or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat › Tease, new Prismasonic cylindrical lens and remote motorized sled.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tease, new Prismasonic cylindrical lens and remote motorized sled. - Page 2

post #31 of 608
My eye glasses have plastic lenses and they work very well -- except when I scratch them or scuff them. As I understand it, the Schneider EL will have glass front and back with the plastic in-between. I'm sure it will have slightly less detail and contrast than their all-glass lenses, but the question is how much less. In my opinion, there's a big performance gap between a Panamorph and a standard ISCO/Schneider. I'm hoping the Schneider EL will slot in between these two...not as soft looking as a Panamorph, not as highly resolved as an all-glass ISCO/Schneider. In the absence of comparison, the Panamorph looks pretty good. I'm anticipating that the EL will look better, but we shall see.
post #32 of 608
I wasn't aware of any glass in it, but, I agree their "target" is Panamorph (quality).
post #33 of 608
The new Schneider lens has 10% light loss due the the plastic and glass design.
post #34 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by russelliht View Post

The new Schneider lens has 10% light loss due the the plastic and glass design.

If that's right, I know someone who will have a big smile when they get up in a little while.
post #35 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by GetGray View Post

Price is right. Performace is yet to bee seen.

You didn't see it?
post #36 of 608
Hi Mark, yes I did. This year and last year. But only at the booth. Never in a critical enviroment.
post #37 of 608
They had it on their spec sheets they were passing out at CEDIA. It shows the comparison between the lenses and that was the rating for their plastic lens.
post #38 of 608
Very interesting. I didnt bother to pick one up. Shame on me. Still, very interesting. Thanks.
post #39 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post

My eye glasses have plastic lenses and they work very well -- except when I scratch them or scuff them. As I understand it, the Schneider EL will have glass front and back with the plastic in-between. I'm sure it will have slightly less detail and contrast than their all-glass lenses, but the question is how much less. In my opinion, there's a big performance gap between a Panamorph and a standard ISCO/Schneider. I'm hoping the Schneider EL will slot in between these two...not as soft looking as a Panamorph, not as highly resolved as an all-glass ISCO/Schneider. In the absence of comparison, the Panamorph looks pretty good. I'm anticipating that the EL will look better, but we shall see.

If you know me by now, you'd know there's a very complicated explanation for why equating plastic eyeglass lenses with plastic projection lenses isn't valid. But I'll spare you all that.

Plastic eyeglass lenses are truly woeful for projection. I tried it for kicks (cost a few bucks) several years ago. Eyeglass lenses' curvature is measured in 1/4 diopters, with +/- 0.09 diopter tolerances (by australian standards anyway), which can amount up to about a 2% tolerance on a glass curvature... utterly unacceptable for projection purposes. On a 250mm nominal focal length lens you could have bits of that were 244mm focal length and other bits that were 256mm focal length, all mixed up together on the same surface: hardly the stuff of legendary optical performance. A flat spot on a glass lens of just 0.1% difference to the rest of its surface makes that lens a reject, as you can never focus it evenly.

For projection lenses you're talking 0.25% radius tolerance all over a large lens, as a starting point, and consistent over the entire surface, better, if your manufacturer can manage it. You really would need glasses - the kind you mail-order off the back of Superman comic books - to view a picture projected through eyeglass-quality plastic lenses. That, and the human eye has an ability to adapt to slight inconsistencies in eyeglass focal lengths and still deliver a reasonable image on the retina. There's no "adaptive" process in projection. You have to get it right first and all other times (which is why most use, and always have used, glass).

I'm not quick to naysay the new Schneider lens, because I don't have a clue under what conditions it was made. Plastic eyeglass lenses I have experience with. They're fun, but useless for even half-serious viewing.

The "10%" light loss figure could have been misunderstood, or quoted out of context. I do know that some plastics are clearer than glass, and are used in preference to it in some cases. They are certainly cheaper - by the thousand - but the setting up of dies and so on costs a literal fortune. So, unless Schneider are intending to make these lenses by the thousand, or at least many hundreds, I can't personally see the point. But as I said, of course I'm not at all privy to their business plan.

When you're using plastics in doublets (as I assume any decent projection lens would have to do) the problems increase, as matching indices of refraction across a large production run is often batch-dependent. Even slight variations, sometimes within a batch, can make errors more glaring at the margins.

It does seem like a retrograde step - going back to plastic - but if anyone can do it and garner OK results, I guess a big firm like Schneider can. However, glass is still the preferred option, for mine, but I would say that, wouldn't I?

P.S. Japan Dave... you have zero sense of humour mate.
post #40 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by GetGray View Post

I wasn't aware of any glass in it, but, I agree their "target" is Panamorph (quality).

Panamorph quality?? I thought Panamorph was equal or even better than an ISCO/Schneider so I have been told.
post #41 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

Panamorph quality?? I thought Panamorph was equal or even better than an ISCO/Schneider so I have been told.

Given I was either misquoted or simply mis-understood about when I spoke to Mr.Kelly, I'll say this again. It was HIS claim, not mine that his VC was better than ISCO III. This is HIS opinion and he is entitled to that. I DO NOT agree with that as I have made prisms VCs, Prism HEs and now a HE a cylindrical lens and whist a 2 prism VC is better then a 2 prisms HE, it is not as good as what I have now. That is MY opinion BTW.

I am sure the guy at the Schnieder display said that the lens on demo (ie the one used on the projector) was their new plastic/glass combo lens EL lens. If it was, then it was impressive. I got to hold the lens out side and it was very light, yet still extremely well built.
post #42 of 608
Mark,
I don't think I've seen any reference as to the cost for your MK4. If you can't state it here, please PM me with it...thanks
post #43 of 608
Sorry, against forum rules for me to post a price here
post #44 of 608
So, is there any new news on this? Price range, throw ratio specs (big one for me, as I currently run a rather short throw), etc?

-Sean
post #45 of 608
Alan seemed to indicate that this new Prismasonic lens would be significant in size to accommodate the beam at lower throw ratios. Perhaps he can expound further. I suppose we'll all find out soon enough.
post #46 of 608
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 230-SEAN View Post

So, is there any new news on this? Price range, throw ratio specs (big one for me, as I currently run a rather short throw), etc?

-Sean

The lens has variable focus, it will accommodate and be able to be dialed in for different throw distance just like the Isco or Schneider.
I will have more info as Prismasonic gets closer to launch. I also posted this in the <3000 projector forum for a reason.
post #47 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Gouger View Post

I also posted this in the <3000 projector forum for a reason.

The next level in a-lens at yesterday's price from an established manufacturer? If that's case then I'll call it a revolution, at least commercial.

I guess the current b-stock clearance price on HD5000 will become its final price.
post #48 of 608
Waiting for the latest news.
post #49 of 608
So the price will be more like a few thousand then a few hundred?
post #50 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vao View Post

So the price will be more like a few thousand then a few hundred?

That's the ballpark. Considering others are 10 grand range...depending on the final price, it should be in the price range of the well reviewed prism lens.
post #51 of 608
Man I would love to see a powerbuy on these when they do release as I want one
post #52 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by W00lly View Post

Man I would love to see a powerbuy on these when they do release as I want one

That would be cool, I'm stil interested in the specs. Any idea on a time frame for this lens? I'm gonna upgrade the PJ here in the next few months and would like to move on from my DIY Prism lens.

-Sean
post #53 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by 230-SEAN View Post

I'm gonna upgrade the PJ here in the next few months and would like to move on from my DIY Prism lens.

The best move you will make. You'll live the clarity of a cylindrical lens
post #54 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX View Post

The best move you will make. You'll live the clarity of a cylindrical lens

I know I will Mark! I just have to find a lens that will work with my TR and work with my bank account, lol.

-Sean
post #55 of 608
Sorry to double post, but after having looked at the rendering next to the pic of the H5000R, the case appears to be the same size. Does that mean that the TR would be limited to the same TR specs found on the H5000? Or not since this new lens ins't prism based, there for offering a larger area for the light beam to pass through?

-Sean
post #56 of 608
This will be the lens that will have many interested especially due to price.
post #57 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by 230-SEAN View Post

Sorry to double post, but after having looked at the rendering next to the pic of the H5000R, the case appears to be the same size. Does that mean that the TR would be limited to the same TR specs found on the H5000? Or not since this new lens ins't prism based, there for offering a larger area for the light beam to pass through?

-Sean

No, it should be much more flexible because the glass looks to fill the full width of the case, where the prisms had to fit inside the case (with room for rotation), so were much smaller.
post #58 of 608
Even though the glass is wider allowing a closer throw, you really should be opting to get the PJ back as far as you can so your pin cushion is not an issue.
post #59 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post
Even though the glass is wider allowing a closer throw, you really should be opting to get the PJ back as far as you can so your pin cushion is not an issue.
Have to agree there ever since I moved my projector back, what a difference
post #60 of 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztheatre View Post
Even though the glass is wider allowing a closer throw, you really should be opting to get the PJ back as far as you can so your pin cushion is not an issue.
I totally understand this, but my current apartment only allows a TR of 1.5 at best with the new JVC PJ's, so I am on a hunt for the perfect lens (meaning a lens that will work with the JVC at a 1.5 TR). I guess I could just go with a different PJ that isn't as deep as the JVC, but then I would be giving up PQ on all aspect ratios.

-Sean
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat › Tease, new Prismasonic cylindrical lens and remote motorized sled.