Originally Posted by Deja Vu
Personally I don't believe that JVC's (or for that matter Sony's) 3D is top notch for current technology. DLP, IMO, and a lot of others, who are more versed in these matters than me, (Conan 48, Zombie, Toe etc.) feel DLP is presently the best technology for 3D, it may lack in some other areas, but not in the 3D area.
Here's a quote by Toe concerning ghosting on his JVC RS-40 compared to DLP.
"I would agree with that, until I saw a DLP in action Sam. I thought the ghosting on both of our 40s was minor, but once I saw my buddies DLP, I realized all that negligible ghosting was not quite as negligible as I once thought. Not that the 40s are bad as far as ghosting and blu ray 3d (120hz material in general to my eyes now is pretty bad though TBH as far as ghosting with the 40) in general (besides a few real problem titles like Dinosaurs Giants Of Patagonia), but once you see completely ghost free 3d, the 3d on the 40 is not quite as impressive as far as ghosting goes. Gaming especially was a real eye opener......I find ghosting distracting enough in games on my 40 that my motivation for gaming in 3d became much less. Seeing ghost free game after game on my buddies Acer was very cool and frustrating at the same time!
If I had the cash and my setup could accommodate one of these DLPs (so far none of the models would be ideal with my setup due to crappy placement flexibility with either lens shift, zoom range or both), I would grab one in a second just to use as a 3d projector, and use the 45 for 2d duties.
Having said all that, I sure hope our 45s improve in the ghosting area, but I remain skeptical due to still being 120hz. Either way, it certainly wont be in the same league as DLP unfortunately."
Here's a quote from you about the RS-50 made several months ago. What's changed?
"Never thought I'd hear myself say, "Gee, I wish I had a "low end" machine to replace my RS50". But I am!
And... Give me back my cash you've stolen JVC!"
I suggested on both the RS-40 and RS-50 threads that all the people complaining about the RS-50 would be right back buying this year's model. It looks to me that this is exactly what's happening. So much for letting JVC know just how upset everyone was with the RS-50's issues and that they wouldn't be supporting JVC in the future.
It's always a balancing act with display technologies. Nothing's perfect. Some people swear by plasma, some LCD. Some people like projection TV, and others are flat panel advocates. Etc., etc., etc. There's no right or wrong preference - it's a matter of personal taste. It's also easy to find fault and point out weaknesses if you're inclined to do that.
I got a chance to watch the Acer 5360 DLP projector recently (which you've championed around here for the last year). I was impressed, as I thought I would be. There was no ghosting whatsoever, and the 720p resolution didn't bother me much on a 92" screen. It was nice and sharp. I agree with you completely that (at $400-500) it's one of the best bargains I've ever seen in a home theater projector. Remarkable! My sister has a Mitsubishi 3D DLP rear projector, and I've also never seen a hint of ghosting on it. I like it's image even more than the Acer's.
In terms of ghosting, there's no doubt that DLP is king right now. It beats up D-ILA and LCD and plasma, as well as flat panel and projection. Strike one against all those technologies when it comes to 3D goodness. How about cost? All those techs are probably going to cost you more than the little Acer box. Strike two. How about lamp cost? The Acer's lamps are $100, compared to twice that or more for other projectors. Strike three.
Game over, right?
How does the Acer (or DLP in general) do in terms of native contrast compared to D-ILA (JVC's projection technology)? Oops, a swing and a miss. Strike one.
How about real resolution? Sure, the Acer looks really good, but does it compete seriously with a good 1080p projector, like my RS40? Not unless I back up a lot more than I can in any normal size room. Strike two.
How about rainbows? Although they were minimal, I saw rainbows on the Acer, and I've seen rainbows on all my DLP projectors, and my sister's Mits. Do they bother me as much as they do some people? Not at all. But they're there, just like ghosting on my RS40. Does that make DLP projection a bad 3D technology? For some people, the answer is likely "yes." Strike three.
Game over, right?
Wrong, because it's all a matter of taste.
Everyone has to ask, "What do I value most in my display (and in my 3D)?" My answer is native high contrast, and the Acer (or any DLP I've ever owned) doesn't even come close. I suspect a lot of people keep going back to JVC because of this. It's HUGE in terms of how satisfying the image on the screen is for me, and probably for a great many JVC users.
I'm just about as fickle as it comes with electronics. I don't care what name is on the box, if I like it I buy it. I wouldn't trade my RS40 and its ghosting problem for a 3D DLP display now, because the DLP 3D downside is significantly worse than ghosting. That's DLP's only serious advantage IMO, and it's minor compared to the negatives. (Ghosting on my RS40 is no more annoying to me than rainbows are on the Acer 5360.) Maybe the balance will tip in DLP's favor for me at some point, and I'll be the first to say so if it happens. Meanwhile, I'm sticking with JVC for 2D and 3D.
Did you like the baseball analogies? I'm still psyched that the Cardinals won the World Series this year.