Epson 8100 2.35.1?? Zoom? Lens Available?

You could certainly buy an external lens (though you'd need to confirm throw ratio and suitability with the Epsom), but you can use any projector for 2.35:1 viewing, if it has enough zoom range combined with your throw distance to fill the screen. What people don't realise is that the AE3000/4000 only have a memory for the zoom setting (plus focus and electronic shift), but once adjusted most other projectors will give the same result. It might be that the AE4000 suits you anyway, but you don't have to buy one just to zoom 2.35:1.

You must use a lens and a scaler to use ever pixel. It can be an internal or external scaler. And of course a 2.35 screen. Cost for each component can be from the hundreds to over five grand each.

If it has enough zoom range to fill the screen from your throw distance. Also note that there are still black bars with the AE3000/4000, they are just projected off the top and bottom of the screen like any other zoomed projector.

I have the Epson 8100 and a 2.40 screen. You'll need a video processor to do vertical stretch, I have Lumagen ProHDP for that but its expensive. I think there is a Blu-Ray player now that has the stretch built in, maybe the new Oppo does it. There may be some cheaper video processors out there also that will do it. Also you'll need anamorphic lens, I have the Panamorph UH-380, that's not cheap either, look for one used. I throw a 109" wide picture from about 13 feet if that helps and it looks awesome. FWIW for the rare 16:9 movie I watch I just leave the lens in place and stretch it out to 2.40, it's not that bad looking, no big deal except here on this forum you get bbqued for admitting that you do that.

I used to have a HDQ myself, but the HDP is similar and often available quite cheaply now secondhand (there was one for sale on the UK forums recently and the guy was almost giving it away). I'm almost the same size as stopdog at 112" wide, but viewed slightly closer at 12' or so, as he says it's awesome (or simply 'great' in my typically reserved English manner ).

I won't bbq you for stretching 16:9 , but TBH I've just cropped the occasional 16:9 film by accident (Valkerie was one that comes to mind) and I didn't realise until I checked some back later on my TV. I've since made use of some spare black velvet which I clip to the side of the screen to act as side masking and I just move my Isco II out of the way (and slightly adjust the zoom/focus to fill heightwise) for those rare (for me) 16:9 BluRays.

Yea they probably give them away now, back in the day it was pricey but necessary duty for VP with my Barco 1209 (same size as Triumph TR6). I wouldn't buy one now for use on a digital which most have great VP already.

I'm too lazy I guess to move the lens but no big deal for me if I wanted since my PJ and lens are riding top of my equip rack.

Basically any projector with the necessary zoom range (and Epson has it) can do the zoom method. You do NOT get full brightness/resolution doing that. As others said, you need an anamorphic lens (more expensive than the projector in question) and a scaler to do that (or a DVD with V-Stretch).

My suggestion if you are on a budget, is spend a tad more on the Panny (better projector anyways) and call it a day...it will be cheaper in the long run.

Jason

I am in the same boat. I just bought a projector ( Epson 8100 ) and it is my first projector. I too have the 2.3.5. itch. After seeing clips and other members and their setups, i have to say 2.3.5. is next for me. You say the Panny 4000 is a better projector than the Epson ? The only thing that made me choose the Epson was that it was brighter but now i read about HP screens.

So i guess my question is, do i sell the Epson and get a Panny ? I have about just a hair under 12 ft of throw in my living room ( until i move and get a dedicated space ). What size would i be able to shoot on a 2.3.5. screen. Do you lose much picture quality when you keep say a High Def football game stretched in 2.3.5. as i am sure that would look killer.

keithkeith,

HD sports is a 16x9 format. If you merely zoom your lens to horizontally fill a 2.35 format screen you will force content off the screen surface at the top and bottom. The other alternative, sometimes implemented on "TVs" is to stretch the content horizontally. This is to say, distort the proportions. Most people pursuing 2.35 display would eschew this approach. The content must be 2.35 or pretty close to be mapped elegantly onto a 2.35 screen. Some folks will use 16x9 screens that match the 2.35 horizontal width they desire. Then with 2.35 material they could use curtains to mask the 'black' bars top and bottom. The lamp system's output will be taxed harder as the square footage increases. Find a blank wall, play with the zoom on the projector with varying content and the limitations will come into focus (NPI).

Everyone who has ever chased down this path has circled this issue a few times in my experience. Savor the journey.

So whats the Panasonic Model ?

Is it brighter than Epson 8100 ? Is there a new model for it ?

So, in short, if we can get a 2.35:1 screen ,
http://www.amazon.com/Elite-Screens-R166WH1-WIDE-ezFrame-Projection/dp/B001EHFV4S/

And have that Pana PJ , we get the full screen used , right ?