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 100

post #2971 of 3271
9/9/12 at 7:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

Have you played any games on the Epson 5010 and if so, how was the ghosting? Does the flicker bother you at all on the Epson? I am finding flicker more and more annoying as time goes on and this is another advantage to DLP it seems from my experience with the Acer.

I'm not a gamer, so the answer is no! However, what really surprises me is how well the 6010 handles SBS 3D material. I have several SBS movies and they looks amazing with no ghosting showing with this particular material. I know what flicker looks like, but I don't think I'm very sensitive to it, so it's not fair for me to say it won't be a problem for some. The big issue with DLP and DLP-Link is the loss of on/off contrast with DLP link glasses. With my Acer I can use both the Nvidia system and Nvidia 3D glasses or the DLP-link system with the Optoma "box" and the Optoma 3D DLP-link glasses. I have both setups and there is a substantial loss of contrast (black level) with the DLP-link system. Perhaps the Benq's red flash rather than a white flash solves this problem, but introduces another issue - a red tint to the video.

If you do go with DLP for 3D gaming and 3D movies I would recommend you get all your ducks in a row and make sure you can also purchase the 3D DLP-link glasses Zombie recommends. I was seriously thinking of purchasing a Benq for 3D, but the 6010 is so good for my purposes there's no point. As I said I'm not a gamer and lag times etc. aren't applicable to my situation.
Edited by Deja Vu - 9/9/12 at 7:23am
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2972 of 3271
9/9/12 at 7:31am
Thread Starter 
I recall running the same tests with the nvidia glasses vs the dip link on the Acer 5360 and thought the contrast looked better with the Nvidia.

The red flash on the w7000 doesn't seem to have as much impact here as the white flash on the Acer. The ZD201 glasses are perfect here, there is no sign of the red flash signal through the glasses.

I was also surprised how well the 5010 did with sbs content that would destroy the JVC and to a lesser extent, the Sony.
Reply
Reply
post #2973 of 3271
9/9/12 at 8:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

I'm not a gamer, so the answer is no! However, what really surprises me is how well the 6010 handles SBS 3D material. I have several SBS movies and they looks amazing with no ghosting showing with this particular material. I know what flicker looks like, but I don't think I'm very sensitive to it, so it's not fair for me to say it won't be a problem for some. The big issue with DLP and DLP-Link is the loss of on/off contrast with DLP link glasses. With my Acer I can use both the Nvidia system and Nvidia 3D glasses or the DLP-link system with the Optoma "box" and the Optoma 3D DLP-link glasses. I have both setups and there is a substantial loss of contrast (black level) with the DLP-link system. Perhaps the Benq's red flash rather than a white flash solves this problem, but introduces another issue - a red tint to the video.
If you do go with DLP for 3D gaming and 3D movies I would recommend you get all your ducks in a row and make sure you can also purchase the 3D DLP-link glasses Zombie recommends. I was seriously thinking of purchasing a Benq for 3D, but the 6010 is so good for my purposes there's no point. As I said I'm not a gamer and lag times etc. aren't applicable to my situation.

Thanks for all the great info DejaVu. Always appreciate your input. smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #2974 of 3271
9/11/12 at 5:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

too much talking, not enough buying... cool.gif
dino3d.jpg
perfect..! not too many projectors can nail this scene
dino3d1.jpg

I just had a look at Dinosaurs Alive on the Epson. I've seen it on the Acer so I know what it should look like as far as ghosting is concerned. The Acer wins, but not by much. With the Epson I saw one instance of obvious ghosting that lasted maybe 2 seconds and two other very short and not at all obvious instances of crosstalk. On this particular disc I'd give the Epson a 9/10. The scene Zombie posted above is completely ghost free. Most 3D I watch with it gets a 10/10 for ghosting. The Epson beats the Acer in black level and brightness. With 3D I don't notice much difference in resolution; however, with the Epson you can sit much closer to the screen without seeing S.E.D. Overall I'd rather watch Dinosaurs Alive on the Epson due to the lack of obvious ghosting and superior brightness (this does make a big differenced for 3D) and black levels. I would suspect that a DLP with the same black levels and brightness as the Epson would be preferable, but really, with images this good who cares? Well some of you would I'm sure since we all need psychological help with our obsession. biggrin.gif Just to confirm the bottom image is what this scene looks like on the Epson, which is pretty impressive considering how tough this material really is and that's with the Epson's light output cranked to max! I used the Sony PS3 3D glasses.

Check out this thread about the format none wanted:

http://www.avforums.com/forums/ces-2012/1577011-3d-format-nobody-wanted.html
Edited by Deja Vu - 9/11/12 at 6:11am
Reply
Reply
post #2975 of 3271
9/11/12 at 6:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

I just had a look at Dinosaurs Alive on the Epson. I've seen it on the Acer so I know what it should look like as far as ghosting is concerned. The Acer wins, but not by much. With the Epson I saw one instance of obvious ghosting that lasted maybe 2 seconds and two other very short and not at all obvious instances of crosstalk. On this particular disc I'd give the Epson a 9/10. The scene Zombie posted above is completely ghost free. Most 3D I watch with it gets a 10/10 for ghosting. The Epson beats the Acer in black level and brightness. With 3D I don't notice much difference in resolution; however, with the Epson you can sit much closer to the screen without seeing S.E.D. Overall I'd rather watch Dinosaurs Alive on the Epson due to the lack of obvious ghosting and superior brightness (this does make a big differenced for 3D) and black levels. I would suspect that a DLP with the same black levels and brightness as the Epson would be preferable, but really, with images this good who cares? Well some of you would I'm sure since we all need psychological help with our obsession. biggrin.gif Just to confirm the bottom image is what this scene looks like on the Epson, which is pretty impressive considering how tough this material really is and that's with the Epson's light output cranked to max! I used the Sony PS3 3D glasses.

Sounds good! If only they had thrown in a motorized lens and reduced lag (rumor has it the new models have improved this, so we will see) I would be all over it! mad.gif
Reply
Reply
post #2976 of 3271
9/11/12 at 8:27am
Thread Starter 
there must be some sample variances with the Epson's, similar to the JVC's. The Epson 5010 I had for about 3 months wasn't as good as DV's experience with his particular copy. I'll have to go back through my photos to see if I have this shot on the 5010, but I could see ghosting on the copy I had with the Epson glasses.
Reply
Reply
post #2977 of 3271
9/11/12 at 1:54pm
My projector is definitely performing better (less ghosting) than it did when I first got it. The only thing I've changed is its position. There was noticeable ghosting with Happy Feet II, but I can't see any now. Maybe the lamp is a little dimmer or whatever? I'm seriously thinking of putting my present Epson in another setup where the Acer is now and getting the 6020 or the new Panasonic for my HT. I'll wait and let others deal with any issues, but my experience with the 6010 is actually better than I thought it would be.

Anyone know if last year's Epson 3D glasses or PS3 3D glasses will work with the new Epson and Panasonic projectors? The Epson, Panasonic and PS3 3D glasses were all interchangeable with last year's projectors.

If the Epson performed like Zombie's first photo above then you'd hear some cross talk from me about its performance. biggrin.gif
Reply
Reply
post #2978 of 3271
9/11/12 at 6:39pm
I'm looking forward to seeing how the Sony HW50 does. Projector reviews said it was very impressive and held it's own next to the top of the line JVC. From the last I read the Sony does good with 3D even though it's not as good as the BenQ or the Epson.
Reply
Reply
post #2979 of 3271
9/13/12 at 8:10am
Looks like a battle of the Titans is shaping up -- Sony, Epson and Panasonic. I'll bet one will stick out as better in one area and another will do something better in another area. I still don't trust the reviewers when it comes to "ghosting" on these projectors. Its the critical AVS Forum reviews by certain members that I'm waiting for -- everything else is just marketing IMO.
Reply
Reply
post #2980 of 3271
9/13/12 at 9:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by xb1032 View Post

I'm looking forward to seeing how the Sony HW50 does. Projector reviews said it was very impressive and held it's own next to the top of the line JVC. From the last I read the Sony does good with 3D even though it's not as good as the BenQ or the Epson.

Wishful thinking, don't believe everything you read.
Reply
Reply
post #2981 of 3271
9/13/12 at 9:53am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joesyah View Post

Wishful thinking, don't believe everything you read.

I think that was going off of memory too (the comparison).

we need a shoot-out V2 this year to validate all the various claims.
Reply
Reply
post #2982 of 3271
9/13/12 at 11:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

Looks like a battle of the Titans is shaping up -- Sony, Epson and Panasonic. I'll bet one will stick out as better in one area and another will do something better in another area. I still don't trust the reviewers when it comes to "ghosting" on these projectors. Its the critical AVS Forum reviews by certain members that I'm waiting for -- everything else is just marketing IMO.


Agreed!
Reply
Reply
post #2983 of 3271
9/13/12 at 11:46am
Thread Starter 
send me all your projectors.

send them soon, and send them fast... cool.gif

This is going to be an interesting year!
Reply
Reply
post #2984 of 3271
9/13/12 at 12:11pm
I just recently spent an afternoon with the W7000, and I came away with radically mixed feelings. On the positive side, it is quite bright (though no more so than the Epson), has good optics for a very sharp image, and calibration controls that are a joy to use. However, it had 2 major deficiencies. First, in any mode of operation you MUST use the DI. Without it, this projector has perhaps the worst black level I have measured in the last several years. This is performance that was eclipsed in 2003, even by BenQ. Even with the DI, the black level is only mediocre. This is one area where the Epson is clearly superior. It has a significantly better black level without the dynamic iris than the BenQ has with it.

Second, in 3D mode only at very low light levels--you can see this with a 10% stimulus test pattern--the image goes very red. Furthermore, it is uncorrectable. I haven't seen any discussion of this--maybe I missed it. It may just have been a problem with this one unit. This issue, if it is a common problem and not a one unit defect, is a deal-breaker in my opinion for movie watching in 3D where dark scenes are quite common.
Reply
Reply
post #2985 of 3271
9/13/12 at 12:40pm
Tom's findings agree with Kris Deering. He found other issues too:
http://www.hometheater.com/content/benq-w7000-3d-dlp-projector-page-2

As expected the contrast measures are really poor (600:1). These are reasons to wait for the refined DC3 models from Mitsubishi or Acer.
I believe a certain Nation Sales Manager hinted that Acer and BenQ are manufactured by the same company.

Oh maybe the Sony 50ES will resolve to a pixel.
Last year was frustrating with one-step-forward and two-steps-back with too many corners cut.

How about a DC3 laser/LED powered 1080 projector due in October. Price about $2K:

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/home-cinema/1294555/viewsonic-pro9000-lamp-free-projector-review-hands-on

Thank you!
Edited by HiFiFun - 9/13/12 at 1:46pm
Reply
Reply
post #2986 of 3271
9/13/12 at 12:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joesyah View Post

Wishful thinking, don't believe everything you read.

Don't be a fanboy of any one brand either.
Reply
Reply
post #2987 of 3271
9/13/12 at 1:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

This is one area where the Epson is clearly superior. It has a significantly better black level without the dynamic iris than the BenQ has with it.
Second, in 3D mode only at very low light levels--you can see this with a 10% stimulus test pattern--the image goes very red. Furthermore, it is uncorrectable. I haven't seen any discussion of this--maybe I missed it. It may just have been a problem with this one unit. This issue, if it is a common problem and not a one unit defect, is a deal-breaker in my opinion for movie watching in 3D where dark scenes are quite common.

The black levels on the w7000 are a disappointment. That said, it appears there might be some unit variations in how much light is leaking inside the optics (and outside) of different Benq's causing different contrast ratios. The highest measured was 2,200:1, the lowest I saw measured was 500:1. Given the fact that one person has also reported a broken lens assembly, noisy IRIS's, extra light leaking more than others, etc... I would venture to guess the native on/off is somewhere in the 800:1 to 1500:1 range on average depending on unit variance possibly (again I am not saying for certain).

I often see red tint on new DLP's, that usually wears off after 500 hours on the lamp. The same red tint is there somewhat on the Mitsubishi hc3800, hc4000, and even more so on the Viewsonic Pro8200. It was so bad on the Pro8200 the first 300 hours that I literally had to watch the image much much cooler than normal until the lamp wore in, now after some lamp wear I have no red tint at all.

The Optoma hd8300 was likely actually the best 3D projector this year while still holding relatively ok black levels (>2,500:1 Native on/off, and > 10,000:1+ with the IRIS), but they just priced it wrong and the only buyers were mostly on the refurb market. Other than going with an LCOS or LCD, then the only other one with decent blacks would be the Acer 9500bd, but the IRIS is a tad bouncy, but with the 1:1 pixel mapping fix the Acer seems like a good deal if it is bright enough in 3D for a person's setup and if they are not too RBE sensitive..
Edited by coderguy - 9/13/12 at 1:54pm
Reply
Reply
post #2988 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:15pm
The Acer 9500bd, Optoma hd8300, and Benq w7000 would all be contenders for best 3D, and there are some in here that did finally see the w7000 vs. the Optoma hd8300 in 3D, they both thought the Optoma was better in 3D because the Optoma just had far better contrast and still perfectly clean 3d, but it also cost almost twice as much new.

Before proclaiming the Benq w7000 as the 3D leader, I'd like to see it put against the Acer 9500bd which has better contrast by nearly 2x or more and now also has the pixel mapping fixed. You would also have to even consider the Optoma hd33 against the Benq w7000, because the hd33 has about the same level of blacks even without the IRIS, and the hd33 just lacks placement flexibility and zoom flexibility, but overall it should be competitive to the Benq for less money if we are just talking black levels (Benq might be brighter in 3D mode, not sure).
Reply
Reply
post #2989 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:16pm
Between you and coder you guys drive me nuts lol.. I cant pull the trigger on a projector ... I keep going back and forth lol
Reply
Reply
post #2990 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:17pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Second, in 3D mode only at very low light levels--you can see this with a 10% stimulus test pattern--the image goes very red. Furthermore, it is uncorrectable. I haven't seen any discussion of this--maybe I missed it. It may just have been a problem with this one unit. This issue, if it is a common problem and not a one unit defect, is a deal-breaker in my opinion for movie watching in 3D where dark scenes are quite common.

I've watched Underworld Evolution 3D and countless other 3D movies on the W7000. With the Optoma ZD201 glasses, the red flash is completely obscured by the glasses, even in the darkest scenes. I am not sure what glasses you are using, but if they are the BenQ, they are some of the worst performing for blocking the red flash from this particular projector.

I've been clear to point out that no one would mistake the W7000 for the JVC. However, the 3D PQ is excellent and it has the favorable lens shift for those of us with an HP screen.

for those that haven't actually seen this projector, let's not ignore the comments from other trusted reviewers (Chris H & Kris D) since the 3D is still quite thrilling on this machine.

"if someone asks me what the best 3D projector out there is for under $30,000, I would answer that the BenQ W7000 is the best that I've seen."

Where the W7000 sets itself apart from the rest is 3D. Bar none, this is the best 3D I’ve seen in home theater to date. With lumens to spare, the BenQ delivered a bright, punchy 3D image that was completely devoid of the artifacts I so often see with any other display technology. It didn’t matter what 3D material I put on, I never once saw any distracting artifacts like strobing, ghosting, or flicker. This is the bar that other 3D projectors should strive for.

Another topic not brought up is the flicker from the non-DLP units. Perhaps some folks don't see it, but my eyes/brain are laser focused (whether I want to or not) at seeing the shutter flicker. I saw the flicker on the JVC (worst), HW30 (tolerable), Epson 5010 (good, but not as good as the DLP's), BenQ w7000 and Acer 5360 3D DLP, rock solid... flawless in this regard.

I watched 4 straight hours of 3D the other day (Avengers 3D and Wrath of the Titans 3D) like it was watching 2D. Flicker is a little discussed topic in the reviews that can have a serious impact on the viewer (eye strain & headaches) depending on their sensitivity.

Having said that, of course i'm looking forward the Mitsubishi's 2nd attempt at getting this right with the 8000. If it had a full lens shift, it could be the ideal 3D projector for my setup.
Reply
Reply
post #2991 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:18pm
Sorry, what are you looking to watch on it?

There haven't been many comparisons of the Acer 9500bd and Benq w7000, but if those are the two you are looking at, having it narrowed down to two projectors isn't so bad.
Reply
Reply
post #2992 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:20pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Before proclaiming the Benq w7000 as the 3D leader, I'd like to see it put against the Acer 9500bd which has better contrast by nearly 2x or more and now also has the pixel mapping fixed. You would also have to even consider the Optoma hd33 against the Benq w7000, because the hd33 has about the same level of blacks even without the IRIS, and the hd33 just lacks placement flexibility and zoom flexibility, but overall it should be competitive to the Benq for less money if we are just talking black levels (Benq might be brighter in 3D mode, not sure).

We still don't have accurate measurements of the 9500 in 2D or 3D mode. PC claimed ~900 @ D65 and 690 in 3D.

W7000 is 1500 @ D65, 1100 in 3D.. a noticeable difference if true. 3D brightness is king and would take less contrast for a brighter 3D image. Nothing is worse than dim 3D in my book. Heck, the Acer 5360 720P 3D DLP was more enjoyable in 3D mode than the JVC with it's much better contrast.
Reply
Reply
post #2993 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:22pm
Na Im sorta leaning towards JVC Rs45 Sony Hw30 or Epson 5010..

Thing Is I dont know anything about mounting or screens or how to dial it in with like the zoom etc etc..

My local shops all tell me not to go bigger then 100 inches... I can sit anywhere from 8-11 feet back and mount the projector anywhere from 14-18 feet back..

Then Screen comes into play.. I was reading someones thread with a RS45 and said they got a 2:35 screen... My local shop says if I dont have a Anamorphic lens then the picture will look terrible... I honestly read and read and read and I think I just confuse myself lol
Reply
Reply
post #2994 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:23pm
In my opinion but havent seen any of this stuff the monster glasses you used Zombie for the jvc made a pretty good difference
Reply
Reply
post #2995 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

We still don't have accurate measurements of the 9500 in 2D or 3D mode. PC claimed ~900 @ D65 and 690 in 3D.
W7000 is 1500 @ D65, 1100 in 3D.. a noticeable difference if true. 3D brightness is king and would take less contrast for a brighter 3D image. Nothing is worse than dim 3D in my book. Heck, the Acer 5360 720P 3D DLP was more enjoyable in 3D mode than the JVC with it's much better contrast.

I agree, however the Optoma hd8300 can do 1000+ lumens in 3D on a new lamp, and the hd33 isn't that far behind, the hd3300 should also be around there. If we are judging purely on brightness, than yah the Benq will probably win especially paired with the HP screen, but I'd take the Optoma hd8300 if judging on all attributes since it's relatively close in brightness (should be bright enough for many of us), but the hd8300 isn't widely available anymore (if at all), so kind of a moot point. Still I'd like to even see the Optoma hd3300 vs. the Benq w7000 or the Acer.
Reply
Reply
post #2996 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holiday121 View Post

Na Im sorta leaning towards JVC Rs45 Sony Hw30 or Epson 5010..
Thing Is I dont know anything about mounting or screens or how to dial it in with like the zoom etc etc..
My local shops all tell me not to go bigger then 100 inches... I can sit anywhere from 8-11 feet back and mount the projector anywhere from 14-18 feet back..
Then Screen comes into play.. I was reading someones thread with a RS45 and said they got a 2:35 screen... My local shop says if I dont have a Anamorphic lens then the picture will look terrible... I honestly read and read and read and I think I just confuse myself lol

I would never go back to that shop again, 2.35 looks fine with no A-Lens, it actually is sharper unless you pay for an ungodly expensive 2.35 lens, and from the ones I've seen I haven't been too crazy about the A-Lens setup, but it does get rid of the black bar overshot areas entirely and does maintain a very slightly higher resolution (but it maintains it with less sharpness). 2.35 without an A-Lens does look better if you use masking.

I sit about 8 feet back from a 106" 16:9 screen, so it just depends on how big you want it. I could sit 10' back and still be ok, but I like to sit a bit closer than most. At 11 feet back, I'd say 110" is about the max size to go, but some may want it smaller.
Reply
Reply
post #2997 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:38pm
I would like to go 120 inches.. But after hearing I can go 2:35 that changes alot of things then... Now What I dont get is when I was 16:9 material how is that going to look ? The bars will be on the left and right then?
Reply
Reply
post #2998 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:40pm
Yah, going for a 2.35 screen definitely isn't the friendliest for 16:9. There are workarounds (masking or electric screens). With an electric screen you can have native aspects in both and you just move the screen up or down to change it, but you will still see the black bars overshooting past the screen border (so best to have a black wall or masking). With the JVC, the blacks are pretty dark so not having masking isn't the end of the world, but it is still better.
Reply
Reply
post #2999 of 3271
9/13/12 at 2:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holiday121 View Post

Na Im sorta leaning towards JVC Rs45 Sony Hw30 or Epson 5010..
Thing Is I dont know anything about mounting or screens or how to dial it in with like the zoom etc etc..
My local shops all tell me not to go bigger then 100 inches... I can sit anywhere from 8-11 feet back and mount the projector anywhere from 14-18 feet back..
Then Screen comes into play.. I was reading someones thread with a RS45 and said they got a 2:35 screen... My local shop says if I dont have a Anamorphic lens then the picture will look terrible... I honestly read and read and read and I think I just confuse myself lol

They dont know what they are talking about. If you have a dark screen wall, the bars that overshoot the screen will not be seen.

For 1.78 material on a 2.35 screen you have bars on the sides, but it is not projected light so as long as you have good light control and are not getting a lot of light coming back to your screen from room surfaces/walls then these bars will be darker and less noticeable vs top/bottom bars on a 1.78 screen. I honestly dont feel any need to mask the sides of my 2.35 screen since I never notice the bars now (I always found top/bottom bars on my 1.78 screen a distraction) unless I actually look for them which is never how you view a film.
Reply
Reply
post #3000 of 3271
9/13/12 at 4:13pm
Member rwestley did what we all wanted at the show. His report merits repeating
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwestley View Post

I had a chance on the last day of CETA to test the disk "A Turtles Tale, Sammys Adventure" on the new JVC and Mits new HC 8000D in 3d. I do think that the JVC's have somewhat improved ghosting. I watched about 5 minutes of the film and only noticed slight ghosting on the trees at the start of the film. You really had to look for it. This film is a real torture test to check for ghosting. They claim a 330.000x1 contrast ratio.vs 160.000x1 for the 7900 their other new machine.
I also visited the Mits booth very early in the morning and convinced them to test the new 8000 with the same film and their new glasses. The 8000 is a DLP projector with a MSRP of about $3000. It will be released in about a month. Since it was early the staff was able to close the curtains so it would look better. The 3D on this projector looked really bright with not a hint of ghosting. In fact it was the best 3D that I saw at the show on reasonable priced units. The Mits people claimed that the 8000 with work with their new glasses along with compatible glasses such as Xpand. They claim the new glasses only have a 25% light loss for 3D. That being said there was no way to measure this. I can say that the picture was bright and looked great with their new glasses. They ware also very light and comfortable. It would be nice to check this projector out once it is released. I would love to see how it looks with a good 2D source. It might be an interesting alternative to the BenQ 7000 and another good choice for those who want a projector with great 3d.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › JVC RS 45 / Sony HW30 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5010 mini-shootout