Here is the original french article comparing the AE900 and Z4 translated. Following that is a comparison between the Z4 and Toshiba MT400.
My test of Panasonic PTAE900, and comparison with Sanyo PLVZ4.
Here is still a queen of silence! Sony HS50 which had opened the way was copied with much talent. It is almost total silence. The joystick to move the objective, and thus the image, in all the directions is the same one as on the PTAE700, and it makes always as toy as front. Fortunately that a serrated roller of tightening makes it possible to
block it. It is not in all cases more of the lens shift, with such a displacement, it is adjustment of objective! Ca makes me think of the rear view mirror on my car. Miss more than they do it electric.
The menu is of a great simplicity, and I adjusted the projector crushes hair in a few minutes, what leaves think that large majority of the users who do not dare too
much to play with the adjustments will have a beautiful image even if
they do not touch with nothing. I know well that for certain amateurs, this detail is rather secondary, because they will seek to obtain an optimum adjustment, maybe with a DVD of adjustment like Video DIGITAL Essential, that is to say straightforwardly with a professional calibration, but for all the others, and it is the great majority, I can ensure you that you can plunge without fear to have to put the
hands in dirty oil.
Gladiator Zone 2, on Denon DVD3910 in HDMi connection by means of a cable Oehlbach 2411.
The image made 2.30m, I sat with 4m screen 16/9 E, and Denon is in 720p, obviously!
Chapter 2, the war.
I see defects that Sanyo PLVZ4 nor Toshiba MT400 does not have, other innovations of this re-entry. In particular, halations like gray shades around the forms and objects, a well-known defect on the vidéoprojecteurs 4/5 years ago.
It is very visible on the contour of the trees against the sky. The tree trunks are duplicated of a feature and a shade of two
centimetres each with dimensions.
It is rather enormous, and yet my adjustment of sharpness, adjusted with a test card, is at least. I carried out several tests to try to reduce it, without success. This, however, and they is happy, does not destroy either the impression of details, because the objects of small size do not show this defect, and if the bottom is not very contrasted color, one sees nothing either. The detail of the images thus, is excellent, and I am agreeably surprised by the luminous details especially: they have much glare, and that made a beautiful image.
Sky, on these difficult scenes of chapter 2, swarm a little.
A little more than the PLVZ4. It is not the sorrow to seek the least grid, nothing is seen! I approached to see it, and while moving back slowly, with 2m of the image (2.30m broad), and I do not see it virtually more.
In chapter 6,
I looked at this scene much on the PLVZ4, diving in the half-light, lit slightly by the light filtered through the window, and César which crosses the part of right-hand side on the left
behind statutes and stops in front of a large bust. There, piqué is remarkable, can be even better than on the PLVZ4 (I say can be, because my PLVZ4, a model of pre series, has just fallen out of carafe!)... In spite of the effect of halation, of unfolding of the images, although the blacks are stopped a little, less detailed than on the PLVZ4, the effect 3d, depth, the detail, the smoothness, make a very beautiful image. In fact, the effect of unfolding, of shade if you prefer, is visible only if the objects are against a bottom of very different
color. On this scene, it is not the case, thus one does not see this defect there. There or it is the worst, it is for a clear object on a very dark bottom, like a face approximately plane and a dark maroon bottom behind plane.
On the traveling which goes from the cage to the slaves towards the
village, a scene that I use systematically to test the fluidity of the
projector, the result is excellent. Comparable so that I know best, quite simply. And comparable with the PLVZ4.
Piqué of image is remarkable, but can be a little hard. When the gladiators aligned against a wall receive a white powder jet
(talc?) on their bodies, the jet is so detailed that a powdery cloud is not seen, but of the tiny particles, for example.
The color is excellent, a hair cold can be, compared to Sanyo, but I do not draw any from conclusion because a thorough adjustment
(which I does not make on a model of pre series that one entrusts a
few hours to me), will undoubtedly allow to modify.
And BV now? (BV, for vertical bands, are the defect of process LCD, and when one leaves a PLVZ4 his box, and that no adjustment is made, the image is truffée by it. The BV are vertical gray traces which do not move, whatever the image). And many BV there is. They are extremely weak, they are extremely regular, and they do not make as dirtinesses at certain places of the image -
in all cases not on the specimen which I have in test - but they are
there. And not of adjustment in sight.
Piqué and the detail of the plane backs are very beautiful, what makes an exceptional depth of field, higher than that of the PLVZ4, and approaching those of a projector DLP.
With my test cards, I could locate these BV. They are seen on the greens, on blue lights and the yellow. One sees nothing on the white, and it is probably for that which they are if not very awkward with a
film, nor on the reds.
There are not either shades of lights on not dimensioned and the
corners of the image, as often on projectors LCD, and as on the PLVZ4 of my test. The light is very regular, the uniform color,
it is very right if one distinguishes a light loss of intensity on a
zone of 20 cm each with dimensions of the screen, on all the high one.
To return with my BV, they make like a subtle chalk-lining against certain images, and not on the white zones. On gray funds, it is there that they appear a little, but not like dirty traces on the screen. While looking at again with test cards, I realize indeed that on degrade of gray, they are invisible on the white, and they appear on the gray rectangles, whatever their intensity, except the very dark ones.
With more and less compared to the PLVZ4, my general impression leans towards this last for the following
* more cordial colors,
* piqué without shades duplicating the forms located on a bottom of
* total absence of BV.
I preferred, on the other hand, on the PTAE900, the total absence of zones faded in the angles (although I did not
succeed in seeing these discolourations, present on the test cards of the PLVZ4, by looking at films), piqué of the images, but especially the effect 3d, depth of field.
I liked his swarming less, but it is compared to the PLVZ4 only. In the absolute, it did not obstruct me a whole, because it is present only in the very difficult moments. I think of receiving another specimen of PLVZ4 which will enable me to
push a little more the tests, and thus to validate or not these first impressions.
Panasonic PTAE900/ Sanyo PLVZ4, second round.
Conscious that the background noise of a store of Hifi is not
especially favourable with total silence, and that the noise of a projector is a really important data for a
user who will have the machine with less than one meter of his ears, I benefitted from closing between midday and two to extinguish all the
apparatuses, and to really listen to the noise of the ventilators.
not, it is not Sony HS50, as opposed to what I said earlier, and in complete silence, I hear the ventilo clearly. Who looks at a film in total silence? Let us say that in silence, it is heard, without it being awkward, and that if a film is put, one understands nothing any more the whole.
Idem that Panasonic, but in acuter and a little more extremely. You will note that Sanyo is given for 22dB and that Panasonic posts
26dB. Somebody cheating, because they is false. Panasonic is quieter than Sanyo. Not much, but a little, and the noise of Sanyo is acuter. With dimensioned, Sony HS50 posts 24dB, and it is really quiet. I am not far from thinking that everyone cheating! It is nice!
The technicians will explain me. Here facts.
The PLVZ4 had broken down at the time of my preceding test (it is a
model pre series, whereas Panasonic is a final version), and it is the same one as one brings to me today. And well it took me 3 minutes to correctly calibrate it (with DVE, not with Colorfacts hein!), while the first time, you remember it, I fought during 2 hours... me that exceeds me, it is not my level. In short, it is regulated. I check that Panasonic was not put out of order, and rolls... turn over to see Gladiator!
It is necessary to keep in mind which the PLVZ4 which I test does not
have its final firmware, and that the ratio of contrast of my specimen is blocked to 5000:1. The final version pushes to 7000... what will follow is thus with
reading in the light of this remark.
beautiful image, not only one BV, no the grid. "phantom" unfolding around the objects, on the other hand, jump me to the eyes as of the first image, whereas I did not seek it, it should be specified. On the scenes with a gray sky, the BV arise a little. There is nothing the whole, absolutely nothing, with Sanyo. Idem for swarming: in the difficult scenes, there is a little on Sanyo, and a little more on Panasonic, but hardly more.
The image has more light with Sanyo, while the colors seem rather close with the?il, and rather beautiful, of the two with dimensions ones. There is much more promptness on the image of Sanyo than on that of
Panasonic, and although the two machines saturate some very enlightened details
like the flames, the fume which is released from the pot cooking on fire, in bottom on the left of the image, at the beginning of the following chapter, have much more light and of matter on Sanyo that on Panasonic. Smoke blanchâtre is detached much better on the black bottom. You will say to me, a smoke, it is not a film, and it is not because it is less true on Panasonic than on Sanyo, that the film is wasted, and you will be right. It is all the difficulty of the tests in fact. Because without comparative, the image produced by Panasonic, in basic 2.30m, with a install its of quality, it is large spectacle, and worse, with a beautiful film, I would be astonished that you are able to think of the small details! Yes but here, beyond that, the idea to invest in a beautiful product forms also part of the
pleasure, and it is with this pleasure there that my test refers. In this case, the difference between the two images is unambiguous, without nuance. The difference is really important.
By tearing off me eyes in chapter 6, to seek differences in piqué of image, on the large plans, plane backs, I did not find anything. Null match. On the other hand, there still, Sanyo is much more luminous and makes an image sharper than Panasonic. Both, once again, the colors saturate with the flames of the candles. As opposed to what I said the first time, and while looking at several times the scene or César the part of
right-hand side crosses on the left behind the line of statues to stop
with the bust, the depth of field is more important on Sanyo than on Panasonic, because of this addition of light, who does not destroy the blacks. On the other hand, I lengthily looked at the dust whirling and lit by the light filtering
of the window on the left. Can be board I considering a little solarization with Panasonic, can be not...!
The second scene of chapter 8 occurs in the greyness and the fog. It is hard for the video noise, swarming, and BV. Sanyo, well. Breaded... about as well, but on the other hand, there still, what a difference of luminosity and glare of the small details between
This is immediately confirmed with the following scene, that or of the bones strew the ground in the foreground in the forest. There, Sanyo posts a superiority really crushing which carries my conviction
that these two machines are not at all of the same class. All the colors come out with much more detail and from life that on
I said much last year that Panasonic PTAE700 and Sanyo PLVZ3 were two
excellent machines which made very beautiful images, with dimensioned, I do not forget it, of Hitachi PJTX100. Moreover I had fun some, because it is not frequent to see 3 machines of similar quality at
nearby prices, who are held in a handkerchief of pocket. That puts to me more at ease for affirms that it is not any more the
case. Sanyo made an ahead important jump, compared to Panasonic and compared to the PLVZ3 (I did not have a
PTAE700 to go at the bottom of this question). I wondered how that could be possible, and I wonder whether a part of the answer (or the answer entirely), does not come owing to the fact that Panasonic, like Hitachi, made of the nine with old man, by installing new matrix LCD of Epson, while Sanyo, and well it is apparently a very new projector. If my track is right, and technical projections being rather fast, the development of the PLVZ4 is thus the fact of a more recent
research, what, in other words, the place as a projector with a generation moreover than Panasonic...
I do not hide you that I will dig this track, because my curiosity is poked.
The continuation? The test of Hitachi PJTX200, the third small drainage canal of the brilliance trio of projectors
LCD to less than 2000
Jean Patrick Grumberg,
I tested Sanyo PLVZ4 and Toshiba MT400.
The chance of the calendar and the exits of products posed between my
hands, at the same time, two machines which do not aim the same public ones. Of dimensioned, a projector DLP from Toshiba, and other, an apparatus made for those which see arcs in sky when they look at a
film coming from projectors DLP, Sanyo PLVZ4.
I had to beat to me during 2 hours and half against my nonfinal
specimen of the PLVZ4 to start to have an image which resembles
something, include time to disencumber me of the BV: won bet, I consider being arrived at 95% of the zero BV... and I think of being able to still better do! For those which are unaware of it, BV, or vertical bands, make like traces of dirtiness vertical (and very light) on the screen. They are independent of the images of film, and they are one of the defects of technology LCD, with the effect of grid, who are the grids of the matrix, the blacks which are not deeply black but gray dark, and light halations of colors on dimensioned or angles. Ca does much defect for the LCD will say to me, and I will answer you that you are right! Of another dimensioned, the DLP has other defects, with the result that none technologies is perfect, and that that benefits all the manufacturers: one buys as much a projector for his qualities as for the discretion
of the defects as I come to quote!
The PLVZ4 succeeds the PLVZ3, who one of the apparatuses was the most sold in France, with with dimensions of Panasonic PTAE700 and Hitachi PJTX100, so much so that the PLVZ3 continues its life and is not stopped. The amateur of the beautiful Sanyo quality thus finds himself with not
an apparatus in top of the Sanyo range, but two, which are found to 500 of variation: 1500 for the PLVZ3 and 2000 for Z4 (they are the suggested prices, not inevitably prices charged).
Consequence of the continuation of this model, that I find completely justified considering his qualities and
considering it is not exceeded at all, my test of Z4 will have to answer two questions not envisaged with my
program: the difference in price justifies it to offer the PLVZ4 compared to
excellent Z3, and must one resell his Z3 to buy Z4?
Adjustments of the panels to get rid of these dirty BV. It seems to to me, holidays having erased my poor memory, that the menu of adjustment of the panels is the same one as on Yamaha
LPX510, or was the this PLVZ3? In all cases, it is very pleasant to use, very easy and very intuitive, and the result immediately is seen. I remember that the last time that I used this menu, the result was very frustrating: they was perfect on the test cards... and dreadful on film! And when I wanted to directly regulate the image on film, and well not, it was impossible, the menu is thus made that it cuts the source and passes in internal
test cards mode.
I had deduced from it that the video circuits by which the image of a
reader DVD passes are not taken into account in the adjustment of the
BV with test cards, and that the adjustment reached its limits there, visible. In fact, with this PLVZ4 and its new Epson matrix, I realize that my assumption was false. The menu of adjustment is the same one, but it is not any more the same history. One is in the WYSIWYG! When the test cards are disencumbered of BV, the image is also, or virtually too. On the ciels, there or it is the worst, and well I did not have the least embarrassment 4 away m with an image
of 2.20 m. And believe me, I am a maniac of the detail and BV!
Thus BV: won bet! What is not a small matter, because only Sony HS50 was, hitherto, free. It is certainly not the absolute perfection, and one can see, at rare moments, and on a few centimetres length, a breath of gray trail, but not more.
As I fixed myself like objective to compare Z4 with Z3, I delivered myself to the same work on this last, with the same one finely, and I could almost note the difference at once. Also I confirm with force, the reduction of the BV is better on Z4, even on the test cards of adjustment. Indeed, one especially sees it on the green and a little less on the red, when the alignment of the panels is finished. With Z3, there remain always gray traces, small bands on the rectangles of the test cards, whereas on Z4 there is no more only of smooth surfaces, free from any shade sinks. Knowing that the BV are worse on films than on the test card, I let to you imagine my joy!
On the other hand, shading, there is always. The shading, it is as an aureole of often rosacée or green different color, whether one distinguishes slightly on the edges or in the angles, when one looks at a test card clear gray, or a completely snow-covered scene. There, one cannot not see this zone rosacée on 50 cm on the right of the
image. On a film, it is largely less visible, and I point out it to you, one finds some alas on all projectors LCD...
Let us pass to the adjustments before test.
It should be said to you that between the optical iris and the iris of
the lamp, I fought well during two hours to make him leave a beautiful black and
a beautiful white, so that contrast is with the height of its promises and that the white
are not flarings. Frankly, I never saw projector such a difficult to regulate, and I want to believe that it is because it is a version pre series
with the software not yet final. Knowing the good quality of the PLVZ3, and knowledge to make of Sanyo, I am not done too much of concern, if I were in your place. After two hours rather hard, I arrived at something of rather beautiful, even if I am not completely satisfied. I obtained a beautiful depth of field and a remarkable detail. There or I stopped, there is still light to better gain with dimensions colorimetry and
depth of the blacks.
On paper, the projector is less noisy than Z3. In reality, there is no difference.
On paper, contrast is higher than Z3. In reality, the difference is weak, but it exists.
On paper, there is a double iris, in reality, there is no effect of pumping which comes to obstruct this choice.
On paper, the power passed from 800 to 1000 ansi lumens. I did not distinguish from differences, but I must recognize that I did not focus myself too much on top. It is like the colors. In 12 bit, one posts 64 billion colors. I all did not hope them to check if the card says true or not, please excuse me.
Let us pass to the tests and the comparison with Z3.
Denon DVD3910 in 720p and HDMi connection entrusted to a Oehlbach
cable. A PLVZ3 is on standby on the other digital display, and allows me to pass from one apparatus to the other almost to the flight.
Gladiator Zone 2. Chapter 2 the battle.
No swarming in the sky, nor of solarization because of the clouds. The details are well returned, including in the plane backs, even if piqué is not as impressive as on a projector DLP having the
same resolution. The image is soft, fluid, there are no harmful jerks with the image. Z4 delivers a very beautiful image.
Good moments ago in a test and I hold one of them. Often, the author of these lines must twist the eyes and the ears, and to reconsider twenty times the same beaches for finally detecting
differences. Imagine visual or auditive tiredness... There, a beautiful surprise awaits me the first second film. While I am seeking hypothetical swarmings in the blue gray ciels, one of my fixings, and one of the reasons which left me on the hunger since so a long
time with the projectors, my?il is immediately stopped by a phenomenon which I had completely
zappé of my tests, the grid of Z3. Completely invisible on Z4, the grid is well there, who comes a little to disturb the detail on the faces and in the sky.
This dimensioned, Z4 took a great step ahead, because one absolutely sees no trace which lets think that an
unspecified not lit zone can exist between the pixels. With the limit, after having seen the images of Z4, that would obstruct me almost more than the BV! It should be said that the disappearance of a defect, by comparisons from one machine to another, does not produce the same psychological effect as the examination of
an apparatus alone, without any reference mark other than the memory, and that also explains why many amateurs are very happy with systems
of bad quality, until the day or they discover another thing.
Enormous advantage for Z4 thus, by the total disappearance of the grid of the pixels, and it quasi disappearance of the BV. An image without defect, that changes a film!Dimensioned black, and as I mentioned it above to you, the specimen which is between my hands does not make it possible me to
push the adjustments to check rather far if the projector can reveal
more details in the dark zones than its excellent predecessor. At least, it makes as well! Idem for colorimetry, I do not have the impression that the widening of the pallet of the
colors results in a difference in colors to the screen but can be that
more adapted film visionnage, thing that I did not have time to make, would bring good surprises to me. Known as you, there still, that it makes as well, and it is very well, because Z3 is a success on the matter.
It seems to to me that the PLVZ4 made a little less halation around
the objects located against a contrasted bottom than the PLVZ3, but it was already weak on Z3.
Dimensioned piqué of image, it is the same thing. Optics is better, according to information which was given to me by Sanyo. I do not see that piqué is however better. It was very well with Z3, without being level of a DLP having the same resolution, it is not worse, and it still does not reach piqué of the DLP.
Comparatif Sanyo PLVZ4 counters Toshiba MT400
I went so far as to make comparative with Toshiba MT400, comparative which has direction only for people of the same race as
me: those which do not see the arcs in sky, for finally noting that the MT400 has less of piqué than Z4, because of the difference in resolution, piqué partly compensated by a better relief and blacker blacks. This comparative, considering the differences in selling price (1700 for Toshiba, 2000 for Sanyo, resolution of 1024x576 for Toshiba and 1280x720 for Sanyo, technology DLP counters LCD, much direction does not have inevitably, and it is more coincidence of their meeting which gave me desire for
doing it than formal logic and hard. It would be more judicious to compare the PLVZ4 with Panasonic PTAE900
or Hitachi PJTX200, for example. But good, what is fact is made, here!
Dimensioned noise initially, there or the DLP are rather late. The MT400 has a noise of ventilator acuter than that of the PLVZ4, but none of both is awkward, they are of a discretion which I consider perfect. One is very very far from the vacuum cleaners and dry the hair, and more close to a discrete breath which disappears, with habituation, after a few moments.
In term of heat of the colors, promptness of the images, and general energy which emerges from the screen, the MT400 arrives far in front of the PLVZ4. In Gladiator, each time that an object out of metal is detached from the bottom, that the light hangs a reflection on a jewel, it is a line of light, a key lives which is detached from the image of the MT400, while it is smoothed more on the PLVZ4. No moment, however, the image of the MT400 or the PLVZ4 move away from the spirit of the
cinema: it is never hard, never video, on any the machines.
In chapter 6, one sees much more details, the image is much richer on the MT400 than on the PLVZ4, while at the same time Z4 more piqué havehas and shows more details. The explanation comes from the depth of field, better on the MT400, who gives more relief to the scene, and with the blacks, who allow to see more things. It is the case, for example, folds of the clothing plunged in the half-light: with the MT400, one sees details which are blackened with the PLZ4.
Dimensioned contrast, color, light, strength and dynamics of the images, the MT400 further goes than the PLV4. Dimensioned swarmings in the ciels and with dishes, the PLVZ4 is smooth and more stable. The traveling which goes from the cage to the slaves towards the
village is a good test to check quality of the video treatment. Not surprise for the PLVZ4 which does one without fault. On the other hand, gross good surprise for the MT400: there are few projectors DLP last generation which can be left this
moment of torture with honor, and there, it is almost perfect, in all cases without any visual embarrassment when I tracking of close
each small defect. The MT400 almost as fluid and is deprived of jerks as the PLVZ4, a very good point. There still, one realizes with the details which are behind plane that the PLVZ4
has more piqué. On the other hand, and without I not being able to explain it, the MT400, in 720p (in 576 it is less true) approaches well the precision of the
details of the PLVZ4.
You me will not want any not to conclude, because it does not seem to to me that these two machines form part of
the same list, at the time of a choice. Of with dimensions technique DLP, who seems to be cut to measure for the Home Cinema, and other, the LCD, who makes progress with step of giant, and can even make better than the DLP in certain cases, but which, in the fork of the 1500/2000, came as a solution for those which the arcs in sky inconvenience. In other words, if you are in this category, the chances that you choose a MT400 are null, because only some top-of-the-range does not make any (arcs in sky), and if you are not obstructed, it seems not very reasonable to give up the quality of the blacks of
the MT400, now that the machine is quiet and that traveling, swarmings, solarization, are controlled.
Let us pass to the comparison of the MT400 with some famous projectors
DLP this time.
The landscape is this one. In DLP, the famous one and exemplary Toshiba MT500 was my projector of
reference, and it did not have comparable successors. The manufacturers indeed moved in two directions. To go further and higher than the matrices 1080x576, the manufacturers adopted, for their projectors high definition with resolution of 1280x720, the matrix DLP Texas Instruments HD2+ which has, in my opinion, leaded the quality of all the projectors, because of defects that did not have the old and less expensive
projectors not liked. The resolution of these projectors, thanks to contrast and technique DLP, give an impression of smoothness higher than that of the of the same
LCD resolution, and the arrival of a projector with this smoothness, and delivered defects of chip HD2+ is a bath of youth and a source of
joy for the demanding amateurs, but I will speak about new Mitsubishi, who produces this turn of force, in another article. Lastly, manufacturers, to democratize the market, produced DLP low resolution, who turn in the 1000/1200, and which best than one can say is than they are acceptable, but not exciting. It is in this context that Toshiba decides to leave a projector which
is located at semi way. Near or better than the DLP with matrices 1024x576, with a price in serious fall (1690 with the tariff), and a silence that do not reach the concurrent machines, and more expensive.
It is in Mitsubishi HC900 that I begin my comparison. If comparison one can make, because as soon as I light the HC900, remembers to my good memory the blower now insupportable as of the
these projectors of before last generation. It is the noise factory against silence! For the remainder, not too of surprised: they make share equal to swarmings in the sky, with the fluidity of the traveling, they do not solarize, and, good surprise for the MT400, piqué of image is as good on a machine as on the other, whereas the HC900 always shone, thank you with its higher optics. There or the MT400 injury a little the pawn of the HC900, it is on colorimetry. Toshiba had indicated to me that the temperature of the colors of the
MT400, before any adjustment, is particularly right and pleasant, and it is not sweet talk of manufacturer. The heat of the colors which I like at Toshiba is present and quite
present with the MT400, what gives him an advance on the HC900. Remain the density of the blacks, who has the air a little better on the MT400, but not enough to make a deal of it. In short, the difference in noise, or rather, the existence of a projector DLP of this quality with this level of
silence makes the match cruel for the HC900: there is nothing better at his place, while its noise of ventilator gives desire for extinguishing it almost
as soon as lit. Victorious MT400!
MT400 counters his/her big brother MT700.
Here still comparative strange. Never a chip DLP of 1024x576 cannot hope to reach the smoothness of a
chip DLP of 1280x720. Thus why to measure them one with the other? And well it is because chip HD2+ of the MT700 (and alas of almost all
the others almost all other projectors equipped with this chip) is so
unpleasant to look at, that I wanted to see, more and less one and other, which leaves gaining. Is needed that you keeps in memory, while reading what will follow, that I am roughcast enough by the effects of solarization, these blocks of colors without ranges to delimited contours and which
withdraw, with my taste, any cinematographic savour with an image, and that I hate swarming (whereas, will say to me, if one wants to approach the image of a room of movies, that swarms rather much! Admittedly, but how that which did not see with its small contradictions throws me
the first stone!)
On Gladiator still, zone 2, I looked at many times chapter 2. The MT700 shines by its swarmings on the blue of the sky, the MT400 does not make any. I see already solarization on the image of the MT700, with the clouds, the MT400 does not make any. It is radical. There or the MT700 shows its superiority, it is in chapter 5.Piqué of image is much better with the MT700, but surprised, the details appear better with the MT400 and the movements are more
fluid. If it is added that the colors are softer, the MT400 exceeds the MT700 of a small head.
In chapter 6, when César crosses the part, lit by the diffuse light coming from a window which lights very
slightly on the left, and this part which seems like charged with dust. It moves behind the statutes to go towards a bust (as I make all my
tests without any sound, I do not know if the character represented by this bust is quoted or
not) With the MT700, the detail is seizing, and there is an effect 3d, an effect of impressive relief. The scene is rich of thousand details which weigh down the image, conformément, I am sure, with the v?ux of the director. The MT400 does not reach this relief, the image is more punt, more banal. On the other hand the clouds of particles of dust which fly in the air
form halations, paving stones of lights, while on the MT400, they are truths clouds, who give this milky impression, embuée, dusty with the scene, and there still, I am sure that it is what the realizer wanted! You will decide yourself what seems most important to you: the effect of relief, richness of the details, the thousand objects which furnish this room, or mystery of the atmosphere charged veils it...
I finally wanted to look at what the two machines give on the
traveling that I quoted higher, who goes from the cage c6ntenant the slaves to the village. There, the MT400 is more stable, that hops less than on the MT700 which jerks always too much with my
taste, for its price, and in the absolute. Without speaking about the swarming of the sky and pink reflections in
sand which should not be, and which is not there on the MT400.
Finally, the MT400 gives a softer image and tone hotter than the MT700, it is quieter than the MT700, and it has worse piqué of image, less small information, and it is the only point or it is in retreat compared to the MT700. On all the other points, the MT400 is higher, or equivalent, with the MT700. And it is until one waited! Well considering Toshiba.
Jean Patrick Grumberg,