Optoma UHZ65 - 4K laser ($5,000 MSRP) - Page 27 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 329Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #781 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 05:46 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 14,213
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3454 Post(s)
Liked: 2526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post
Sharper, higher resolution, better motion, better uniformity (no bright corners), more stable picture with no lamp flicker, no lamp replacement, brighter, does not dim over time, does not need recalibration, and can go with a larger screen.
Not being able to display p24 content at a integer multiple of 24 is better motion?

It won't have a chance of having bright corners, it'll have an entire bright screen when displaying black. That's better right?

It definitely does dim over time. They lifetime of the laser engine isn't infinite is it?

As far as calibrated brightness, it seems you have unrealistic expectations.
Stereodude is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #782 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 12:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,874
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1047 Post(s)
Liked: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Not being able to display p24 content at a integer multiple of 24 is better motion?

It won't have a chance of having bright corners, it'll have an entire bright screen when displaying black. That's better right?

It definitely does dim over time. They lifetime of the laser engine isn't infinite is it?

As far as calibrated brightness, it seems you have unrealistic expectations.
Latest TI update for 4k chip allows for native 24p at 2:2 48hz.
Ruined is offline  
post #783 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 12:54 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 22,551
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3695 Post(s)
Liked: 2055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
Latest TI update for 4k chip allows for native 24p at 2:2 48hz.
So long as Optoma implements that and pushes that out to customers. It's not like end users can go to the TI page and download and install it themselves.
stanger89 is offline  
 
post #784 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 01:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,874
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1047 Post(s)
Liked: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
So long as Optoma implements that and pushes that out to customers. It's not like end users can go to the TI page and download and install it themselves.
The UHZ65 isn't even available yet so Optoma doesn't have to push anything to anyone.
Mikenificent1 likes this.
Ruined is offline  
post #785 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 03:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Not being able to display p24 content at a integer multiple of 24 is better motion?

It won't have a chance of having bright corners, it'll have an entire bright screen when displaying black. That's better right?

It definitely does dim over time. They lifetime of the laser engine isn't infinite is it?

As far as calibrated brightness, it seems you have unrealistic expectations.
24p is already fixed and motion is better with FI as well.

So Obviously you have no point because like I said, no bright corners, hence more uniform. Stranger's original question: "what do you want, or what do you think you're getting with the Optoma that would make you willing to settle for poor contrast?", I respond with one of my points, uniformity, and then you mention contrast! lol that's obviously all you know.

As far as calibrated brightness, how would you know as you obviously know nothing about the projector?? The average brightness loss of a calibrated laser projector is 20%, even if it was 30%, it would STILL be brighter than the 540/640! With every passing hour that gap would widen.

It's not Infinite? That's your childish point? Lol

Oh and another point, you don't have to buy a new $500 bulb every 2000 hours.
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #786 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 03:29 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 22,551
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3695 Post(s)
Liked: 2055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
The UHZ65 isn't even available yet so Optoma doesn't have to push anything to anyone.
It's hard to tell that given how you post like you've got one, all your hopes/guesses/opinions are stated like decided facts. Hopefully they've incorporated TI's latest updates before these ship, but I'd not assume they're fixed just because TI released an update before they shipped. Sometimes it takes companies a long time to integrate software changes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post
As far as calibrated brightness, how would you know as you obviously know nothing about the projector??
Nor does anyone else, they're not out yet, Art's about the only one who's seen one, and that was just a teaser at CEDIA, and yet everyone excited about the UHZ65 seems to completely ignore the UHD65 performance and talk about it like they've seen it. All we have to go on is the UHD65 which seems to be essentially the same unit, but with a different light source.

Quote:
The average brightness loss of a calibrated laser projector is 20%, even if it was 30%, it would STILL be brighter than the 540/640! With every passing hour that gap would widen.
The average brightness loss of an Optoma projector is a lot higher than 20%. The UHD65 was more like 60%.

I'd like nothing more than for these projectors to be great, but Optoma doesn't have a history of pushing the performance envelope forward.
stanger89 is offline  
post #787 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 03:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: US
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
It's hard to tell that given how you post like you've got one, all your hopes/guesses/opinions are stated like decided facts. Hopefully they've incorporated TI's latest updates before these ship, but I'd not assume they're fixed just because TI released an update before they shipped. Sometimes it takes companies a long time to integrate software changes.

Nor does anyone else, they're not out yet, Art's about the only one who's seen one, and that was just a teaser at CEDIA, and yet everyone excited about the UHZ65 seems to completely ignore the UHD65 performance and talk about it like they've seen it. All we have to go on is the UHD65 which seems to be essentially the same unit, but with a different light source.

The average brightness loss of an Optoma projector is a lot higher than 20%. The UHD65 was more like 60%.

I'd like nothing more than for these projectors to be great, but Optoma doesn't have a history of pushing the performance envelope forward.
I have to say as an actual owner of a UHD65 I keep hearing about calibrated brightness being a problem. Well nothing could be further from the truth for us. I have to run in ECO mode because my wife thinks bright is too bright. I even turned down brightness then.

This projector was off my radar but now it is back on after the issues reported with the Sony385 (and only 1500 lumins) and JVC640 bright corners and frankly we value sharpness over contrast. The 640 is still barely edging out.

My UHD65 throws a nice picture in my Cave and with the calibration.

Home Theater: Optoma UHD65, B&W 802 Nautilus, HTM1, 4-B&W 805's for surround, 4-Martin Logan 22's ceiling speakers ATMOS, 2- 18" Velodyn Subs, Marantz 8802A, MacIntosh 8207 AMP and Proceed AMP 5, Oppo 203, XBox One
BondDonBond is offline  
post #788 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 04:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
Nor does anyone else, they're not out yet, Art's about the only one who's seen one, and that was just a teaser at CEDIA, and yet everyone excited about the UHZ65 seems to completely ignore the UHD65 performance and talk about it like they've seen it. All we have to go on is the UHD65 which seems to be essentially the same unit, but with a different light source.

The average brightness loss of an Optoma projector is a lot higher than 20%. The UHD65 was more like 60%.

I'd like nothing more than for these projectors to be great, but Optoma doesn't have a history of pushing the performance envelope forward.
Is the Sony 1000ES and the 5000ES the same machine, is the RS600 and the Z1 the same machine, what about the 10500 and 5040UB? Do they all have the same performance?? No. Stop comparing the UHD65 and the UHZ65 especially when it comes to light loss! You're comparing the light loss of a bulb projector to a laser projector! Doesn't correlate.

I agree with your last point 100% though.

Last edited by Mikenificent1; 09-16-2017 at 04:13 PM.
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #789 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 04:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by BondDonBond View Post
I have to say as an actual owner of a UHD65 I keep hearing about calibrated brightness being a problem. Well nothing could be further from the truth for us. I have to run in ECO mode because my wife thinks bright is too bright. I even turned down brightness then.

This projector was off my radar but now it is back on after the issues reported with the Sony385 (and only 1500 lumins) and JVC640 bright corners and frankly we value sharpness over contrast. The 640 is still barely edging out.

My UHD65 throws a nice picture in my Cave and with the calibration.
Calibrated, the Sony is even less, 1350 lumens. I'm in a similar boat, it's either this Optoma or other laser DLP, or the RS540.
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #790 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 04:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 721
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post
Calibrated, the Sony is even less, 1350 lumens. I'm in a similar boat, it's either this Optoma or other laser DLP, or the RS540.
Calibrated on the UHD65 is only 850 lumens bright lamp. So something is screwy somewhere. Plus native contrast is only 1000:1 calibrated while dynamic contrast is 2000:1. The new Sony is in the 15,000 - 18,000: 1 range for native contrast and 200,000:1 dynamic contrast.

In addition the 385 is true 4K the Optoma has half the native resolution of true 4K. I don't think there is a comparison really. The DLP XPR projectors are going to have a hard time competing until they get better contrast and go full 4K.
GregCh is offline  
post #791 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 04:46 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 14,213
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3454 Post(s)
Liked: 2526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post
24p is already fixed and motion is better with FI as well.

So Obviously you have no point because like I said, no bright corners, hence more uniform. Stranger's original question: "what do you want, or what do you think you're getting with the Optoma that would make you willing to settle for poor contrast?", I respond with one of my points, uniformity, and then you mention contrast! lol that's obviously all you know.

As far as calibrated brightness, how would you know as you obviously know nothing about the projector?? The average brightness loss of a calibrated laser projector is 20%, even if it was 30%, it would STILL be brighter than the 540/640! With every passing hour that gap would widen.

It's not Infinite? That's your childish point? Lol

Oh and another point, you don't have to buy a new $500 bulb every 2000 hours.
My mistake. I didn't realize you had one. Can you show us your post calibration brightness measurements?
Stereodude is offline  
post #792 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 05:08 PM
Member
 
nolimithardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I see many advantages in laser DLP.

Very stable light source which only loses maybe 1-2 percent brightness every 1000 hours !
And does not need recalibration.

A well designed laser DLP is stable like a tank.
All components have nearly no degradation over time.
The lasers, the DLP chip, the sealed dustfree lightpath etc...

A 4K Sony with lamp has better blacklevel, but in nearly every other aspect it's not on par.
The SXRD panels degrade over time, the lamp ages and needs replacement every 1000 / 1500 hours.
It's not completely dustproof.
The brightness is only 1350 AL calibrated.
The sharpness is worse, because of 3 chip design and misconvergence.

There are many tradeoffs for better black levels.
Also if these new laser DLP's manage to support a good dynamic contrast laser dimming system and offer at least 5000:1 contrast ratio, you could also get very decent black levels in dark scenes.
If the UHZ65 can deliver 2500 calibrated Ansi lumens that would be a big plus against the 1350 AL of the Sony.

You could light up a very big white screen with HDR in a batcave.
Or in my case use a very dark grey, nearly black screen which allows for superb contrast in a white living room.

I currently own a JVC X5500 / RS420 but my next will be a bright laser DLP.
Brighter, sharper, much more stable - in exchange for worse black level, which a dark screen can compensate quiet a bit.
Also the instant On/Off power of a laser projector is very exiting and does not hurt in comparison with a lamp based projector.

Acer also has a exiting one on the way, the VL7860.
And the Dell S718QL also is very exiting and maybe even better than the optoma because more brightness and not only blue lasers, but red + blue lasers.
We are not far from true RGB laser anymore

Last edited by nolimithardware; 09-16-2017 at 05:16 PM.
nolimithardware is offline  
post #793 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 05:27 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 22,551
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3695 Post(s)
Liked: 2055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post
Is the Sony 1000ES and the 5000ES the same machine
And aside from brightness, they have very similar performance.

Quote:
...is the RS600 and the Z1 the same machine
Not even remotely.

Quote:
...what about the 10500 and 5040UB?
Again, not even remotely.

Quote:
Do they all have the same performance??
When they're really similar, they have very similar performance yes. Lets go back, the Planar 8150 and all the LED DLPs based on the same Delta platform all have very, very similar performance.

Quote:
No. Stop comparing the UHD65 and the UHZ65 especially when it comes to light loss! You're comparing the light loss of a bulb projector to a laser projector! Doesn't correlate.
It's as good a guess as any, at the very least the odds of it losing a ton of light like the UHD65 is about equal to the odds that it won't lose much of anything. That said, knowing Optoma's history, given that the UHD65 and UHZ65 seem to be based on the same Coretronic platform IIRC, I would have to assume their brightness performance is quite similar.

But lets look at it this way, if it loses only 20% when calibrated, that would put it at over 2200 Lumens. That makes it significantly brighter than the Sony VW885 ($25k MSRP) and nearly as bright as the JVC RS4500 ($35k MSRP). Sorry but I have a hard time believing Optoma, in a budget projector platform, can hit those kind of calibrated Lumens. Especially not when the RS4500, which is in a much larger chassis is gets very loud when run in high lamp to hit its specs. It seems far more likely to me that their using a filter setup much like the UHD65 that it quite a ways off D65 but much brighter that lets them claim such high Lumens.

Either that or it will be at even more terrible contrast since you're looking at business-class machine brightness and cost there.

What do they say, when it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. $5000, Laser, "big iron" (RS4500, Lumis, DPI, VW1100) brightness, Home Theater image quality. Something just doesn't add up there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolimithardware View Post
The lasers, the DLP chip, the sealed dustfree lightpath etc...

A 4K Sony with lamp has better blacklevel, but in nearly every other aspect it's not on par.
The SXRD panels degrade over time, the lamp ages and needs replacement every 1000 / 1500 hours.
It's not completely dustproof.
Neither is DLP, you'll find folks have reported dust blobs with DLP. It's rare, but it happens. The same is true with LCoS, it's rare.

Quote:
I currently own a JVC X5500 / RS420 but my next will be a bright laser DLP.
Having a high end (higher end than any of these XPR machines) DLP hanging in my HT, next to my RS600, I think you'll be disappointed with that move.
stanger89 is offline  
post #794 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 08:02 PM
Member
 
nolimithardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Beside black level, what do you think my JVC has what a laser DLP does not, stanger ?
nolimithardware is offline  
post #795 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 10:02 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,829
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2582
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolimithardware View Post
Beside black level, what do you think my JVC has what a laser DLP does not, stanger ?
No rainbows, higher lens quality, motorized lens control, lens memories, higher pixel fill, 3D, custom gamma curves (better HDR), better/more flexible placement options (a large offset to the lens on the UHZ65), less noise and much higher build quality.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #796 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 10:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 721
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
No rainbows, higher lens quality, motorized lens control, lens memories, higher pixel fill, 3D, custom gamma curves (better HDR), better/more flexible placement options (a large offset to the lens on the UHZ65), less noise and much higher build quality.
It would have been easier to list the specs where the Optoma beats the JVC. (See below)

1) The Optoma has a laser that lasts longer than JVC's bulb.
GregCh is offline  
post #797 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 11:18 PM
Member
 
nolimithardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
No rainbows, higher lens quality, motorized lens control, lens memories, higher pixel fill, 3D, custom gamma curves (better HDR), better/more flexible placement options (a large offset to the lens on the UHZ65), less noise and much higher build quality.

Ok, I have guessed, that you will count these advantages.

The thing is though:

- I don't see the rainbow effect.
- I don't watch 3D
- A lens like JVC's would be fine and maybe possible with one of the following laser DLP's
and if not, I think that the 1 DLP chip design compensates for a slightly worse lens, because there is no misconvergence involved
- I don't necessarily need motorized lens control nor lens memory, because I'm using a 16:9 screen
- The slightly worse pixel fill of DLP does not seem to be a problem anymore if compared to the ol' 1080p's, because of the higher pixel count + XPR shifting
- I don't watch HDR, I only need the brightness for a dark grey, almost black screen, so that ambient and stray light does not effect the picture too much in my living room with white walls

Like this:

https://picload.org/view/dgdaigll/un...01777.png.html

- Noise isn't a problem either (hushbox) and those new XPR DLP's are not as loud as the "old" DLP's
- Don't need higher build quality because I never see the projector nor touch it (hushbox)

As you can see I don't find any of your counted disadvantages really important.
But I see advantages like long lasting laser, no gamma drift, no lamp changing, higher brightness for the dark screen etc.
The black level and 1500:1 contrast ratio is a thing I don't like, but I hope that they manage to get the laser dimming / dynamic contrast right, so that dark scenes don't look to grey.

Last edited by nolimithardware; 09-16-2017 at 11:31 PM.
nolimithardware is offline  
post #798 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 11:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 721
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolimithardware View Post
- The slightly worse pixel fill of DLP does not seem to be a problem anymore if compared to the ol' 1080p's, because of the higher pixel count + XPR shifting
No, the pixel fill issue is more of a problem with the new XPR DLPs. It is most likely what is responsible for the extremely poor contrast and loss of brightness compared to JVCs DILA.

You should watch the latest Home Theater Geeks video before making a final decision on this projector. All of the reviewer's had nothing good to say about DLP at CEDIA. They basically reflected what Seegs has been saying that the new DLP XPR projectors can't compete with LCoS or LCD in the home theater market. That their key market is in the business projection market and Home Theater has passed them by.
GregCh is offline  
post #799 of 955 Old 09-16-2017, 11:40 PM
Member
 
nolimithardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I thought seegs108 meant, that the fillrate is important because of the less visible pixel structure on D-ILA projectors.
Because here I don't see any problems with 2716 x 1528 pixels + XPR.

Contrastwise I totally agree and hope that we get better contrast and good laser dimming.

The thing is, that in a living room with white walls and straylight / little ambient light, a really bright projector and a nearly black projection screen seems to work much better than a light grey screen and a high On/Off contrast projector like JVC.

That is really one of the things I hope to achieve with a 4000 Ansi lumen DLP and a very dark screen.
A very strong in picture / Ansi contrast, or "punch" in the picture like many people say - in a living room, not batcave.

BTW, I tested so called "high contrast screens" with a grey base and gain particles and don't like them.
The next screen I want is a matte dark grey, almost black screen with no sparkling effects or hot spot.
And that needs much brightness for 130" inch diagonal, which a JVC sadly cannot provide.

Last edited by nolimithardware; 09-16-2017 at 11:48 PM.
nolimithardware is offline  
post #800 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 01:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Calibrated on the UHD65 is only 850 lumens bright lamp. So something is screwy somewhere. Plus native contrast is only 1000:1 calibrated while dynamic contrast is 2000:1. The new Sony is in the 15,000 - 18,000: 1 range for native contrast and 200,000:1 dynamic contrast.

In addition the 385 is true 4K the Optoma has half the native resolution of true 4K. I don't think there is a comparison really. The DLP XPR projectors are going to have a hard time competing until they get better contrast and go full 4K.
You're in the wrong thread , this isn't the UHD65 thread so no one cares about it s 850 lumens here, this is the UHZ65 thread with laser and 3000 lumens. Why bother bringing up dynamic contrast when the Optoma's is actually higher?? Lol
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #801 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 01:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
And aside from brightness, they have very similar performance.



Not even remotely.



Again, not even remotely.



When they're really similar, they have very similar performance yes. Lets go back, the Planar 8150 and all the LED DLPs based on the same Delta platform all have very, very similar performance.



It's as good a guess as any, at the very least the odds of it losing a ton of light like the UHD65 is about equal to the odds that it won't lose much of anything. That said, knowing Optoma's history, given that the UHD65 and UHZ65 seem to be based on the same Coretronic platform IIRC, I would have to assume their brightness performance is quite similar.

But lets look at it this way, if it loses only 20% when calibrated, that would put it at over 2200 Lumens. That makes it significantly brighter than the Sony VW885 ($25k MSRP) and nearly as bright as the JVC RS4500 ($35k MSRP). Sorry but I have a hard time believing Optoma, in a budget projector platform, can hit those kind of calibrated Lumens. Especially not when the RS4500, which is in a much larger chassis is gets very loud when run in high lamp to hit its specs. It seems far more likely to me that their using a filter setup much like the UHD65 that it quite a ways off D65 but much brighter that lets them claim such high Lumens.

Either that or it will be at even more terrible contrast since you're looking at business-class machine brightness and cost there.

What do they say, when it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. $5000, Laser, "big iron" (RS4500, Lumis, DPI, VW1100) brightness, Home Theater image quality. Something just doesn't add up there.



Neither is DLP, you'll find folks have reported dust blobs with DLP. It's rare, but it happens. The same is true with LCoS, it's rare.



Having a high end (higher end than any of these XPR machines) DLP hanging in my HT, next to my RS600, I think you'll be disappointed with that move.
Tell that to the 5000ES owners, I'm sure they will ALL disagree with you.

"Big Iron" comment, maybe, but right now that is just speculation. Show reports have said it looks good.
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #802 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 01:09 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mikenificent1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
No rainbows, higher lens quality, motorized lens control, lens memories, higher pixel fill, 3D, custom gamma curves (better HDR), better/more flexible placement options (a large offset to the lens on the UHZ65), less noise and much higher build quality.
Those are all legitimate except who cares if the lens quality is higher if the 1-chip DLP is much sharper than the 3 chip misconverged JVC?
Mikenificent1 is offline  
post #803 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 04:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,874
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1047 Post(s)
Liked: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post
Those are all legitimate except who cares if the lens quality is higher if the 1-chip DLP is much sharper than the 3 chip misconverged JVC?
There seems a concerted effort on this board to shoot down this projector (along with most 4k DLP) and downplay its significant laser light source advantages, which is unfortunate.

The reality is what some people think is unimportant others think is critical. I would never go back to a lamp/bulb projector, period. If it has a lamp/bulb, it simply does not exist on my list of potential purchases. Some find a laser light source far more important than blacker blacks, and that is simply the way it is.
Ruined is offline  
post #804 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 08:33 AM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,829
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikenificent1 View Post
Those are all legitimate except who cares if the lens quality is higher if the 1-chip DLP is much sharper than the 3 chip misconverged JVC?
And what if the lens can't delineate pixels well? Would it matter then?
Seegs108 is offline  
post #805 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 11:02 AM
Member
 
nolimithardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I will order the new lamp based Acer M550 XPR projector with 2000 calibrated lumens to test it against my JVC.
If the Acer gives good punch on a dark grey screen and also a visibly sharper picture than the JVC, then a laser based XPR DLP can only be even better.
nolimithardware is offline  
post #806 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 11:15 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,874
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1047 Post(s)
Liked: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
And what if the lens can't delineate pixels well? Would it matter then?
Would it matter when one realistically has no idea how excellent or terrible the lens quality will be and its all speculation to say otherwise?

I am not sure there has been a projector besides the UHZ65 with so little concrete info available yet so much negativity pre-release in modern times - already page 27 with 40,000 views, much of the posts negative, and there hasn't even been a review of an engineering sample yet. All this despite the lamp model it being based on being very well received, top selling, and with tons of happy owners. Also ironically a lot of the doom and gloom posts like "native 24p being impossible on 4k dlp" has already been made possible in the meantime by TI while this projector was in development.

This thread can be summed up to one thing: some people value solid state light source very highly, and some people don't. The ones that don't value it don't understand why this projector is so attractive, and the ones that do value it find this projector to have a lot of potential.

Last edited by Ruined; 09-17-2017 at 11:27 AM.
Ruined is offline  
post #807 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 12:21 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,829
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
Would it matter when one realistically has no idea how excellent or terrible the lens quality will be and its all speculation to say otherwise?

I am not sure there has been a projector besides the UHZ65 with so little concrete info available yet so much negativity pre-release in modern times - already page 27 with 40,000 views, much of the posts negative, and there hasn't even been a review of an engineering sample yet. All this despite the lamp model it being based on being very well received, top selling, and with tons of happy owners. Also ironically a lot of the doom and gloom posts like "native 24p being impossible on 4k dlp" has already been made possible in the meantime by TI while this projector was in development.

This thread can be summed up to one thing: some people value solid state light source very highly, and some people don't. The ones that don't value it don't understand why this projector is so attractive, and the ones that do value it find this projector to have a lot of potential.
We do know a lot about this projector though. The video processing, lens, DMD with XPR, I/O and chassis remains the same as the UHD65. The huge difference between the UHD65 and this model is the price point. That matters a lot when you take all of this in context. I can tell you right now that the lens quality, build quality, feature-set and calibration capabilities are NO WHERE close to that of the Sony's or JVC's selling at the same price point. No to mention contrast performance is abysmal for it's price point. If solid state illumination is your thing why not opt for the Epson LS105000. Street price shouldn't be that much different and all of the things mentioned above are on a similar playing field to what JVC and Sony offers at this price point. Most aspects of the UHZ65 cannot keep up with the other competition at this price and that's why you see so much negativity.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #808 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 12:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 9,603
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2225 Post(s)
Liked: 1093
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolimithardware View Post
I will order the new lamp based Acer M550 XPR projector with 2000 calibrated lumens to test it against my JVC.
If the Acer gives good punch on a dark grey screen and also a visibly sharper picture than the JVC, then a laser based XPR DLP can only be even better.
Where are you getting the calibrated lumens value?

Current projector - JVC RS25 and Marantz VP15S1
Future projector - pre-ordered new JVC from AVScience
Ericglo is online now  
post #809 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 12:54 PM
Member
 
nolimithardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 16
From here:

http://www.projection-homecinema.fr/...-dlp-4k-1999e/

See also picture below:
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Mesures-de-contraste-et-de-luminosité-ACER-M550.jpg (97.9 KB, 42 views)
nolimithardware is offline  
post #810 of 955 Old 09-17-2017, 01:09 PM
Member
 
nolimithardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 16
@ seegs108

The Optomas are really not that good, you are right on this point.
Especially the UHD65 was not a revelation.

But look to the new Acer M550, it offers more brightness as the UHD65 at a lower price point.
1999,- euros here in germany.

It has decent (not overly good) native contrast and a very good lamp dimming system, which is not visible as owners reported.


Gregory from PJHC gave the Acer M550 a gold award and a rating of 89%, the Optoma got no award and a rating of 77% - for much more money here (costs 3299,- euros here).
Price difference = whopping 1300,- euros for a worse projector

http://www.projection-homecinema.fr/...-optoma-uhd65/


If some bugs are sorted out like correct 24p (which ruined has announced here), a lower input lag for gamers, more contrast (2000:1 native / 4000:1 dynamic), higher brightness, laser, corner to corner sharpness etc. , these machines have very good value, especially in a living room where you need more brightness.

A sharp and bright 1 chip "Faux K" DLP can look more punchy and brillant compared to a JVC or even a 4K Sony in most scenes.
Ekki from Cine4home made some comparisons between the Acer V9800 and the Sony VW550 and the Acer looked crisper in many scenes.

Last edited by nolimithardware; 09-17-2017 at 01:14 PM.
nolimithardware is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

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