or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › Official Mitsubishi hc4000 ONLY Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Mitsubishi hc4000 ONLY Thread - Page 9

post #241 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joesyah View Post

To do what you're talking about..you'll need to spend more money. A JVC is your best bet if blacks are more important than anything else. Keep in mind, where you gain in one area of image quality,you'll lose in others. No projector or any display for that matter is absolutely perfect..it doesn't exist.

Oh I know. Thanks though. I'd like to get a jvc, but it isn't in the budget. I personally think this pj will be awesome. I'm just worried about the black being bad, not mediocre. I can deal with mediocre, it's bad that I'm trying to avoid. I'm buying this pj so I'll find out soon enough. I seriously doubt I'll even dream of returning it due to bad performance. I'm more voicing my worry than anything else.

Thanks for the info guys. My next posts will hopefully have screenshots (or calibration questions).
post #242 of 2855
Thread Starter 
Yah, it definitely passes up mediocre to somewhere just above mediocre to fairly good, so no worries.
Anyhow, you can increase perceivable black levels by just lowering the overall brightness of the image, similar to what an IRIS does.

If you really want, you can be your own IRIS, calibrate a second user mode and every time the scene goes to a darker scene, hit it with a button on the remote, "the human IRIS" I call it, haha. Not exactly the same effect as an IRIS, but not that much different than the average IRIS depending on how bright your current setup is.

Many projectors without an IRIS use lamp dimming, some use DUAL IRIS's, and some use a combination of everything.
post #243 of 2855
If you haven't seen some of the pics comparing contrast of the Epson 8350 and 8700. You should check them out. This is the difference going from entry level to a mid level LCD unit. Basically its pretty close to what i see when using my Iris and what I see without it being engaged..maybe not quite as bad though.However, it is closer to the difference between my W1000 and SP8602. Pics exaggerates things but it can give you an idea. Also remember if you don't have another projector to compare it too, you'll have a tougher time seeing the faults. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...4#post20481224
post #244 of 2855
Thread Starter 
I thought that pic was funny, although the projectors weren't calibrated and it looks like in his lower IRE's the 8350 has a terrible blue push, but either way, it's not that far off from the truth.

That is why I say if you are going to be dumping $1200+ on an Epson 8350, mise well get something else (either a DLP with better bright scene POP, or an LCD with better dark scene POP). That is what made so many people mad at me.

That scene has just enough bright areas to where the Mits would have been between the 8350 and 8700ub in that shot. The Mits beats the 8350 for blacks in mixed lighting, but not the 8700ub.
post #245 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

I thought that pic was funny, although the projectors weren't calibrated and it looks like in his lower IRE's the 8350 has a terrible blue push, but either way, it's not that far off from the truth.

That is why I say if you are going to be dumping $1200+ on an Epson 8350, mise well get something else (either a DLP with better bright scene POP, or an LCD with better dark scene POP). That is what made so many people mad at me.

That scene has just enough bright areas to where the Mits would have been between the 8350 and 8700ub in that shot. The Mits beats the 8350 for blacks in mixed lighting, but not the 8700ub.

Looking at that post, if all of the 8350's look like that, egads thats bad..surely something wasn't calibrated correctly on the 8350, the mits doesn't look anything close to that..now granted maybe if you are running in the sports gamma, but if you use cinema gamma that is not even close...and I agree coder, sure seemed to me to be pushing blue in the lower IRE's...
post #246 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishopt View Post

Looking at that post, if all of the 8350's look like that, egads thats bad..surely something wasn't calibrated correctly on the 8350, the mits doesn't look anything close to that..now granted maybe if you are running in the sports gamma, but if you use cinema gamma that is not even close...and I agree coder, sure seemed to me to be pushing blue...

The 8350 looks better in person for sure I've seen it..actually installed one in a person's home. The point is they always look great until you have something to compare them too.lol
post #247 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishopt View Post


....it has a large offset, meaning that the projected image is always above the projector when mounted.

I think you meant to say the 'projector' is always above the image when ceiling mounted. Not the image.
post #248 of 2855
Thread Starter 
The 8350 does neither dark scenes or bright scenes particularly well, it is what I would call average across the board. That's why I can't imagine why people hate me so much for recommending the Mits or the Sanyo over the 8350 (I did give them the brightness warning obviously), all I was trying to do was save them from the 8350, lol.

I just don't like AVERAGE projectors, I want a projector to either WIN in at least one area, or at least be close to the top, if you know what I mean.

It was noted in the Mits LCOS thread by Tom Huffman that is gets very hard to see a difference after 4000:1 in anything but DARK SCENES, and I can confirm this by taking measurements. There is however big differences when you get sub-optimal intrascene contrast in bright scenes and dark scenes together like on the 8350.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program.
post #249 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaman View Post

I think you meant to say the 'projector' is always above the image when ceiling mounted. Not the image.

The image is above the projector, its just that when mounted on the ceiling its upside down...
post #250 of 2855
So, now that I have done a ton of reading I have also decided that the Mits HC4000 is what I am looking for, I have a question for you guys..

How big of a screen do I go with? My room is a dedicated theater, total light control, 12X20 with 10' ceilings.

I was thinking 120" but I want to go as big as possible without sacrificing PQ.

Thanks, Lane
post #251 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhard77 View Post

So, now that I have done a ton of reading I have also decided that the Mits HC4000 is what I am looking for, I have a question for you guys..

How big of a screen do I go with? My room is a dedicated theater, total light control, 12X20 with 10' ceilings.

I was thinking 120" but I want to go as big as possible without sacrificing PQ.

Thanks, Lane

Good question, I sense some more reading in your future....so have you read about CIH 2.35 screens? You didn't state the primary purpose, if watching movies would be the primary purpose or tv and movies split. So curttard is running a 2.35 CIH setup which is about 143" diag, if I recall correctly...you then can hit the apsect button and switc to 16:9, which will then be smaller then a noraml 120" 16:9 screen...so lots to think about...I wish I had the ceiling height and the room to run a big 2.35 CIH setup but I don't have the ceiling height...you loose some resolution when you switch to 16:9 and some brightness but not much....also how far back are you going to be sitting?
post #252 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishopt View Post

The image is above the projector, its just that when mounted on the ceiling its upside down...

Ah, touché
post #253 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhard77 View Post

How big of a screen do I go with? My room is a dedicated theater, total light control, 12X20 with 10' ceilings.

I was thinking 120" but I want to go as big as possible without sacrificing PQ.

Thanks, Lane

The question is how close will you be sitting?

PQ is going to be relative to a ratio of how big and how close you sit. Usually we use the screen width ratio: how many times screen width? I like to sit no closer than 1.5x screen widths away, then I can watch DVD's, cable HD (which varies Greatly with PQ). If only blu ray, you can sit a little closer, if you want/like that.

The screen width formula is just a guide. People sit closer or further to taste. Also, it's based on the width, not diagonal of the screen....and also on the 16:9 screen ratio. Not sure how to do it with a 2.35 screen.
post #254 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanteraGSTK View Post

This has me somewhat worried. I do see that there is no light control, but I'm worried about black levels. This would be my first PJ and I'm really excited with the reviews I've seen with this pj, but I want to avoid washed out black levels as much as possible.

I've seen plenty of screenshots (can't take much from them), so I know that there are people that get decent black levels. I'm going to have a completely light controlled room so it should be better especially with the grey screen I plan to build.

Am I worrying for nothing? I wish there was a dealer in Dallas that had one so I could demo it before ordering one.

If it's your first pj, don't be worried about pulling the trigger. The Mits is my first pj and I can say that I've been pretty happy so far (projecting on to a gray wall) because I know my experience will only get better as I set my room up and calibrate its settings to optimize the picture quality. Many people here can attest that you're not going to find a better projector around this price point.

I'd debated getting the Epson 8350 since it's similarly priced and has higher overall lumen output, but in the end, I preferred a single chip DLP for the DLP pop, colors and sharpness. It's plenty bright given my current room set up and black levels are what you'd expect around this price point. Could they be better? Sure, but as coderguy said, it's not everything and I wasn't going to spend nearly $1000 more to get them.

Even though I'm a Kuro owner, the 92" projected image in my dedicated media room puts you more in the movie and that theater-like experience trumps Kuro blacks IMO.

I'm in Austin, btw-- Go Mavs!
post #255 of 2855
PanteraGSTK here som HP shots...its a very dark movie, even during the daytime the light is really flat, so you can do better on blacks I would rate the mits as very dark grey but I also have a light grey screnn that drops it a little...I can watch the movies and it doesn't bother me..would I like blacker blacks...for sure but then the DLP ones that can do better are outside of my price range...I've had the benq but couldn't live with it I think the only one would be the infocus and its 3k....so here are some shots, as always if your computer monitor is not calibrated then, well you get the drift....





Notice his hair, robe and the background...you can make out all three but they are very close...









Also keep in mind that I add some grain to the picts since I am always too lazy to get the tripod and shoot these freehand, so some are not as sharp and the grain comes from me shooting at iso 1600....oh well hope it helps
post #256 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by richmack View Post

If it's your first pj, don't be worried about pulling the trigger. The Mits is my first pj and I can say that I've been pretty happy so far (projecting on to a gray wall) because I know my experience will only get better as I set my room up and calibrate its settings to optimize the picture quality. Many people here can attest that you're not going to find a better projector around this price point.

I'd debated getting the Epson 8350 since it's similarly priced and has higher overall lumen output, but in the end, I preferred a single chip DLP for the DLP pop, colors and sharpness. It's plenty bright given my current room set up and black levels are what you'd expect around this price point. Could they be better? Sure, but as coderguy said, it's not everything and I wasn't going to spend nearly $1000 more to get them.

Even though I'm a Kuro owner, the 92" projected image in my dedicated media room puts you more in the movie and that theater-like experience trumps Kuro blacks IMO.

I'm in Austin, btw-- Go Mavs!

Enjoy...now aren't you glad you didn't go down the lcd path
post #257 of 2855
I've been happy with my Mitsu HD1000U but am going bluray for the room so I'm looking to upgrade. Should I even consider anything besides the 4000 since I've had good luck with Mitsu so far? What's the current best deal around? Thanks.
post #258 of 2855
Thread Starter 
If you have a giant screen you could look at the Benq's w1100 or w1200 for even more brightness. So far the biggest issue with the Benq's judging by other posters is some minor QC issues though. The Benq fans are said to keep changing speeds which becomes a bit distracting. The other issue is the occassional lockups of the machine.

If you wanted to spend more, there are LCOS projectors to consider, but then again we're back to how much bright scene POP you willing to really lose. I personally don't think LCD's are really worth it for most people, although the Epson 8700ub is pretty good if your willing to take the QC risk. Although I don't really feel the Epson is worth the price, if spending that much mise well step up to a JVC or just buy 2 projectors instead.
post #259 of 2855
Thanks bishop for the reply. Now, about this 2.35 thing you speak of..... That is intriguing. I will use the projector for 50% movies, 50% HDTV/PS3. Are there pre-made 2.35 screens available? Or would I need to do some DIY. And really stupid question, how does the hc4000 do 2.35 and 16:9??

Fleaman: I am not sure how far back I will sit. I guess that depends on how big my screen will be But, I think your idea of 1.5 times screen sounds like a good starting point. Since my room is 20' long I have some flexibility in seating.

Thanks Guys!
post #260 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhard77 View Post

Thanks bishop for the reply. Now, about this 2.35 thing you speak of..... That is intriguing. I will use the projector for 50% movies, 50% HDTV/PS3. Are there pre-made 2.35 screens available? Or would I need to do some DIY. And really stupid question, how does the hc4000 do 2.35 and 16:9??

Fleaman: I am not sure how far back I will sit. I guess that depends on how big my screen will be But, I think your idea of 1.5 times screen sounds like a good starting point. Since my room is 20' long I have some flexibility in seating.

Thanks Guys!

Curttard is running one, but the short version is you make the screen as big as you want/can for 2.35 movies, then when you hit the aspect button and switch to 16:9 it places that in the middle of the 2.35 screen, so watching movies you would have a bigger screen then when watching TV/PS3...since you are planning on doing 50/50 you may want the bigger 16:9 screen, most screen makers make them in different ratios with 2.35 being one of them...the other thing to keep in mind that when you use the CIH function on the mits since it uses the center of the screen you loose some resolution ~800p vs 1080p and you loose some brightness in the 16:9 image...just something to think about...
post #261 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by bishopt View Post

since you are planning on doing 50/50 you may want the bigger 16:9 screen,

No reason the 16:9 should be bigger. Just choose the 16:9 size you want, then extend it horizontally for your 2.35 size. I'm watching 16:9 stuff at exactly the same size I did for the past 5 years when I had a 16:9 screen.
post #262 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by curttard View Post

No reason the 16:9 should be bigger. Just choose the 16:9 size you want, then extend it horizontally for your 2.35 size. I'm watching 16:9 stuff at exactly the same size I did for the past 5 years when I had a 16:9 screen.

Good point curttard...are you using the aspect button or doing the zoom trick...Is the brighness drop off noticeable?
post #263 of 2855
Curttard, Is there a calculator to use for the mits and a 2.35 screen. Or how do I know how far to go horizontally to get to 2.35? Sorry for the stupid questions, I am brand new to the projector world.

Also, I have a dedicated theater room with total light control so I assume that losing the brightness wont be an issue.

I really think the 2.35 screen would be a huge hit with my friends and kids for movie watching.

Do most blu-ray movies come in 2.35?

Lane
post #264 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhard77 View Post

Do most blu-ray movies come in 2.35?

Lane

That would probably depend. On recent releases I notice less 2.35 vs movies made say 10 years ago.

I think it's the movie industry trying to fit more of their films closer to the 16:9 home standard that are in millions of homes now (but not 10 years ago).

It's funny 'cos one of the reasons I first got a PJ was due to widescreen DVD's playing on my 27" CRT tv , not a pretty sight....
post #265 of 2855
Thread Starter 
My friend kept asking me what I would do if I was back in the 1970's, I said I don't know guess go to the movies a lot and try to pretend the picture looked good, lol. Actually I bet I would probably stop watching TV at least until the 1990's, lol.

With all this BBQ, fast food, giant projectors, computers, Internet, Tv's, remote controls, it's a wonderous rarity when I ever even leave my chair. Just kidding, haven't even watched a projector in almost 2 weeks, had to take a break.

What a healthy lifestyle technology encourages us to have.
post #266 of 2855
I remember how happy I was with my first dvd player....until I popped in the first 2.35 aspect movie connected to my 27" 4:3 CRT

Up until then, all the VHS tapes/rentals seemed to be pan and scan, so it filled up the 4:3 tv.

I also remember buying my first HiFi VHS deck (mitsubishi ) somewhere in the early or mid-90's for about $450.
post #267 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaman View Post

I remember how happy I was with my first dvd player....until I popped in the first 2.35 aspect movie connected to my 27" 4:3 CRT

Up until then, all the VHS tapes/rentals seemed to bw pan and scan, so it filled up the 4:3 tv.

I also remember buying my first HiFi VHS deck (mitsubishi ) somewhere in the early or mid-90's for about $450.

Your dating yourself so I too bought a high priced vhs deck early 90's....then went the laserdisk route, I could actually rent them in my area...ahhh the good ole days with visions of crt projectors in my head, lol
post #268 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by curttard View Post

No reason the 16:9 should be bigger. Just choose the 16:9 size you want, then extend it horizontally for your 2.35 size. I'm watching 16:9 stuff at exactly the same size I did for the past 5 years when I had a 16:9 screen.

Do you find yourself keeping it "Anamorphic" for most watching? On certain 16:9 material like my AppleTV2 menu, the top and bottom get clipped, but movies seem fine. I don't notice terrible stretching on 16:9 material (Avatar) to fill the 2.35 aspect ratio, but then again this was while projecting a picture during the day onto a blackout screen (with a bunch of wrinkles and seams) so it was difficult to tell.

I'll have to try again tonight with a more critical eye.
post #269 of 2855
There is no anamorphic stretching/squeezing.

No cropping or clipping either.

All that is happening is you're only using part of the 16:9 chip area, in this case the 2.35 area of the chip (think of a 2.35 box inside the 16:9 image). Then you get a 2.35 screen to size/fit that area. When you hit the aspect button on the HC4000, it would put the 16:9 image in the middle of that 2.35 screen, so there will be black bars on the LH/RH side of the 16:9 image. The top/bottom of the 16:9 image will not be cropped.

This is assuming 16:9 and 2.35 material only. All other aspect ratios maybe different.

So the 16:9 image would be smaller in a 2.35 screen setup with the HC4000, and you will have black bars on the LH/RH side of the screen.

There is no anamorphic lens used (this is a poor mans way/version). And blu ray disc don't have anamorphic encodings.
post #270 of 2855
Quote:
Originally Posted by lhard77 View Post

Curttard, Is there a calculator to use for the mits and a 2.35 screen. Or how do I know how far to go horizontally to get to 2.35? Sorry for the stupid questions, I am brand new to the projector world.

Just figure out the height you want, and multiply it by 2.35 to get the width of the screen. As far as calculating throw distance and offset, to get the 2.35 image size you want, divide the width you calculated of your 2.35 screen by 1.77 to get the height of the imaginary 16:9 image.

Quote:


Also, I have a dedicated theater room with total light control so I assume that losing the brightness wont be an issue.

Brightness is always an issue :P To calculate the brightness of your 2.35 image, again, plug into the projector calculator the dimensions of your giant 16:9 image -- the 2.35 width as the width, and that width divided by 1.77 as the height.
Quote:


I really think the 2.35 screen would be a huge hit with my friends and kids for movie watching.

As I've made clear in this and the other thread, I can't say enough good things about 2.35 movie viewing. It's tremendous.

Quote:


Do most blu-ray movies come in 2.35?

I'd say it's around 50/50, at least in my collection. The more "epic" movies are almost always 2.35 -- stuff like Star Wars, LotR, the disaster movies like 2012, etc, as well as "arty" movies like Black Swan, The New World, and more. As a very general rule, 16:9 movies are typically comedies, documentaries, and "talking head" dramas. Movies with sweeping cinematography benefit enormously from a 2.35 screen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by richmack View Post

Do you find yourself keeping it "Anamorphic" for most watching? On certain 16:9 material like my AppleTV2 menu, the top and bottom get clipped, but movies seem fine. I don't notice terrible stretching on 16:9 material (Avatar) to fill the 2.35 aspect ratio, but then again this was while projecting a picture during the day onto a blackout screen (with a bunch of wrinkles and seams) so it was difficult to tell.

I'll have to try again tonight with a more critical eye.

For 16:9 material, you can hit the ASPECT button and it displays it accurately in the middle of the screen, leaving black bars on the left and right, no cropping or distorting of the image at all. Personally I made two shelves for the projector, so when I switch to 16:9 material, I move the PJ to the lower shelf and zoom in -- this way I get maximum brightness and resolution. I think most people would be perfectly content just using the Aspect button. I made some styrofoam panels covered in navy sheets that I put up over those left and right areas to keep them nice and black.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaman View Post


So the 16:9 image would be smaller in a 2.35 screen setup with the HC4000, and you will have black bars on the LH/RH side of the screen.

Smaller than what?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › Official Mitsubishi hc4000 ONLY Thread