. With the Epson you may feel the image looks a little "dull" by comparison. I realize the Sony will lose it's brightness over time faster than the Epson, but at least with the Sony you have the opportunity to get a higher, more preferable, peak white brightness. With the Epson you'll never even get the opportunity.

If you decide on the Epson 100% be sure to look into a higher gain screen. A Stewart ST130 may be a good option. This will bring the 13ftL up to 16+ftL which is a much better overall starting point for brightness.
 
#13 ·
With the size of his screen, he is not going to have enough brightness to be able to use the DCI filter.
 
#19 · (Edited)
Bill did the comparison review to the 350ES. Please take a look at this:

"We measured the Cinema mode color gamut as being dead on target:"

Cinema Mode measurement from Projector Central:


Lol that is not "dead on target"

Look at cine4home's measurements:

Cinema Mode (eerily similar to Projector Central's measurement):


Here is THX mode (the best ootb mode):


Notice how much more accurate THX mode is? Now take a look at Projector Central's THX mode lumen output number. 1095 lumens.

Like I said, 1100 lumens is it's output in a color accurate mode.

After I brought this to Bill's attention he edited his 350ES vs LS10000 review with this:

On the LS10000, some folks will opt for Cinema mode, which creates a theater-quality image at 1275 lumens. Others will prefer THX mode (1095 lumens) or Digital Cinema (1038 lumens) for their reference-quality color accuracy and wide color gamut, respectively.
 
#20 ·
It does look like the cinema gamut has a slightly wider color space than the THX. Some may call this inaccurate, others may call it enhanced. In any case the difference on the graphs appear small enough that on most scenes, it would be difficult to pick whether cinema or THX is better. On a large screen, having the extra brightness may be a better trade-off.

BTW, do you know why the AVS store is not selling the LS10000 or LS9600e, but does carry other Epson projectors?
 
#21 ·
Enhanced for what? It's either accurate or it's not. If we begin to quote inaccurate lumen numbers for brightness on projectors where will it stop? Pretty soon people will be saying the Epson 5030 is 2000+ lumens with "enhanced" color. There's a reason people always quote calibrated numbers. It's because it's the only standard we have to compare lumen numbers. Most of gamut in Cinema mode is oversaturated.

Epson is only selling these laser models through certain channels. Only select distributors and dealers are able to sell it. My guess is that AVScience made a conscious decision not to sell it. AVScience is one of the "big guys" and it would seem like an odd move from Epson to not allow them to sell it. But that's just my guess, whether or not that's true is something Mike or Craig may be able to answer.
 
#23 ·
You're right in saying that it's not far off. In reality it isn't and most people would find the color performance good enough. I'm not personally a stickler when it comes to color. As long as skin tones look "real" I'm usually okay with it. There are however a lot of enthusiasts who are real sticklers when it comes to color accuracy. It's important to use calibrated numbers because it's the standard by which all reviews usually go by and in the last decade or so it's pushed these companies to give us more and more lumens each year with accurate color. Professional reviewers have forced these companies to live up to a standard and try to compete with each other to deliver more color accurate lumens than the other company. If we start to deviate and be okay with less color accurate modes then it will lead to a slippery slope that won't be beneficial to the consumers in the end, especially those that care about getting a lot of lumens with accurate color.
 
#26 ·
Too big. I own an LS10000 and IMO it will not adequately light up a 160" diag 16:9 screen. I use a 128" diag 16:9 screen with 1.3 gain and I wouldn't choose to go larger. I'm getting around 21 fL in my calibrated state giving plenty of margin. I also watch a significant amount of TV and a larger screen exacerbates the image deficiencies of DirecTV too much for me. I recommend going a lot smaller with either projector.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gamest
#25 ·
Epson has a policy of local sales only on certain models, so no shipping. That is why they do not sell the 4030 or 6030 either, nor does any other online retailer. For the 9600/10000 Epson is not using distributors and a company has to have a direct account with Epson. That requires a minimum amount of sales per year and some other requirements. I'm sure AVS meets the requirements and might already be a direct dealer but the no shipping policy is what hurts them. Epson has this policy for other models in the commercial and education market. However, this is the first time they had put a home projector in the direct dealer only category. So even a lot of local dealers who normally buy through distribution will not be able to get the 9600/10000. If Epson changes their policies I am sure AVS will carry them.
 
#28 ·
..my AV installer got the LS10000 to my house for the demo and projected on the wall. The throw distance was 17-18' and he was on dynamic mode and zoomed the 2:35:1 and 16:9 image and showed me the lens memory feature and said I can go upto 175" - 2.35:1 screen or 160"- 16:9 screen :(.....
 
#32 ·
You have been advised to go smaller; read Ron Jones' last post. Also, I believe the VW350 (with new or low hrs lamp) is brighter than the LS10000. Over time, this would change.
 
#35 ·
Im thinking of going with the LS10000.

Should i be concerned about my throw distance/Zoom?

11.5 feet from lens to screen. ( Maybe 12 feet if lucky)
120" matte white 1.2 gain
Complete light control, black walls, ceiling etc...

Zoom would be used near max.

using the calculator says 20fl. No idea how accurate these are though.
 
#37 ·
Im thinking of going with the LS10000.

Should i be concerned about my throw distance/Zoom?

11.5 feet from lens to screen. ( Maybe 12 feet if lucky)
120" matte white 1.2 gain
Complete light control, black walls, ceiling etc...

Zoom would be used near max.

using the calculator says 20fl. No idea how accurate these are though.
I don't think you have any worries. According to Epson's online calculator for the LS10000, it can give a 120" diag image from 11'2" to 23'10", so you should be fine. There's generally some margin in those specs. With respect to fL, you would get over 30fL at max zoom assuming 1100 lumens, 120 diag 1.78 screen, 1.2 gain. Plenty of brightness.
 
#46 ·
I'd argue 56 vs 32 ms is a large enough difference where if one of your priorities with your projector purchase was gaming the Sony seems like a much better choice. If wanting a larger screen with gaming being an interest the Sony seems like the better option no matter how you spin it.
 
#50 · (Edited)
But on the other hand, one must give a lot of weight to not having the ability to do DCI-P3 at all. I would rather have it with 30% less light than at rec 709 and not have it. One's eyes quickly adapt to a dimmer picture and to ones eyes a 30% loss might look like only a 55 loss in brightness to your eyes. Now what's the big deal over P3. If you can't do it, so what? Do you go to the movies now because your picture at home is too narrow in color space and its a lot netter at the theater in P3. Only a true video nerd like me and a few other here would ever complain about their color space at home compared to a commercial theater. WE WANT P3 BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN TOLD WE WANT IT AND REC 709 KINDA SUCKS. Are you bother by the lack of yellows on your screen and how fire engines and stops signs are not the right color of red. Do this act as a ***** slap that you are watching an artificial picture and not reality. If you can't do P3, you will probably never really miss not having it but WTF, I have it on my Sony and my screen size, through distance, and gain will allow me to enjoy it.
 
#51 ·
Bot on the other hand, one must give a lot of weight to not having the ability to do DCI-P3 at all. I would rather have it with 30% less light than at rec 709 and not have it. One's eyes quickly adapt to a dimmer picture and to ones eyes a 30% loss might look like only a 55 loss in brightness to your eyes. Now what's the big deal over P3. If you can't do it, so what? Do you go to the movies now because your picture at home is too narrow in color space and its a lot netter at the theater in P3. Only a true video nerd like me and a few other here would ever complain about their color space at home compared to a commercial theater. WE WANT P3 BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN TOLD WE WANT IT AND REC 709 KINDA SUCKS. Are you bother by the lack of yellows on your screen and how fire engines and stops signs are not the right color of red. Do this act as a ***** slap that you are watching an artificial picture and not reality. If you can't do P3, you will probably never really miss not having it but WTF, I have it on my Sony and my screen size, through distance, and gain will allow me to enjoy it.
Well you yourself have talked about how your 1100 is not bright enough for 3D on your 1.0 gain 110" diagonal 16:9 screen. Most Sony 4K owners have larger screens than yours. Not much difference between 1080P 3D and 2D DCI on the 1100. I agree with you about your eyes adjusting, but that is going to be tough to do, when you have a choice of removing the filter and gaining 30% brightness. Increased brightness is very addicting.
 
#71 ·
Just a thought. The Epson doesn't use the same light source as the Sony, so it likely doesn't have the same unfiltered spectrum. If it has more saturated natural primaries it doesn't need to filter as much light to go to DCI color space and then wouldn't loose as much light by going from rec.709 to DCI-P3. I therefore don't find it unrealistic that the drop in DCI mode is much less than the Sony.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top