or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › JVC RS 45 / Sony HW30 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5010 mini-shootout
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

JVC RS 45 / Sony HW30 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5010 mini-shootout - Page 94

post #2791 of 3271
That is the 2D version, he said the 3D version which sells for $100+ unless you get it from China.
post #2792 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by drhankz View Post

WHY - it is commercially released now.
Why buy it on eBay?
Amazon has it for $29.

The 29.99 is only for the extended 2D edition.
post #2793 of 3271
Thread Starter 
it's a shame they did these exclusives since Avatar could have been the 3D BD that could have helped driven sales (not just for Panasonic).

I watched it last night on the W7000 with the Darby @ 50%. I like the Darby higher on 3D than I like in 2D mode (usually 30-35%). I usually go for the scene where she tells him to 'definitely run' and the whole chase scene that goes into the night with the attacking hounds, etc.

I'm completely burned out on Avatar, the story, the 3D, etc. I've watched it on the Acer 5360, JVC RS40, RS50, RS45, RS55, Sony HW30 & VW95, Epson 5010 and the BQ W7000. I have a number of other 3D BD's I'd rather use now to show 3D to visitors.

It might be time to put together a little 3D demo disk with the best scenes from each 3D movie. I would include the 'Thriller Remake' on MJ's 'This is it 3D BD' - this is a great, short 3D clip with nice pop outs.

JC - which program can handle assembling full 3D BD frame packed content?
post #2794 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

it's a shame they did these exclusives since Avatar could have been the 3D BD that could have helped driven sales (not just for Panasonic).
I watched it last night on the W7000 with the Darby @ 50%. I like the Darby higher on 3D than I like in 2D mode (usually 30-35%). I usually go for the scene where she tells him to 'definitely run' and the whole chase scene that goes into the night with the attacking hounds, etc.
I'm completely burned out on Avatar, the story, the 3D, etc. I've watched it on the Acer 5360, JVC RS40, RS50, RS45, RS55, Sony HW30 & VW95, Epson 5010 and the BQ W7000. I have a number of other 3D BD's I'd rather use now to show 3D to visitors.
It might be time to put together a little 3D demo disk with the best scenes from each 3D movie. I would include the 'Thriller Remake' on MJ's 'This is it 3D BD' - this is a great, short 3D clip with nice pop outs.
JC - which program can handle assembling full 3D BD frame packed content?

I'm not sure, Jason. I thought I'd read that MVCtoAVI could split Blu-ray 3D files into left/right pairs. Once they're split (and unprotected), they can be assembled in Sony Vegas Pro to create a Blu-ray 3D compilation disc. However, I haven't been able to get that to work. If you can find a program to split the files successfully into a format Vegas can understand (like AVCHD or MPEG2), it's a breeze to burn the Blu-ray 3D iso. If you find such a program, I can help with the rest. PM me.
post #2795 of 3271
I am also at major burn-out on Avatar, I was never a huge fan of it (it was good but not a lot of re-playability). It was a generally ok movie, but after seeing it twice THAT was enough for me.
Another thing I am really burned out on is Harry Potter.

I don't like visiting the theater, so I usually only get to see movies 3-6 months later smile.gif
post #2796 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMyers View Post

Totally off-topic...
I'd like to see Avatar in 3D on Bluray (on my HW30) but I don't want to pay the eBay prices and I didn't purchase a Panny Bluray player to get a copy.
Would anyone with a copy like to temporarily exchange some 3D blurays for a week or two? We could cross ship and agree to mail back on some specific date. I've got Hugo 3D, Deep Sea 3D and Grand Canyon 3D. I'd be happy to mail any or all of these for a temporary exchange for Avatar 3D.
If anyone is interested, please drop me a PM. Oh, I'm in the USA FWIW.
Thanks in advance!
... Altan

There is a generous guy out there... Thanks man!

Avatar 3D on the way...

I haven't seen it since 3D IMAX @ the theater. I recall the 3D was amazing and the plot was so-so. I said there was no sense in watching it in 2D, so I haven't bothered. But I'm feeling the need for 3D speed now... wink.gif
Edited by MadMyers - 6/19/12 at 10:33am
post #2797 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

I'm not sure, Jason. I thought I'd read that MVCtoAVI could split Blu-ray 3D files into left/right pairs. Once they're split (and unprotected), they can be assembled in Sony Vegas Pro to create a Blu-ray 3D compilation disc. However, I haven't been able to get that to work. If you can find a program to split the files successfully into a format Vegas can understand (like AVCHD or MPEG2), it's a breeze to burn the Blu-ray 3D iso. If you find such a program, I can help with the rest. PM me.

This new forum software is trashing all carriage returns on replies on text. I mentioned something to the new site owners, but it doesn't look high priority on their list to fix. It's a shame, because it ruins the readability of replies for this of us who take the time to put in proper spacing.

I'm on a missions to give it a shot, I just built a little powerhouse of a computer and want to break it in with some heavy hitting editing software.

http://us.shuttle.com/barebone/Models/SZ77R5.html

32GB ram, Core I7 3770K (unlocked), running at 4.25Ghz and 2 OCZ Vortex 4 SSD's (fastest in the industry) in a raid 0. Boot times are sub 10 seconds to a fully loaded Win 7 ultimate desktop. I threw in an 'old' ATI 6850 I had laying around which is still a nice card.

This computer should tear through any rendering with a quickness. I'll let you know what I find, I have a few specific sites that should be discussing this process in detail.
post #2798 of 3271
Great. I recently put together a couple of video editing systems. The most powerful has an Intel 3930 6-core CPU, is liquid cooled and OCed conservatively to 4.2GHz. It has 5 SSDs. SSDs make a tremendous difference in the speed of production.
post #2799 of 3271
Thread Starter 
wow, I should have known you'd have a killer setup for video editing. I built this to run 2012 server release candidate since we use vmware and hyper-v at work all the time. I wanted to get a jump start on the new 2012 OS.

I figure i'd dual boot to Win 7 to mess around with editing. I didn't think editing the frame packed 3D BD would be so tough, I see some very expensive commercial packages out there. I have a license for Vegas at work and was going to play around with making a 3D demo disk, but it sounds like you've explored this area already.

http://3dvision-blog.com/5502-mvc-to-avi-3d-video-converter-software-by-peter-wimmer/

so no go on this guys app?
post #2800 of 3271
I'll try it again, but I didn't have any luck the first time around. Theoretically, it's supposed to work. I'm wrestling with a whole set of unrelated issues using MVCtoAVI and Cineform to convert my JVC 3D clips for use in Vegas Pro, but that's a whole other kettle of fish. I'll let you know if I have any more luck using Peter's utility with commercial discs.
post #2801 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

wow, I should have known you'd have a killer setup for video editing. I built this to run 2012 server release candidate since we use vmware and hyper-v at work all the time. I wanted to get a jump start on the new 2012 OS.

I was doing almost EXACTLY the same thing (well sort of). I had this server issue, so I took it back to my home as a temporary Windows PC to test it. Totally off-topic, I've gotta to do the same thing myself (do a 2012 server). I just hope the newer version of HyperV has working replication so I can stop using Linux to run Windows virtuals smile.gif

Anyhow, I was using a 24-core server with a $2000 raid array to play games on (kind of funny). It didn't really make it any faster, it booted faster, but you still have the general overhead of timing in some cases. All the stuff was off-loaded onto the GPU of the Video Card anyhow (well almost all of it).
post #2802 of 3271
How does the colour on jvc lcos or Sony compare to dlp, are they similar looking or fairly different? I've never owned an lcos projector but have clocked up quite a few hours on dlp and lcd and I have to admit I prefer the colour on dlp, it just looks natural to me in a way that lcd isn't and I've become really accustomed to that look. The down side is that dlp doesn't have the contrast and black levels of the better lcd projectors and lcos, atleast non that I can afford, maybe the Benqw7000 is o.k but I've read it's not great. I guess I'm looking for the best of both worlds and are wondering if I'll fnd in lcos, particularly something like jvc rs45.
Edited by nirvy111 - 6/19/12 at 10:08am
post #2803 of 3271
Sharp introduces a 90" 3D monster. Note the 80" is already selling for $4K. Sharp says the TV costs just $28 a year in energy costs to operate.
Where is the front projector competition?

175

http://news.consumerreports.org/electronics/2012/06/sharps-bows-90-inch-lcd-tv-people-look-for-bigger-walls.html
post #2804 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiFun View Post

Sharp introduces a 90" 3D monster. Note the 80" is already selling for $4K. Sharp says the TV costs just $28 a year in energy costs to operate.
Where is the front projector competition?

I would NEVER buy that monster. Why should I buy a ridiculously expensive TV with inferior picture quality? I'll take a JVC RS55/X70 projector with the amazing blacks, 4K benefits, and film-like image any day over this thing. High-end projectors blow this Sharp out of the water. There is no competition.
post #2805 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiFun View Post

Sharp introduces a 90" 3D monster. Note the 80" is already selling for $4K. Sharp says the TV costs just $28 a year in energy costs to operate.
Where is the front projector competition?
175
http://news.consumerreports.org/electronics/2012/06/sharps-bows-90-inch-lcd-tv-people-look-for-bigger-walls.html

I would love to have one for my living room where a projector would not work. Anyone want to loan me some $$$$?

biggrin.gif
post #2806 of 3271
I would be willing to try one, but only if I know I'm never moving again and if it didn't have that digital look. To me TV's are too digital looking.
post #2807 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SED <--- Rules View Post

I would NEVER buy that monster. Why should I buy a ridiculously expensive TV with inferior picture quality? I'll take a JVC RS55/X70 projector with the amazing blacks, 4K benefits, and film-like image any day over this thing. High-end projectors blow this Sharp out of the water. There is no competition.

We just hung a Sharp 80" 3D in our office (the non 3D was out of stock, so they ponied up the extra $$ to get it sooner). It is very heavy (153 lbs) and the screen uniformity is average at best.

the thing that bothers me the most about it is the pixel spacing. On bright images, you get a 'moire' type pattern with uneven white field uniformity. We had several complaints from folks about 'the big pixels'.

The 2D is ok with mixed content, but it has the typical LCD clouding with some noticeable bright edges / corners on dark scenes. No match for the RS55. The 3D is also nowhere near as good as the W7000 on my HP screen. Thankfully I got to see this first hand before spending this kind of $$.

IMO, it's worth about a 1/2 of it's street cost based on the issues that bother me and the use of an average panel. Plus it looks like a peanut next to my 142" screen. I'd put one in my living room for 2k street, but that's about it.

Once Sharp releases the 'Elite' model at 100"+ with a quality panel, I'd consider one for the living room.
post #2808 of 3271
Even on the Plasmas sometimes I think something is missing because it just makes it too digital looking when you watch it close.
What people have to realize is that a TV that is 50" the pixels aren't bothersome for the distance most people watch it from. Besides contrast, part of the reason the Plasmas look so good is you're watching the image so small. Also the larger the Plasma gets or even LCD's, according to what I've seen (so far at least), the bigger TV's and really super big Plasmas don't have the same contrast as like the old Elites or in general just the smaller TV's.

Blow that up to 100", we really need 4k TV's before I'm even interested, the pixels are too big looking when you watch it at like 1x or 1.25x distance.
post #2809 of 3271
After weeks of finishing my setup and cabling everything (HW30) I finally started watching things!

dsc1314t.jpg

I just used the out of the box settings recommended by Tom for now (except I turned Flow Motion off) with the lamp on Low and it looks great! Can't wait to calibrate this puppy.
I haven't really calibrated Sound yet either because I lost my setup mic (I ordered a new one on ebay) but it was still awesome!!

I really wanted to thank you all, most of all Jason, but also everyone else and of course Mike from AVS.
post #2810 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

everyone is certainly entitled to their own methodology in the attempt to provide objective info. As an avid HT enthusiast and long time photographer, I don't agree with the usefulness of the screenshots in this particular section of the review.
http://www.projectorreviews.com/sony/vpl-vw1000es/performance.php
The 2 map photos appear to be at different zoom/crop levels. There is a 3rd VW1000 screenshot that can be enlarged, but none for the X70.
The 2 'Video' photos are taken at different zoom/crop levels, and the 2nd link for the X70 is dead.
"For your consideration, our usual close up images:
Top left: Sony VPL-VW1000ES, Top Left Center: Runco LS-10d, Top Right Center: JVC X70R, Top right: Epson Home Cinema 5010"

The X70 photo is also a dead link, all the photos appear to be at different zoom/crop levels.
If someone posted similar screenshots in this thread, they would have gotten fried.. there needs to be consistency.
IMO, 3D screenshots showing crosstalk should be standard now in all professional reviews. Kraine started it, I expanded on it and the result is something that people can relate to when trying to compared how the 3D projectors compare against one another in regard to the ability to handle cross-talk.
In addition - full Q/A reports of the review sample should be reported. There are duds and golden samples - explain the convergence of the projector, any notable lens anomalies, etc. The 'blue spike' on the RS45 review generated a lot of controversy since no one else reported this. (bad sample?)
All the pro review sites missed the 1:1 HDMI issue on the BenQ W7000 and Acer 9500 which is a mystery. This was obvious with the most basic Q/A patterns which any calibrator should use to make sure they are working with a decent sample.
I knew of inexperienced members who used to post these pictures ad nauseam and have the gall to act the expert.
post #2811 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drakul View Post

After weeks of finishing my setup and cabling everything (HW30) I finally started watching things!

I just used the out of the box settings recommended by Tom for now (except I turned Flow Motion off) with the lamp on Low and it looks great! Can't wait to calibrate this puppy.

I haven't really calibrated Sound yet either because I lost my setup mic (I ordered a new one on ebay) but it was still awesome!!

I really wanted to thank you all, most of all Jason, but also everyone else and of course Mike from AVS.

that's great to hear you like it. All projectors can benefit from a calibration, so it should look even better once calibrated. FYI - Gamma = off is about as close to 2.2 gamma as it gets. The gamma can be tweaked extensively, but it requires a connection to a computer and the image director software. This isn't necessary, but a nice option to have if needed.

Aliens is a great sci-fi movie to demo.
post #2812 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Even on the Plasmas sometimes I think something is missing because it just makes it too digital looking when you watch it close.

What people have to realize is that a TV that is 50" the pixels aren't bothersome for the distance most people watch it from. Besides contrast, part of the reason the Plasmas look so good is you're watching the image so small. Also the larger the Plasma gets or even LCD's, according to what I've seen (so far at least), the bigger TV's and really super big Plasmas don't have the same contrast as like the old Elites or in general just the smaller TV's.
Blow that up to 100", we really need 4k TV's before I'm even interested, the pixels are too big looking when you watch it at like 1x or 1.25x distance.

I was sitting about 1.25 from this 80" when I noticed the issues I mentioned. I was thinking the same thing, this should be a higher resolution screen. Maybe Apple can hire Samung to make a 'retina' 4K 100" display.

I wonder how far off we are from the printable OLED displays.

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/focus.php?subaction=showfull&id=1329392549
post #2813 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by presenter View Post

Greetings, OK, I'll try to explain how I use these images here.
[cut]
As someone pointed out, most images I post are mostly for entertainment, but you can glean real information from these photos.
Or you can just take my word that the VW1000ES black levels are truly superb.
[cut]
The JVC may still have more dynamic range, but on a really dark scene, the VW1000ES dusts it, the Epson, and anything else I can think of. Even with 1200 lumens hitting the screen, vs the Epson's roughly 630 (from memory) of the two, both calibrated, on any dark scene I like, the Sony is putting out darker blacks, and whites twice as bright, and it's obvious to me, even when manually switching back and forth.
[cut]
Finally, forgetting the photos, the gamma, the rest of this.
[cut]
I will say this, the VW1000ES was so impressive, that I really did try to buy one. As I've blogged, etc., every manufacturer I've ever asked, where I've been interested in buying their projector, has some form of accommodation plan with a nice discount. Generally I seem to be offered the same discount as an internal employee, or a dealer sales person. The discount was about as expected, and still way, way, way, out of my budget (I strained to buy the RS20 and it was only an $8K projector back in the day). I offered permissions, advertising, etc. to knock down the price to something I could afford. As expected, however, it did not happen. Well, maybe in 2-3 years there will be a VW3000 that's even better, that I can afford. And while I'm disclosing, especially since my three top award winners (over $3500) this year were the VW1000ES, the VW95ES and the JVC X70R, I can tell you that Sony has never spent a penny advertising with me, but I do get to go to their press dinners at shows, like everyone else. And JVC has only advertised briefly a couple years ago and once before that. Combined, I would estimate that Sony and JVC account over the last two years for 0% of our advertising revenues, and perhaps 0.5% over the last 5 years. And so it goes. -art
Here are the objective measurements Home Theather Magazine provides in their review of the Sony 1000:
" The full-on/full-off contrast ratio shown above was measured directly off the projection lens using a Minolta T-10 (illuminance) light meter. The 100 percent full-white reading off the screen with the above settings was 21.35 foot-lamberts as taken by our Minolta LS-100 light meter. The black level with the dynamic iris engaged, as seen on this screen, was too low to measure directly by any device available to us. But by using the direct contrast as measured by the T-10 meter, together with the 100 percent white level on the screen as measured by the LS-100, I calculated the full-screen black level to be a remarkable 0.00014 ft-L.

But when any bright object appears on the screen, the black level will increase since the dynamic iris responds to the average picture level. With Advanced Iris set to off (wide open with no dynamic action) and the gamma correction on 2.2, the full-on/full-off contrast ratio dropped to 2372:1 (21.35 ft-L full white, 0.009 full black). "
http://www.hometheater.com/content/sony-vpl-vw1000es-4k-sxrd-3d-projector-take-2-ht-labs-measures

Do you suppose the vw1000es looks so much better than the 30 and 95 because Sony downgraded the lens in those projectors this year? Heck they can't even resolve the 2K pixel elements on the screen!
This is also indicative 1:1 pixel mapping loss was missed for both the BenQ and Acer DLP projectors. You are excited for 4K rez while not even professionally seeing 1080p projectors coming close to resolving 2k.
Then there are the unresolved issues over the claimed superior black level for the BenQ 7000, which no one else has observed.

In my opinion the truth is simple and the thrashing about reviews and blogs are a cover. I for one don't buy it.

But if I was to use pictures in reviews, this would be the one. Great for gamma and shadow detail. Mostly for entertainment of course:)
320
http://backtothefuture.wikia.com/wiki/Manure
post #2814 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiFun View Post

Sharp introduces a 90" 3D monster. Note the 80" is already selling for $4K. Sharp says the TV costs just $28 a year in energy costs to operate.
Where is the front projector competition?
175
http://news.consumerreports.org/electronics/2012/06/sharps-bows-90-inch-lcd-tv-people-look-for-bigger-walls.html

Greetings!

Hey, LCDTVs are fine for lower quality, serious home theater is still about picture quality, as well as size. I'm sure you can buy a projector for $1500 - $3000 that will blow away this beast at just about everything picture quality about the sharp, whether color accuracy, or 3D crosstalk, black levels. Of course, projectors aren't designed to work in some rooms. This sucka should be great for sports in the family room.

However, do not be DECEIVED! Did you not see that comment about energy efficiency ($26 a year). I just did the math. At national average, that's about 25 hours a week. But more to the point, they say it uses about the same as 2 75 watt incandescent lights. Folks that's 150 watts. The average projector runs between 200 and 250 watts, though some of today's brightest 3D capable home projectors (W7000 BenQ, can break 300 watts.

So, there's no big savings here. Using their numbers, and Epson 5010 or Panasoni PT-AE7000, use less than $50 a year, but the screen size can be twice the area, no problem, so depending on your screen size for a projector, the Sharp could be anywhere from slightly less to maybe at best, half the cost.

The bottom line - similar but different. Nice for sports, less for movies, no doubt. I would, however, be very curious to see a 90" plasma, as in general, plasmas have better Picture Quality than LCDs. -art
post #2815 of 3271
Hi all,

I've been trying to understand whether the Sony BR50s (kids) work with the epson 5010. Reading the earlier posts, I seem to understand it does but on the 3010 3D glasses compatibility thread, these glasses are mentioned as not syncing with the 3010. My understanding the PS3 ones do but I'm still not sure about the Sony BR50??? Please confirm for me. Cheers.
post #2816 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe View Post

Hi all,
I've been trying to understand whether the Sony BR50s (kids) work with the epson 5010. Reading the earlier posts, I seem to understand it does but on the 3010 3D glasses compatibility thread, these glasses are mentioned as not syncing with the 3010. My understanding the PS3 ones do but I'm still not sure about the Sony BR50??? Please confirm for me. Cheers.

The Sony BR50 kids glasses are not going to work with the Epson 3D projectors. You have choices of the Epson factory glasses, PS3 glasses or the Monster Vision 3D RF glasses which work well with the 5010.
post #2817 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

The Sony BR50 kids glasses are not going to work with the Epson 3D projectors. You have choices of the Epson factory glasses, PS3 glasses or the Monster Vision 3D RF glasses which work well with the 5010.

Thanks, it's been great reading for the last few days - I've only got to page 47 or something but I've decided to get the 5010 (or TW8000 in Australia). Thanks for the reply to the above post and all the effort in this thread. Hopefully, I'm not going to find by page 80, you've decided the 5010 is an absolute lemon.
post #2818 of 3271
If you guys want to see some exceptional 3D graphics, try Dragon Age Awakenings on the PC with the Nvidia 3D TVplay. I only played it 5 minutes, but it was the best 3D I've seen so far in any movie or game if going purely by how the artwork seemed to mesh with the 3D depth. I was blown away by how detailed the graphics and color looked in 3D (I am playing it in 1080p/24hz mode since it isn't an action game). It was even very playable on the JVC (well at least the first few minutes had almost no ghosting), but I'm sure it ghosts worse at parts once I get farther into it.

You can buy the Ultimate edition for $7.50 from Amazon download (http://www.amazon.com/Dragon-Age-Origins-Ultimate-Download/dp/B004APAEHA/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1340668598&sr=8-4&keywords=dragon+age+awakening). Even if you don't want to play it, I would almost buy it just to stare in disbelief at how good it looks in 3D. For $7.50 you get the expansion and original game. The graphics are better than the Pixar movies I've seen. Also another good one for people wanting 3D space stuff, is X3: Albion Prelude (Terran Conflict), overall it has far better graphics than watching Imax: Hubble or Imax Space Station in 3D.

Even MS Flight Simulator X is fun in 3D with the scenery packs (but it does ghost a bit on the JVC, but at least not on the parts that matter too much). Flying around in a Cessna in 3D in the mountains (after you get scenery add-ons) is pretty amazing looking, almost feels like you are really flying a plane.

Many (maybe most) games are almost unplayable in 3D on the JVC due to ghosting, but so far Dragon Age and FSX are playable. Batman Arkham demo looked horrible (ghosting everywhere). X3 is a mixed bag because it ghosts very bad and you have to adjust parallax/convergence when you go between areas (but it helps some because the depth points remain constant in this game for the most part). The parallax on the JVC is overall useless, except in a few very specific instances where the depth remains the same (and even then it barely helps, but it does help temporarily until you have to adjust it again).

3D gaming I think is a mixed bag for true gamers, but I am doing it just to enjoy the graphics more than anything. I will probably buy a new projector to play a highly modded FSX on, since the JVC ghosts here a bit.
Edited by coderguy - 6/25/12 at 5:46pm
post #2819 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiFun View Post

Here are the objective measurements Home Theather Magazine provides in their review of the Sony 1000:
" The full-on/full-off contrast ratio shown above was measured directly off the projection lens using a Minolta T-10 (illuminance) light meter. The 100 percent full-white reading off the screen with the above settings was 21.35 foot-lamberts as taken by our Minolta LS-100 light meter. The black level with the dynamic iris engaged, as seen on this screen, was too low to measure directly by any device available to us. But by using the direct contrast as measured by the T-10 meter, together with the 100 percent white level on the screen as measured by the LS-100, I calculated the full-screen black level to be a remarkable 0.00014 ft-L.
But when any bright object appears on the screen, the black level will increase since the dynamic iris responds to the average picture level. With Advanced Iris set to off (wide open with no dynamic action) and the gamma correction on 2.2, the full-on/full-off contrast ratio dropped to 2372:1 (21.35 ft-L full white, 0.009 full black). "


OK, HifiFun, obviously you find little or nothing of use in my reviews, which is fine (I don't force you to come to my site to read them), I don't write them for folks like yourself - hard core, spec oriented, (probably) engineering types, although I do believe many such people do find useful things in my review. You "hard core" guys have at your disposal, the forums, and your own testing gear (often), etc. to pick a part things to levels that just don't matter to many people. And that's all good.

Question, do you really think 1:1 pixel mapping accuracy is one of the most important issues for people buying a projector under $1500?
And just for fun, all else being equal, including price:
Which is the better projector for "everyone" - the projector with real 1:1 pixel mapping, mediocre, color and a 1 year warranty, or one without real 1:1 pixel mapping, great color, and a 3 year warranty? Would your decision always be the same? for example: what if the 1:1 projector has 450 lumens calibrated, and the other 750, and you want a 140" non-high power screen, in a room without overly great lighting control?

Do you see that some people may not care about the benefits of 1:1? (Many people leave overscan on, on many projectors - especially due to image tearing around the edges of some HDTV content, but usually found on most standard def signals. For those people (including most LCDTV owners I suspect), they aren't using 1:1 even if offered... (yes, standard def is not 1:1, unless you are viewing in a "native mode" of true 1:1 in which case that's one very small image.

But, my goal is to help folks who aren't on their 4th projector (this month or this year...). The goal is to help folks figure things out. I have always claimed my reviews to be first and foremost, subjective. I don't measure contrast, because, basically, its only a curiosity for techies, and near useless for determining how a projector does in terms of blacks. The right projector purchase is a balancing act of trade-offs.

I read your excerpt from HTMag, and that's great, I read reviews on many sites, but almost always wait until I've reviewed a projector, before seeing what others have found (or think).

But what does HTM's specs tell you about how the Sony will behave in terms of blacks, say on the bond night train scene, compared to say, any other two projectors with at least also, very good black level performance? Or whether watching the sub scenes in Red October will get you dizzy with the iris action all over the place (significantly brightening and darkening a scene that shouldn't vary at all, or barely), or one that is subtle and smooth. Almost Nothing. The use of a dynamic iris makes both specs pretty much useless. (Note, if you don't believe in dynamic irises, that's fine, there's JVC for you, but that's your only choice for excellent black performance, without a dynamic iris.

For example, as HTM points out, adding any bright area drops the contrast. But, consider. If you are using a PS3 as your player, or any other player that leaves a visible white pause graphic up on the screen, HTM they don't address how much the iris opens if there's a small amount of say 50 IRE, or 35IRE on the screen, or 70 or 90 or 100. What is the impact on the iris action if 2% of the screen is over 90 IRE, how about 5% over 50 IRE, some projectors will react a lot, or a little. Which provides the best results over a wide range of scenes is going to be a subjective call. Period.

With the PS3, I've observed that most projectors iris does not react to that small pause marker, or if it does, it's extremely slight. By comparison, with the Sony, the change is quite visible - significant... mostly because the Sony on a black screen can be far darker, than say an Epson or JVC. There are many aspects of a dynamic iris's action that affect the viewing quality experience, and off/on, Ansi, or other specs won't answer those questions (unless you can fully map out how the iris responds to changes). Since you can't, someone's got to say, "nice and smooth" or, "needs work, may annoy you", or fine except on extremely dark scenes with subtle changes, where it can see-saw...

But, I'm still not sure, was your point that you don't like the way I do reviews, or is your issue that you don't think that the Sony has good blacks? I really couldn't figure out your objection to the Sony, or were you just unhappy with the lack of contrast specs.

BTW, for the measurements we do do, including brightness, contrast settings, calibration settings... I leave that to a professional. Mike's a THX certified calibrator, and has been calibrating projectors since before I met him a good decade ago. He's rather competent. I was quite happy to turn over calibrating to him 4-5 years and over 100 home theater projector reviews ago.

Getting practical (more my thing): Would you buy a projector with a very obvious iris action, that you can't help but notice? If it had the best contrast specs and sold for less than another projector with worse contrast specs? Or would you skip watching an annoying picture without having the specs to prove to you that it's annoying?

Ive seen some iris actions so sensitive that a man in a white shirt moving just one shirted arm, can affect the brightness of the entire scene, causing significant change, and it can be most annoying, as the amount of white as the arm moves closer to the camera gets slightly larger, and causes the whole scene to lighten, then a moment later the scene darkens as the man puts his arm down. Looks like someone off camera having fun sliding the room lighting dimmers up and down significantly with the man's arm movement.

How does having all those HTM numbers tell you which iris action is watchable and which are to be avoided? You worry about 1:1 pixel mapping on near entry level projectors, but I worry about whether the projector is bright enough to be enjoyed in 3D, or whether an iris will annoy you, or if a projector's color wheel causes a lot or a little rainbow effect to someone like me - I seem to be about typical for someone rainbow sensitive.

I figure if you were reviewing projectors you would probably take the projector apart, dissect the color wheel, test it's rotation speed, measure the relative size of each filter slice, etc. All very noble things, and potentially useful, if you have a chart, that shows people how rainbow sensitive they are, so they can tell if they will be bothered by it, and how much. I simply try to paint a picture, so people can try to figure that out. (Of course if you don't know if you are rainbow sensitive, only one way to find out.)

Look, there are plenty of people out there just looking for a great projector - for their needs, for their budget. Most are not really hard core enthusiasts like yourself. A number of those will, however, become enthusiasts.

PS, regarding the BenQ W7000. My black level determination was very simple. With the first version of the BenQ (firmware .22 if I remember) black levels were pretty much entry level, and well worse than the older W6000, which it should be essentially the same as.

When BenQ sent me one with the newer firmware, I simply watched it, side by side with the Epson 5010 I have here. It couldn't match the Epson, but was far better than the first one, and definitely what I like to call "ultra-high contrast" a term that is descriptive, but not tied to specs. I had compared the original W7000 to the same Epson.

I use the term "ultra-high-contrast" projectors to describe those projectors that someone who really likes great blacks will favor over those that can't earn that description. The W7000 I had here was definitely in the ball park with projectors like the PT-AE7000, etc. And way better than projectors like the Epson 3010, 8350, Mitsubishi HC4000, Optoma HD33. It's been a while and I haven't re-read what I wrote, but I believe that the W7000 is probably a touch better, overall, in blacks, than the Acer H9500BD which I found to be exceptionally good at them for such a low cost projector.

As I've said repeatedly, the trick is to find the best projector for you needs, there are tons of factors, color, blacks, brightness, crosstalk, for 3D. I try to paint an overall picture for folks, so they can make their best decision. Specs are fun, and very often useful, but usually fail to paint a complete picture.

That concludes my rant. -art
post #2820 of 3271
I think people are being kind of unnecessarily blunt (as always in this forum), I enjoy your reviews over the years, but I would say it would be wise to check for pixel mapping issues and post it in future reviews since it can affect the image very much like a convergence issue can. If people are looking for the sharpest projector in the lower-end pricing, then it might matter to them, but I agree in video most people buying sub-$1500 projectors are not going to see a huge difference in pixel mapping (but there is an EXCEPTION). If they are using processing enhancements (in HTPC, or a Darby Darblet, the internal PJ sharpnening options, or a Lumagen, etc...), then projectors with poor pixel mapping will often start showing ringing earlier than normal making these enhancements not work out as well.

I don't think we had a problem with you saying the Benq w7000 gets close to the Panny 4000/7000 in black levels if talking about the Panny's Rec709 mode, when you consider the Panny fails to surpass 8,000:1 Dynamic On/Off and has around 2500:1 to 3000:1 Native On/Off. The problem was maybe the way you described the older w6000's black level in the review (the Benq getting close to Epson 8700ub levels), I think that was sort of a miswording for you. However, every reviewer makes "wording" mistakes, so it's not a big deal.

I would like to see you measure Native On/Off. I don't even care about the ANSI measurement or the Dynamic On/Off that much (although the Dynamic On/Off can tell us how bouncy an IRIS will likely be if we have the Native On/Off measurement first). Generally most IRIS's can only function well without being too bouncy at a 3x to 5x multiplier of Native On/Off, because otherwise the IRIS's would need to be designed differently with a "read-ahead" buffer from a media device that sends sufficient data in advance, and this device doesn't exist. The good IRIS algorithms are based on derivatives and plotting. The Sony IRIS's are so smooth because the Sony's use a smoother and sometimes less aggressive derivative or plotting function. I agree about some measurements being nearly useless (ANSI Contrast is a near useless measurement, and Dynamic On/Off without measuring Native On/Off first), but of all the measurements, Native ON/OFF is one we can sort of count on (some of the time). That said, Native On/Off measurements cannot be fully trusted (I don't care who they are or how expensive their light meter is). Otherwise, you need to try to use the same reviewer to compare different On/Off on different projectors (or unless you can find several different reviewers where the numbers tend to track in agreement, then you can find some likely validity to the method.


However, if we look at the Native On/Off numbers, then in most cases they do agree with your black level assessments, except for a few projectors over the years. In most cases, the MFR will set the IRIS to be a multiplier of 3x to 5x (except a few) in the projector's Rec709 or most purist mode.

Case in point (about the values measured by various people):

Panny ae7000u / Rec709 mode = Native On/Off 3,000:1 | Dynamic On/Off 8,000:1
Epson 5010 Cinema = 6000:1 Native On/Off | Dynamic On/Off = 15,000:1 to 25,000:1
Benq w7000 Native On/Off (2000:1), Dynamic On/Off (10,000:1).... Some measured the Native On/Off lower, but I'm giving benefit of doubt with optimal calibration
Acer 9500bd Native On/Off (2500:1), Dynamic On/Off (12,000:1).....

None of the above numbers really disagree with your black level assessments, BUT someone is always going to find an exception or a place a reviewer worded something that wasn't perfect. Still, I do have to say that Native On/Off numbers are the most telling, and they don't usually lie.

My understanding on the Sony vw1000 would be that it can do about 20,000:1 on/off (not 2000:1). That measurement was probably based on a non-production sample, although I've never measured it myself, so I have no idea.

I would be a little surprised if the vw1000 can beat the blacks of a JVC RS-55. You have to average multiple scenes obviously and make sure the gamma's are VERY closely matched up between two projectors, especially if you are measuring by eye (because bad gammas will trick the eye even though gamma affects mid-tones more). Comparing projectors' black levels you need to be very careful about fL and Gamma drift. Even if your calibrator gave you a projector 2 hours after calibrating it, the problem is I've seen projectors gamma and fL levels drift by 20%+ in only a few hours on a new lamp. The JVC's are notorious for this. That is one downside to the JVC's, they don't hold their calibrations as well as Sony's and not nearly as well as most DLP's. I've grown pretty tired of keep re-calibrating my RS-45.

However, I will say that given the methods you are using in black level comparisons, you have done a pretty good job at placing the projectors so far, but I think you could find a better method that would be even more accurate. Some of the images on your site do lack consistency though, I have to agree with the others on that one (sorry).
Edited by coderguy - 6/26/12 at 4:23pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › JVC RS 45 / Sony HW30 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5010 mini-shootout