New Epson 3D projectors! 3010, 5010, 6010 - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
AndreasMergner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 1,799
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
#1 is referring to max output mode ie-dynamic, whereas #2 and #3 are referring to best mode.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dfan View Post

but he doesnt compare contrast in 3D and also no comparison of cross-talk between the two

also his comments are self contradicting....atleast I cant make heads or tails out of what he is saying

1) It's a huge difference in brightness. Of course glasses, and processing also affects 3D brightness, but there is no contest at all, the Epson is dramatically brighter in 3D.

2) The two projectors are closer in brightness in their best 3D modes (a 3D image from Ultimate Wave 3D Tahiti).

3) By comparison, 2D brightness is closer: Here are the two projectors again, this time in "best" 2D (the overexposure of the Epson is washing it out a bit)


#1 contradicts #2 for 3D and in #3 is he saying 2D they are closer in brightness ? which contradicts the published numbers


Current HT: HTPC-->Epson 5010 projector-->135" screen, BFM TLAHs x7 & THT
Build log: DIY rotary sub for contemporary HT in 100 year old house?
Andreas' Slow Rotary Sub build
AndreasMergner is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 11:28 AM
Member
 
vullcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Okay I think I am understanding the technology better now. It would seem that even though these panels refresh at x number of hz, everything from what I've seen can still only accept a 60hz (max) signal over HDMI 1.4a?

The projector would have to have Dual Link DVI input (it seems they all still use VGA when they do have computer input, which is a big WTF to me), display port input, or a higher / newer HDMI standard such as those found on the 2k and 4k resolution projectors.
vullcan is offline  
post #633 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 01:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
Smackrabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Posts: 893
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by vullcan View Post

Okay I think I am understanding the technology better now. It would seem that even though these panels refresh at x number of hz, everything from what I've seen can still only accept a 60hz (max) signal over HDMI 1.4a?

The projector would have to have Dual Link DVI input (it seems they all still use VGA when they do have computer input, which is a big WTF to me), display port input, or a higher / newer HDMI standard such as those found on the 2k and 4k resolution projectors.

Saying that a DLP refreshes at 2500 Hz due to how the colorwheel works is very misleading. Using that form of math, you could take the 480 Hz panels on the Epson, say that since each color is refreshing at that rate, that it's really 1440 Hz, and be just as accurate, which isn't accurate at all. With DLP they are trying to rotate faster to reduce rainbow effect in the displays and projectors, not to add more frames, and the chips themselves still operate at 60Hz. With LCD, they are trying to reduce blur by having them run faster, though they still only accept 60Hz signals typically. You can use frame interpolation to add more than 60 frames, but there isn't content you can display with more than 60 frames per second.

Don't get caught up in "DLP has more frames due to the color wheel" or "LCD has more frames due to the panels".

Chris Heinonen
Senior Editor, Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity, www.hometheaterhifi.com
Displays Editor, AnandTech.com
Contributor, HDGuru.com and Wirecutter.com
ISF Level II Certified Calibrator, ReferenceHomeTheater.com
Smackrabbit is offline  
post #634 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 01:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kirnak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbaseuser View Post

VERY true...my 6500 UB is this way. Do you know if the 8700 and above (those with "THX Certification") behave this way? It seems like THX wouldn't certify a projector who's color points weren't linear, or at least very close to linear.

I have the 8700UB and yes, it acts this way. That said, calibrating at the 75% saturation point yeilds a gorgeous picture. The 100% saturations may be over just a tad, but probably closer than a un-calibrated PJ is regardless.

I've calibrated a few friends PJs of different brands, and they all benefitted from the 75% calibration. I've not calibrated any DLP PJs, so I can't speak to those. But I will say that anyone with a LCD--and possibly DLP--PJ that hasn't had a 75% calibration is missing out on a rather large improvement in PQ, IMHO. Even my wife, who is not even close to a videophile, sees a huge difference.

In some modes, a 100% saturation calibration yields horrible results. In Dynamic and Living Room on the 8700UB the saturations are curved. In other words, not only is saturation off at 75% and below, Hue is way off as well. Calibrating at 75% gets all saturations much closer on hue as well as saturation.
Kirnak is offline  
post #635 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 02:22 PM
Senior Member
 
stansell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Englewood CO
Posts: 305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm thinking of replacing my Sony VPL HS-10 with this based on Art's review. So, I'm guessing black levels will still seem like a remarkable improvement to me going from 700:1 to 40,000 : 1 . Amazing how much technology has improved since I bought that Sony in 2003.
stansell is offline  
post #636 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 02:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 102
ack_bk is offline  
post #637 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 02:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kirnak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoey67 View Post

I've said it before and I'll say it again...the 8700 and 5010 is a sucker buy. Which doesn't surprise me one bit and is prob why it's being discontinued. Why would someone pay 2k...when for half price 1k the 8350 can be had for at least 90% of the 8700 PQ. Sure for most folks here on avs you'll be able to see the slight improvements but for the general audience they couldn't tell them apart.

It all depends on what you need. The 8700 is not really twice the price of the 8350, more like $700 more and you get a free lamp. That brings the difference down to $400. For that you get much better blacks, CFI, and far superior video processing. The first gets you a better picture in a theater, the second two make a pretty big difference when watching sports, the last makes a nice improvement when watching any cable HD--or any SD--source. Having owned both, I'll say that the 8700 is definitely worth the price difference. IMHO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreasMergner View Post

I would love for the 3010 to be better than the 8700. It will make my decision easier....but then why would you buy the 5010? It would have to be MUCH better in some way for anyone to buy it unless lens shift minus two 3D glasses is worth $1400 to you.

According to the french review of the 5010, it's got some pretty major improvements over the 8700 and the 3010:

1. There is an external filter you can use that will improve the color of the Dynamic and Living room modes to the point where they can be calibrated close to THX mode, except with 1600 lumens. That level of power in a PJ in this price class is unprecedented. If that holds true, you're talking triple the output of the 8700 and still retaining THX class color. This is a game changer. Large, dark gray screens will be doable. This means vastly improved ambient light performance and black levels in truly huge screens. Not a huge difference in a 100" screen, but a world of difference in 130" screens and larger.

2. Motion is said to be handled better and CFI when used is said to be better.

3. Motorized pixel alignment. If this works, it should eliminate any advantage the DLP PJs have in sharpness. 100" screens and larger should see an improvement, and 130" screens and up should see a very nice improvement.

If the preceding three features hold up to review, I see the 5010 being well worth the asking price. I can't wait to see full reviews on this, and I am really hoping that somebody posts a cie diagram af a post-calibrated 5010 in dynamic mode. If it really is all that, the 5010 should be the best 2D PJ you can buy for under $10,000. The question is, can they really deliver on these points while holding the line on everything else?
Kirnak is offline  
post #638 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 02:35 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
guitarman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Bay Area San Francisco.
Posts: 12,968
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by defiancecp View Post

Well, that depends on where you're looking for benefits The DLP chip refreshes for each segment of the color wheel, and the color wheel spins at the "x" speed for each frame. So, for a 6x speed color wheel with 7 segments (rgbrgbw) like the optoma has, that's 6 rotations of the color wheel per 60hz frame (since 60hz is what the 6x refers to), or 42 refreshes of the chip per frame, so just over 2500 refreshes of the chip per second.

Since what we're talking about here is speed and related smoothness, this is completely irrelevant; both projectors refresh the same frame over and over. However, motion smoothing/frame interpolation could make a difference, but it's not in any way tied to the refresh rate - most frame interpolation works at 120hz, so as long as the screen refreshes that often that's all you need. Having said that, apparently the optoma has it and the epson does not, so that's advantage optoma, but not because of the faster speed, just because it has this feature anad the epson doesn't.

Having said that, the display refresh rate *does* matter is in 3d specs- the image shifts from left to right and one image must be allowed to completely clear from the old screen for an LCD, which they do by using one blank frame. The faster the LCD refresh, the less light loss due to blank frame. So screen refresh speed matters to 3d brightness, though these would seem to be completely unrelated specs until you dig deeper DLP doesn't have this limitation (and even if it did, a 2500hz blank frame would be pretty non-impactful - though theoretically they may have to blank a whole rotation of the wheel or color balance would be impacted, that's irrelevant since they don't have to blank anything And now I'm parenthetically rambling..... )

You have a typo lets not pump out bad information. The Optoma has a six segment wheel there's no 7th white segment.

Tom/guitarman
VideoDementia

Are you twisted also?
http://www.videodementia.com/sales/TomWithWires.jpg
guitarman is offline  
post #639 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 02:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 102
So the projectorcentral review makes is pretty clear that the Optoma is more stable for 3D (less cross-talk, better contrast).

But for folks that need a brighter projector the Epson may be preffered.
ack_bk is offline  
post #640 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 02:39 PM
Member
 
Matt in Houston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

Projectorcentral review posted:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/epso...tor_review.htm

Ouch....not so highly regarded in 3D as Art's review...
Matt in Houston is offline  
post #641 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 02:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt in Houston View Post

Ouch....not so highly regarded in 3D as Art's review...

No. And I tend to think that for 3D the Optoma would be the better choice. We know DLP handles 3D better and kudos to Optoma for using RF vs IR.

That said, the Optoma is lacking in lumens which really affects me as I often host football parties and have to deal with ambient light. I also have white ceilings and a large sceen (125") and have concerns that that the Optoma just cannot cut it.

Face it, there are major tradeoffs for either of these projectors, but that is why they are cheaper. Looks like you have to drop about double the price to get everything you want.
ack_bk is offline  
post #642 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 02:51 PM
Member
 
Matt in Houston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

No. And I tend to think that for 3D the Optoma would be the better choice. We know DLP handles 3D better and kudos to Optoma for using RF vs IR.

That said, the Optoma is lacking in lumens which really affects me as I often host football parties and have to deal with ambient light. I also have white ceilings and a large sceen (125") and have concerns that that the Optoma just cannot cut it.

Face it, there are major tradeoffs for either of these projectors, but that is why they are cheaper. Looks like you have to drop about double the price to get everything you want.

True, true...

But the review does say that with the glasses on (Which matters most anyway for 3D, who would watch it with them off?) that the Epson is only marginally brighter. I was hoping this would not be the case, as I was considering the Epson for a friend's home theater situation. Doesnt seem like its worth the trade off if its only marginal.

Also, I have a 120' screen and with some ambient light (not pointed directly at the screen) it is plenty bright. Im still not sure how their measurements for the HD33 are so far off from Guitarmans light meter. Anyway, I really dont think you would have to worry about either projector not being bright enough...but the Epson is brighter still. Again, is it worth the trade offs? Not for me.
Matt in Houston is offline  
post #643 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 03:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kirnak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt in Houston View Post

True, true...

But the review does say that with the glasses on (Which matters most anyway for 3D, who would watch it with them off?) that the Epson is only marginally brighter.

But they tested the Epson in ECO mode and the HD33 in Full Power: "We set the Home Cinema 3010 to Cinema mode with the lamp at its low power setting, while the HD33 was set to Cinema with the lamp at full power, putting the two projectors roughly 100 lumens apart--almost identical, as far as the human eye is concerned." Set the Epson to full power and there should be more of a difference. Plus, use a higher output mode like Living Room and there's a bigger difference again. You also need to consider that the higher output modes on the new Epsons are supposed to be better color than previous generations. You should be able to calibrate dynamic to a fairly good color output and have the brightness you need for 3D. They really didn't address that in the review.
Kirnak is offline  
post #644 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 03:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt in Houston View Post

True, true...

But the review does say that with the glasses on (Which matters most anyway for 3D, who would watch it with them off?) that the Epson is only marginally brighter. I was hoping this would not be the case, as I was considering the Epson for a friend's home theater situation. Doesnt seem like its worth the trade off if its only marginal.

Also, I have a 120' screen and with some ambient light (not pointed directly at the screen) it is plenty bright. Im still not sure how their measurements for the HD33 are so far off from Guitarmans light meter. Anyway, I really dont think you would have to worry about either projector not being bright enough...but the Epson is brighter still. Again, is it worth the trade offs? Not for me.

It depends on how much of your viewing is in 2D vs 3D. For me, I can't imagine more than 5% of my viewing being in 3D. 10% max. So the improved lumen output on the Epson during a ball game in the middle of the day with some ambient light is important and may be the difference maker. I need to see some more reviews and head to head comparisons. And then there is the more expensive upcoming Mitsubishi 7800 and BenQ 7000 which may be exactly what I am looking for, although they will cost more.
ack_bk is offline  
post #645 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 03:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirnak View Post

But they tested the Epson in ECO mode and the HD33 in Full Power: "We set the Home Cinema 3010 to Cinema mode with the lamp at its low power setting, while the HD33 was set to Cinema with the lamp at full power, putting the two projectors roughly 100 lumens apart--almost identical, as far as the human eye is concerned." Set the Epson to full power and there should be more of a difference.

Yes, and the Epson will have a much longer bulb life.

And of course there is the question of customer service. And I have seen first hand how piss poor Optoma's customer service is... So something to consider. If you want better customer service from Optoma that means stepping up to the 3300, and you still don't have glasses included. That means the Optoma costs hundreds more than the Epson.
ack_bk is offline  
post #646 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 03:11 PM
Member
 
vullcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smackrabbit View Post

Saying that a DLP refreshes at 2500 Hz due to how the colorwheel works is very misleading. Using that form of math, you could take the 480 Hz panels on the Epson, say that since each color is refreshing at that rate, that it's really 1440 Hz, and be just as accurate, which isn't accurate at all. With DLP they are trying to rotate faster to reduce rainbow effect in the displays and projectors, not to add more frames, and the chips themselves still operate at 60Hz. With LCD, they are trying to reduce blur by having them run faster, though they still only accept 60Hz signals typically. You can use frame interpolation to add more than 60 frames, but there isn't content you can display with more than 60 frames per second.

Don't get caught up in "DLP has more frames due to the color wheel" or "LCD has more frames due to the panels".

Thank you very much for the added clairification.

I wasnt thinking about film content, the 240hz+ "feature" orignially peaked my interest because I recently got a true 120hz computer monitor and it has been a game changer in certain video game titles I play, the added smoothness of rendering frames above 60 FPS (@60hz like most LCD monitors) was enough for me to purchase the $700 120hz samsung 1080p monitor, who's picture quality isnt much better than a $200 variant.

With that in mind, when switch over and game on the Epson 8350 (which is a projector with very little input lag to begin with), I now notice the slight lag & input delay when rendering at 60hz even more, and was hoping to step up to a projector that would allow me to input a 1080p signal @ 120hz.

I guess now that I realize all these projectors can still only accept 60hz, I am looking at a toss up between the Epson 5010, Mits HC7800 and BenQ W7000. I love Epson's customer service, I'll tell you that.

I've never had a DLP projector before but I am willing to give it a try. I really want better blacks so I can make out fine detail in dark scenes, sharpness (to read text in video games crisp and clear) and colors that pop. I do have a 120" grey screen with a white ceiling, and while I mostly watch movies at night sometimes I like to play games during the day so high lumens is a big plus. With the 8350 I have to run it (calibrated) in living room / dynamic mode @ ~12 foot throw. I love how the colors look in cinema mode but its just far too dark. I am hoping that by throwing nearly $3000 at the "problem" I can have the best of both worlds?
vullcan is offline  
post #647 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 03:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
defiancecp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 880
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
So the projectorcentral review references 'significant crosstalk'. I do wish they'd bother to give some actual detail :/

Oh well, I'll get some pics detailing crosstalk vs my old optoma when it gets here.
defiancecp is offline  
post #648 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 03:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
defiancecp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 880
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

No. And I tend to think that for 3D the Optoma would be the better choice. We know DLP handles 3D better and kudos to Optoma for using RF vs IR.

Quick clarification: The same RF glasses are compatible with the Epson as well if you get the emitter ($79). They're actually designed and manufactured by bitcauldron, and are compatible with a wide array of 3d devices (anything with a 3-pin vesa plug, anything with an IR emitter). They're sold by curt palme, monster, and now optoma. Probably a few other names as well.
defiancecp is offline  
post #649 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 03:59 PM
Member
 
dave1969's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by projectorcentral View Post

What this means is that the Home Cinema 3010 is preferable any time you have a very large screen or a lot of ambient light, while dark rooms and smaller screen sizes will benefit more from the HD33's more moderate output.

wow not what i was hoping for. Seems like its too bright for a dedicated room. I could use an ND filter. dont know much about them and the degrees of filtering
dave1969 is offline  
post #650 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 04:40 PM
Member
 
ElVasco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ugh I guess I have another newbie question. It says I have to keep the lens in the center of the screen? So if I don't want to use a keystone, which degrades the quality and I want to ceiling mount, what do I do? Do I get a super long metal tube "extender" so it drops half way down my wall? I know I can "tilt" the mount x amount of degrees so that the lens is aimed at the center of the screen, but won't I degrade quality then too? Some days I wonder if I should have stayed out of projectors as it requires a Ph.d in electronics and I used to think I was pretty good with electronics...
ElVasco is offline  
post #651 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 04:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mikes2cents's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
All I can do is LOL here. I could have predicted the outcome of these reviews based on specs. I believe I did. And both sites said, or did not say what I expected based on reading lots of reviews on each one. I suppose the 64k question is just how much worse is the crosstalk?
Mikes2cents is offline  
post #652 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 05:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
defiancecp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 880
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikes2cents View Post

All I can do is LOL here. I could have predicted the outcome of these reviews based on specs. I believe I did. And both sites said, or did not say what I expected based on reading lots of reviews on each one. I suppose the 64k question is just how much worse is the crosstalk?

EXACTLY! That's why I'm really disappointed that neither of them has side-by-side pics of crosstalk severity, or some means of quantifying it, or *something*.
defiancecp is offline  
post #653 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 05:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
defiancecp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 880
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElVasco View Post

Ugh I guess I have another newbie question. It says I have to keep the lens in the center of the screen? So if I don't want to use a keystone, which degrades the quality and I want to ceiling mount, what do I do? Do I get a super long metal tube "extender" so it drops half way down my wall? I know I can "tilt" the mount x amount of degrees so that the lens is aimed at the center of the screen, but won't I degrade quality then too? Some days I wonder if I should have stayed out of projectors as it requires a Ph.d in electronics and I used to think I was pretty good with electronics...

Center of the screen horizontally, top of screen vertically. Tilting will cause the image to keystone. You can correct it with keystone correction (which will degrade quality) or by tilting the screen as well (I would not recommend this for more than about 5*... though I'm personally doing it 8*

Better would be to mount it at the top edge of the screen.
defiancecp is offline  
post #654 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 05:05 PM
Member
 
ElVasco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Defiance, I could kiss you. Grazie!
ElVasco is offline  
post #655 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 05:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kirnak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave1969 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by projectorcentral View Post

What this means is that the Home Cinema 3010 is preferable any time you have a very large screen or a lot of ambient light, while dark rooms and smaller screen sizes will benefit more from the HD33's more moderate output.

wow not what i was hoping for. Seems like its too bright for a dedicated room. I could use an ND filter. dont know much about them and the degrees of filtering

I'm going to respectfully disagree with the review here and say not to worry. Even with a small 102" screen you're looking at around 24 or 25 ftL with a .8 gain screen in eco mode. That's going to be damn near awesome with ambient light. In a dark dedicated theater room, just turn down the contrast to achieve 16 ftL. This leaves you plenty of room to turn up the contrast as the bulb ages/dims. With a small screen like this that means you'll actually get to use the bulb for it's whole life, as opposed to replacing it when it starts to dim. If you start out needing all the lumens a PJ puts out, you'll be replacing the bulb fairly quickly, as the bulb will start a slow dimming process almost immediately.

Extra lumens will allow you to go darker with your screen, which will make for a better picture. Even in a dark theater room, light from the screen itself is reflected back at the screen. A darker screen will be less affected by this, improving your picture. With any ambient light, a darker screen will be vastly superior to a light gray or white screen.

If you already have an expensive 1.3 gain or higher screen--that you don't want to replace-- that's 100" or smaller, then you might need a ND filter with the Epson. If you haven't bought your screen yet, then no big deal; get a .8 gain screen or get a large screen. If you use one of the excellent DIY paints on this or other forums, just repaint with a darker gray.
Kirnak is offline  
post #656 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 06:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mikes2cents's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by defiancecp View Post

EXACTLY! That's why I'm really disappointed that neither of them has side-by-side pics of crosstalk severity, or some means of quantifying it, or *something*.

This quote tells me most of what I wanted to see:

"3D image quality. The Optoma HD33's 3D picture is more stable and more refined than that of the Home Cinema 3010, with significantly less crosstalk and flicker. This makes the HD33 easier to watch over a long period of time. Though the 3010 is the brighter of the two projectors, 3D glasses make it look only a little brighter than the HD33 in 3D despite the sizable difference in 2D brightness. The HD33 has markedly higher contrast in 3D, which gives the picture greater depth."

Kudos to PJC for having the nards to say it. The other review either did not have the same experience I was expecting, or glossed over it. You decide. I am actually disappointed because I wanted Epson to nail this. I do recall posting that I did not expect the 3010 to match the 8350 in CR or black levels. Guess I need to reevaluate my plans and what I want to do with my 8350.
Mikes2cents is offline  
post #657 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 06:14 PM
Member
 
Matt in Houston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 140
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirnak View Post

But they tested the Epson in ECO mode and the HD33 in Full Power: "We set the Home Cinema 3010 to Cinema mode with the lamp at its low power setting, while the HD33 was set to Cinema with the lamp at full power, putting the two projectors roughly 100 lumens apart--almost identical, as far as the human eye is concerned." Set the Epson to full power and there should be more of a difference. Plus, use a higher output mode like Living Room and there's a bigger difference again. You also need to consider that the higher output modes on the new Epsons are supposed to be better color than previous generations. You should be able to calibrate dynamic to a fairly good color output and have the brightness you need for 3D. They really didn't address that in the review.

You just quoted them from their "Contrast" sub heading in the HD33 shootout section. I was specifically talking about the 3D brightness. Here is their quote regarding that:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProjectorCentral View Post

Though the 3010 is the brighter of the two projectors, 3D glasses make it look only a little brighter than the HD33 in 3D despite the sizable difference in 2D brightness. The HD33 has markedly higher contrast in 3D, which gives the picture greater depth.

I dont know what 3D mode setting the Epson was in when they made that quote...we can only assume.
Matt in Houston is offline  
post #658 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 06:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
defiancecp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 880
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikes2cents View Post

This quote tells me most of what I wanted to see:

"3D image quality. The Optoma HD33's 3D picture is more stable and more refined than that of the Home Cinema 3010, with significantly less crosstalk and flicker. This makes the HD33 easier to watch over a long period of time. Though the 3010 is the brighter of the two projectors, 3D glasses make it look only a little brighter than the HD33 in 3D despite the sizable difference in 2D brightness. The HD33 has markedly higher contrast in 3D, which gives the picture greater depth."

Kudos to PJC for having the nards to say it. The other review either did not have the same experience I was expecting, or glossed over it. You decide. I am actually disappointed because I wanted Epson to nail this. I do recall posting that I did not expect the 3010 to match the 8350 in CR or black levels. Guess I need to reevaluate my plans and what I want to do with my 8350.

Maybe... but the flicker/crosstalk thing is confusing to me. First, I've yet to see any modern (120hz refreshing) active 3d display with any sort of visible "flicker", so I have to have a bit of doubt about what they're talking about. And crosstalk, as I've said before they all have it, and honestly I expected the optoma to have less. but how much more is the epson? Give some examples - or better yet pictures - of the crosstalk in specific scenes. Quantify, give examples, SOMETHING... just a brief comparative mention like that doesn't really say much of anything. And the flicker thing - that sounds really bad, so why is this barely mentioned??
defiancecp is offline  
post #659 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 06:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
Kirnak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt in Houston View Post

You just quoted them from their "Contrast" sub heading in the HD33 shootout section. I was specifically talking about the 3D brightness. Here is their quote regarding that:...

I dont know what 3D mode setting the Epson was in when they made that quote...we can only assume.

Since it's the only place the review mentioned the settings when they compared the PJs, i felt it was safe to assume those were the settings for the comparison. Also, it makes sense considering other reviews. What Art said in his HD33 review, before the 3010 was even announced: The Optoma HD33 definitely earns its Hot Product award.... Oh, it easily could use another 40-60% more lumens, Art liked the PJ, a lot, but thought it could use more output. His 3010 review states: We've mentioned the Optoma HD33, as the other, similarly priced 2D/3D home projector. It too is a bright projector, but no match for the Epson Home Cinema 3010. The image below shows the Optoma on the left, Epson on the right. It's a huge difference in brightness. Of course glasses, and processing also affects 3D brightness, but there is no contest at all, the Epson is dramatically brighter in 3D. Considering the information at hand, it seems likely that my assumption is valid.
Kirnak is offline  
post #660 of 2311 Old 10-19-2011, 06:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave1969 View Post


wow not what i was hoping for. Seems like its too bright for a dedicated room. I could use an ND filter. dont know much about them and the degrees of filtering

Sorry, but that is just not true. The Epson has plenty of adjustment options. More lumens, especially for 3D, is a good thing.
ack_bk is offline  
Reply Digital Projectors - Under $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