or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › VW40 versus 1080UB Shoot Out?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

VW40 versus 1080UB Shoot Out? - Page 2

post #31 of 108
Art, doesn't your review sample of the Sony have an issue? I would think that given how many people trust your opinion that you wouldn't be doing comparison posts, never mind a full review, until you were sure you'd seen a proper Sony model. It just seems a bit premature to me since you have a feeling your review sample may not perform the way others do. I've been wondering about this ever since you posted your original review
post #32 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKuan View Post

The Epson looks darker in these two pictures. However, the pause icon on the Sony screenshot is brighter suggesting two possible causes.
1) The Sony screenshot was exposed longer and thus the black level shown is elevated compared to the Epson one. 2) The Sony iris reacted to the bright pause icon and did not choose smallest iris setting in that "blank" screenshot so its black level was not optimum but the bright icon was brighter (eventhough the Sony's is not as bright as the Epson's).

On the side by side image, that's what you have - a side-by-side. The camera is set up behind the projectors. This is a single photo, not two separate photos stitched together. Therefore, obviously, the exposure is exactly the same.

As to brightness variation, you mention, these two projectors - on 100IRE white, measured within 10 lumens of each other, if I recall correctly, although when I measured both the Epson and the Sony (separate times) both had less than 20 hours on them. By the time the side by side was taken (since the Epson arrived almost month before the Sony, the Epson probably had 80+ hours on it, compared to about the same 20 hours on the Sony. Probably not enough difference to matter. Go figure! -art
post #33 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKuan View Post

The Epson looks darker in these two pictures. However, the pause icon on the Sony screenshot is brighter suggesting two possible causes.
1) The Sony screenshot was exposed longer and thus the black level shown is elevated compared to the Epson one. 2) The Sony iris reacted to the bright pause icon and did not choose smallest iris setting in that "blank" screenshot so its black level was not optimum but the bright icon was brighter (eventhough the Sony's is not as bright as the Epson's).

Part II (sorry).

So, let's use your other assumption - that the Sony iris did not shut down, as much as the Epson's. Fair assumption.

Bottom line, though, is that on a scene with a small bright area (like the pause) - well less than 1% of the image, the Sony ends up with inferior black levels. Well, then that's what you get - inferior black levels whether the iris is on (as described) or off (in which case the iris is wide open), compared to the Epson.

Now, that would differ to a scene that is all dark, not one bright spot, in which case, your assumption would be that the Sony might outperform or match the Epson, and that's possible, but that is an iris issue, not a ANSI contrast or Off/On contrast issue. To do either, the iris must be fixed.

As to the fully dark image without any iris action or bright spot, consider that the image provided is an example. To provide a true picture I would need a couple dozen images, to show the effect of iris action. such as black but for 1% 100ire, black but for 5% 100 ire, black but for 20% 100 ire, black but for 1% 50 IRE, black but for 5% 50 IRE, etc. etc. etc.

Lastly, My overall conclusion re black level performance between these two projectors is based on Watching them, not the photos taken while paused. At no point, during any side by side watching, did the Sony match the Epson in black levels, at least on generally dark scenes. I don't try to compare black levels - in a very small area) on a scene that is very bright. Doesn't make sense, as your eye likely cant discriminate fast enough with all that bright around it. If you are watching a scene of a football game on a bright sunny day, and there is a small black area (everything else bright), you are not likely to notice the difference between two good projectors in terms of the blacks. -art
post #34 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by timfrommass View Post

Art, doesn't your review sample of the Sony have an issue? I would think that given how many people trust your opinion that you wouldn't be doing comparison posts, never mind a full review, until you were sure you'd seen a proper Sony model. It just seems a bit premature to me since you have a feeling your review sample may not perform the way others do. I've been wondering about this ever since you posted your original review

Yes, the Sony has a problem, and my life would have been simpler if Sony (to whom I reported the issue within a day or so of receiving the projector, said, "hold on, we'll ship another right out." Instead they told me something that translates to "in about a month, we should be able to get you a 2nd projector.

I do what I can, in that regard. I could simply not review any projector with an apparent QC flaw (that would be about 20%-30%), especially since about half the projectors I receive are pre-production units, and uneven backgrounds on review units are probably the case on about 50% of the 3LCD and LCoS projectors, for that reason.

More to the point, however, I have plenty of references, to make sure my opinion is the best possible under that circumstance. For one, I had a perfectly good VW60 just a couple months before the VW40 arrived. For the VW40 to match the Epson, the VW40 would have also had to pretty much match the VW60, something no one has accused it of doing, especially not Sony.

Secondly, the nature of background unevenness, is either color shift, or brightness, or both. Even the darker center of the image, dramatically darker than the upper right or lower left corners, still couldn't match the Epson. Hey, those two corners are so bad on my unit, that the black levels at those points probably are no better than a poor performing 720p projector, not a first class 1080p.

Third, I can work with the basic assumption that the VW40 at least matches the older VW50 in black levels, a concept that the black levels in the center of that image, would support, even though the corners would not.

Also, although I don't do side-by-side's with it, I use the RS1 as a reference, which further helps, clarify.

BTW, here is the image, for those of you trying to follow this. The Epson is on the left, the Sony, the right. The image was taken with each projector in Cinema mode, Iris engaged, lamp on bright, each image about 45" diagonal, f stop at f5.6, time exposure of about 10 seconds (perhaps longer - I have the info stored in the original photo, but the exact exposure is not that important). The camera is a dSLR - Olympus'es top of the line E510 (for those who care).

BTW, as you guys can see of another similar image, taken the same evening, the same "frame" just the projector on the left is the Optoma HD803, a typical $2500 DLP 1080p projector.

Despite the way the Epson clobbered the VW40 in the previous picture, the Sony is still good enough to easily outperform the Optoma (which claims 8000:1 contrast BTW), with it's iris engaged. With this shorter exposure (all that was needed to bring up the difference between these two, you can barely even see the same blue hotspots from the Sony, and the center of the Sony is still significantly darker than the Optoma.

Finally, again, for perspective, a last image shot the same way, is a side by side, I never used in a review. Here is that Optoma HD803 on the left, and the Epson on the right, of the same black frame. Talk about night and day, and the Optoma is an average projector in terms of black levels.

So, all considered - how good is the Epson, in this regard? At its very best, it rivals my RS1 in terms of best possible black levels, something I don't think even the VW60 can do, although it's close.

OK enough fun for me for a while, got about another 20,000 words to right before I finish the comparison report, and if I spend more than an hour a day, having fun here, it will never get done. -art
post #35 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by presenter View Post



I favor subjective, and comparative combined. To me the single most important measurement is lumens, because if a consumer screws up the brightness issue - let's say a 130" 1.0 gain screen, with a projector that only does 300 lumens in its best mode, is a huge problem, whereas the slight difference in black levels, between a 1080UB and a Sony VW40 is a minor issue. Next most important, to me is color accuracy, especially since I find that many of the emails I receive, mention that they decided on projector A, over projector B, because A was reported to have excellent color balance "out of the box" while B, could be that good, but needs some level of calibration, and they have no inclination, or interest in getting involved at that level.

-art

I believe you provide a valuable resourse and it is enviable that you are even willing to provide some insight in your biases.
post #36 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mit07 View Post

I believe you provide a valuable resourse and it is enviable that you are even willing to provide some insight in your biases.

Thanks, no problem.

And as I love torturing well worn phrases - "that's why I pay myself the big bucks". -art
post #37 of 108
It might be better to use a O IRE image that doesn't require pausing the PS3.
post #38 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by presenter View Post

Part II (sorry).

At no point, during any side by side watching, did the Sony match the Epson in black levels, at least on generally dark scenes. I don't try to compare black levels - in a very small area) on a scene that is very bright.

It is interesting that in the satellite picture comparison, the Sony (right) side has darker black level yet this was not pointed out. Photoshop showed R=1 G=2 B=6 compared to R=3 G=4 B=9 for the Epson measured in the same area.
This particular picture was used to show that the Epson shows more stars even though its black level was elevated. One can easily tweak the Sony to shows more stars at the expense of black level.
This is a reason a favor more measurements and less screenshots.
post #39 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKuan View Post

It is interesting that in the satellite picture comparison, the Sony (right) side has darker black level yet this was not pointed out. Photoshop showed R=1 G=2 B=6 compared to R=3 G=4 B=9 for the Epson measured in the same area.
This particular picture was used to show that the Epson shows more stars even though its black level was elevated. One can easily tweak the Sony to shows more stars at the expense of black level.
This is a reason a favor more measurements and less screenshots.

Good point. Although measuring the black at different points on the screen get you different measurements, sometimes closer, the Sony has a slight edge on this image, so my statement was incorrect. Actually, I make my calls watching the scenes, rather than freezing them. As I say constantly "take the images with a grain (or larger) of salt, they are there to support my commentary, not the other way around." I realize that there are compromises, and I pretty much trust the images to reflect what I am saying, but they don't always.

Perhaps a better point, is based on your comment, that you could get more stars at the expense of black levels. You have an iris engaged on both of these projectors, no matter how you set it up, it will screw with the results so that scene will therefore behave differently. As will exactly how you calibrate each projector. If you start tweaking differently for each type of scene, doesn't get you very far. You'll notice that the near whites are also a bit brighter on the epson, when you can find a matching point where both are below 255 for all three primaries. Basically, on this scene, the Epson is brighter looking overall. When viewing, neither one was blowing out the near whites, but my camera's limitations insure that result, because of it's limited dynamic range. If I find the time, I'll look for another one of the bracketed images (it's away on a backup server), about 2/3 of an F-stop below. That will make both of them identical on blacks, but will show what difference there is in whites. ie. your photoshop measurements showed about a 2 value difference. If the white measurements are 5 or 8 or 15 more, than the Epson has more dynamic range on that scene, and therefore, if the whites were made to match, the Epson would have darker blacks.

Sorry, though, I really can't promise to get to that anytime soon. You might remind me in a couple of weeks, after I finish my definitely subjective comparison and awards report.

Anyway, how do measurements help? Measuring the ANSI or OFF/ON contrast of either of these projectors either means turning off the dynamic iris, in which case you have nothing resembling best performance with the iris engaged.

And if you measure with iris engaged, you run into the problem that each scene with different light dark balance, will give you different results because the iris dynamics are different.

Anyway, for measuring, it would make more sense to view grayscale test patterns, rather than scenes, but the same problem of the dynamic iris behaving differently on every different image won't go away.

And that, suh, is where subjectivity rules. I do not believe you can set up a measurement system that would be reflective of projector performance under normal use, when dynamic irises are engaged, even though you could create hundreds of different scenarios and measure each, for comparison, but when push comes to shove. IMO, the Epson, overall, provides richer (blacker, and more color neutral) blacks. I have, of course a number of additional side by sides not posted in the review, and upon just inspecting them, you really can see the difference in the iris behaviors of each projector compared to the other, from one scene to another. In some cases, the Epson appears brighter, in others they are almost identical, and if I look hard enough, I can probably find a scene where the Sony chooses to be the brighter of the two. They did, however measure within 8 lumens of each other with the iris off, which is well within the accuracy of my Optic One meter.

Since I only visit the forums for 3-4 days every couple of months, I don't get to spend time finding out what other reviewers and you guys are finding in your own analysis, so I'll ask you. As to overall black levels, what consensus if any, is there from those who have watched the two projectors side by side regarding black levels, etc., how were they calibrated, in terms of contrast and brightness, etc.?

(Note, actually my personal policy is to avoid reading the forums or what other reviewers write, about any projector, until my review is finished. And believe me, the last thing I want to do, right after I publish a review, is read what other reviewers say about the projector)
enough -art
post #40 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Dodds View Post

It might be better to use a O IRE image that doesn't require pausing the PS3.

Yes, you are correct. As it turns out, I can get my AVIA disc to do that, even for a 10 - 20 second exposure.

I plan to do so in the future, but thanks for the point, right on! -art
post #41 of 108
I just find it odd that you would post your opinions on a forum and in an official review based on conjecture is to what you "think" something will look like based on a few reference points. I just think it's a bit unprofessional to do so.
post #42 of 108
Art,

Full on/off shouldn't be any different when measuring a projector with a dynamic iris, although (in the case of the Sony anyway) you will have to choose which iris setting to use. I'd suggest Auto 1.

Simply show a 100 IRE image and measure the brightness of that. The iris should fully open. I assume you already do this for your lumen measurements.

Then do the same with a 0 IRE image. The iris should fully close. Voila, the contrast ratio!

Naturally you'll need a good light meter, but again it is the relative differences between different projectors that we are after.

ANSI would be trickier, mainly because of room effects, but I'm less interested in that anyway. For the same reason.
post #43 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Dodds View Post

Art,

Full on/off shouldn't be any different when measuring a projector with a dynamic iris, although (in the case of the Sony anyway) you will have to choose which iris setting to use. I'd suggest Auto 1.

Simply show a 100 IRE image and measure the brightness of that. The iris should fully open. I assume you already do this for your lumen measurements.

Then do the same with a 0 IRE image. The iris should fully close. Voila, the contrast ratio!

Naturally you'll need a good light meter, but again it is the relative differences between different projectors that we are after.

ANSI would be trickier, mainly because of room effects, but I'm less interested in that anyway. For the same reason.

Ahh, some technology to sink my teeth in.

No, I have to disagree completely! Your method is not a reasonable idea that provides useful info, just a fun way to invent absurd contrast ratios.

What you end up with is a non-usable contrast number, much like the 50,000:1, and the 15:000:1 numbers being bandied about by manufacturers. BTW, I've read, here and there, that the films used to do movies only have a maximum contrast ratio of something slightly upward of 6500. In other words, All these projectors with super high contrast ratios, if the numbers represented reality, would all have identical black level performance, if they claim upward of 7000:1 (can you say every home theater projector). I think not!

When that iris is engaged, and you have some pure white the screen, the iris is wide open. when you do black it's closed down. When you are watching content, you cannot get the closed down iris "black" if there is a bright area on the screen. In fact, measuring with and without iris engaged is exactly how these projectors are measured by their manufacturers, to my best understanding.

And, if that is the case, give or take a small variation, we can all stop debating, because there are only three projectors out there that would be truly superior. The Epson would handily be the king of black levels (50K:1), a small magnitude better than the other two: the Sony VW60 next (35K:1), and the JVC RS2 trailing slightly (30K:1). And, obviously the Sony VW40 would be completely non-competitive, to the Epson with the Sony's "pathetic" 16K:1 contrast ratio.

This is exactly why the contrast specs are worthless when dynamic irises are in play. And the manual iris people do the same thing.

If an iris blocks 75% of the light when closed down to maximum, then no bright area can be more than 25% of the brightness when the iris is open.

Strictly a numbers game, with little practical value. And even from a lumen standpoint. Consider - the iris is shutting out 75% of the light, so your projector measured at 400 lumens, is now a 100 lumen projector on a 100 IRE measurement. So, wonderful, let's use the Sony VW40 as an example. It measured 460 lumens. Let's say at minimum iris, we lose that 75% of the light. Bingo, you have just bought a 115 lumen projector.

Measuring without engaging an iris, will give you a true off/on contrast ratio, which is a good indication of a projector's performance, before the iris, and if all irises were equal, would be a great indicator. but there is way too much variation in how much an iris stops down at maximum to use a contrast spec, with iris engaged at 0 IRE (or just dark) for any reasonable predictability. In other words, depending on the iris design, a projector with a poorer native off/on contrast ratio, may well be able to do better black levels if the iris strategy is superior.

BTW, if you think the contrast ratio numbers are high, at CES I saw a display claiming over 1,000,000:1. I loved it. There is no video or film (source information) that can get within magnitude, except for straight computer generated graphics to my knowledge). But what an nice number, all those zeros... gotta love it.

So, don't be surprised if next year we see the first 100,000 or 200,000:1 projector contrast spec. In fact, you should expect it, since the highest number seems to double every year. It was only five years ago that 2500:1 was king, and now we are at 50,000:1. -art
post #44 of 108
I just picked up a VW 40 yesterday and it suffers from the same black problems (blue/green corners) as the review model posted on projectorreviews.com. Not sure what to do just yet, I will most likely take it back and try and swap it for another unit.
post #45 of 108
I find that reading the posts in this thread is humorous. Most of the members that are raising issues with Art's method of reviewing are obviously obsessed with the numbers game. Measurement numbers are fine for establishing a ballpark category of PJ performance. However, we (or at least me) want a projector that displays the best quality movie image possible for the money we are (I am) willing to spend. After all, that's what I'm buying a PJ for.

Anyone can create a situation in which the measurement of one display device is better than another. All of the 1080p projectors, being sold for under $3K (or even $6K), will display satisfying, quality, pictures for their owners (better if correctly calibrated). All of these PJs have “warts” and performance limitations of one type or another. Most of these PJs also have, at least, some of their performance parameters highly exaggerated (the “bigger is better” syndrome), and some manufacturers exaggerate more than others.

There are a lot of reviews of these projectors, including Art's (www.projectorreviews.com). They all provide information on the units tested, some with more measurement details than others. All of these reviews are biased by the reviewers experience and objectives. Unlike Consumer Reports, all of the reviewers get their review units from the manufacturers as either pre-production or early production models.

Art's reviews are primarily subjective based on his considerable experience (not conjecture) with viewing, and reviewing, projectors from a lot of manufacturers. Art has been very liberal in providing us with information on his experience and biases, which almost all of the other reviewer don't provide. As such, he provides me with the kind of information that I need to make an informed purchase decision, since I cannot (with one unusual exception, 4 years ago) see these PJs for myself.

Back to the subject of this thread -- Based on all the information that I've gathered, I am confident that either the Sony VPL-VW40 or the Epson Home Cinema 1080UB would satisfy my PJ viewing requirements and budget (barely). At this price level, it is the “intangibles” (personal preference, video processing capability, availability, price levels, warranty, customer support, etc.) that will dictate which one I get. So far, my preference is for the Epson 1080UB.

As Kris D just experienced, the Sony VW40 has it's problems too. Kris, you should definitely return it for a replacement.

PS – I'm a retired EE that has spent over 32 years in the design and development of communications and weather satellites. As such, I have been obsessed with electronics performance and measurement. Having dealt with our customer's staff, I am also well aware of the value of a customer's perceived view of product performance. All of the performance measurement numbers don't mean diddly squat, if the unit doesn't do the overall job being asked for.
post #46 of 108
Well said Claus.
post #47 of 108
Thanks Claus, you just pointed out why I believe Art tells me exactly what I need to compare different models. Forget all the numbers and specs, which one looks the best? Which has the features I think are worth my money?
post #48 of 108
Thanks for the post Claus. I think there are many people on this forum that needed to read that. I sometimes find myself getting obsessed with "the numbers and specs".
post #49 of 108
There are some of us who are interested in absolute performance and are capable of drawing our own conclusion. We also want to know if we are getting a sugar pill or the real deal ...
post #50 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uther View Post

I know, hence the entire purpose of my post. This is one of several reviews in which the two are compared. In this case, the review favors the 1080UB, in others (e.g., Projector Central, AVS Forum), the Sony comes up tops.

Actually, I haven't really seen any reviews where the Sony VW-40 comes out on top against the UB (except for Sonystyle.com : ) Sony doesn't want you to pay more for a Sony because its better than the competition, they want you to pay more because you're getting a Sony (I know this because I have one).

This is a quote from the PJC review you mentioned:

"When placed side-by-side with the Sony VW40, it is apparent that in comparable image modes the Cinema 1080 UB has both brighter highlights and deeper blacks than the VW40, making for a significantly wider dynamic range and a more three-dimensional image. "

The better comparison would be with the VW60...
post #51 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKuan View Post

I completely agreed. Subjective evaluation with screenshots are almost worthless to me. Take example of the blank screen of Epson vs VW-40, you can clearly see that the Sony screenshot is more overexposed than the Epson's one by looking at lower left corner pause symbol which has more glow (more overexposed). I can also point to other screenshots that the reviewer seemed to have tailored them to support his preference.
This is why I rather see more posted measurements such as black level measurement, on/off measurement and ANSI contrast measurement to see if they correlate with the reviewer subjective perception.

Give me a break, so I suppose that when you get your pj you'll probably just watch test patterns in your black box with your light meter and laptop set up and not make any subjective evaluations about it? As long as any situation is touched by man, it will be inherently subjective, and should be judged accordingly.

Thank you Claus, another voice of experience supporting our "lowly" subjective evaluations.
post #52 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmccormack View Post

asides from dust blobs, i know already how amazing the 1080ub throws out for a picture, and have seen the vw40 and was blown away as well, i have a z3 of course so anything today looks way better, of course my z3 which is an LCD had some issues, particuallry on the 2nd year, blue polarizer failed and then the actual LCD chip was replaced about 2 1/2 years in, the picture quickly deteriorated in the span of about 2 months, i had persisten image issues and then some real burning in started to happen on the bottom right corner where the left corner and center had started to develop a yellowish tint. I took extreme care of the z3 and cleaned it all the time, but i use my pjs as my main tv so it did log some good hours, about 5000 right now, so my question is, would i have to worry about these issues as much if i did go with an LCOS? If i do go LCD i would go with Epson as they do have the ridiculously good warranty, the vw40 i would also get an extended warranty however no overnight replacement there.

My Sony HS10 (LCD) also had issues with polarizers and then the LCD block, which is a big reason I went with the VW40 instead of another LCD. I've never read of such problems with LCOS, I'm sure people would have posted about it here if they were susceptible.
post #53 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKuan View Post

There are some of us who are interested in absolute performance and are capable of drawing our own conclusion. We also want to know if we are getting a sugar pill or the real deal ...

And that, suh, is perfectly reasonable! I'm just not the guy to turn to. My focus, if you will, is more for the "newbies" than the "hard core".

I've added, more measurements and settings over the last two years, to appease some of you, but, even now, I find my reviews to be more technical, in many areas, than the average first time buyer can cope with, and I am to some degree afraid, that more technical stuff, will just scare the bejeezus out of the folks who really need the most guidance.

And, as always, I'm just one of a number of reviewers, many of which provide the numbers you guys are looking for, such as measured contrast ratio.

And that's the story. BTW, Claus, thanks for the help. Sometimes I just can't explain the why of what I do, as well as I can write about projectors. -art

BTW, my preference of the two projectors is definitely the Epson. However, these are two excellent projectors, that are far more different, than better/worse.

My own bottom line reason for favoring the Epson, is that when watching movies in my theater, and switching from either the Epson to the RS1, and back (viewing 10-20 minutes at a time), or the VW40 tot he RS1 and back, I find the Sony is more like the JVC, but the JVC comes across to me as the better projector. The Epson, vs. the JVC, comes out as more different, than not as good. With the VW40 a feel it's a step down, whereas, with the Epson, which also is not as refined/good as the RS1, it is more different, and if I had to pick a projector from those two, to replace my RS1, I would take the Epson. Talk about subjective!

While I had both here, and was constantly changing projectors (4-5 times an evening), I kept finding myself spending more time on the Epson. When I was done playing, and just wanted to finish out a movie, I would almost consistently choose the Epson.

Anyway, it's just my 2 cents - spend it wisely! -art
post #54 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by pottscb View Post

Give me a break, so I suppose that when you get your pj you'll probably just watch test patterns in your black box with your light meter and laptop set up and not make any subjective evaluations about it? As long as any situation is touched by man, it will be inherently subjective, and should be judged accordingly.

Thank you Claus, another voice of experience supporting our "lowly" subjective evaluations.

I rather have the reviewer do that for me.
Having more measurements included in a subjective review can help a reader gauge the reviewer's bias.
I've read many automobile reviews where the reviewer commented on a car's acceleration that feel stronger than the actual measurement suggest.
Just imagine how the review could be interpreted quite different if the reviewer did not take acceleration measurements .
post #55 of 108
Just some food for thought - regarding projector performance... The other day I received, and watched the blu-ray version of Close Encounters - awesome. This is the first time I've seen the movie in many years. (I had it on VHS, but not on SD-DVD), and I tossed all my VHS a good 5 years ago.

OK, much of the spectacular effects occur during the last half hour - the Dark Side of the Moon Sequence.

I happened to be watching on the Home Cinema 1080 UB.

QUIZ time:

Now, for those of you who have either the Epson or the Sony, and get a chance to watch the movie, here are my questions:

1. What really stood out? I mean after it ends, what did you remember as the most significant aspect?


2. What did you think of the scene as the mothership comes over Devils Monument?


3. What else did you really notice, or impressed/depressed you?

OK, here are my honest answers to the three questions:



1. The most significant aspect, for me is that when it came to the end, I felt much like I did when I first saw it 25+ years ago. Uplifted, inspired, and sign me up for the next flight! - Personally, I'm a sci-fi person, and it is still my dream to get to near earth orbit (go Rutan, Virgin Galactic, etc.) (BTW, if you guys click on enough banners on my site, I just might afford to get there...)

2. The Mothership scene coming over the mountain? One word: Breathtaking!

3. What else did I notice...? The music and the visuals combined to really broadcast a sense of joy, and awe. (You will note that "when you wish upon a star" runs through the musical orchestration mixed with the core Close encounters tones.)

Now, if you answered #1: The black level performance

#2, If you answered: Excellent contrast, rich, well saturated colors


#3, If you answered fan noise, or iris noise...


Then I conclude it is time for a reality check.

IT'S ABOUT THE CONTENT!

If you can't forget about the projector when watching something, you are missing the point. I know many of you are hooked, but it is possible to forget about the equipment, you just have to work hard at it, to "turn off that side".

Hope this sage advice helps someone out there! -art

BTW, When the disc arrived, I knew I would wait until I could watch it without interruption (after the family went to bed), and I KNEW there was absolutely no way, I was going to interrupt the movie to fool with projectors. I wanted to experience the movie.
post #56 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by AKuan View Post

I rather have the reviewer do that for me.
Having more measurements included in a subjective review can help a reader gauge the reviewer's bias.
I've read many automobile reviews where the reviewer commented on a car's acceleration that feel stronger than the actual measurement suggest.
Just imagine how the review could be interpreted quite different if the reviewer did not take acceleration measurements .

So, which would you prefer, the car that measured the faster acceleration? or the car that gave you the more exhilarating experience?

My day to day car is an Infiniti G35, my second vehicle is a 15 year old Mazda Miata. I really like my G35, but I love driving the Miata, it is much more fun, more exciting to drive, despite barely being fast enough to get out of its own way, especially compared to the G35. (0-60 times are roughly 5.8 seconds for the G35, and about 9 for the Miata.)

BTW, re, my Close Encounters posting above, that was last Friday night. Last night I watched it again, but on the JVC RS1. Overall, I have to say, the RS1, is still the better projector, but watching it on the Epson, after not seeing it for years, was the far more moving experience, than last night, seeing it for the second time 3 days later, but that was by virtue of the movie seeming almost like a new experience again, as opposed to seeing the movie a second time, where it again looked great, but "I had just seen it", and it did not move me as much as Friday night. If instead of the Epson and the RS1, it had been the Epson and the Sony, I can say that I would have enjoyed the movie more, on which ever one I watched it on first, regardless of which projector I preferred. -a
post #57 of 108
Art,
The fact is that for all of this you will still send the Epson back when you are done with it.

I ask, how will you feel when you sit down to watch a movie, after you've had the Epson for a while and when the space ship comes up over the mountian you have dust the size of grapefruits on the screen? Will you be able to focus on the movie then? I believe you when you say its probably one of the best PJ's out of the box, but it is in the long run, past your view period that WE have to deal with.

BTW I do like your reviews quite a bit
hats off to your site!
post #58 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by presenter View Post

So, which would you prefer, the car that measured the faster acceleration? or the car that gave you the more exhilarating experience?

-a

I would prefer to have both but if I must choose one with everything else being equal (not likely) then it is a tough choice.
I would probably lean toward the one with more exhilarating experience now than 5 years ago as I tend to drive more safely now.

On another note, I do appreciate your posts which clear up some my earlier confusion in your VW-40 review.
I ended up buying a VW-60 since there were more information/reviews on it and it has performed almost exactly as expected (black could be darker and fan noise could be lower).
The covergence without panel convergence feature enabled is almost perfect, CA is probably a bigger issue than the convergence.
I was interested on the 1080B but the convergence, dust blob and fan noise issues reported were enough to rule it out. I also have a Panasonic projector with one red pixel shift that have been very hard to ignore it.
post #59 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayn View Post

Art,
The fact is that for all of this you will still send the Epson back when you are done with it.

I ask, how will you feel when you sit down to watch a movie, after you've had the Epson for a while and when the space ship comes up over the mountian you have dust the size of grapefruits on the screen? Will you be able to focus on the movie then? I believe you when you say its probably one of the best PJ's out of the box, but it is in the long run, past your view period that WE have to deal with.

BTW I do like your reviews quite a bit
hats off to your site!

True, but then, about 16 months, I think is the longest I've owned any projector (BenQ PE-8720).

As to dust blobs, well if you get the pro version, epson is going to take care of you for 3 years, with a replacement, or 2 on the Home version.

The Epson I have here now has about 230 hours - no blobs in site. BTW, I clean my filters on projectors, about every two months or less. Generally, it is often said, that the more clogged the filter, the more likely to get dust blobs. So, paying attention to filter cleaning may really help (no guaranty).

As to the long run... Well, dust blobs could be problem. Epson and the people who use their panels (all 3LCD projectors but Sony), swear the newer generation of panels is far, far less likely to result in any color panel shift, if at all. Only time will tell. Of course on most DLP projectors, color wheel failures seems to be the long term problem, if there is one. -a
post #60 of 108
One more thing, I mentioned frequent cleaning of the filters. The amount of crap on the Epson filter after just 200 hours is most impressive. You take one look at what I saw, and you have to wonder if, by 1000 hours, any air at all could get through that filter. -a
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › VW40 versus 1080UB Shoot Out?