JVC RS 45 / Sony HW30 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5010 mini-shootout - Page 22

I just received my meter which UPS left in the cold rain on my doorstep (a big thank you goes out to UPS for soaking my meter). That was pretty sad, UPS leaving an expensive package in the rain WHILE it was raining.

Now I'm confused!! :-)

As I understood it, grey screens help with blacks and also minimise reflections back into the room where the decoration is less than ideal, e.g. white walls/ceilings.

It's not too late for me to back out of the purchase, but to be honest I don't think I want to. I've managed to negotiate a good deal for the screen - under US$1,000 for 110" tab tensioned, Screen Line electric screen with IR switch! I saw it last night in a light room with an Epson 3200 projecting (saw Batman Dark Knight, Toy Story 3, some live football (soccer for the US guys) on TV etc.) and was very impressed with the picture that this was giving in 2D and that's with an 1800 lumens PJ. I also noticed that there was very little reflected light from this screen on the side walls and ceiling (both of which were white), which i guess helps with perceived PQ. The 5010/TW9000 has 2200 lumens and having seen it project onto a 110" Draper ReactII grey screen (admittedly this was 1.2 gain) I was blown away by how good the Epson 5010 looks on a grey screen - it was almost plasma quality. The 3D on the Draper screen was also superb and even though the light to the eyes is considerably reduced, I found that the drop didn't really register too much and my brain/eyes quickly adjusted.

You say that the Epson can be operated in modes to overcome negative gain (supposedly Dynamic mode?) - are you saying that this will provide a similar picture to normal/Cinema mode if viewed on a 1.0 gain screen?

Apologies for taking this a little off track, but this thread has given me some fantastic advice and has virtually convinced me to purchase the TW9000/5010, I just need that final little push.

Is that 20,000:1 with the iris fully open? In which case its not all that different to the JVCs? As you know, the JVCs only achieve those higher numbers with their fixed aperture closed right down. 50,000:1 native on an X30/RS45 requires longest throw, smallest aperture. So I just want to make sure the right comparisons are being made.....

Good point. This is near long throw BTW I have to double check which configure that was with. I think with iris OFF it measures 15,000:1. With the dynamic iris on it measures 79,000:1. However I don't think there is that much more benefit from the auto iris because the black floor rises pretty fast as soon as there is any significant image on the screen.

TOE.. when you say the lens is manual ? I'm new to projectors ..so what does this effect ? Once set-up and dialed in do you need to do lots of adjustments. ?

For max contrast, on the 95 you can fix the iris to the smallest aperture size though? (assuming that its not so dim that it becomes unwatchable).

The "issue" is for people who use an anamorphic lens setup (see: http://shop.avscience.com/Anamorphic-Lenses_c_36.html) for 2:35:1 format screens. Although the 6010 (not 5010) supports anamorphic formats and trigger for motorized lens, it still does not have motorized lens focus, shift or memory... so everytime he changes from non-AL to AL usage, likely his shift will be off and the focus too - requiring a manual focus adjustment. Even with an external video processor to handle the format changes, the manual shift and focus on the 5010 would still be needed. There are other projectors available that can handle all these AL considerations in a more automated fashion.

Plasma_Novice: "any idea how the 5010 will perform on a grey screen with 0.8 gain? Room is very light (white ceiling, light walls, cream carpet) hence the grey screen."
- You are solving the wrong problem here. With that environment the best screen is a high gain screen. You want maximum brightness from the projector to override the rooms brightness. I went with a Vutec Silverstar high gain screen in my family room fully light by the bright Arizona sun. It made an astounding difference over my neutral screen I had before.

CoolPlazma - I don't think anyone does the anamorphic as well as Panasonic (in this price range), but it doesn't have powered lens shift. I think you need to spend a lot more to go there. Of course if you mount your projector right that shouldn't be necessary. The powered zoom and focus of the panny would work for you, with it's saveable presets.

^^^ not me, Toe, Sam, etc. But yes, the AE7000 would work for AL with its lens memory, digital shift, etc, except other points such as the lower brightness. If JVC had a stable product, we would stick with that I'm sure.

Doesn't a high gain screen kill blacks and contrast? As I said, I saw a 1.2 gain grey screen only last week with the Epson TW9000 and even with the lights on in the light demo room, it gave a PQ equivalent to plasma - really outstanding. I can only imagine that a gain of 4.5 or higher (going on VuTec gains) would really mess with whites, blacks and contrast - but that might just be my (very limited) understanding when it comes to screens!

Saw the 5010 again on content other than LOTR, was a bit more impressed this time. I am not going to comment on 3D, as that is Zombie's area of expertise, I did see it but have nothing much to say other than its better than the JVC in 3D as we already knew.

This time he had it hooked up to a video processor (not the lumagen but a cheaper one), but I didn't get to play with all the controls on the Epson or his VP (we had so little time again as he had to go to work soon). One thing is I think this projector will be matched up well going with a Lumagen for added noise reduction, I am betting it will help. Some Samsung Bluray players have some noise reduction filters, although they help some, but not by a huge amount.

Saw a few Game of Thrones scenes, blacks were handled very well just like the 8700ub does, but I favored the sharpness of the 5010 this time even more so. Also, the first episode of GOT (game of thrones), the snowy scene when they come out of the cave looked better on the 5010 than the 8700ub, so I could at least see some improvement here for sure. I saw a few more inherent differences to the 8700ub, first the D9 and pixel fill is helping some over the 8700ub in certain scenes, the SDE was a tiny tiny bit less apparent, but it was hard to judge at times unless you stand so close.

His convergence is better than most of the reports in here, his was only off maybe 0.7 to 0.9 total in the middle 1/3rd of the screen (divide screen by 3 parts and judge all colors), I didn't test the other sides (I really just didn't have time to note it all). It is important to make sure the projector is focused correctly for convergence, and make sure the projector is warmed up and the all controls are in neutral positions. Even with the convergence close enough to the JVC, my JVC is still sharper, but keep in mind that not only are most of the newer JVC's pretty sharp, I have one with near-perfect convergence, so that is probably why.

He works a lot of hours and lives semi-far away, so my time is still limited unless I swap it with him for the JVC.

It's so specific as to what will look better as to what you are watching. There were times I felt the Epson POPPED more but other times was flatter than the JVC too, we watched a few scenes from Hawaii: An Island Symphony (this disc heavily favors DLP and sharper projectors in general), the Epson did the best out of every LCD we've run this disc on, but it still couldn't match a DLP for this. I preferred the JVC on the disc overall, but at least a couple scenes on it favored the Epson. Overall I still favor the JVC, but the Epson has its own niche so to speak.

The Epson's real strength is complete blackouts where the Iris can slam shut, or when there is mostly neutral grays with the blacks. The Epson's slight weakness (only compared to the JVC) in blacks is when there are really a lot of mixed lighting in the black area but still mostly black (think space ship with headlights on), the IRIS on the Epson causes the scene to not look as dynamic as the JVC (whites are not as bright), but it still looks good.

I doubt most people would care about the difference in black levels compared to the JVC, a few would, to me the bigger thing with the JVC is the ability for the JVC to look better on reference level blurays like Tree of Life, other than that the Epson is pretty good. As good as the new Epson is, let me just add that I still would recommend if someone already owns the 8700ub to maybe go to a different tech just to have a new experience, but that depends how hard-core they are about 3D, as the Epson is good for that.

I am most interested to hear if some of the other members found the Epson to be a worthy replacement for the JVC.

The JVC produces a very consistent image, the Epson is more unforgiving and temperamental at times, although I think if consistency is what you are after, a DLP is probably the most consistent.

Contrast is the difference between black and white that you see. The problem is in a bright room your blacks are going to suck no matter what. The way to create better apparent contrast is to make the brights brighter, then the not so blacks look blacker in comparison. Just like those optical illusions with the different shaded squares. Vutec has a video showing the differences and it bears out in reality to me.

coderguy, will SDE be visible sitting 7' from a 120" screen? I hate SDE. I wonder if I can pry the smoothscreen filter out of my panny and put in the Epson.

Coder,

what was his screen & yours, plus which jvc model is yours?
details, details.

7' from 120", yah a little, depends on the scene, SDE is harder to spot in dark scenes, easiest to spot in clouds and sometimes snow.
He has the same screen I have, 120" HP, mine is only 106" HP though, I have other screens, one larger but I have yet to mount it.

We had all but 45 minutes to do these tests, but did the best we could. He likes the 3D, but for me I don't care as much about 3D as he does.

Isn't a smaller screen always going to yeild a sharper picture since the pixels are tighter/closer?

I sat at the same distance equivalent or really close.
The sharpness is not really an issue on the Epson IMHO as long as you get the convergence tuned in if it is off, or use the tool. The person that calibrated it may have used the tool, but I didn't go in there messing with it (he would probably get mad since he paid for a calibration, unless we had more time and wrote all the settings down).

Sharpness is harder to judge on LCD vs. LCOS, it's very tricky because of the pixel fill, we used the splashing water from the Hawaii bluray for judging it. Here the pixel fill doesn't make the water look better, it makes it more digital so it's easier to see if it's the real sharpness or the SDE sharpness. I didn't use my sharpness pattern, but we did compare multiple things. BTW, he used to own the Optoma hd33, but he only had it for one day so I never saw it, he immediately returned it because he said the black levels looked like a business projector at his throw distance.

If someone glanced at TV content, some might claim the Epson is sharper, but if you do the comparison right, the JVC is still a little sharper. That doesn't mean every JVC will be sharper than every Epson since there are convergence variances.

[quote=coderguy;
As good as the new Epson is, let me just add that I still would recommend if someone already owns the 8700ub to maybe go to a different tech just to have a new experience, but that depends how hard-core they are about 3D, as the Epson is good for that.
[/QUOTE]

Why do I get the feeling that this advice is like saying if you have had a relationship with a blond you might now want to try having one with a red head.

Me? Which do I prefer?

As James Bond once answered, I don't much care as long as the cuffs match the collar.

So the Epson looks it best when the screen is all black?

Signed,
Dazed N. Confused


PS. Thank you for the rather substantial release of Serotonin

True, but so is all advice when you think about it, heck some people even prefer 3D on the JVC for better blacks in 3D.

Well it's more to get the full experience of all the techs I suppose, but hey some people always buy the same car, always date blonds, but most of those guys are probably buying the Pannys.

The Epson's black level comparison was in reference to the JVC, we already know the Epson beats most non-JVC's, so I was just saying the Epson with its better uniformity did look better than the JVC on all black, but I didn't do an fL measurement, but his was calibrated to 17 fL or thereabouts, about the same as mine was. They are both around 14-16fL since we last checked.

I can't do a true black level comparison without a side-by-side, so take it for what it was, look to Art's upcoming review for more black comparisons.

A bit off topic here but I have a question that I REALLY need an answer to ASAP. I have a chance to pick up a forum members RS40 for $2,300 shipped. It has about 100 hours on the original lamp and comes with mount, emitter, and 2 pair of glasses. He says it has great convergence. I am currently using a JVC RS2 and love the black level but the convergence sucks and I want to watch 3d BD's. My next projector must have excellent convergence as I sit 1x screen width. I only have a max of lens to screen distance of a little over 11'. My 1.0 gain screen is 96" in width so I am limited as to what 3D projector will work for such a short throw. My small room has 100% light control. The ceiling and all walls are covered in black velvet and the carpet is black as well so it doesn't take much light on the screen to give a bright image. I tend to like a dimmer image thn most as I have light sensitive eyed. I currently use a .3 ND filter with my current projector

So, would it be crazy to buy that RS40 or should I go another route? Price is an issue of coarse.

Thanks,
Tom

Please post if you make the switch. I am also toying with the idea of the Epson. I figure with the pre-order price of the RS45 and with low hours I wouldn't be out much if I did decide to change. My biggest concern with the Epson is how much of a difference there is in black levels in 2D (that's one area I'm pretty picky in) vs the RS45 and how long fast bulb dimming will occur using Dynamic mode in 3D. If only the JVCs weren't haunted in 3D!!!


By this comment are you referring to more of an artifact free/cleaner image than the Epson?

Neither the JVC or Epson has artifacts in reference level blurays, the difference is the JVC's native contrast and better handling of natural lighting for whatever reason (partly due to no IRIS). The other difference is the pixel fill makes the JVC more film-like. This film-like attribute can in a few cases cause a softer look on poorer sources, but on reference level content a lot of these camera issues are non-existent.

I am more likely to use a reference level disc when I am limited on time, because it gives the best average of the differences of two projectors without issues in the source lying to your eyes.

Different lighting and types of noise will favor different projectors, DLP, LCD, LCOS, it just depends, it's so complex to try to highlight every difference. Remove these source issues and it becomes a different ball game. Even saying TV looks better on the Epson is way oversimplifying it IMO, as it really still depends.

From what others have said the RS40 is on par with the RS45. I have an RS2(FPJ1) and my RS45 is much sharper than my RS2 and my guess is that black levels are slightly better. I run my RS45 with a lens aperture of -15 and it's much brighter than my RS2 which has less than 600 hrs on the bulb. Not to mention I haven't noticed the RS45 blurring like the RS2 did on camera pans. I use CMD3 but even without CMD engaged motion is definitely better IMO. If that helps.

I agree, I am shocked some people found their JVC's to only be a little sharper than the RS1 or RS2, unit variances I guess. Man every time I turn on the JVC I am baffled by the sharpness. I am very sensitive to sharpness, that's why I returned or sold most of the projectors I previously owned (sharpness), but I didn't need to with the JVC. If the JVC was the same sharpness as the Epson I saw, I doubt I'd have returned either. Compared to the 8500ub, the convergence was better on the 5010, let's hope most are like that one I saw.

Hehee! The Broncos are kicking serious butt! The entire state and the surrounding midwestern states are all rooting for them, I think just about every city is rooting for them to win this weekend, except for New Englanders of course. I was surprised how many classy Steelers players and fans were wishing Tebow and the Broncos well, I guess they don't like New England either. Let me know if you want to come and watch the game at Cedar Peaks Saturday night, game starts at 6pm, just call me. I will have a couple of friends over for some pizza, wings and drinks.

GB2!!!

P.S: Hey isn't Haflich a Patriots or Baltimore fan?

I hear ya! Its been crazy since that win! Thanks for the invite! My Dad/step bro are supposed to come by for the game (it will be the first HD cable experience on the 45!) on Sat, but if that changes I will let you know (you are more than welcome to come by here as well if your plans change if you dont mind roughing it in my hole in the wall theater! ).

Sucks to be Mark if he is a Patriots fan..................... Sat is Tebow time!

I vote for sleeveless.

I am definitely not as picky with color when watching 3d for whatever reason as long as its not way out of whack.


When I say manual lens I am talking about focus, zoom and shift having to be adjusted by hand at the projector as opposed to a fully motorized lens which can be adjusted from the remote control. A motorized lens is really only important if using a CIH 2.35/37/40 type screen. If you are using a 1.78 screen, a manual lens is fine since you will simply set focus, zoom and shift and not have to touch this again (or rarely at least).