JVC RS 45 / Sony HW30 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5010 mini-shootout - Page 86

Well, I would translate the terms "Screen Door Effect" and "visual pixel structure" as both being a visual perception or effect for any given individual, with no actual measurable or quantifiable meaning - so to me those two terms would mean the same thing. Whereas, Pixel Fill would be the actual quatatative measurement of the pixel structure. I don't know - does that make sense? I actually never even heard the term "Pixel Fill" until this conversation...

So how do these projectors compare in terms of SDE? With one has the most/least pronounced SDE?

I received my Epson 6010 yesterday and set it up last night, replacing my RS40. I haven't calibrated it or my Lumagen XS yet; just the normal shift/focus stuff to get it lined up through my anamorphic lens onto my screen. I turned off any sharpness settings and set it to 3D THX. Again, no brightness/contrast or other changes yet, so I know that the IQ can be made even better. Popped in the Three Musketeers and enjoy a fantastic 3D picture. Only saw once instance of ghosting and it was very minimal and nothing to complain about really. Looked like a little edge enhancement in one short scene. No problemo. My wife and I enjoyed the vibrant, bright 3D image that the 6010 put out. Leagues ahead of the JVC. Popped in IMAX Under the Sea and my wife was extremely happy and said it was a keeper (just like her husband ). I watched The Darkest Hour 3D alone and was very happy with the IQ in dark scenes.

I plan to calibrate the Lumagen (easier to do with autocal) after putting on some hours on the lamp. I'll do some more basic adjustment today, but I have to say that out-of-the-box, it's pretty good in 3D THX. I'll be watching some 2D today just to compare with the JVC's 2D image and get a feel for the FI; then some more 3D tonight with the Mrs.

What really struck me was how good the black floor and CR are on the Epson. I've been promoting "the Dark Side" of the JVCs for years. I was actually all set to stack and use both PJs, but quite frankly, after seeing the Epson in action in my bat-cave, I'll be selling my RS40. The Epson is that good. And for me, the pixel fill is not an issue. Maybe for closer seating or 20/10 eyes in bright white scenes, but not a show-stopper in my book. I tend to watch and enjoy movies and not look for trivial issues once I've set up my PJs. If it's glaringly obvious, that's a different story, but I did not see anything like that on the Epson. No bright corners, no glaringly obvious SDE from normal 1.5x seating distance, no noticeable issues after 5 hours of use. I'll post if any come up, but don't think I'll see any consider others are very pleased with their Epsons.

My only complaints are trivial. For some reason, a User's Manual was not included, just a quick setup guide. No big deal really as the manual is available as a PDF file. Not sure if this is normal. Perhaps it's a user error as I just haven't found it, but don't think that's the case. I did miss the powered lens shift/focus of the JVC, but these really are set and forget features anyway. Again, not a show stopper. At least it has a CMS and does 3D great. Finally, while the glasses seem better than my Xpand 103s, they don't include any adjustable/replaceable nose bridge pieces. Being of Italian and Jewish decent, I'm blessed with a Roman nose that's been broken more than once. My bridge is wider than normal, so I'll need to figure something out for that. Mini band-aids will be my first approach for now.

Time to update my Harmony remote for the Epson and head downstairs to the HT to watch some more movies on this excellent PJ.

Lcos projectors have the least that's the Jvc and Sony, next is the Panasonic ae7000(it's lcd with smooth screen), then the Benq7000 dlp and lastly the Epsons 5010 lcd.

It's a non issue for most people it seems so I wouldn't worry about it.

If lcd and dlp had the same pixel fill or pixel gap the visible pixel structure between them would still look different because dlp is single chip and lcd is 3 with misconvergence. To be honest I don't know what you mean though.

Thanks Jason! I suspect that your thread pretty much started a lot of us down the Epson path. If the JVC RS40 did 3D well, I'd never have have switched. Sadly, the lamps on the JVC dim too quickly and therefore aren't bright enough for 3D, plus they ghost more than most. While JVC lead the way with cheap 3D, they dropped the ball by not making improvements in lamp or 3D in their next gen PJs. No one to blame but themselves.

I'll look into RF glasses like the Monster Vision or the Optoma. Only issue is trying to run IR and RF at the same time. One of the (many) reasons I bought the 6010 over the 5010 was the included glasses.

Can I use the rear RJ45 connection for Monster RF while still getting IR out the front for the Epson (and other) glasses?

After popping in AVS disc, I picked THX for 2D and dialed in brightness (-1) and contrast (13), turned off Epson Super White, Power Consumption is ECO, Auto Iris is Normal, FI is set to Normal, set Gamma to 2.2 , Sharpness is off/0 and Noise Reduction is off. I left Skin Tone at the default (3). I examine the convergence and didn't see any issues or need to tweak it at all.

I watched Star Wars III after and was very, very pleased. As I said, an Autocal will come later on the Lumagen. I'll take a lux meter reading tonight, before watching some 3D, just to note the initial lamp readings. I'll turn off Auto on 3D in order to try the 3D Brightness setting. If this doesn't make much difference, I can go back to Auto.

One more issue which I find very troubling. When I check Info, the lamp hours still reads 0. I've probably put on at least 8 hours by now, so that's a problem. I may try hitting lamp reset just to see if that kick-starts it. There are more items that are ---, but the only other one I remember is bit rate. Again, that's not right as it should be showing 8 or 10.

ANYONE ELSE HAVE THIS ISSUE or was missing a hardcopy User's Guide? I'll call Epson on Monday to see what they have to say.

Epson PJs don't show hours until you have 10 hours on the bulb. So don't worry about it.

Thanks for the observations Steven, and just a note before you sell the jvc as it might annoy, my 6010 vert shift dial seems to allow the image to drop 3-4" over a few days. I did put some tape on the dial and we'll see how it goes, but there is that issue with mine. I guess it's the dial moving slightly over time? It's mounted ceiling/upside down. Before you run your calibrations, might check to see if your on Firmware 104 too, as it might make a little difference.

In Harry Potter like movies the JVC still has more contrast in many scenes, but it isn't a mind blowing difference. The Epson can go darker than the JVC in some scenes believe it or not, I just tested my RS-45 against an 8700ub. It only happens though when there are no bright whites in a scene and muddy grays, and it takes a second or so to get there, it's because the Epson's IRIS closes so far down in this situation. I took some pics but they didn't come out that well with my cheap camera, I may post them later.

As far as pixel fill, this topic has been muddied. Let me re-state it I have studied an LCD vs. a DLP for 500 hours, and LCD does have slightly more visible digital looking pixels, unless you have horrendous convergence on the LCD. If you look at the picture of clouds on an LCD split-screened to a DLP, the pixels are more visible from seating distance on the LCD (and convergence doesn't matter that much in this case).

Is the PIXEL FILL really an issue?
For most people sitting at 1.2x or farther I don't think it will bother that many(only a SELECT few), but for people sitting less than 1.2x screen width, perhaps it will bother a few more (but probably not that many even here).

It does detract a bit from the film-look. And BTW, I can tell the difference in pixel fill between a DLP and LCOS even at 1.1x to 1.2x SW sitting distance, and the pixel fill between these 2-techs is only 5% difference or so vs. 30%+ for LCOS vs. LCD. That doesn't mean I can often see the SDE on the Epson (I rarely can see it), but it just means I can still see the digital twange the pixel fill gives to the image even WHEN there is NO SDE.

It is not a big deal as I said before, I just prefer the smoother image of LCOS slightly in some cases. The 8700ub I had here recently for testing however is not as sharp as the 5010 I saw, and the convergence is not as good (but it is still sharper than most LCD's I have seen). I owned an 8500ub myself a long time ago, and tried swapping it a few times with Epson's RMA, and the convergence was way off on every unit I had tried. This is why I still have a bit of a bad taste in my mouth from Epsons in past years. The 8700ub I just tested here was with good convergence (but it is not precisely as good as my JVC which is only 0.3 pixels off on average across the screen). The 8700ub was 0.75 to 1 pixel OFF at some points, but a little more off at extreme points. The 5010 was for the most part 0.5 to 0.8 off across most of the screen.

From what I have seen (and I have seen many many Epsons and a few JVC's), the JVC's do have better convergence (on average) than an Epson. Could be anecdotal, but I've also heard some dealers tell me the same thing. Now you can still get bad convergence on a JVC as well, but it's rarer. The only real gripe I ever had with Epsons was when you RMA them, you often get ones back with bad convergence. I do NOT know if this still applies with the Epson 5010 RMA process however.

Hi guys. I need your HELP! :-) Sorry, if I'm in wrong thread.
I'm building entertainment room in my attic and trying to choose 3D FullHD projector.
It's for 2d/3d movies only. No games. May be some HDTV ... Attic is 100% light controlled.
Projection Distance - 6 meters.
Screen - 200 "16:9 MW. I want to use it as a 189" 2.35:1 and 173" 16:9 screen (for 3D) with masking.

At first I wanted to buy Epson EH-TW8000 (Hong-Kong version of 5010), when I was in China a month ago. Then I was advised to take the Epson EH-TW9000 (6010). It was out of stock, and I decided to wait couple months until next trip. I bought everything but the projector. At the same time decided to read up on projectors.
During this month I changed my mind several times. I thought about the JVC RS45 with the lens memory and good contrast, but, I am afraid it's not bright enough for my screen.
A couple of days ago I was sure that it must be panny 7000, because I really need a lens memory. But it turned out it doesn't have motorized lens shift, and I have to correct it everytime, when switching between 2.35:1 and 16:9. Owners says that lens shift joystick sucks! And there are people, who say that the panny's 3D is so-so. But anyway it looks like they're happy.
I am completely confused :-(
I understand that the screen is big, but I decided to take the risk. I hope it's possible.

So... the questions:
1. Is there any difference in black levels on 2d/3d between epson 5010 and 6010?
2. Is the image quality of 6010 visibly better than 5010's. (the reason of questions - if I'll buy 6010, it will be 4000$ vs 3000$ in China, where I'm gonna buy it)
3. Why projectorcentral's calculator shows on 6010 twice fL then on 5010, at same throw and zoom? I guess this question is for coderguy ;-)
4. Is it true, that panny 7000 and epson 5010 has same lumen output after calibration?
5. How many lumens I need in 3D mode for 173" 1.78/1 screen? And how many in 2D for 189" 2.35/1 screen without anamorphic lens?
6. I'm almost sure that epson can handle my screen. What about panny?

Thanks Bob. That's good to know.

What about the bit count info? I would hope to see an 8 or something there and not ---.

I registered the product using the supplied disc and see that it provides a link to the User's Guide. Guess they don't include a hardcopy and are saving trees.

Yea, my vertical shift dial could be a little more robust. It's doesn't seem to be as solid as I'd like. It jumps a little too much for my preference and does seem to affect the horizontal slightly too. Not the best design. I did manage to get it perfectly lined up for my purposes without too much effort, so hopefully it won't slip on me. My Epson is set up on a platform and not inverted, so that may help. Still, Epson sells the 6010 with a ceiling mount, so they fully expect these to be ceiling mounted.

I'll keep an eye on it and if it slips, then it's going back. That's just unacceptable IMHO. You should have to readjust V/H shifts, Zoom, or Focus once you have it dialed in. These are set and forget settings really.

1) No
2) No - It's the same projector in a different case and a longer warranty and a few extras...
3) There are a lot of why's when it comes to projector calculators. Most likely a bugged entry.

4) No it is not true, the Epson is brighter, for instance the Epson is about 40% brighter in a purist mode to d65 calibrated to Rec709. The Epson can ALSO get to 1400-1500 or so lumens calibrated near d65 in its torch mode, the Panny has a semi-accurate torch mode that can get to around 900 to 1100 lumens I believe, but even the Panny at 1100 lumens isn't as accurate as the Epson at 1400 lumens. There are side effects to the torch modes even if the calibration meter reads normal, for one the sat. tracking becomes more abnormal, there are some gamma bumps, extra image noise, and a few other side effects (this is what I saw from a 5010 in torch mode). However, the d65 torch mode is still incredibly amazing on the Epson, better than any torch mode I have ever seen on an LCD.

5. How many lumens I need in 3D mode for 173" 1.78/1 screen? And how many in 2D for 189" 2.35/1 screen without anamorphic lens?

For 3D, just forget it, you can't do it that big without it being REALLY very DIM or using a high gain painted screen (painted because I doubt you can buy a high gain screen this big without spending a fortune). Hence, even on the Epsons torch mode the 3D is not bright enough at that screen size without super-duper gain.

For 2D, sure you can do a 173" in Lamp High on an Epson 5010 in torch mode (definitely not on the Panny though), but you will only start around 15 fL to 16 fL, so after some lamp wear you will be too dim IMHO. You need at least 1.2 to 1.4 gain for that size, and 1.5+ gain gain is better.

The image quality and blacks are the same between the 5010 and 6010. The 6010 does have a few extras going for it. It has THX settings which do look great out of the box (but if you calibrate either model, then this is a mute point). The 6010 includes two pair of 3D glasses, a mount, an extra bulb, a longer warranty, and is black instead of white like the 5010. It also has settings for Anamorphic lens which was critical for my use. I have a 136" Carada BW 2.35:1 screen and A-lens which I don't need to move, but can use the settings in the 6010 to control the stretch.

I can't speak to the Panny except to say that it's not particularly favored in this thread compared to what else is available. For a screen that large, you're going to need a light-cannon and no ambient light. You have 100% light control, so that's good. The 6010 is plenty bright and easily handles my 1.4 gain screen (125.2 inches wide by 53.3 inches high). I don't know if you're screen measurements are width or diagonal, but it's very large in either case and it sounds like you already bought it. Don't take this to harsely, but that seems like a silly thing to do before deciding on your PJ. The two go together. You don't go out and buy the biggest screen that can fill your room without doing the research first. Something that big requires a high gain (suggest a DaLite HP) and a very high lumen PJ. In addition, you're going to need something with very good resolution/pixel structure. That probably eliminates an Epson right there, even though they work provide a bright 3D picture and not an issue on my 136" diagnal and 1.3x seating distance.

The other issue with an Epson is that it does not have a lens memory. Since you're not planning to use an A-lens, I don't know why you're even considering an Epson. It has manual controls for zoom, shift, and focus and you will NOT want to change these manually. You need an A-lens if you really want to use an Epson in a CIH setup. Use of an A-lens will also help keep the full panel resolution and lumen which is a must for the screen size you've settled on.

If I were you, I'd return or sell the screen and start with something a little smaller. If that's not an option, I'd probably look into the use of Motorman's Omega filters and use two decent light canon PJs that have motorized lens memory. That should provide your best and cheapest shot at filling that big screen with enough light at 2.35:1 CIH. And even then, I'm not sure about how visible the picture structure will be when blown up that big. Then again, it may not be too bad since you have to align the two PJs and this will actually help in that area. Not the sharpest option, but good enough. It's the approach that I would take for a screen that large and desire for great 3D. And my best advise is to call AVS Sales BEFORE the starting any HT.

Thanks, codergUy and sorry about a/u
It was really difficult to make a decision. I feel much better!



Thank you 2, Steven All measurements are diagonal, and yes, I already bought the screen. But it's motorized. So I can easy remake it with masking to 150" diagonal screen.


I'm already thinking about 6010 and anamorphic lens.

If that's the case, then I highly recommend the 6010. I already have an Prismasonic FE-1500R lens and like it a lot. In your case, you might want to consider the Epson Panamorph A-lens option since it looks like it's built to easily attach Epson 6010 and the included Chief mount.

I have a 136" diagonal 1.4 gain 2.35:1 screen and the Epson easily handles it in ECO mode in THX. I could get more light out of the Epson by using it's Normal power mode and Dynamic settings in 2D. Maybe more in 3D with 3D Brightness set to high. Right now, I have zero need for these and will reserve for when the lamp dims.

My guess is that the Epson may work with A-lens on a 150" diagonal 2:35:1 setup. Your throw distance of around 20' is a little longer than mine (16'), so that's something to factor in as well. The shorter the throw, the brighter the picture, so you could be pushing it at 150". You do have a bigger screen overall than mine, so I understand the need for 6 meters.

Hopefully, someone else can chime in on whether or not this will work.

And before you buy from China, give Mark Halflich at AVS science a call. AVS has good prices on just about everything including A-lens. $4K seems like a lot for a 6010. $3K is a lot for a 5010. Why so much?

After sleeping on it - I will go Sony 30WH - more expensive, but cheaper bulbs, no lag time, better warranty, less noisy with almost the same or better brightness after calibration as Epson.

I just watched Day of the Dead 3D and was disappointed in the 3D. I'm a sucker for zombie flicks and was hoping for more depth. I think I need to restrict myself from buying any BD that wasn't shot natively in 3D. I'm holding off seeing Underworld 4 until this weekend when my son is in town. It was a gift from him.

IMHO, Fusion Camera Systems or IMAX 3D are best. Underworld 4 was shot using Red Epic Cameras. The bulk of upcoming 3D titles that I want to see (Prometheus, Spiderman reboot, RE5, Hobbit movies) are also shot using Red. I hope they look as good as what I've seen from the FCS and IMAX 3D. Anything less seems to be sadly lacking.

I'm very disappointed that all of the Marvel movies have been shot in 2D and then given to us in post-prod 3D. I need to not support this lazy/cheap approach to 3D and will avoid Wrath of the Titans, MIB3, Gravity, and Star Trek 2 in post-prod 3D. Need to start voting with my wallet.

Which camera was the Resident Evil 3D filmed on, I saw that one recently. There were some good popouts, but it wasn't like mind-blowing. I guess animated films are generally the best case for 3D usage.

And maybe some few words of comparison one more time? I'm particularily interested in W7000 vs. HW30.


Sorry, but it's fake 3D. You can clearly see artificial separation, many objects don't have depth (screenshot). It is strange I don't see this film here: http://realorfake3d.com/

I agree, Fright night was one of the worst ever, it gave me eye-strain on the JVC and I quit watching in the middle of the movie. Resident evil 3D was good where it had POP-OUTS but the movie itself was pretty boring, didn't see hardly any ghosting on the JVC in this movie though (except a couple spots, but not much).

How is the 3D on the RS-55? Do you notice any ghosting... enough to be distracting anyway?

-Phil

He has pics posted at the beginning of the thread showing the ghosting, so yes there is ghosting, it is the same as the JVC RS-45 that I own as far as ghosting (or close to it). It does not bother everyone the same, it really depends how hardcore you are about 3D, some movies like Avatar or Resident Evil that I just mentioned barely ghost any even on a JVC. Others will have much more severe ghosting, just depends on the contrast of the scenes and a few other things. It is distracting to many, to me it is somewhat distracting depending on the movie. The other thing is the JVC isn't as smooth looking in 3D and causes more eye-strain (it is a sort of a super-lightning speed fast flicker you can barely see unless you side-by-side another unit).

The 2D is however exceptional, except I am disappointed on the constant color and gamma drift on my JVC from the lamp dimming, but I am probably more sensitive to this than most. I do not know if the RS-55 has the same color and gamma drifting issues (or even all RS-45's). If my RS-45 didn't have near-perfect convergence, then I would have been willing to RMA it to see if another has better color, but I'd rather have the color issue than a convergence issue for sure (Color can be fixed eventually, just need to setup an HTPC for blurays w/ color mods - haven't messed with it yet).

I was going to sell the RS-45 and grab the w7000 or maybe the Sony hw30, but I am having second thoughts because it is a lot of trouble to sell a projector, and again back to the convergence issue if go to the Sony might not be as sharp if I don't get super lucky on convergence again (even just for the fact that it is unlikely I will get another unit of any model that has this good convergence, except of course a DLP).

Here some info for 3d for you zombi.

If there any wrong info in this list correct it please :

Real 3D:

2013
N/A

Fake 3D:

2013
Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters
Untitled Star Trek Sequel

2012 REAL 3D:

47 Ronin
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter
The Amazing Spider-Man
Brave
Dorothy of Oz
Dr. Seuss' The Lorax
Dredd
Finding Nemo 3D
The Great Gatsby
The Hobbit
Hotel Transylvania
Ice Age: Continental Drift
Jack the Giant Killer
Journey 2: The Mysterious Island
Life of Pi
Madagascar 3
ParaNorman
Piranha 3DD
Pirates! Band of Misfits
Prometheus
Resident Evil: Damnation
Resident Evil: Retribution
Rise of the Guardians
Silent Hill: Revelation 3D
Step Up 4
StreetDance 2
Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3D
Underworld Awakening
Wreck-It Ralph

2012 FAKE 3D:

The Avengers
Frankenweenie
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengence
Gravity
John Carter
Men in Black III
Star Wars Re-release
Titanic 4
Wrath of the Titans


2011 real 3d:

The Adventures of Tintin
Arthur Christmas
Born to Be Wild 3D
Cars 2
Cave of Forgotton Dreams
The Darkest Hour
Dolphin Tale 3D
Drive Angry
Fields of Valor: The Civil War
Final Destination 5
Fright Night (in 3-D)
Glee: The 3D Concert Movie
Gnomeo & Juliet
Happy Feet 2 in 3D
Horrid Henry
Hugo
Justin Bieber: Never Say Never
Kung Fu Panda 2
Mars Needs Moms!
Nova Zembla 3D
Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
Puss in Boots
Rio
Sanctum
Sex & Zen 3D
Shark Night 3D
The Three Musketeers
Torrente 4
A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas

2011 FAKE 3D:

Beauty and the Beast 2
Captain America
Conan the Barbarian
Don 2
Ghost in the Shell: S.A.C. Solid State Society
The Green Hornet
Green Lantern 5
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil
Immortals
Lion King 3D
Priest
Ra.One
The Smurfs
Spy Kids 4
Thor
Transformers: Dark of the Moon *
* actually "hybrid," see note 6
Turtle: The Incredible Journey
Valhalla Rising 3D


2010 REAL 3D:

Alpha and Omega
Animals United
The Child's Eye
Despicable Me
How to Train Your Dragon
Jackass 3D
The Last Reef
Legend of the Guardians
Megamind
The Mortician
Natalie
Resident Evil: Afterlife
Sammy's Adventure: The Secret Passage
Saw 3D (Saw VII)
Shrek Forever After
Space Chimps 2
StreetDance 3D
Step Up 3D
Tangled
Toy Story 3
Tron Legacy
Yogi Bear

2010 FAKE 3D:

Alice in Wonderland
Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
Clash of the Titans
Daybreakers
Dune
Gulliver's Travels
Hubble 3D 1
Hybrid
The Last Airbender
My Soul to Take
Nutcracker in 3D
Piranha 3-D
Running Man
Shrek 3D Starter Kit


2009 REAL 3D:

Astro Boy
Avatar
Coraline
A Christmas Carol
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
Dark Country
The Final Destination
The Hole
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
Jonas Brothers 3D
Journey to the Center of the Earth
Monsters vs. Aliens
My Bloody Valentine 3D
Shock Labyrinth
Toy Story (re-release)
Toy Story 2 (re-release)
Under the Sea 3D
Up

2009 FAKE 3D:

Besouro
Dawn of the Dead
G-Force
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince


2008 REAL 3D:

Bolt
Dolphins and Whales
Fly Me To the Moon
Hannah Montana
Scar
Wild Ocean
2008
InAlienable
Kung Fu Panda


2007 REAL 3D:

Battle for Terra
Beowulf
Meet the Robinsons 3
U2 3D

2007 FAKE 3D:

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix


2006 REAL 3D:

The Ant Bully Deep Sea 3-D
Monster House
Night of the Living Dead
Open Season

2006 FAKE 3D:

Flirting with Flamenco
The Nightmare Before Christmas Superman Returns


2005 REAL 3D:

The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl
Aliens of the Deep
Chicken Little 7


2004 FAKE 3D:

The Polar Express

2003 REAL 3D:

Ghosts of the Abyss
Spy Kids 3-D

1986 REAL 3D:

Captain EO

1983 REAL 3d:

Amityville 3-D
Jaws 3-D
Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone

1982 REAL 3D:

Friday the 13th Part III


1954 real 3d:

Creature from the Black Lagoon
Dial M for Murder

1953 real 3d:

Hondo
House of Wax