JVC RS 45 / Sony HW30 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5010 mini-shootout - Page 37

Originally Posted by Bob Sorel

I haven't been hanging around in this forum for awhile, so I just read this entire thread. Some random thoughts:

1. First of all, GREAT JOB, Jason! And your review comes off as very unbiased and fair - a breath of fresh air.

2. I don't understand why everyone is so enamored by the JVCs when it comes to 2D performance - I owned an RS1 (not very good projector at all) and currently own an RS-35, and the best I can say about the JVC is that it really doesn't do too much wrong in the way of hurting PQ, but it really doesn't excite me to watch it either. The blacks are nice, but the colors don't pop like they do with DLP, and intrascene contrast in mixed scenes is mediocre at best. Unless the newer units have improved leaps and bounds over my RS-35, I see no reason to buy another JVC, especially considering their problems with 3D and lamps.

3. Up until now I have had ZERO interest in 3D, but if glasses like the MV3D can be used on ANY projector, then maybe the time is right to jump in and at least start considering a 3D solution. I wear prescription glasses, so the MV3Ds, as described by Jason, appeal to me.

4. Even though I have not set up my HTPC for 3D, I already own an Nvidia card, so if I buy something like Arcsoft Totalmedia Theater 5, will I be good to go on the source side? Currently I rip all of my Blu-rays and then remux them to .MKV and store them on a rather large (40 TB) server. I don't think I can do the same thing with 3D Blu-rays, but I think that I can simply rip the 3D Blu-ray and leave it in Blu-ray format and then play it back using TMT5...Is this correct?

5. Of the projectors mentioned in this thread, the Epson 5010 interests me the most. Jason, am I correct in thinking that if I buy the Epson and let's say, 4 pairs of MV3D glasses, I can make all of this work with my HTPC and TMT5? I am a real 3D noob, so if someone wants to point me to HTPC/3D primer rather than answer my noob questions, I would appreciate it very much (The 3D guide we have in the HTPC section is very outdated and pretty much useless).

6. For the time being, I could just buy the Epson and keep my RS-35, though my hopes are that the 2D performance of the Epson will satisfy me more than that of the JVC, despite the higher native on/off contrast of the JVC.

7. Out of curiosity, what is the AR of most 3D titles? I am using an ISCO anamorphic lens with a 2.35:1 HP 2.8 screen right now (114" diagonal at 16:9 - 144" diagonal at 2.35:1), my throw is ~1.7 SW, and seating at ~1.5 SW. Moving the very large ISCO from one projector to the other is simply not practical, so if the majority of 3D titles are in the same AR (probably 16:9), then that would be very nice...

Once again, thanks to everyone contributing here, especially Jason!

Originally Posted by zombie10k

I won't be using the JVC for 3D, just my quality 2D BD's and dark sci-fi.

Originally Posted by coderguy

I think the hc7800 has some deal-breaking issues IMHO for 3D and maybe even a couple serious ones in 2D, and I am a huge Mits DLP fan. I would recommend anyone of course always research the owner's thread first as much as possible.

Originally Posted by Deja Vu

What gives?

Originally Posted by john2910

Hello what are those deal breaking issues?

I have watched the jvcx30-epson tw9000-sony hw30 in 3d and the hc7800 absolute wins from those projectors in 3d.

Its realy easy on the eyes(no eye strain).

Less ghosting and Great FI

And a great contrast and depth.

Its the best 3d i have seen on a projector.

But ofcourse everybody must go watch(like i did) for your self to make the decision.

Originally Posted by Bob Sorel

2. I don't understand why everyone is so enamored by the JVCs when it comes to 2D performance - I owned an RS1 (not very good projector at all) and currently own an RS-35, and the best I can say about the JVC is that it really doesn't do too much wrong in the way of hurting PQ, but it really doesn't excite me to watch it either. The blacks are nice, but the colors don't pop like they do with DLP, and intrascene contrast in mixed scenes is mediocre at best. Unless the newer units have improved leaps and bounds over my RS-35, I see no reason to buy another JVC, especially considering their problems with 3D and lamps.

Originally Posted by coderguy

@rwestley
The only two 1080p 3D-DLP's under $2k are the Optoma hd33 and Acer 9500bd. Probably the Acer is better but I'm not 100% since I haven't seen it.

@Snowboarders
Yah, it always makes you wonder, do you respect them for their determination and skill, or do you feel pity for them for their suicidal tendencies.

Hi, Bob. Haven't seen your name for a while.

regarding 3D and the HTPC - Which Nvidia card do you currently have? I use the inexpensive GT430 and it works great with 3D on all the projectors I tested. I use Power DVD10 (never updated to 11 yet) and TMT5. I find either one will work better with certain movies, so it doesn't hurt to have both.

You can pull the BD's to ISO and use a free ISO mounting application that makes each ISO appear to be a drive letter than TMT5 or PDVD10 can load.

There are some pains with the HTPC Nvidia setup such as trying to get it to correctly switch between 60hz, 24p and 24fp. An alternative I've been using with good success is one of the first 3D network media devices.

i was not able to tweak the MV3D's quite as good as the Epson factory glasses, but I'll say they were my favorite of the factory glasses in regard to comfort and performance. I like the tint of the Epson glasses, it's quite close to the MV3D's. They fit fine over my glasses.

Can you run a 2 projector setup or would you definitely replace the RS35? I just picked up the RS55 and love the e-shift feature. mainly because I sit close to the 142" screen and the difference is pretty obvious when it's turned on. I won't be using the JVC for 3D, just my quality 2D BD's and dark sci-fi.

I have watched the jvcx30-epson tw9000-sony hw30 in 3d and the hc7800 absolute wins from those projectors in 3d.

For 3D, I've been thinking about picking up another C3X and go the 2 projector passive route.

Originally Posted by zombie10k

Where are you seeing the setting, in the Nvidia control panel or the projector itself? I haven't fired up the 5360 in a little while and will check it out again to be fair in my comments.

btw, I give the 5360 plenty of credit.. it was a great combo with the 3D vision setup, and it was a blast to run ghost-free 3D on a big screen way before 1080P 3D projectors were announce in September 2010.

Originally Posted by zombie10k

Ah, ok I thought it was something additonal. I've had it set for the NVIDIA setup. I am going to run the acer and Epson for a little side by side tonight just to refresh my memory.

Originally Posted by TomHuffman

I got a RS45 for my own use a few days ago, and after spending a few hours with it I have to say that I am quite pleased.

BTW, for even less money one could get an Epson 5010 or a BenQ W7000, both of which have built-in CMSs that work very well. Both of these projectors offer very good images, though in its current incarnation the W7000's native contrast is quite low and must be used with dynamic black.

Originally Posted by zombie10k

Ah, ok I thought it was something additonal. I've had it set for the NVIDIA setup. I am going to run the acer and Epson for a little side by side tonight just to refresh my memory.

Originally Posted by 42Plasmaman

Epson 5010 was measured at 5000:1
http://www.displaycalibrationonline...._epson5010.asp

I find Art's comments and photos concerning the RS-45 and its inaccuracies with it's black level very revealing. The Sony VW-95 looks very good and quite accurate with respect to the star field photo. The JVC doesn't appear even close -- it has an obvious heavy blue to purple bias. Is his projector a poor sample? For me that's a major flaw. This particular comparison makes the VW95 look very, very good and I'm beginning to understand why members here are raving about it!

Originally Posted by TomHuffman

I got a RS45 for my own use a few days ago, and after spending a few hours with it I have to say that I am quite pleased

....

4. One odd aspect of the projector's performance is that high-quality broadcast and Blu-ray sources provide image quality that easily surpasses what I was accustomed to with the Sharp. However, with lower quality HD broadcast sources, I thought that the image looked worse. The image seemed a little noisy and colors appeared blotchy, almost as though they were being viewed with a lower bit depth. A more extreme version of this is sometimes referred to as the clay face artifact.

Because this phenomenon comes and goes depending on the quality of source, one could argue that the JVC is resolving more detail, showing differences in source material that were invisible with a lower resolution unit. Or it could be exaggerating differences that are not actually present in the source material. I honestly don't know what I think about this.

...

3. After calibrating the projector, my initial impression was that dark scenes looked excellent, but brighter scenes seemed flat and lifeless. I decided to try a higher gamma. I adjusted the gamma up from 2.22 to 2.3. This transformed the image. Dark scenes still appeared excellent, but now brighter scenes looked luscious, with great depth and realism.

Originally Posted by Bob Sorel

Yes, I agree, but the Sony should be better considering the price difference. But I am puzzled why Art liked the JVC better than the lower priced Epson 5010, as the Epson seemed to beat the RS45 on everything except black floor, and even then it was quite close. If the black floor is THAT important, why not just throw an ND2 filter on the Epson? It has lumens to spare and would probably be plenty bright on most people's screens even at half brightness. Then simply remove the filter when the lamp ages and loses output.

Maybe the Epson doesn't look as good in person as it does on paper...

Originally Posted by Bob Sorel

I use a custom gamma curve on my RS-35 which is set to 2.4 in the mid and upper IREs, tapering down to 2.2 at the bottom end, thus giving me a lot of depth in mid and brighter scenes, along with better shadow detail in darker scenes. The problem I have, though, is that the RS-35 lamp I have lost a LOT of lumens in the first 400 hours (~45% to 50%), and since the lamp is losing color unevenly, every time I calibrate I lose even more lumens than the lamp is losing overall. I now have about 700 hours on my lamp and it is more than time to replace it (as far as I am concerned), because even on my HP 2.8, the image lacks the pop and depth it had no matter what I do with gamma.

The RS-35 looked great when it was *new*, but it drops light output so fast that I either have to soon live with a less than stellar picture or I have to replace the lamp every 400 hours to keep it looking good.

Or I could just get a smaller screen...

Originally Posted by Joseph Clark

My guess is native contrast, which by my count is 10x higher on the JVC. It's why I still swoon when I watch dark scenes on the JVC. If the JVC weren't so terrible to ghost, I wouldn't be looking anywhere else.

Originally Posted by Joseph Clark

My guess is native contrast, which by my count is 10x higher on the JVC. It's why I still swoon when I watch dark scenes on the JVC. If the JVC weren't so terrible to ghost, I wouldn't be looking anywhere else.

Originally Posted by Deja Vu

I doubt that it is 10Xs higher. My understanding is that under ideal circumstances the RS-45 has a contrast of about 50,000:1 on/off with manual iris closed completely and in low lamp mode and with the zoom closed down. I think in real world conditions half of that would be close. The Epson showed 5,000:1 at normal zoom with no iris to close. I think we're really talking about 5Xs the difference, which is still very impressive on JVCs part; however maybe not so dramatic. the numbers game is an interesting one.

Originally Posted by zombie10k

There is something wrong with that RS45 or it's calibration. The one I had for a few days and my RS55 don't look anything like that sample. A reviewer who is also a calibrator has a major benefit. The 10% and 20% IRE on that gray scale adjustment could be off the scale with blue and I would have fixed it before commenting on it since it's not normal.

In addition, the condition of the projector sample should be stated in the reviews since there can be noticeable variance. Based on my first RS55, I would have been let down from the e-shift since there was something wrong with the lens that wouldn't allow a sharp focus from edge to edge. The replacement is significantly better. I am wondering if their RS45 also had an issue with the lens. The RS45 I reviewed was perfect with focus and nearly perfect with convergence.