JVC 2011 models & MSRP: RS40 50 60 & HD250. - Page 198  

Just off to a UK launch demo of the X7 (RS50). I'll be sure to post back later with my impressions.


Actually, "I don't do impressions, my speciality is in the study of the mind..."

You are measuring less lumens at 6500k with the X7 than with the HD750? That is surprising.

How would you compare overall image quality between the two?

It seems like prior owners will not really see "measurable" improvements. Hopefully there are improvements that are not easily measurable.

Thanks for your impressions!

Just got back from a dem of the X7.

Curious happenings on the 3D front, one minute unwatchable due to crosstalk, later very impressive?

Full details here

Any suggestions?

Could be lack of sync between the shutter glasses and the emitter?

Hi,

it's not me, it's people who realized this test

http://www.cinemotion.biz/noticia_de...=1165&ccat_n=0

Currently, I didn't see the X7, sorry.

But the 3D effect was definately working?

Not sure what the impact would be or what you would actually see/not see if the glasses were not in sync?

Thanks for the link.

If the glasses were not completely in sync with the image, you will see ghosting because the shutter may be open at times when it should be closed. 3D will work but the ghosting is present.

Did other viewers wearing their own 3D glasses see the extreme crosstalk during the same video segments that you did or were you sharing a single pair of glasses with other viewer? Were you using the same pair of 3D glasses for both the initial and the later viewing? Others have reported that with various 3DTVs a weak (i.e., low voltage) battery in the glasses can cause the glasses to not fully sync properly, resulting in crosstalk. Any chance that was the case here?

This definitely sounds like a sync problem, maybe with the emitter, but probably with the glasses. I've experienced it with weak batteries in the glasses on my Samsung, and I've seen it happen in demos at stores. On a few occasions, sales people have had to change batteries mid-demo.

Thanks Darin. What is your best guess as far as the ST130 maintaining polarization?

I don't understand. If the JVC projectors are horizontally polarised, and the JVC glasses are made by Xpand and horizontally polarised, why are the 103's which are vertically polarised, brighter?

Mike S

There were only 3 pairs of glasses in the room, and one of those was brought later by a JVC rep and was not there during the inital viewing.

I can't say I kept track of which pairs I was using, however, me and another viewier both noticed the initial problem and both saw the improvement, which would mean both of our glasses would have to been out of sunc initally and both in sync later?

I think the emitter is powered by the projector. If it started off good and then got worse later it could make more sense it was a battery issue but possibly not so much the other way around?

Kelvin was going to the same demo so will be interesting to find out if he experienced anything similar.

found this thread with peoples impressions

http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/in...topic=84426.75

wow... almost 200 pages... you people can't shut up about these projectors!!

i've been busy starting my blu-ray collection. it's helped me pass the time the past few weeks waiting for my rs40 (which i assume has been born and is in the stork's mouth on it's way to me as i type this). are we still thinking mid december guys?

as of a few weeks ago i had zero blu-rays, now thanks in large part to black friday deals i have 65 and counting... amazon is awesome!!

I went later and the issues they were having seemed to be resolved. One pair of glasses did suffer a flat battery later on, with on eye getting stuck in the 'off' position. That viewer (Rollon1980) had noticed flicker as well that I wasn't seeing. Though I then gave him 'my' glasses and he still saw it, so I think it's viewer dependant. I did suffer a headache afterwards though, so maybe it's subliminal with me.

I thought that the Christmas Carol film looked much better than the Samsung demo disc they had as it had noticable ghosting, so I guess it's also disc dependant. I did think that the 3D stuff was a little dim for my taste though (the lamp is at around 200 hours on this particular X7 FWIW).

Interesting that I didn't really feel the 2D side was a massive improvement over my recently calibrated HD350 plus VideoEQ. We watched in THX mode on both the X7 and the HD990. Needless to say there was a difference, but only that the HD990 looked redder and the X7 bluer. I couldn't say which was closer to correct as I'm not that refined a viewer. I thought that the brighter scenes had a decent amount of depth to them, but IIRC THX targets 2.2 gamma and I'm used to seeing 2.35 so it didn't seem much if any different to what I'm used to. The fade to blacks weren't as good because the HD990 was in hide mode when viewing the X7 which meant that there was the additional black level being projected over the top of the X7. They did turn off the HD990 later on, but I was starting to get a headache at that point so can't say of the blacks improved much. I also noticed that the shadow detail I've gained since my last calibration was missing from both the HD990 and X7 so perhaps they would benefit from a calibration as they'd only had a basic setup and used in THX mode.

What I did notice was that motion seemed smoother. This was despite the Arcam BluRay used for 2D having to be used in 1080/50p mode. It gave a frame jump due to the conversion, but motion otherwise seemed good. I now plan to home demo the Arcam with my HD350 to see if I get this improvement in my setup or whether it's more due to the projector. The 3D stuff was at 1080/24p from a budget Samsung player and seemed very smooth as well, so perhaps it's the projector though. We tried playing with the CMD settings at one point, but we weren't clear which was which, so turned it off again (I believe we later heard that it doesn't work at 1080p on this pre production model, but I may be wrong).

I'm glad I went (if only to meet fellow AV fans), but I also feel relieved that I'm not getting the urge to upgrade my HD350 unlike the last time I went and felt disapointed with the AE3000 I had at the time...perhaps we're starting to get to the point of much smaller incremental improvements, either that or I've reached my personal 'good enough' level and I'm not refined enough to appreciate the difference.

Who said the X103s are brighter than the JVC glasses (I haven't seen any posting that indicated this)? The X103s should essentially be the same, if the screen retains no polarization, or dimmer if the screen does retain some of the polarization.

You're right, I just reread the postings about the Xpands and they're the same, not brighter with a non polarised screen. Makes sense now.

I know that this was a first impression with a pj that may not have been fully calibrated to make it all that it can be, but nonetheless the impression that the hd350 wasn't left wanting much after viewing the X7 somewhat relieves me of the 'need' to upgrade my rs20 to the rs50/60 ( 2D interest only). Obviously no fair judgement can be made until owners report in and several reviewers offer their views after some time with them. I was really hoping my next upgrade was going to be laser/led to get away from this bulb dimming stuff and to hopefully see increased on/off and ansi contrast improvements with increased lumens. Which I'm going to guess that would be on most folks wish list for their next pj.

I just got off the phone with Mark about the glasses and my mount options. I have come to the same conclusion in that I believe using a low retaining screen will produce identical results for both sets [JVC & X103] and the M$ question is if JVC has done something with the optics to fine tune the glasses to their PJ's (like for color accuracy).

Being we won't know right away I plan on buying two pairs of each, with a heavy lean towards the X's since they're almost 40% cheaper (if identical). That being said if the JVC's are tuned somehow better than I'd certainly pay the premium for better PQ.

Everyone's results will differ in one way or another of course based on % and type of polarization retention. We might all want to buy at least one of each.

Mark is going to provide definitive return policies but his initial feeling is that once they're worn . . .

I am going to contact Stewart re the polarizing preserving characteristics of their various screen materials. I am almost 100% confident that the sales guys won't know other than for their silver screens and I will have to talk to my engineering contacts there who will need to do some tests. I am sure this issue has never come up before. Please let`s not flood them with phone calls. Let me do it, I will get them going quickly and will get results quickly.

The X's are vertically polarized which will only affect you if your screen retains polarization. If it retains vertically you're all good (better) with the X's; if horizontal than you need the JVC's; if none then either will work.

The thing to keep in mind when buying these X103s is that they shouldn't be any different than the JVC glasses if you have a screen that doesn't maintain any polarization (like the HP). If you change screens, though, and the new screen does maintain polarization (or some significant percentage of it), you'll probably find yourself looking at a dimmer image with the Xpands than with the JVCs. How much dimmer will depend on how much polarization the new screen maintains, but it's something you should be aware of. Since I don't anticipate switching from my HP, I'm ordering Xpands from AVS. It's a really good price, and substantially cheaper than the JVCs. If for some reason I were to switch in a couple/three years, I suspect 3D glasses will be a lot cheaper, so I'm not concerned either way.

Ideally, if your projector puts out polarized light (the Sonys put out vertically polarized light and the JVCs put out horizontally polarized light), then IF your screen maintains polarization to any significant degree, you will get more light through the glasses (that means when the lens is open) if the fixed polarizer in the glasses passes the same orientation polarized light. So with the right screen, go with the X103 (fixed vertical polarizer) for the Sonys and the JVCs (fixed horizontal polarizer) for the JVCs. If you screen does not maintain polarization to any significant degree, than the angle of the fixed polarizer in the glasses makes no difference all other things in the glasses being the same, if so. If anyone doesn`t get it, call me 240 876 2536. We all keep posting the same thing over and over and over. No shame if you don`t get it. Call me and I will gently splain it for you. That's what I am here for, gentle splaining and selling.

Thanks Mark. Looking forward to whatever you find out.

I have the RS40 on order and a Draper Onyx 1.0 gain screen (73" diagonal, 64" wide). Would you recommend the X103's or JVC's, Mark? Appreciate your advice!

Jesus H!!! It's been said already like 20 times, it even says it in Mark's comments you quoted. Let me save Mark some time as he's probably getting bombarded.

You say 1.0 gain, but that doesn't tell us anything, because it could be a gray screen with a gain layer added to it, in which case it might maintain some polarization, if so you would get the JVC glasses for the brightest 3D image. If it's a matte white 1.0 gain screen, then there is probably 0 polarization maintained, in which case you would save money and get the Xpand glasses.

Thx for the reply, but plz chill

My Draper Onyx 1.0 gain screen is matte white. I was using it with my CRT projector.

Guess I should order the Xpands

From my testing some "matte white" screens do seem to maintain a little of the polarization and in that case using the JVC glasses will give you a little brighter image. I would wait to decide on which glasses to purchase until you have a chance to actually test the screen. Since you already have the Draper Onyx screen you can test it by using a pair of linear polarizing filters. Place one filter over the lens of a flashlight and shine the now polarized light on the screen. Then while looking at the screen thru the 2nd polarizing filter rotate it to see if the light on the screen gets brighter and dimmer or stays the same (if it doesn't change then your screen does not maintain polarization). If you don't already have a couple of linear polarizing filters, as were typically used with 35mm film cameras, you can use two pairs polarzing sunglasses which typically will have a linear polarizing lens. As an alternative you could use two pairs of RealD glasses (i.e., the 3D glasses given away at theaters) but since these use circular polarizing filters it's a little more complicated. However, you can use these if you shine the flashlight thru one lens of the glasses back-to-front and then view the screen looking thru the 2nd pair of RealD glasses backward (reversed from the way you normally wear them). Rotate the glasses you are viewing thru to see if the images gets brighter and dimmer, or stay the same. NOTE: It would be a good idea to test to be certain your flashlight/polarizer setup is correct. Do this by directly viewing (i.e., not being reflected off of the screen) the flashlight (with its polarizer attached) thru the 2nd polarizer and as you rotate the viewing polarizer you should see a lot of dimming of the light coming from the flashlight in one position of the viewing polarizer.

Onyx is a frame type and it uses Draper tensioned fabrics. The M1300 is such a fabric with a gain of one. It looks like non tensioned mat white but with a different backing and probably retains no polarization.