Preliminary results of my mini RS1 VW60 shootout - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 11:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaspianM View Post

In order to raise the black level (the lowest vidoe black level) you will need a reflection that is higher level than that of the black level. The reflection comes at a lower level and can't raise the level.

If you have a mixed scene containg both white and black, the white reflection will raise the black level floor within the scene. That is ofcourse the ansi consideration not on/off.

Of course. But, other than a fade-to-black, all other scenes will have variations in the amount of light and thus the potential for light reflection

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 11:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CaspianM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Land of Cardinals
Posts: 5,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

Of course. But, other than a fade-to-black, all other scenes will have variations in the amount of light and thus the potential for light reflection

True.

It is all about quality...that is the picture

JVC & NEC 8" CRT with 106" wide Stewart screen. All NHT speakers driven by Pioneer Elite AVR and bluray

Custom dedicated 8 seat theater

CaspianM is offline  
post #33 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 12:07 PM
Member
 
ionsite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 36
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mit07 View Post

In addition to the sunglasses every guest could wear a KKK style black robe with hood to reduce reflections.

No laughing during funny scenes...the glare off white teeth kills contrast.

That was funny !!! I was thinking on the same lines!!!!!
ionsite is offline  
post #34 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 12:11 PM
Member
 
ionsite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 36
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Dodds View Post

I know people are always trying to decide between these two, so last night I did a shootout in my home and with familiar material.

My RS1 has 700 hours, but is by all reports notably brighter than some others. The VW60 has 40 hours on it. Both were projecting onto a 125" grey screen from 15 feet.

The most obvious difference between them at first was that the RS1 was brighter. The VW60 needed to be in High mode to match the RS1 in Normal mode. However, both gave quite acceptable (to me) brightness on a screen that size even with the VW60 in Low.

That aside, it was really hard to pick a 'winner'. Black levels were very close, with the VW60 just a a bit better. Neither were as good in this area as I'd like. The RS1s added brightness and native contrast therefore gave the image a little more punch. But the emphasis is on 'little'.

The RS1's colours were more vivid, but the VW60 can be adjusted to give similar saturation. By the same token the VW60 was a tad more natural, especially using the Normal colorspace. Black Level uniformity was a little better on the Sony, and it didn't have any signs of colour uniformity. The only time I noticed Brightness Compression was with white type on black bcakgrounds.

Noise wasn't an issue with either, either auditory or in the image.

Both are big, dark and shiny.

So, to me, they are very very close. I even used masking to have them sharing the screen and found it pretty hard to separate them.

In the end, I may go for the Sony simply because it has the extras of powered lens, anamorphic capability and for the very slightly better blacks.

Then again, I may not.


good to read the comparison...as I ordered my vw60 yesterday !
ionsite is offline  
post #35 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 03:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Cameron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Kaysville, UT
Posts: 2,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilsiu View Post

Just watch - someone will start selling contrast enhancing home theater glasses (maybe the guys from Monster cable are listening)

Crud I need to file a patent!

I already had some guys rip off my "Magical DLPness" material


-- Well I have really blown my budget now. --
Cameron is offline  
post #36 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 03:48 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Dodds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: San Francisco, now Australia
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_LA View Post

Actually, the REAL black level I'm talking about is absolute black - how much light is being transmitted through the physical elements of the projector and "leaking" onto the screen? You know, the "shadow puppet" test.

I am rarely bothered by black level in a high contrast scene, it's those dark, nearly pitch-black, low-contrast moments (i.e. Se7ven, Blade Runner, etc) where much of the screen goes "projector grey" that get my goat.

This has more to do with how much "light leak" there is than contrast per se.

If you run your projector with no signal and turn the brightness all the way down, the amount of light you now see on your screen is as dark as your blacks are ever going to get.

This is the "reading" I'd like to see more discussion and reviews of.

I know this is affected by screen size & gain, ambient light, etc, but if someone like Jason takes pictures of this under controlled, similar circumstances for every projector he reviews, you WILL get an objective idea of how units perform compared to each other in this regard.

When I think of black level, this is ultimately what I am referrring to.


This what I am referring to as well.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Steve Dodds is offline  
post #37 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 04:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Steve Bruzonsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Gilbert, Arizona
Posts: 17,634
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by reio-ta View Post

Ummm those are seriously all FALSE. My CRT projector has more contrast than any digital. I can put it on a wall and beat any digital you throw at it. I have white walls too. It still has better shadow detail and highlights than your digital. Black gets very black. The bars don't shine. Put up a 0 IRE pattern and you can look at the tubes, they're 100% black. Try that with a digital lamp projector and you'll go blind even looking at the lamp doing "0 IRE".

My CRT maybe puts out 7.5 foot lamberts. With that little light on a digital you'll be crying home saying "mommy, I can't see anything but daytime scenes on my projector!", in a white walled room and even with velvet over everything will still see squat.

How bright a projector is, means nothing. All it does is make your whites look like the sun at the expense of your black bars looking like they were exposed to Chernobyl the brighter it is.

A CRT reduces light instantly, a digital can't because it must block light, unlike a CRT with just shuts off. Even if you spent over $100,000 on the projector and the rest of your room, using experimental light dampening material, a $1,000 CRT, POS version from the overpriced Curt, would still beat your $100,000 projector setup. So the "numbskulls with white rooms" will beat yours with even the lowliest CRT pertaining to: real contrast,black floor, shadow detail, and highlights. Not taking into account ANSI contrast or sharpness, which even a cheapy LCD will beat the CRT.

So if what you say is true, explain why a CRT can do it and none of your digitals can? Not saying digitals don't have their place, but to say those sort of things, is 100% untrue and one day a digital will beat the CRT too. And when that day comes, you'll have nothing which will back up those claims you make.

Unfortunately, your Dwin CRT, that you just bought used, right now has 0 fl rating cause it doesn't work. Which is why I ditched my HD-700 to go digital. You've got the best blacks available right now - just no nothing else!!

"Doug Winsor" used to troll at some AV Forums as "Steve Bruzonsky"! My home theater at:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Steve Bruzonsky is offline  
post #38 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 06:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
Jmouse007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 676
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ionsite View Post

good to read the comparison...as I ordered my vw60 yesterday !

Congratulations and welcome to the Black Pearl club. Your going to love your projector.
Jmouse007 is offline  
post #39 of 112 Old 02-22-2008, 08:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
Jmouse007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 676
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by reio-ta View Post

Hey Jmouse! What's going on? How's the VW50 Pearl doing? The VWx Pearl series are so nice, but they just have too much black floor for me! Black bars glow too much, the black credit screens at the end of movies glow bad, etc, so I MUST have a CRT!

I'm hoping in a few years a LASER projector will fix the black floor glowing issue with digitals.

In answer to your question, we began having ongoing problems with our Pearl. Convergence, focus problems, the power supply went bad for no reason after the pj had been on for 5 hours (we watched two movies back to back) and took the bulb and several chips with it. They had to also replace the video processor and when we got it back there was another problem, sent it back and when it came back again we noted a loud electrical buzzing/humming noise, reported it (sent Laredo MP3 recordings of the sound along with a written time line description) and got the usual "it's perfectly normal, working within speck" routine. Well, two weeks later, out of the blue and for no reason the pj refused to accept any commands from the remote, the pj refused to shut down and the video processor froze creating a frozen image on the screen that we could not stop! Changed the remote control batteries twice, still no go, tried to shut the pj down using the controls physically located on the pj... NOTHING WORKED! Finally, after we had shut down everything going to the pj, the bulb shut down over 45 minutes later BUT the cooling fan continued running and running and refused to shut down. Finally I had to physically pull the plug to shut the pj off. Several days later I plugged it back in again and after turning on the pj it shut down all on it's own twice within a minute and a half of being turned on! After 4 and a half months of playing pj ping pong with the repair center in Larado and having sent it back three times for numerous differing problems SONY finally agreed to replace it with a Black Pearl. It was like pulling teeth and we had to pay a fee to "upgrade" but it was worth it because I had no confidence that the pj would ever work properly. Sadly, we got a lemon, fortunately from what I have heard our experience was the exception, NOT the rule.

Before the Pearl went belly up it served us well, but as good as it was, and it was a fine projector, the Black Pearl is a definite improvement on a multitude of levels. It is sharper, the convergence was perfect right out of the box and the colors, black levels and contrast are better and the Black Pearl is brighter than it's predecessor. Lord willing, this time we will not have any more problems.

So now we have joined the ranks of the pirates and become Black Pearl owners. All I can say is "Arrr me hearties; yo ho, yo ho, a pirates life for me."
Jmouse007 is offline  
post #40 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 04:37 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Dodds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: San Francisco, now Australia
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
For those interested in comparative black levels here are two shots I took of the VW60 and RS1. Both were taken with a Canon S3 IS and tripod using a manual exposure of 15 seconds, 3.2 aperture, and ISO 200. No post processing was done other than to resize. They are quite dark but the differences should be apparent on a decent monitor.

Whilst they are very close, you can see that the VW60 has a slight edge.
LL
LL


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Steve Dodds is offline  
post #41 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 07:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 377 Post(s)
Liked: 440
Reio! Why stab at Curt/ He is one of the few commercial CRT places keeping parts, service, etc available. He doesn't exactly live in luxory. If he goes, the sport will have suffered probaby close to a mortal blow.

Interesting re the shots Steve. Lets assume the RS1 has an on/off CR of 15,000 and the Sony $35,000. The difference is slight. Now lets try it with an RS2. Cleary the JVC should equalor win but the difference if any would be very small. Yet to the eye under goood viewing conditions and the right viewing test material, the RS2 appears much err blacker.


In any event, the most blacks I ever watch are at CRT HT meets. The cry is always look at em blacks. At home I watch sports and the blacks look absolutely fine on everything. RSsing , RS2, Sony VPL-vw60, VPL-vw2000. On my 9 inch ref CRT.

I've got a 11S2 coming.

All this stuff is very good. The ones I like the least are the RS1 and then the very good RS2, probably due to the lenses. With a color fix and a better lens, the RS2 would be great I think.The best so far are the 200 and my CRT. When watching, total overall performancebetween the two are about the same with some qualities better in each obviously. Watching normal films too, the viewing panel likes both equally and gets anoyed with my constant switching. At some point they just want to watch the porn uninterrupted. A joke.

Mark Haflich

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #42 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 12:43 PM
Member
 
mbonikow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I have no idea why people complain about the lens on the RS1/RS2. They are in the league of all good projectors. Mine does not display color fringing, can be adjusted for nearly perfect convergence at 60-70% of the screen and seems tack sharp, sharper than the Pearl lens. I have owned Sharp 12K dlp (same lens as 20K) and many other "fine" lens machines and none offered much better lens quality. As for a CRT having better lens or sharpness... give me a break

On comparing Sony's inflated 30K:1 contrast with iris trick to native RS1 contrast, again... give me a break

The way the eye works if you have bright highlights in the scene and dark background, which is the way most movies are shot to increase the perceived intra-scene contrast, then RS1 is a winner vs. VW60, 30K contrast ratio and all...

If Pearl has slightly lower absolute black, then this is due to clamping down of the iris and to me has little real world value as I don't watch a black wall, but rather a movie, which never is 0 IRE.

I have seen VW60 in excellent setup and have owned two Pearls and as nice as they are, the brightness compression from the iris is not for me. RS1 comes across as a more open, cinematic projector.

To me iris tricks are like breathing through a straw, sure you can do it, but why?
mbonikow is offline  
post #43 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 01:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Raul GS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 24
The corners look awful in the RS1. Are they generally that bad or is that just a fairly poor sample (or is it a photo artefact)?

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence, than it does knowledge. Charles Darwin
Raul GS is offline  
post #44 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 01:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 377 Post(s)
Liked: 440
Its not in the range of a good lens projector. Compare the image in sharpness or firmness if you will to a VPL-vw200, a Marantz 11S2, a say Sim2 HT3000 and then go back to an RS1 or RS2. I have, many many times. You want it to make no difference but it really does. Its like a camera. With an average lens a great photograpgher can make a great picture. But give the same photographer a Leica and the magnificant happens. Try it instead of saying it can't be.

Mark Haflich

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #45 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 03:13 PM
Member
 
mbonikow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Respectfully Mark, I would have to disagree that it's like a camera. Film has a resolution in the 20M+ range if we are just talking pixels, (forget the color depth),medium and large format photography is in 40M+, so yes there a great lens would and does make a difference. Our pj's are just barely at 2M, not exactly pushing the envelope.

The projectors you mentioned are ALL 2-3 times the price range. As such, as great as they are they are not a fair comparison. Nevertheless, the differences you attribute to the lens might be more of the difference in technology of DLP and LCOS. Still, I have seen Marantz flagship and RS1 in direct comparison fed the same material and I did not find the lens to be a decisive factor for me. Nor did the other AVS forum members that were present at that shootout. I found other parameters more important. However to each his own, it's why we all drive different cars right?
mbonikow is offline  
post #46 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 03:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Cameron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Kaysville, UT
Posts: 2,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Wait I thought everybody drove Hondas.

-- Well I have really blown my budget now. --
Cameron is offline  
post #47 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 04:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,820
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 377 Post(s)
Liked: 440
I'd be more concerned if they weren't forum members. There is far far too much following a leader here. safety in numbers.

No one including me is saying the Rs1/2 are not good values for the money. But having a lens comparable to the better stuff would make it yes several thousands more expensive but would also make a world class projector (that and a CMS).

Mark Haflich

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #48 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 05:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbonikow View Post

Respectfully Mark, I would have to disagree that it's like a camera. Film has a resolution in the 20M+ range if we are just talking pixels, (forget the color depth),medium and large format photography is in 40M+, so yes there a great lens would and does make a difference. Our pj's are just barely at 2M, not exactly pushing the envelope.

The projectors you mentioned are ALL 2-3 times the price range. As such, as great as they are they are not a fair comparison. Nevertheless, the differences you attribute to the lens might be more of the difference in technology of DLP and LCOS. Still, I have seen Marantz flagship and RS1 in direct comparison fed the same material and I did not find the lens to be a decisive factor for me. Nor did the other AVS forum members that were present at that shootout. I found other parameters more important. However to each his own, it's why we all drive different cars right?

Why argue with Mark?

He has admitted that he can't identify what difference the lens makes.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is offline  
post #49 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 05:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr.D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbonikow View Post

Respectfully Mark, I would have to disagree that it's like a camera. Film has a resolution in the 20M+ range if we are just talking pixels, (forget the color depth),medium and large format photography is in 40M+, so yes there a great lens would and does make a difference. Our pj's are just barely at 2M, not exactly pushing the envelope.

The projectors you mentioned are ALL 2-3 times the price range. As such, as great as they are they are not a fair comparison. Nevertheless, the differences you attribute to the lens might be more of the difference in technology of DLP and LCOS. Still, I have seen Marantz flagship and RS1 in direct comparison fed the same material and I did not find the lens to be a decisive factor for me. Nor did the other AVS forum members that were present at that shootout. I found other parameters more important. However to each his own, it's why we all drive different cars right?

I tend to agree with you . I see zero problems with the lens on my HD1. It resolves down to the subpixel level and I see no abberation , diffraction or obvious flaring issues. I'd be interested in knowing what the supposed problems are that indicate the lens is a majorly limiting factor with the RS1.

digital film janitor
Mr.D is offline  
post #50 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 06:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CaspianM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Land of Cardinals
Posts: 5,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
So why vw200 has a better lens than vw60 if it is going to provide any improvements?

It is all about quality...that is the picture

JVC & NEC 8" CRT with 106" wide Stewart screen. All NHT speakers driven by Pioneer Elite AVR and bluray

Custom dedicated 8 seat theater

CaspianM is offline  
post #51 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 08:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr.D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by reio-ta View Post

He's probably talking about MTF, unless you have something like a Qualia level, like the VW200, $30,000 SIM2, or CRT, etc, MTF won't be 100% up to par. .

And I'd like to know how someone can judge the MTF being sub-par and that being down to the lens without something meaningful to compare it with. I hear that the lens on the RS1 is "sub-par". I don't hear anything meaningful explaining how we arrived at that conclusion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reio-ta View Post


Just because you can resolve the sub-pixels, doesn't mean MTF is good. Realize he has a 9500 Ultra 9" CRT modded by Mike Parker himself and set up by MP too. The resolving power of that is probably more than what 99% of people on this forum will see.

I fail to see how a lens that is entirely capable of resolving down to the individual pixels and gaps between those pixels can be regarded as lacking in MTF. The lens only has to resolve down to the level of the pixels on the panel across the width of the lens. Which it does. The second issue is how well the lens transmits light and this isn't something we can reliably know unless we take the lens off and analyse it on its own terms outside of the system of the projector itself....which kind of defeats the point.

All that is really being said when people reach for MTF is that a theoretical lens that transmitted more of the available light on the RS1 than the original lens would be an improvement in this regard. Improving the resolving power is moot as you only have to resolve the panel which the original lens manages already.


So all that's being said here is that a better lens on a projector would perform better than an inferior lens: which you can say about any lens and projector.

From that somewhat moot point we've now arrived at the lens on the RS1 being "sub-par".

Do I hear anyone saying the lens can't resolve the panel?
Do I hear anyone saying the lens has obvious abberation ?
Do I hear anyone saying the lens is massively "slow"?
Do I hear anyone saying the lens has objectionable flaring?

All I hear is that a lens with a better MTF would offer "improvements" which as I've said you can say for any projector or lens as there is no such thing as a lens with perfect MTF except for possibly one constructed by gravity.... be a while until we get those I think.

digital film janitor
Mr.D is offline  
post #52 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 08:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rlindo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ON, Canada
Posts: 4,739
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

I'd be more concerned if they weren't forum members. There is far far too much following a leader here. safety in numbers.

No one including me is saying the Rs1/2 are not good values for the money. But having a lens comparable to the better stuff would make it yes several thousands more expensive but would also make a world class projector (that and a CMS).

Matters little to me but it would seem many who have seen many different projectors and many who view/review PJs for a living feel the rs1/2 (especially the RS2) are world class projectors so I guess they are either:

a) wrong because you say so

b) simply have a different opinion than you which last time I checked is ok to have in this world. Your opinion is just that- your opinion.

It's amusing to me that a member here has said he has compared the rs1 to highly valued single chip dlps and said he didn't see much of a difference in the lens and you are basically saying he is wrong. Also amusing you earlier brought up a member here who I guess used to make lenses to back up some point you had about the lens quality in the RS2 yet that very same member thinks the RS2 is the best digital pj he has seen and has said he plans to buy one. I guess to his professional lens making self, the RS2 lens is just fine.

Whatever though...again, it isn't like I care.

ROB
rlindo is offline  
post #53 of 112 Old 02-23-2008, 08:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CaspianM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Land of Cardinals
Posts: 5,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
A better lens would not only have better resolving power but also better contrast (ansi), better unformity or less of light fall out near the edge and corners, less aberrations and distortion. Some even have better transparency for better light transmission.

It is all about quality...that is the picture

JVC & NEC 8" CRT with 106" wide Stewart screen. All NHT speakers driven by Pioneer Elite AVR and bluray

Custom dedicated 8 seat theater

CaspianM is offline  
post #54 of 112 Old 02-24-2008, 02:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr.D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaspianM View Post

A better lens would not only have better resolving power but also better contrast (ansi), better unformity or less of light fall out near the edge and corners, less aberrations and distortion. Some even have better transparency for better light transmission.

Which you can say about any lens.

My point is that criticising the lens in terms of MTF only really applies to resolution and how well the lens transmits light. MTF doesn't readily quantify things like flaring and optical distortion. Its a subjective measure of contrast vs resolution: how much detail it resolves vs how well it transmits light across the lens surface.

The original lens doesn't have significant problems with resolution or optical distortions. The only thing you can say by bringing MTF into it is that a lens with better transmissive properties would transmit more light and therefor be better IN THIS REGARD. And this is a totally moot argument as you can say this about ANY lens with regard to transmissive properties.

Improving optical distortion and resolution will not bring any particular gains with regard to the system that the lens is used in (in this case the RS1) . Why not? Because the RS1 does not exhibit problems in these area with the original lens.

Criticising the lens in terms of MTF is nebulous in the extreme. I'm just wondering what point people are trying to make by repeatedly stating " a better lens would be better" You might as well say a higher resolution panel would improve the RS1 for all the relevance it has.

digital film janitor
Mr.D is offline  
post #55 of 112 Old 02-24-2008, 04:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.D View Post

Criticising the lens in terms of MTF is nebulous in the extreme. I'm just wondering what point people are trying to make by repeatedly stating " a better lens would be better" You might as well say a higher resolution panel would improve the RS1 for all the relevance it has.

It is the same kind of argument made by those shilling $2,000 speaker cable.

Sure, it is impossible to measure any difference using those expensive cables. But, if you are a true audiophile/videophile snob, you can hear/see the difference. At least that is what they tell themselves. This argument is especially appealing to those who happen to sell this kind of equipment.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is offline  
post #56 of 112 Old 02-24-2008, 06:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Catdaddy67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Mark, is it fair to say that you feel that it is very hard to quantify how these lenses actually perform comparably via objective standards (CA, distortions, etc)?

I tend to agree that logically if two lenses dont show any significant difference in CA or distortions that they dont differ in performance. I had a near perfect HD1 in regard to the lens. I have had a near perfect 15S1 and 11S2, also, at least as far as CA and geometric distortions go.

I am sure that the "flagship" Marantz (was that an 11S1? - when was that comparison made?) that is referenced above also likely had a similar objectively performing lens.

Unlike with $2000 speaker cables, however, there are distinctively different looking images that are provided by the RS1 and the 15S1, and I dont mean just in black level and brightness.

It could be argued that its because of the differences in technology between DLP and LCoS and that would probably be a decent argument that accounts for some of the difference but what about the people who still own a Sharp 20k who have attested to the perceivable differences between just it and the Marantz 15S1?

To say that is the same argument by those shilling $2000 cables might be literally correct but I believe it is incorrect in spirit as unlike with the speaker cables there IS a difference in PQ of some of these machines (albeit I dont know how much of that is attributable just to the lens.)

My setup, still in progress:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Catdaddy67 is offline  
post #57 of 112 Old 02-24-2008, 07:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
No question that different projectors have different looks. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.

Mark (and anyone else) is free to prefer one projector to another. I will not debate that preference.

But, if someone argues that it is the lens (or some other component) that is responsible for an element of picture quality, I hope that I am not alone in being sceptical of that view if it cannot be explained.

Again, I am not saying that the RS1 can't be improved by a better lens. Tom Sites suggested that ANSI contrast would improve marginally, for example.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is offline  
post #58 of 112 Old 02-24-2008, 08:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CaspianM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Land of Cardinals
Posts: 5,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Without pointing to any lens on any of these pj's, keep in mind that we are dealing with zoom lens. A better designed zoom and glass have wider sweet zoom range within its range for corner/edge focus/abberations/shading and resolution. Zoom lens can be extremly expensive if well made.

It is all about quality...that is the picture

JVC & NEC 8" CRT with 106" wide Stewart screen. All NHT speakers driven by Pioneer Elite AVR and bluray

Custom dedicated 8 seat theater

CaspianM is offline  
post #59 of 112 Old 02-24-2008, 09:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ronomy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,037
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Dodds View Post

For those interested in comparative black levels here are two shots I took of the VW60 and RS1. Both were taken with a Canon S3 IS and tripod using a manual exposure of 15 seconds, 3.2 aperture, and ISO 200. No post processing was done other than to resize. They are quite dark but the differences should be apparent on a decent monitor.

Whilst they are very close, you can see that the VW60 has a slight edge.

The only way to compare pictures like this is to also match exactly the peak lumen output on both projectors. If one is bighter than the other then pictures like this mean nothing.
Ronomy is offline  
post #60 of 112 Old 02-26-2008, 01:51 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Dodds's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: San Francisco, now Australia
Posts: 2,883
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Well, the thread got a little sidetracked, but I've made my decision.

They were so close in their strengths and weaknesses that I almost tossed a coin (literally).

In the end, I've also been trying out an anamorphic lens and was enthused enough by the result that the VW60's ability to work with one tipped it over the edge.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Steve Dodds is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

User Tag List

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