New Epson 3D projectors! 3010, 5010, 6010 - Page 4 - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > Display Devices > Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP > New Epson 3D projectors! 3010, 5010, 6010

Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

dbshelton's Avatar dbshelton
08:53 AM Liked: 10
post #91 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 160
Joined: Jan 2011
Did I read the 3010 manual correctly that the offset for a 120" screen is 0" ? I guess the center of the lens should be placed even with the bottom or the top edge of the screen??
evnow's Avatar evnow
08:55 AM Liked: 12
post #92 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 459
Joined: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbshelton View Post

Did I read the 3010 manual correctly that the offset for a 120" screen is 0" ? I guess the center of the lens should be placed even with the bottom or the top edge of the screen??

Yes. 3010 has zero offset (actually a slight negative offset of 0.3" for a 150" screen). This makes it easier to install than HD33.
dbshelton's Avatar dbshelton
09:03 AM Liked: 10
post #93 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 160
Joined: Jan 2011
I can easily make this work in my living room, whereas the HD33 would need keystone to work. Guess I'll see what the reviewers tell.
ClemsonKev's Avatar ClemsonKev
09:03 AM Liked: 11
post #94 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 255
Joined: Feb 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by batutta View Post

Here's the manual for the 3010--

http://files.support.epson.com/pdf/p...plhc3010ug.pdf

What?!?! Page 12 shows placement off to the side on a side table similiar to my needs! Didn't think this thing had LENS SHIFT?!


dbshelton's Avatar dbshelton
09:08 AM Liked: 10
post #95 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 160
Joined: Jan 2011
It is confusing, but nowhere else in the manual has anything about lens shift. This is probably a preliminary manual, with changes coming.
ClemsonKev's Avatar ClemsonKev
09:29 AM Liked: 11
post #96 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 255
Joined: Feb 2006
Hey, but with that offset of 0 for my 106" screen, maybe I could sit it on the coffee table (see photo above). Would be a throw distance of about 10.6 to 11' I believe.... what do y'all think?
kaotikr1's Avatar kaotikr1
09:39 AM Liked: 42
post #97 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 874
Joined: Oct 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedavej View Post


Is this typical of projectors, claiming a price of $3k, then when it actually hits the streets it has a lower price? I would wait for the 5010 if it were around $2k, but at $3k its a little too high. Might end up going with the 8350.

Yes. MSRP is 3000, but Map should be lower. At least that's what I've seen with the Epsons before.
threed123's Avatar threed123
10:06 AM Liked: 39
post #98 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 2,486
Joined: Oct 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemsonKev View Post

What?!?! Page 12 shows placement off to the side on a side table similiar to my needs! Didn't think this thing had LENS SHIFT?!

In the pages following it talks about horizontal and vertical keystone adjust up to 30 degrees--so no lens shift, but a heck of a lot of keystone adjustment--Keystone adjust is never your friend though as you can't one-for-one pixel adjust then as the image gets scaled.
evnow's Avatar evnow
10:47 AM Liked: 12
post #99 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 459
Joined: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemsonKev View Post

Hey, but with that offset of 0 for my 106" screen, maybe I could sit it on the coffee table (see photo above). Would be a throw distance of about 10.6 to 11' I believe.... what do y'all think?

If you are going to put it on (or better still under) the table, an offset is actually better than no offset. How high is the bottom of the screen from the floor ?
batutta's Avatar batutta
11:20 AM Liked: 16
post #100 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 185
Joined: Sep 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by threed123 View Post

In the pages following it talks about horizontal and vertical keystone adjust up to 30 degrees--so no lens shift, but a heck of a lot of keystone adjustment--Keystone adjust is never your friend though as you can't one-for-one pixel adjust then as the image gets scaled.

What I'm confused about is why horizontal keystone has a slider, but vertical uses buttons. It almost looks like the horizontal keystone is done through lens shifting, but the vertical is digital scaling. Perhaps it has lens shifting but only along the horizontal axis.
ClemsonKev's Avatar ClemsonKev
11:38 AM Liked: 11
post #101 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 255
Joined: Feb 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by evnow View Post

If you are going to put it on (or better still under) the table, an offset is actually better than no offset. How high is the bottom of the screen from the floor ?

The coffee table is 17.5" tall. If I placed it on it (and not the side table, see picture above, as I had planned w/ a lens shifting PF) then the throw will only be about 10' or so. The side table would put throw around 13'3".

The bottom of the screen will be around 15" I'm guessing from the photos on Amazon of the Favi 106" screen (UPS tracking shows it being delivered today).

I would probably stick w/ a lens shifting PJ and stick it on the end table before I stuck a PJ under the coffee table. But the kids really were hoping for 3D. My PJ budget is <$1800.

Any suggestions?
threed123's Avatar threed123
11:46 AM Liked: 39
post #102 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 2,486
Joined: Oct 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by batutta View Post

What I'm confused about is why horizontal keystone has a slider, but vertical uses buttons. It almost looks like the horizontal keystone is done through lens shifting, but the vertical is digital scaling. Perhaps it has lens shifting but only along the horizontal axis.

Interesting theory, but does hold based on the use of a slider.
newfmp3's Avatar newfmp3
12:09 PM Liked: 141
post #103 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 4,044
Joined: Jan 2005
nice looking models, but once again....no black. Unless you wanna buy the overpriced one just because it's black.
rgathright's Avatar rgathright
12:15 PM Liked: 12
post #104 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 4,439
Joined: May 2000
Is the 6010 the only one that is black?
palpitatn's Avatar palpitatn
12:47 PM Liked: 10
post #105 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 100
Joined: Feb 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post


You're forgetting part of their target audience, people who buys their first projectors and people who can't have projector because of wiring issues.

For my living room, for example, I don't want to run cable for a projector, now with wiHD I can buy a projector.

One way the wirelessHD would be great is for those of us who already have 1 HDMI wired (but can't or don't want to bother running a second HDMI cable), can we connect our single HDMI cable to one input and then connect via wireless the second input from second source to utilize the split screen? That would be cool.
cheesetogo's Avatar cheesetogo
12:51 PM Liked: 10
post #106 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 50
Joined: Aug 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

You're forgetting part of their target audience, people who buys their first projectors and people who can't have projector because of wiring issues.

For my living room, for example, I don't want to run cable for a projector, now with wiHD I can buy a projector.

You're going to have to run a power cable still, and you can buy HDMI cables that are nearly flat. This is really a big feature for you?
evnow's Avatar evnow
12:54 PM Liked: 12
post #107 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 459
Joined: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemsonKev View Post

The coffee table is 17.5" tall. If I placed it on it (and not the side table, see picture above, as I had planned w/ a lens shifting PF) then the throw will only be about 10' or so. The side table would put throw around 13'3".

The bottom of the screen will be around 15" I'm guessing from the photos on Amazon of the Favi 106" screen (UPS tracking shows it being delivered today).

If the bottom of the screen will be 15" high, you would need to place 3010 about 10-12" above the floor. So, it would have to be below the table. Below the table is usually a better experience anyway, as the projector will be out of the way. This is what I've done in the past.

If you want a shorter throw - the new optoma 750E would be great - but it is 720p.
ClemsonKev's Avatar ClemsonKev
01:33 PM Liked: 11
post #108 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 255
Joined: Feb 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by evnow View Post

If the bottom of the screen will be 15" high, you would need to place 3010 about 10-12" above the floor. So, it would have to be below the table. Below the table is usually a better experience anyway, as the projector will be out of the way. This is what I've done in the past.

If you want a shorter throw - the new optoma 750E would be great - but it is 720p.

Thanks for the info! Looks like my 1080p choices are:
  • go 3d and stick the 3010 under my coffee table $1599
  • go 3d and stick the 5010 on the side table $2999
  • NO 3d and stick the 8350 on the side table $1100

720p not an option for me..... my older plasmas are 720p and I'm looking to upgrade size and quality (3d would be a bonus).
palpitatn's Avatar palpitatn
01:53 PM Liked: 10
post #109 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 100
Joined: Feb 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemsonKev View Post


Thanks for the info! Looks like my 1080p choices are:
[*]go 3d and stick the 3010 under my coffee table $1599[*]go 3d and stick the 5010 on the side table $2999[*]NO 3d and stick the 8350 on the side table $1100


720p not an option for me..... my older plasmas are 720p and I'm looking to upgrade size and quality (3d would be a bonus).

IMHO, if you can work the 3010 without lens shift and really causing issues having the PJ under the coffee table, the advantages of the 3010 are worth paying $500 more. The picture should be better than the 8350 and then you also get 3D. For me, lens shift is a must.

My choices are 8350, new 5010 for $3k (eek!), or get a used 8700. If the 5010 MSRp can be under $2500, it would be a no-brainer for me.
ClemsonKev's Avatar ClemsonKev
02:04 PM Liked: 11
post #110 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 255
Joined: Feb 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by palpitatn View Post

IMHO, if you can work the 3010 without lens shift and really causing issues having the PJ under the coffee table, the advantages of the 3010 are worth paying $500 more. The picture should be better than the 8350 and then you also get 3D. For me, lens shift is a must.

My choices are 8350, new 5010 for $3k (eek!), or get a used 8700. If the 5010 MSRp can be under $2500, it would be a no-brainer for me.

Yea, we are about in the same boat. What I am leaning towards (as football season is NOW underway): buy the 8350 this weekend, use it for a year or two. Then ebay it for what I can and buy the 5010 w/ lens shifting. The 5010 will probably be under $1900 by then and there will MUCH more 3d available than just certain movies and ESPN3D. (unless the format dies, I heard ATT U-Verse dropped ESPN3D recently.....).
mcnizzel's Avatar mcnizzel
02:07 PM Liked: 10
post #111 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 158
Joined: Nov 2010
If you compare the money you'll lose in depreciation on the 8350 in a couple years, to the added price of the 5010 now, you might not be as far away as you think. If you got the 5010 on sale that would help too, and the best part is you'd have the sooner! I have no patience when it comes to playing the waiting game obviously. haha
roknrol's Avatar roknrol
02:47 PM Liked: 20
post #112 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 332
Joined: Jun 2008
My observations (not actual experience mind you ... so correct me if you've witnessed otherwise) is that both Epson and JVC list for their respective MSRP prices, but the JVCs can be had for a 15-20% discount (with even greater savings for pre-orders), but the Epson PJs don't sell for much less than 5-10% off list (unless you count the factory rebate game Epson, thankfully, hasn't played for awhile).

So with that information, I would speculate the new JVC RS45 could potentially be had for less than the 5010. IMO, that's moving Epson out of their market (best performance for the best value segment). And at $4k-$5k for their non-3D, quasi-LCoS machines, I'm not sure how they're going to find a receptive market for those PJs.
roknrol's Avatar roknrol
02:53 PM Liked: 20
post #113 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 332
Joined: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgathright View Post

Is the 6010 the only one that is black?

For the newly announced machines, yes, the 6010 is the only all black model. However, I believe the 31000 and 61000 are both "Pro" models and therefore black in case color. At least they were last year (I haven't seen recent photos from this year's CEDIA).
ClemsonKev's Avatar ClemsonKev
03:07 PM Liked: 11
post #114 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 255
Joined: Feb 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnizzel View Post

If you compare the money you'll lose in depreciation on the 8350 in a couple years, to the added price of the 5010 now, you might not be as far away as you think. If you got the 5010 on sale that would help too, and the best part is you'd have the sooner! I have no patience when it comes to playing the waiting game obviously. haha

Yes, I have considered that. But I too have no patience when it comes to playing the waiting game.... football=now, 8350=now, 3010=October, 5010=November.

I was being a little patient (for CEDIA announcements), but with no lens shift love from the 3010 in my price range, I may just have to pull the 8350 trigger.
palpitatn's Avatar palpitatn
04:58 PM Liked: 10
post #115 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 100
Joined: Feb 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by roknrol View Post

My observations (not actual experience mind you ... so correct me if you've witnessed otherwise) is that both Epson and JVC list for their respective MSRP prices, but the JVCs can be had for a 15-20% discount (with even greater savings for pre-orders), but the Epson PJs don't sell for much less than 5-10% off list (unless you count the factory rebate game Epson, thankfully, hasn't played for awhile).

So with that information, I would speculate the new JVC RS45 could potentially be had for less than the 5010. IMO, that's moving Epson out of their market (best performance for the best value segment). And at $4k-$5k for their non-3D, quasi-LCoS machines, I'm not sure how they're going to find a receptive market for those PJs.

I agree with you. I was told Epson historically has been a stickler at allowing significant discounting of their PJ's. If anyone knows differently, let us know. In also looked at the JVC route. I'm disappointed in the lack of significant changes with the RS45, especially the lamp!
psg's Avatar psg
06:16 PM Liked: 11
post #116 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 299
Joined: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClemsonKev View Post

What?!?! Page 12 shows placement off to the side on a side table similiar to my needs! Didn't think this thing had LENS SHIFT?!

In photos posted a couple of days ago you can clearly see the lens adjusters on the 5010 and 6010 and the fact that they are NOT there on the 3010.

C'est la vie...
DaGamePimp's Avatar DaGamePimp
06:33 PM Liked: 169
post #117 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 15,593
Joined: Jan 2001
Wow, 0 offset is going to be a deal breaker for many people with the 3xxx.

Jason
TrickMcKaha's Avatar TrickMcKaha
06:42 PM Liked: 13
post #118 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 1,018
Joined: Jun 2004
For sure, but I've been considering it nonetheless for use with a high power screen, and if one cannot have lens shift, then zero offset can be the next best alternative.
mcnizzel's Avatar mcnizzel
07:29 PM Liked: 10
post #119 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 158
Joined: Nov 2010
it does show the projector placed in a room diagram off to the side, but it specifically references keystone as the method for adjusting the image, not any sort of lens shift.
evnow's Avatar evnow
07:35 PM Liked: 12
post #120 of 2311
09-09-2011 | Posts: 459
Joined: Aug 2011
For me, 0 offset is slightly better than the 9" offset of HD33. But noway I'd prefer an LCD without lens shift than a DLP - given the cross-talk free 3D. I also do quite a bit of surfing on the PC (even coding) using the projector. DLP would be much better for that.

If 3010 had lens shift it would have been a tough choice.

Reply Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3