or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › Epson 8500UB 200,000:1 CR
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Epson 8500UB 200,000:1 CR - Page 49

post #1441 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSlow View Post

Curious, what BD player do you have?

I have a panasonic bd30. I also have a samsung 2550. I can't remember if I have the issue with both or not. I will check again. I have a feeling it has more to do with how I run my cables and a little to do with the projectors ability to pick up a signal. I have a 6ft hdmi that runs from the blu ray to the receiver. Then a 3ft that runs from the reciever into the wall plate. The run in the wall is 15 or 20ft. (Can't remember exactly) Then another 6 ft cable to the projector. So I could be somewhere in there. I know today, I had none of those problems with any signal from my computer and directv. I am running a direct connection with the blu ray right now and experienced none of the problems.
post #1442 of 3635
Have been running a panny ax100u since October of 2006. I've had some issues with it, but for the most part it's been a really good first pj - very bright - just not very good blacks and sharpness leaves a lot to be desired. I've been looking at the epson 8500 though and was hoping that someone in this forum could offer some detail about how much of an improvement this unit will be over my current 720p pj, or from an ax200... Is it going to be a significant difference in picture quality to warrant this upgrade? My HT is in a basement fairly light controlled, dark walls, etc. We sit about 12' from an Elite screen 92" and watch 70% movies, 20% tv, 10% games. Have a panny plasma 50" in my bedroom and the picture blows my pj away, will i get a similar wow and waf factor upgrading to the epson 8500? thanks.

Brent
post #1443 of 3635
I have indeed upgraded from the 200U. I watch from 12 ft on a 110" Wilsonart laminate. I think you'd be impressed with the 8500. I find it has a remarkable picture, especially so in darker scenes. I find it to be brite and sharp and vibrant.
I am using it in a normally dark setting with normal lamp and the THX mode which I understand has very low lumens.
But in my case it's plenty brite. I liken the screen to a giant LCD tv...Worth the money? All I can say is that I'm happy with it and don't regret the cost...but obviously it's a bit of a money grabber!
post #1444 of 3635
With 8500 should i turn on 4:4 or off ? Thanks
post #1445 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSlow View Post

I have indeed upgraded from the 200U. I watch from 12 ft on a 110" Wilsonart laminate. I think you'd be impressed with the 8500. I find it has a remarkable picture, especially so in darker scenes. I find it to be brite and sharp and vibrant.
I am using it in a normally dark setting with normal lamp and the THX mode which I understand has very low lumens.
But in my case it's plenty brite. I liken the screen to a giant LCD tv...Worth the money? All I can say is that I'm happy with it and don't regret the cost...but obviously it's a bit of a money grabber!

OldSlow did you have a chance to compare the ax200u vs. the 8500 directly? Thanks for the input. I know i would like it if i made the switch, my question would be would i have any post purchase regrets if the images are fairly similar. giant LCD tv sounds great - this sounds a lot better than my currently washed out pic with the ax100u and a 1900hr bulb...
post #1446 of 3635
No I did not get that chance to compare...it was something I wish I had a chance to do. All I can say is that I didn't expect it to be as big a difference as it was. Initially I thought there was a smaller difference. But After watching POTC movies I changed my mind. Very very nice. And I consider myself not to be really all that wowed by subtle differences...it takes a bit to really make me notice...more so with audio than video but still.
I'd be surprised if you weren't very pleased!
post #1447 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by tekbud View Post

Have been running a panny ax100u since October of 2006. I've had some issues with it, but for the most part it's been a really good first pj - very bright - just not very good blacks and sharpness leaves a lot to be desired. I've been looking at the epson 8500 though and was hoping that someone in this forum could offer some detail about how much of an improvement this unit will be over my current 720p pj, or from an ax200... Is it going to be a significant difference in picture quality to warrant this upgrade? My HT is in a basement fairly light controlled, dark walls, etc. We sit about 12' from an Elite screen 92" and watch 70% movies, 20% tv, 10% games. Have a panny plasma 50" in my bedroom and the picture blows my pj away, will i get a similar wow and waf factor upgrading to the epson 8500? thanks.

Brent

I definitely got the wow and waf factor with the 8500. I have it dropping in front of my panny 50" plasma and she definitely thinks it looks awesome. I'd say the blacks are pretty damn impressive for a projector (it's my first), black level detail isn't quite there but i haven't tweaked it much yet other than art's settings on projectorreview. (I hope more people post their settings).

If I pull up the projector right over the plasma and run dual video output i can compare directly the top right of the plasma and the projector (screen is 110" da-lite high power) Exactly side by side comparison plasma brightness, sharpness and glass of course looks better. But the screen holds it's own and give you the cinema theater look. I'll watch every movie with 1080p grinning ear to ear for sure. You won't regret it.
post #1448 of 3635
Tekbud,

Unless you plan to junk it, you might want to try a new lamp which will greatly improve what you are seeing with the 100u after 1900hrs. No, it will not be as good as the 8500ub, but you will probably need to replace the bulb anyway to sell or even enjoy using it. Might as well see it with a new bulb and then decide if you still want better. If you do I recommend the 8500ub.
post #1449 of 3635
Got my Epson 8500UB a few days back along with an Emotiva X-3. I had to wait until today to open them up and try them out. I purchased a set of Klipsch THX Ultra 2's a couple of months ago and the wife could care less about the upgrade in sound (compared to a set of Def Tech's.) After I got the projector up and going, I told her to come downstairs and her first words were "Wow." She was impressed with the image and so was I.

I had the projector shooting a image of 130" by 68" (16X9) on a white wall from 14 feet. Using the default THX setting on normal lamp. NFL channel looked very good. WALLE on Blu Ray looked super. Can't wait to tinker with it some more here in a couple days.

In short, no problems and very happy............
post #1450 of 3635
I agree, but I also think its a good Idea its a good idea to limit american families to one male newborn per family. I should fit right in here.
post #1451 of 3635
^Reminds me of one of those AI bots that pop up in forums from time to time!
post #1452 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetfreaky View Post


If I pull up the projector right over the plasma and run dual video output i can compare directly the top right of the plasma and the projector (screen is 110" da-lite high power) Exactly side by side comparison plasma brightness, sharpness and glass of course looks better. But the screen holds it's own and give you the cinema theater look. I'll watch every movie with 1080p grinning ear to ear for sure. You won't regret it.

That HP screen is a pull down? do you get wrinkles or waves?
post #1453 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSlow View Post

That HP screen is a pull down? do you get wrinkles or waves?

no wrinkles when i pulled it down after shipping. i had bad luck with it retracting but Jason from AVS took care of me and is replacing it. You should call him.

It's my first screen. it's pretty damn flat. some really slight waves at the bottom where the black border meets the white, but you could only see it if you stand next to the screen and try to see if it's flat. standing straight on it's impossible. I also think that probably isn't permanent but i've only had it a few days. i do know the screen is plenty bright.
post #1454 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverfaithful View Post

So far people who have their units are very unfriendly with sharing. I only seen one user who has posted screen shots. I don't understand this. I thought people would be happy to post screen shots, I know I would be happy to show off my new toy. Stop being scrooges, it's the holidays...

That is because "screen shots" are too small on your computer screen to mean anything. At best, they might on a side-by-side basis taken from the same screen with comparison projectors show show color or other anomalies, but this is no way to evaluate a projector on a 100 inch screen.
The "screen shots" only prove the projector does produce pictures; which should not be a surprise. gil
post #1455 of 3635
That's what zoom is all about. If you don't like the fuzzy SD picture from Turner Classic Movies on your 110 inch screen, why not re-zoom from 110 inches to 55 inches and enjoy the increase in "popiness"?
post #1456 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiHoStevo View Post

No.


Is there a difference between a Lexus and a Yugo?



You can buy a 5 by 9 foot kitchen laminate for $100; that's about 110 inch diagonal and never seen anything requiring a big buck investment.

So; HiHo, there ain't no difference between a Lexus and a Yugo screen in my opinion. Well, maybe the sales pitch makes you feel better.
post #1457 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverfaithful View Post

You don't compare a high end projector with a entry level or mid-range projector. It is like comparing a Lexus and a Hyundai.

Did you mean between a CADILLAC and a toyota?
post #1458 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by stereomandan View Post

Thanks for the reply Another Dad.

The problem with the 1080UB and 6500UB was that the outermost points would line up properly at the outer reference points once the projector was calibrated, but the points further inside the color triangle don't line up. (see the points inside the color gamut triangle to see how the measured points don't line up with the correct reference points, even though the outer points do.) This led to undersaturated colors in a large portion of the color gamut.

This still may be the case with the 8500UB and 9500UB, but we won't know until someone does the measurements.

It's great to hear that at least the THX mode allows MUCH more accurate color more to begin with without calibration.

Dan

DEJA VU also made comments for AVS about "color latitude" enhancement by the use of filters. There have also been comments from Germany (Cinema4Home) about special filters. As a experiment and on recommendations of specific filter types from DEJA VU, I bought 62 mm, UV, FL-D and 81A filters from CameraFilters.com; cost was $75.

To mount them, I cut a circular hole in the lens cap and epoxied the UV filter (which doesn't affect the color range at all) male threads to the inside of the cap allowing attachment of either, none or both the other two filters from the front of the mounted lens cap.

Skippng to the good news is that picture seemed far more "real". Using the Joe Kane "Digital Video Essentials" HD-DVD disc and in both THX and Theater modes, it was startling to see the demonstration materials look so great on either a Day-Lite glass bead 106 inch screen or the Wilson Kitchen laminate 110 incher. The red headed model, posed with the color tabs showed what I thought was a spectacular improvement of facial tones and there were no 'hot spots' fading from color to white. Viewing distance to the screen at maximum zoom was about 12 feet. On most initial tests, I used all three filters together, but with only the FL-D (mounted with the UV), the results were very close for the color "expansion" since the 81A seems to contribute only some additional warming.

Black and white films from Turner Classic Movies using all three filters looked like exactly the right level of filmlike 'warmth' (to me) without any of the overblue usually seen without resorting to reducing the absolute color temperature; required to match the black and white contrast range as seen in theaters.

I felt the best improvement in color quality, using all three filters together, was achieved by increasing the absolute color temperature from 6500 oK to 7500 oK, reducing the brightness to -2, increasing the contrast to +8 to boost the approximate 3/4 f/ stop brightness loss. Skin tone was a toss up from default 3 to possible 4. No change in tint or color saturation from default.

Looking at all of the test color patterns on the disc through the red/blue/green gelatin filters, there was no difference from the 8500 default results using no camera filters. All the colors seemed "improved" on both the 100% and 75% levels. Don't ask me to explain that one.

To sum up; based solely on my observations and a little help from Joe Kane's DVE disc, I think this is a worthy improvement over the default mode. Looking forward to comments.

gil
post #1459 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSlow View Post

That HP screen is a pull down? do you get wrinkles or waves?

All non-tensioned pull downs will have wrinkles and waves. The nice part about the HP material is that they are impossible to see when viewing a projected image on the screen. If you turn your projector off, you'll see them. Once the projector is on, they completely disappear. This is not true of any other material I've ever owned or demo'd (3 or 4 other Da-Lites and several cheapo screens, including the one from monoprice).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil Arroyo View Post

You can buy a 5 by 9 foot kitchen laminate for $100; that's about 110 inch diagonal and never seen anything requiring a big buck investment.

So; HiHo, there ain't no difference between a Lexus and a Yugo screen in my opinion. Well, maybe the sales pitch makes you feel better.

As I just mentioned, I think the HP is a great option for pulldowns if you don't want to be bothered by waves and wrinkles. Also, some of the new black screens do amazing things in ambient light. I was absolutely blown away by the Black Diamond II. Obviously it depends on your viewing environment and personal viewing habits, but I've never seen a kitchen laminate that can handle ambient light like the BD II or the HP.
post #1460 of 3635
I've had my 106", 16:9, Da-Lite, Model C, High-Power, screen for 5 years. I still do not have any waves. I also bought mine through Jason Turk at the AVS Store. It works great with some ambient room light, too.
post #1461 of 3635
ditto for Jason, but I suggest you jump over to the High power thread here http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=773065 so we can keep talking about the 8500 here

So anyone want to post some calibration settings?
post #1462 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil Arroyo View Post

To mount them, I cut a circular hole in the lens cap and epoxied the UV filter (which doesn't affect the color range at all) male threads to the inside of the cap allowing attachment of either or both the other two filters from the front of the mounted lens cap.

Thanks for the tips! I was wondering how I can mount a filter on with no thread on the lens. Just to confirm: 62mm filter will fit the lens cap, correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil Arroyo View Post

Skippng to the good news is that picture seemed far more "real". ... using all three filters together, was achieved by changing the absolute color temperature from 6500 oK to 7500 oK reducing the brightness to -2, increasing the contrast to +8 to boost the approximate 1/2 f stop brightness loss. Skin tone was a toss up from default 3 to possible 4. No change in tint or color saturation from default.

Have you tried a ND filter? Another poster suggested that using one will improve the black level.
post #1463 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuadESL63 View Post

Thanks for the tips! I was wondering how I can mount a filter on with no thread on the lens. Just to confirm: 62mm filter will fit the lens cap, correct?
YES, fits perfectly and will not obstruct any part of the lens.

Also the lens cap does not reflect any significant light back across the lens.



Have you tried a ND filter? Another poster suggested that using one will improve the black level.

I think there is plenty of black level without any need to resort to ND filtering and I did not want to reduce the light level in Theater 1 or 2 any more than I had to for the FL-D filter by itself or with the 81A in THX. I don't use brighter "modes".
post #1464 of 3635
I'm thinking about saying goodbye to my four year-old Hitachi HDPJ52 (720P LCD). Money being a bit tight right now, I don't know whether to spring for the 8500 or the 8100. Is there a major difference? Will I see a big improvement over my old Hitachi in either case? I intend to have my new PJ professionally calibrated. I have a 106" Vutec screen in a light-controlled room.
post #1465 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSlow View Post

I have indeed upgraded from the 200U. I watch from 12 ft on a 110" Wilsonart laminate. I think you'd be impressed with the 8500. I find it has a remarkable picture, especially so in darker scenes. I find it to be brite and sharp and vibrant.
I am using it in a normally dark setting with normal lamp and the THX mode which I understand has very low lumens.
But in my case it's plenty brite. I liken the screen to a giant LCD tv...Worth the money? All I can say is that I'm happy with it and don't regret the cost...but obviously it's a bit of a money grabber!

You've done what I'm contemplating of doing too. Congrats on the 8500, it's a great projector no question about it

But if you had to compare vs 2000lumens ax200, what percentage improvement did you think it is. For example in bright scenes, is it almost the same? And in dark scenes the 8500 will win for sure, but by how much?

I'm mostly using the vivid cinema mode or normal as the room is painted white with a 1.8 greywolf 106" screen and brightness makes more of difference when not in a bat cave. Makes it's look like a 100 inch plasma
post #1466 of 3635
As far as i understand it I am using what amounts to very low lumens. Thx mode and Normal lamp = 500 lumens?
It's quite dark in my room.
I found that the cinema 1 mode with the 200U was too dull.
I had a new lamp in the 200U. Last going off before the thing was sold I was using Normal mode in the 200U. I don't know what the Lumen equivalent for that mode = but I can say that's they are near the same for what I am using now. So all that being said...the 8500 does brighten up quite a bit when you start upping the modes...albeit the really brite mode looks kinda weird for colors!
Hope that helps!

As an aside...I watched Last of the Mohicans on dvd last nite.
I used that super resolution and FI mode on 1.
I was impressed that a dvd worked so well on such a large screen. The movie is 16:9 and up close the resolution and picture was very good. Of course scenes that were in the distances look a lot less so...

I have been trying to think of a way to describe dark scenes compared to the 200U and I think the best way to say it is that they are more vivid! The 200u would be more grey and more washed out and dull!
post #1467 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by vshine View Post

... My old projector was a Infocus 7200 which I paid over $5k for about five years ago and I can tell you even though the 8500 was half the cost of the 7200 it is definitely a step up in performance. Considering the 8500 is in the same price range as most high end LCD and plasmas I consider it a bargin.

And here I thought I was the only one that waited *way* too long before upgrading my old 7200. I'm contemplating doing the same jump to the 8500ub and while bothered by some of the recent posts here, still think it's probably the best choice for me. The Panasonic 4000 looks interesting also, but I think the brightness edge of the Epson is winning me over.
post #1468 of 3635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil Arroyo View Post

DEJA VU also made comments for AVS about "color latitude" enhancement by the use of filters. There have also been comments from Germany (Cinema4Home) about special filters. As a experiment and on recommendations of specific filter types from DEJA VU, I bought 62 mm, UV, FL-D and 81A filters from CameraFilters.com; cost was $75.

To mount them, I cut a circular hole in the lens cap and epoxied the UV filter (which doesn't affect the color range at all) male threads to the inside of the cap allowing attachment of either, none or both the other two filters from the front of the mounted lens cap.

Skippng to the good news is that picture seemed far more "real". Using the Joe Kane "Digital Video Essentials" HD-DVD disc and in both THX and Theater modes, it was startling to see the demonstration materials look so great on either a Day-Lite glass bead 106 inch screen or the Wilson Kitchen laminate 110 incher. The red headed model, posed with the color tabs showed what I thought was a spectacular improvement of facial tones and there were no 'hot spots' fading from color to white. Viewing distance to the screen at maximum zoom was about 12 feet. On most initial tests, I used all three filters together, but with only the FL-D (mounted with the UV), the results were very close for the color "expansion" since the 81A seems to contribute only some additional warming.

Black and white films from Turner Classic Movies using all three filters looked like exactly the right level of filmlike 'warmth' (to me) without any of the overblue usually seen without resorting to reducing the absolute color temperature; required to match the black and white contrast range as seen in theaters.

I felt the best improvement in color quality, using all three filters together, was achieved by increasing the absolute color temperature from 6500 oK to 7500 oK, reducing the brightness to -2, increasing the contrast to +8 to boost the approximate 3/4 f/ stop brightness loss. Skin tone was a toss up from default 3 to possible 4. No change in tint or color saturation from default.

Looking at all of the test color patterns on the disc through the red/blue/green gelatin filters, there was no difference from the 8500 default results using no camera filters. All the colors seemed "improved" on both the 100% and 75% levels. Don't ask me to explain that one.

To sum up; based solely on my observations and a little help from Joe Kane's DVE disc, I think this is a worthy improvement over the default mode. Looking forward to comments.

gil

There is a new thread started by DEJA VU entitled "TURBOCHARGING THE 8500". So, interested in the use of camera filter experiments to improve color range and general picture enhancemtent, you may wish to follow that thread.

gil
post #1469 of 3635
Just wanted to post a quick update to my issue of posterization and red wavy lines. I am pleased to report that after many hours and a week or so later it has not come back. Hopefully I won't have to exercise the warranty. Has anyone who kept theirs had problems more than once or twice? I suppose people who had more frequent problems would be calling Epson.

Anyway, just an FYI.
post #1470 of 3635
Has anybody else played around with the Contrast Enhancement or the Super Sharpness. You can make this thing really, really pop! I have found that a Contrast Enhancement of 1 is just enough that when I compare it with my normal THB1 settings, the colors aren’t too intense, but what I really love about the Contrast Enhancement is that incredible black levels you can achieve. When an image fades to black, it’s stunning, my room is almost pitch black. Color purist will not want CE on.. but I am loving it on football and I watched a bit of the movie Cars in Blu-Ray, CE makes it look 3-d like….. I love this PJ, I can’t help but enjoy everything I throw at it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › Epson 8500UB 200,000:1 CR