Sony VPL-vw1000 - Page 30

I havent heard the 95 but low lamp on this is almost inaudible. I would not care if it were hanging two feet above my head if it were on low.

Thanks!

The 1000 is surprisingly as quiet as a mouse. We can't even hear it and it is over the first row.

Joerod, How big of a step up is the VW1000ES from the VW95ES?

+1

Get the review up JOEROD!!!!

Mark,
I took your settings and tried again. It came out just a little better than the first time I measured. I got 1047 lumens on long throw. Its not worth moving the projector to a table in front of the screen for short throw. It would still be under 1600 lumens. This is using the full panel and best brightness settings.

I guess the only other thing to try is 230 volts.

The above lumens were calculated using the brightest spot on the screen. If I used the dimmest spot I would have 677 lumens. When looking at my screen with a 100% pattern I can see a slight shading across the top. The lower portion of my screen is noticeably brighter than the top. My brightest spot is approimately 12 inches down from the center and 6 inches to the right.
I wish someone else would take their brightest reading and then take their corner readings and post them.

I can't profess to be an electrical engineer but surely the power supply would just switch the voltage to whatever the device requires, regardless of whether you put 230v or 110v into it? Seeing as this projector is Japanese, the native voltage would be 110v. If it didn't switch the voltage, I am pretty sure it would just fry the circuit-board.
Is it not more likely that there is a problem with Randall's?

Well, I was kind of thinking this could be like some amps where a 20amp circuit or 220v plug allows the amp to put out more power... but I have no idea really on a projector if its possible that it changes anything.

Mark suggests that the design would keep it from making any difference.

i've been happy with my JVC RS-1 for a 4 years or so but have checked in from time to time to see whether progress of performance for the dollar has moved forward far enough to cause me to upgrade. i'm using a Dalite 118" x 49" (size from memory) "2:35" 1.5 screen and sit about 13 feet back in a pretty dark room.

i'm thinking seriously of the Sony VPL-VW1000 4k projector (my dealer will have stock to deliver to me next week) and i'm wondering if my ISCO III lens will work considering the design of the projector body and lens openning. i know how close the lens needs to be to my RS-1. i'm concerned about the ISCO fitting close enough? has anyone tried that?

the next question would be will i lose anything if i just use the zoom to get my 2:35 to fill my 2:35 screen and avoid the lens. i'm fully committed to having the wide screen.

many thanks in advance for help......i've just started doing my research and so need to figure things out quickly.

Ok Mark - I see what is going on now - very sneaky..... go ahead and get me a price on the limited edition 2000 lumen European model.

wait... ugh now I have myself thinking about European models...

I see Standard and Poors lowered Sony's credit rating to near-junk status. How much more money do they need to lose before one should
worry about the longevity of their projector division?

Randall. I can't find my meter and I was just guessing as to how to get 2000 ANSI out. But I did verify that 1400 is to be expected and not the 20000 being measured in Europe. The machine I have and Randall's ae masuring about the same lumens. We should hear about Art's machine soon and others as well. I will eventually figure out why the Euro machines are measuring higher but I don't have enough data.

I expected 2000 lumens when I purchased it and that is what Sony advertised.

I did not expect 2000 lumens based on Sony, but I did based on wolfgang and bought based on that. We must figure out why those measure higher. If I have an electrician run a plug for me so I can test, then what cord for the Sony do I get? I confirmed in the manual that the power supply is autosensing.

Agreed. I have heard it said over and over again. 2000 lumens at D65.

Never heard Sony state 1400 lumens calibrated!

Of coarse I was always skeptical of that because not many projectors ever reach spec'd lumens at d65.

Working hard.

Be up soon...

What about cooling issues, the air intake is around the lens, a tight/close fitting A-lens may compromise the cooling to the 1000.

Just a quick impression on my viewing of the 1000, as I am now at Mark H's house for a couple of days, on the way home after a trip to Boston.

The sharpness, yet smoothness, rich colors, together with high brightness makes for a striking picture. Tom Huffman gives a more detailed report of his viewing and calibration of this projector on the ChromaPure website; it is incredible how close the 'Reference' preset is to near-perfect calibration. (In one of many tests I froze the scene shown so often of cine4home's reviews, of the Piazza San Marco in 'Casino Royale', and studied it from my viewing distance as well as up to 1 ft of the screen: the detail and resolution I observed is MILES beyond anything I could ever observe on my computer screen from cine4home's reviews.)

The discussion of the 'fully calibrated' lumens one obtains has been discussed quite a bit, and a reasonable consensus may be emerging: Tom's result for this projector is ~ 1400 lumens, and I just saw cine4home's new report of ~1600 lumens, which I would take as essentially the same (both in high lamp, min throw, etc.) For me (on a Dalite HP2.4 screen), this will generate 40+ ftL for a 144x61 (2.35) pic, and 50+ ftL for a 128x72 (16x9) one; if I find this too bright, low lamp should reduce this by 25 to 30% I presume. I also note that high lamp seems to me to be about the noise level as my RS20 in low lamp, and I truly cannot hear the 1000 in low lamp from a couple of ft away.

So this looks like this is going to be my next projector. Whether it's actually 'worth' the cost compared to some other very good new projectors is of course a very personal decision. But if you are comfortable with the cost I don't think you will be disappointed.

One could also limit the maximum iris opening to limit the light as well, but I'm guessing the majority of people buying this unit want the max lumens.

On the right combination of screen, area and gain, like yours, this would be quite a projector. Congrats!

While we're on a the subject of impressions...

I was finally able to spend as few hours with the projector this week. Coming from a 3 generations of JVC projectors, the investment was steep but I was willing to take the plunge.

So far I couldn't be happier. Images are bright and vibrant with a tremendous amount of pop. I was able to audition a Lumis and a dual stack Runco D73 and the VW1000 is most certainly in the same league IMO.

As for 3D, this is certainly the best I've seen so far of any consumer projector. Plenty of brightness and not a hint of ghosting so far. I also tested a few clips from movies typically plagued with Ghosting. Despicable Me and Monster House are two good examples. Neither had any signs of ghosting. In fact, the 3D was on par with a Titan Reference 3D I auditioned a couple of weeks ago. To say the least, I'me very pleased so far.

One annoyance is the external IR emitter which is "optional". For $25k retail, it should be in the box. Anyway, the range out right sucks. They only work line of site which is not a reasonable option for most theaters (including mine). Simple solution was the Monster RF kit which works perfectly so not a big deal but it was an annoyance.

I'm measuring 32fl on high lamp mode, reference setting, auto iris off. That's on a 49x87 16x9 image and 20ft throw. Still working on an new AT screen which I anticipate to have on hand in the next couple of weeks. Likely the Seymour E4k or Stewart Microperf, 11ft wide 2.35

How would you compare the picture quality to a Sony 4K digital cinema? A couple of weeks ago, I saw Fincher's version of The Girl with The Dragon Tattoo at the theater and was astounded by the quality even at low APL scenes. It was as if Fincher's technical crew improved the gamma settings from The Social Network to create a much better looking cinematography. The contrast in the film didn't appear as deep as any current projector...yet, was left very impressed (hardly noticed any veiling, milky blacks, low ansi, and whatnot).

Also, with its superior lens quality in relation to 4K...is your purchase heavily based on its optics, as well - as it is mainly responsible for its image sharpness and smoothness?

That would be hard to tell, there are 5 different current Sony 4K digital cinema chips. It would be incredible to test out all those Sony cinema chips plus the Sony VW1000ES

Hi Guys. I am really exhausted so I will be brief.

I am confident the machine will out put 2000 lumens uncalibrated in some torch mode. I don't know what settings that will be at but I will find out. My machine goes to Berkely on Monday but I will get another soon and another light meter. When I do, I will find the 2000 lumens torch mode.

Sony has never specked lumens on any of its projectors at d65. The speck is 2000 lumens unspecified as to set up parameters. I can't list manufacturers for obvious reasons, but for example one that specs say 1300, gives out about 900 lumens calibrated. Most manufacturers speck lumens without specifying set up parameters and normally we assume torch mode, closest throw, iris wide open, full panel width illumination, brightest color space, highest operating temperature. There simply is no reason to expect Sony to have done it diffently with the 1000ES. Sony specked its 30 and 95 about the same percentage higher than in calibrated mode and the number of calibrated lumens we are getting from the 1000Es is in line with the same percentage reduction from the 2000 speck.

The problem with some thinking that the speck was calibrated lumens was that several very well respected Europeans stated they were getting 2000 lumens calibrated, but that is their statement not a speck by Sony.

This machine has a myriad of set up paraneters The reality creation two settings when reality creation is on affect a lot of other parameters and I do not at this point have a real clue as how to determine an optimum setting for them. Switching reality creation to on changes brightness and affects gray scale even when the two settings (resolution and noise filter) set to 0.

Even forcing the machine to full panel by switching from normal aspect to 2.35 has set up options. One can zoom in to fit the image back onto a 1.78 screen. Correct geometry will be obtained. The lumens out will increase by 7% before zoom in. Zoom in will reduce the 7% gain somewhat. But the loss with zoom in can be avoided by not zooming in but by simply moving the projector closer in so that the image fits the 1.78 scren.

The concept of having a 1.89 panel instead of a 1.78 panel is new to all of us and requires a lot of thinking. Most of the set up options such as reality creation and the black level settings in the expert menu, and others, are not really explained in the manual. Experimentation and observation are in order. I have spent many many hours doing this and I have a lot more to go. I share what I observe.

Fortunately, out of the box, the preset modes, particularly the Reference mode, is almost spot on and throws a fantastic picture. The 3D mode which comes on when a 3D signal is received by the projectorn incorporates some of the settings from the modes which can be selected (e.g., Reference Mode). In this case the regular modes become modified subsets of the 3D super mode let's call it. On my screen, the 3D with the Refernce mode subset, is very very bright, has beautiful colors, and good depth. The brightness setting under the 3D settings does not appear to affect the shutter tming on the glasses, it actuaky changes the brightness on the screen. Watching content, there is litttle apparent ghosting. The torture tests come out fine. I just want to keep watching it and I have had and have lots of other high quality projectors. I will let others compare the machine to other options including those that other versions of 4K presentation. Links to comparison reviews can be found in the 1000ES threads in this forum.

I saw this film at the Edwards theater in Brea, CA. If only there's a way to find out. But it was a new Sony 4K, when I asked the theater manager...

Knowing what we know now regarding light out put... a Studiotek 100 is ruled out. Would you guys go with a Studiotek 130 or a High Power 2.4 for a 141" x 60" 2:35:1 screen? The projector is table mounted 20" from the top of the screen yet is only 10" above my head (on a similar view plane to my line of sight which is ideal for a retroreflective screen). The angle for the Stewart screen is also not a problem...so both will work but with different foot lamberts produced. The theater is very dark.

Anyone see the 1000 on both a lower gain (1.3) and on a high gain screen for comparison?

The ChromaPure review seems to think a 1.3 gain screen up to 12' wide will work well with the 1000 leaving plenty of room for bulb aging.

What is the gain on your 49"x87" 16x9?

Taking a guess, if you're using a Stewart StudioTek 130, your measurement is below the lumen value the review machine in the Home Theater magazine got with consideration to screen size. You seem to be less than 750 lumens based on your numbers and assuming 1.3 gain. Can that be right?

I would have expected well over 50fl with your screen size and assuming a 1.3 gain.

I don't recall if he mentioned his throw in the review. I would assume the distance from the projector to the screen would also be a factor here. Those measurements were from the projector mounted 20ft away from the screen. Moving the screen forward 5ft towards the projector, I measured 65fl in high lamp mode. If that helps.

BTW - I am using a ST130

Wow so throw is a huge difference maker on this projector. 5 ft forward and DOUBLED ftL.

Ken and I spent some hours last evening with the 1000 and all I can say is wow ! There will be more detail to follow but the image detail is just jaw dropping. I personallly have never seen moving images with that kind of detail and clean and smooth to boot.

The unit I have has incredible uniformity and the panel alignment rivals or exceeds my HT 5000 which has been the best projector I'd ever seen previously in that parameter.

For those who like to sit close this is it. Pixel structure can be seen but you have to get a couple of feet from the screen surface.

I'm comfortable in saying that high quality BD has way more detail to be had than any 1080x 1920 display can give us. At the end of the evening I watched the movie RED and I was just awed with no real way to describe it. The big deal is textures are all there without being hamstrung by the projector resolution limitations like speaker headroom.

These shots give a nice idea of the difference between HD and 4K :

Top Sony 1000 Bottom SIM2 HT 5000