Official Panasonic PT-AE3000U OWNERS Thread. - Page 31 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-21-2008, 08:41 PM
Member
 
erik71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by fanbrain View Post

What other adjustment would need to be made?

Is the lens of the projector above the top of the screen, and you are using a large amount of vertical lens shift? That is the only thing I can think of that explains the large amount of image shift when you zoom (the larger the lens shift, the more the image shifts when you zoom).

Since the top of the image moves below the top of the screen when you zoom to 2.35:1, obviously the digital vertical shift cannot correct it.

I think you have two choices if you want to use the lens memory feature to switch aspect ratios without manually adjusting the optical lens shift:

1) Move the projector down so that the lens is at or below the top of the screen.

2) If 1. is impractical, you could try reducing the vertical optical lens shift a little and then aiming the projector down a bit to center the 16:9 image vertically. That will unfortunately result in some keystone, so you will need to adjust the keystone compensation on the projector. This will degrade your image quality, which may be unacceptable. That is why 1. is preferable.
erik71 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-21-2008, 09:44 PM
Member
 
ReddickBulldog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReddickBulldog;15118973

View Post

Buhler?

Buhler?

Anyone?

Thanks to all for the help for a newbie.
ReddickBulldog is offline  
Old 11-21-2008, 10:56 PM
Advanced Member
 
den110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogone View Post

Here are 3 of the better HD-DVD transfers from some screen shots I posted up a ways in this thread...check it out. Not too soft to me...
Keep in mind, that I am taking these with a digital camera sitting 8 feet in front of a 120" screen





They look pretty sharp to me

"It's time to nut up or shut up."
den110 is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 02:00 AM
Member
 
gbickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogone View Post

Cool...Let's see some screen shots and compare...

a closeup photo of computer text on the scren is the only way to convey how sharp/soft a projector is...
gbickle is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 05:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ingeborgdot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,244
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Look at the text on those shots! Looks pretty clear there. I am not going to watch a computer.
Ingeborgdot is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 06:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ResOGlas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,364
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingeborgdot View Post

Look at the text on those shots! Looks pretty clear there. I am not going to watch a computer.

Many folks do use their PC with their projector.
ResOGlas is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 06:39 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
aquafire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Might be on his unit...many others it is not.
aquafire is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 07:05 AM
Newbie
 
cmccurdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just ordered mine from PP and will report on it next week
cmccurdy is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 10:35 AM
Senior Member
 
R o d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I tested numerous screen samples from Elite, Carada and Da-Lite this week. This is not an easy process as the samples are relatively small and in different sizes from the three vendors. Only Carada sent nice 12.5x9.5 samples. Da-Lite's were barely adquate at roughly 7x7. Elite's were 2.5x7 and very difficult to evaluate. Since my HT is not yet completed, I placed the AE3000 on a box about 10' from the wall in a fairly well light controlled basement where I plan to fix a 100" 16:9 screen. The projector will eventually be shelf mounted behind a wall 13' from the screen. For testing I used Normal and Cinema 1. All other settings were right out of the box. Here's what I found ...

First off, all the gray screens were quickly eliminated because they were too dim, and although they did improve black levels, there was some slight color shifting on lighter colors such as whites and yellows. I felt that black levels were pretty good on the non-gray screens so it was an easy decision to discard them. Da-Lite's High Power was also removed from consideration rather early because it was just too bright, unnaturally bright and uncomfortable to view. That narrowed the field to varying shades of white with gains from 1.0 to 1.8.

The higher gain screens such as Carada Brilliant White 1.4 and Elite High Gain White (which is actually sort of a pearlescent gray or silver) 1.8 were definitely brighter. However, the question I kept asking myself is, does brighter necessarily mean better? I exercised quite a bit of patience and different screen shots to answer this question because initially the eye tends to judge brighter as better. In some cases it was. For example, darker color scenes in high gain brought out some shadow detail better than the lower gain. On the other hand, lighter scenes such as a sky with a slight tint of blue were rendered white with the high gain. Similarly, well lit scenes with vivid color were slightly washed out with the high gain and seemed to have greater depth in the lower gain.

I like to watch film noir so I tested some B/W images and found the high gain again to help in shadow detail. It also brightened the white in a man's shirt, but the tradeoff was to weaken the black in his suit. Overall, in a side-by-side comparison, I thought the lower gain screen produced a better black level than the higher gain in B/W movies.

Having decided on white low gain, I removed the others from the wall and focused on the Elite CineWhite, Carada Cinema White and Da-Lite Da-Mat. Honestly I found little to distinguish between them. Putting the samples together gave a consistent image across all three. The Elite is less than half the price of the others and has received very good reviews from this site, so that made my decision easy. I placed my order and should receive my new screen early next week.
R o d is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 11:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 354 Post(s)
Liked: 289
Screens (or screen samples) must be evaluated in the same room, light control conditions, throw distance, zoom setting, etc. Change just one of these and all bets are off.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 12:21 PM
Senior Member
 
PBonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 201
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Some thoughts on this projector's high ANSI contrast, as compared to my 3 year old Sony Ruby.
My screen is about 3 feet from a beige side wall on he left, and I have noticed that on certain scenes that are dark overall, with bright objects on the left, the wall is lit up much more than I noticed with the Ruby, while the blacks and black level detail are just as good or better than the Ruby. This would seem to be due to the greater contrast within each scene (i.e. ANSI). You almost have to not look at the bright areas in order to see all the detail in the dark areas, because your eyes need to adjust. (Or my age is taking effect). I'll probably add some black felt to the sidewall to eliminate the reflection.
Still very pleased with the 3000. I'm using the Color1 setting. Excellent convergence and sharpness, but I haven't seen the projectors folks claim have even better sharpness.
Paul
PBonn is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 02:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 354 Post(s)
Liked: 289
Would someone please post a link to the test pattern people are using with the sentence "This sentence is written with single pixel width text." (or whatever it says). Yes I suppose I could make one but people seem to be using a standardized one it seems.

Thanks.

In exchange here is an excellent dead/stuck pixel full screen test generator program I found:



Link.

My 3000 passes all tests but I have owned LCDs in the past that didn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReddickBulldog View Post

Thanks to all for the help for a newbie.

You're welcome.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 03:53 PM
Member
 
ErikPMR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My unit has sharp looking text and picture, too.

Doesn't it make the most sense that most units look great, but a few people got bumb projectors. How can mine look so good if the overall projector is faulty?

If those with bad units replaced their projector, they would likely agree with the majority of people that love the picture quality.

It's possible they are not setting them up correctly as well. (i.e. sharp on one half and not the other... usually a "twisted" setup)
ErikPMR is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 04:56 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
aquafire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


My unit has sharp looking text and picture, too.

Doesn't it make the most sense that most units look great, but a few people got bumb projectors. How can mine look so good if the overall projector is faulty? If those with bad units replaced their projector, they would likely agree with the majority of people that love the picture quality. It's possible they are not setting them up correctly as well. (i.e. sharp on one half and not the other... usually a "twisted" setup)

It is getting increasingly frustrating reading this forum and listening to many people here dismiss many of us having issues with the Panny 3000. As I have stated many times my unit was not clear. It had color uniformity issues and simply was not sharp. I sent the images to Projector People and the comment I received back was that they had tested 3 other units side by side and the images were identical to mine!!! "Normal" at this price point was the answer.

Some of you are happy with the unit and thats awesome news. For others the quality control and multiple problems from 1 machine is pathetic. Proof is the 25%+ rate problem poll going on here. It is not "a few" people! I believe many here are so happy with the price point for 1080P that issues are ignored. And as with anything everyone is sensitive to different things. For me sharpness and clear text in the middle of my screen is important. "Normal" blurry text is not for me.

I have said it before at $2499 the Panny unit has a boat load of features. I started this thread and had high hopes! But after 3 weeks of frustration it had to go back. During my time with the unit I spoke to numerous members here on the phone, in person, and by PM. Many had the EXACT SAME ISSUES I HAD. LCD is a cheap technology and many are ok with its limitations.

I was able to find a NEW projector that outperforms the Panny 3000 in every way minus a few features.... for less money!

Please stop dismissing the many members here who have paid good money for poor performance.
aquafire is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 06:31 PM
Member
 
steindog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So I take you must have gone over the PP 4 hour return without restocking fee policy? If you had it 3 weeks I assume you had to pay 15% in order to send it back and get the balance in refund? If this is the case I can understand your frustration since you obviously were not satisfied with your ae3000. I'm still scratching by on my old AX100 and following these threads quite closely. I'm definitely going to wait for the upcoming batch of 1080's coming up to see what the word is before my upgrade but the panny isn't off my list yet. I am curious what "NEW" model you ended up switching to is.
steindog is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 07:03 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
aquafire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Sony HW10.

No restock fee they waived it. I wanted to exchange for an Epson but they said my unit was so "normal" I wouldn't be happy with any "units in this price range".
aquafire is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 07:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brajesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Metro Atlanta
Posts: 5,925
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:


Move the projector down so that the lens is at or below the top of the screen.

I'm having the same image shift issue going between 1.78:1 and 2.35:1 on my 2.35:1 screen. If I rear shelf-mount the PJ [right side up, not upside down], would the lens need to be at or above the bottom of the screen to avoid image shift up/down with lens memory? How high can the PJ be? ... as high up as the middle or top part of the screen? Thanks.

HD Media Keen Videosaurus
Brajesh is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 07:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
ilsiu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 867
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquafire View Post

I was able to find a NEW projector that outperforms the Panny 3000 in every way minus a few features.... for less money!

Where did you find the HW10 for less money than the Panny?
ilsiu is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 07:49 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
aquafire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I don't think I can post pricing and dealer info here...
aquafire is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 07:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 354 Post(s)
Liked: 289
He didn't ask for the price. He asked for the name of the dealer you got the Sony from. There's no rule against that. You already mentioned Projector People was where you bought the Panasonic 3000 from so you know mentioning retailer's names is allowed.

In A/V reproduction accuracy, there is no concept of "accounting for taste". We don't "pick" the level of bass any more than we get to pick the ending of a play. High fidelity is an unbiased, neutral, exact copy (or "reproduction") of the original source's tonal balance, timing, dynamics, etc..

m. zillch is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 07:59 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
aquafire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It was in Canada at a local dealer. And with the dollar worth 30% less...
aquafire is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 08:01 PM
Advanced Member
 
ilsiu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 867
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquafire View Post

I don't think I can post pricing and dealer info here...

Could you PM me? I was set on the Panny due to the lens memory feature. Although the Sony may have better image quality (I'm not 100% convinced I'd be able to tell the difference), the higher price tag eliminated it from my consideration. If that's not the case, then I'd like to put it back into contention.

Thanks!

Edit - I see you already answered. Hmm, I'm in the states so I don't think I'd be able to get the same price delta as you. That still leaves me with the Sony > Panny by ~700 USD. Thanks anyway.
ilsiu is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 08:47 PM
 
dogone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The HW10 is not a better projector...It is just different. I bought the Sony and the Panny from the same dealer and tested them side by side and sent back the one I was pleased with the least...I'm very happy with my choice...Saved some coin in the process. IMO, you get more for less money with the Panny...
dogone is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 10:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
Sujay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 565
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Finally set the 3000 up and hooked the PS3 up to it. Count me in as another happy customer. Looks mighty impressive even just on our wall. 120"
Sujay is offline  
Old 11-22-2008, 11:50 PM
Member
 
n171n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My 2.35 Elite EZFrame R115WH1-Wide arrived yesterday. It looks beautiful. Unfortunately in my excitement at trying to get the biggest screen for my wall (see previous post/room layout) I made a small but costly miscalculation on the dimensions.

I would prefer not to pay the return shipping PLUS restocking fee. So, if anyone is interested, I will gladly pass this along to you at a reasonable discount below retail. This is brand new -- never used -- full warranty -- will include receipt upon request. pm/email
n171n is offline  
Old 11-23-2008, 06:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Maestro J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by fanbrain View Post

I lined up the 16:9 with no V shift, then when I zoom to a 2.35 image, the top of the image moved down enough that I can't compensate using the V shift. Maybe I'll take a movie of it.

EDIT: made video

http://vimeo.com/2310849

Projector is at 14' ceiling mounted
Screen sizes are:

16:9- 110"
21:9- 138"

It says your video is no longer available?
Maestro J is offline  
Old 11-23-2008, 08:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HMenke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Northern Kentucky (Greater Cincinnati)
Posts: 1,076
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by fanbrain View Post

Zoom question:
I just hung my 2.35:1 screen today. I set the zoom memory for the 2.35:1 ratio, then zoomed for the 16:9 ratio. I noticed that now when I zoom between 2.35:1 and 16:9, the top of the picture moves down three inches.

If feasible, you'll want to move your screen up to vertically center it in line with the PJ.
HMenke is offline  
Old 11-23-2008, 10:00 AM
Newbie
 
jcasari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi all,

This is my first post here but I have been reading this forum for quite a while to help me decide on a theater setup. Here is what I have so far:
1) Got my AE3000U yesterday
2) Ordered a 5x10 DW laminate for the screen
3) Building frame with masking now

My question is to do with projector placement. I'm doing a constant height setup and will build a 2.35 screen (size will be full width of laminate, thus it will be 51" high and 130" diag). My plan is to zoom from the 104" diag 16:9 to the 130" diag 2.35:1.

I have the option of placing the projector at any distance up to the full depth of the room (18'). Seems the minimum throw I can use is about 14' to get the needed 2.35:1 screen. This will put the projector right above my 12" platform.

So, finally, my questions:

1) Is it best (for the screen size I'm trying to do with this projector) to keep it as close as possible to the screen or can I mount it on the back wall (throw would be around 16.5' lens to screen- an extra 2.5 feet)?

2) My planned vertical center of screen is 60" from floor (or 48" from platform). At what elevation should I put projector if I mount it at the closest throw? I have 9' ceiling but I'm concerned about head bumps if too low and loss of quality and lens shift problems on zooming if too high.

It will be a light controlled room. I'm leaning to back wall mounting and hoping extra 2.5 feet will not be too damaging to quality. Any recommendations?

Not sure if this is the right forum for this question so let me know if I need to move it.

Thanks,
Jorge
jcasari is offline  
Old 11-23-2008, 12:03 PM
Member
 
Mrfooks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 36
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am trying to get my computer to work on my Panny AE3000 with no success.
I am connecting from the DVi port on the computer video card which happens to be a Nvidia GEforce 5200 to an hdmi port on my Denon 4308 receiver.
The Nvidia utility shows the denon and asks me which I want as my primary, but nothing comes up on the projector screen.
I then moved the dvi-hdmi cable straight to the projector. It changed in the Nvidia utilty to reflect the Panny, so it sees the projector but again nothing shows up on the screen.
I did a clone view first of all and then changed to dual view and still nothing shows up.
Does anyone know what I am doing wrong?

Thanks.
Mrfooks is offline  
Old 11-23-2008, 12:58 PM
Member
 
leonp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I wanted to follow-up on questions raised by Brajech and fanboy(?) concerning using the lens memory feature to setup a 2.35:1 screen. I am planning to do this also, but want clarification before I purchase my new setup.

Please verify that this is correct:

Using the lens memory function in this manner will ONLY work if the projector lens is directly in front of (but not necessarily centered) the screen. In other words, the lens shift feature may be used, but NOT so much that the entire screen is above or below the lens.

I am planning to use a drop with my ceiling mount so the projector is just low enough to be even with the top of the screen. If I do this, can I use the lens memory feature to shrink a 16:9 image down to where it will be centered within the 2.35:1 screen?

My throw distance is about 12.5', screen width of 2.35:1 will be about 109".
leonp is offline  
 
Thread Tools


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