4K Sony VW 1000 first short Test - Page 25

Hi everybody,

i have the Sony now for about 2 Months already and i am very very satisfied with it .
Wonderful colours, good Brightness and the 4k Up scaling is a great benefit for me.
Great projector and it is absolutely worth its price to my opinion.

Now I want to purchase a HTPC for my Sony.

Does anyone have experience with the ATI Radeon 7970 and the Sony 1000 and AV Receivers or Pres?
I have the Denon AVP A1 HD with the 3d upgrade and wonder if I can put the (4k 24p) Signal from the PC through the Denon to the Sony? Is that possible?

Otherwise, if I use the DVI Port to get the 4k signal directly to the Sony and the HDMI Signal (for Sound) to the Denon (is that possible?) does a “better” soundcard for the PC make any sense?
The Ati Radeon “Supports AC-3, AAC, Dolby TrueHD and DTS Master Audio formatsHD Master Audio etc.”

Sorry for my bad school English.
I hope anyone can help me .

Greetz Hasenpfote

Don't try 4K pass through with the Integra 80.3. I just upgraded and found out the hard way. I'd been waiting to receive one to swap out with my 80.2. Anything existing that is 3D compatible like the Denon will Id say without hesitation be in the same boat as the 80.2 Integra. At this stage I don't know any pre/pros or receivers that will properly pass through 4K. I posted about my situ only just a few days ago in the other VW1000 thread and also the 80.3 owners thread. I went for a Radeon 7950 instead of all the way to 7970. The 4K desktop does look pretty direct into the VW1000 the few times I've the tried it. Your solution via DVI could work as long as I use an output adapter to hdmi direct to the proj. Then the sound via the cards HDMI should work. I can't say I've ever tried to output that way from a GFX card though to be certain both outputs paths would be always active to make it work. You'd also be stuck with needing to switch between both VW1000 HDMI inputs and have a sep run of cable. Something I would not be doing in my setup as its just to hard too run a another HDMI to the proj.

You would think there would be more choices for a SSP which would pass 3D and 4K. I think the ADA Mach 4 would work but with no on screen display and very expensive.

I'm just bypassing my D2 for video using a Pany 310. The picture is better not going through my D2 processor. I do miss my onscreen display from the D2.

Same here - Missing my D2 OSD.

Hi to all,

@ OzHDHT,

thank you for your answer . I dont want to give my Denon away in this moment, so i think i have to use 2 HDMI connections for the sony and its HDMI inputs.

My Dealer has a PC with the Ati 7970. He will try next week, if both connections, the DVI - ATI directly to the Sony (4K Picture), and HDMI - ATI (for Sound) to a reciever (or Pre) work at the same time.
He wonders in this moment if the reciever limits the solution of the picture (DVI) to FULL HD .

Greetz
Hasenpfote

Could not agree more, its a god sign when a company get out to end user´s ( not that you are a complete "normal" user - meaning in a god way Wolfgang ) and listening to some constructive feedback and see a real home cinema.

Now that´s not, something we see everyday from a company ( not even Sony ) so Hr. Mayer, you must have impressed more people, than just us dedicated in here

dj

Dream team for a dream theatre.
Fantastic stuff and very inspiring....
Congratulation to Hr. Mayer.

I run drooling all over when I'm thinking at this projector VPL-VW1000ES,how cool will look in my home theatre,but is way over my budget.My current one is 95ES.
You, lucky owners....

Just calibrated a VW1000 and an RS55 last week.

Both were mounted in the rear of their throws. The RS55 was almost as far from the screen as it could be and still focus the image. The VW1000 was mounted 20-25 feet from a 110"D screen. I didn't measure the exact distance. Someone else did that install. Auto-Iris was off. Measurements were taken with both PJs in High Lamp and with Irises open fully. Both calibrated to D65 with White set at the brightest setting possible and yet still be at D65. Black set at extinguishment. (The blackest black each PJ can make and still have a 1 IRE step be visible.

RS55: 682 lumens; on/off CR - 31K:1; 3D measured thru the glasses was 1/6th as bright as 2D; 3D required a very different calibration compared to 2D. On the 105"D ST130 screen, 2D was 27.4 fL and 3D was 4.42fL

VW1000: 933.6 lumens; on/off CR - 9K:1; On the 110"D ST130 2d was 34fL; I didn't measure 3D thru the glasses, but it obviously caused a huge reduction in brightness; 3D required a significantly different calibration from 2D; I would estimate that 3D was somewhere between 1/4 and 1/6 as bright as 2D

Impressions:

Both PJs threw beautiful images; the vw1000 was visibly brighter, especially in 3D even though it was on the larger screen. They both looked very sharp and detailed, the VW1000 maybe just a bit more so.

Though I've seen a fair sampling of 3D displays, these were the first that I have actually measured in 3D. The hit in lumens output coincides with my subjective impression. It is huge. I have read repeatedly that 3D cuts the light output in half and I have repeated that common wisdom myself. However, the reality seems to be much worse. Keep in mind that both PJs were new and are as bright as they are ever going to be.

With the RS55, I had to use a gamma of 1.8. A gamma of 2.2 yielded low IRE scenes that were just too dim to make the shadow detail acceptably visible, even with a new lamp. 3D is not going to hold up well as the lamp ages and dims. 3D on the VW1000 seemed subjectively brighter than on the RS55 (I wish I had measured it, now.) I expect it to remain acceptably bright longer than the RS55, but I don't expect it to remain acceptably bright for anywhere near the life of the bulb. Time will tell.

I think that both of these PJs are in the same picture quality league. Personnaly, if both PJs were the same price, I would take the VW1000 over the RS55 without reservation. However, the RS55 lists for 1/3 the price and is clearly the much better value.

Using the Sony at long throw is a terrible "value". It loses almost half its brightness, which is a good part of the reason its more expensive...but it doesn't gain much native contrast dong that. So never worth it. Yes the pic is awesome anyway. But I would not buy it at 20k for 1000 lumens.

The brightness hit for 3D with any projector, assuming calibrated d65, is about 85%. Of course it doesn't look 85% dimmer to your eyes, it will look a little over half as bright because you have to decrease brightness by 75% to make it look half as bright. I have other comments but you need to call me for those.

Let me ask you this...do you really need a car? Sell it and get a projector...

That's what I did. I still have a car, but its about 32k cheaper!

Woftgang,

Great Job!, Did you tell them we need more lumen in the projector? Please tell them we want 3000-5000 lumen on the next generation. thanks

On a side note, does 3D works with external isco lens on? thanks

Sean

So I pulled the trigger on one of these units today... seemed like the right PJ for my set up to replace my aging 3 chip DLP. I'll be getting it in next week and hopfully have the unit mounted by next Friday.
However I still have one outstanding issue... I was hoping someone could point me in the right direction for a mount? There was mention earlier of using a chief mount with Sony plates but no one has mentioned the model numbers etc...? Any have that info please?

Thanks
Calvin

Wolfgang - hi, have you published the lumen output in 3D mode or ft-L through the glasses? Home Theater Magazine here in the US recently stated that their production VW1000 was only putting out 2.1 ft-L in 3D mode (through the glasses), compared to the X70 @ ~2.0 ft-L and the VW95 at 2.4 ft-L. That seems odd given the difference in light output in 2D mode.

Thanks for any info on this topic.

wolfgang..maybe you can give us your settings for the brightest, accurate picture you have found for your situation.. thanks

Thanks Wolfgang, this is very helpful, for a non-calibrated projector would you say that cinema 1 is producing the best results?


Can you say a bit more about this? I don't have my VW-1000 yet so maybe it will be more clear when it's here, you mean that in 2.35 zoom the projector is cropping the black bars and using the full matrix for the cinemascope, much like what the v-stretch does and the horizontal stretch is done my the anamorphic lens, or I'm wrong?

Thanks

When using the 2.35 zoom the projector uses the full panel for the 16:9 image and instead of the 1.78 ratio you get a 1.88 ratio picture. To fit the 1.88 picture to the screen the top and bottom of a 16:9 image has to be cropped.

Hi Wolfgang, I just want to ask a few questions re your rec settings on a smaller screen size and tuning for best contrast, as opposed to max lumens and larger screen sizes. On my current 110", soon to be 123" ST130, I am running low lamp, auto limited, contrast 90, in cinema 1. Prob similar to what Mark's still running. I was watching Game of Thrones last night with a lot of darker scenes, so contrast levels were really noticeable. Also, apart from already using 2.35:1 zoom with content that matches up particularly film based, I have also set up 1.85:1 zoom. Isn't the 1.85:1 zoom also using the full panel with slightly less blanking? Apart from concentrating lumens, is that mode fairly ideal for utilising the full resolution of the panel with 16:9 based content? I'm just trying to ensure I'm best utilising the VW1000 for my particular screen size, which as mentioned is currently at the smaller end of the spectrum.

Yes, I hear you Wolgang. I noticed that with pure TV content in true 16:9, like many HBO shows for example, the 1.85 is def less line drop as should be logically be the case.

I thought your advice would be as you suggested regarding the smaller screen- I will put aside the other zoom options, particular if there is no resolutional gain to be had in those modes, only extra lumens. Do you have any specific advice though as I mentioned on absolutely contrast optimised setting? I think I am pretty much there in terms of my settings on my screen size, but I figure you're the guy who has the most know-how on this.

When using the 2.35:1 zoom to watch a 16:9 program the picture is not actually brighter, it is larger. There are more lumens to the screen but the lumens per unit area of the screen is the same.

I always use 2.35:1 zoom for 16x9 (and of course, 2.35) material. My screen is 72"H and 144"W, so with a 16x9 pic it is 128"W, but with 17x9 (as it is with 2.35 zoom) it is 136"W. I thus get 8" more in width. True, this looses a couple of inches from the 16x9 pic, but this is not noticeable. (For 2.35 sources I zoom to fill the 144" width, having a pic ~ 61"H; I lens shift this to the bottom of the screen and have all the 'black bar' at the top, where it is hardly noticeable.)

some 4k samples : forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=155857&page=2#31