Predictions for 2013 4K projectors - Page 3

The term "affordable" is relative. For some $20K is affordable while for others the price would need to be below $5K to be affordable. IF JVC introduces a native 4K projector later this year I would not expect it to be priced below $15K and perhaps more like $20K. I would expect it to be priced to go head-to-head with Sony's 4K projector (VW1000 or its successor, if there is one that is announced at CEDIA). However, I would not be surprised, perhaps even expect, JVC to include a 4K input on their next generation of 4K-Lite projectors using e-shift. These next generation of eShift models will probably have prices similar to, or a little less than, this year's models. Perhaps JVC will include eshift with a 4K input on the replacement for the X30/RS45 and that could really get 4K-Lite down to an affordable price for most HT owners. I really expect that true, native 4K projectors to carry a premium price for the next year, or two.

As for a Red 4K projector with a laser light engine for $10K, I'm not really sold yet because:

1. Only an engineering model exists and I cannot get too excited until we see what the performance and price is for the final product.

2. It may suffer from both low contrast ratio and rainbow effect (RBE). Since Red appears to be using a single LCoS chip per engine (two engines for 3D) and the response time of LCoS technology is slow compared to DLP so even though a color wheel is not used, the speed at which the LCoS can realistically switch between displaying the red, blue and green image components will be limited and this could result in visible RBE. At least this is something to watch out for as the production version of the Red projector comes to market.
Edited by Ron Jones - 6/12/12 at 7:39am

Your absolutely right it is relative. To me, an "affordable" 4K projector would be $8K MSRP just like the RS55/X70. I agree that there is a low chance that will happen next year but will happen in possibly two or three years from now. A 4K input would be nice on their next-gen projectors. Even nicer would be adding e-shift to the RS45 replacement as you said! Only time will tell but I'm expecting good things from JVC as I am planning to finally get my first projector next year!

I plan to be at CEDIA for the JVC press conference. I haven't heard when or where yet, but last year it was at 8am Thurs. morning, just before the trade floor exhibits opened. I'll be blogging (at projectorreviews) a few times during that day and plan on setting up a one-on-one with the JVC reps to discuss their new projectors. By the way I was told at last year's Cedia by a JVC rep. that they were not able to get a 4K capable HDMI chipset in time to meet their final design/production schedule but perhaps the next year's model would support this.

At his point I'm not certain where we stand as for 4K and HDMI since the Blu-ray 4K standard, and probably a companion HDMI standard update, are not yet finalized. The currenly available HDMI standard and chipsets that do support 4K are limited 2D only at 24 Hz. and as a result will probably not be fully compatible with the Blu-ray 4K standard when it is finalized (probably in 2013). So even if a projector coming out in late 2012 does accept 4K input via HDMI, it would only be limited to 2D at 24Hz (as is this year's Sony VW1000). For the JVC eShift technology this might be a real limitation since these projectors cannot support 3D and 4K-lite at the same time (their LCoS chips simply have too slow a response time bo be able to do both), but for native 4K projectors capable of 3D, I first want to see what Blu-ray 4K has to offer (e.g., 4K at 48Hz, 4K with 3D, ?) and I'll then wait for a projector with the capability to support that new media.
Edited by Ron Jones - 6/12/12 at 9:16am

That's awesome. I'll definitely be looking forward to reading your blog this September. My excitement has been steadily growing as we come closer to CEDIA. JVC will most likely have a new design for their projectors and I'm interested to see what they come up with as well as picture improvements of course.

Since they fix definitely the bulbs issue that seems to persist ( It was demonstraded in this site), it wil be a great thing. I have a MICO 50 pj, but stil hold my RS 25. It's aged 750 hours original with a spare lamp I bought. When you live in Brazil and other countries of South America, having a bulb trouble can be very complicated and expensive. You take at least 2 months to get another at a very high price, considering import taxes and other costs. By the way, I had no trouble with shorter spare life bulbs with my RS 25.

Still 60% import Duty on electronics in Brasil Waltie?

I hear pricing is getting better. CDs and so on have the advantage that there are no additional charges for public performance/display, according to a young DJ there I know.

I was really hoping for more wireless features and more quiet projectors but also firmly agree to do away with all the non sense that is required to get it on the ceiling. Time for a change as that is a huge pain an really looks horrible. They are making them look nicer so why have to hang them on the ceiling , make them all lens shift and focus on those aspects, and 4k can wait a few more months. Anyone else agree they might be heading in the wrong direction. and i am really begging to wish APPLE would make a Projector. What do you think.

There are many projectors which can be positioned at a height of screen center and perform best at that location. Projectors that have vertical offsets can be used above or below the screen and most projectors can operate within the screen and above or below it. A few cheap projectors are required to be mounted above and below the screen and these are generally DLP which color wheels and cheap lenses, not the latest and greatest DLP chip, and the mounting was chosenby the manufacturer to increase contrast when using a small lens. Lens shift also degrades a picture and the effects of lens shift can only be negated by using big ass expensive lenses. Once again ths depend on how critical one is. Oh yea. At least a few people out there prefer to mount their projector from the ceiling where people like you won't walk into it by mistake. Its not so much a question of protecting the person from injury. They do not want people to damage the projector or bump it so it needs to be adjusted in mounting and operating parameters. I am sure you understand this.

Here's my 2 cents for CEDIA or this year

RED - no show
JVC - 4k pro model, no consumer 4k. A new consumer model that is brighter, better on/off and eshift3
Sony - a VW95 that is brighter, better on/off and reality creation. I am doubtful a cheaper 4K model will arrive, maybe a bit of a price drop for the Vw1000 though
Sim2 - first consumer single chip 4k DLP projector for big $$
Runco - ditto
Digital projection - ditto again, fingers crossed a production version of their LED Titan
We already know what Optoma, Mitsubishi, Benq, Vivitek are planning from ISE

As others have said, brighter LED or consumer laser would be nice, not bothered about 3D
Edited by danieledmunds - 2/2/13 at 10:39am

Why on earth do you think Apple would make a projector? On top of that Apple is known for style not performance. If they were to bring something to market it would need to be an amazing product not something that just looks nice. The majority of Apple products are mediocre (some are complete ripoffs) when it comes to price to performance ratios. No, I don't want to see an Apple projector.

I would not buy anything Apple anways. Especially a projector

OK... Why the Apple hate?

I am not a huge fan of Apple either, but they make the best and most accurate portable displays.

I know this could turn into a flame war, but Apple is on the side of improving the visual space.

The push with much higher resolution displays, making sure colors are accurate, good shadow detail, I think we should be thanking Apple for looking out for the videophile.

I love the image quality of my iPad retina. It has significantly more pixels then 99% of the HDTV's with great color and shadow detail.

Anyone trying to get me a better picture in my home theater is on my side...

I'm a little pissed they helped kill off the audiophile, but at least for video they are working for a better future...

Apple entering the Projector space is a possibility.......iirc the have a patent for glasses free 3D projection.

Here it is: http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/369879/apple_wins_patent_3d_projector_needs_no_glasses/

Patent: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=7,843,449.PN.&OS=PN/7,843,449&RS=PN/7,843,449

Apple wins patent on 3D projector that needs no glasses

Apple's patent describes how to track viewers and reflect different images into left and right eyes off a rippled screen

Mikael Ricknäs (IDG News Service)
01 December, 2010 22:52

Apple has been awarded a U.S. patent for a display system that would allow multiple viewers to see a high-quality 3D image projected on a screen without the need for special glasses, regardless of where they are sitting.

Following the success of 3D films in movie theaters, home electronics manufacturers are hoping that 3D technology will entice consumers to buy new TV sets and Blu-ray players. But entertainment is far from the only field in which 3D can enhance the viewing experience: others include medical diagnostics, flight simulation, air traffic control, battlefield simulation, weather diagnostics, advertising and education, according to Apple's U.S. patent 7,843,449 for a 3D display system, awarded Tuesday.

Most 3D displays today require viewers to wear special glasses, hindering widespread acceptance because users generally do not like to wear equipment over their eyes, according to Apple. In addition, such approaches are impractical, and essentially unworkable, for displaying a 3D image to one or more casual passersby or to a group of collaborators.

Apple's patent describes using a special reflective screen with a rippled texture to create an autostereoscopic projection system, meaning one in which different images are projected to each eye without the need for special glasses. The system tracks the viewer's eyes and calculates their position in space. It then projects each pixel of the stereoscopic images to a precise spot on one of the screen's ripples, reflecting it into one or other of the viewer's eyes. If Apple can do this for one pair eyes, it suggests, it can project multiple images to different points on the ripples for multiple users at the same time.

Apple isn't the only company working to get rid of the 3D-glasses. Toshiba demonstrated glasses-free TVs at the Ceatec electronics show in Japan, which will go on sale in late December, according to the company. Also, Nintendo's handheld 3DS will allow users to play 3D games without glasses. It will go on sale in Japan in February and in Europe, Australia and the U.S. in March. When and if Apple will turn its patent into real products remains to be seen.

It's simply because of the companys business model. Their patent trolling is disgusting. I will never buy anything apple, no matter what they come out with, I will never support them. I know there are more that feel the same than not.

if they made a projector that projects a 70in image, it would sell more than anything because its Apple. If would also be very expensive

JVC will have a consumer 4K at their top end, an eshfit 4K, and a non eshift 1080p.

Sony will have a cheaper price point 4K and/rt a laser projector
Edited by mark haflich - 2/3/13 at 8:14am

A JVC 4K machine would be quite the remarkable product. I just hope the their new chip does motion on par with Sony's LCOS chip. A 4K JVC projector with great motion, the native contrast of their 1080p counter parts, and with an MSRP less than Sony's 1000ES would be phenomenal.

Gee Mark...I hope you mean't E-Shift .......this would be a 1080 model with 4K inputs?

No. I'm sure he meant an real 4K machine. I think it's in bad taste that JVC coins their e-shift technology as a faux 4K. I also see you asking about 4K inputs in other posts. I don't see the point of putting an HDMI input on a 1080p JVC unit. If you fed it an upconverted 4K signal the projector would immediately downscale that back to 1080p for projection. It would be pointless to have that sort of input on a unit that is 1080p. Pointless especially considering there is no 4K standard or 4K content out there anyways.

This is sort of like 720p projectors and TVs accepting 1080p signals. They do this because there is 1080p content and a 1080p standard. They still downscale everything to the panels resolution for playback.

I understood he mean't a high end model with a native 4k panel, but additionally another model with e-shift, which I took as a 1080p native panel as current models with e-shift(ed) to '4k'. However I feel a 1080p native panel coupled with 4k inputs and e-shift will provide an excellent result with a native 4k source, as no upscaling will be required unless the source material is less than 4K and as per existing, each frame displayed in 2 flashes.

IE Current e shift models take a 1080p source upscale it to 4K and display the 4k upscaled image frame in two flashes, having 4k inputs and 4k sources would mean no scaling would be required, the 4k native frame would be displayed by the 1080p panel in two flashes. My guess would be that the end result would be quite close to a native 4k panel displaying the same native 4k source.
Edited by Highjinx - 2/2/13 at 4:22pm

Yes but it's still only going to be 1080p if that's the panels resolution. The e-shift doesn't actually add resolution to the image. The 4K image downscaled is still going to only be 1080p. Considering there is no 4K content out there it isn't worth it to JVC to spend any extra money on such an input or money on software needed to handle the higher resolution content. It would only make sense to put such an input on a 4K native machine so you can see the benefit of upscaled content and actual 4k content when some gets released.

What your suggesting is the audio equivalent of sending 5.1 audio to a receiver capable of accepting it when all you have is stereo speakers. That 5.1 gets downmixed and all you get is stereo audio. Or considering there is no 4K content yet a closer audio equivalent would be to upmix to 5.1 audio from a stereo source, send that to the same receiver as mentioned before. In the end you're going to end up with basically the same thing you started out with. Stereo sound. Such an input on a device when there is currently no content for it is redundant.
Edited by Seegs108 - 2/2/13 at 4:29pm

When the e-shift was announced last year, the 4K label caused a bunch of controversy. I agree the name can cause confusion to consumers but it's still a great stop-gap technology at this price point. They are clear in the description of the technology and it works very well. Especially on a large screen with the close seating distance.

It's more than making the pixel structure disappear, there is an increase in perceived contrast and detail in the image. Analog but sharp is a description often used to describe the effect.

4K Sony vs. JVC in the fall @ ~10K would be great, but true 4K sources will still be scarce based on what we're reading about today. Mark's recent postings about Sony are a little alarming.

There is definitely benefit from the technology. I especially like claims that it helps motion on JVC units. I don't have anything against e-shift other than its pseudo 4K marketing scheme. It confuses people.

The current JVC e-shift units take a 1080p signal up scale it to 4k and display the 4k frame in two flashes sort of an interlaced method of display, granted with 1080p upscaled to 4K there is no increase is resolution......but with a true 4k input source there will be a greater than 1080 resolution displayed with a 1080 panel as each flash is displaying 1920x1080 and two of these flashes(offset)make up a single frame(3840 x 2160)....end result will be true 4k(consumer).....give or take a few pixles worth of data along the LHS/RHS edges

No doubt the 4K native flow will be better.........specially as there is no e-shift element in it's path. But how much better remains to be seen.
Edited by Highjinx - 2/2/13 at 5:02pm

It would only benefit from 4K sources though. JVC won't be doing this until there is some sort of delivery system (other than a PC) and actual content. For them to do this now would be a waste of their money. If it was fed a 4K signal the processing would be completely different than what e-shift currently does. Yes it would still flash 2 1080p images but it would need to know how to correctly display the downconverted 4K in 1080p twice to try and save as much resolution during the process. The R&D for such software would probably be expensive to make and this is probably why we aren't seeing it. That and the lack of content. Without content there isn't really a driving force for such technology by the consumer. When 4K is actually available I'm sure they will allow such software to made.
Edited by Seegs108 - 2/2/13 at 5:37pm

TI and Hughes developed a similar approach for 1080p DLP rear projection TVs. However in their case the DMD chip used had 1/2 the pixels of the full resolution 1080p image and when fed a 1080p input signal one half the pixels were displayed then shifted (the Hughes approach was diagonal like JVC's eShift) and the other half were displayed. The JVC approach, on the other hand, starts off with a chip set that has only 1/4 the pixels of a true 4K image and with the initial plus shifted sub-frame they are still only displaying 1/2 the discrete pixels of a full resolution 4K image. So the bottom line is JVC could upgrade next year's eShift projectors to accept a 4K input singal and display an image better then 1080p, but still would fall short of a true 4K resolution image. Don't get me wrong it would be a great idea for JVC to add this capabiility and the cost of a JVC eShift 4K projector should still be much less than for a native 4K model for several years to come.

The Consumer Electronic Association has recently defined the term Ultra High Definiation to be applied to the consumer 4K format of 3840 x 2160 pixels. The term Ultra HD can only be used by consumer products that meet the following defintion:


It does appear to me that a JVC eShift projector even with a native 4K input would not qualify to be called Ultra HD as it only has psuedo 4K resolution and does not have "eight million active pixels" as it actually only has 4 million overlappping active pixels than can be discretely addressed.
Edited by Ron Jones - 2/2/13 at 5:49pm

Agree the manner in which it will be executed will differ. The 4K will not need to be down converted, it needs to be split into 2....don't think it will be too complex, they are up scaling 1920 x 1080 to 3840 x 2160p currently and splitting it into 2 flash fields to make up the 4k frame currently.....will they do it? I feel they will, as it will make 4k affordable to many, the 4k sources will come(in time). Their 8K pro machine does the same e-shift with 4K panels to create an 8K image.

The lens needs to only resolve 1080, to project the 4k image as it's done in 2 flashes. The cost will be significantly cheaper...for a similar result? ahhh that is the question!

I'm sure JVC will have their high end native 4K model as Ultra HD4K...and the e-shifted 1080p as 4K.........now if they sped up their panels and did 4 flashes per frame with their native 1080p panels....would they qualify to use Ultra HD?

I think you're overly simplifying the whole process. I think the whole process is a bit more complex especially when you are shifting the image in a diagonal fashion. I think the price of 4K machines will come down in price dramatically over the next few years and there won't be a need to supply consumers with faux 4K imagery. If they did, I think it will turn into a situation similar to DLP wobbling.

You could be very well be correct.......however I feel JVC will take this opportunity and market a cost effective product(1080p e-shifted 4k with 4k inputs) with near 4K quality to the masses, who will possibly be viewing from distances that differentiating between e-shifted 4k to native 4k may be difficult..........and the cost saving significant.