Official JVC X30 / RS45 owner's thread! - Page 92

I played around with the ae7000 but decided to wait 5 weeks to get the rs45 and it was totally worth it, 2d in my opinion did not compare, jvc way more dynamic, sharper and natural looking picture. Blacks much better as well. Funny thing when veiwing the ae7000 my wife though it wasn't much of an upgrade from what we had (sanyo z2000). Now the RS 45 was a very obvious upgrade to both of us.

I agree with you that the 2D picture quality of the JVC RS45 is incredible

I can't say I agree with all the findings here, but we all have different opinions. The main thing about the JVC is that certain types of camera work and filming favors it, while certain types of filming favors other projectors such as DLP.

Playing a movie or two on a projector and then declaring a winner is not a great test, I have compared about 20 movies now.
It all has to do with the source transfer, the processing, and the overall quality of the camera work is what it comes down to.

It is true that DLP will win on some movies, but I find the JVC wins more, but it's not just because of dark scenes vs. bright scenes, it's just a combination of factors.

It was interesting to read both Art's review and the projector central review. It seems that neither reviewer was satisfied with it's performance compared to similarly priced competitors.

Art even admits a bias towards JVC but from his comparison to the W7000 in the RS45 review it seems like he tries so hard to twist his words to make it sound as little as possible that he likes the W7000 more. All JVC has over the W7000, from what he says, is better native blacks, in regards to PQ.

From the Projector Central side it seems the reviewer likes the Panasonic AE7000, Epson Home Cinema 5010, and Mitsubishi HC7800D all a bit better than the X30. He got to compare them all side by side. Those three all got a 5 star rating in performance while the X30 got, not a half, but a whole star reduction in overall performance.

JVC really needs to step up their game. Just because they have the best native blacks doesn't mean they can slouch in other areas (especially 3D). Though, I think they know their projectors will sell anyways because of that point alone.

Contrast and sharpness are the most important things to me when comparing projectors in this price range IMHO. I'd have to see the Benq w7000 to know if I agree with Art or not, but I expect to find the same thing I've already found in my other comparisons.

The JVC is at its best in reference level content, here it can pass up most all the projectors, even in bright scenes here it at least matches DLP and sometimes surpasses. We know the 3D is not the best on the JVC, that's why it takes a hit in reviews, but the "JVC only has the best blacks" is also not correct. It also has fully motorized controls, a sharper image than the Sony or Panny, and the Epson has a less film-like image. Most purists and enthusiasts don't judge a projector by an "averaged out rating" from a review site, we look for what we need in the image and then go to that. Contrast and sharpness and film-like are attributes not to be undersold.

The Benq w7000 will have the DLP look, it might even look better in bright scenes, but the black levels are not just slightly worse on the Benq, they are a level of global magnitude worse. I almost bought the w7000, but I started reading the specs carefully. The Native On/Off is only 2200:1 at farthest throw on the w7000, that is a tough sell for a projector in this price range. If you mount the projector at closest throw, you might only get 1500:1 or less.

An IRIS can only do so much with a Native starting that low, and that is even barely higher than the Viewsonic Pro8200 I have that I paid $500 for. That said, the Benq is great for Sports and HD type material, but in movies I would find it very hard to believe most would prefer the Benq. If you just randomly pick movies or whatever, some will have bad camera work and might favor the DLP, I can't help it that so many movies have bad camera work, but most movies with high budgets are going to look better on the JVC, just my opinion.

I've spent enough time with both the Benq w6000 and the JVC RS45. The Benq w7000 from all accounts has identical 2D image. You guys that think these are comparable in that area are comedic!

Even my buddy that owns the w6000 was totally blown away with the RS45!
I like the Benqs..hell I own one. But there's no way in hell you'll get me to say the Benqs will best the RS45 in 2D imagery.
The difference in contrast is drastic. That's stating it in a nice way.

What is most important to me is not how an average movie looks, it's those movies with those incredible shots, and that means you do need some black levels. Even Green Lantern and Thor had some pretty decent camera work, Thor was the better movie (Green Lantern was entertaining in a laughable way, but man kind of cheesy).

I thought Thor was good, the JVC blows DLP away on this. The JVC looks better in Tree of Life than any DLP I've seen yet even in bright scenes. I'll keep trying this disc now to see if any can beat the JVC in bright scenes, but thus far no go. I've watched it on 3 DLP's so far, not the w6000 yet, would need to see it on a Runco, might get that chance eventually, don't know. I expect camera work to only get better in the future, not worse (hopefully), so I expect I'll find more and more movies looking better on the JVC as time passes. Super-8 was also no competition for DLP vs. LCOS, this movie needed film-like and black levels if any did.

Now on the opposite side, throw a movie like Bad Teacher in there or some other one with no special shots, and the JVC still does fine, but it doesn't beat DLP here, but who cares since we aren't really watching the movie for PQ anyhow.

The Q750 Runco is a nice machine, that's probably the only DLP I can think of owning after this JVC. Even then, it can't match the RS45 in overall contrast, but it sure looks impressive nonetheless.

Or the RS-55 with e-shift sounds cool too.
It adds even more of that film-look, gets closer to that 35mm look, sharp but smooth.

I've considered upgrading to the RS55. I may just wait and see what comes out next year instead, while being content with the RS45.

My 45 has issues with white streaking so it's not fair for me to compare it to the 6000 I have. I do agree that the 45 should easily best the 6000....unless the 45 is faulty.

Yeah I would say serious issues, if you pick the w6000 over it.
I love the pacific series. I have it here on hard drive. There are a lot of dark scenes. How did you watch them on the w6000?

It's really an opinion. I much preferred The Tree of Life on my Planar PD8150 then on my JVC DLA-RS20. What do you mean specifically when you say "camera work"?

Yep...but JVC seems to think that seeing white streaking from 6ft is acceptable.... so I will just keep my two projector setup and go back and forth.

Well I'm not sure about the Planar vs. the RS-45, but the Planar is basically the same as the Runco LS3?
So yah, how much does that projector cost, maybe $5000+?

Also, you're comparing an RS-20, the JVC has gotten sharper since the RS-20 on average. The RS-20 and RS-45 have about the same contrast.

LOL, well yah, I once had an 8500ub with a bad lamp and convergence off 2+ pixels. At the time I also owned a 720p Sanyo z5 that has some type of aging issue (loss of contrast due to panel aging).

Comparing the two projectors was like a slug-fest of how bad can it get. I preferred the 8500ub of course even with the horrible convergence, but you gotta get a good sample to compare. The 8500ub and 8700ub are nice projectors for LCD, if you get a good sample.

The Mitsubishi hc4000 was the first projector since my original 2006 purchase of the Sanyo that blew away, the JVC is the third projector to blow me away.

You get used to traits in an image and then you want different traits just to get a different feel. I can appreciate the different look to the JVC, it won't always look better 100% of the time compared to other projectors, but on some stuff it does look better.

Once you own a DLP already, and then get you an LCOS, you'll have all the bases covered for the most part.

C & J - you guys should not look at the RS55. it might make you want to spend 2x the money. in my particular setup (big screen, close seating distance) the e-shift quickly distances itself from the RS45 and all the other projectors i've seen when viewing quality source material. The image looks flat to me now without it.

it's about time JVC put in a major feature to separate itself from the entry models vs. last year with the 40/50.

Well that sucks! Sorry you didn't get a better unit or service. I have to get right up on the screen to see any of that in white text on black background. It's so minute though, it doesn't cause an issue.

I think I know what you are seeing. When I was in Colorado I saw a really well setup LCOS projector at the commerical Cinema (a rarity but it happens), it was like very bright, at least 14 fL, I saw SUPER 8 on it. It was like one of the few times I've seen a projector look good at the commercial cinema that was calibrated right.

I had to sit real close when watching SUPER 8 because the small theater room was pretty packed. I am sure the projector was a Sony 4K or something like that, it looked new and different than other commercial projectors. Even though the dark scenes weren't as good as the RS-45, at the CINEMA they still had some type of magical depth round look to them, must have been the resolution.

I watched this movie twice at the Cinema, saw it on another projector and it looked horrible. I was only watching it because I was trying to get a good feel of different commercial projectors. I didn't sit through the whole movie the second time. I tried to watch it a third time by going into another room, but I got bored and left :P

zombie ..man you're like a devil on my shoulder!:

Ok so after unboxing and setting up my new proj all i can say is WOW. im comming from an hd65 (which i know is quite the jump) but after some tweaking I am so amazed by the color, black level and just how filmic the picture is. I had been researching this purchace for awhile (reading this forum constanly) and after my demo at magnolia AV i was sold! Now all i need to do is upgrade my screen from a 92 firehawk to a CIH setup I was thinkin 112" and classic cinema gain, thoughts? is carada a good choice?

The Da-Lite High Power is a good choice, gives you the extra OOMPH for 3D brightness, while also letting you close the IRIS to -15 to get max Native On/Off for 2D. Be aware of the narrower viewing cone though as well as the placement restrictions if you go with an HP.

I would just tell them you have 20/10 vision and you can see it from 50 feet back. You should push for an exchange hard, no reason to live with that issue IMHO.

Those Sony 4K projectors cost upwards of $100K it better have "magical depth". I saw Thor and 50/50 on a Sony 4K in a local theater. I have to say I still like the way a 3 chip DLP looks more.

Yah but at the Cinema it totally depends on the setup. I've seen some pretty expensive projectors look like Dog poo there, this one however looked good.

I saw Harry Potter on a three-chip DLP that looked good, but I preferred the RS-45 over it.
These are the only two movies I can recall seeing at the Cinema that really looked all that good, most of my Cinema experiences are somewhere between mediocre and absolutely horrible.

You think this is a better choice that a 2.35.1 Cinema White 112" for a batcave? I'll be doing primaraly 2D watching of movies

I've never seen a Cinema White, but I would prefer gain for any projector that has a manual IRIS, because you get 50,000:1 with it at -15 aperture vs. 15,000:1 contrast with it at 0 on lamp low. I would want to run it at -15 aperture for as long as possible to maximize the contrast.

So that is the main issue IMHO.

Very good point... Hmmm.... Thats whay i ask u experts BTW your calculator is AWESOME!!!

Thanks for the comments. Do note that my calculator has a lens shift bug with some projectors, it shows about 5 more inches of lens shift for the JVC than it really has. This bug will not occur in my calculator to any DLP projector that I know of, or any LCD/LCOS projector with 50" of lens shift. I didn't notice it before since it only happens on specific projectors.

I've isolated the bug to a pixel scaling issue with the grid in different browsers (yah even for simple programs you have to write scaling algorithms sometimes), I just haven't had a chance to patch it yet. Patch coming real soon though.

you guys know i'm one of the first to jump on JVC.. first RS40 was bad, 2nd RS50 has lamp issues and way under performing vs. advertised specs, but the e-shift on the RS55 is really nice on the 142". It adds an appearance of depth to facial features and the entire image looks like I turned up the resolution about 2-3 notches vs. when it's turned off. In a number mixed contrast scenes, it's a little hard to tell the 45, 55 (e-shift off) and the 5010 apart, but when you turn the e-shift on to 3, the increase in IQ becomes quite apparent to my eyes at my seating distance.

btw, the first RS55 dropped about 100 lumens in a short period of time, so I am using the replacement with much reservation (only critical 2D BD viewing) and using the other projectors for regular movies, HDTV, 3D, etc. The lamp in my HW30 is performing way beyond my expectations.

I was reading about 80"+ Plasmas, apparently these larger Plasmas are having some issues with Native on/off compared to smaller plasmas.

Funny, you try to get one tech that can do something so well, and then they make it bigger and starts losing its own advantage. The LED TV's I guess will have the best blacks. Still too expensive.

One thing that would really suck about a 92"+ TV is the size of the darn thing, moving that thing would be hell on wheels.