AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › The Three 1280x800 LED Clones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Three 1280x800 LED Clones - Page 11

post #301 of 421
9/15/11 at 7:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoisonWolf View Post
Is it "possible" for some people to notice these discrepancies in the "information processing"? Like how some people can notice rainbows, whilst others cannot?
Anyone can notice the effects if sitting close enough to the screen. Showing rectilinear content like lines and geometry are most obvious. In a few other threads on here, people are complaining about "floating focus" between the colors, this is likely to be a combination of square to diamond conversion and chromatic aberration of the lens.

But is it bothersome enough for the average person to not buy the unit?


Quote:
Originally Posted by PoisonWolf View Post
I can't wait for TI to release a proper 1280x720 chipset in a square-pixel format. =(
You can get it now, there are 0.65" DMD projectors with proper square arrays. The drawback is you need to pay more, and you can kiss a thin projector goodbye
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #302 of 421
9/15/11 at 7:44am
Thread Starter 
After going through all these many points/counterpoints related to this diamond-shaped pixels of the HD PICO chipset all i can think is, if only that new Barco LED projector model 650i sold for half its msrp of $10,000.00 i would jump on it with both claws ! Now i am beginning to feel somewhat disappointed/frustrated/uncertain how to proceed...
At this point in time i would gladly pay $5,000.00 for a pj with native 1920x1080 resolution, PT-120 LED chipsets from Luminus Devices, "Vida" video-processing chip from HQV, lens from Canon/Fuji/etc and the manufacturer being a reliable company.
Reply
Reply
post #303 of 421
9/15/11 at 8:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCaugusto
After going through all these many points/counterpoints related to this diamond-shaped pixels of the HD PICO chipset all i can think is, if only that new Barco LED projector model 650i sold for half its msrp of $10,000.00 i would jump on it with both claws ! Now i am beginning to feel somewhat disappointed/frustrated/uncertain how to proceed...
At this point in time i would gladly pay $5,000.00 for a pj with native 1920x1080 resolution, PT-120 LED chipsets from Luminus Devices, "Vida" video-processing chip from HQV, lens from Canon/Fuji/etc and the manufacturer being a reliable company.
Stick with your trusty old hx300g for another year?
Reply
Reply
post #304 of 421
9/15/11 at 12:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by anomaly123 View Post

Anyone can notice the effects if sitting close enough to the screen. Showing rectilinear content like lines and geometry are most obvious. In a few other threads on here, people are complaining about "floating focus" between the colors, this is likely to be a combination of square to diamond conversion and chromatic aberration of the lens.

But is it bothersome enough for the average person to not buy the unit?




You can get it now, there are 0.65" DMD projectors with proper square arrays. The drawback is you need to pay more, and you can kiss a thin projector goodbye

optoma ml500 L × W × H: 6.7" × 8.7" × 1.7"

casio 230 L × W × H: 8.3" × 11.7" × 1.7" Technology: 0.7" DLP 1280x800
http://www.projectorcentral.com/proj...sort=pop&sz=15

the casio goes on sale for 630$ish from time to time
Reply
Reply
post #305 of 421
9/15/11 at 5:19pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anomaly123 View Post
The physical size of the active array really is in a 16:10 ratio. This is due to how the pixels are arranged, can't just just divide the columns and row directly to get the ratio because they are not aligned like a square
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
anomaly123 >>> Could you please elaborate on that comment ? I understand that each line of horizontal pixels on the HD PICO chip doesn't have the usual arrangement that all other DMD chips have of square pixels laying on top of another line of square pixels, but since the native resolution of the HD PICO is 1140x912 -a perfect aspect ratio of 5:4 - how could it project with an aspect ratio of 16:10 ?
You mentioned that the physical size of the active array is in a 16:10 ratio; Are you implying that some of the area of that native 1140x912 grid of pixels is actually inactive ?
Tx...
Reply
Reply
post #306 of 421
9/15/11 at 5:44pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoisonWolf View Post

Stick with your trusty old hx300g for another year?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am beginning to wonder if i should skip this generation of HD PICO pjs and just wait awhile longer for that elusive 1920x1980 LED pj with a msrp of less than $3,000.00, if it ever comes true; I don't think it would make sense for me to buy yet another inexpensive "temporary LED pj" to hold me over until then...
After reading posts in different threads related to findings on this DMD chipset that weren't even divulged by the manufacturer, Texas Instruments, AND the fact of the availability of a standard (square pixels) 0.65"~0.7" native 1280x800 DMD chipset which would take care of all concerns related to 1:1 bit mapping, lost information from diamond pixel to square pixel, "information distortion", poor font display, etc, etc, yeah, i am beginning to wonder...
Reply
Reply
post #307 of 421
9/15/11 at 6:13pm
Well, eat meat has hinted many times that there is the casio as a pseudo-LED alternative, which is also typically cheaper.

It's unfortunate that they didn't opt to use the bigger chipset that has proper 1280x800 1:1 mapping. Maybe, TI's next generation of 1280x800 chipsets will be using the .45 size with proper square pixel structure using the 1280x800 resolution.

That way, they can delay the 1080p chipset for another year and keep milking us dry till our wallets are carcasses on a barren wasteland :P

Quote:
Originally Posted by MCaugusto View Post

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am beginning to wonder if i should skip this generation of HD PICO pjs and just wait awhile longer for that elusive 1920x1980 LED pj with a msrp of less than $3,000.00, if it ever comes true; I don't think it would make sense for me to buy yet another inexpensive "temporary LED pj" to hold me over until then...
After reading posts in different threads related to findings on this DMD chipset that weren't even divulged by the manufacturer, Texas Instruments, AND the fact of the availability of a standard (square pixels) 0.65"~0.7" native 1280x800 DMD chipset which would take care of all concerns related to 1:1 bit mapping, lost information from diamond pixel to square pixel, "information distortion", poor font display, etc, etc, yeah, i am beginning to wonder...
Reply
Reply
post #308 of 421
9/15/11 at 6:43pm
So would ye guys reckon that the Casio would beat any of these clones, picture wise, as a HT pj?
Reply
Reply
post #309 of 421
9/15/11 at 8:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCaugusto View Post

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
anomaly123 >>> Could you please elaborate on that comment ? I understand that each line of horizontal pixels on the HD PICO chip doesn't have the usual arrangement that all other DMD chips have of square pixels laying on top of another line of square pixels, but since the native resolution of the HD PICO is 1140x912 -a perfect aspect ratio of 5:4 - how could it project with an aspect ratio of 16:10 ?
You mentioned that the physical size of the active array is in a 16:10 ratio; Are you implying that some of the area of that native 1140x912 grid of pixels is actually inactive ?
Tx...

Here is a picture, it shows the physical size versus the numbers. The 0.45" diamond DMD is physically 16:10 with a counting method that is not compatible with square arrays



The extra half pixel at the edges of the array are inconsequential in the grand scheme of things
Reply
Reply
post #310 of 421
9/15/11 at 9:19pm
The K330 is now listed in Germany at around 620$ (without taxes).

No releasedate shown

Quote:
Originally Posted by eat meat View Post


the casio goes on sale for 630$ish from time to time

Where? O.o
Reply
Reply
post #311 of 421
9/15/11 at 11:42pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raine0 View Post

So would ye guys reckon that the Casio would beat any of these clones, picture wise, as a HT pj?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've never seen nor used a Casio hybrid pj but i imagine that it throws a very nice picture, as tested and reported by Projector Central; However, for my type of usage of 10~12 hours per day i would be very concerned about parts longevity considering that weird combination of red LED, blue Laser AND a green phosphor color wheel that is used for illumination. Besides, Projector Central also mentioned that brightness dropped considerably after a couple of hundreds of hours of use as well as noticeable degradation of some colors.
I fell in love with those LED colors, the reliability afforded by Luminus Devices LEDs, the fact that i simply turn my projector on and keep it on for hours at a time without any worries that plague lamp-based pjs such as loss of brightness, color-changing, bulb exploding, etc - at 55 watts per hour, why not ? - and i would not trade that for anything else.
If i didn't already own an inexpensive "temporary pj" such as the LG HX300G and i was in the market for one i would jump all over one of these clones, if for anything else just to try one out and see how it performs for HT application; After re-evaluating performance vs. price vs. features for these clones i might wait until Christmas to see if they really/really come down in price to less than $500, as i don't think i am ready to spend again the same amount of money i paid for my LG pj just to get another pj which i am not even absolutely sure about its native pixel count, native aspect ratio and how to best fit it to a screen !
Yeah, now i am officially disappointed, frustrated and unsure how to proceed forward. Time to take a break....
Reply
Reply
post #312 of 421
9/16/11 at 12:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoisonWolf View Post

Well, eat meat has hinted many times that there is the casio as a pseudo-LED alternative, which is also typically cheaper.

It's unfortunate that they didn't opt to use the bigger chipset that has proper 1280x800 1:1 mapping. Maybe, TI's next generation of 1280x800 chipsets will be using the .45 size with proper square pixel structure using the 1280x800 resolution.

That way, they can delay the 1080p chipset for another year and keep milking us dry till our wallets are carcasses on a barren wasteland :P

my main point is casio has the same thinness as the optoma(1.7in) with a 0.7" DLP at 1280x800 and at the same price point(on sale)I never said it was cheaper,it isnt.
my response was to this(not much more $, bigger chip and just as thin.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by anomaly123 View Post
You can get it now, there are 0.65" DMD projectors with proper square arrays. The drawback is you need to pay more, and you can kiss a thin projector goodbye

ill get to see a optima ml500 soon.
Reply
Reply
post #313 of 421
9/17/11 at 12:54pm
Hello,

New to projectors but have been following the conversations on the new 500 lumen led projectors with the intent to buy. Thanks for the education. I wanted to ask about the diamond vs square pixel layout issue that has been brought up. What is the advantage of square over diamond? I imagine that there are more vertical and horizontal lines in a scene that would benefit from the square layout than there are 45 degree angles that would be best portrayed by the diamond pixels. It was also mentioned that the projector had to convert signal from regular square pixel layout to accomodate the diamond pixel format, which can cause distortion of the source material. Other than that is there anything?

That seems like plenty of reason, just wanted to make sure I am understanding the argument in favor of good old squares.

Thanks!
Reply
Reply
post #314 of 421
9/17/11 at 1:17pm
I don't think there's much advantage for diamond shape from what I've read so far. Although one advantage is there's little to no screen door effect. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Reply
Reply
post #315 of 421
9/17/11 at 1:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raine0 View Post

I don't think there's much advantage for diamond shape from what I've read so far. Although one advantage is there's little to no screen door effect. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm starting to wonder if I should buy a cheaper square vs the newer diamond shaped led, it will be used mostly for hulu, netflix and video games.

Wondering more after reading this post on what kind of warranty each projector comes with and what company will follow through if there is a problem after say 6000 hours of use.
Reply
Reply
post #316 of 421
9/18/11 at 1:31pm
Yikes!! That's scary, in a high resistance, fire inducing sort of way. Did it have an Underwriters Laboratories® certification? They may be interested in someting like this, you'd think a fuse would have blown long before getting that bad. Hopefully this was an exception and more owners do not experience such a failure. I loved the Qumi, but the focus issues were too much to live with. I so want to see these LED PJs succeed, I personally loved the oversatuation.
Reply
Reply
post #317 of 421
9/20/11 at 12:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by nonalcoholic View Post

The K330 is now listed in Germany at around 620$ (without taxes).

No releasedate shown

Hi nonalcoholic,

Can you please share us where did you see K330 listed? Two weeks later, my older brother is going to be in Germany, so i am planning to have one, of course if it is released.
Reply
Reply
post #318 of 421
9/20/11 at 11:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobcaticus View Post

October the 4th from projectorpoint.co.uk


It was originally listed as a Sept 9th release, then bumped to Oct 4th.
Reply
Reply
post #319 of 421
9/24/11 at 6:07am
Thread Starter 
Folks >>> I had to slightly re-do the ZOL.com test comparison list that i posted on page 4 for these four clones as it appears that the site has re-tested the ACER K330 pj; The original test had been deleted, perhaps because it was from a prototype and the manufacturer wasn't pleased with the results and now ACER sent ZOL.com a current sample for re-testing ?
The most severe changes were an increase in Maximum Brightness from 389 to 417 lumens (294 to 328 lumens for ANSI Brightness) FO/FO contrast from 2.291:1 to 3.186:1 and a DECREASE in ANSI Contrast from 276:1 to only 59:1; Color Saturation also decreased.
Based on that poor ANSI contrast result i am afraid the ACER K330 is out of consideration for my needs...
Reply
Reply
post #320 of 421
9/24/11 at 6:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCaugusto View Post

Folks >>> I had to slightly re-do the ZOL.com test comparison list that i posted on page 4 for these four clones as it appears that the site has re-tested the ACER K330 pj; The original test had been deleted, perhaps because it was from a prototype and the manufacturer wasn't pleased with the results and now ACER sent ZOL.com a current sample for re-testing ?
The most severe changes were an increase in Maximum Brightness from 389 to 417 lumens (294 to 328 lumens for ANSI Brightness) FO/FO contrast from 2.291:1 to 3.186:1 and a DECREASE in ANSI Contrast from 276:1 to only 59:1; Color Saturation also decreased.
Based on that poor ANSI contrast result i am afraid the ACER K330 is out of consideration for my needs...

I'm seriously considering cancelling my Acer preorder. I'm not sacrificing my ANSI contrast for a couple of funny extra lumens. Damn, Acer. I wonder if they measured the ANSI contrast in the brightest mode. Could eco mode measurements enhance the ANSI contrast and color gamut?
Reply
Reply
post #321 of 421
9/24/11 at 6:20am
Wow! That's a huge drop in ANSI contrast value! Didn't look at the review but is it possible they left 2 out of the 59 and it should be 259?

I wonder if that's right? Pity there's no other person or site that can confirm or deny these numbers.

Decisions, decisions...
Reply
Reply
post #322 of 421
9/24/11 at 6:53am
Here's a novel idea: Wait a few weeks until it's out before deciding.
Reply
Reply
post #323 of 421
9/24/11 at 7:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raine0 View Post

Wow! That's a huge drop in ANSI contrast value! Didn't look at the review but is it possible they left 2 out of the 59 and it should be 259?

I wonder if that's right? Pity there's no other person or site that can confirm or deny these numbers.

Decisions, decisions...

We can only hope it's some kind of a typo. The results are in diagrams though, pretty sloppy double checking if that's an error:

http://translate.googleusercontent.c...-8s0goJvq9varg
Reply
Reply
post #324 of 421
9/24/11 at 12:10pm
They've made a mistake because on the next page, that state that once calibrated, the results are 328 for the Acer K330.

Seems like one if the better ones.
Reply
Reply
post #325 of 421
9/24/11 at 12:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberheater View Post

They've made a mistake because on the next page, that state that once calibrated, the results are 328 for the Acer K330.

Seems like one if the better ones.

Those are the calibrated ANSI lumens numbers on the next page. Right below them are max brightness measurements.
Reply
Reply
post #326 of 421
9/24/11 at 12:37pm
Acer was top dog before and now with the new scores (providing they are accurate), who's it now?
Reply
Reply
post #327 of 421
9/24/11 at 12:49pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raine0 View Post

Wow! That's a huge drop in ANSI contrast value! Didn't look at the review but is it possible they left 2 out of the 59 and it should be 259?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raine0 >>> That was my exact thought when i saw that figure; It doesn't make sense considering these are essentially tweaked clones while the other pjs measured above 150:1 ANSI contrast; Perhaps ACER made the same mistake again by sending them this time a demo unit for testing ?
The NEC L50W seems to be the one on top considering its measured maximum brightness, ANSI brightness and especially FO/FO contrast and ANSI contrast; It is also the one with the highest msrp, NO "Menu" control available on the projector itself (unlike the others), lens focus by means of a separate control on top of case that looks like an opening for dust infiltration as well, BUT it also has a nifty sliding lens cover.
Meanwhile, on the Optoma ML500 thread, new owners are reporting a very cool-running projector with minimal heat, no focus issues at start-up (Qumi), no problems with signals being automatically scaled to its native resolution (LG HW300T), excellent well-saturated colors, etc, etc...Hmm...
Reply
Reply
post #328 of 421
9/24/11 at 12:50pm
Geez cyberheater! You had my hopes high there again for a minute!
Reply
Reply
post #329 of 421
9/24/11 at 1:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCaugusto View Post

Meanwhile, on the Optoma ML500 thread, new owners are reporting a very cool-running projector with minimal heat, no focus issues at start-up (Qumi), no problems with signals being automatically scaled to its native resolution (LG HW300T), excellent well-saturated colors, etc, etc...Hmm...

...but no audio out or wireless, and a media player that seems to have playback bugs (although I'm guessing the last one is common to all the projectors, because I suspect they all share the same code.)

To me it seems absurd to condemn projectors that haven't even been released yet. Everyone should just chill and wait a few weeks.
Reply
Reply
post #330 of 421
9/24/11 at 1:44pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryDudley View Post

...but no audio out or wireless, and a media player that seems to have playback bugs (although I'm guessing the last one is common to all the projectors, because I suspect they all share the same code.)

To me it seems absurd to condemn projectors that haven't even been released yet. Everyone should just chill and wait a few weeks.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HenryDudley >>> I am certainly not "condemning" any one of these projectors but simply reporting back the test results done by an online publication which used the same testing procedure for all four pjs.
Its called product researching as in "i don't believe in planned obsolescense" by purchasing an item that has been poorly reviewed and then having to pay the price by owning a "lemon"....
Of course, it is also a good idea to "chill" awhile and wait for reports from initial owners, considering that "an ounce of prevention never hurts"...
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › The Three 1280x800 LED Clones