Planar 8150 review

....the reviewer doesn't seem to know what an adaptive iris is all about.

The issue is that no commercial test patterns exist yet to test DynamicBlack. We made a few here at Planar that we have shared with TI and some of the reviewers. I suspect that by this time next year, there will be several available.

Another great review by Art.Here was my take of it.Great fp for about 3 times the cost of many fp's that are just as good.I do not see them selling many at that price.Really can't see how they can stay in buisness.

We could have given up features to lower the cost. We feel that consumers deserve higher quality choices.

As Art mentions, "...one might expect it to be a poor value proposition compared to big name, high volume projectors from the likes of Panasonic and Epson. Truth is, the PD8150 projector is expensive, but provides quite a bit of value for the high price."

There is a market for quality, and we are doing just fine.

buddahead: That wasn't my take on Art's review. I'd be surprised if there are any $2700 pjs that match the 8150's purported performance...but of course, I've not seen the 8150 and the only relatively inexpensive pj I've seen is mine, the Panny AX100U...which puts out an amazing picture for the price (MSRP on the newer 200 model is $999) but which had big quality control issues (my pj as well, and with about every Panasonic product I've bought). Would the 8150 yield 8 times better performance than the AX200U. Of course not, but we all know that there's a law of diminishing returns in terms of moving up the price scale to get higher levels of performance. (Nor do higher prices, of course, guarantee better performance.)

Back to Art's review. It is the case that Art had an earlier glowing ("WOW")review of the In Focus IN83 and I agree that there wasn't as strong a sense of superlatives (relative to price range) for the 8150. Also, the IN83 is, I think, about $2.5K less. But again, a $2700 pj might get you a high % of the 8150's performance, but just as good?? Maybe you have direct experience with some pjs that I don't have.

Other reviewers have accorded the 8150 higher praise (and Art certainly did praise it too). Based on the Cine4Home review (available from another AVS thread), Tom Norton's Ultimate A/V review, Kevin Miller's A/V Revolution review, Kris Deering's Home Theater review -- and Art's review as well, it seems to me that the reviewer's consensus is that the 8150 is an excellent projector, and most reviewers have said "a good to great value for the price".

FYI, I've ordered an RS20 and was interested in the 8150 -- especially what I would anticipate to be it's greater sharpness and "dlp look" --but ultimately wasn't comfortable spending 8K MSRP for a projector. Nevertheless, I hope that Planar will have a highly successful run with it and continue with upgrades to newer models...ultimately this has to benefit all of us consumers.

http://www.ultimateavmag.com/videoprojectors/608plan/

http://www.avrev.com/home-theater-fr...projector.html

http://www.hometheatermag.com/frontp...ar/index1.html

Mike W.

Neil:

About 4 years ago I began to upgrade all of my 25 year old audio/video setup. At that time most reviews came out in print magazines (some of which have since folded, others like ultimate a/v are now online). A friend said to me "you have to learn to read between the lines, because almost all reviews are positive." Indeed they are, both for audio and video equipment. Maybe that's because most products are good to great these days, or that "almost every product has some good features or would be pleasing to a certain type of audience," or one could take a more cynical view and say that reviewers don't want to bite the hand that feeds them. Depends on your view of human nature I suppose. In any event, I eventually learned to read between the lines a bit. You have too look as much as what reviewers "don't say" about product X almost as much as what they do say (relative to their other reviews.)

Two other problems with reviews. One is that a reviewer may legitimately say "this is the best pj I've seen in this price range to date," but then a week or month later, in a subsequent review of a pj in the same price range, the reviewer can still honestly say "this is the best pj I've seen in this price range to date," and so on. Problem 2, more of an issue with A/V mags in which multiple people review pjs or loudspeakers, processors, and so forth, is that one reviewer may say "It's the best pj I've every seen for under 10K". Then another reviewer get's assigned to review another pj, and concludes "It's the leading pj in the under $10K class." And of course, both can be honest conclusions because they come from different people.

All that aside, I can only speak for myself when I say that I do pay a lot of attention to reviews, particularly when different reviewers reach a consensus. Not only are the reviewers a lot more A/V savy than I am, they've also seen more pjs than I can every hope to. Even though I live in mid-sized city that has several good A/V stores where you can see pj's set up in showrooms, it's still really difficult to make direct pj comparisons for oneself. Only a few manufacturer's pjs are set up for viewing, different viewing rooms have different viewing conditions, and so forth. Some dealers would be able to order a demo pj for a personal viewing at their office or showroom, others maybe not. Art's reviews on projectorreviews.com are among those I like the best, both for all the issues that he covers and because...for those projectors that I have seen personally...his conclusions seem to match my perceptions pretty well on factors that I consider most important. There is another reviewer who is well regarded by many members of the AVS forum, Greg Rogers, who posts his reviews online but you need to subscribe to that online magazine: Widescreen Review

I'm not a subscriber, but perhaps some other members can tell you how to subscribe if you're interested.
Happy hunting,

Mike W

I demoed the Planar 8150 at Cedia this year along with the new 720P Planar Viper.

The 8150 demo theater was set up much better than the Viper demo.

The 8150 demo used the woven Screen Research AT screen ?about 10ft wide. They also used some new fangled video server/processor to feed the thing.

I thought the picture was very good. For some reason, I don't recall if they were using an anamorphic lens or not. Unfortunetly, I had to rule this PJ out for my own theater, due to a lack of long throw lens option.

I could live with the Screen Research AT screen. I did not see any of the screen artifacts that I have seen in the past with other AT screen demoes.

I also would say I have to agree with Mike W. In particular, I like to see multiple positive reviews from a wide variety of sources. This seems to be the case with the 8150.

Isn't the standard lens for the 8150 relatively long throw (at least compared to most DLPs, other than Marantz, Sim, Runco, for which you can buy a long throw lens for extra $$. Interestingly, for the 8150 I believe it's the opposite: you can buy a short throw lens for extra $$)? I also have a relatively long throw for my intended screen size, but as I recall the 8150 would have accommodated it, which was another aspect of it that I found attractive. What's your pj distance to the screen, and how big a screen?

Mike W

Mike W,

22 ft 1" minimum to the screen. 2.35 to one AR Stewart Studio tech 130 47" high by 110 inches wide.

It turns out that even the long throw lens on the Marantz may not work.

This is why I demoed the Viper. It appears to have a much more flexible set of lens'.

By purchasing and installing the screen first, I have unwittingly painted myself into a corner, so to speak. PJ's that will work are very unpleasantly priced.

If the 8150 had a nice long throw lens, I think it would be my PJ. Any plans for making one available for the 8150, Brian?

The JVC:s and many LCDs including the new Pana would work, but it looks tougher on the DLP front. Are you only considering DLPs? I think it is also possible to stick on an outer lens to get a longer throw, just like you do with an anamorphic one. maybe someone more knowledgeable can comment on this? Are you planning an A-lens? There are both compression and expansion lenses and a compression one should give you a longer throw.

Drexler,

My mistake.

I meant to say 22ft 1 inch throw, which is of course 264 inches.

So, if I am correct, if I stay constant height for 16:9, the equiv 16:9 screen to my 120D 2.35 to 1 scrren is 96"D or 47x84 which yields an unfortunate 3.1 throw lens.

Now you can see the problem.

I fixed it on the edit.

You can use a Vertical compression lens to get your through ratio.

Nate

Yup, I see the problem. If you're going constant height then playing around with a few pjs on the projectorcentral screen calculator (which some posters have suggested needs to be viewed only as a rough guide), not even the JVCs or, for example, Panny 3000 would be able to get you that small a 16x9 image from 22' (I'm leaning toward having a variable image size, and for 16x9 I'm looking at the same ballpark as you, 86-88" wide, but from a throw no further than 17'). No chance to bring a pj closer in? What price range are you considering for a pj, because it also seems to me that from that distance you're going to need a pj that has high lumen output, or at least moderate output if your room if fully light controlled?

It might be wise to speak with some of the sales folks at AVS and get their ideas.

cine4home's new planar pd 8150/8130 review is up.

http://translate.google.com/translat...-8&sl=de&tl=en

I have to say that I am enjoying my film collection 'new and old' on my Planar PD 8130 projector. cine4home are only confirming what I myself and other planar owners are seeing in our home theaters, great pictures, solid engineering at what I think is still good value for money!

Yep,

By satisfying my strong desire to keep the PJ out of the HT by shooting through a porthole, I have unwittingly thrown myself into the $30k plus range, instead of the desired less than $10k range.

Really, the screen is pretty damn big, and the throw distance is not very long, when you actually look at it. That extra 5 ft sure doesn't seem like much to me. A 17ft throw would put the PJ directly above the heads of my second row riser folks. I have a 12 inch riser and a 7ft' 3" ceiling, you get the picture.

Planar already makes long throw lenses for the Viper that would work perfectly well. The 8150 has the ability to interchange two lenses, short throw and standard throw. Lens interchangeability seems to be a rare, but useful/distinguishing feature in the current crop of 1080P <$10k PJ's. Not sure why they can't add a third, long throw option to the mix for us dumb folks.

....I too had the desire to place the projector in an av closet behind the back wall of the theater room, but after some comparison shopping, I quickly got over it.

The development cost for the two lenses was quite high - and a good short throw is more expensive to design than a long throw, so I should have just done a 'standard' and a long throw but then all my friends in Europe and Asia would have been upset...

Let me know if you need any help with your install.

Thanks,