2009 Mitsubishi Owners Thread (C9/737/837) - Page 13

I have had my 60737 for awhile now, and all this talk about geometry and resolution and keystone on or off as default, is driving me crazy! Does anyone know the real answer or just speculating on how it was for the 2008 models? When I go into the menu that displays the lines the only place I notice a "bowing" affect is directly at the top and bows from about the middle of the top line across the + and finishes on the right hand side still in the middle of the box on the right. The screen is divided into 4 squares while doing this test. So like everyone else, whats my problem then? ha

We don't know yet, but let's assume for a minute, the situation is the same on these new 09 models. When he says "lower resolution"... what exactly does he mean? Not getting full 1080p resolution 'sounds' scary, but maybe not. What are we really talking about here?

Is it only the difference of having overscan, or not? (For that matter, where does overscan play into all this?)

Is it similar to the "HD size" 1 or 2 setting on my plasma TVs?

Hey, if you're happy with the way your set looks with real content right now, then just leave this thread for a few months and come back later and check the consenus once there are a larger number of them in the wild owned by uberusers and larger number of them that have been seen/calibrated by professional calibrators who can provide more definitive feedback based on real experience with this year's models.

Seriously, if you're happy now with how real content looks, there's no rush to get to the bottom of this. If it's giving you heartburn, just go away for awhile.

Cool, man. At least now I understand where you're coming from. I wonder if it really is the same this year --why would we have these two 837s show up with very obvious geometry issues if auto-correction to prevent that was already on by default? We know they made the cabinets a little deeper this year specifically to address geometry issues from the previous model --maybe that allowed them to not use an auto-correction on by default.

Anyway, as I said to newmason --these sets are still very new and not a lot of them in the wild yet. Not even a high-quality experienced reviewer has reviewed one yet that I've seen.

Both excellent questions. I'm not sure "resolution" is as easy in this context as "is it showing 2,073,600 pixels of output?". Maybe it is. Or maybe it has more to do with the accuracy/consistency of reproduction of pixel size and shape of each of those 2,073,600 pixels. Dunno. Somebody in Ohio hire Nicholc2 to look at one of these things.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/06/11...-in-the-flesh/

Gallery of new model pics in the flesh at a show.

Can one of you folks that is in the know about the #37 series please explain to me what the differences are between the 737 and 837? Are they similar in picture quality?

Also my goal is to up-size my viewing from a Sony 52" LCD. Besides the obvious differences in size, does the picture quality (clarity, color depth, contrast etc..) compare favorably with what a LCD can produce?

Are these sets capable of 24p?? since they are 120hz they shouldnt be like pioneers 73hz?? Also are there any issues I should look for when I pick mine up 60"737 unlike light leakage and dead pixels n stuff.

As somebody who has recently test-driven the 2 highest rated LCDs (Samsung A950, Sony XBR8), and owns some of the better Plasmas (I own 3 including the Panasonic G10), there's a hundred ways I could measure the differences, and try to describe them. But I think my simple answer would be -- compared to the very best Plasma or LCD panels, the DLP's image is a little softer, and the blacks a little lighter, but I should stress "little" because it's still very good.

That's short and sweet, and just one man's opinion.

It's also only 1-side of the overall DLP package.

Screen size and cost are the other parts of this package, and what makes it special. The bang-for-buck is amazing, and I have to tell you... it feels pretty good at the end of the day, knowing I spent only 1/2 or even 1/3 of what those high-end LCDs cost, and yet my screen is much bigger, and my image quality is close enough that I don't feel like I'm missing anything important. In fact, I'm seeing things I've never seen because of the size of the screen.

It's a shame the industry insists on thin and sexy cabinets, because DLP technology seems to be the best thing going in terms of quality + price + screen-size. This is my first DLP, and even though I haven't tweaked it much (waiting for 200-300 lamp hours to do calibration) I can tell you already it's a winner.

I myself do not understand the thin is better mindset. If you have a stand that holds DVD, Blu-Ray player and Receiver then it takes more depth space than the TV does. No lose there. How noticeable are the imperfections in Standard Definition TV? I guess what I am really asking is do you find SD watchable? Our Cable system is still behind the times and only SD digital. However I can receive all the networks OTA in HD. Also watch a lot of DVD and Blu-Ray content.

On PQ the only difference I'm aware of between 737 and 837 is an iris with the Mits trade name of "Dark Detaier" that is supposed to improve contrast significantly. Alas, I can give you no personal feedback on how well it does that. Some people claim it can harm gamma response while improving contrast, but I don't know personally.

The consensus is DLPs are inherently significantly better at reducing motion blur than LCDs due to the differences in the tech. Mits enhances this on both models (this year, for the first time on both model lines) with something they call "Smooth120hz". Some people claim they can't see much difference with it on or off. I haven't noticed a difference myself with turning it on/off in very limited testing. But the takeaway is either model of this year's Mits DLPs should be better than any LCD re motion blur.

Now, re 120hz and "judder", or "avoiding 3-2 pulldown". The consensus I've seen is that Mits 120hz DLPs do NOT do this, unlike 120hz LCDs, because of an arcane term known as "wobbulation" in creating the 1080p image on a Mits DLP. Wobbulation is also likely the cause of Happy's observation of a slightly softer image. OTOH, Mits claims they are doing *something* to improve 24 fps images --I'm just not sure what it is.


The last thing to remember about DLPs is that off-angle viewing is worse on DLPs versus LCD and (particularly) plasma. My informal testing is if you get about 60 degrees off-angle to right or left you'll start to see dimming of the picture. Or, if you are lying on the floor two feet away from the DLP above you on its stand, you'll have a miserable experience. If you are quite abit further away and below, it won't be so bad. Even on our 2004 62725 I can watch the TV comfortably from the kitchen in our "split level" house about 30' away and 8' down from the TV.

What I can tell you from personal experience is that a 2009 Mits DLP beats both a 2004 Mits DLP and a 2005 Sony LCD like red-headed step-children for PQ.

I sure appreciate the feedback. All of this info hopefully will help me make a good choice. As far as off angle viewing, it is normally just the wife and I viewing and we are normally in front seated about 12-13 feet away. I do sometimes lay prone on the floor (gimpy back) at about the same distance and angle. We were considering the 65" models for that distance. The wife made the comment "We sure don't want to lose any picture quality..."

That's a really cool wife. You should keep her.

Just for you, I layed on the floor about 10' away from my 60737. Definitely a noticeable bit of dimming, but seemed watchable to me. I couldn't do 12-13' away, because there is an end table and couch in the way.

Hey, man. . .give the store tech a laugh. Go lay down the right distance away right there in the local store and find out for yourself. There was a time pre-surgery where I could definitely "feel your pain"!

I will be sure to pass that along

I appreciate your sacrifice for the cause Actually when I lay down my head is right at the foot of the couch so that is about 10 feet! On you second suggestion... Hmm, other than the visual image of a old white haired guy lying on the floor ( they probably would think I just suffered a coronary), we just won't get to have that experience.. No dealers anywhere close that will allow me to view the set.

If PQ is be-all/end-all for you, then DLP is not the way to go. Where DLP's SHINE is in price-performance for the size. Arguably, screen size *is* an element of PQ. And there are even scientific analysis showing how big a screen needs to be before the human eye will be able to perceive the PQ improvement between 720p and 1080p at a given distance. Personally, my wife and I would much rather have a very good 60" (65", 73") DLP than a slightly better 50" Plasma in our price range. But, Your Mileage May Vary.

Guys, once we spend a little more time with our TVs, we should start posting the settings we use. Obviously nothing can replace a real calibration from a professional, but we could at least establish some basic starting points, and maybe learn something from each other. I'm going to be focused heavily on Gaming, because I'm a die-hard gamer and it's one of the main reasons I wanted a big screen, besides movies of course.

I'm about to lock myself away for a couple hours with Resistance2, NHL09, Pure, Infamous and the multiplayer BETA for Uncharted2.

We started our HD experience several years ago with a 55" Sony rear projection LCD. It had an optical block issue that Sony stood good for out of warranty and they gave use the option of repair or discount on a newer model. That is how we ended up with the 52" LCD we have now. Comparing the two, the rear projection was a bit dimmer and softer image. Also the LCD seems to have deeper/richer colors. The rear projection had a good picture but not as much contrast I guess. Very hard to describe. It sounds like the DLP image is similar to what I had on the Sony rear projection.

I would imagine that gaming on a big screen would be very immersive. Your idea of sharing settings, while not a replacement for individual calibration, sounds like a great way for folks to get to know their sets and maybe give them some ideas on how to get the most out of the sets.

We started with a 2001 Mits RPTV 55" monster (that thing was huge). 1080i only --not even 720p. I promise you the 2009 Mits 1080p kicks the butt of those sets; but a good plasma --inch for inch-- is still better. If you can afford a good 60"+ plasma, then I am happy for you and go for it (and please consider remembering me in your will!).

I've long been of the following mindset:

- If money is no object, then you get the biggest and best plasma you can. That's the best picture out there so long as one gets a quality screen. I'm quite fond of the larger Panasonics myself.

- If you insist on having something to hang on the wall, get a plasma. I'm just not fond of the motion processing that I see them have to do with LCD's. It makes everything look fake and like it's on video tape.

- If you want the best bang for your buck and you're not going to put it on the wall, get a DLP as nothing comes close in the price / performance category.

I actually first desired a DLP precisely for what some people view as a drawback of the DLP, the "soft" image. With the matte, non-relective screens that DLP's have the images to me, especially on blu-rays, are much more akin to watching a movie screen and theatre experience than either the plasmas or the LCDs. That also comes into play because I have a viewing room which lets in a lot of ambient light during the day and I don't like the idea of constantly fighting glare like I would with a plasma or LCD's glass screens.

As a sidenote to Bama29, I sit about the same distance back as you do and I'd tell you to get the 73" Mitsubishi. I just upgraded from a 61" Samsung DLP and the difference is night and day. Much more immersive and the quality of the picture is divine. I'd be tempted to get the 82" model, but that'd be completely overwhelming. At the seating distance you're talking about (12-13 feet), the 73" is "filling" without being overwhelming.

Just my opinion, of course.

I had a 73833 from Nov 08 till May 28th this year. My 73833 will be replaced very soon. I sit 12ft + with my head thrown backwards on the couch, I never experience any problem with the picture either being watched directly, or being watch at an angle. My TV rests on a $1300.00 plus Salamander furniture with rolling casters, height 23 inches. My HDTV den is dark( we want it this way.)
When 82837 shows up, It will be mated with Xbox360/PS3, and Pioneer Elite SC-09 Susano receiver.
Monoprice.com just delivered CL2 HDMI cables a few days ago.
I can not wait to fire up this big monster.
If I am the first to get it delivered to, I will like to start a special thread on this.
Oh, I even requested SERIAL # 1 from Mitsubishi. The TV will be shipped from Georgia.
I will keep you all informed.
Thanks.
George T. Omoregie.

Sorry, that is not what I intended to convey. I have an '08, so my comments should be taken with that in mind, but at least with the '08 models, they appear to perform geometry correction at the factory, as it has been turned on as default according to most of the posts I've read. I had to specifically go into the service menu and turn it off. Sorry if I confused anyone.

I've never restored geometry, but I would assume that it would depend on what the settings were the last time they were saved. It might do nothing, if the service tech saved it after he tweaked it. But I don't know.


I tried to explain it in an earlier post, but it's had to put into words. Essentially, electronic geometry correction "distorts" the image electronically, and the goal is to introduce an exact opposite distortion to any optical distortions that physically exist. The problem is, once you do that, pixels in the image no longer perfectly map up with their corresponding pixels in the imager (DLP). So interpolation has to be done, which robs resolution, or fine detail. The best way to see it would be to put up a black/white checkerboard image, with each square being 1 pixel in size. Once you distort the image, a white pixel may not fall exactly on a physical pixel in the display, so interpolation has to be done to figure out what to produce on that specific mirror to best duplicate the original image. Essentially, a single pixel is trying to reproduce parts of multiple pixels. The resulting image would look like a checkerboard where the image pixels fall exactly on the imager pixels, but some areas of the screen would look gray. In a moving image, moire is a common effect that is visible when you don't have 1:1 pixel mapping.


Overscan is optically (physically) inherent in these displays. The fact that there are displays out there with geometry issues is proof that they can't build these sets with PERFECT geometry. You just can't build something this big, made out of plastic, mirrors, and lenses, projecting an image at extreme angles, with ZERO tolerance for error. They couldn't even do that with the Hubble, and it was much more expensive. So the projection path is designed such that there is overscan, because on the vast majority of content, geometry issues aren't very noticeable as long as the resulting image has flat edges. If there are wavy edges, it becomes much more noticeable. Overscan is a way of "hiding" geometry imperfections. I don't know if the geometry menu has enough adjustment range to bring overscan down to almost zero, but obviously, if you could, that would destroy 1:1 pixel mapping. You would essentially be reproducing a 1920x1080 image on something roughly similar to an 1824x1026 display.


Agreed. If looking strictly at image quality, a good plasma is a little better than DLP. No geometry issues, almost 180° viewing angle, and maintains contrast in brighter rooms better. But the "softness" of DLP is a double-edged sword. That's mostly due to the wobulation, which also tends to smooth jaggy lines (diagonal lines appear straighter as opposed to jagged). Because if this, DLP doesn't have screendoor effect. There are pros and cons to all display technologies. We have a 42" plasma in one room, and the 73" mits in another, and the mits is by far the preferred display to watch. It's MUCH more immersive. The best way I can describe it is: the plasma looks better if you're looking at the screen, and the DLP is more enjoyable if you're looking at the content.


Every time I say this, people get all up in arms and don't believe me. But no RP-DLP is a true 120hz display. They are displaying a set of pixels from the image 120 times a second, but due to wobulation, each set is only half of the pixels. RP-DLP displays can refresh the entire image every 60th of a second. That's why they can't do 5:5 pulldown to eliminate judder. Their "smooth 120" feature does some interpolation to modify motion effects, and might even do it on the sub-frame level (so the fact that half of the pixels are displayed 120 times a second may still be a benefit). But it's not the same as having a true 120hz refresh rate.

Ok, throw rocks at me. Everyone else does when I say this.

Thanks for the opinion. I do have room for the 73" but am a bit concerned that the SD content that I still have to watch due to our Cable provider might look bad. I bet HD over the air or a Blu-ray would look great.

Darin, thank you for taking the time to explain all of that.

Believe it or not... it actually makes sense to me, and hopefully will to others too.

I know you've been getting drilled with DLP questions in multiple threads, and you are certainly a good sport about it.

Thanks again. We owe you one.

The TV can only work with what it's given. SD content is always going to look bad compared to OTA-HD, cable provided HD or blu-ray.

I've actually been happy that Dish Network has improved the quality of their SD signals over the past few months. It's still not anywhere near as good as HD of any sort, but it's not an eyesore like it used to be.

We have a lot of OTA digital subchannels here in LA that are in 4x3 and those SD signals, even though they're on subchannels, look decent.

With more and more content moving over to either digital signals or HD feeds, I'd worry less about SD quality and enjoy the larger size now rather than wish for it later.

No problem, but now I'm lead back to the original question --how do we turn off auto-geometry correction?


I restored mine yesterday. It went back to the way I remember it being the first time I went into the Manual Geometry Alignment menu item.



I think what you just said is we don't have to eliminate overscan in order to achieve 1-1 pixel mapping, which was the concern of at least some of us.


New subject: Do we know what "Film Mode" does in the Global options in the menu? The options are Off and Auto. The owners manual says "In Auto, the TV automatically detects and applies film-decoding correction to movies filmed at 24 frames per second." Do we know how it does that?

Do you have a delivery date or timeframe?

My 65737 appears to be having an argument with my PS3. Most of the time, they get along fine, but in some circumstances - exactly which I have not yet figured out - the Mits will refuse to switch to or from the HDMI-connected PlayStation. In fact, the attempt to switch will cause the TV to refuse to respond to anything, not even the power switch. I must pull the plug to resolve the situation. Near as I can tell, the problem occurs when I power up the Mits and the PS at the same time. Or maybe it's when I try to switch to the PS when it's powering up or loading a disk. Anybody else seen anything like this?