The official Epson 8700UB thread - Page 46 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
First ... 44  45  46 47  48  ... Last
Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP > The official Epson 8700UB thread
Gregory's Avatar Gregory 10:24 PM 05-15-2011
That was the information that I'm looking for. Of course we would all like to hear that Dynamic mode could be calibrated to look exactly like THX, but keep all of the lumens. Then you wouldn't need THX mode!

So, as usual.........no free lunch.

Thanks,
Greg

coderguy's Avatar coderguy 11:36 PM 05-15-2011
Well, it's a mixed bag as always.
Some CMS let you cheat a little by shifting only certain individual color points, by color phase, gamma, and grayscale level.

It can get complicated though, and I'm not a professional calibrator, but the only way I've found to calibrate these blown modes is really by having another D65 calibrated device in a split screen comparison as you are trying to calibrate a DYNAMIC mode. Then you can make individual concessions at certain points to keep you happy.

It takes a long time, can take hours and hours, but even then you'll find adjusting one thing causes a side effect somewhere else. The way to do it I've found is to just make like 4-5 different calibrations with different color shifts and compare them in split-screen testing across multiple movies and test content.

These types of calibrations are more applicable on projectors that have FARTHER OFF OTB modes.
It would be easier to calibrate these modes with a third-party video processor, like a DVDo Edge or whatever, but those things generally cost so much it isn't worth it just to get more powerful calibration options. They also won't always help you preserve lumens, sometimes they will, depends on the individual projector's calibration weaknesses.
mach250's Avatar mach250 01:20 AM 05-16-2011
what are the differences between this and the 8350 besides 800-1000 dollars?
coderguy's Avatar coderguy 01:25 AM 05-16-2011
Better black levels, better BRIGHTER scenes, about a TON of difference IMHO.
Many people wouldn't care though, if you are a VERY picky enthusiast (almost purist) like I am, you would care.

The 8700ub is certainly worth the price difference over the 8350.
mach250's Avatar mach250 01:30 AM 05-16-2011
my biggest problem is that my living room ceiling is vaulted and I have a ~4x6 window with no curtain/shade. however it is on the opposite side of my house that gets sun.
coderguy's Avatar coderguy 01:36 AM 05-16-2011
Added
------
I would almost definitely lean toward the Benq w1100 or w1200 if you have some open windows, it will do better in fighting ambient light than any of these others I mentioned.
The Benq w6000 is another option, but then you're getting closer to the price of the Epson 8700ub again.

Otherwise, if you want to save some money over the 8700ub and don't want the Benq's, get the Mits hc4000. The 8350 is bright enough, but I personally think DLP wins in the sub $1300 range by a big margin.

The 8700ub is a better at competing with DLPs than the 8350, just from personal experience here, my opinion is not the HOLY GRAIL necessarily (although I think it is!)

Black levels won't matter in your setup, all that will matter is brightness mainly.
royvegaspinoy's Avatar royvegaspinoy 04:18 AM 05-16-2011
Just received my 8700ub a few days ago after returning a mits HC6800 and epson 8350. I definitely made the right decision. Now, this is my first projector, so I'd like to ask your opinions on whether you guys would consider my convergence to be acceptable or not. Picture was taken with a cell phone so it's a little blurry.

Patterns used:
http://i.pbase.com/o6/78/287278/1/73...sConv1080p.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/image/7...8/original.jpg
LL
LL
ERuiz's Avatar ERuiz 04:45 AM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by royvegaspinoy View Post

Just received my 8700ub a few days ago after returning a mits HC6800 and epson 8350. I definitely made the right decision. Now, this is my first projector, so I'd like to ask your opinions on whether you guys would consider my convergence to be acceptable or not. Picture was taken with a cell phone so it's a little blurry.

Patterns used:
http://i.pbase.com/o6/78/287278/1/73...sConv1080p.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/jackcnd/image/7...8/original.jpg

I don't get it and don't take this in a bad way, but why do people take pictures with their cell phone's crappy camera when they are trying to show an image where FOCUS and CONVERGENCE is the main concern? The last thing you need is added blurriness and crap introduced by a cheap camera. It doesn't give us much to help you on, when we have an image with such bad quality, that we can't tell if it's really convergence or just a bad picture.

Taking the "camera induced" blurriness away, I would say you have a 1 pixel convergence on both red and green. I would say that is acceptable on an Epson 8350 but I don't know about an 8700UB, since I've heard their convergence is much better for the most part.
coderguy's Avatar coderguy 04:46 AM 05-16-2011
It looks like 2-2.5 pixels off, but it's hard to tell in that picture.

Did you put the projector at closest throw, and make sure it was perfectly aligned perpendicularly to the screen (sometimes shooting onto a white wall temporarily is a good test).
Depends if you can see it from farther back and how well text focuses in general, and you own preferences as to if you want to risk an RMA or not.

You guys definitely need to post better pics, but you should be able to tell convergence yourself just by looking at it.

Here to clarify some of this, I am posting my convergence on the Sanyo so you can see what 1.25 pixels off looks like at shortest throw.
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/7540/cimg0488o.jpg

Here is how 1.25 pixels affects the edge / outlining of different colors (not very much):
http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/4033/cimg0501.jpg

Notice on some color text you can't even see it.
Obviously 1.25 pixels off is invisible from even more than 2-4 feet away, depending what color it is next to, from 5+ feet it doesnt matter at all, it's completely invisible.

Then in another image where it appears to be off over 2 pixels, but it's from using lens shift at mid-throw, so you have to be careful how you test it.
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/7988/cimg0416k.jpg

You can tell in the above image that there is no way for us to tell how far off it is, because of the blooming. You need to get a clear pic like the first one if you want us to know, but even closer up.

Here is another image of convergence off 1.25 pixels:
http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/1133/cimg0481m.jpg

Look at the attached thumbnail, see all the blue highlighting, that's simply from the PJ not being perfectly aligned to the screen as well as lens shift.
Someone could be posting a pic of their CONVERGENCE, we tell them it's off 2.5 pixels, and really it's perfect, you gotta be SUPER SUPER careful.
LL
royvegaspinoy's Avatar royvegaspinoy 05:14 AM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERuiz View Post

I don't get it and don't take this in a bad way, but why do people take pictures with their cell phone's crappy camera when they are trying to show an image where FOCUS and CONVERGENCE is the main concern? The last thing you need is added blurriness and crap introduced by a cheap camera. It doesn't give us much to help you on, when we have an image with such bad quality, that we can't tell if it's really convergence or just a bad picture.

Taking the "camera induced" blurriness away, I would say you have a 1 pixel convergence on both red and green. I would say that is acceptable on an Epson 8350 but I don't know about an 8700UB, since I've heard their convergence is much better for the most part.

Yeah, I get what you're saying. I figured it was clear enough to pick out the convergence anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

It looks like 2-2.5 pixels off, but it's hard to tell in that picture.

Did you put the projector at closest throw, and make sure it was perfectly aligned perpendicularly to the screen (sometimes shooting onto a white wall temporarily is a good test).

Depends if you can see it from farther back and how well text focuses in general, and you own preferences as to if you want to risk an RMA or not.

No I didn't put it at closest throw. It is at 10'5 projecting 106" on a white screen. I sit 11' away from the screen and I do sort of see the reds, but I think it's just because I already know it's there and am always looking for it.

I'll work on better placement and better pics. This is another one from 10'5" throw, for now.
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...y/SNC00462.jpg
ERuiz's Avatar ERuiz 05:34 AM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by royvegaspinoy View Post


Yeah, I get what you're saying. I figured it was clear enough to pick out the convergence anyway.

No I didn't put it at closest throw. It is at 10'5 projecting 106" on a white screen. I sit 11' away from the screen and I do sort of see the reds, but I think it's just because I already know it's there and am always looking for it.

I'll work on better placement and better pics. This is another one from 10'5" throw, for now.
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...y/SNC00462.jpg

Yea, from that last pic, the convergence looks pretty bad.
dr bill's Avatar dr bill 06:26 AM 05-16-2011
When calibrating the 8700, start in THX mode?

Also, what global settings are best to start with (e.g., Auto Iris on or off, etc.)?

Thanks!!!
newfmp3's Avatar newfmp3 08:33 AM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by mach250 View Post

what are the differences between this and the 8350 besides 800-1000 dollars?

Only you can decide what is worth it to you. Each room will have different results. But for me, the difference in black levels alone was a huge enough difference. To me blacks are extremely important. Colors pop more on the 8700 and you have more sharpness options like super resolution and frame interpolation which actually works quite well.

So, better motion abilities, sharper, better blacks, colors pop more, the detail in dark scenes is much better - contrast better. And it seems to be the iris is nowhere as painfully slow as it was on the 8350. The iris on the 8350 was useless to me, I could watch it draw it was that slow. The iris on the 8700 is practicall invisible to my eye - at least on the unit I have.

When I went fom my Plasma in my living room to my 8350 I felt underwhelmed by the projector, so much so I knew I mad a mistake getting it. When I go from my Plasma to my 8700, well lets just say I'm using the 8700 a lot more these days.
coderguy's Avatar coderguy 09:05 AM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfmp3 View Post

So, better motion abilities, sharper, better blacks, colors pop more, the detail in dark scenes is much better - contrast better. And it seems to be the iris is nowhere as painfully slow as it was on the 8350. The iris on the 8350 was useless to me, I could watch it draw it was that slow. The iris on the 8700 is practicall invisible to my eye - at least on the unit I have.

When I went fom my Plasma in my living room to my 8350 I felt underwhelmed by the projector, so much so I knew I mad a mistake getting it. When I go from my Plasma to my 8700, well lets just say I'm using the 8700 a lot more these days.

I have to totally agree with this. I hate to state my blunt opinions sometimes, because I know it makes owners of other projectors upset thinking, wow my projector isn't that good.
We are really just trying to steer people in the right direction, even if we aren't perfect at it. I still say grab a Mits hc4000 DLP over the 8350 unless you need placement flexibility, but the 8700ub on the other hand, just has a TON of extra dark black levels, and well worth the cost.

In reality most of us are just pickier than others.
slantsflood's Avatar slantsflood 01:41 PM 05-16-2011
Would this pj be too bright for the first 500 hours or so paired with a carada bw?
Benito Joaquin's Avatar Benito Joaquin 02:27 PM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by slantsflood View Post

Would this pj be too bright for the first 500 hours or so paired with a carada bw?

How far back would the projector be from the screen? What size screen?

Benny
dr bill's Avatar dr bill 03:25 PM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by slantsflood View Post

Would this pj be too bright for the first 500 hours or so paired with a carada bw?

Mine (100 hours) is 14' back from a 142" Carada BW, and works great! No complaints about brightness.
NYMN's Avatar NYMN 04:25 PM 05-16-2011
royvegaspinoy - that's pretty bad convergence. I wouldn't be happy with that at all!!
royvegaspinoy's Avatar royvegaspinoy 06:52 PM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYMN View Post

royvegaspinoy - that's pretty bad convergence. I wouldn't be happy with that at all!!

Yeahhh.... looks like I'll be calling Epson.
slantsflood's Avatar slantsflood 08:18 PM 05-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benito Joaquin View Post

How far back would the projector be from the screen? What size screen?

Benny

Pj would be 17 feet back. 118 diag 16.9 screen. Dark colored basement with lighting control and no windows. The reason i ask is i saw a stewart studiotech 130 paired with a runco ls3 and i dont know if it was the brightness or sparkles or the rbe. But i was almost dizzy after watching it for 10 mins. Ive seen the epsons, sonys, and jvcs all on 1.0 matte white screens and never had any kind of dizzy effect at all. And i really dont want to deal with a nd filter if it is too bright for quite a while. If i dont get the bw, ill get the ccw
BobL's Avatar BobL 08:23 PM 05-16-2011
It won't be too bright. Although, some are more sensitive than others but in a dark environment most people don't complain about being too bright until about 35 ft/l or more. I wouldn't worry about it. Plus you can always use the low power mode if you find it too bright.
newfmp3's Avatar newfmp3 08:02 AM 05-17-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr bill View Post

When calibrating the 8700, start in THX mode?

Also, what global settings are best to start with (e.g., Auto Iris on or off, etc.)?

Thanks!!!

I started in THX mode, and I do like it for movies. But, once I switched to PC I noticed how it wasn't very sharp. Fonts were just blurry like I could not get the focus sharp enough. Theater, Living Room, black1/2 and even XV gave me a much sharper image. I mean the difference was quite noticable. I compared sharpness settings, super res settings back and forth and now I'm playing with Theater mode on ECO with normal iris the most for PC related or gaming. Living Room is just too bright for me right now with a HP screen and new bulb, even on ECO. Not so bad with a few lights on, but the lower modes on eco are just fine in my room for brightness.

I'll say this, Crysis 2 on PC 1080p high detail on this 8700...holy cow does it look great. With my 8350 everything just looked washed out and dull in comparison. I found on the 8350 in order to get any color pop I had to have the color sat upwards of +8, but then it looked over saturated so I turn it back a bit, and then it was dull looking. Right out of the box the 8700 just looks better with more pop right away in any mode. I actually get very limited time to play with each mode, I'm sure some here are better suited to give more technical answers then myself. I haven't had it long enough yet to decide on any one mode.
ERuiz's Avatar ERuiz 08:15 AM 05-17-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfmp3 View Post


I started in THX mode, and I do like it for movies. But, once I switched to PC I noticed how it wasn't very sharp. Fonts were just blurry like I could not get the focus sharp enough. Theater, Living Room, black1/2 and even XV gave me a much sharper image. I mean the difference was quite noticable. I compared sharpness settings, super res settings back and forth and now I'm playing with Theater mode on ECO with normal iris the most for PC related or gaming. Living Room is just too bright for me right now with a HP screen and new bulb, even on ECO. Not so bad with a few lights on, but the lower modes on eco are just fine in my room for brightness.

I'll say this, Crysis 2 on PC 1080p high detail on this 8700...holy cow does it look great. With my 8350 everything just looked washed out and dull in comparison. I found on the 8350 in order to get any color pop I had to have the color sat upwards of +8, but then it looked over saturated so I turn it back a bit, and then it was dull looking. Right out of the box the 8700 just looks better with more pop right away in any mode. I actually get very limited time to play with each mode, I'm sure some here are better suited to give more technical answers then myself. I haven't had it long enough yet to decide on any one mode.

So a higher priced PJ performs better than a lower priced model? What a shocker.
Benito Joaquin's Avatar Benito Joaquin 08:42 AM 05-17-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by slantsflood View Post

Pj would be 17 feet back. 118 diag 16.9 screen. Dark colored basement with lighting control and no windows. The reason i ask is i saw a stewart studiotech 130 paired with a runco ls3 and i dont know if it was the brightness or sparkles or the rbe. But i was almost dizzy after watching it for 10 mins. Ive seen the epsons, sonys, and jvcs all on 1.0 matte white screens and never had any kind of dizzy effect at all. And i really dont want to deal with a nd filter if it is too bright for quite a while. If i dont get the bw, ill get the ccw

not bright at all. You should be fine to move forward with those dims. The dizzy effect you encountered....not sure what could have caused it. As BobL mentioned, you are in good shape. You can always work with too much brightness, better that than not enough!

Benito
newfmp3's Avatar newfmp3 08:50 AM 05-17-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERuiz View Post

So a higher priced PJ performs better than a lower priced model? What a shocker.

Why are you so down on everyone?

I'm sure there are lots of people considering an 8350 or a 8700. If you read the reviews of the 8350 out there, and I won't list them, they make the 8700 sound like its not worth it.....when that is just not true.
coderguy's Avatar coderguy 08:58 AM 05-17-2011
There are also plenty of higher priced projectors that do not perform better overall than lower cost ones, but of course on average the higher priced ones will be better.
I agree that guy is jumping on people just for giving opinions.

I always want more opinions in this forum, not less.
We also need more comparisons, the professional reviewers are good, but they leave stuff out.
They also often do rush jobs and don't give a proper review.

I know I'll hate a review when it starts out as "this is one ugly projector, it just looks..."

I'm thinking, you know, if the projector was pink with purple poka-dots, but had the best PQ, I really don't care!
Of course it's a bonus for it to look nice, but it's hardly a deciding factor, I guess some with the WAF it is.
newfmp3's Avatar newfmp3 10:25 AM 05-17-2011
speaking of looks. I personally do not hate or love the 8350/8700 case. Its size isn't even an issue for me (it is for the woman though) since it means a really quiet PJ. After coming from a noisy infocus he 8700 is a nice change in that dept. I think even in normal mode the 8700 is quieter then my Infocus was in ECO.

But, I HATE white. White iPad, Pod, PC, MAC, fridges, stoves....white = ick for me and it just stands out in my theater like a sore thumb since I have don't have white ceilings.

I gotta say, the JVC's and Sony's and more out there look pretty in black. But paying $1000 more just to get the 9700 in black isn't my thing.

..oh, and I have another 8700 on the way. Fun times. At least they are a pleasure to deal with. I have never had anyone question or argue anything. Besides, a picture is all you need to say sometimes.
ERuiz's Avatar ERuiz 10:39 AM 05-17-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfmp3 View Post

speaking of looks. I personally do not hate or love the 8350/8700 case. Its size isn't even an issue for me (it is for the woman though) since it means a really quiet PJ. After coming from a noisy infocus he 8700 is a nice change in that dept. I think even in normal mode the 8700 is quieter then my Infocus was in ECO.

But, I HATE white. White iPad, Pod, PC, MAC, fridges, stoves....white = ick for me and it just stands out in my theater like a sore thumb since I have don't have white ceilings.

I gotta say, the JVC's and Sony's and more out there look pretty in black. But paying $1000 more just to get the 9700 in black isn't my thing.

..oh, and I have another 8700 on the way. Fun times.

+1 They should give us options to choose between white or black.
helcik's Avatar helcik 02:56 PM 05-17-2011
I am one of them, still deciding between 8350 and 8700. I have currently 8350 and besides black levels I am very satisfied with it. Anyway, 8700 is on the way to compare the black levels. I am not sure if there will be that much difference in my room setup and if I'll pay 1 grand more for the upgrade. Keep your finders up, should be here by Thursday. I will report my thoughts then.
charlievoviii's Avatar charlievoviii 03:47 PM 05-17-2011
..
First ... 44  45  46 47  48  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop