or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by zombie10k

have you upgraded to the 1100 motherboard yet? it takes noticeable edge off those older movies you mentioned. I was waiting for them to modify the RC (reduce the aggressiveness) and thankfully they did it with this upgrade. I haven't seen the 2000 but I have seen several 8000's. imo, the JVC's with e-shift are superior in most ways I can think of. better OOTB color, contrast (without a doubt) and find the e-shift + MPC is more refined than the smooth screen technology....
you are about 5 years late to the .95 DLP party... even though the throw distance is a pain, I like this projector for how clean and sharp the image is. Color is also very good OOTB. I am trying to find a way to mount it or see if the short throw lens turns up eventually. This projector has 90 total hours, it was basically old stock that was never used.
Not really, I thought they were very similar to one another with the auto iris. When I measured the contrast on both units with the T10, the main advantage of the 57 was when you would manually clamp the iris to -7 and compare the #'s, I can dig them up and post later today.I like running wide open + auto iris so I would have likely chosen the 4910 this year.edit: with the iris off and just manual settings, I don't think you would see an obvious difference between the...
Yes, the iris can close lower in auto mode vs. the lowest possible manual setting. It can get quite small depending on the scene. While it's not perfect, I'm definitely impressed with their first attempt and would upgrade this year if I didn't have 1/2 dozen different projectors here already...
I looked at this closely, when you have your nose pressed to the screen, you can see the difference in pixel structure, the edges aren't quite as defined as the previous gen, it reminds me a bit more of the Sony pixel structure. With e-shift engaged / MPC processing, I think they look very similar to the point where I didn't mention it in the comparisons. Perhaps it can be measured, but it wasn't obvious @ 1.25 SW from my 142" 16:9
I've seen several of both model years, I don't think there is a notable difference, basically the same imo. The big difference is the iris. I would take a 4910 over last year's top model since the black floor isn't going to be as convincing in low -> very low APL scenes. I guess it depends on what content you watch, but definitely noticeable with my dark sci-fi movies and stage concerts.it did an impressive job keeping up with fast APL changes in this Tiesto concert.
I always wanted a Qualia 004 since it was a pioneering projector for it's time. The cool factor is high, 95 lbs of mass, etc. Then I saw the insane price for the replacement lampshttp://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-LMPH-700-Qualia-004-lamp-New-in-the-factory-box/121287419085The 600/1100 lamps even at full retail look like a bargainMy 1100 will be vintage by the fall, your lumis is an antique!!
my thoughts are generally aligned with Trusted Reviews, he did not trash the projector and was honest about the pros/cons.regarding the comparison above, if the Runco 750 + company wasn't enough to satisfy on a relatively large, low gain screen, the HD91 wasn't going to cut it either. It's basically the same lumen output as the 750 + clones, ~ 600-650 @ mid throw. So the CineLED 1000 would make the most sense in that setup.
I thought everyone forget about that CC DIVX fiasco by now, what a mess that was. Consumers were clearly not ready for that model back then... I can see the 4K BD being locked down in a similar way.
mike was replying to the # of hours on the lamp so far.. The 4K media device is fun to play around with but my main content is on the mede8ter + a 20 TB storage array. I'm already running low on space and looking for a new expansion.
New Posts  All Forums: