or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › SIM2 MICO50 LED Has Arrived
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SIM2 MICO50 LED Has Arrived - Page 15

post #421 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Health Nut View Post

However, even with current LCD's using local dimming, it seems crude since the area of local dimming is 'low resolution' The true ideal would be dimming of individual pixels... anything less is 'crude'. What if you have need for half of a zone to be full white and half to be full black? Anyhow, local 'zone' dimming seems crude... You would think you might even be able to see individual rectangular zones given diferences in brightness....

Darin pretty much refuted your argument but think of it as a multi zone DI system and the idea that it is crude quickly goes away. You could of course add a fourth DLP but the optics become a lot harder to implement. Think of it as A Chroma system followed by a luminance control filter.

You still have the problem that the single chip DLPs might be too slow to recreate even the 8 bit gray scale but the intrascene contrast would be dramatically improved. on a second thought the fourth panel lcd might solve that problem also.
post #422 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post

I just read a Google Translation of the German review and it appears to very complimentary. I'm not sure what method they used to arrive at the on/off contrast number. I don't see any difficiency in contrast, and the blacks are intense. I also have no problem with lens focus at the edges. Mine is a T2. (I've heard, by the way,that it is not recommended to use the Mico/T1 lens with anamorphic lenses).

They praised the build quality, the color purity and gamut (good examples shown of pale vs saturated color), the out-of-box linearity, the sharpness, the liquid-cooling, and the suitability of wedding LED to DLP. They even said the price wasn't out of line (after factorying in the cost of 10 to 15 UHP lamps over 30,000 hours for a non LED projector). The faint humming from the power supply,the intensity of the status lights on the back of the unit, and the non-intuitive remote were minor annoyances to them. All in all, though, the review depics the Mico as an excellent piece of engineering....validating my good judgement (or good luck) as an early adopter.



Yes, that sums up our review very well. We really liked the Mico 50...

Regards,
Ekki
post #423 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cine4Home View Post

Yes, that sums up our review very well. We really liked the Mico 50...

Any plans to do a review of the Runco 750? Perhaps a comparison?
post #424 of 701
Didn't Ekii and his friends already do a Delta machine, the vivitek? Unfortunately it was just sitting there at Vivitek's ISE booth. By the time I made it to hall 11 the Delta booth was already emptied, so no idea what it had on show, besides a lonely turned off small widescreen cube.

The Runco demo was well executed, from what I heared, but since it was only once an hour, many people will have missed it, like me. They weren't smart enough to do one just after six, when people had to quickly pop by next door to get their bags from the press room. The Runco folks were showing it at 400 lumens, which showed (according to my ISF Calibrator source;-)).

The PD FL32 was shown at peak performance of 500 lumens, a slight drop was perceived following the switch to D65/709 preset, so the 450 the PD rep expected from this setting would be an honest figure I guess.

500 lumens is maximum performance without resorting to RGB overlap (the continous power discusion from a week weeks back in one of the threads here). This is also clear from what I heared at Christie, who's 50"(?) LED cube wasn't too bright. A new software version was to bring full direct control over the LEDs to more consistently reach the 600 lumens it currently has as peak performance.

I have no idea what they did but the Clarity 70" looked a tad brighter, despite being larger, perhaps the brighter content enhanced the brightness perception.
post #425 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post

Didn't Ekii and his friends already do a Delta machine, the vivitek?

Yes, they did the Vivitek. But not all Delta based machines are equal. The PD is in my opinion a very poor performer. My dealer saw the PD side by side with the Runco and said it's no contest. He's trying to get both, the Sim2 and Runco for me at the same time, hopefully next week.
But still, I'd be interested to read some numbers from Ekki on the Runco, especially since the numbers (brightness above everything else) of the Sim2 turned out to be lower than what has been posted on this forum by others. I'll most likely take home one unit, whichever I like better and see how it stacks up against other projectors I own and have access to.
post #426 of 701
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan View Post

But still, I'd be interested to read some numbers from Ekki on the Runco, especially since the numbers (brightness above everything else) of the Sim2 turned out to be lower than what has been posted on this forum by others.

Ekki got between 500 and 600 Lumens on the SIM2 and Jason measured around 650. The Delta/Vivitek/Runco measured round 400 to 450. These numbers bear out what I have seen in terms of relative brightness. If and when you do a side-by-side comparison, you will see the difference too.
post #427 of 701
PD claims it developed the complete machine in house and doesn't use the Delta engine at all.

Anyway, no idea as to US pricing on the PD, but locally the Kroma lists at 33k-35K, including VAT, depending choice of lens. Roughly twice the amount the competing projectors list at, so that will be a tough sell. Eventhough its market presence is higher than the US brands (for convenience this includes DPI).

From what I hear there's a nice margin on these LED projectors, at least on the Runco, so interesting machines to sell.
post #428 of 701
Other projectors you own, hmm did you ever get that Barco you were considering getting?
post #429 of 701
All Vivitek projectors are completely manufactured by Delta, not sure what others add or have Delta modify for them.

Black level and black uniformity on the DPI demo wasn't too good. The DPI at ISE was showing just a DPI logo at the bottom of the screen, most of the time, so it was extremely clearly visible, so even I would notice;-).
post #430 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post

Other projectors you own, hmm did you ever get that Barco you were considering getting?

I didn't buy one for myself, no. I don't need the extra brightness and as far as all other aspects go, I think there are, for my taste, better alternatives. I'm using Barco in other non-HT related installations however with great results.

Over the past decade I've done nothing but upgrade after upgrade in every area to the point where I couldn't enjoy HT anymore. This has to end. I've decided to get a new screen, keep it at 12' wide (scope) max., get a pj that makes me happy, never look back and enjoy it for at least the next 5 years.
I like what the Lumis does, but I think there could be a benefit with a 1-chip design. 1-chip was never an option for me with color wheels, but LED has changed that. 10 to 12 ftl is enough for my taste, hence my interest in the new LED based machines.

I'm also gonna make some changes to the audio side of things, which was more expensive than video anyway. So selling off a bunch of speaker cables will pay up for the change in video alone. Nothing lost there.
post #431 of 701
Thread Starter 
Here's a British review on the SIM2 LED: http://www.trustedreviews.com/tvs/re...P-Projector/p1
post #432 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan View Post

Yes, they did the Vivitek. But not all Delta based machines are equal. The PD is in my opinion a very poor performer.



Th PD is not Delta based at all!

Regards,
Ekki
post #433 of 701
Just read the kast section to the review http://www.cine4home.de/tests/projek...2Mico_Test.htm. Only just over 500:1 ANSI contrast, that's even a greater delta to earlier reviews than dynamic contrast and like the native contrast roughly half the score in earlier reviews. Though it read as not measured, but taken as a given?
post #434 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post

Just read the kast section to the review http://www.cine4home.de/tests/projek...2Mico_Test.htm. Only just over 500:1 ANSI contrast, that's even a greater delta to earlier reviews than dynamic contrast and like the native contrast roughly half the score in earlier reviews.

Have any other Mico50 reviews included native on/off CR?

I'm still confused about what "Kontrast dynamisch" meant in the cine4home.de review. It isn't clear to me whether the projector was setup to blackout on blackouts with the "Kontrast dynamisch" measured some other way than white to full black, whether the projector was setup to not blackout on blackouts but instead to have the 10,800:1 to 12,500:1 total ratio they mentioned, or whether there is some other way they got those figures.

--Darin
post #435 of 701
I was at a pub last night and they had on draft Kontrast Dynamisch. I tried it. Really strong dark stuff and after a few sips I blacked out. I was fine this morning, no after effects.
post #436 of 701
I tried to find a post with this question already asked and could not find one, but what I wanted to ask is...is the Mico 50 really as bright as they say and how does it compare to the JVC HD750 in terms of brightness? Two years ago I bought the hd100 and was quick happy with the picture but I do have ambient light issues and noticed that after a months time, my bulb was not bright enough for my 113" screen. I recently purchased the JVC hd 750 and was quite happy with that projector, but then, of course , the led projectors started hitting the streets. Brightness is my biggest concern and even though the hd750 is much brighter than my previous JVC, I know that the bulb will soon go dim. So now i have the urge to upgrade my hd750 to a serious projector that wont require a bulb change every 8-12months. I know that cost of the Mico 50 is much higher, but a local dealer will give me a good trade in value for my JVC and he will sell me the Micro 50 (when they get one in) at a great price considering what the msrp is. So is it worth the extra money and will the Mico be at least as bright as the JVC (either in best or brightest mode)? Hope someone here has experienced both projectors. I hope that if the Mico is as bright as the JVC ( when the JVC has a new bulb) then I will be quite happy with it. Again thanks and sorry for crossing over to the upper class side
post #437 of 701
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by silver700 View Post

I tried to find a post with this question already asked and could not find one, but what I wanted to ask is...is the Mico 50 really as bright as they say and how does it compare to the JVC HD750 in terms of brightness? Two years ago I bought the hd100 and was quick happy with the picture but I do have ambient light issues and noticed that after a months time, my bulb was not bright enough for my 113" screen. I recently purchased the JVC hd 750 and was quite happy with that projector, but then, of course , the led projectors started hitting the streets. Brightness is my biggest concern and even though the hd750 is much brighter than my previous JVC, I know that the bulb will soon go dim. So now i have the urge to upgrade my hd750 to a serious projector that wont require a bulb change every 8-12months. I know that cost of the Mico 50 is much higher, but a local dealer will give me a good trade in value for my JVC and he will sell me the Micro 50 (when they get one in) at a great price considering what the msrp is. So is it worth the extra money and will the Mico be at least as bright as the JVC (either in best or brightest mode)? Hope someone here has experienced both projectors. I hope that if the Mico is as bright as the JVC ( when the JVC has a new bulb) then I will be quite happy with it. Again thanks and sorry for crossing over to the upper class side

The JVC HD750/RS2 starts out with about the same brightness as a MICO50 but it's typically down about 50% after 500 hours. The MICO50 looses about 5% over 2000 hours and then the rate of decline slows to a nominal creep over the next 30,000 hours.
post #438 of 701
Depending on the settings a 750 can output around 800 lumens which is brighter than anyone has measured the Mico. As Pete pointed out, the output with a lamp based projector will quickly drop and you may end up with less light than the Mico.
post #439 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post

The JVC HD750/RS2 starts out with about the same brightness as a MICO50 but it's typically down about 50% after 500 hours. The MICO50 looses about 5% over 2000 hours and then the rate of decline slows to a nominal creep over the next 30,000 hours.

That's what I am hoping for. I know specs show the Mico at 800 lumens which is really close to the 900 lumens that the JVC reports, but like Jason at AVScience always says, some of the specs are not totally correct. Thanks for the response.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan View Post

Depending on the settings a 750 can output around 800 lumens which is brighter than anyone has measured the Mico. As Pete pointed out, the output with a lamp based projector will quickly drop and you may end up with less light than the Mico.

That is exactly why i want to go to a led base projector. I went through 3 bulbs with my first JVC and have already gone to my second one on the hd750 Thanks for the help.
post #440 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cine4Home View Post

Th PD is not Delta based at all!

Regards,
Ekki

Nice review as always

I was however surprised that the contrast ratio on a Dark chip 4 was only 2200-2500 to one. Why do you think it was so high?

What is the highest contrast ratio you have ever measured on a DLP projector and what do you think is the limiting cause of that high ratio? Is it the back plane reflection on the chip that limits the contrast ratio or something else?

Would you expect 3 chip dlp projectors to have a better contrast ratio than a single chip dlp projector? If so why?
post #441 of 701
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephan View Post

Depending on the settings a 750 can output around 800 lumens which is brighter than anyone has measured the Mico. As Pete pointed out, the output with a lamp based projector will quickly drop and you may end up with less light than the Mico.

Calibrated to D65 with a new lamp on high power the HD750/RS2 has been measuring between 500 and 600. The SIM2 LED @ D65 was measured at about 650 by Jason and slightly lower by Cine4home. The 800 lumen spec for the JVC is the "marketing spec" which corresponds to the 800 "marketing spec" for the Mico. Hence my observation that the two projectors start out with about the same brightness, but the JVC declines rapidly and needs a new lamp after about 500 hours (if you want to stay above 50%). Over 30,000 hours, that's 60 lamps (@ $300 each or $18,000) compared to one set of LEDs for the Mico. With the Mico you pay now; with the JVC, you pay later.
post #442 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post

The 800 lumen spec for the JVC is the "marketing spec" which corresponds to the 800 "marketing spec" for the Mico.

I can assure you it's not a marketing spec on the 750 side, but actually measured. Brightness varies around 25% (give or take a few) between one end of the throw range and the other. There might very well be variations between different units as well, which might further affect brightness.

I have not measured a Mico yet, but as you said Jason measured around 650 lumens and Ekki measured 530/570 lumens depending on throw. So if one is lucky and gets a "good" Mico, it could indeed be brighter than a "bad" 750. But of course there's no guarantee for that.

I think the best option would be to measure the 750 in question with a brand new bulb, see how much light there is and then make a decision about what projector to get. If the 750 with few hours on the bulb is significantly too dim for ones taste, I think it might be worth considering the step up to a Lumis. Of course that step in brightness comes at a price.
post #443 of 701
Actually Jason Reported just over 600, later this was adjusted by Alan, saying that Jason rounded off the figure downwards and the figure was actually much closer to the 655 reported by Coldmachine? Is this one of the US's largest Mico delaers stepping in for marketing reasons or genuine underreporting of the measurements, who knows, but it is slightly suspect.

At ISE Sim2 had a poor showing, but I was later told the Mico was at show at Stewart Screens and a couple of other places. When I had a quick look round the Stewart stand I never noticed the Mico, so can't compare it to the DPI (1000 lumens, 100000 hours marketing spec, the LED lifetime is the one quoted by Luminus, but non of the Delta machines have been showing 1K lumens, nor was this one), nor the PD FL35 (500 lumens according the PD rep showingme the machine. Had him switch to D65 preset and there was some loss of light output. So, maximum there was inded the 400-450 that keeps popping up. Now if one puts that in a Microtile... The regular 50" (LED) cubes were underpowered to my taste.
post #444 of 701
Of course one could stack two JVC's;-).
post #445 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post

Actually Jason Reported just over 600, later this was adjusted by Alan, saying that Jason rounded off the figure downwards and the figure was actually much closer to the 655 reported by Coldmachine? Is this one of the US's largest Mico delaers stepping in for marketing reasons or genuine underreporting of the measurements, who knows, but it is slightly suspect.

I dont think there is anything in the least suspect about Alan stating that his Mico was closer to my number than it was to 600. For you to say that there is defies belief, and I think you are totally out of order. Alan is a totally honest guy, and I dont think you will find anyone here who will disagree with that.

If Jasons number was just over 600, the difference between his and mine is effectively non existent. The difference between the Cine4home's 570 and my 655 is not of any significance. The slightest error in testing or equipment would easily account for that, as could minor optical differences.

I know for a fact that, taken across a large number of units, the Micos calibrated output just over 600 lumen. All the user/reviewer ratings provided, to this point, are in close agreement with that.
post #446 of 701
Yeah I did word this strong, too strong probably. So sorrry! But I am extremely warry about such things. So, if one reports first 608 and then has some-one else (equally well respected as you point out) say 'no that one unit actually measured higher, but the reviewer rounded the numbers down', that makes me suspicious, regardless of reputation.

So, 20-25% variation in measurements are insignificant and we may expect those from various variation in measurements (and factory calibration variation). If this is the case (and I am not saying this is not the case, at all), then (to me) posting these numbers becomes meaningless.
post #447 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post

Yeah I did word this strong, too strong probably. So sorrry! But I am extremely warry about such things. So, if one reports first 608 and then has some-one else (equally well respected as you point out) say 'no that one unit actually measured higher, but the reviewer rounded the numbers down', that makes me suspicious, regardless of reputation.

So, 20-25% variation in measurements are insignificant and we may expect those from various variation in measurements (and factory calibration variation). If this is the case (and I am not saying this is not the case, at all), then (to me) posting these numbers becomes meaningless.

Im not sure how you get 25% variation.

We must compare max with max and min with min. I can get the min number from my test if anyone is interested. Lets take the lowest and highest max lumen numbers as 570 and 655.

570/655*100=87%, thats a difference of 13%.

Considering that you have 2 different machines, testers and equipment, then I would say that the difference is not of major significance. In fact, I would say that had the same machine been tested in both instances, we could have returned those same numbers.

Lets say both measurements were taken with 95% accuracy. One number could be 598.5 and the other could be 622. 598.5/622*100=96% and therefore a 4% variation. That is exactly the type of number that would be expected. ...... (You could argue that the 5% errors could go the other way, diverging rather than converging, but that would lead to a variability that is not possible with correctly functioning LED sources.).

The point I'm making is that taking one or other number as an inviolate absolute is a mistake. There is a degree of error involved.

I'll repeat what I said earlier. The normal brightness for a Mico is just over 600. No results, given norms of test variability, have called that into question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post

Of course one could stack two JVC's;-).

Stacking 2 JVCs would give you extra light, but you'd still be a long way short in PQ.
post #448 of 701
I am looking for what would be a significant difference. 18% on the minimum figure of 530 would add 95 lumens to 625, add the lens min/max 40 lumens and we're talking of 665 lumens. If the min figure is 515 the max figure would be at your max measurement minus just under 20%. So, what difference is significant.

To me the non-sim2's (as i missed that one) are too dim even on a not too large a screen, so another 100 lumens is most likely not bright enough, trying to see what to me would be bright enough.

As for the JVC stack I am not that critical, the HD1 stack rear pro I saw a couple of years ago was /understatement at least bright enough.
post #449 of 701
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post

I am looking for what would be a significant difference. 18% on the minimum figure of 530 would add 95 lumens to 625, add the lens min/max 40 lumens and we're talking of 665 lumens. If the min figure is 515 the max figure would be at your max measurement minus just under 20%. So, what difference is significant.

Donald, I think you may be looking for something that simply isnt there.

The max calibrated output form a Mico is just over 600 lumen. No posted numbers, allowing for test error norms, call that into question.

Either 600 lumen is enough or it isnt. I was surprised at how bright it appeared as were others who have seen it. You should get a demo first anyway.
post #450 of 701
All this talk made me go measure mine, and I am getting 653 lumens from my Mico 50. I am very close to the shortest throw distance of the lens, almost right at the shortest throw.

On my 133" diagonal high power, that gives me right about 35fl, at the sweet spot!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › SIM2 MICO50 LED Has Arrived