Sony VPL-HW50ES or Epson 5020/6020 - First Projector

I am in the same boat as you, I am looking at the same projectors and same size screen. Not sure about the SI screen for me , They are kind of pricey and I am sure if its worth the price or not. Who did you buy the screen from and what is your projector height off the floor?

I think in a month we will have some good projector reviews. That's what I am waiting for.

I would certainly read the reviews carefully when the 5020 comes out, they should both be top choices but some different feature sets and strengths could obviously come into play.

I currently own a Sony VPL-HW15 and am starting to drool over the HW50. When I bought the HW15 I had a unique chance to compare it in my home to a Benq W6000 DLP model and an Epson LCD. I like the Benq a bunch except for being sensitive to rainbows, and it was worse in that respect than the Optoma I was replacing. The HW15 just stood out to me as having a very refined image, very good color and not jumping out as doing anything wrong. I've never been unhappy with it, except that I want a 3D experience now, thus the HW50 envy.

I've seen and lusted over the BD screens at a local Magnolia, so I am sure BD ZE will be a fantastic choice for your room. I see that SI finally has a retractable motorized version of the BD... gonna have to look for more info on that, and I may have to choose between that or an HW50 for an upgrade!

If you haven't mounted your screen yet, I would suggest going even lower to the floor, if possible. I have a 119" screen and the bottom edge is 24" from the floor. After six years, I wish I had gone about four inches lower than that. I like the feeling that you are looking straight forward out a window rather than having to look somewhat up at the screen. I think it enhances that feeling of immersion you are looking for.

My two cents,
Duane

Did you order the Sony HW50ES? If so, how is it getting there on Monday if its not available yet?

1st, either one of those as your 1st PJ is like hitting a home run on your 1st at bat so that's pretty sweet. 2nd, IMHO @12-13FT 108" will seem teeny in a short time. I'm at about 10Ft and I can easily upgrade from 100" to 120" minimum. That's the only weak point I see in your 1st set up.

I'm sure you will like it. I just put up it's little brother, the HW30ES (which is about half the price online vs. the 50es) today in my batcave home theater. It replaces a Sanyo Z3000 LCD projector, which I loved, but had developed some kind of streak down the middle of the screen.
The main difference I've noticed so far is the lack of screen door. I guess this is a LCoS feature. It makes the picture much smoother. I can get right up to the screen and not see the gaps between pixels. Amazing.
Also, the lens shift and zoom is NOT as good as the Panny/Sanyo/Epson LCD projectors... but it's still good... just do some calculations before you get one. I had to lower my ceiling mount (8ft ceiling) by about a foot.

The gaming lag was a big deal to me also. Bizzare that Epson hasn't addressed that. Go Sony!

The Sanyo was a nice projector, but the SDE of LCD is a bummer once you go LCOS. LCOS is more consistent.

Have to agree here. Most say if you sit far enough back you wont see Screen Door on LCD Projectors. While this is kind of true, it gives the picture an overall digital feel which is easily noticeable once you are used to DLP or LCOS.

LCOS is 90% Fill ratio, DLP is 80%, and LCD is about 50% I think.. (might be 60% now for the new panels)

From all reports the HW50 seems like an excellent Projector.

Panasonic's don't suffer from SDE with their smoothscreen tech.

Hello,
Is there any update of this topic ?
I'm quiet interested to know if the hw50 has low input lag.
I'm a hardcore gamer, so...
Thanks !

Hi, the HW50 measures 30ms in the 'gaming' mode setting in the projector. There are a few reports of 50ms and 62ms on the 5020. The Sony seems to be the leader now of the new models in regard to lag time.

will we feel the digital thing(soap opera i think you mean) if we use lcos or lcd? sorry for my english kind regards

I also sit at 10ft & I'm finding that while I like the immersion of my 120" screen, I can see the compositions better with a 110" screen (that I drape on top of the 120" screen just for testing purposes). I also agree with the other poster about lowering your screen; I find that when I stand up the image feels more immersive... which means I need to lower my screen.

The 120" at 10ft sitting distance is 1.15x SW. With a 110" screen & 10ft sitting distance, that's 1.25x SW. As much as I like the big image, I'm thinking of going with the latter. With the 120" at my sitting distance I almost get a little lost in the image & the process of looking around at the beautiful image, while great, detracts from absorbing the full composition of shots IMHO.

Anyone else agree? I myself am still a little torn on whether or not I want to downgrade my screen size (I'm buying a new screen b/c I want new material; namely, the HCHP material from Da-Lite).

Cheers.

We sit about 12' from a 118" wide screen, which is about 1.25 screen widths. It's about right for me . And a little closer to our 106" wide 16:9 screen - that works out to about 1.30 screen widths. Looks great though - especially with the new Darbee !!

Mounting close to the floor has absolutely nothing to do with correct screen installation. Height depends on where your direct line of sight hits the screen. Correct positioning with one row is about 1/3 the way up from screen bottom. Perhaps a tad (inch or two) heigher. It actually depends on the angle which of course will change with the viewing distance but that is too long a post at this hour.Just set it so that with your normal head in a chair position tour eyes look at the 1/3 up spot or a few inches above that. With two rows with the second row about a foot higher we try to have the second row sight line hit 1/2 up. I am exhausted from the Redskins game.
Edited by mark haflich - 12/4/12 at 10:40am

Everything stated above is mostly correct, but I think the most often made mistake with screen installation is to mount big screen "too high" in a single row theater. Why so? Equipment racks from TV era often need to fit below the screen etc. The vertical bottom of the image often stays in same position when people swap 40-50 inch TVs to 100+ inch screen and obviously one ends up looking upwards.

My 110 inch 16:9 screen is just 23 inches from the floor and immersion it gives for both 2D and 3D is just amazing. I measured my eye level on my sofa (a cozy one, one sits quite low in it) and despite being a bit on the taller side 6 ft 2" my eye level is just 40 inches from the floor. So if I did mount my screen on a "traditional" of the used height of 30 or so from the ground I'd have pretty much whole 2.35:1 picture above my eye level, which IMO kills the immersion quite bad. Ok, my setup is a bit more clever than that as I move 2.35:1 image to the bottom of the screen and mask the grey bar above the picture, but even so I would not put screen any higher than it currently is.

Local pro that sells screens visited my house for other reason recently and I showed him my theater room. He left fully convinced that "lower is better2; obviously unless there is a reason to mount higher like having multiple rows...

Often, when given a chance one does not go to 1st row in the movies to avoid looking upwards, yet for various reasons home theater room is quite often build a bit like 1st row on the movie theater.

Here's what THX says about vertical viewing angles.

http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-entertainment/home-theater/hdtv-set-up/

Awesome game.

Willie

Probably means nothing unless the Skins beat baltimore this Sunday. then they are really in the hunt for the dision crown or a wild card. the whole mess will likely then come down to last game, Dallas at home.

I realize this thread has gone over a month with no entries but since I am in a very similar position to the OP I would like to see what, if anything, has changed over the past month with more folks using both of the projectors listed here.

I am in the process of building a new house. We are a ways from making a final projector/screen choice so I have been reading every thread I can find on the projectors in my price range ($2500-3500). My room is dedicated and has light control but is not a true home theater in the sense that others have their rooms painted black and use it only for HT. The room is a true Media Room with audio (stereo and multichannel), TV, movies and general entertainment use (when the wife can run me out of it). The room is 15X18 and is all on a single level with 10' ceiling. All equipment will be rack mounted with the projector ceiling mounted. I anticipate 90% movies and the rest TV or maybe HTPC (TBD). I like the idea of 2.4:1 but 16X9 would be better for TV etc. No gaming is planned so delay is not an issue. The speakers are not going to be behind the screen and the front L/R with be just outside the screen area (color of speakers in to be matte black). 2D is the priority...3D is of very minor interest at this time....just can't enjoy it at the current level and the wife hates it so not an issue right now.

If money were no object I would go anamorphic lens with automatic masking of a 16X9 screen with a 120" diagonal. However, money is an issue and the extra cost of the lens and the sled is too much for the budget. I am think of a video processing with a Lumigen or similar device to do the 2.35:1 (and other scaling). It seems a more cost effective solution. The other idea is to go with a projector with a power lens and memory but in my price range that looks like the Panny 8000 which scares me with the lousy warranty and frequent complaints of various types.

My current thoughts are with the Sony 50ES as it seems to be the best at 2D vs the Epsons. Another option might be a JVC but the they are pricey and there is no real history on the new lamp design yet so if it does work out I still have that as an option. I still have 3 months before the projector will be installed.