Originally Posted by JustMike
Actually, to clarify even further, Cine4Home found the following for the JVC RS55
Lamp low, iris open, shortest throw: 640 lumens, 26,000:1 contrast
Lamp low, iris open, longest throw: 560 lumens, 32,000:1 contrast
The RS65 added roughly an extra 10,000 to the left of all of those ratios, at the same light output. To reach its highest contrast figures, you had to run the RS55 with the iris closed, which dropped its short-throw lumens to 310 even on high lamp (!) but yielded 69,000:1 contrast.
For the 95ES:
Lamp high, iris open, shortest throw, 850 lumens, 13,000:1 contrast
Lamp high, iris open, longest throw, 680 lumens, 15,000:1 contrast
Lamp high, iris closed, longest throw, 330 lumens, 20,000:1 contrast
Lamp high, iris auto, shortest throw, 850 lumens, 54,000:1 contrast
Lamp high, iris auto, longest throw, 680 lumens, 84,000:1 contrast
(I didn't list the Sony in low lamp, since none of the combinations yield enough brightness for my screen...)
So, basically, the Sony even with its iris closed does not perform as well as the JVC in terms of native contrast, even with the JVC's iris wide open. But, crucially, they found that enabling the dynamic iris on the Sony gave the same brightness as a wide-open iris, but gave a contrast higher than the highest figure the RS55 could do at D65.
So, I would really like to see the 95ES in action (I still
have not been able to find one in the SF Bay Area!!) to see how it fares on a mixed scene where it will have to find an iris compromise to keep the bright elements fairly bright while not raising the black floor too much, compared to the JVC, which doesn't have to make that compromise.
I did watch exactly such a scene the other day on the VW1000ES, and the performance was very fine indeed. I'd love to see how the 95 does with the same content.