need advice on Runco LS-7

If just worrying about 2D quality in movies, a newer JVC would beat it IMHO.
Either a JVC RS-45 or RS-55.

The RS-40 B-stock from this forum are under $2000 and that is the best buy if you are trying to save money. Next step up is an RS-55. The RS-45 has the same PQ as the RS-40, except the RS-45 has the CIH lens memory to support 2.35 screens without an A-LENS. The picture quality is the same.

DLA-RS40, DLA-RS45, DLA-RS55

It is hard to find them on the JVC site sort of.

Have you seen the LS-7 in action? I have..........it's a light cannon and will outperform the JV models by a long shot if light output is needed........

Seating distance will also make a huge difference...........pixel structure on the LS-7 would be problematic sitting less than 13 feet.

It's all about application..............in a big room on a big screen, the LS-7 would be a better choice than fore-mentioned JVC models.

Unless he is putting in a giant screen and needs a huge amount of brightness, the JVCs will outperform the Runco any day. And pixel structure has little to do with the difference between 720p and 1080p these days. Even if you can't see the pixel structure of a 720p display at your seating distance, scaling and the artifacts associated with it will hurt the image resulting in a softer picture with artifacts. I would stick with a 1080p display regardless of what the dealer told you. And if you're looking in the $7K and under market, there are a lot better options.

I agree and disagree.

I would not buy it only because it is 720p. That being said it is a light cannon, the picture is clear and sharper than any JVC, and brighter. For sports or gaming go DLP. Movies you can do D-ILA or LCOS (JVC or Sony)
I would get the LS-5 or 3 if you do not have any issues with rainbowing (RBE) from a single chip machine. The color wheel is still very fast 6 X and should not be an issue for most people.

If you are not doing any gaming or sports go with the JVC, but I would go with the newer 45, 55, 65 as they have a working CMS to correct for color issues... there were issues with the CMS on the 40( does it have CMS), 50, 60.

my 2 cents.

If you have more Runco questions you can PM me. I have seen almost every Runco in person and can provide comparisons.

It is true that the DLP may look better motion-wise in sports, but that is not a good reason to pay that kind of money for a 720p projector even if using for Sports, and since he is more movies than sports, then the CMD3 mode on the JVC is reasonably ok for Sports (or look at the Sony hw30), and the difference isn't usually a deal breaker. I'd say if concerned, get a secondary cheaper 1080p DLP like a Mits hc4000 to pair with the JVC, because the image is close enough to the Runco in Sports/bright scenes motion (no reason to waste the money). Either that or a Benq w1200 (with it's 120hz FI and DLP motion), except the w1200 is a loser in gaming. The Runco's advantage is it does many things well and has a super sharp image and much better contrast for movies over lesser DLP's, but in most cases a 2 projector setup easily beats it overall for less money. However, if buying a JVC and a secondary DLP, the contrast issue is null and void since it has almost no effect to Sports. IF a person is RBE-sensitive, either an Optoma hd33 or a Viewsonic Pro8200 paired with the JVC is the best bet.

For 2d movies, you are hard-pressed to beat the image of the JVC, and I've seen most of the projectors (including commerical 4K Sony Projectors that cost $100,000).
For gaming, I would recommend a 2nd cheaper projector, not a Runco DLP, the operating cost is a waste of money IMHO for gaming. Gamers tend to run projectors into the ground.

FYI one correction:
The DLA-RS45 does not have a full 6-point CMS, you need an RS-55 or RS-65 for that functionality. For most people, the color on the RS-45 is good enough after a grayscale calibration, but in some yellow scenes it can be a tad over-pushed (it's not a big deal, I'm just obsessive).

Coder Thanks I ment to have the 45 as no CMS as the older model.

I would disagree on the PQ of the HC-4000 though. A good friend of mine has one and compared to my Q and even an LS-5, 3, 1 the PQ is much lower... not bad, but a lot of background noise that I do not see on the LS series or the Q. Otherwise I agree with recommendations.

A normal working hc4000 does not have any background noise that I have ever seen, but never compared it to a Runco. I had a Mits hc4000 side-by-side against many projectors in shootouts when I owned it for 500 hours, and it was the cleanest. The Mits is cleaner than the other 10 projectors I've owned (including the JVC and Epsons). Krane noticed the same thing in his review of it as well, he said it was near reference level for noise and motion. That is why sometimes reviewers cite the hc4000 as a videophile like quality to the image. On a cable signal especially, the hc4000 was ahead of the other PJ's I've tested/owned in the sense of clarity and lack of noise.

Sure it has its weakness, but maintaining a clean signal and motion is not one of them (except it has no FI or much processing), and on an even "no-processing playing field" it was the cleanest I saw. The w1200 actually has a bit more noise than the hc4000 (although they are close enough to not matter for the most part).

I agree about the JVC sharpness, of course not everyone gets lucky on the first try and gets one as sharp as some of us did (but judging from reviews and people in the RS-45 thread, most do get a sharp one).

I recently saw a Benq w6000 and w1200, and used to own the hc4000, and my well-converged JVC is close enough in sharpness to these to be a non-issue. DLP fans don't believe me when I say this (they say but DLP is sharper). I am a sharpness junkie and for years was trying to find a NON-DLP sharp enough that I could live with (the JVC was the first one that did enough things well and was still sharp enough compared to a DLP).

I'd say the JVC is somewhere just below the Benq DLP's in sharpness, and sharper than most of the cheaper DLP's (at least when you factor in focus uniformity). That said, DLP has a lesser pixel fill and no convergence issue (but some have CA), but cheaper DLP's often have focus uniformity issues. I'm sure Runcos are sharper, but unless you're playing games with tiny text or sit less than 1x screen distance, it's too close to be an issue for most of us.

Maybe background noise is a bad way to describe it, but compared to my Q it was very different.... Yes I understand it is NOT a fair compare.

I still like the HC-4000 just not on the very top of my list. At the top for under $1250 though.

To be completely honest having owned an older JVC RS20 and now a Planar PD8150 (which is the same as the Runco LS-5) I would say that the two have a different look and feel to them. It obviously comes down to DLP versus LCOS. Black levels will be very comparable between the RS45 and the LS7 (or LS5, or LS3 as they have a fantastic dynamic iris).

As coderguy and Mike from AVS have said, sharpness on the new JVC models this year is nicer than what they were previously offering. But the Runco will look a tad sharper.

My best advice would be to see a JVC in person just so you know for yourself if you prefer the way LCOS looks compared to the Runco (DLP). I'm a huge DLP advocate as I prefer the way it looks over LCOS or LCD. Everyone is going to be giving you their 2 cents when all that matters is what you think. Go and see one, it's honestly the best way you're going to make up your mind.

I am not that familiar with Runco pricing, but I believe an even dollar for dollar comparison would be the RS-55 or even an RS-65 and a 1080p Runco. In that case the Runco will not be close in black levels given the light output, the RS-65 will easily blow past it. I have never seen a DLP with good black levels anywhere near the price of the RS-45 (maybe an Optoma hd8600, but the blacks aren't that close to the RS-45).

I'm not convinced the Runco is close to the JVC RS-45 in black levels when the RS-45 has the aperture fully closed at farthest throw, but I'd have to own a Runco for a little while to know for sure, so I guess I cannot say with certainty. I am sure though that the RS-55 and the RS-65 can clobber it to death in black levels, at least if someone is a black level fanatic where every last drop counts.

I really like the Runco Q750 which retails for much more than any JVC. However on the contrast/black levels it can't match the RS45 on its best day. So price has nothing to do with it. Colors and motion sharpness is where the Runco stands out. It's black levels and contrast are no better than the Infocus SP8602. It does have a more refined iris making the transition from darkness to light less noticeable. Colors are also very rich on the Runco.

If you could combine the attributes of the JVC and Runco. You'd have the best projector in the world IMO.

I've seen Runco's in showrooms, but I don't consider it a good test unless I own a projector or unless I really get to spend a lot of time with one at least. You have to very intensely calibrate a projector to compare black levels, and then you need them side-by-side. That said, if a projector is too far behind (like when I tested a Benq w6000 at Fry's), I can immediately know. When I saw the w6000, I knew the black levels weren't that good because it had no play in the calibration (I didn't even need to side-by-side it). The Runco's I've seen did not look much different (if any) to me in bright scenes than any other very sharp and good DLP. Perhaps the processing was a tad better, but on most Blurays processing hardly matters.

Personally I think the Runcos are over-priced for what you get, I'd rather just buy 3 middle-end projectors than a Runco, but maybe I would change my mind if I had one in my home (no idea).

For the OP, here is a very favorable review of the LS-7.

http://www.projectorreviews.com/runc...ls-7/index.php

The LS-10 (the 1080p versioin) won Outstanding Product of the Year for 2011 at projector reviews.

John

The Q-750 does Not have a physical IRIS.

It does dynamicly change contrast with settings, but no physical iris. I have not seen the 8602. I have seen an old SP (do not know the number; a friend had one) and the Runco contrast is much better as are the blacks. The Q ($15K) does retail for more than the JVC (12K), but can be had for about the same price and sometimes even less than an RS-65. I agree the black levels on the JVCs are better.

I thought it used some form of LED dimming tech, but wasn't sure. I think the blacks are great on the Runco as I did the SP8602. Both compete well against projectors like the Sony HW30 in contrast. Both have MUCH better contrast over the Benq w6000 or w7000. They just don't do JVC black levels. If a person didn't compare them. They may not find them lacking at all. Only in the darkest scenes will they come up short.

The fact the JVC can even be compared to a projector that costs 4x more tells you something, but as always DLP vs. LCOS each has their advantages.

I would buy a high-end Refurb DLP (like an Optoma hd8600) or a middle-end new DLP in addition to JVC RS-55 long before I'd buy a Runco. Sure the other DLP's aren't quite as good, but close enough and you get two projectors which cover the gamut of strengths and weaknesses.

I've seen an optoma hd8600. Image quality on a Runco dlp is much much higher. They just seem to do things a step or two higher on every aspect of an image overall. I'm a huge stickler when it comes to dynamic irises. The 8600 I saw had the newer firmware installed (I asked) and it was still very noticeable on just about every shift from light to dark and vice versa. Image sharpness was only mediocre for a single chip dlp and color was much better aswell. The Runcos come pre calibrated to d65 which is a nice perk to those less savvy on the calibration front.

The ls series will have better ANSI contrast compared to the rs45 and 55. The dynamic irises in these will also give you a very respectable on off measurement as well. The only time you're going to see a difference is on a shot like a star field or something similar. Other than that I think the Runco outpaces the JVCs in every way in terms of picture quality.

I just want to say that after owning a Runco (Planar) for almost a year now that you get what you pay for. If you want a projector with close to zero flaws go for the Runco especially if you have the money.

I was comparing retail as we are not supposed to talk about discounts. I do NOT know what an RS-65 goes for. I do know what a Q goes for from dealer and on the internet and you can get anywhere from 30-60% off on the Q depending where and when you purchased.

As you said they are very different and to say you want a middle of the road single chip DLP and compare it to top end JVC is not fair either.

Most people are not looking for two projectors. I would rather have one that does what I am looking for the best (motion, long lamp life, DLP etc)

I did not want to settle on a so so- DLP and a high end or midle end I-DLI or vs versa.

Everyone has to do what they believe is right for their situation.

Comparing means always taking price into account. Is a 50K or 80K projectors really 8 or tens times better than a 10K or 80 times better than a 1K ? Most would say no, but they are better, There are deminishing returns after a while... at least for most owners.

Well as one person that has tested the real benefit of dynamic IRIS's and other darkening technologies, I have found that at best the real world difference is maybe half of the measured on/off value unless you are going to just watch a pure black screen, and that is even only if you are measuring the IRIS near immediately and not waiting for it to catch up.

For instance, an IRIS that can be measured at 50,000:1 dynamic on/off isn't the same as a projector that can natively do it without an IRIS. Neither dynamic On/Off or ANSI are very inventive testing methods (Native On/Off is more important), but we really need to change the way we test projector contrast. We need some gradiated and more dynamic type tests if we really want to know how projectors perform.

Some would rather own one projector, but a 2-PJ setup is just better, maybe if you are hardcore on the aesthetics of the room I can understand it, otherwise it's fairly simple to get 2 PJ's mounted.

Wow.............if I could only find those values on an LS-12!