or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Epson 61000 vs. JVC RS50, also why the Panasonic PJ News Blackout?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Epson 61000 vs. JVC RS50, also why the Panasonic PJ News Blackout?

post #1 of 41
Thread Starter 
I am upgrading and need help.

First - I have what was a very expensive fixed 150" 2.8 gain screen. This means even with the gain I need some lumens and I am not sure if the JVC will be able to do the required lumens for 3D on that screen.

So - get the Epson LCOS 61000 which will arguably be the best 2D projector ever made sub-$10k or go with a JVC and hope they have not made too many compromises for 3D and that the 3D will work on my BIG screen.

Honestly to me the only viable 3D solution seems to me to be the $15K LG one. Maybe JVC can prove me wrong.

Also where are the PANASONIC projectors???? No one cares about a $500K plasma.
post #2 of 41
You could sell that 150" screen and buy that 152" plasma. That I would call "very expensive".
post #3 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

I am upgrading and need help.

First - I have what was a very expensive fixed 150" 2.8 gain screen. This means even with the gain I need some lumens and I am not sure if the JVC will be able to do the required lumens for 3D on that screen.

So - get the Epson LCOS 61000 which will arguably be the best 2D projector ever made sub-$10k or go with a JVC and hope they have not made too many compromises for 3D and that the 3D will work on my BIG screen.

I have a 142" 2.8HP Cinema Contour and looking at the RS40 or RS50. Worst case I will zoom in a bit to a smaller size to accommodate the brightness if needed.

regarding the specs or general opinion on the Epsons, I'd personally wait to see the reviews. Given Epson's track record with their LCD projectors, i'd be a bit skeptical in their QA with this first gen product. I think they have to gain the confidence of the 3k+ class.
post #4 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I have a 142" 2.8HP Cinema Contour and looking at the RS40 or RS50. Worst case I will zoom in a bit to a smaller size to accommodate the brightness if needed.

regarding the specs or general opinion on the Epsons, I'd personally wait to see the reviews. Given Epson's track record with their LCD projectors, i'd be a bit skeptical in their QA with this first gen product. I think they have to gain the confidence of the 3k+ class.

I have both the Epson 7500 and 9500 and both have been excellent projectors. I'm thinking of buying two Optoma "boxes" so I can run both projectors - one for left eye and one for right eye. I'll fire 3600 lumens at a Da-lite 120" HP (2.8 gain) and for 3D that should do it (supposedly you only lose 20% brightness with two projectors for passive 3D since each projector loses 40% which translates into 20% since you have two projectors running rather than one, and 86% for the active shutter glasses type so that should be interesting). I've experimented with 1800 lumens for 3D and that's barely enough so 3600 should suffice. As the bulbs wear over time a lot of people on this forum will slowly have the best on/off C.R. possible, but they won't see a thing from the screen.
post #5 of 41
I was primarily referring to the convergence issues on the 8500's. it might be acceptable with a 2k projector, but would want to know they have improved their QC for the more expensive products.

obviously time will tell with these new projectors since no one has them yet.

can cyan/red anaglyph 3D really be compared to the new JVC shutter glasses in regard to lumen loss? No one has been able to measure the light through these glasses yet, i'll reserve judgement once Cine4home gets his hands on the production models.
post #6 of 41
We were surprised that Panasonic didnt show anything. I have no idea, but they maybe waiting until CES. As i have always been invited to the premiere of their projectors, i should probably contact them and ask whats happening
post #7 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

I am upgrading and need help.

First - I have what was a very expensive fixed 150" 2.8 gain screen. This means even with the gain I need some lumens and I am not sure if the JVC will be able to do the required lumens for 3D on that screen.

So - get the Epson LCOS 61000 which will arguably be the best 2D projector ever made sub-$10k or go with a JVC and hope they have not made too many compromises for 3D and that the 3D will work on my BIG screen.

Honestly to me the only viable 3D solution seems to me to be the $15K LG one. Maybe JVC can prove me wrong.

Also where are the PANASONIC projectors???? No one cares about a $500K plasma.

Panasonic has nothing other than the AE4000 through at LEAST the end of this year. They may have something at CES, but it was unknown as of Cedia.

Also, LG has the edge for 3d, but is inferior to most anything else for 2d, so my summary is you have to REALLY love 3d to justify what they are asking.
post #8 of 41
Regarding Panasonic, it seems that some people actually do have some info on them.

Since projectorreviews claims that they are under NDA (not from JVC, this is more recent) from a "major" manufacturer. and the fact that on another thread a new Panny projector has been confirmed by Kraine (i hope i got his name right)
post #9 of 41
Note though some of what Kraine said didn't turn out true. Not specifically saying the rumor isn't the case, but things were different for some stuff.
post #10 of 41
Jason,
Is the Epson 8700 coming with a voucher for a free lamp replacement?
post #11 of 41
Thread Starter 
still so tough!

Epson 61000

or

JVC RS50???

I think I may skip 3D for now and go with the Epson, 1,000,000:1 on/off is going to be incredible!!!

I do not think that JVC will have the lumen output to do 3D on a 150" screen, and I am concerned about 2D image quality loss.

Obviously I will wait for reviews on the Epson as it is their first foray into LCOS.

Also can someone please share the rumors about the Panasonic? I find it baffling that after dominating the home projector market volume wise PT-AE3000-4000 for the last two years and also dominating plasma and LED 3D thin displays and also having the exclusive deal with DIRECTV for the only 3D broadcast channels that Panny would just run away from the market and not introduce something to compete!

Panasonic would have to have gone crazy!
post #12 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

I think I may skip 3D for now and go with the Epson, 1,000,000:1 on/off is going to be incredible!!!

I hope after all these years here you've learned that these ratings are just marketing scams and if you haven't then I feel sorry for you.

You'll be lucky to see more than 50K:1 native here especially being their first gen pj in this tech and I'm being generous but gl2u.
post #13 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

still so tough!

Epson 61000

or

JVC RS50???

I think I may skip 3D for now and go with the Epson, 1,000,000:1 on/off is going to be incredible!!!

I do not think that JVC will have the lumen output to do 3D on a 150" screen, and I am concerned about 2D image quality loss.

Obviously I will wait for reviews on the Epson as it is their first foray into LCOS.

Also can someone please share the rumors about the Panasonic? I find it baffling that after dominating the home projector market volume wise PT-AE3000-4000 for the last two years and also dominating plasma and LED 3D thin displays and also having the exclusive deal with DIRECTV for the only 3D broadcast channels that Panny would just run away from the market and not introduce something to compete!

Panasonic would have to have gone crazy!

From what I've read Epson dominates those markets, but regardless it would be interesting to know what Panasonic is up to. I think I'm going to wait for 3D to sort itself out. Epson obviously didn't feel comfortable entering this market at this time, so that tells you something. I may go the really cheap route for now with a little 720p DLP 3D projector ($629.00 about what I'd spend on tax on a JVC)) and upgrade my HTPC (doesn't require much). These DLP pjs are bright enough since they start out with close to twice what the JVCs have in the way of lumens. I may not have high CR or 100% colour accuracy, but who cares if the image from one of those relatively expensive HT projectors is so dull you can barely make it out anyway. I don't want to take a beating on something I buy today that I'll want to replace 6 months from now, especially if both Epson and Panasonic introduce high lumen 3D projectors at a reasonable price. How many people here feel somewhat burned each year when the new 2D projectors have been introduced? Plenty, I'll bet. If you're going to upgrade regularly, at least be somewhat smart about how you deal with your equipment addiction. An 80" diagonal screen will probably work well, a 120" will be iffy and a 150" ? One thing I do know is that for 3D the bigger screens are much more immersive (since the depth causes the width of your screen to appear to shrink) so you either have a large screen or pull your seating a lot closer if you don't have the size to support the kind of immersion I'm talking about.
post #14 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Dallas View Post

I hope after all these years here you've learned that these ratings are just marketing scams and if you haven't then I feel sorry for you.

You'll be lucky to see more than 50K:1 native here especially being their first gen pj in this tech and I'm being generous but gl2u.

The native has been reported to be 40K:1 on the 61000.........which means it will probably be ~35K:1 real world.
post #15 of 41
I am not sure why you are putting Panny with the LCOS pjs. If you were thinking they might have a LCOS pj, then my guess would be that Epson wants to sell their pjs at a premium right now. The other thing is maybe Panny just didn't want to invest in a first year chip. I could see a 3D LCD, but the performance isn't going to be as good as Epson or JVC.
post #16 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

The native has been reported to be 40K:1 on the 61000.........which means it will probably be ~35K:1 real world.

On a hand made pre-production prototype...
post #17 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post

On a hand made pre-production prototype...


Point is that it will not be anywhere near 50K:1 and if lucky might hit ~35K:1 give or take native.
post #18 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

Point is that it will not be anywhere near 50K:1 and if lucky might hit ~35K:1 give or take native.

And how did you magically come to that conclusion? Epson's have previously been able to hit their ratings. Epson has claimed the native panel is capable of 100k:1. 50k:1 in a projector isn't a stretch if the panels can do 100k:1 bare.
post #19 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post

And how did you magically come to that conclusion? Epson's have previously been able to hit their ratings. Epson has claimed the native panel is capable of 100k:1. 50k:1 in a projector isn't a stretch if the panels can do 100k:1 bare.

It IS a stretch for these particular models...........

The Epsons have been reported to have a Native CR rating of 25000 and 40000 for the 31000/61000........the native panel rating(I read that 100k:1 rating as well) is just that..........just the panel............a LOT is lost when put to real world use in the projector. I have read this native rating in more than one place now including here..........

http://www.cnet.com.au/epson-eh-r4000-339306174.htm

My "magic" 35000:1 is just a guess that it will come close, but not quite hit the native rating of 40k:1

Here is a translated part of the cine4home preview............(http://translate.google.com/translat...n&hl=&ie=UTF-8)


The above values were determined with open iris lens and remains the big question, to which the projector contrast here are capable of? Definitive statements can be made for this yet, unfortunately, since the hand-mounted prototype "Wire Grids" nature can not be adjusted accurately to the micrometer. The following information is therefore to be understood only as preliminary, but could already be seen: At the open-iris optics R4000 prototype reached a contrast of around 25,000:1 native, which ensures a very high Inbildkontrast and the SXRD Sony technology already in this first generation leaves behind. If you close the iris in the optical, up to 20 steps are available here, this native contrast are enhanced by scattered light filtering up to 35000:1. However, this is paid for with a loss of light, then left around 500 lumens calibrated yet, what are still not considered to be dark. When little brother R2000 were the first measurements were slightly lower, he moved between 13000:1 and 19000:1 depending on the mode and iris setting.

I am guessing my 35k:1 "guess" was actually from the cine4home preview, so I wont take credit for that Anyway, nothing "magic" about it

As far as the 61000 vs the RS50.........I think it is a VERY safe bet that the RS50 will be superior in native contrast.
post #20 of 41
Thread Starter 
I am not so quick to get on the JVC fanboy express.

I think comaring the Epson 61000 to the new JVCs is valid.

JVC does not use a dynamic iris so is going to have less quality maximum black when the screen would fade out to black so to speak.

If Epson has 40,000:1 native and the 20 step dynamic iris that is undetectable in operation it will be very high quality indeed.

Also I am very concerned about JVC having a soft image in the past, and we do not know what sacrifices have been made to make them all 3D.

I mean to include 3D at that price level what has JVC compromised in the 2D picture?

I just think we should keep an open mind.

The reason I am thinking about Panasonic is that Panasonic may come out with an LG type light cannon at 4000 lumens with 3LCD but price it at $3,000. Panny has a history of making incredible PJ performance available CHEAP and I bet they continue, much to the irritation of the elitists.

In that case I would buy the Epson 61000 for 2D and the Panasonic light cannon for 3D.

For some reason JVC owners tend to be very snobbish and superior I have noticed, I am not sure why - I haved owned an RS1 and a PT-AE4000 and seeing them both on the same screen the - JVC owners don't have THAT much to be crowing about, when their product is 600% of the price. I feel the PT-AE4000 is in some ways SUPERIOR to my RS1.

I am skeptical about 3D from JVC with like 1200 lumens. That simply won't work at all. You are getting almost half lumens in 3D. So I guess if you have a 60" screen the JVC 3D will be great but then why not buy a 600HZ Plasma flat panel for 3D?

If I get 3D I want it to work on my 150" mega screen in my dedicated black walled theater and be and incredible immersive experience.

I am ALSO NOT A FAN of active glasses that JVC is going to use - the polarized passive glasses like were used for IMAX AVATAR 3D experience are a superior solution - much lighter, cheaper, they don't break or cause headaches etc etc.

As far as I am concerned the jury is out and I want to see what all the independent reviews say. I have noticed before too that Cine4Home sometimes does not have 100% objecrtivity as they want to make you buy their aftermarket products.

If I had the money I would buy the LG light cannon with 3800 lumens and the Epson 61000 and use both.

I am hoping Panny will come out with a cheap version of the LG - Panasonic has done an incredible job of bringing great performance to the masses which also seems to drive the elitists nuts but I am happy. I want everyone to be able to experience as much home theater goodness as possible and the cheaper the better!

Not everyone is a trust fund kid with Ferrari's or had the inside connections or ivy league school access to get rich.

I really applaud people who build their own success but despise people who flaunt it.

In accordance with my personal beliefs charity is done anonymously. Like the Facebook guy who wants everyone to bow to him for giving 100 million - if he had an ounce of personal character he would have given the money to New Jersey anonymously. Charity is not charity when you want a building named after you or recognition, benefit and adulation for your "gift" --- anyway don't mean to turn this into a rant...

however I am all for making the best home theater experience available to the most people!!!
post #21 of 41
I am not sure how many elitists or which elitists you are talking about, but I think most would be happy with great performance at Walmart prices. Personally, I consider all of you digital owners elitists. I haven't spent more than $1k on a pj yet. Well, I just did spend around $1500 a pj for my Barco 909s. I guess you could consider me elitist, because I do get a better image than most any pj under $3k.
post #22 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

I think comaring the Epson 61000 to the new JVCs is valid.

I think it is very valid and would love to do it. But the main reason I'm not considering the Epson at this point is because I think the lack of 3D could have a big affect on resale and what I care more about how much a projector will cost me to own total that how much it costs me to buy it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

JVC does not use a dynamic iris so is going to have less quality maximum black when the screen would fade out to black so to speak.

This is a place where I would love to check out that Epson 61000 and it won't surprise me if I prefer it for on/off CR overall (considering native and dynamic).
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

Also I am very concerned about JVC having a soft image in the past, and we do not know what sacrifices have been made to make them all 3D.

I mean to include 3D at that price level what has JVC compromised in the 2D picture?

It may be the opposite. They did things for 3D that will help with 2D. Like the higher bit depth processing may have been done for both. I think that might help the overall sharpness look in 2D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

For some reason JVC owners tend to be very snobbish and superior I have noticed, I am not sure why - I haved owned an RS1 and a PT-AE4000 and seeing them both on the same screen the - JVC owners don't have THAT much to be crowing about, when their product is 600% of the price. I feel the PT-AE4000 is in some ways SUPERIOR to my RS1.

In some ways it is, but I don't think that 600% claim is reasonable at all. For the time the AE4000 has been on the market the used RS1s have been worth around the same as the AE4000 or less and my memory is that the preorder price for the RS1 was less than double the price of the AE4000 now (which is the same as its intro price). Of course the 3 year newer product does better when looking at original MSRP, but that is not a reasonable thing to do IMO any more than it would be reasonable to put down Panasonic because the AE1000 doesn't look that good compared to the JVC HD250 for instance. BTW: For the record, I owned an RS1 and currently own an AE4000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

I am skeptical about 3D from JVC with like 1200 lumens. That simply won't work at all. You are getting almost half lumens in 3D. So I guess if you have a 60" screen the JVC 3D will be great but then why not buy a 600HZ Plasma flat panel for 3D?

Because I can use a Da-Lite High Power screen with proper setup and get way more size than that plasma for one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

If I get 3D I want it to work on my 150" mega screen in my dedicated black walled theater and be and incredible immersive experience.

I am ALSO NOT A FAN of active glasses that JVC is going to use - the polarized passive glasses like were used for IMAX AVATAR 3D experience are a superior solution - much lighter, cheaper, they don't break or cause headaches etc etc.

Maybe you should look at something like 2 Epson 8350s and Dolby Digital Cinema glasses, with 2 external Optoma boxes at $400 to drive things. Color could be a concern, but would likely get more light off the screen this way. Or maybe add an 8350 to whatever main projector you want. I haven't really tried the 3D with 2 completely different projectors (other than test patterns with an AE4000 and 9500UB), but it might be fine.

--Darin
post #23 of 41
I bet these Epsons will be fantastic overall projectors. Compared to the JVCs, I think there are/will be advantages and disadvantages (some of which depend on the individual). I am really curious how well the DI works on the Epsons. I personally have never seen a DI that did NOT bother me, but I guess there is always a first. Of course you could turn it off on these units (which is what I would do I am sure unless they somehow managed to make it undetectable which I just dont see happening for those who are sensitive to this) and still have killer native contrast.

I do have a RS40 pre-ordered, but am still very curious about these Epson models (LOVE the idea of lens memory which the RS40 lacks) since I am betting they will be awesome overall.

When are these scheduled for release?
post #24 of 41
People making these comparisons tend to think of the R21K/61K as LCOS PJs. They are not. Epson's R3LCD panels have more in common with regular glass-based LCDs than real LCOS.

It looks like Epson has taken a half-step on their well-tried LCD process by modifying it for reflective operation, but it is still poly-Si glass based, so one would expect Epson to have lower fill factor and lower raw brightness (unless they do micro-lenses etc.). This is a fairly reasonable if conservative step for Epson since LCOS is very tricky to get right, and there are all those JVC/Sony/Canon patents in the way. You get the benefit of ON/OFF CR, but not the other LCOS goodies.
post #25 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

JVC does not use a dynamic iris so is going to have less quality maximum black when the screen would fade out to black so to speak.

Unless Epson has changed how their dynamic iris operates, it may not make your blacks any darker compared to the non-iris mode. Their iris tends to have more of an effect on the bright end of the scale by opening up more than it does when disabled. So one would need to attach a ND filter in order to bring the blacks down while still keeping decent brights when the iris opens up. This is based on first hand experience with their 8500UB. But if I remember correctly, the 8500UB used a lamp iris, so maybe things will be different with a lens iris. Do the new Epsons have a dynamic lamp or lens iris?

Another potential problem with the Epson is the whole bright-corner issue that plagued most LCOS projectors and was mentioned in cine4home preview. JVC has had plenty of time to minimize the problem. Who knows how Epson will do on their first version.
post #26 of 41
You assumption that shutter glasses cause headaches and polarized don't is wrong.
I can go into details if you want.
post #27 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

Like the higher bit depth processing may have been done for both. I think that might help the overall sharpness look in 2D.

How?
post #28 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

How?

by maintaining detail during movement. What I really want to do is try some test patterns like scrolling text and license plates going by with an RS40 versus one of last years JVC with FI on for both to see if it is easier to read the stuff with one and whether one looks sharper during that. It won't surprise me if the RS40 does better. That is 1080i material though and one is a synthetic pattern. With film during movement there might not be enough detail to matter. I should also say that I wouldn't expect the higher bit depth processing to help the sharpness look with static images or when there is very little movement.

--Darin
post #29 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post


. . . . .
JVC does not use a dynamic iris so is going to have less quality maximum black when the screen would fade out to black so to speak.

If Epson has 40,000:1 native and the 20 step dynamic iris that is undetectable in operation it will be very high quality indeed.

. . . .

I'm glad you qualified your statement above with an IF. The only measurement I've seen of the new Epson Reflective LCD projector's native contrast ratio is on the German cine4home web site (link HERE for translated version) and they measured a 25,000 : 1 native on/off CR with the iris open. This is in the ballpark of JVC CR for their current entry level DILA projectors and similar to their top-of-the-line DILA projectors from a year or two ago. Also any clairms related to CR when using the dynamic iris (DI) tend to just be advertising dept. BS. The action of the Epson DI will cause visible pumping of black levels if set too agressive. In order to avoid objectionable DI artifacts on the projected image the the usable on/off dynamic CR (i.e., with DI engaged) on the new Epson projectors will probably be or the order to 50,000 : 1 to 100,000 : 1 (as per the cine4home review), which is similar to the claimed native CR for the new JVCs (RS40, 50, 60). Having a high native CR is always going to be better than a similar value of dynamic CR, so I suspect the edge will go to JVC in this case, but I'm certain these new Epsons will be quite good. By the way I'm currently a Epson LCD owner (6500UB).
post #30 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by krinkle View Post

still so tough!

...with the Epson, 1,000,000:1 on/off is going to be incredible!!!

If that doesn't scream newbie I don't know what does lol
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Epson 61000 vs. JVC RS50, also why the Panasonic PJ News Blackout?