or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat › $2K+ a-lens worth it?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

$2K+ a-lens worth it? - Page 3

post #61 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

i was interested in knowing what kind of lens they were using at the cinemas.

ISCO or Schnieder. 35mm Film uses a 2x stretch lens. D-Cinema typically uses a 1.25x stretch lens from ISCO. The reason D-Cinema uses 1.25x and not 1.33x as we do in HT is the 2K projectors are 2048 x 1080, not 1920 x 1080.
post #62 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post

Hi Frank, perhaps the screen was curved, plus the adverts were being displayed without the lens, this would cause the image (adverts) to look curved... The reason the movie was fine was because they would have introduced the lens for the movie which creates some pincushion which would have disappeared because of the curved screen... which makes the movie look normal and geometrically correct...

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

ISCO or Schnieder. 35mm Film uses a 2x stretch lens. D-Cinema typically uses a 1.25x stretch lens from ISCO. The reason D-Cinema uses 1.25x and not 1.33x as we do in HT is the 2K projectors are 2048 x 1080, not 1920 x 1080.

thank you oztheatre and Mark
post #63 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

ISCO or Schnieder. 35mm Film uses a 2x stretch lens. D-Cinema typically uses a 1.25x stretch lens from ISCO. The reason D-Cinema uses 1.25x and not 1.33x as we do in HT is the 2K projectors are 2048 x 1080, not 1920 x 1080.

I really learn a lot in this thread. Thanks Mark!
post #64 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenC View Post

I would agree with this. The HD5000 is a great performer

I've been tortured over the decision between a Panamorph UH480 or the Prismasonic HD5000 lens for my set up. I still haven't fully decided.

In my case I'm setting up for a zoom-method, variable image size, with variable 4 way masking. So I'm not sticking to any single particular screen size. But I have bought the biggest screen I could get to allow for future upgrades. This is 124" wide viewing area.

However, I'd calculated from my 13.6' (ish) throw distance that I would need an anamorphic lens if I want to get up to that full 124" wide. So in my case the lens would most likely be used only when I want to view scope movies at the biggest size possible on my screen, due to a limited throw distance.

I'm still not sure which lens (Panamorph or Prismasonic) would best suit such a scenario and the issue is now accute since I'm having my projector lift installed tomorrow. I am trying to leave dimensions availalbe for adding an A-lens if necessary.

I like the Panamorph as I've seen it in action and the cinem4home measurements of that lens were re-assuring. Also, I like the idea of moving the lens out of the way when not used (that's the anal videophile in me, not wanting more glass in the way when not necessary).

But then...maybe I wouldn't see a difference with something like the Prismasonic HD5000 in the light path all the time. (However, even if I had an A-lens in the path, I'd still be wanting to re-zoom the image a lot).

A quick pre-test showed me I might be able to get up to a 122" wide image with my JVC RS20 just by zooming. So I'm starting out with no A-lens to see if I feel the need. But then, future projectors I buy may not have as large a zoom ratio as the JVC.

Ugh...decisions...
post #65 of 145
Get the 5000 from AVS it is rebranded under their logo.
post #66 of 145
Cinema Anamorphic lenses do not introduce any perceptable pincushion because of the longer throws. In fact, most aperture plates used in theatres with curved screens are filed very slightly concave (in the vertical dimension only).

When I worked at the Cooper in both Denver and Minneapolis which had deep curced (Cinerama) screens, the aperture plates had a significant concave shape in the vertical dimension only and the bowing of the image was quite visible on the screen particularly on rolling credits , both with 35mm flat and scope and 70mm.
Vern
post #67 of 145
Rich,

I had similar thoughts regarding lens choice as you.

I haven't seen any of them yet , but I talked to my dealer about it yesterday.

I was previously able to get both lenses at about the same price and he said it was a no-brainer. Get the UH480, it's the superior lens.

He previously had the HD5000 in his theater but had to change to a UH480 as the big lens of his new Sammy A800B didn't fit and he was clipping parts of the picture. The bigger UH480 gets the job done. Also, he commented that the Panamorph produced a sharper and clearer picture (even though the HD5000 is still a great lens).

Unfortunately for me they sold the last unit in stock a couple of weeks ago and he wasn't sure he could get as good price anymore (they had a great deal importing from Panamorph before). We'll wait for the price, but if he can't get it as cheap he recommended me to go to another dealer to get the UH480 at the old price instead of him selling me the HD5000! Now that's what I call honesty and good customer service!
post #68 of 145
Thank you for that input Drexler. I'll definitely keep it in mind!
post #69 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Also, he commented that the Panamorph produced a sharper and clearer picture (even though the HD5000 is still a great lens).

How much clearer and sharper would a Panamorph would be to a HD5000. Mind my ignorance I thought they would be the same regarding Picture quality. What would make one better than the other?
post #70 of 145
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

How much clearer and sharper would a Panamorph would be to a HD5000. Mind my ignorance I thought they would be the same regarding Picture quality. What would make one better than the other?

Frank,

Thanks for the question. Because of my set up and I can take the advantage of the "pass" mode therefore I've my mind set for the 5000 for a while. But if it is going to be clearer and sharper, I will not hesitate to reconsider the 480
post #71 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlkc View Post

Frank,

Thanks for the question. Because of my set up and I can take the advantage of the "pass" mode therefore I've my mind set for the 5000 for a while. But if it is going to be clearer and sharper, I will not hesitate to reconsider the 480

I'm certainly Interested to understand the difference between the two. What makes one better the other? Is it the lenses they use?
post #72 of 145
Maybe I should add:

I'm planning to keep the lens in place at all times and do the scaling in the projector. My dealers comment regarding it being a no-brainer was regarding my situation. If you need to shift between anamorphic mode and pass through the HD5000 is a very good bang-for the-buck option, and it's still very sharp. He just noticed that when he had to change due to the HD5000 being too small he noticed the picture became even sharper.

I can only speculate about the difference between the two: better optical coatings? Higher quality glass? Tighter specifications? More efficient design? I don't know. If I had to pick one, I guess the coatings will have a big impact. I've heard there is a major difference between the UH380 and UH480 lenses and the coatings is the only thing that changed.
post #73 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Maybe I should add:

I'm planning to keep the lens in place at all times and do the scaling in the projector. My dealers comment regarding it being a no-brainer was regarding my situation. If you need to shift between anamorphic mode and pass through the HD5000 is a very good bang-for the-buck option, and it's still very sharp. He just noticed that when he had to change due to the HD5000 being too small he noticed the picture became even sharper.

I can only speculate about the difference between the two: better optical coatings? Higher quality glass? Tighter specifications? More efficient design? I don't know. If I had to pick one, I guess the coatings will have a big impact. I've heard there is a major difference between the UH380 and UH480 lenses and the coatings is the only thing that changed.

I wonder if there is also a difference between the actual lenses also? Do panamorph manufacture there own lens?
post #74 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by hlkc View Post

Frank,

Thanks for the question. Because of my set up and I can take the advantage of the "pass" mode therefore I've my mind set for the 5000 for a while. But if it is going to be clearer and sharper, I will not hesitate to reconsider the 480

Sorry to intrude guys.. but I would seriously do some more research.. I just can't see there being that much difference between 2 5 element CA corrected prism based lenses... The difference if any would be miniscule at best... Surely someone in the US has both.. a retailer perhaps?
post #75 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

I wonder if there is also a difference between the actual lenses also? Do panamorph manufacture there own lens?

I was told their lenses are made in Somalia Franin, assembled by mentally challenged kids in Afganistan, then shipped to Mongolia China, rebadged as their own brand and then shipped to the USA to be sold for $500 each.

Probably not true, but someone told me.. and I believe them
post #76 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post

Sorry to intrude guys.. but I would seriously do some more research.. I just can't see there being that much difference between 2 5 element CA corrected prism based lenses... The difference if any would be miniscule at best... Surely someone in the US has both.. a retailer perhaps?

Well, projector lenses comes in different qualities even if they have the same basic design. Why couldn't this be true for anamorphic lenses?

Also, people are paying a lot of money to upgrade their UH380 to the UH440 version. Why do this for a minuscule difference? And now we're only talking about getting a new coating.
post #77 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post

Sorry to intrude guys.. but I would seriously do some more research.. I just can't see there being that much difference between 2 5 element CA corrected prism based lenses... The difference if any would be miniscule at best... Surely someone in the US has both.. a retailer perhaps?

Well thats what I thought until I read this comment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Also, he commented that the Panamorph produced a sharper and clearer picture (even though the HD5000 is still a great lens).
post #78 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Well, projector lenses comes in different qualities even if they have the same basic design. Why couldn't this be true for anamorphic lenses?

Also, people are paying a lot of money to upgrade their UH380 to the UH440 version. Why do this for a minuscule difference? And now we're only talking about getting a new coating.

Are these lenses using the same coating? The Primasonic,Panamorph and the MKIII?
post #79 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post

i was told their lenses are made in somalia franin, assembled by mentally challenged kids in afganistan, then shipped to mongolia china, rebadged as their own brand and then shipped to the usa to be sold for $500 each.

Probably not true, but someone told me.. And i believe them

post #80 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aerialsound View Post

Get the 5000 from AVS it is rebranded under their logo.

Thanks for the referal! It is a great lens...we assigned parts AVS1-R and AVS1-M (R=remote controlled and M=manual). Both are under $3k so a great value.
post #81 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Turk View Post

Thanks for the referal! It is a great lens...we assigned parts AVS1-R and AVS1-M (R=remote controlled and M=manual). Both are under $3k so a great value.

Hey that's marketing, and not to mention price talk!! Perhaps you can delete your own posts and give yourself a warning?
post #82 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post

Well, projector lenses comes in different qualities even if they have the same basic design. Why couldn't this be true for anamorphic lenses?

Also, people are paying a lot of money to upgrade their UH380 to the UH440 version. Why do this for a minuscule difference? And now we're only talking about getting a new coating.

It could be... but prism based lenses are limited... and both these brands would be as good as they can get them. They both have the 5th element for grid distortion, they would both use the same RI glasses so I just can't see there being some night and day difference. The difference, if any would be quite tiny.

Did the guy that told you this have them side by side at the same time? Or was he relying on memory?

Did he view the exact same footage using the same projector with the same hours, the same dvd player and same conditions? All of this would play a part in any noticeable differences between these 2 products.
post #83 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post

Hey that's marketing, and not to mention price talk!! Perhaps you can delete your own posts and give yourself a warning?

A wink does not cancel out that sarcastic font size, I think you may need calm down and have a look at the bigger picture here, pun intended.
post #84 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oggythemoggy View Post

A wink does not cancel out that sarcastic font size, I think you may need calm down and have a look at the bigger picture here, pun intended.

I wasn't trying to 'cancel out' my sarcasm... It was my intention to come across sarcastic... It's a bit of a long story... so don't you worry about my sarcastic posts...
post #85 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post

I wasn't trying to 'cancel out' my sarcasm... It was my intention to come across sarcastic... It's a bit of a long story... so don't you worry about my sarcastic posts...

Thats ok, I won't worry about it at all....so long as the the sarcastic source isn't a dealer of some sort.
post #86 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oggythemoggy View Post

Thats ok, I won't worry about it at all....so long as the the sarcastic source isn't a dealer of some sort.

So long as? or what?

Point is there is to be NO SALES talk, NO MARKETING on this forum... except if you work for AVS it seems. Double standards and nothing more. Weak!
post #87 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post

So long as? or what?

Point is there is to be NO SALES talk, NO MARKETING on this forum... except if you work for AVS it seems. Double standards and nothing more. Weak!

Does that mean I cannot mention that I sell the Prismasonic at a competitive price ???
post #88 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenC View Post

Does that mean I cannot mention that I sell the Prismasonic at a competitive price ???

No GlenC it does not mean you can mention that you sell the PRISMASONIC at a competitive PRICE.... unless of course you're a pen pushing avs 'yes man' lol.

I like your calibration website btw.
post #89 of 145
Quote:


They both have the 5th element for grid distortion

Not actually. The corrector lenses remove astigmatism only. Astigmatism manifests as differential focus between vertical and horizontal planes and is endemic to any prism design, no matter how "high quality", unless corrected.

Even with a corrector, grid distortion is completely unchanged. To fix it requires heavy investment in very complex and quite strong (bent radically) cylindrical optics, which prism systems (being two plane-sided prisms and a very weak cylindrical corrector) cannot possibly achieve. To be fair, most cylindrical anamorphics do not address this problem all that well either.

Also it should be remembered that correctors only correct precisely for one focal distance. Outside this "sweet spot" they begin to blur away again. To correct for all focal distances you need, once again, cylindrical optics with one section of them (comprising at least two separate lenses) being an adjustable (i.e. moveable) focusing component (i.e. slides back and forth).
post #90 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie Bob View Post

Not actually. The corrector lenses remove astigmatism only. Astigmatism manifests as differential focus between vertical and horizontal planes and is endemic to any prism design, no matter how "high quality", unless corrected.

Even with a corrector, grid distortion is completely unchanged. To fix it requires heavy investment in very complex and quite strong (bent radically) cylindrical optics, which prism systems (being two plane-sided prisms and a very weak cylindrical corrector) cannot possibly achieve. To be fair, most cylindrical anamorphics do not address this problem all that well either.

Also it should be remembered that correctors only correct precisely for one focal distance. Outside this "sweet spot" they begin to blur away again. To correct for all focal distances you need, once again, cylindrical optics with one section of them (comprising at least two separate lenses) being an adjustable (i.e. moveable) focusing component (i.e. slides back and forth).

Again my ignorance what is astigmatism and what does it look like?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat › $2K+ a-lens worth it?