AVS Forum banner

JVC DLAx5000 (RS400) vs DLAx7000 (RS500)

5K views 18 replies 11 participants last post by  jorgebetancourt 
#1 ·
Hi,

Could someone who has view'd both of these projectors please give me their observations/opinions on just how much real world difference there is between the 2 projectors..

Any input greatly appreciated..

Thanks..
 
#2 ·
You can start with this post by Seegs108.

. . . I'm seeing a lot more lens streaking on this RS400 compared to my RS500. I'd say convergence is a hair better on the RS400 though. Neither unit has an issue with bright corners in that you'd be able to see them with real content, but you can make them out on the RS500 ever-so-slightly more, but you need to stare at an all black image for a decent amount of time to see them. The contrast difference between the RS400 and RS500 is quite easily noticeable with the RS500 needing no help at all with the DI. The RS400 can't quite compete with the RS500 in manual iris mode while it's at -15 on the manual iris with Auto mode 2 enabled. I'll say that again, with content, dynamically the RS400 cannot keep up with what the RS500 can do natively. That to me sums up the two projectors. Do I think the RS400 is great? Yes. And do I think it's the better deal? Yes. But do I think it can come close to the RS500 or RS600 in terms of subjective contrast? No, not really. JVC didn't make the same mistake this year as it made with the X500 and X700 where the level of contrast difference was negligible. This year the difference is there and appreciable. I'm still keeping the RS400 for the LS10000 shootout. Even though it can't hold it's own against the RS500, I think the RS400 can hold it's own against the LS10000.
 
#8 · (Edited)
Why would you say that, since he admits that his RS500 sample is not a good sample? Even went to the point of telling Seegs, if he was going to do a shootout between the LS10000 and the JVC, that Seegs should use a bad sample of the JVC since that is typical. If he wants to know the difference, why not PM a few members that have seen both. Might send Kris Deering a PM and see what he has to say privately. Seegs also has both and I believe he will do measurements and he is planning on doing a group shootout with RS400, RS500 and LS10000 and maybe more. This shoot out will be a group setting, not just one viewer.
 
#4 ·
I also have one of each here. The only noticeable difference between these units in terms of overall PQ is the amount contrast visible within the image. The RS500 simply trumps the RS400. I'd also argue that the screen size you plan on using will play a huge factor in which unit you should go with. It seems the least amount of light you can output with the RS400 is 700 lumens. This is with the iris closed all the way. So if you have a small screen the 40000:1 contrast and 700 lumens will result in a black level that can be noticeably higher than what you'd get from an RS500. Basically what I'm saying is that the RS400 can be almost too bright for smaller screens. With the RS500 you have more flexibility in terms of lumen output while also getting far more native contrast. If you have the money and plan on keeping the projector for a few years I'd recommend getting the RS500 because it's more compatible with UHD BD compared to the RS400 (P3 support is not something you get with the RS400). But if you're looking for something to hold you over for the next year or so then the RS400 may be the better option. Neither choice is a poor one. :)
 
#5 ·
You still get 86-87% P3 coverage with the RS400. Many UHD flat panels are around this point. With low to mid saturation levels, this should work pretty well I would think...but at higher saturation points the limitation (desaturation) probably becomes more visible.
 
#9 ·
I wonder how correct 85% of P3 will look with uhd bd. I'm been waiting on the outside regarding how uhd bd will compare to the 400 and 500. I'm sure Seegs will be all over if he still have both in hands and he is able to maximize both units. Hopefully more members have this comparison going, because Zombie, Kris, and Darin usually compare all the models too. I'm hoping that the RS400 will prove to be very close, for its more bang for the buck. I know Deja Vu will choose the RS400 but I wish his RS500 sample was better.
 
#7 ·
All the information you need is out there to make a decision and ultimately it's up to you on which to buy. If you want to know which has the superior picture, it's the X7000 due to it's higher contrast. You should be aware that (from the evidence presented thus far) about 5-10% of X7000's have presented issues with "bright corners" aka black non-uniformity, so there's a chance the unit you end up with may need to be exchanged for a new one. Please refer to the owners thread in this subforum for more information.
 
#12 ·
I have an rs400 you will not regret it.. It is absolutely amazing the difference and when you stream a 4k movie you will not believe your eyes.. I streamed mission impossible and i couldn't pay attention to the movie because i was just freaking out how good it looked.. Anyhow, buy it and save yourself the 2 grand and in 2 or 3 years a 4k projector would be under 2 grand and you can buy another one.. These jvc projectors cant be beat..
 
#16 ·
Hello Darin,

Firstly I must confess to some limited knowledge in this area. Currently I am going on what some of the professional calibrators In the UK have been saying. I wish they were here as they could discuss it with more understanding than I have at present. Anyway, as I understand it, very little saturation information is represented at the higher levels. I agree it is best to roll of the error but if the main bulk or volume of info does not show up above 70 percent then the intensity of the colours in a JVC 400 should be similar to a 500 most of the time for real world viewing unless of course I'm way off base.

Paul
 
#17 ·
Firstly I must confess to some limited knowledge in this area. Currently I am going on what some of the professional calibrators In the UK have been saying. I wish they were here as they could discuss it with more understanding than I have at present. Anyway, as I understand it, very little saturation information is represented at the higher levels. I agree it is best to roll of the error but if the main bulk or volume of info does not show up above 70 percent then the intensity of the colours in a JVC 400 should be similar to a 500 most of the time for real world viewing unless of course I'm way off base.
It would be interesting to discuss this with them. Was this on avforums?

The way I see it is that when there is a certain amount of error a person can decide how much to spread that error out. They could concentrate it so it would be like sitting on a pin when it happens, or they could spread it way out so that most things are wrong compared to what the original content called for, but just a little wrong.

Since our eyes are work largely relatively I think spreading the error out a certain amount makes the most sense. In a side-by-side the unit with the smaller gamut would likely look less saturated more often, but without the more saturated display present I think this wouldn't be much of an issue other than maybe noticing on fully saturated things.

As one example of how things are relative, by itself I think the P3 red on the RS500 looks pretty saturated, but if I put a filter in front of the lens that makes half the screen much more saturated then the original P3 part looks very unsaturated in comparison.

--Darin
 
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