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 95

post #2821 of 3271
Thread Starter 
The 1:1 mapping issue was a big deal IMO - especially if someone has a nice sized screen. The response from those with the W7000 update has been unanimous - much better after the fix.

even at a low cost of $1500 for the 9500, the basic expectation is that the projector displays 1920x1080 pixels where they belong. I'm glad BQ fixed the issue, but it remains to be seen if Acer will follow.
post #2822 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

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).....
So I have to say that Native On/Off numbers are the most telling, and they don't usually lie.

Greetings Coderguy! Always a pleasure.
I probably should have quoted your whole response, but that would be too long.

First a question re 1:1 (remember, I'm just a hobbyist, not an engineer: the last time I studied electronics, was for my amateur radio license, back when I was building tube gear (because they were still figuring out ICs). That's over 40 years ago. (No wonder I still own a tube pre-amp).

OK, 1:1. How would you like to see that tested? And do you see it necessary in under $1000 projectors (or what I call home entertainment projectors, that really aren't designed for precision PQ and near perfect rooms. I realize that some hard core enthusiasts will buy them, but they make up maybe a couple % of all those entry level projectors sold.

BTW, your point about ringing, etc, is valid... But, from a subjective standpoint, doesn't something like saying: "If you use a lot of the (dynamic sharpening - Brilliant Color, etc.), the image quality becomes far less natural looking, rather quickly". We can talk about dining, and defining it, etc. But, don't most people just want to know that if you crank up controls to a point, PQ will suffer?

I understand that the projector with perfect 1:1 will hold out better, but what if their Brilliant Color implementation sucks, or some other flaw, so that, even with less ringing, what if the picture still becomes more "over the top", than another projector... with more ringing. I still vote, for "this one looks really good, under xyz circumstances..."

Next, getting back to the contrast...

First I need a clarification. Which is better? by your numbers - in terms of overall black level performance (when watching): The Acer, or the PT-AE7000. By the numbers, we have a split.
So, which one will do better, on the night train scene, how about the Red Oct. sub... It's not just the range of the iris 3 or 5... but what it reacts to. I have no doubt that in the old Optoma's they had some irises that probably were in the 3 range, but were terrible, while others pushing to 5, had better algorithms, and appear smoother (and probably blacker blacks)...

That brings us to the BenQ W7000. First, since there have apparently been 3 firmware versions with different iris and related firmware... Do we know which firmware that was done with? I'm simply asking, as I have no idea what the numbers of either BenQ I had, have measured. By your numbers: The acer should do better than the BenQ, and one really can't tell if the Panasonic is better or worse than either, since it has the lowest "dynamic contrast" spec, but the highest native.
One interesting thing, subjective and numbers match completely with the Epson as it has both the best numbers, and, of course, by my take, the best blacks of any iris driven projector I've seen under $5,000. But, when one number is better on one projector, and the other number is better on the other, such as Acer or BenQ vs. Panasonic, how can we use the numbers to make a call? I haven't worried about the different contrast methods. Thoughts (perhaps PM, so as not to clutter this thread any more)?

Finally, re the contrast, so after all of this, discussion, why do we at projector reviews need to do contrast. Even if I reported contrast,( or measured 3D brightness through glasses at their different settings), I'm not going to be utilizing them except perhaps to give me some further clarity, but I'm not going to be discussing how 2500 /10000 makes this projector better or worse than that projector with 3000/8000, etc. I'm going to talk about how different types of scenes look.

BTW, re the W6000 part you mention at the beginning. 1. perhaps a misspoken line, perhaps likely I was trying to explain that (not knowing where I wrote the objectionable statement - recently or a year ago), the W6000 is an ultra high contrast projector, like the 8700UB... I'm absolutely sure I've never said it was as good as the 8700UB, or 5010 (in terms of blacks), nothing iris based near the price comes very close to those Epsons. As I have stated, those projectors I call ultra high contrast, have pretty darn good blacks. Basically when you have one of those (H9500, W6/7000, PT-AE7000) , having better blacks still is definitely desirable, but you have achieved a point where other factors become more important in terms of an overall improvement.

yak with ya soon. -a

Get back to me on the 1:1 test, and also I'll again entertain discussion about measuring contrast, but, it's not like others aren't publishing the data, as both you and Hififun point out. Just means more money I have to shell out to Mike, for each projector's measurement/calibration. Mike is not an employee, he just calibrates about 25-30 projectors a year for me, and writes a handful of education projector reviews a year. He probably devotes well less than 4 hours a week for us. He has other gigs (and is a "retired engineer.") But Mike would probably describe himself as a laid back guy that just likes good wine. -art
post #2823 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

The 1:1 mapping issue was a big deal IMO - especially if someone has a nice sized screen. The response from those with the W7000 update has been unanimous - much better after the fix.
even at a low cost of $1500 for the 9500, the basic expectation is that the projector displays 1920x1080 pixels where they belong. I'm glad BQ fixed the issue, but it remains to be seen if Acer will follow.
Hi Zombie! Glad to here I'm not subjectively crazy, regarding the W7000.
Re the 1:1... I'm not saying that 1:1 isn't important, or useful... My point was that I find it less an issue on lower cost projectors. They have enough compromises, that how good the 1:1 is, isn't likely to make very many people change their purchase decision... (Oh, it will a few!) I really haven't found 1:1 to be much of an issue in the $2500+ projector range (including the BenQ). I really don't expect an issue on the better projectors, but where should the cut off be. I know for some purists, perfect 1:1 compared to "almost", might be more important than 50% more lumens, or a color management system that allows for more accurate color. I think that's great. As you know my screen size is decent - my primary is a 124" 2.35, so for widescreen movies I've got almost 10 feet of width. I never sit as far back as 10 feet.

I like close and immersion. -a
post #2824 of 3271
When it comes to the Pansonic vs. Acer vs. Benq which are all very close, well I would generally give the projector with the highest Native On/Off the winning hand most likely (so the Panny wins barely. When they are that close, I agree that the best thing to do is to go by what your eyes suggest for the tie breaker. I will concede that if you did contrast measurements that you have to be very careful and there are some good and bad things about doing it. If done correctly it can more precisely put projectors in their place (at least I think so). It only takes a couple minutes to setup a proper Native On/Off reading, so the labor shouldn't add that much cost .

1:1 Test
You can use many standard pixel or convergence testing patterns for the 1:1 mapping test, or you can just draw a straight black line in a paint program on an HTPC (although this method you have to be careful the Video Driver isn't causing an error). What are you looking for is how cleanly the line looks, a pixel mapping error looks a little bit like Chromatic Abberation or convergence, except generally the pixel mapping border is going to show up as a dimmer outline of same color as the pixel itself, whereas CA and Convergence often show up as a different color around the pixel. It's not always easy to differentiate, but the pixel mapping issue is consistent across the screen (if looking at a pattern anyhow), whereas CA and convergence will vary a bit. Obviously you must turn off ALL enhancements before doing the test (sharpness, detail, Frame Interpolation, etc...).

Here is one potential side effect of the 1:1 mapping error (since the border is drawn gray and not black, the error is not nearly as visible as it could be).
A worse side effect would be if 2 pure black pixels were drawn instead of just an edge enhancement. This edge error will only be visible where colors meet borders, so it will not affect the entire resolution of the image as some think it does (it will reduce it some though.
178

Here are the potential effects in video, but keep in mind this eagle is blown up 10x or more, so although the difference in person can be seen on this eagle from 1.2x seating distance, but it's a very small difference compared to the exaggerated difference blown up in the photo. Look at the tips of the feathers on the eagle (the black part of those feathers are only 2 pixels wide). On the top left is a DLP with a 1:1 pixel mapping error, on the bottom right is an abnormally perfectly converged LCOS projector. Now the LCOS projector does have smaller pixels due to pixel fill, so that's part of what you are seeing, but the lack of contrast in the pixels themselves is due to the DLP having an edge error. When comparing the eagle's body, face, or feet then the error could not be seen even when the image is this blown up (this is because different colors show the error easier than others, generally black on white or the highest contrast pixels).

556

1:1 mapping is important, but the level of importance is going to depend on multiple factors (how good the lens is in the first place). Overall, in most video, at least on my VS Pro8200 (my backup projector) it is really not an issue, but in HTPC it could make the text look 10% to 20% clearer for those really picky, as well I have to be more conservative on sharpness controls with the VS than my other projectors because of ringing.

Consider the final below image, to where the projector with the pixel mapping error (on right) actually looks sharper than the one without the error (on left), this is just because whether or not you can see the error depends on what type of contrast and colors are on the borders of the pixels. So generally things like sharp clouds, noisy images, as well as extra sharp reference level video, and HTPC text are the main places it is likely to show up.

393
Edited by coderguy - 6/28/12 at 6:06pm
post #2825 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Art - hi, have you had a chance to view the W7000 with the 1.03 firmware? I'd be curious to hear if you think there is a noticeable difference vs. the previous firmware version.

The reason I think it was a big deal is because this wasn't a feature set or price point topic, but an obvious fault in the programming of the projector software that got past their Q/A. I think most would agree that the PQ shouldn't look better (and sharper) with VGA vs. an HDMI connection.

I use the single pixel pattern test on the AVS HD calibration disk for checking convergence on the 3 panel projectors and to make sure there are no anomalies on the DLP's. In this case, there was a clear difference between these 2 source inputs using the same test pattern.

The HDMI error might look worse with a PC desktop or a GUI for a network media player, but it also affects the overall PQ while watching Blu-ray and other HD content.

After the firmware update, it finally looks nice and sharp. The older firmware looked soft, especially in comparison to the W6000 and SP890 which are both sharp projectors. Now all 3 look equally sharp with an HDMI source.

I'm glad BenQ fixed the issue since the W7000 is the only HP friendly 3D DLP. This is a nice 3D upgrade to my original Acer 5360 which set the stage in 2010 for completely ghost free (and flicker free) 3D. There used to be a time when people honestly thought that crosstalk was caused by the content, not the display. Then a cheap $500 projector proved otherwise. cool.gif

Pre 1.03 HDMI:

W7000-HDMI.jpg

VGA:


W7000-VGA.jpg
Edited by zombie10k - 6/26/12 at 8:37pm
post #2826 of 3271
It seems the error is partly someone elses fault other than just the MFR's. Someone has been goofing up the kits or VP's (or one of the co-existing parts) delivered to the MFR's.

So I have to say that although the pixel mapping thing is an issue, when talking about cheaper projectors, it does not automatically mean the projector with the pixel mapping error will appear less sharp than the one without.
Edited by coderguy - 6/28/12 at 6:07pm
post #2827 of 3271
Thread Starter 
is the 8200 error the same (severity) as it is on the W7000 and 9500? try and post a closeup of the same single pixel test from the AVS disk, or draw the single pixel black line in MSPAINT.
post #2828 of 3271
From judging the image, it looks about the same, but I will double check.
Edited by coderguy - 6/27/12 at 3:05am
post #2829 of 3271
Thread Starter 
I've only seen the error first hand on the W7000, but speaking on this model alone, there is a noticeable difference now that the mapping error is fixed. it's now as sharp and clear as the W6000 and the SP890, which makes sense since they share the same chassis & lens.

RE: CGI rendering - what are we talking about SGI Indy, LightWave on the Amiga 4000 early 90's or earlier?
post #2830 of 3271
Here is the same pattern on the Viewsonic Pro8200:

The pictures didn't come out that good, but they get the point across (people don't assume the pixels on the VS look like this, they don't). I was holding the camera in my hand and my hands were shaking a bit. The color error around the pixels is how it looked in real life, but the white pixels themselves were perfectly sharp and defined looking in person (I need to get my Tripod out and need a better camera).

Note on the first image, you can barely see the mapping error (it looks like Chromatic Abberation that's why it ALMOST fooled me), but a simple adjustment to a brighter Gamma shown in the second image reveals the underlying issue (pixel mapping). You can see why the Pro reviewers missed it on the VS by looking at the first image (they all assumed it was CA).

I know it's not pure CA because the error is exactly even across the entire screen, the error is more cleanly visible on an HTPC when drawing a colored line (third image), and the menu text does not show the error on the VS at all. I might suggest that using normal gamma, the error might not be as visible on the VS as some projectors, but I would also note that there is no way of knowing unless we A/B'd them. Also, you would not see any purple outlining on the Pro8200 with most colors (see third image), but it would instead outline it with the same color as the pixel. This pattern tends to make the error look worse than it really is. Unlike some of the other projectors with the issue, the Viewsonic does not look better in VGA mode than HDMI (unless I just have a bad VGA cable, perhaps since all my VGA cables are really old).

1) First image with Normal Gamma (2.2), problem hiding itself and appearing to be Chromatic Abberation
667

2) Second image with Brighter Gamma (1.8?), now the real culprit behind the purple outlining is shown, there are pixels that were too dark to be cleanly seen at a gamma of 2.2
700

3) And for anyone that still has doubts, look what happens when I draw a single colored line in a paint program, you end up with an additional 2 extra dimmer pixels as a border (3 total pixels) based on a lighter version of the original color. I physically edited the image in a paint program just to add the actual outlining of where the pixel ERROR borders. Here we can see NO signs of Purple aberration and this was also a REAL picture of the Viewsonic taken from my camera but with the outer line added to highlight the error.
300

4) Below is how clean black on light gray looks (opposite of white on black which shows purple), again we see no signs of purple outlining simply because the error is less intrusive on this particular color range. This image might not be easy to see what I am talking about on your monitor, so refer to next image.
167

5) Finally, here is a digital representation of the above in case the above does not show up on your monitor.
178

In real world viewing, I again say on the VS the issue reduces the sharpness of text only by 20% even at worst case with the most contrasty looking text colors, and in most video you cannot tell when using 2.2 gamma (it takes an eagle eye quite literally other than a few very specific scenes). I would not consider the VS's pixel mapping error a deal-breaker for MOST people given the above-average focus uniformity balances the problem out in this price range. For instance, the Viewsonic even with this error is still sharper than the average LCD in the same price range (unless you get an LCD in this price range with super good convergence). At the $1,500+ price range deal-breaker status gets more likely.

Wow that was intense, now that concludes my lesson on how to tell the difference between pixel mapping and chromatic abberation smile.gif ... (or pixel mapping vs. convergence, same rules apply)
Edited by coderguy - 6/27/12 at 6:29pm
post #2831 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

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.

Thanks! I couldn't have done it without your thorough research.
I bought the Disney calibration bluray and I'm going to use that soon.
post #2832 of 3271
Coderguy, did you make up your mind on which dlp projector you are buying?
post #2833 of 3271
Pretty much, just trying to find a good deal.
post #2834 of 3271
Thread Starter 
The price at consignia is prob as cheap as it's going to get for the 8300.
post #2835 of 3271
I've had the Epson 6101 for awhile now. I've only been using it for 3D and I have to say I'm very happy with it. The brightness in Dynamic 3D mode with only a few slight tweaks is addicting -- I run the 3D glasses setting at high and use the Sony PS3 3D glasses most of the time because they seem brighter than the Epson ones and they're rechargeable. Ghosting is pretty much non-existent, for me at least, and I occasionally look for not when I remember to -- that's how noninvasive ghosting is. I can see keeping this for a few years (came with two lamps) unless something really exceptional comes along and its cheap.

My next purchase may be a 2D to 3D converter by Blackmagic Design -- definitely on my mind.
post #2836 of 3271
Here's a review of the Optoma HD8300. For $1,900.00 at seems like an exceptional deal. Yes, that's a refurbished unit.


http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/projectors/projectors-reviews/optoma-hd8300-3d-dlp-projector.html
post #2837 of 3271
Actually was considering doing 3d with two CHINESE LED projectors that cost $25 each. I heard ALI-BABA is where all the real HT guys shop.
post #2838 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

Here's a review of the Optoma HD8300. For $1,900.00 at seems like an exceptional deal. Yes, that's a refurbished unit.
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/projectors/projectors-reviews/optoma-hd8300-3d-dlp-projector.html

I could only find a few members that had the 8300, but they didn't post much information after a brief intro on setting it up. I can't image they sold many of these at their street price. The refurb price is great, assuming it's not someone else's return that had issues.

It would have been nice if it had the HP friendly lens shift. I have plenty of the MV3D's that would have worked with it out of the box.
post #2839 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Actually was considering doing 3d with two CHINESE LED projectors that cost $25 each. I heard ALI-BABA is where all the real HT guys shop.

Dang, now there's spammers getting posts into this forum... Delete! DELETE! wink.giftongue.gif






Lol.
post #2840 of 3271
It was sold out and the price on the last one jumped $200 anyways, even though their cart says otherwise. I should have kept quiet on the projector until I had it in my hands. As soon as I posted in that comparison thread it was better and could do > 1000 lumens in 3D, poof sold out.
post #2841 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Do these 3D glasses look familiar to anyone?

These are the original active shutter 3D glasses for the Sega master system. Considering they are 25 years old, it looks pretty good with some of the 3D titles.

They look like the 1980's terminator glasses. cool.gif

Sega3D.jpg

Sega3D1.jpg

Sega3D2.jpg
post #2842 of 3271
Do they work with a projector? eek.gif
post #2843 of 3271
They are probably more comfortable than the Sony ones

wink.gif

(The Sony ones aren't that bad...)
post #2844 of 3271
A couple of random thoughts...

1) I wonder if AVSForum postings have gone down in volume with the new forum? The nicest thing I can say is the new forum isn't any better.

2) I purchased some 3D blurays at Frys (they had a $16.99 sale)

3) Hubble 3D was recommended elsewhere. While it's fine, it's certainly nothing special (in terms of 3D, ignoring the content). No need to purchase this one, IMHO

4) I got the Owls of Ga'hool 3D one... that's pretty impressive.

5) Avatar 3D, Hugo, and Under the Sea are my top 3D picks so far. I don't see how anyone could be unimpressed with any of them
post #2845 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMyers View Post

A couple of random thoughts...
1) I wonder if AVSForum postings have gone down in volume with the new forum? The nicest thing I can say is the new forum isn't any better.

It does seem a number of the regulars are not posting as often as they were before the transition. It is summer though, vacations, etc. Also a lag in new products at this time of the year to discuss.

my guess is that in 8 weeks (IFA / CEDIA), the place will be flooded with new members asking 'what should I buy in the fall'..

RE: the new site - I'm getting used to it, but the worst part about this new forum software is that it crushes all replies - so if someone took the time create proper sentence and paragraph spacing, it's ruined on each reply. I brought this up as a topic and the mods/ new site owner didn't see this is as a bug, so I doubt it will get fixed.

Also, 'tapatalk' is pretty bad compared to the custom AVS android app. No PM's and it's hard to follow a conversation with threaded replies.
post #2846 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMyers View Post

A couple of random thoughts...
1) I wonder if AVSForum postings have gone down in volume with the new forum? The nicest thing I can say is the new forum isn't any better.
While the advertisers want to build a dossier of every site you visit and tabulate every post, your anonymity here is your most valuable asset.
Otherwise you are advertising to the world "come get my new $25K projector".
So the nicest thing I can say is "stupid is as stupid does".

Kris Deerring reviews the BenQ 7000 in the latest Home Theater Magazine and gives it 3.5 stars for 2D and 5 stars for 3D.
post #2847 of 3271
Thread Starter 
I believe that's the first 5 star review they've given to a 3D projector.
post #2848 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

Also, 'tapatalk' is pretty bad compared to the custom AVS android app. No PM's and it's hard to follow a conversation with threaded replies.

And just to be clear, this isn't a tapatalk problem as far as I know. Rather, it's the AVSForum's implementation of the tapatalk interface. Tapatalk works great for me on every other forum I use it.
post #2849 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I believe that's the first 5 star review they've given to a 3D projector.

What did they give the Sony 1000 for 3D?
post #2850 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

What did they give the Sony 1000 for 3D?

They gave two ratings for 3D. Four stars out of five when using a 92 inch high gain screen and 3.5 out of five when using a 118 inch standard screen. They also gave the 2D performance five out of five by the way.
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