or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Optoma HD8600 - Page 4

post #91 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by bezlar View Post

Maybe we should all just get back to the point. Is the 8600 any good or not? Or is the vivitek h5080 the samething just less money?

You must mean the H5082, which is the [theory] 8600 clone. The H5080 is the 8200 clone.
post #92 of 660
According to a vivitek customer rep the h5082 and the h5080 are the same machine just different model for best buy so they dont have to match price.
post #93 of 660
I find it interesting that Optoma USA and Vivitek USA are within 7 miles of each other. Would have been easier if they had shared warehouses!

Web sites are similar as well. The Vivitek H9080FD LED projector looks interesting with 100,000:1 contrast ratio at 800 lumens, 20,000 hours light source life. Anybody know the price point?

edit: Looks like the price is $15K and it's a big beast!
post #94 of 660
But the 5082 has better specs (as published by Best Buy) than the 5080, and a $500 higher MSRP.

Doesn't sound like the same model.
post #95 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by robkramer View Post

But the 5082 has better specs (as published by Best Buy) than the 5080, and a $500 higher MSRP.

Doesn't sound like the same model.

Vivitek doesn't list the 5082 on their site, a slight spec change could be an excuse to have a separate model number. Vivitek can claim the 5082 has hand picked DMD's or lenses or bulbs or something to justify the spec and price difference. Doing a Google search for the 5082 brings up Best Buy, predominately.
post #96 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Regan View Post

I find it interesting that Optoma USA and Vivitek USA are within 7 miles of each other. Would have been easier if they had shared warehouses!

Web sites are similar as well. The Vivitek H9080FD LED projector looks interesting with 100,000:1 contrast ratio at 800 lumens, 20,000 hours light source life. Anybody know the price point?

edit: Looks like the price is $15K and it's a big beast!

I'm told the LED light source will actually go 50,000 hours, still it's out of my price range for a new TV. Definetly the future for DLP chips. Lets get them prices down. For now we have low priced DLP with great DI, but still with the color wheels and lamps burden.
post #97 of 660
Good review up at projectorcentral for the 8600.
post #98 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Regan View Post

Vivitek doesn't list the 5082 on their site, a slight spec change could be an excuse to have a separate model number. Vivitek can claim the 5082 has hand picked DMD's or lenses or bulbs or something to justify the spec and price difference. Doing a Google search for the 5082 brings up Best Buy, predominately.

Ok, then that makes both the 5080 and 5082 clones of the 8200.
(same lens shift, same PixelWorks DNX chip, etc)
post #99 of 660
The case and the way the lens sticks out looks more like the 8600. Also has the interchangable lens like the 8600.
post #100 of 660
Here ya go: http://www.projectorcentral.com/Optoma-HD8600.htm

Comparable to the JVC RS25??
post #101 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyb View Post

Here ya go: http://www.projectorcentral.com/Optoma-HD8600.htm

Comparable to the JVC RS25??

Nice review, but doesnt mention if there are iris issues. Projector Reviews clearly stated the iris was visible (similar to the 8200). I look forward to lawguy viewing this and letting us know his honest opinion!
post #102 of 660
I'll give you my "not so honest opinion".

I did not see the iris in 1/2 hour of viewing and I did see it on the 8200.
post #103 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottyb View Post

I'll give you my "not so honest opinion".

I did not see the iris in 1/2 of viewing and I did see it on the 8200.

Thats a good start. When I had the 8200 I noticed the iris about 90% of the time. It was that bad and I lived with many projectors with irises previously. Hopefully this is improved. How long did you view the projector for? What were your iris settings?
post #104 of 660
OOPs editd.

1/2 hour and cinema 1. Manual iris at 3 and still plenty bright.

Scott
post #105 of 660
What rate does it do 24fps at? I am not interested in FI.
post #106 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by robkramer View Post

You must mean the H5082, which is the [theory] 8600 clone. The H5080 is the 8200 clone.

I don't think so. The H5080 seems to be the same as the 8600. I believe that the 5082 on Best Buy's site is just a unique Best Buy sku so BB can charge more than everyone else. I could be wrong.

I hate to bring everyone down But I have not placed my order yet. I am heading out to the West Coast today but I think I will order it when I return on Friday.
post #107 of 660
post #108 of 660
Yet again a fairly large descrepancy in lumen output numbers. PR got 696 (717 full zoom) calibrated with lamp on bright iris at 6. PC measured 945 at full zoom, calibrated, in bright lamp with iris at 6. So we have a fairly high descrepancy of 220+ lumens. Makes it really hard to determine ftl on a large screen. Has anyone here done any lumen measurements of their PJ at home to determine which site has more accurate lumen readings? I don't mean just this PJ, but any PJ.

Thanks,
Bricktop
post #109 of 660
Ordered 8600 today will post comments when I swap out old. The two reviews sold me on it plus the fact that my dealer is a friend and said much better than 8200.
post #110 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrickTop View Post

Yet again a fairly large descrepancy in lumen output numbers. PR got 696 (717 full zoom) calibrated with lamp on bright iris at 6. PC measured 945 at full zoom, calibrated, in bright lamp with iris at 6. So we have a fairly high descrepancy of 220+ lumens. Makes it really hard to determine ftl on a large screen. Has anyone here done any lumen measurements of their PJ at home to determine which site has more accurate lumen readings? I don't mean just this PJ, but any PJ.

Thanks,
Bricktop

Does anyone here actually trust what Projectorcentral says? I would personally go with Art at projectorreviews as I don't think projectorcentral is a credible source.
post #111 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrickTop View Post

Yet again a fairly large descrepancy in lumen output numbers. PR got 696 (717 full zoom) calibrated with lamp on bright iris at 6. PC measured 945 at full zoom, calibrated, in bright lamp with iris at 6. So we have a fairly high descrepancy of 220+ lumens. Makes it really hard to determine ftl on a large screen. Has anyone here done any lumen measurements of their PJ at home to determine which site has more accurate lumen readings? I don't mean just this PJ, but any PJ.

Thanks,
Bricktop

Your right their info is flawed, lumens are not a universal thing they need to supply the screen size and gain they were using. Knowing whether they're using calman or another color sensor device with program would be good to know also. Light level should be tested with a light meter. They should supply the light info in Lux or Ftc so users can calculate what their lumens will be.

In bright lamp, manual iris opened my light meter reads a solid 37ft-candles. My screen is 106" diagonal 1.0 gain. Max brightness for this screen would be 1121 lumens. Low lamp 30ftc = 909lumens on my screen. I'm not going to take the projector down so those numbers are close to max zoom, not as high of a reading as it could be but close enough.
post #112 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans View Post

Does anyone here actually trust what Projectorcentral says? I would personally go with Art at projectorreviews as I don't think projectorcentral is a credible source.

Agreed, and it looks like Art thinks the DI isn't up to par, similar to the 8200 DI.
I saw the 8200 at Optoma and thought it looked great, except the DI was too obvious in several scenes.
post #113 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Regan View Post

Agreed, and it looks like Art thinks the DI isn't up to par, similar to the 8200 DI.
I saw the 8200 at Optoma and thought it looked great, except the DI was too obvious in several scenes.

You need to read the whole review.
Later in the review he said something like it's not very often it(the iris) affects the image so even with the iris, it's dazzling.

Also, I've seen it and it's no where near the 8200 iris.
post #114 of 660
Yes I know, only one owner with a positive on the iris plus me and Scotty also. Wait till a dozen or more people get one and give feedback on the Iris, The debate will be over. Main competition is the RS25, love it.

Here's an effective test I did. Testing how well the mechanical Iris lowers overall brightness. My light meter shows each click lowers the brightness by about 3ftc, now there are 9 clicks on the Iris. Think about that, that essentially the full gamut of brightness, so very effective indeed. Factory likes the Iris at 6 but at I was able to get the light level down to digital theater reference 12ft lamberts off the screen taking the iris down to number 3. Very cool
post #115 of 660
Gimmie some scenes where other irises show up and I'll compare this one.
post #116 of 660
guitarman or scottyb ,is that the HD8600 is far ahead of the HD81? does optoma made a great leap forward?
post #117 of 660
If DI is better than 8200, I could probably live with it(other than price and reliability concerns). It sounds like the 8600 DI still isn't at the level of the Planar 8150. I wonder if there are some tweaks in the service mode for DI like the 8200 has?

Guitarman, a good torture test is "Dark Knight", this is where I saw 8200 DI issues from scene to scene with a slow ramp up or down of iris,
check jail interior scenes with interrogation of Joker.

The HD81-LV has more iris steps, 14 I think, and I really like that feature. Of course it's DI is useless, same as the HD-81.
post #118 of 660
OK info in both reviews, but neither went into VP or how it handles 24p material (regardless of the CFI stuff - if it stays at 60Hz or goes to 48 or 96 or whatever). For film, I personally must have a multiple of 24 rate and repeated cadence (with any kind of frame interpolation off).
post #119 of 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Regan View Post

If DI is better than 8200, I could probably live with it(other than price and reliability concerns). It sounds like the 8600 DI still isn't at the level of the Planar 8150. I wonder if there are some tweaks in the service mode for DI like the 8200 has?

Guitarman, a good torture test is "Dark Knight", this is where I saw 8200 DI issues from scene to scene with a slow ramp up or down of iris,
check jail interior scenes with interrogation of Joker.

The HD81-LV has more iris steps, 14 I think, and I really like that feature. Of course it's DI is useless, same as the HD-81.

I'm telling you man this is the one. I watched hours of Dark Night and qued in on the jail scene and nothing zero detection. Ok there's a shot early in the movie when the black cop looks up to the sky which is lit by the moon, there I saw the iris close down in the seconds time. But it this something to rule a DI out? I'll bet all of them show that clip the same way. But man the black level with the additional static iris taking the off screen lamberts to 2.2 is unreal. Fade to black, this is a 2.35 movie and when a scene fades to black you can't see the 2.35 bars with the video, it's just total black. You have to check it out.
post #120 of 660
I just got one. Give me a few days and I will get back with some measurement. I just replace my Sharp XV-Z20000 with a Anthem LTX-500 (RS20 clone). After just 10 minutes it's seem very good. Will let you know after more testing.

Bruno
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home