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 18

post #511 of 3271
Black levels are very important to me. When I left movie watching on my Pioneer plasma for the JVC the ansi contrast in the Pioneer destroyed the JVC. Very dark scenes were darker on the JVC but on 95% of the remaining content the Pioneer looked better and in many cases due to the very high ansi contast the black levels looked about as good as possible. I'm certainly not expecting that on a projector but better black levels really have a major impact on the overall image!

But yeah if you aren't doing a side by side comparison it's really hard to make a judgement call. I saw the RS50 last year at a dealer and then saw my RS2 on my Dalite HP screen and judging by memory the RS50 didn't look any blacker than my setup. Now having the RS45 in the same room as my RS2 I think black levels might be slightly better even though I've not set them up side by side (not much room for that anyway).
post #512 of 3271
Thread Starter 
please keep the thread somewhat clean, thanks.


Epson 5010 Calibration:

Pre-Calibration - The color gamut was oversaturated with the Cinema mode setting. I decided to change to the Natural mode. This was decent with gray scale, and not far off REC 709.

lamp=high
Pre calibration lumens = 866 lumens
D65 lumens = 849 lumens. I only had a pull a bit of blue out to get it to D65.

Gamma controls were easy to use and only needed minor tweaking to track well @ 2.2.

The color controls were equally easy to use and it didn't take much to get HSL cleaned up.



Color errors were relatively easy to fix with the built in controls and chromapure.



Most colors were close to R709 with the exception of cyan which needed a little help from the color controls.

post #513 of 3271
Thread Starter 
I have 3 light meters, all indicate the same lux reading. light output is consistent when viewed side by side with the HW30 which is putting out the same lumens @ D65.

maybe I have a golden sample. Cinema mode was also ~ 850 as well. Living room was ~1700, also higher than Art's tech guy.
post #514 of 3271
I 100% support Zombie. I have spoke with him before and I know it is a gamble sticking your neck out posting measurements. He is very skilled and definitely has nice equipment to do multiple readings. He will post it like it is. Don't shoot the messenger unless you want one less competent person posting measurements.
post #515 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Joe - the Epson is a torch in 3D mode. On a white background in 3D mode, I measured ~1,900 lumens. The brightness is intense combined with the 2.8 gain HP.

after all the various combos, this one finally feels bright enough through the glasses.
post #516 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by xb1032 View Post

:P



Thanks for the info and I'm looking forward to your take. If you can please comment on how black level compares on the 5010 to the RS45 in 2D with the DI on (the best you can from memory). Also please comment on how well the CFI works compared to the CMD on the JVC with camera pans.

I know we can't talk pricing here on AVS but to make things simple are the Epsons the same price everywhere or are these units discounted at all?

Epson set the price. Everybody discounts them the same.
Reply
Reply
post #517 of 3271
Looks like I definitely need to break out my meter next week when I return from my business trip. I am using 2.4 which is what Art's calibration recommended for cinema mode.

I watched Contagion last night with the wife and I really got to see the strengths of the Epson. A lot of shifts from dark to bright scenes, a lot of scenes with shadow details, and some overall beautiful color shots thrown in of the city.

Zombie - How is the convergence on your unit? Mine is about 2 red pixels shifted to the left and after using the pixel alignment tool I got it down to none on the left side of the screen and the bottom right is about 1 1/2 off still. Epson is sending me a replacement sometime next week hopefully.
post #518 of 3271
I'm not questioning Zombie's measurements, relax guys, I'm just trying to figure out the discrepancy or if there is a reason or rhyme (we know pre-production is one reason). Pre-production variances are rarely more than 10% to 15% though. Now I'll need to go get some more data for the calculator.
post #519 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Anyhow this is the largest variance I've seen, so I'll have to go do some acquisition work on the numbers now for the Epson, as something could be wrong with my numbers (and 4 reviewers numbers as well).

post #520 of 3271
Hey Zombie, what is the position of the projector's throw when the measurement was taken, about mid-zoom?
post #521 of 3271
Zombie,

Keep up the good work, I'm closely following you measurements and comments on these units. What a great service you provide for those of us who can't make side by side comparisons of these units and are in the process of buying the best possible unit within our budget.

An excellent job.
post #522 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Epson set the price. Everybody discounts them the same.

Thanks!
post #523 of 3271
This thread proves Zombies never sleep... note the postings up to 5:53AM EST. That is simply GOOLISH!

I wish there was a remote controllable webcam setup in Jason's "lab".
post #524 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmalto View Post

Zombie - How is the convergence on your unit? Mine is about 2 red pixels shifted to the left and after using the pixel alignment tool I got it down to none on the left side of the screen and the bottom right is about 1 1/2 off still. Epson is sending me a replacement sometime next week hopefully.

I have to look closer, red is off a bit on the lower right, but it's not that bad.


Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara View Post

Zombie,

Keep up the good work, I'm closely following you measurements and comments on these units. What a great service you provide for those of us who can't make side by side comparisons of these units and are in the process of buying the best possible unit within our budget.

An excellent job.

thanks! I am mostly surprised by the lumen output in 3D mode. I watched countless hours of 3D movie scenes last night, including DM which is tough on ghosting. The 5010 performs well with this movie and the brightness/colors/contrast is a strong combo.

Fade to blacks are nice, the overall black level uniformity is very good on this projector. Now that it's calibrated, I have to go back and do some A/B/C of 2D content on the HW30, 5010 and the RS55.

coder - the Epson is ~17' from the 142" 16:9. The readings were taking with the same meters (usually settle on the AEMC CA813) as the RS45, HW30, etc which were consistent with other tests from various reviewers. I am not really interested in figuring out discrepancies between copies of a specific projector. There were RS50's that were 100-200 lumens brighter than the best I could get out of my particular RS50, regardless of which lamp JVC sent me.

regarding 3D brightness - almost 2000 lumens in 3D mode is going to be a big deal for some people. It's twice as bright as my measurements on the RS45, benQ W7000 and Sony HW30 and it scorches my big 2.8 HP screen. No one sitting in my HT with these Epson glasses on is going to think 3D is dim, that's for sure.
post #525 of 3271
After spending quite awhile doing A/B comparisons of Art's static screenshots it will be interesting to hear your subjective take. The screenshots seem to show the 5010 has a definite sharper image detail on for example The Fifth Element starship.

Looking forward to hearing your feedback on how smooth the 5010 looks in panning shots both in 2D w/FI and 3D without (N/A) and also regarding any levels of flicker.

Wanna see those great 3D shots you are able to capture so well!
post #526 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 4 View Post

Zombie can attest that I am a fairly astute evaluator of projectors and can nail things about projectors after only a short observation period. That said, I am not bothered by rainbows from DLP. judder, motion blur, and most ghosting.

I thought the ghosting on this years JVCs was quite different than last years which bothered me. This year I really enjoyed the 3D on the JVCs but clearly the screen shots of the torture tests do show more ghosting that some of the LCD competition.

Zombie will attest that I nailed the benefits of theJVC 4K e shift from my Cedia observations when some others refused to acknowledge that the picture was improved or could be improved by the e shift when viewing from normal viewing distances.

I have given the why it does considerable thought given that the image is less sharp due the scaling and pixel overlap BUT looks mopre sharp to the eye at normal distances. My thesis is that the pixel overlap results in additional shades of contrast between the original pixels. Let's suppose that two adjacent pixels have a contrast differential of one. The pixel overlap creates additional pixels comprised of the overlaps. I think the scaling algs used by JVC for its 4K e shift actually present contrasts between the two. So your eyes see shades not there before, sort of a pixel ramp between the two. I am simplifying because there are multiple opverlaps in the creation of 4 million plus pixels when only 4 million plus are actually being flashed. MTF, a measure of sharpness, is how much contrast can be resolved. Since more contrast steps are being flashed and casn be seen, the MTF is actually increased and presents as greater sharpness to the eyes while by line pair standards the image may be less sharp. I am just postulating, I am no expert here but the net result is a more sharp, better image to ones eyes. The spaces that would otherwise be betwen 1080p pixels are now completely filled in, obscuring of course the 1080p pixel grid flashed nby the two different 1080p frames being flashed. Thus, the fact that the lens can't resolve a grid in 4K shift doesn't mean a thing, there are no longer spaces between the pixels to observe as a grid due to the overlap. The image is more solid because of the fill in of the spaces where there was no fill before, and is easier on the eyes. The lens can resolve the real pixels and the pixels created by the overlap. It can resolve the 8 million plus so the lens is a fine one in that regard and is doing its job with respect to the higher resolution being created. Just my thoughts and of course my explanation as to perceived increased sharpness may be dead wrong.

In my opinion the 4K scaling is primary used to reduce 3D ghosting (which you acknowledge), as separate pixels do not drastically change their value and work at only half the speed.
Sony is doing it too but at 2-3x prices. It should also improve the 3D motion resolution with judicious use of frame interpolation.
I will grant that a clever engineer could use twice the pixels to offer a slightly refined motion resolution, but at the expense of considerably more processing power. All this is to compensate for the relatively slow liquid crystal transient response.

This is why we see several 8-25K LCoS projectors. One has to ask: Is this technology cost effective compared to the decreasing prices of the competition?
post #527 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiFun View Post

In my opinion the 4K scaling is primary used to reduce 3D ghosting (which you acknowledge), as separate pixels do not drastically change their value and work at only half the speed.
Sony is doing it too but at 2-3x prices. It should also improve the 3D motion resolution with judicious use of frame interpolation.
I will grant that a clever engineer could use twice the pixels to offer a slightly refined motion resolution, but at the expense of considerably more processing power. All this is to compensate for the relatively slow liquid crystal transient response.

This is why we see several 8-25K LCoS projectors. One has to ask: Is this technology cost effective compared to the decreasing prices of the competition?

Not sure why this discussion is within this thread, but as it is...

That 4k description from Mark sounds so similar to the DRC (digital reality creation) that was on my old Sony hi-scan rear projection TV from circa 2000. DRC blended what would have otherwise shown as course graininess, into a very smooth picture much like LCD but not as clear as Plasma. The DRC was one of the primary features that caused me to love the picture quality so much and it looked great even when viewed within a few feet unlike most rear proj TVs at the time.

I may be noob, but I question WTF does digital resolution enhancement have to do with 1) 3D ghosting which is due to refresh overlap btwn L/R images, and 2) with frame insertion (FI) which simply reduces judder??
post #528 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

coder - the Epson is ~17' from the 142" 16:9. The readings were taking with the same meters (usually settle on the AEMC CA813) as the RS45, HW30, etc which were consistent with other tests from various reviewers. I am not really interested in figuring out discrepancies between copies of a specific projector. There were RS50's that were 100-200 lumens brighter than the best I could get out of my particular RS50, regardless of which lamp JVC sent me.

Thank you for the info. It is my mistake, the Zoom range on the Epson is so huge and I forgot. You're actually at 1.88x zoom, that makes the modifier in my calculator about +15%.

700 * 1.15 = 805

Your measured numbers are actually ballpark to the calculator. Zombie's measurements are the first I've seen on a later model / production. I did see the 5010 but I didn't get to measure it. Based on Zombie's numbers, I will be weighting his more because so far his numbers have all come out very close on the other projectors to my calculator.

So I think the baseline for the Epson at mid-zoom is going to now become 750 lumens instead of 700. So the calculator's baseline was only off a bit less than 8%, so not a huge deal, but that is within the variance I expect, so all good news. Zombie, I am sorry if I offended you earlier, I really do apologize. I am just trying to ensure the calculator has semi-accurate numbers. I was just tired and not thinking about the baseline and modifier.
post #529 of 3271
I seem to recall reading about lamp issues with the last crop(s) of Epson projectors, I think the 8700UB. If that's true is it known if the lamps in the 5010/6010 are a different design re: worrying about lamp issues? Also, any reports of dust blobs with the 5010/6010?
post #530 of 3271
Zombie:

Based on your review of the 5010, I'm going to order one tomorrow afternoon. I had decided to pass on 3D this year, but with the 5010's 2D being more or less an 8700UB (which I like), and with the price difference being only $700 more - I'll give it a shot. Note that to date, I've returned a W7000 and a X30.

You've reviewed most of the new 'affordable' 3D models, and your setup is the same as mine (shelf mounted, with a 17'-18' throw, and a 2.8 HP). The only difference in our setups is you have a 142" HP, while I have a 159" HP (mine is bigger than yours).

So, I should get the same PQ in my HT (apples and apples). Thanks for your time and effort.

Hopefully, there will be some 'good' 3D movies this year.
post #531 of 3271
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkhunter View Post

Zombie:

Based on your review of the 5010, I'm going to order one tomorrow afternoon. I had decided to pass on 3D this year, but with the 5010's 2D being more or less an 8700UB (which I like), and with the price difference being only $700 more - I'll give it a shot. Note that to date, I've returned a W7000 and a X30.

You've reviewed most of the new 'affordable' 3D models, and your setup is the same as mine (shelf mounted, with a 17'-18' throw, and a 2.8 HP). The only difference in our setups is you have a 142" HP, while I have a 159" HP (mine is bigger than yours).

So, I should get the same PQ in my HT (apples and apples). Thanks for your time and effort.

Hopefully, there will be some 'good' 3D movies this year.

no problem, hopefully you will like the 3D as much as I do. It would have been nice to have the FI, but it's not a deal breaker since there is a good mix of brightness, color and contrast in 3D mode.

I had to triple check the lux measurements when in 3D mode just to make sure, but just by the eye alone, you can see a significant increase over the 2D mode. The fan is a little noisy in this mode, but I do have the projector sitting 5" near my head.
post #532 of 3271
Zombie. Does the JVC 4K e shift work in 3D? I thought I remember JVC saying it didn't. Sorry for being OT. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.
post #533 of 3271
Thread Starter 
negative, the e-shift is disabled in 3D mode.

My favorite part of this projector so far is the 3D torch mode.. I can see the smoke coming off the HP screen.
post #534 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

no problem, hopefully you will like the 3D as much as I do. It would have been nice to have the FI, but it's not a deal breaker since there is a good mix of brightness, color and contrast in 3D mode.

I had to triple check the lux measurements when in 3D mode just to make sure, but just by the eye alone, you can see a significant increase over the 2D mode. The fan is a little noisy in this mode, but I do have the projector sitting 5" near my head.

Hey Jason, you are usually very acute in your observations about flicker and judder, emphasizing FI in 3D as a very nice (and to some necessary) feature to have in reducing or eliminating judder. What is it about the brightness, color and contrast of the 5010 that is discounting those other attributes as non-factors?

Any opinion about 2D-3D conversion? Other HW30 users reported it actually looks pretty good on those units, which seems to be one of the few that may do it well enough to warrant using it occasionally.

How is the update of the OP coming along. Got an ETA for prelims?
post #535 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolplazma View Post

I may be noob, but I question WTF does digital resolution enhancement have to do with 1) 3D ghosting which is due to refresh overlap btwn L/R images, and 2) with frame insertion (FI) which simply reduces judder??

Take the high contrast 3D tree scene posted earlier from the Grand Canyon disc. The left side pixel shows the bright sky, the right side show the dark tree bark. With a 2K panel the same pixel must rapidly switch between these two states.
With a 4K panels there is now luxury of separate pixels for the left and right. The left pixel gets to "stay" being a bright sky, the right gets to stay being dark tree bark. For static scenes the pixels exhibit ideal behavior. Ghosting is now drastically reduced to the synchronization of the projector emitter and the glasses receiver pair and contrast range of the LCD shutter glasses. For motion there is still the potential for transient artifacts along the edges.
The higher refresh rate, the less flicker.
post #536 of 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiFun View Post

In my opinion the 4K scaling is primary used to reduce 3D ghosting (which you acknowledge), as separate pixels do not drastically change their value and work at only half the speed.
Sony is doing it too but at 2-3x prices. It should also improve the 3D motion resolution with judicious use of frame interpolation.
I will grant that a clever engineer could use twice the pixels to offer a slightly refined motion resolution, but at the expense of considerably more processing power. All this is to compensate for the relatively slow liquid crystal transient response.

This is why we see several 8-25K LCoS projectors. One has to ask: Is this technology cost effective compared to the decreasing prices of the competition?



The 4K e shift is disabled in 3D for the JVC RS55/65 in 3D. So at least your thesis is incorrect for the JVC. I think for the JVC, the 4K e-shift allows more varying contrast and color points to be presented, not of course by expanding the gamut but by allowing more points within the continuum of the standard to be displayed, such points being scaled to very close to what they would be if they were original source pixels.

I think there are varying contributors to ghosting and one being the lag time of a pixel at a severe transition contrast point. Adding an extra pixel would I think still present the same issue but the transition cross would be smaller, sort of decreasing the width of the ghost at the transition point.

But I would think this component of ghosting would be very minor and often swamped by the much wider ghosts often seen on LCD projectors caused not by the switching of a border pixel but by the shutter lens of the glasses being open when the wrong eye image was still present or partially present on the screen.

Just my thoughts. What do you think?
post #537 of 3271
Here is a translated German site on 3D, ghosting and test patterns:
http://translate.googleusercontent.c...TJDvfofEvjFI3g
post #538 of 3271
I don't see how 4k pixels helps with crosstalk. The theory mentioned above is that half the pixels are showing the left image and the other half the right image. But what stops each lens of the glasses seeing all 4k pixels? You would have to polarise half the pixels vertically and the other half horizontally.

In the case of the JVC this point is not relevant, not just because the 4k e-shift is disabled in 3D, but there are in fact only 2k pixels. The other 2k comes from optical trickery and not actual different pixels.
post #539 of 3271
I am still thinking about the Panny ae7000. Most of the lumens of the Epson plus low lag and FI and DI in 3D. I know different things bug different people, but screen door is my biggest problem. Smoothscreen is amazing for that. I sit 7' from my 120" screen. I really want the max 3D brightness though, so I may go with the Epson. Plus they should be rewarded for their excellent warranty.
post #540 of 3271
why are 4K projector discussions and projectors other than RS45/HW30/5010/W7000 being posted here??
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