Well, the Navitar HD conversion lens with a T2 lens vs using a T1 lens was recommended to me by someone that is very well respected around here, has used the Navitar lens, and assured me that the T1 lens on the Lumis is inferior to the T2 - just as found by Wolfgang Meyer on the two T1 lensed Lumises he tested. I'm sure I'll get a ration of you know what from Health Nut, but this is what I've been told. By someone here that knows far more than I do. I was also told ( and haven't found anything to refute it ) that these HD conversion lenses are vitually transparent - much like the ISCO III - they have virtually no negative effect, don't effect sharpness or anything else I can tell ( and they aren't cheap either ).
One thing I know - my bulb is losing brightness without anything else causing it.
The last Lumis I measured had, IIRC, about 700 hours on the lamp and with the Iris closed and lamp on low it measured 1160.
The couple of C3X1080's I remember measuring at 1000+ hours were below 600 (in the mid-500's).
Maybe I got a bad bulb. On the other hand, the Lumis I originally saw at CES 2009 was on a pretty small screen, and not all that bright either.
Interesting. Having become interested in the Mico, I decided to measure the lumens on my C3X1080 and was kind of surprised to see I was only getting 466 (with 1700 hours on the bulb). The image doesn't look the least bit dim to me, but obviously it's a lot dimmer than what I started with (memory is hazy, but I think it was in the 800's). Funny thing is, I thought the image improved over time. Blacks are really good for example. I guess that explains why I no longer notice screen texture (Studiotek 1.3 gain). Maybe brighter isn't always better.
That is the upshot - Casino Royale looks stunning now, but of course not as bright. I hate bulbs - they suck - no matter who makes them or what projector they are in.