SONY VPL-HW40ES : New SONY SXRD 1080P home theater projector - Page 3 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews

AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews > Display Devices > Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP > SONY VPL-HW40ES : New SONY SXRD 1080P home theater projector

Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

Stereodude's Avatar Stereodude
05:10 PM Liked: 698
post #61 of 2290
05-05-2014 | Posts: 10,249
Joined: Jan 2002
It can't possibly hit those contrast numbers unless it has a dynamic iris. Does it? All the information at the start of the thread says no.
timescape7's Avatar timescape7
05:09 AM Liked: 10
post #62 of 2290
05-06-2014 | Posts: 49
Joined: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post

It's up at Sony USA:

http://store.sony.com/economical-full-hd-home-theater-es-projector-with-reality-creation-3d-zid27-VPLHW40ES/cat-27-catid-All-Home-Theater-Projectors?_t=pfm%3Dcategory

A little bit confusing the contrast specifications, 100000:1 or 120000:1?

Extra lamp coupon included but no 3D glasses.

It's probably error entry. In other parts of the world, no mentioned of CR numbers.
Stereodude's Avatar Stereodude
09:18 AM Liked: 698
post #63 of 2290
05-06-2014 | Posts: 10,249
Joined: Jan 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by timescape7 View Post

It's probably error entry. In other parts of the world, no mentioned of CR numbers.
The listing seems to just be a copy and paste of the HW55ES, so that probably explains the dynamic contrast numbers.
Craig Peer's Avatar Craig Peer
11:30 AM Liked: 400
post #64 of 2290
05-06-2014 | Posts: 5,811
Joined: Aug 2003
AV Science has a new Sony HW40ES in stock, just FYI. smile.gif
enricoclaudio's Avatar enricoclaudio
11:38 AM Liked: 181
post #65 of 2290
05-06-2014 | Posts: 1,227
Joined: Aug 2005
I'm waiting for reviews to take a decision but the HW40 looks killer. Iris is not a deal breaker for me because I always turn it off.
Niagara's Avatar Niagara
01:55 PM Liked: 10
post #66 of 2290
05-07-2014 | Posts: 30
Joined: Jun 2004
This machine looks sweet. I was ready to pull the trigger on the Epson 5030 but I'm really intrigued by this.

I'm in construction stage now of a totally dark man-cave. I think a low-gain screen would compensate for the lack of dynamic iris.

I like the 21 db quietness too, my seating will be directly below the PJ.
Niagara's Avatar Niagara
08:02 PM Liked: 10
post #67 of 2290
05-10-2014 | Posts: 30
Joined: Jun 2004
I don't live very far from Hamilton On, so I had the opportunity to stop by Eastporters today. I'd like to say firstly I was very impressed with the place. Dave was friendly and quite knowledgeable. I'll be buying from them soon.

I was able to see a demo of 3 PJs:

-the Sony HW55ES (they don't have a 40 yet)
-the Epson 5030
-the JVC X35

The room was totally dark using a 1.0 gain screen, I forget which make. Demo disk was Avatar, the opening sequence where the ship is drifting through space with the black space background.

I could not see any noticeable difference between the Epson and the Sony. Therefore I have dropped the Sony HW40 from my list. If the 55 isn't any better than the Epson, the 40 which lacks the DI must be a step down.
Picture quality and blacks seemed equal on both machines.

Now, here's where it gets interesting. Dave then demoed the JVC X35. I was blown away. The blacks were extremely deep and the colours were stunning. The backdrop of stars against deep space was nothing short of amazing. The colour scenes, like the blue interior of the spacecraft "popped" right out of the screen.

(Am I allowed to talk price??? I apologize if not) The JVC is about $600 more than the Epson but includes a spare lamp. But the Epson includes 2 sets of glasses.

So I am strongly considering the JVC even though it's a bit outside my budget. The LCOS technology seemed to me more vivid than the Epson LCD plus I like the idea of a sealed light engine so no dust blobs. And better build quality. Dave said they get a lot of returns and service headaches on the Epson.

So much to think about...
Stusok's Avatar Stusok
06:11 AM Liked: 10
post #68 of 2290
05-11-2014 | Posts: 8
Joined: Mar 2012


Its here!!
Stusok's Avatar Stusok
06:22 AM Liked: 10
post #69 of 2290
05-11-2014 | Posts: 8
Joined: Mar 2012
Great store!! The first time I was able to see all projectors together and see all the comparison other than trusting reviews. I highly recommend any one in area to stop in!
lordmetroid's Avatar lordmetroid
03:05 PM Liked: 11
post #70 of 2290
05-11-2014 | Posts: 37
Joined: Oct 2005
I want a quiet as possible projector, is this the best option? Or is their an even quieter projector?
Pecker's Avatar Pecker
07:39 AM Liked: 27
post #71 of 2290
05-12-2014 | Posts: 1,223
Joined: Nov 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niagara View Post

I don't live very far from Hamilton On, so I had the opportunity to stop by Eastporters today. I'd like to say firstly I was very impressed with the place. Dave was friendly and quite knowledgeable. I'll be buying from them soon.

I was able to see a demo of 3 PJs:

-the Sony HW55ES (they don't have a 40 yet)
-the Epson 5030
-the JVC X35

The room was totally dark using a 1.0 gain screen, I forget which make. Demo disk was Avatar, the opening sequence where the ship is drifting through space with the black space background.

I could not see any noticeable difference between the Epson and the Sony. Therefore I have dropped the Sony HW40 from my list. If the 55 isn't any better than the Epson, the 40 which lacks the DI must be a step down.
Picture quality and blacks seemed equal on both machines.

Now, here's where it gets interesting. Dave then demoed the JVC X35. I was blown away. The blacks were extremely deep and the colours were stunning. The backdrop of stars against deep space was nothing short of amazing. The colour scenes, like the blue interior of the spacecraft "popped" right out of the screen.

(Am I allowed to talk price??? I apologize if not) The JVC is about $600 more than the Epson but includes a spare lamp. But the Epson includes 2 sets of glasses.

So I am strongly considering the JVC even though it's a bit outside my budget. The LCOS technology seemed to me more vivid than the Epson LCD plus I like the idea of a sealed light engine so no dust blobs. And better build quality. Dave said they get a lot of returns and service headaches on the Epson.

So much to think about...

What size screen was the demo?

Were they using the manual iris at all on the 55?

Steve W
enricoclaudio's Avatar enricoclaudio
10:03 PM Liked: 181
post #72 of 2290
05-12-2014 | Posts: 1,227
Joined: Aug 2005
http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreymorrison/2014/05/12/sony-vpl-hw40es-review/

Not a professional review but at least something to read until we get serious reviews.
kraine's Avatar kraine
05:14 AM Liked: 80
post #73 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 1,400
Joined: Dec 2001
And soon there will be a french review online wink.gif


Niagara's Avatar Niagara
06:45 AM Liked: 10
post #74 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 30
Joined: Jun 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pecker View Post

What size screen was the demo?

Were they using the manual iris at all on the 55?

Steve W

Hi Steve. I forget the exact screen size but it was about 115" diag give or take. He didn't touch the iris at all on the Sony.

I agree 100% with the review in Enrico's link (the Forbes article review). The Epson and Sony both looked excellent, roughly equal in contrast/blacks and picture quality. But the JVC was head and shoulders better than both in deep blacks. All 3 are great machines I don't think you can go wrong with either. That article is spot on.

My last PJ was bought 10 years ago, the Sanyo Z2. I'm tired of murky greys. For that reason I'm leaning on the JVC for my cave. A little pricy but includes a spare lamp.

So I guess that puts me in the wrong thread. I'll bow out.
enricoclaudio's Avatar enricoclaudio
07:20 AM Liked: 181
post #75 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 1,227
Joined: Aug 2005
The HW40ES includes a spare lamp too.
Pecker's Avatar Pecker
07:35 AM Liked: 27
post #76 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 1,223
Joined: Nov 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niagara View Post

Hi Steve. I forget the exact screen size but it was about 115" diag give or take. He didn't touch the iris at all on the Sony.

I agree 100% with the review in Enrico's link (the Forbes article review). The Epson and Sony both looked excellent, roughly equal in contrast/blacks and picture quality. But the JVC was head and shoulders better than both in deep blacks. All 3 are great machines I don't think you can go wrong with either. That article is spot on.

My last PJ was bought 10 years ago, the Sanyo Z2. I'm tired of murky greys. For that reason I'm leaning on the JVC for my cave. A little pricy but includes a spare lamp.

So I guess that puts me in the wrong thread. I'll bow out.

No, that's okay. All views welcome.

What I'm thinking is this - the Sonys are known for being brighter than the JVCs, but the JVCs for having blacker blacks.

With the manual iris closed down c/w low lamp mode, or on a larger screen, the Sony's blacks may look better and there'll be less of a difference. If you have a large screen the JVC might not be bright enough. The JVCs give out virtually zero light for black, so increasing screen size won't improve things for them, whilst they will for the Sony.

What I've heard is that the Sony's blacks aren't as good as the JVC, but that they're not a million miles away. I've also heard good things about the automatic iris, though I know they're not everyone's cup of poison. Finally, they're generally accepted as being better at handling motion than the JVCs.

I'm considering a Sony. I'm coming from DLP, and was hoping for good things from the Optoma HD91, but it looks just a little dim for my screen. As a DLP fan I'm used to blacks not being 'inky', so that's perhaps less of a problem with the Sony for me. I am, however, not a big fan of LCD-based projectors' motion handling, so improvements here in the Sonys (over the Epsons and JVCs) is a big benefit.

Will I be persuaded to 'go over to the (not quite so) dark side', and buy a Sony? Will the 55 be worth the extra over the 40? Dunno, I'm going to demo soon.

Your comments are more than welcome.

Steve W
Niagara's Avatar Niagara
07:46 AM Liked: 10
post #77 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 30
Joined: Jun 2004
Good comments Steve. The salesman seemed to be biased towards selling the JVC. He did seem to downplay the Sony.

Good point about the iris, if it was closed down it might narrow the difference.

I have a totally black cave. It's an addition to our house - a full basement with no windows. My screen will be 115" diag so I think the brightness will be fine no matter which I choose.
enricoclaudio's Avatar enricoclaudio
08:27 AM Liked: 181
post #78 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 1,227
Joined: Aug 2005
Animate movies are not the best choice when demo projectors, including Avatar. Avatar looks great on almost every projector even in my old Sony VPL-VW40 from 2008. But if I'm a sales man then Avatar would be my first choice if I want to impress a customer looking for a projector. BTW I'm not questioning the fact that JVC has better blacks, that's something that everybody here knows wink.gif If I have a basement the JVC would be my top choice if not the only one.
GeoffreyMorrison's Avatar GeoffreyMorrison
12:54 PM Liked: 24
post #79 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 94
Joined: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post

http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreymorrison/2014/05/12/sony-vpl-hw40es-review/

Not a professional review but at least something to read until we get serious reviews.

LOL "Not a professional review"
enricoclaudio's Avatar enricoclaudio
01:30 PM Liked: 181
post #80 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 1,227
Joined: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffreyMorrison View Post

LOL "Not a professional review"

My apologies for use the incorrect word. I wanted to say incomplete or " Not a full review" instead. But it was pleasant to read, though!!
GeoffreyMorrison's Avatar GeoffreyMorrison
01:41 PM Liked: 24
post #81 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 94
Joined: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post

My apologies for use the incorrect word. I wanted to say incomplete or " Not a full review" instead. But it was pleasant to read, though!!

So contrast ratio, light output, color temp, color space, input lag, and gamma measurements, plus side-by-side testing with the Epson 5030 and JVC X35 using an HDMI splitter is incomplete?

Thanks a lot. Sorry I didn't blabber on for 2,000 words about how the remote feels.
kaotikr1's Avatar kaotikr1
01:46 PM Liked: 42
post #82 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 879
Joined: Oct 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffreyMorrison View Post

So contrast ratio, light output, color temp, color space, input lag, and gamma measurements, plus side-by-side testing with the Epson 5030 and JVC X35 using an HDMI splitter is incomplete?

Thanks a lot. Sorry I didn't blabber on for 2,000 words about how the remote feels.

I read the review and thought it was very good, but I didn't see anything about input lag so I went back through and even searched for "game" "input" "lag" and no hits came up...where am I missing that....?
GeoffreyMorrison's Avatar GeoffreyMorrison
01:57 PM Liked: 24
post #83 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 94
Joined: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaotikr1 View Post

I read the review and thought it was very good, but I didn't see anything about input lag so I went back through and even searched for "game" "input" "lag" and no hits came up...where am I missing that....?

Weird, thanks for the catch. Not sure how that happened. It's up there now.

One of the best I've measured, in terms of input lag.
enricoclaudio's Avatar enricoclaudio
02:02 PM Liked: 181
post #84 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 1,227
Joined: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffreyMorrison View Post

So contrast ratio, light output, color temp, color space, input lag, and gamma measurements, plus side-by-side testing with the Epson 5030 and JVC X35 using an HDMI splitter is incomplete?

Thanks a lot. Sorry I didn't blabber on for 2,000 words about how the remote feels.

What about screen size, screen gain, throw distance, room lighting conditions (living room, dedicate HT, totally light controlled room??), input lag, iris, reality creation, panel aliment, 3D performance...
enricoclaudio's Avatar enricoclaudio
02:09 PM Liked: 181
post #85 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 1,227
Joined: Aug 2005
Sorry I can see you add the input lag. WOW that's impressive. Can you tell us if it comes with dynamic iris? Sony does not say anything about this on specifications and the user manual is not available yet. Thanks!!!
GeoffreyMorrison's Avatar GeoffreyMorrison
02:12 PM Liked: 24
post #86 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 94
Joined: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post

What about screen size, screen gain, throw distance, room lighting conditions (living room, dedicate HT, totally light controlled room??), input lag, iris, reality creation, panel aliment, 3D performance...

The screen is mentioned (thanks for reading)

The room was dark because I'm not an idiot and this isn't my first rodeo.

There is no iris.

Input lag is mentioned.

I didn't get into Reality Creation, as it's the same as with other recent Sony PJs. I found on its lowest settings, it does increase the apparent detail a little. It's worth playing with if you get the PJ, but shouldn't be a factor in buying this PJ (there are other aspects that are far more important).

I didn't review the 3D performance because it doesn't seem anyone cares anymore. My mistake if you do. Given how similar the 40 is to the 55, I'd expect 3D performance to be roughly the same. The 40 doesn't come with glasses however, so add $130 per person to your calculation on price.
GeoffreyMorrison's Avatar GeoffreyMorrison
02:12 PM Liked: 24
post #87 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 94
Joined: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post

Sorry I can see you add the input lag. WOW that's impressive. Can you tell us if it comes with dynamic iris? Sony does not say anything about this on specifications and the user manual is not available yet. Thanks!!!

I didn't realize Sony doesn't say it doesn't have an iris. That is weird. I'll add that to the review.
AV_Integrated's Avatar AV_Integrated
02:30 PM Liked: 393
post #88 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 3,592
Joined: Jun 2005
Geoffrey - It's awesome that you are coming on to follow up with some points. You mention the JVC is a better model for home theater, but how far off is the Sony really? Also, for motion, I've always found that DLP is far ahead of what LCoS and LCD deliver in terms of a non-blurred image. No doubt over the years the LCD models for sure tend to be blurry compared to DLP, but how does the Sony stack up for motion? This is important for those viewing sports and playing video games. Finally, did they send you some 3D glasses to check out? Sony typically is solid with 3D and a step ahead of JVC. While many don't care about 3D, it certainly remains the case that for those who enjoy 3D, front projection is THE place to get it!

Certainly lens shift range and zoom range are nice to know, but are math instead of opinion, and I would certainly appreciate your long-experienced opinion on the above questions if you would care to share.

Thanks!
GeoffreyMorrison's Avatar GeoffreyMorrison
02:39 PM Liked: 24
post #89 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 94
Joined: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV_Integrated View Post

Geoffrey - It's awesome that you are coming on to follow up with some points. You mention the JVC is a better model for home theater, but how far off is the Sony really? Also, for motion, I've always found that DLP is far ahead of what LCoS and LCD deliver in terms of a non-blurred image. No doubt over the years the LCD models for sure tend to be blurry compared to DLP, but how does the Sony stack up for motion? This is important for those viewing sports and playing video games. Finally, did they send you some 3D glasses to check out? Sony typically is solid with 3D and a step ahead of JVC. While many don't care about 3D, it certainly remains the case that for those who enjoy 3D, front projection is THE place to get it!

Certainly lens shift range and zoom range are nice to know, but are math instead of opinion, and I would certainly appreciate your long-experienced opinion on the above questions if you would care to share.

Thanks!

I measured the JVC X35 as having something like 38,000:1 contrast ratio. One of the highest I've ever measured. The 40ES, using the same methodology and screen, measures 5151:1. So yeah, it's a LOT lower. It doesn't have the depth or richness that the JVC has. That's not to say it doesn't look good. The Sony looks fantastic, but you can't beat contrast ratio (IMO and after years of comparative group testing). The Sony has a lot of other positives though, that it's brighter, has lower input lag, more accurate color, is a little quieter, and, of course, is $1,000 cheaper.

That all said, is the JVC 7x better looking, as the numbers suggest? No. But it does look better, more "film like."

Yeah, DLP is way better for motion blur. WAY better. LCOS and LCD can't compete. The motion interpolation and black frame insertion modes on the Sony help, but no LCOS is going to be as free from motion blur as DLP. If you don't mind SOE, then the Sony is fine. I don't harp on it much in reviews because LCD fanboys always cry fowl that I'm always complaining about motion blur, but it bugs the crap out of me. Doesn't stop me from enjoying an otherwise good image though, which LCOS (usually) delivers.

Sony didn't send any 3D glasses, but I'm sure I have a pair here that will work with it (probably left over from the 50ES). If I can find them I'll have a look.
AV_Integrated's Avatar AV_Integrated
03:28 PM Liked: 393
post #90 of 2290
05-13-2014 | Posts: 3,592
Joined: Jun 2005
That would be great. The general consensus (which I agree with) is that in a 2D world, the X35/RS46 models are the entry level LCoS units to beat and the projector to beat. It is good, but not great with 3D, and is very usable on screens up to around 120"-133" in a light controlled theater. It's the theater projector. Not the 'I wanna projector' projector.

Sony seems to be the one to go to for more general viewing. Brighter with excellent build and image quality with better 3D. A more versatile projector for larger screens or for less than 'theater' situations.

So, I guess the question would be: Why get the Epson? The 5030, at this point, seems a bit overpriced. Epson had the 8350 and the 8700UB models with incredible lens shift and good optics at very different price points, but then the 3020 lost the lens shift of the 8350. The 5030 kept it, along with the higher price tag. But, now, the 5030 seems to be getting bested by the Sony at $2,500 MSRP, which should mean a bit less in the real world. So with the Epson available at $2,600 (Visual Apex) right now, it's not exactly a deal. In fact, considering the free spare lamp, the Sony may be a better deal right now and may be available for less. Though, Sony tends to be tight with street pricing.

Worth mentioning that street pricing for JVC tends to be well under MSRP and the RS46 is easily available from around $2,800 with the X35 not far off.

My personal concern is my 161" screen which I would love a RS46 for, but know the light output just won't cut it, but really thinking of a Sony model when I finish the space. 3D is secondary to my concerns or a non-issue. But, filling a screen that size is a challenge for most projectors. I was floored by how well the W1070 has been doing, but that projector is meant as a holdover until I finish my space.

But, for recommendations to others, it seems silly to go with the Epson 5030 over the Sony. LCoS looks better, it always has from what I've seen. I don't know why I would spend the same on a LCD projector. The big advantage LCD has had for years has been price, but DLP comes out way ahead (W1070) with great models and LCoS is closing in on pricing from the other end. Why buy the Epson 5030?

Gear in this thread - VPL-HW40ES by PriceGrabber.com
Reply Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3