JVC - New Bulb Design Update? - Page 2

I'm a big sci-fi fan also. I was watching Search for Spock recently. The image of a stark white Enterprise against a pitch black star field was amazing. No iris pumping. Just pitch black with a bright spaceship and diamond stars.

I bought the X3 with full knowledge of some bulb issues. But, I am indeed a weekend user, so I knew it would take a couple of years to get to the 500 hour mark. I can tolerate $400 every couple of years. That said, I'd still prefer to spend that lamp money on some really, really good single-malt Scotch.

Did they ever find him (just kidding)...

Try space scenes in 3D, it's mind blowing actually how dark the blacks end up being in 3D even though I know part of it is from losing too much brightness (still I'd say it's the first time I've ever seen blacks I would actually call INKY on a projector was when I put the 3D glasses on and saw the blacks in 3D).

Not sure if it will really help the lamp last longer, but as long as the noise doesn't bother you then it shouldn't hurt to run it that way.

There's a lot more to it that just gain though. Room conditions, throw length, and personal preference are important too.

I've got a 150" diag 1.0 gain screen. Some people would say there's no way an RS40 would work with a screen that size/gain. However, the room is a bat cave and I'm at short throw. To my eyes, the image looks great and is plenty bright (lamp in normal mode with app. at -10).

I'll let you know if anything happens to my RS55 in high altitude mode. I can't see it being a problem, all it appears to do is raise the fan speed and I can feel more air exiting the projector.

CG - I know it's a meaningless test due to being a single sample, but I figure why not give it a shot if it gives me some peace of mind that i'm not frying my 'non-flap' -003 lamp.

mention of the HP vs. unity gain is like the Hatfields vs. the McCoys.. PC vs MAC, Ford vs. Chevy..

Yah, I know there is a lot more to it, but if I qualify everything I say too much, then my ramblings in this forum would get even longer than they already are. And I do not think people want to read it all to be honest. Believe me as someone that has some background in testing methodology and statistics, I can get way too deep into this stuff when it comes to testing. I have written forum articles that are just way too long, and I need to achieve better brevity like Zombie does so well.

The technical and engineering person in me wants to be exactly precise in everything I say, which is why I tend to already over-qualify everything against the IF's, AND's, and BUT's.
So please do not encourage my bad habits

Most of the things I say or recommend are meant to apply to the general population rather than the exceptions, and that's the best I can really do in here.

I don't own an RS45 and my post did specifically say "heard" it was worse. Obviously, several have said that, so take it for what it's worth. My opinion concerning saving money and going for the B-stock RS40 over a new RS45 still stands. Not much difference between the two and spending considerably less makes any lamp issues much easier to stomach. Heck, the OP should just call Jason, order a B-stock and take him up on the 003 lamp offer, and buy cheap meter on Amazon to measure the lamp.

As for the Omega filters, I'll agree that convergence may be an issue, but everything that I've read indicates that this setup is the best 3D out there with full 1080p to each eye. There are too many glowing reports to ignore from some people who I respect from years on AVS. However, as I stated, it's not for CIH setups (which I already have an investment in lens and screen) and I'm VERY happy with the Epson 6010 for 3D and 2D as well. The blacks are good enough for me even though it's through use of auto-iris and not native. IHMO, the JVCs don't hold up well for 3D as the lamps age and the jury is still way out on the 003 lamps and I have my doubts.

Fair enough, and YES I agree about the B-stock RS-40's being a great deal, heck I was telling everyone to buy them.
That is at least partly why they are already sold out

If they weren't sold out, I'd still be telling people to buy them. And yes if I had a choice, I would have bought the B-stock RS-40 and saved my money for a Lumagen, but at the time I did not have that choice.

Winners can't be losers (or do I have that backwards??!!)

If you're not concerned about 3D, then why would you look to sell what you already have? The only reason I went to the Epson was for improved brightness and 3D. Keep the JVC for it's great blacks. The Epson does not have better blacks, it's brighter. It sounds like you're limiting it's hours using a second PJ, so that's good for the RS40 too.

Not being able to see 3D begs the question of why you opted to buy the RS40 in the first place? Why didn't you go for a previous gen JVC?

Although not wanting to spoil your free lamp party, with all those projectors you own, I'm not sure you could put enough hours on it, as I think he meant someone that doesn't mind leaving it on 5-8 hours a day. Otherwise it will take forever to get over 500-1000 hours.

true, ~50 hours in 5 months isn't much, although I did use it the other night to watch 'Contraband' which was an ok movie. there's 2 more hours.

I've had the RS40 for over a year and at the time the used JVC's were as much as the new RS40. If I did decide to sell my RS40 it would be because I would also sell my Vivitek H5082 and then just replace those 2 with a 5010 but at the going prices I have seen I probably just hold onto both projectors. I was just trying to pocket a little money by using 1 projector.

Thanks,
Mike

I didn't know that they're sold out again. The post from AVS about ANOTHER batch is still at the top of the forum. If they're all gone, AVS should take it down. I'm actually glad if they're gone as it makes selling my used RS40 more marketable with less competition. I'm still debating on selling it now that the Epson proved to be good enough in 2D and blacks.

Yes, I've got sour grapes concerning JVC and the lamp issue which basically necessitated my needing to buy the Epson in the first place. The RS40 does put out a great 2D picture, but their resale value and demand has plummeted. JVCs used to hold their value, but not anymore. I know that you're happy with the 3D from the JVC, but I am definitely not. It's much too dim and too much ghosting IMHO. 3D was the only reason I upgraded from a very fine RS20. Once bitten, twice shy. JVC lost a faithful, three time customer.

I don't know that I'm 100% happy, but I've gotten used to just trying to find the good instead of the bad. The 3D black levels are just incredible on the JVC, you cannot deny that one fact. Now for animated content, I am not fully happy, but I'm satisfied for now. That said, I have less than 50 hours of 3D under my belt, so maybe I will change my mind in the near future. All I have to do though is grab me an Optoma hd33, which will beat your little Epson at 3D (sorry, I'm just messing with you). Keep in mind I've seen 3D on the Epson (it's one of the few projectors I have seen 3D on besides the JVC), and the blacks are really nice, but the JVC blacks in 3D are just amazing.

I am actually an outdoorsy guy (well I want to be anyhow), but due to my job and probably partly being in this forum too long, I don't get outdoors enough. Well that and the fact that it's often 110+ degrees outside where I live which kind of turns me off to nature. Anyhow, only reason I mention this is I really would like to see more Planet Earth type 3D stuff, especially national parks, forests, space, all kinds of scenery. I am a huge scenery buff...

Grand Canyon 3D on the way and a couple others, will see how bad the ghosting drives me crazy. For me, nature stuff in 3D is actually amazing. I did not think I would like 3D, but some stuff when filmed right you gotta admit is really scary like you are there.

No question about the great blacks on the JVC in 2D and 3D, but then again, a lot of that is achieved with a clamped down iris and low lamp setting. Quickly fading lamp output also helps with blacks, but to the point were 3D is not viable IMHO.

I originally planned to use the JVC for 2D and Epson in 3D, but the later proved to do 2D well enough to make the RS40 expendable. And I obviously watch more 2D then 3D, so that's saying something about the Epson. And don't forget to add in the hassle of frequent calibrations for the JVC's gamma/greyscale. I'll likely sell the JVC, enjoy the Epson for a few years, and upgrade to something better down the road.

That is why I have stuck with the smaller 106" HP screen with the JVC mounted at 18 feet back (which gives me very close to near the max 50,000:1). Now I finally do use Aperture -5 to -10 sometimes, but I can still go to -15 for SCI FI and certain things that are filmed well enough with good shadow detail where I can take a dimmer image to get the better blacks.

I do sit really close to the screen, so for me the problem is partly just not wanting to gamble on LCD again. I've been burned too many times on convergence. I was ecstatic when I received the JVC and noted the convergence was so very very good. As a matter of fact, the JVC is the first really sharp NON-DLP I've ever owned, the Sanyo z4000 was decent sharpness but it still had over 1 pixel error (but it was all on blue so it was sharper than most). I have also owned Epsons and they failed for me before, now the more recent ones I've seen appear much better, but just as you are burnt on JVC, I am sort of burnt on LCD in general.

My friend owns the 5010 because I told him to get it, that is why I have some experience with the 5010. My other experiences with projectors are trade shows, dealer shops like the ones in Dallas, the 10+ I owned recently, and various other places like the few calibrations I've been doing for free here and there. Every time I travel I try to make it to a dealer if I can, but so many times I end up being disappointed by their setups. I actually haven't done the dealer thing lately, need to do some more trips to the dealers to see what's on display. I also go to stores and try out projectors there when I can get away with it (it's a royal pain though and usually not worth it), and Fry's hates me now because I went in there and was such a pain to get the guy to pull projectors out and show them to me.

this is one of the most amazing 3D BD's i've seen yet. I believe it was filmed in 2003 and they made a special macro lenses for the 3D cameras. This is a real frame packed BD with an english DTS-HD track.

Bugs! A Rainforest Adventure 3D Blu-ray

it's a shame it's not avail in the US, but the 3D is out of this world and worth importing. Extreme closeups on various insects, plants, etc. It's intense 3D for 40 minutes.

Great, looking forward to it, too bad I am so cheap that I picked Super Saver get in 5 years shipping...

Are you referring to 2D or 3D animation and why are you not fully happy with it? Please elaborate!

...Glenn

2D animation was fine, some 3D animation does ghost quite a bit. I am not sure how bad it bothers me as I have limited experience in 3D animation (I've seen 6-8 titles). I've got a few more coming. Oddly enough I have mild OCD disorder with projectors, but for some reason the ghosting hasn't hit my OCD threshold just yet.

As far as 2D goes, man I've been through way too many projectors. I am not quite to Zombie's status of owning all the recent ones, but I've owned a lot and some different ones than he has (so we have different info to provide). For 3D, I've been comparing with Ultimate Wave Tahiti, Under the Sea, a scene from Resident Evil, and a couple others (but I haven't found my reference 3D disk yet by any stretch). The reference bluray I am using is Tree of Life for 2D (well that one and several others). I watch the same scenes very specifically and I have a reference level hand print-out done by a printing shop of certain tests. This is more of my artistic approach to calibration after I use the meter, so don't take the hand printout thing too seriously.

I studied multiple DLP vs LCD's in split screens for almost 1000 hours once as pathetic as that sounds. I don't know why I really did it, but I was practicing calibrations at the time. It really improved my calibration skills, but I think I still have nightmares from all the work involved.

I have a lot of useless info that people would probably not find that interesting when it comes to LCD and DLP. Such as how LCD can POP more when the lower pixel fill aligns with a certain type of camera work (most often seen in closeups of faces). People would be shocked I can say LCD can pop more than DLP, but it takes the right conditions. All three different techs can beat the other in certain scenes, that's the sad truth to it. The main factors are camera work, scene dimensionality or distance perspective, lighting, noise levels, and post-mastering.

Yes, it is hard to believe.

I'll just say that I've seen several instances where people switched from "way more expensive so it must be better" screens to HP and were delighted.

There are some screens that look silkier than the HP. I do not think they are better though across the board, but I guess in a way they are different and some could say they are better.
Most of the time I just prefer the brightness cushion regardless of that silkier look which costs 5x more money to get to after losing 50% of the brightness.

I can't even remember most of the names of the screens I've seen (I just am not as interested in screens I guess as people using 3D is kind of limiting the choices).

I'm coming up on 300 hours on my 45 with no perceivable lamp dimming. My family has been very pleased with the 45. We have had 15 years with 9" CRT's so black level/depth of image is very important and noticeable.
I recently spent a evening with a buddy drinking and watching concerts on his HW30, I don't know how posters can say the black level of the Sony is even close to the 45. I did notice the image was more fluid on the Sony compared to the JVC, but still not as good as a CRT. We also noticed what we used to term "creeping moss" on 1st-2nd generation plasmas in very dark scene's. That was very distracting.
If black level is important, get the 45. I believe the JVC is significantly brighter than the Sony as well. If 3D is important, get the Sony or Epson.
You are going to have to compromise somewhere.
By the way, high gain screens are terrific for brightness, but they also elevate the black levels. If it is a 2.4 gain screen, your black level just went up 2.4. I personally would recommend a reference screen such as Joe kanes 1 gain or similar. When you replace your projector in a year or two, you don't want to replace your screen as well. 3D changes almost everything I wrote.
I hope this helps with your bulb, projector evaluations, screen choices.

The RS45 is the same brightness as the HW30.

JVC RS45: ~ 20 hours on the lamp

2D mode @ D65 = 927 Lumens (Normal)
2D mode @ D65 = 614 Lumens (Economy)
3D mode @ 8500k = 771 Lumens (Normal)

Sony HW30: ~ 115 hours on the lamp

2D mode @ D65 = 894 Lumens (Normal)
2D mode @ D65 = 559 Lumens (Economy)
3D mode @ 8500k = 793 lumens (Normal)

Gamma on the HW30 should be set to 'off' which is very close to 2.2. I know what creeping moss looks like, there is nothing like that on my calibrated HW30.

Not sure what silky means, smoother/less grainy I suppose.

Higher brightness makes noise/grain more visible; in any case the HP is appreciated by many for its smoothness/lack of texture.


This is a red herring; the same can be said of a brighter pj with the same contrast.

Try to find a pj that's 2X+ brighter (2.8 is very rarely achieved) than a JVC with the same contrast, at any price.

I have not heard of this new bulb before this thread. If JVC felt the need for a redesign, maybe we will have issues with the current bulb. I still really, really like this unit.

The only truly objective way to determine lamp dimming is with a meter. After 300 hours, your lamp has dimmed regardless of your perception, which is subjective, not objective.

As you've stated, you and yours have a long history with 9" CRT. That makes you very partial towards the best black floor you can get from a digital PJ. You'll get no argument from me that JVCs have the best blacks for the money. Likewise, your tolerance for a dimmer picture is likely also based on your lengthy CRT history. CRTs were never bright enough really, but your eyes adjusted in a bat-cave.

For 2D viewing, a JVC provides great PQ. My fault with them is their measured lamp dimming (or worse, totally failure) after too short a period. I'd be very surprised to hear of folks with original 001 or series 002 bulbs getting 2000 hours of advertised bulb life expectancy. I'd be happy with 1000 hours and lamps the price of Sony's. Neither appear to be in the cards unless the 003 are the answer and cost half the price. Good luck with that. Not going to happen. Lamp dimming obviously results in very poor 3D PQ, which benefits greatly from a brighter PJ. But as you said, 3D changes almost everything you wrote.

Just received my replacement bulb today for my RS50 from JVC (first one the 002 went out at 690hrs). It has the flap although it appears like shiny stainless steel or tin and is movable - it's only connected at one end and can move. This seems pointless as the lamp rests on its side so the metal flap would just sit there against the side unless there's some air movement.

I'm assuming this is the 003 revision as it has the flap - labelled OT. Here's hoping this lasts more than 1000 hours.

Lumens are back to the originals which is really nice

THX / THX: 794 lumens
User 2 / Off: 1138 lumens
User 2 / Cinema 1: 606.6 lumens
User 2 / 3D: 758.62 lumens
3D / 3D: 824 lumens
Cinema 1 / Cinema 1 (8500): 425 lumens

This is with 0 hours on bulb, Aperture 0, Lamp High (except in Cinema 1 / Cinema 1), CMD off and color management off.

It's hard to explain, it's not really that there is any less visible lack of texture, but what we often forget is that even if we cannot visibly identify a fault in the image (like SDE for instance), the lack of it or a smoother image overall (as an example or as noted with the JvC RS-55's e-shift function), can still increase the perception of the image. You do not have to specifically always be able to easily identify a trait in an image for it still to improve the image as a whole.

That is what I meant, some screens look silkier, I don't know how else to explain it. The HP is a great screen and does not have any visible texture, but even I will admit a few screens do potentially look a little better, but I wouldn't trade the HP for it because I need the extra brightness. I am guessing it has to do with differences in reflection and refraction of different screen materials.

Gary if you were watching anything but BluRay and claim, there is creeping moss in the dark scenes then it's the signal source not the HW30, or he has a problem with his unit or it isn't setup correctly. I can see macro blocking on some scenes from my sat source but that is a problem with the sat signal not the HW30. Using Bluray(Oppo player) I have never seen that problem in the dark scenes and we typically watch 2 blurays a week. As for the blacks, I came from watching a highly tweeked Zenith 1200Pro(Barco Cine 8 onyx, c/w HDMI i/p, gamma boost etc etc) for 6 years and don't find the blacks from this HW30 distracting at all, and I find the low level details and shadow details quite good if not better than my CRT. THe absolute black floor is of course elevated from the CRT but when you're watching actual content it really doesn't come into play, maybe on the rare occasion.
That being said, everyone has their own opinions on what they percieve as better or worse. BUt don't be blaming the HW30 for any creeping moss, unless he has a defective unit or it isn't setup properly. As for brightness, even on eco I have exactly the levels that are called for by THX and others, mind you that is for 2D, I haven't bothered with 3D as it's hard to find any 3D content around here.

Glad to hear you're still happy with the 45 and you've had no bulb problems yet, then again you only have 300hrs on it(you been too busy riding that bike have you).