Originally Posted by Big Picture
How many pixels are there in the 2:35 image height on a 2:35 screen thru a 16:9 projector? Is viewing a 2:35 image thru a 16:9 projector like the PT 4000 going to produce a noticeably inferior image over an anamorphic lens setup?
Does the PT 4000 render a great 2:35 image on a 2:35 screen or is it just so so suggesting that viewing 2:35 on this projector might best be done on a 16:9 screen? ?
Admittedly I'm still trying to fully understand the CIH scenario.
It's been nearly 24 hours since I was on here, and now it's 3 pages later.. but I'll go ahead and respond anyway. Bob summed up the details probably better than I could on the last page. This discussion really is better suited for the CIH subforum (you do realize there is an entire subforum for CIH discussion, and there is no shortage of zoom vs lens discussion there).
I've done a fair amount of reading in the CIH forum myself. My conclusions are that there is no right choice for everyone, zoom or lens. They both have advantages and drawbacks. The largest drawback to zoom, however, has always been that it was a PITA to do. With Panasonics new lens memory, however, they have elimated that, which in my book puts their zoom method in front.
As far as picture quality, there are even pro's and con's to each method for that. Some will say they can see pixels when zooming, although on a Panasonic I'd guess they would have to be sitting pretty darn close to a huge screen to see it, closer than would be comfortable to me. I will report back once my 4000 is installed and let you guys know if I can see pixels at my seating distance and screen size (based on what I've read I know I won't) while zoomed for CIH.
The light loss argument actually isn't usually as bad in real application as people often tend to state. Sure, your losing pixels (made up ones btw) of light, but in reality it isn't usually as much as it would be in theory. The reason is because when zooming your also increasing the light output, making the real difference often 10% or so. I suspect the AE4000 will be plenty bright enough for me to begin with, so I don't have any concerns about losing a little bit of light output. If I do, I will always have higher lamp settings or picture settings I can switch to.
So in summary, the BD disc only has 800 pixels (according to Bob, I didn't do the math) of picture height on it to begin with (for 2.35), and that's what you'll be displaying on your screen. You aren't losing anything in that regards. So to clarify my previous post, the more important factor is the source material not necessarily the projector. Your displaying 16:9 material on a 16:9 projector, so nothing is gained or lost. There are no 2.35 projectors or source material currently available, at least not on the common market that I'm aware of.