JVC RS 45 / Sony HW30 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5010 mini-shootout - Page 13

The Sanyo z5 was built like a brick, but the PQ degraded over time. My polarizers (or something) are shot on it, it can still do bearably almost ok in really punchy scenes, but in the past year or so it developed a weird shadow reflection on the screen where white text on black has a shadow. I had 3 dust blobs over 15,000 hours, all easily removed with the blow holes.

I put 15,000+ hours on it, so I'm not complaining. Of course a lot of those hours were just leaving it running on the time and never turning it off (the Viewsonic Pro8200 took the Sanyo's place as my TV, the JVC is the movies, and my LCD TV is for decoration that never gets used). I am going to give it away to someone I know most likely, or sell it in the used market for $5k.

Forum posting rules state that any pics of stacked boxes must have a projector resting on said stack.

Epic fail!

Eagerly awaiting to see how the 5010 compares...

When I first looked at this pic I though man that's a lot of money (and it is). But my next thought was that all three of those combined probably didn't you much more than purchasing an RS55 or a VW95 . That really puts things into perspective when considering the upper end line know the performance difference isn't that much better.

I'm back.

Watched some more 3D and I've come to the conclusion that this will be my 3D projector of choice. Ghosting is VERY minimal and damn the 3D brightness is ridiculous. I toggled 3D on and off and the brightness in 3D, in it's insane 3D dynamic mode with glasses brightness set to high is almost brighter then the 2D cinema mode in eco mode for 2D!! BTW, I love the panasonic 3D3 glasses. Very light and rechargeable, and seem to have a neutral tint. I'm running the 3D glasses almost always in high brightness mode as there are only a very select few titles that need the benefit of slightly lower brightness to reduce ghosting to almost zero.

2D:

I'm actually pretty amazed at how this projector performs in 2D. I bought this projector from a place that has a 14 day return policy and I didn't really think I would keep it. Just needed seomething to play with over the holidays I looked for reasons to get rid of it, but I can't now. The performance for the money is just too good.

You guys are probably wondering how this compares to expensive projectors like the X7, X70, VW90, INfoucs SP8602, etc that I've had in the past year.

Very well actually and beats the more expensive projectors in some categories

The 5010 too me is a combination of a DLP and LCOS in one machine.

The image on the 5010 REALLY POPS!! bright scenes have a three dimensional imagd that I did not see on any LCOS (the X70, VW90 are pretty close) It looks similar to the Infocus in bright scenes. Whites are WHITE, while the X70 has more of a "foggy" look in bright scenes.

I believe the brightness was around 700 lumens in best mode but it seems brighter then my X70, and Much brighter the the X7. Not sure if it could be just perception and the image dynamics that make it seem brighter then it really is. I really wan't someone to test the ANSI contrast on the 5010, as it's hard to imagine it no being really good. LCD in general has better ANSI then LCOS, while DLP has the highest ANSI. This might be the reason for the "pop". With the new D9 chip it very well may have gotten a bump.

Sharpness from corner to corner is perfect, as is the convergence. I DID NOT expect this at all from my prior experience from the 6500 and 8700. They had horrible convergence and average sharpness. Again, this may just be an exceptional unit it this regard and other 5010 may not be as good.

SDE (screen door effect) Yes it's visible at around 1 screen with too me, but even then it's not intrusive and really only visible in white scenes are scenes with solid colours. This may bother some people more then others. Pixel grid structure is extremely visible up close.

Motion is Very good. Ran the motion tests from the Japanese FPD benchmark disc and it reproduces motion as well as I have seen from any projector. No blurring or smearing, or loss of texture detail during the panning store front scene. Motion is about the same as a good DLP. FI works well with very few artifacts but is very aggressive in all modes and I really wouldn't use it for film content.

Blacks. Without the iris they are good to average, and with the iris it can get very close to the JVC on many scenes and the Epson has the blackest fade to black of any projector. (iris pretty much completely closes) Really dark movies with very low APL scenes still have a clearly visible advantage to the JVC. I would say that 80% of dark scenes would be very hard to tell the JVC and Epson apart for the average movie. However something like the move Afraid of the Dark which I recently watched, that has pretty much low APL scenes throughout favour the JVC.

The iris is generally not visible is very good most of the time. It can get tripped up once in a while but it's the best iris other the the Sony VW90 that I"ve seen. It is still noisy however, and it quiet scenes it can be annoying. It makes a kind of gurgling sound that while not high pitched is audible once in a while. I'm tolerating it right now, but I may just turn it off for some types of talky movies.

The picture is very digital looking. This is probably a great thing for some and a negative for others. It looks more like a giant LCD, but with better colour, motion, and black levels. Grain in films stands out like a mother ****er on the 5010. I tried MANY movies and newer "cleaner" films look great, some older stuff or even some newer films like Black Swan, that have grain or use it for "artistic" reasons, it really stands out. Even more so then the X70 with eshift. However the depth and detail is phenomenal, producing a 3D like picture. This doesn't have the "film look" at all really. The Sony and JVC looks a little more refined I guess I would say with a buttery smooth image that is reminicent of a GOOD cinema picture (hard to find nowadays withe the crap film projectors out there) but they lack the "pop" of the Epson in bright scenes.

Overall I would say that the Epson will be liked more by some then any of the LCOS machines out there. I really liked the improvement in dynamics from the X70 but the Epson takes it too another level. If you wan't a giant LCD flat panel like picture, then go with the Epson. If you wan't a smooth less noisy film like picture with ultimate blacks, go with an LCOS. They really are very different, but both very good

I'm really enjoying the Epson right now and may play with it for a while

BTW. Almost forgot to mention that this thing puts out massive light output in 2D in it's living room or dynamic modes. Now I know what a picture might look like on an HP screen I don't really find these modes necessary for me as I have a bat cave but it's nice for doc, and sports, or if you dont have a light controlled room then the brightness would be a great addition. Living room mode looks fine in terms of colour, but the Dynamic mode has colour that is not very good but can be tweaked a bit for accuracy at the cost of some lumens.

I probably forgot some stuff so ask away.......

Nice review...

To me LCOS looks more DLP-like than LCD on all but the brightest of scenes, but I have never seen a 5010. As you noted above, it depends on what you are watching.

I agree for an all-in-one solution the Epson 5010 is a good buy, but the JVC is mainly more of a movie projector and will shine through on movies with very advanced camera work (like Tree of Life, LOTR, Harry Potter, Star Wars, etc...). When you see really sophisticated camera work, you should get the same POP as a DLP in an LCOS (IMHO), and really the LCOS should surpass it. LCOS is more sensitive to bright-light washout than DLP or LCD, but other than that it looks more refined to my eyes. At first I wasn't sure if I preferred the LCOS look, but over time I definitely do, the more refined image is a huge benefit for film.

There are a lot of movies with blah camera work, so in that sense it's nice to have a DLP for some stuff (or the 5010).

I agree that DLP is still more film like then LCD, but then you do get some very harsh looking DLP's like the W6000 where grain stands out more then most other DLPs. The INfoucs was buttery smooth. By DLP like, I guess I'm referring more to the pop in the brighter scenes of DLP vs. LCOS and not in regards to film look. Also the Epson 5010 is a pretty big step up from the 8700.

My friend currently has the 8700 and it looks more dull, and just more blah (thats my scientific assessment) then the 5010.

...and I 100% agree that some will find the look of LCOS more pleasing and refined but some will prefer the more digital and punchy look of the Epson. You have to see both and decide. They are very different but really nice in different ways.

Why not go DLP. Well rainbows for one, and the extremely crappy blacks. Even the Infoucs can't come close to the Epson for blacks and it's one of the better ones.

Decisions, Decisions.......

I always liked a digital look, but grew to like the smoothness of LCOS. Now, I'm getting addicted to that "pop and wow" (stealing Arts, famous quote here) of the Epson again.

Conan48 -- Just how good are the 3D blacks without a DI? I have a HP screen so 3D should be really bright -- now that I'd like to see. My Acer is pretty good, but more brightness for 3D would be nice. Do you use a HTPC? Any issues with the Epson. I assume Nvidia 3D glasses won't work with this projector so four or five more pairs have to be factored into the cost. From your posts it seems that "ghosting" is not an issue for you with this projector, but was with last year's Sony and all JVC products.

There are three reviews of the 7800 and they are all good and show a refined product with no issues other than two: the bulky glasses and the standard 3D DLP black level. It is one of two new 3D projectors which includes the superior DC3. Its more 3D on 2D mode with a bit better detail.
It has very low registration errors because of the superior glass lens with ED element. I could list 20 more positives but whats the point? Especially since I've been unable to audition one in person.

The Benq probably has the same or worse black level than the 7800.
In summary the 7800 has not been given a fair shake at AVS, probably including myself. It has better color and sharpness than the sub 2K DLP projectors.

However the dark grey black level pales in comparison to the new tricks the liquid crystal camp is using (with the notable of except Epson, which is also a fine choice). There is definitely a tradeoff between speed vs contrast with both camps. However DLP's blazingly fast speed does not cause artifacts or flicker or ghosting.

If I buy one, I'd hope that it has the similar ceiling mounting as the Mitsubishi 4000 with compatible screw holes. So its probably an easy drop in replacement.
The price was dropped $500 to compete with the lower priced competition. If I decide to own one, it will be knowing I'll want to upgrade the glasses, probably to the follow-on model.

http://www.projectorcentral.com/mits...tor_review.htm
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/b...%20Preview.htm
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/b...1%23p176568761

Chalk up 1 new (on order with AVS) Sony HW30 owner (was RS40, and RS45 to be).

As more evidence comes in, the LCoS new direction to deal with 3D is becoming evident. JVC doubled the pixels for no apparent reason. Until now.

The most basic tenet of image quality with a fixed, discrete display is each pixel acts independently of the others. This is why purists turn off all the processing which involves combining multiple pixels.
Further the light from one pixel should be kept separate from adjacent pixels. This maintains 1:1 pixel mapping. Otherwise there will be image degradation, noticeable as a loss of contrast and resolution and here an increase in noise.

I've already written about the every increasing clarity of flat panels, namely the 70-80 LCD Sharps in purely subjective comparison to the Sony. It was very alarming then. Now, having learned more of the design, I realize its intentional.

So count me in the camp of Projector Central and Tom Huffman. I cannot in principle, or after casual observation, support this new trend in 3D LCoS technology.

Note: I still need to evaluate the reduced 2D contrast of 3D DLP projectors to see if I can live with that either.

Note: LCD is rising from the ashes (think Epson). Oh the ironies!

Checking in to the mother ship, I will have some detailed impressions tomorrow but I will give you a hint that the Epson is one of the best all-around units I've used this year after giving it an hour calibration. I had 2 friends over to do a quick A/B comparison through several scenes and will go over this tomorrow.

Now for the big problem. I just posted in the 5010 thread for some help but my unit has at least a red 2 pixel shift horizontally that I can't tweak out using the panel alignment tool. I don't know if I am not using it right or what, but it seems straight forward and on the menu screen it shows the issue being resolved but test patterns show otherwise. Do you have any experience using this conan?

The black uniformity is also much worse than my JVC on the left and right sides, I haven't seen anyone else complain of this so it may just be I got a dud. I actually checked to see if my bluray player or any of my other equipment were reflecting off the screen because it was that noticeable. I am going to keep playing with the menu settings and see if I can come up with something.

Coder - Are you sure on the Epson brightness numbers? This thing is as-bright in ECO mode as my JVC in high mode.

Thanks for the preliminary impressions. Indeed i have heard great things about the Epson Have you seen the Sony VW95 yet?

They are based from Cine4, because Cine4 was in the middle of the pack between other reviews I saw and Art's review. Art's review suggests the lumens are even lower than what my calculator states (see below).

The Epson is bright but my numbers are based on calibrated outputs. I probably will not be applying user measurements to offset reviewers for this projector, the reviewers numbers were all fairly close together (most around 700ish calibrated in high), and the projector has such a large variance in lumens depending on calibration that I need to stick with the reviewers on this one for the most part.


Home Cinema 5010 Lumen Output and Color Temp at 100 IRE:

Natural= 635 @ 6969, 455 in Eco lamp mode (default)
Cinema= 635 @ 6924, 455 in Eco lamp mode (default)
Post Calibration: Best Mode = Cinema - or Natural?

Mike Calibrated Cinema mode. Post calibration: 630 lumens

Epson later suggested that for a better color gamut we should try Natural preset mode. More on that below. Both modes measure the same out of the box, so I think we can presume that Natural will measure about the same calibrated as Cinema does.

I put up a test pattern and my uniformity is almost perfect, and convergence is as good as it gets on mine.

I also mentioned that the eco mode seems a lot brighter then 700 lumens.

The one thing I forgot to mention is that Epson has the best warranty of any consumer electronics product. They will ship you next day a brand new unit for ANY reason, and shipping is paid for both ways. You never have to worry about any issues with an Epson. They don't have the best rep for Quality Control but i've heard much less negative reports from 5010 owners then previous generations. Still to early to tell though.

Black levels are just good in 3D because of the insane brightness. Not even shutter glasses can tame the lumens and the blacks on an HP screen would not be the greatest in 3D, but much better then the Acer still.

I have a feeling AVS should stock up on the Epson. The word is spreading......

If someone can provide post-calibrated charts and measured lumens values from the Epson, I'll consider the data, but for now I have seen 4-5 reviewers measure the thing all within the same 650-800 lumens range on lamp high.

One needs to differentiate between the resolution of a static pattern and motion resolution.

This just published review documents the lack of motion clarity observed even with the exprensive Sony 95 with improved lens:
"Motion handling was good in SD and HD with no signs of induced judder and as with SXRD technology detail was only lost on very fast movement. Using our usual motion tests the VW95ES managed to produce around 700 lines during moving plate tests, which for an SXRD model is very good".

Note: For approximately the last 3 years the best of plasma, LCD and DLP technologies have measured the full 1080 lines of motion resolution.
http://www.avforums.com/review/Sony-...or-Review.html

Jason,

When you calibrated using the RCP did you notice any added artifacts afterwards. I recall a couple reviewers mentioning this.

I have a Da-Lite Tab-tensioned (motorized) Cinema Vision 1.3 gain, 110" 16:9 (96"w X 54"h). On the JVC I think it was screen type 3. From what I'm reading (or not), the Sony does not have that same screen type compensation mapping setting for the hue diffs between screens. After comparing a lot of screens I really liked the balance of brightness, performance in moderate ambient lighting (wife is constantly turning on lights while I'm trying to get into dark Alien type movies) and great price after shopping around.

My utimate HT setup is a project in progress... a small (man cave) HT room 14ft front to back that will have a 11.5ft throw distance and 7ft lens height (equal with screen top). That's all the square footage my wife would allow me.

Until then I'm stuck using this in our big living room open area with vaulted ceiling and a long throw. With the JVC I was able to do 21.5ft, but the Sony maximum is only just over 17ft, so I'll need to rearrange furniture to push the temp rack forward 4.5ft.

I'm hoping this Sony is not a heat and noise pig. The RS40 was a toaster and made wild boar noises on high lamp mode (kidding, but it was a little louder than I prefer).

On the older Sony's, I think you had to use their PC software (Image Director) to hook into the projector to calibrate if I remember right (been a while), I never tried it myself, this might have just been for GAMMA but I forget. I think it also has a manual 6-point CMS, otherwise it's probably in the service menu.

Sony's CMS was always insane, kind of like waveform patterns, didn't like it.

That said, the Sony is already close enough, it won't help much if any, probably not any visible difference in 99.9% of scenes from that gamut.

LCD's lose tons of brightness for best modes, but the Epson has 1500+ lumens in 3D mode. The projector can do over 2000 lumens in all.

The projector is very bright, it's just that it's best mode isn't super bright.

Achieving Low Motion Blur, High Clarity and Fluidity
Our two eyes offer two independent data points which improve S/N ratio, depth perception and widens the field of view. So two does the discrimination ability of fine detail. This implies an increase of resolution, as our brain fuses two data sources.
The roll-up term “clarity” in this context includes 2D and 3D static and motion resolution. Here is Consumer Reports observation for 2D motion clarity:
“MOTION BLUR. This model from Sharp includes AquoMotion 240 technology, which combines a 120Hz refresh rate with a scanning (flashing) backlight to create a 240Hz-like effect -- a feature intended to reduce motion blur, a shortcoming of most LCD TVs. With the feature turned on we found it reduced motion blur to the point where it's really not a problem with typical program content. With the AquoMotion 240 feature turned off, this TV showed significant blurring and loss of detail with our test patterns. Note that on typical video content the blurring effect is often fleeting and may not bother most people, but keen-eyed viewers may detect the loss of texture and detail on scenes with movement, especially in high-quality video such as a Blu-ray movie.”
Agreed. This prevents transitory motion artifacts which bother many experienced projector owners to no end. This is why I always leave this LED pulsing for my 2D 70” Sharp 735 flat panel. It, in a word, works! For projectors DLP has been the safe route - being largely free of motion blur/high clarity or fluidity.

For 3D, the active shutter glasses also perform a likewise similar service in preventing the viewer from seeing the 2 million liquid crystals changing state simultaneously. Properly implemented frame interpolation offers some intelligence because it knows where it was, where it is and where it is probably going to.
Does all this matter? I enjoy reading the observations of projectors novices as they can see just as good as the experts, yet offer a fresh and unbiased perspective. This year they have widely commented on the clarity of the new inexpensive 1080p DLP projectors.

Consumers should shop wisely for the new and exciting 3D technology, by taking advantage of the display’s which offer full 1080p 2D motion clarity, and the even higher clarity offered by Blu-ray 3D. While motion clarity largely ignored in this forum, it should be considered just as important as contrast and black level.

Here is the emerging threat of Large Flat Panels - 84" and 4K resolution!
Sony also uses 4K projectors to show 2K pictures in commercial movie theaters. Why?

LG's 2012 assault is to do the same for the home theater with 2K Blu-ray 3D movies. Their main focus is to now process the full Blu-ray 3D motion clarity (1080p+) rather than throw half of it out, as they did in 2011 effectively displaying only 1920*540!
Consumers noticed the reduced clarity and didn't buy into the companies rationalization. This 4K panels allows for lighter passive glasses and full clarity.

Quote:
"If LG continues at this pace, it will be almost useless for us to attend the press conference at CES in Las Vegas. The anticipation of today is the arrival of the first 4K TV "Made in LG." The new TV is equipped with an LCD panel 84-inch well with a native resolution 3840 x 2160 points."

A couple of points. Not everybody was fooled or cared if they "throw out half of it". I preferred the much brighter picture, the lighter and cheaper glasses to the clarity. I still haven't bought any 3D yet though because of the competing tech ad the size; I have two Panny plasmas.

I am looking for my first projector, and I can tell you a 4K 84" panel won't even replace the measly 106" screen I am looking at, especially for the price. I am guessing that TV will come in around $15K.

Due to the 4K and 3D issues, I am considering a Mits HC4000 for my first projector as kind of a disposable option. It gives me the ability to go large with a cheaper path to 4K and 3D in the future. The HC4000 will also get me what I want and the reason for coming to this thread. I want a projector with low lag time. While I don't game as much anymore, I want to be able to.

I also saw that LG is produce a new passive projector for release something in 2012, the CF3DAA.

Details? A link to further info? A quick Google search found info that there is a 3F3DAT with built in free TV tuner and is 1250 lumens. That is quite a low lumens figure and it looked about as big as the huge JVC projectors.

By now you have probably found the same info is as me, but here is all I can find.
http://lgnewsroom.com/newsroom/contents/61604

Note that the press release states that it is 1250 lumens in 3D mode. That is very bright.