Sony VPL-vw1000 - Page 5

I'm still surprised so much false information keeps spreading and spreading. Let me comment on some things.


1/3? If the RS-65 is 1/3 the price of the VW1000, then it should be ALOT cheaper. RS-65 = $12k, VW1000 is under $25k. Also, the Sony is a true 4k machine, not wobulated. The JVC doesn't even wobulate to true 4k, only "4k lite" 3840x2160. True 4k is 4096x2160.





The exact opposite would happen if you're using sub-pixel adjustment. Any adjustment made less than a full pixel, would result in softening the image and loss of resolution.



The lens is huge, so you have to choose. Do you want a high quality lens or a small, cheap one with all the quality drawbacks? While the cheap lenses in the current Sony models are much better than what JVC has to offer, they're not the same quality as some lenses used in professional units. So for a high-end product, I hope Sony made the right choice. We'll have to see how the lens performs in terms of brightness depending on throw ratio, sharpness and CA.

Well Stephan, that is why I posted as didn't understand anything about how the JVC worked. Just saw that they used 1080p panels. Would be happy for a new projector that would be an upgrade to the VW200.
I like the xenon lamp and the great color the VW200 produces.
Guess I'll just stick with the 200 for now.
There are a lot of things that I want... but $25k should go towards things that I need!, Don't really need a new projector right now.

More comments ref. the Sony 1000 demo and impressions here, even on the 4k material shown-

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post20932197

and continues onto the next page.

Anyone know the dimensions of this beast?

Tasty bits here:

https://dealersource.sel.sony.com/ds...e_theater.html

Is it sure it has the Dynamic lamp control like the 95Es and 30ES ?
there is no indication other then this in the brochure:

"Really get into 3D
All Sony ES projectors deliver an amazing 3D experience, thanks to features like Dynamic Lamp Control for improved brightness and 240Hz panel drive, which virtually eliminates crosstalk. Plus, turn any 2D content to 3D with upconversion."

And we all know about marketing

dj

Would really be good to have some info about which procedure gives the better 4K pic from a 1080p source (i.e., BD), the e-shifting of JVC RS55/65 or the upscaling of the Sony 1000. Impossible to tell from the demo's at a show, and also the fact that these projectors are still prototypes (esp the Sony).

Can any of you that really know this stuff do the theoretical analysis?

Well without a doubt a true 4K panel would be best. It can display each and every pixel the exact color it wants. The e-shift has to optimize a two-color swap to emulate the desire color plus it has to share those two colors with neighboring pixels.

Now the reality may be that it is difficult to differentiate the two techniques on 1080p real-world material. In the real world, there are not pixel-sized shifts to completely different colors or luminance. There is almost always some transition due to diffraction of the lens and diffraction at the edges of objects and in this case the source material is 1080p, not native 4K. This may be like Blu-ray's chroma sub-sampling where there are errors but most people don't notice them or see a difference from 4:4:4.

I think this will happen inevitably, just look to the history of Sony from the original Qualia projector to where we are today. The only caveat is the point that Mark H. makes about the lens. Lenses are mature technology and the price for a top quality lens is not gong to have come down appreciably 5 years from now. Presumably significantly less expensive 4 K machines in the future will employ less expensive lenses, but just as the Sony VPL-VW 200 showed, there is always going to be a performance edge to be had from the better lens.

The Sony1000 is pretty impressive independent of the 4K res: 2000 lumens (and thus presumably at least ~ 1200 in low lamp, high contrast mode), 1M:1 CR (yes, with a DI, but Sony's do these well, and the native CR is probably up close to 100K:1), very low noise (22 dB), probably very good motion handling (based on earlier Sony's), and probably higher ANSI CR than the JVC's (based on earlier Sony's). This is all assuming that the final product actually meets all the marks that have been advertised.

I've never had a Sony projector (only JVC so far: RS1 and RS20) so don't have any experience with how well they support their products, so would greatly appreciate any info from those of you who have had Sony pj's. E.g., do they provide FW updates to improve video processing, etc., as they are developed and become available?

It would seem that with a fairly revolutionary product like this such updates will be necessary and important to have as they work out any bugs along the way.

For my experience with them, their customer support is pretty good. Having said that, every company has issues. You hear great things about one company from one person and bad things about the same company from another company. Sometimes it all depends on the person you talk to

Mark is probably the person to answer this. But from what he told me and from what I understood (what someone says and what someone hears is too different things)

is the the following

If you have a 4K source, the Sony wins. Now that is misleading because the JVC doesnt take 4K source so its like saying who runs faster the horse with legs or the the horse without any

Regarding 1080p, Mark told me that the JVC does a really good job in doing this especially since the JVC has 1080p chips and is basically fooling your eye into thinking its 4K.

On the other hand, the Sony has 4K chip and upscales the 1080p image into 4K. He told me that once you saw the Sony produce a true 4K picture everything else didnt look as good. He wasnt saying that the upscaled 1080p wasnt good but rather that in comparison, it wasnt as good as the 4K image. Of course just like when the HD projectors firsrt came out. Once you fed it a HD image, the upscaled DVD picture didnt look so hot. That wasnt to say that the upscaled dvd image was incredible when compared to a non HD projector using a dvd. Everything is relative

In any case, I would think that the Sony with the 4K chips and upscaling would do a better job than the JVC which uses 1080p chips and uses a really cool way of making us think its 4K. Now having said that, the Sony will cost you 20K more than the JVC. Outside of using a 4K source, is the image difference worth 20k, only you can answer that

Keep in mind that the Sony is also limited to 4K at 24p and only in 2D. So even when 4K sources do eventually become available, you may be limited on what you can actually use. So I wouldn't be surprised if later on there are some compatibility issues with what the 1000ES can accept, similar to what we saw with the Qualia 004.

Thanks, Daniel. I understand that Lumagen is planning to have a new version of the Radiance that will output 4K from various sources, so I presume that might be the best thing one could feed the Sony until true 4K material becomes available.

Are these kind of limitations things that might be improved with FW upgrades, or is it an intrinsic limitation of the hardware?

Kris, Do you anything else about the 1000? E.g., is it 240Hz rep rate, etc.? More detailed into is hard to come by.

Saw it at CEDIA. It was OK, but not worth the $25K price point. I'll get the Panny 7000 and have it for 5 years and then get some 4K pj for a reasonable price when that happens. Electronic prices change so rapidly that that could very well happen.

Wolfie

Of course the Sony has some other aspects that in principle make it more valuable (and hopefully not 20K more) than the JVC--much higher brightness (~2x), higher o/f CR (at least with its DI, maybe even native, we don't know yet), higher ANSI CR (if past Sony/JVC comparison holds up), better motion handling (if past Sony/JVC comparison holds up), quieter (though my RS20's noise level is no problem for me), shorter min throw ratio (very helpful for me).

I agree that the demo at CEDIA was not convincing. My interest is based on what this product should deliver when they finish it, admittedly a dangerous basis on which to purchase anything!

That will depends on how good Lumagen do the upscaling... and compared to SONY and JVC...

Could you expand on this? The press release states "In addition to supporting 4K native resolution, the VW1000ES projector also features an exclusive 4K "upscaler" that dramatically enhances all content - SD or HD, 2D or 3D - allowing viewers to see 4K playback, even from their existing media libraries. For greater versatility, it can also display Full HD 3D movies, as well as 2D and 3D anamorphic films. For Full 4K 3D, an integrated IR transmitter drives the projector's TDG-PJ1 active shutter 3D glasses."

If you are talking about potential future 4K input compatibility issues your Qualia 004 example may be the right precedent.

Sony released the Q004 in Mar ’04 at $30K msrp. It was the first consumer 1080p projector and only supported 1080i60 which was the HDTV standard, and 1080p24SF which was, and still used, the broadcast pipeline standard. 18 months later when 1080p60 became the standard for disk players Sony offered a $3K msrp hardware upgrade to original Q004 owners to bring it up to the current Q004R1 model which had 1080p60 support. Also, Lumagen and other scaler companies added 1080p24SF outputs to their product to support the Q004!

At the high end, some level of upgrade support is expected and usually provided. SIM2 does the same thing.

As you can tell from my posts here, I’m trying to decide whether or not I want to shell out more to get the Sony1000 rather than the JVC RS55/65, and I very much appreciate the feedback, pro and con (mostly con!), that I‘ve been getting.

Let me phrase it a different way. Suppose you could modify the RS55 or 65 by 1) doubling the lumen output, 2) adding a very good DI to it, 3) having significantly better handling of fast motion (a principle shortcoming of my present RS20), 4) having a shorter throw ratio (imp for me but not everyone), 5) making it quieter (not really an issue, but still nice). How much would this be worth to you? I.e., how much of an increase in the RS55/65 would you be willing to pay? $5K?, more, less?

Because of the HDMI input used the Sony will only accept 4K at 24fps and in 2D. Any 3D playback will be from an upscaled source. Even Lumagen won't be able to work around this (I talked to Jim at the show, he was disappointed). For the 1000 to accept anything else it would have had to use multiple inputs simultaneously. This can't be fixed via FW.

So you could still use an outboard scaler to convert 1080p sources to 4K at 24p but it won't work for true 4K material at any resolution other than 4K at 24P (2D only). Hope this helps!

External scalers usually do a better job than those in the projectors and Lumagen scalers are excellant

Mark, any idea when AVS will get their unit to 'review'?

I'm on the sony 1000 list to replace my rs50 if it passes muster. mainly want more lumens for my 14foot high power but the 4k conversion should give a more solid picture I'd think. Also might be able to forego my a lens and just zoom for scope.

Professor Miller. Like the Joan Baez song, sometime soon.

I think it ridiculous that somebody posts saying it isn't worth it and I am going to get a $3.5K projector instead. I think it is very fairly priced and will be worth every penny at eventual street. At the special price that we may be able to get a few at and sell, people are lined up already around the block. If somebody high up on the list has doubts, just blink, it will have another happy home. I wish I could afford one but I can't. But I can't fool myself that a some whatever projector will be good enough for me.

No one could see it in operation exccept on 2 clips for a very short time. All the demo showed was that fed a 4K original source it look much better than with an upscaled 1080p source. Duh. What a surprise. The real test will be comparing a high quality 1080p projector to the upscaled to 4K 1080p source on this thing. But even then, other things than the output resoltion will come into play. If people have trouble grasping this concept, I can't help them. And nobody here can answer any more questions other than the info Sony has released. We can have theoretical comments, many from poster who really don't know, but that's about it. I know I want this thing but can't have it. I really would like the new $200K Runco too. But that would require a lottery winning intervention.


Maytbe I should buy a $3.5K Panasonic. Yea right. I would rather just not watch not because it is not good, its just that I am spoiled by projectors so much better.

Thanks, Mark; look forward to it. As I've said several times here, this pj offers many attributes in addition to 4K; just hope it lives up to its potential. E.g., the Sonys have been fairly universally acknowledged to have better motion handling than the JVCs, and I hope that carries over to the 1000. Also the Sony DI seems to have been acknowledged among the best, with least artifacts, so again hope that technology is present in the 1000. Re 4K, it sounds to me that using the new Lumagen to take a 720p/1080i/p source to 4K for the Sony should give excellent results. Too bad this Lumagen doesn't yet exist for you to be able to use it for you test review.

Out of curiosity, have you seen the RS50/60? I just dropped by my local Magnolia and played a bit of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix on their RS60 (with a Panamorph, projecting onto a 126" wide 2.35:1 Stewart FireHawk Cinecurve).

I didn't find any issue with the motion handling.

My only concern with what I saw at Magnolia was that I felt that the projector needed to be a bit brighter. I wonder if this was the infamous brightness issue that some have complained of.