or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014 - Page 49

post #1441 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishari84 View Post

Hi Zombie,
Kraine is giving DLP projectors low scores in 3D because he said pop out is not as good as in Sony HW50ES. How do you compare 3D depth and pop between W7000 and HW50ES?
And does ZD201 provide better depth than True Depth glasses?

I'd also be very curious to know the answer to this.
post #1442 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by xb1032 View Post

I've seen it as well and it looks great but the ghosting is bad at times. I watched Polar Express the other day and that is one title where ghosting isn't bad in most cases on the JVC and actually looks pretty good.

I figured the ghosting might be bad on the Toy Story movies on the JVC with all the dark on light type scenes going on which is one reason I decided to watch them all in 2d. Will revisit them again whenever I get a 3d upgrade. smile.gif

I agree on Polar Express. That is one of the titles that does well on the JVCs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

I watched Toy Story 3 in 3D last year with some relatives who were in for the holidays, but on the JVC RS40 with a lamp that was practically new. It was phenomenal! Trying to watch the Toy Story movies in 3D on the RS45 was an exercise in frustration, since the ghosting was much more severe. The Epson 6010, OTOH, shows very little ghosting with these films, but the 3D looks duller, not quite as rich. It's not at all bad, but it's hard to imagine 3D looking any better than it does on the JVC when it's not ghosting.
Using the hand puppet test, it sometimes took a while for me to see where my hand was with the RS40/45, but I always know immediately where it is with the Epson. There's no doubt in my mind which projector I prefer, in almost every way except for 3D dark ghosting performance. It's the JVC. There is one problem that doesn't get talked about much, though, and it's the drop in gamma the JVCs undergo as the projector ages. This shows up as bright scenes that have less pop and impact. It can be calibrated out, but simply raising the gamma in the menu doesn't get rid of the problem. The Epson seems immune to this. After 1,700 hours, the Epson continues to perform very well in bright scenes, even though the ghosting has increased.

Cool! Good to hear TS3 was good in 3d. Yeah, my 45 sounds very similar to yours which is why I opted for the 2d last night. I am done with 3d in general on my 45 at this point though, but falling back on the 2d is a great option as well as these movies are just pure eye candy on a nice display. biggrin.gif
post #1443 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

Using the hand puppet test, it sometimes took a while for me to see where my hand was with the RS40/45, but I always know immediately where it is with the Epson. There's no doubt in my mind which projector I prefer, in almost every way except for 3D dark ghosting performance. It's the JVC. There is one problem that doesn't get talked about much, though, and it's the drop in gamma the JVCs undergo as the projector ages. This shows up as bright scenes that have less pop and impact. It can be calibrated out, but simply raising the gamma in the menu doesn't get rid of the problem. The Epson seems immune to this. After 1,700 hours, the Epson continues to perform very well in bright scenes, even though the ghosting has increased.

I can chime in here re: my HW50. In my rather light-uncontrolled room (white ceilings/walls everywhere, but black velvet extending 2ft outward from top, left, & right sides of HCHP screen, which itself limits scattering), in dark scenes where the Sony closes its iris, I can barely see my hand in the black bars of a 2.35:1 movie. More precisely, it takes me a few seconds to find my hand.

In other scenes, I can see the shadow of my hand rather easily/quickly.

With a BenQ W7000 & an Epson 8350, there was never a time I couldn't see the shadow of my hand.

So Sony w/ a clamped down iris has very good blacks in my limited experience. In fact, w/ a 110" HCHP screen, most 2D content is blindingly bright & I may be forced to just stop the iris down & turn off dynamic iris (which should increase native contrast anyway, right?). Also wonder if closing down the iris makes the image sharper (a la closing down the aperture on a camera lens filters rays w/ steeper angles).

Does anyone know why clamping the iris down increases the native contrast? Less internal lens reflections?
Edited by sarangiman - 11/30/12 at 1:35pm
post #1444 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiohobbit View Post

Hi,
1. thanks for your report (but I didn't want to know that we'll get to see Smaug already in the first film.. i thoght they keep it a secret until 2nd film or so..)
2. aren't you under NDA or something like that?
3. There is no 4k 3D in any theater in the world. The Hobbit is also only distributed in 2k, in 3D as well as 2D. Current 4k cinema projectors are limited in their hardware and can not show more than 30fps with 4k material. With 2k HFR with 48fps is possible, 2k will be upscaled to 4k (not with the Sony SXRD cinema projectors, as they divide the 4k panel in two 2k sections and show the L/R pictures in parallel via a double-lens).
The Christie C2230 is also only 2k (actually they had two of them in Wellington: http://www.christiedigital.co.uk/emea/news-room/press-releases/pages/christie-projectors-at-the-hobbit-premiere.aspx for double projection, one for the left, one for the right eye).
Concerning contrast with cinema projectors: The usual 3-chip DLPs only have about 2000:1. It is said that typical analogue film copies in cinemas had roughly the same CR. Home cinema projectors had much more contrast for a long time now..
The Sony SXRD cinema projectors have greater CRs, the newest SRX-R515 is specified at 8000:1. If this is true, then this would be the highest native On/Off CR for a cinema projector.
(Just remember analogue film: Black levels were partly even worse than today with the digital projectors...) One thing that ruins black levels completely (esp. in 2D) are the silver screens needed for passive 3D. Bad black level, hotspotting, and you see the structure of the screen at pan shots etc. and sometimes you also see some sparkling effects...

Very interesting info as always audio hobbit! Curious though... I always felt the dynamic range of certain IMAX presentations was quite large. The Dmax of good slide film can be very high; for example, w/ film w/ Dmax 3.6, you should technically have ~4000:1 contrast (10^3.6), no? Or does this fall apart when shining so much light through the film?

TDKR on a 70mm IMAX screen seemed to have ridiculous contrast on the IMAX scenes; not so much on the other scenes, which I mostly attribute to noise in blacks elevating the black level (the noise is suppressed w/ the larger format capture films since their resolution is so high... leading to higher SNR in shadows & therefore a higher dynamic range since DR is defined by brightest bright/noise floor, where you choose the SNR of the noise floor for your calculation).

I guess I'd be surprised if the contrast on those IMAX scenes were lower than my home theater; then again, maybe in my home theater I barely ever achieve anywhere near full contrast due to room reflections... that may be why the IMAX image looks so much more punchy (obviously those theaters are very light-controlled).
post #1445 of 8048
I am no expert reviewer, my personal opinions only on what I have seen. No testing with any meters or equipment. Visual preference only. Here goes: I have seen in the past week the Epson 5020, the Sony HW50 and the JVC x55. I am in Canada and they are all available to demo in my area, however, unfortunately, not all at the same place so I can't do and A/B/C testing. Each was at a different dealer about 1 hour away from one another with different screens and different rooms and different lighting conditions. None of the projectors had been calibrated. Any viewing modes were as from the factory. So bear that in mind.

The theater room in my house is mutli-use so although I have total light control, I do at time watch with some lighting on. I have a Stewart Firehawk screen which certainly helps to control this condition. 2d movie content and HDTV sports is my main viewing content. 3d really bothers some members of my family so it will be used little but I did check it out.

Again, my personal preferences and perceptions:

Epson 5020. Good sharp image from a normal viewing distance, however, put up some text and get a little closer and the panel convergence was horrendous. Probably didn't affect watching bluray content from a normal seating distance but once I checked it out I was turned off. Brightness, was good in both 2d and 3d for bluray. HDTV sports appear smooth. Once I noticed how bad the panel convergence was I lost interest in the projector and didn't spend a whole lot of time with it. Again, however, it wasn't noticeable to me watching bluray from the seating distance provided which was maybe 1.2 - 1.6. At the pricepoint, probably a good all around projector but not for me.

Sony HW50. I went in anticipating good things for this one and for the most part it satisfied. I have seen the HW30 about 1 week ago and this machine is definitely brighter in both 2d and 3d mode. The "pop" factor for me was about the same as the Epson. I spend a lot of time playing around with the RC settings while watching both bluray in 2d and a crappy cable HDTV feed that the store had. My personal take is I love it. For the most part I played with the settings between 20 - 35, much more than that and it started to "digitize" for me but that is a personal take. I had MPEG NR at both "Off" and "Low". I did get to watch a few soccer highlights and the motion looked good. No trails behind the ball when it was kicked. This store had the absolute worst conditions for a projector and they were currently renovating. In the same room as many flat panels. Flourescent lighting glaring in from a nearby office, etc. It surprised me how good it looked considering how poorly the set up was. I did not hear any emitter buzz from the unit while in 3d and the projector was about 3 feet from my head. We did not have any speakers on as I was only interested in the picture so the fact that I didn't hear any buzz as many others have reported is encouraging. SN was 1000664 if I remember correctly.

Another Sony dealer here had told me that Sony Canada was holding shipping for a couple of weeks up here until first week of December for a "board" issue to address some "noise" issue. Take it with a grain of Salt but more than one dealer told me they would be getting them after Dec 3rd.

JVC X55. I really didn't have time to go see this today but my dealer had just got it set up on Wed night and I couldn't wait. So I only had about 20 mins with it but definitely will be returning first of the week to spend a lot more time. My Initial impressions. As far as brightness it was brighter than the X30 demo that was still up beside it, but again the x30 had a few hundred hours on it and the x55 had 5. Since it wasn't an A/B/C comparison I can't really give a definite comparison to the Sony. If it was dimmer, it wasn't by so much that it was immediately noticeable to me. The Sony as well only had 5 hours on the lamp. 2d bluray and HDTV, as most everyone assumes it was outstanding. Excellent colour. Can't explain but the picture was more "immersive" than the Sony, but the room setup was so much better than where I had seen the Sony, it isn't a fair comparison. I literally watched about 2mins of an IMAX under the sea 3d scene and I was extremely impressed. I am not a huge 3d fan in general because I find it visually fatiguing over time but the depth of the picture was amazing. I think the great contrast and colour were why. Also watched a couple of minutes of Avatar and had the same feeling. As far as ghosting, I can't comment. 3d is not really my thing and I don't consider my self qualified. As far as motion in sports I didn't get to evaluate yet but most definitely need to, to make a decision. I have seen fast paced sports on last years x30 and I didn't care for it. Sorry, no time at all to play with the exhift2. Overall impressed with what I saw, but need to spend some real time with it the first of next week.

So for me it is down to the Sony HW50 and JVC X55. I need to spend some real time with the JVC with all content, especially HDTV sports as this is as important to me as 2d bluray. Price wise comparing apples to apples between the Sony and JVC (adding emitter, glasses and spare bulb), it has same 3 year warranty in Canada as the Sony, my price between the two is $900 more for the JVC when comparing the complete package.

Sorry, no technical jargon or measurements. I'll leave that to Zombie and others. Just some personal perceptions and next week I will be spending some more time with the JVC. Can't wait to hear others.
Edited by tjsbuyer - 11/30/12 at 3:25pm
post #1446 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geof View Post

Overlooked? Maybe I'm missing something but I think Zombie is waiting for the JVC's to arrive before commenting on black level performance.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by havok2022 View Post

I think he was referring to the current generation JVCs

As far as 2D goes the RS55 should roughly give the same results for 2D black levels. The up and coming RS46, RS48, and RS4810 are rated at the same contrast level as today's RS45.
post #1447 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by xb1032 View Post

As far as 2D goes the RS55 should roughly give the same results for 2D black levels. The up and coming RS46, RS48, and RS4810 are rated at the same contrast level as today's RS45.

Thus my reply, that you were referring to current gen. AKA RS-55 and not RS-56. tongue.gif:D
post #1448 of 8048
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by xb1032 View Post

Are there any plans on noting comparisions between JVC black levels vs. the Sony/Epson?

This thread has very detailed information in a number of areas however the information provided that compares dark scene black levels is very minimal. I know it's been concluded that the HW50 and the Epson 5020 (and 5010) are so close that they can be considered equals (other sites have noted similar findings as well), but how do the Epson/Sony compare to the JVCs? I'm sure I'm not the only one interested. For those who don't have a projector or are upgrading from a lower contrast projector the comparison listed below is likely sufficient:

However, for those of us who presently have a JVC this doesn't help. We all know that the JVC is better, but what we don't know is how much? This isn't a knock against Zombie's work as what he is doing is a free service to all so don't take this as a complaint. But IMO this seems like a topic that would be of interest to many AVS'ers that is being overlooked. I realize there's that screenshots I'm certain there are other comparisons that can be performed to give a decent idea of what to expect. Is it possible to adjust the manual iris on the JVC to get a similar black level? I'm referring specifically to the darkest of scenes which one wouldn't think room setup wouldn't affect results as much since less light scatter would occur in this scenario.
If not, then I guess I'll go fly a kite (in 3D of course). biggrin.gif

I've seen your posts requesting this but I don't think it's reasonable with any level of accuracy. The current reviews do 1 of 2 things:

1. Show specific contrast #'s via a very expensive meter that measures the raw performance of each projector. There is no doubt the JVC's have the highest native contrast, but many will argue the DI does a great job on the Sony, etc.

2. Try and take photos, that in my opinion, are borderline useless since we don't have 25k studio monitors that can display 14 stops of dynamic range. Trying to use photos is not an option, I am certainly not going to even attempt it since it will start a flame war. For the 1 review site that does this, it generates doubt at best.

This leaves 2 other options. Completely subjective opinion or seeing the projectors in person in your own viewing environment.

For my own preferences I will always have a JVC in the HT stable, but for many others, the Epson 5020 and Sony Hw50 will be more than acceptable. These are both very nice projectors that came a long way from systems 2-3 years ago.

With my HP screen, I want the lowest possible black floor while maintaining the intense brightness. A movie like 'Chernobyl Diaries' shows off the JVC's native contrast. Pitch black rooms with a single flashlight cutting through the darkness is excellent. Same thing with movies like Aliens, terminator, etc.

The VW95 is the closest projector i've seen compared to the JVC's. I cannot tell you if you will be happy with the 5020 or HW50 in replacement of your JVC.
post #1449 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarangiman View Post


So Sony w/ a clamped down iris has very good blacks in my limited experience. In fact, w/ a 110" HCHP screen, most 2D content is blindingly bright & I may be forced to just stop the iris down & turn off dynamic iris

So I understand better your comment, do you mind posting which screen exactly you have ( I know you said HCHP but for me I understand better by make/ model ). Also is this while on high lamp or low lamp mode. Lastly, Is this with any theater lighting on at all or totally dark room. Thanks for your help.
post #1450 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjsbuyer View Post

So I understand better your comment, do you mind posting which screen exactly you have ( I know you said HCHP but for me I understand better by make/ model ). Also is this while on high lamp or low lamp mode. Lastly, Is this with any theater lighting on at all or totally dark room. Thanks for your help.
I'm sure he is referring to the high contrast high power screen by da lite
post #1451 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjsbuyer View Post

So I understand better your comment, do you mind posting which screen exactly you have ( I know you said HCHP but for me I understand better by make/ model ). Also is this while on high lamp or low lamp mode. Lastly, Is this with any theater lighting on at all or totally dark room. Thanks for your help.

Da-Lite High Contrast High Power screen (http://www.da-lite.com/whats_hot/index.php?wID=207)

Low Lamp mode (Cinema 1 preset, D65)

Totally dark room. But I have white ceilings, light colored floors & walls. Luckily, the HP/HCHP screens scatter much less light than typical matte surfaces.

I can't believe I'm saying this but I really do think it's too bright. Never had this problem before w/ my Panny AE-900U & 1.8 gain screen. But this is probably a good problem to have. I could go with a 120" screen; just ends up being so big from my sitting distance (1.15x SW for 120" screen) that my eyes are darting around all the time. I used to think that that would be awesome & immersive but I think it causes strain. Since I live in a condo, it's hard to move my seating position back further. At least with the 110" screen I can move closer if I so desire.
post #1452 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I've seen your posts requesting this but I don't think it's reasonable with any level of accuracy...

Thanks for the reply.

I suppose that all I was looking for was the best description one could give of the differences seen to one persons eyes for dark scenes who has the ability of having the projectors side by side. I'm not looking for specific numbers, pictures, or your personal opinion of which you liked better. Many people aren't picky but since you are looking at details down to the pixel level and it appears that you have a slight preference to the JVCs for dark scenes I thought you might have more insight than you provided. Personally, I'm looking for multiple opinions and have searched this forum and reviews for answers to this question but it seems that most opinions differ but most are also based off of memories rather than side by side comparisons. In no way shape or form would I ever rely solely on your opinion for my purchase. I've read too many differing (and sometimes inaccurate) opinions when TVs were my hobby before projectors;)

Art's review of the RS45 is a good description of what I was pretty much looking for when he said that when the JVC RS45 is in low lamp mode with equal brightness to the 5010 that black levels looked virtually identical, however that is the sample that he mentioned that had a blueish tint in dark scenes and I'm not sure if or how much that flaw skewed his findings. Your comments in regards to 3D ghosting/quality, 3D brightness, and have helped greatly in regards to the HW50 and I'm certain will as well for the JVCs. Please don't take my comments as a gripe as I do appreciate your willingness to provide help, I'm just trying to gather more info on an area that is very difficult to come by when there really isn't an alternative but to research since local stores do not provide a fully light controlled room.
Edited by xb1032 - 11/30/12 at 5:09pm
post #1453 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishari84 View Post

Hi Zombie,
Kraine is giving DLP projectors low scores in 3D because he said pop out is not as good as in Sony HW50ES. How do you compare 3D depth and pop between W7000 and HW50ES?
And does ZD201 provide better depth than True Depth glasses?


Can you comment please?
post #1454 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishari84 View Post

Hi Zombie,
Kraine is giving DLP projectors low scores in 3D because he said pop out is not as good as in Sony HW50ES. How do you compare 3D depth and pop between W7000 and HW50ES?
And does ZD201 provide better depth and pop than True Depth glasses?


Can you comment please?
post #1455 of 8048
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishari84 View Post

Hi Zombie,
Kraine is giving DLP projectors low scores in 3D because he said pop out is not as good as in Sony HW50ES. How do you compare 3D depth and pop between W7000 and HW50ES?

And does ZD201 provide better depth than True Depth glasses?

Hi, I haven't see the BQ 1070 yet, but I don't see any noticeable difference in the depth between HW50, 5020 or the W7000. I use Sammy's Adventure as one of my benchmarks because of the intense depth and popouts throughout this movie.

The only difference between the ZD201 and the True Depth is the ability for the Optoma glasses to completely block the red flash signal equally between both lenses. The True Depth's are very close and wouldn't notice the difference unless directly comparing. The True Depth also have the strongest signal lock vs. the other 3D DLP's i've used, including the BenQ glasses and the ZD201's.
post #1456 of 8048
Newb question and maybe not the right place for it. The JVC 4810 says RF 3d transmitter. The jvc 46 says IR transmitter on the jvc website. Is there an RF transmitter and glasses that would work with the 46? Considering purchasing the JVC 46 from AVscience as a pre release special vs the Epson 5020 I had planned on. 3d is a consideration for me and I'd prefer RF. Thanks for any advice or steering me in the right direction. This thread has been a huge help and a good part of why I'm considering JVC. 2d movies will be 95% of my usage and JVC kills at that. Don't want that 5% that's 3d to suck to hard though.
post #1457 of 8048
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cueball1 View Post

Newb question and maybe not the right place for it. The JVC 4810 says RF 3d transmitter. The jvc 46 says IR transmitter on the jvc website. Is there an RF transmitter and glasses that would work with the 46? Considering purchasing the JVC 46 from AVscience as a pre release special vs the Epson 5020 I had planned on. 3d is a consideration for me and I'd prefer RF. Thanks for any advice or steering me in the right direction. This thread has been a huge help and a good part of why I'm considering JVC. 2d movies will be 95% of my usage and JVC kills at that. Don't want that 5% that's 3d to suck to hard though.

The new RF transmitter will work with any of the new JVC's, including the older models. last year I wanted to use the JVC transmitter and the Monster Vision 3D transmitter at the same time. There are some inexpensive cables that can easily be made into a 'Y' cable for using 2 transmitters.

This could be helpful if someone already has a JVC IR transmitter + glasses, but also wants to add on the RF transmitter as well.

3d-splitter3.jpg


These are the new RF glasses.

JVC-glassesnew.jpg
post #1458 of 8048
Just wanted to post in this thread my opinion of the W7000. Being a CRT guy, I have been extremely LEARY over the years to switch to digital, and I have seen LOTS of them.

Blee0120 was gracious enough to let me, a total stranger, over to check out his setup on the Da-Lite HP. Darin P if you remember has praised this screen over again, and I finally got to see it in person. Blee0120 has a 9ft wide 16:9 HP paired with the W7000, and I have to admit DAMN IT WAS BRIGHT! NICE! 3 CHIP BRIGHT!

Holy crap it was bright. Had to be throwing easily 30 Foot Lamberts. and for DLP, combined with the Iris, the blacks were great.

I do have to admit though, I did see RAINBOWS. Yes, the W7000 reminded me how much I HATE RAINBOWS. In BenQ defense though I will admit, it was minimal. Actually acceptable. Blee, however didn't see them. He is lucky. I wish I was as gifted.

3D was KICK ASS. I like the motion on the stack better, but NO GHOSTING. Very nice.

I have to admit at my old age, DLP needs 4K just to reduce VISIBLE pixel count. Once 4K DLP becomes mainstream in our type of theaters, look out. Combined with the new techs coming to fruition, digital looks to be finally TRULY advancing past what us old farts here considered reference back in the day.

I'm looking foward to showing Blee0120 the stack. I don't think he has ever seen true insane on/off. I think he will be impressed. cool.gif
post #1459 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by overclkr View Post

I HATE RAINBOWS.
I have to admit at my old age, DLP needs 4K just to reduce VISIBLE pixel count.
I thought you might find this interesting http://www.avsforum.com/t/1436473/first-active-projector-screen
post #1460 of 8048
Hey Cliff, haven't heard from you in years. I haven't been on AVS for years since I got a Sammy 800 DLP. Anyway, I just added a Panamorph 480 and it GREATLY reduced the pixel visibility. Do you still have better than 20/20 vision? That may be part of your problem.

hanging around AVS is dangerous to the wallet. I am now anxiously awaiting my pre-ordered 4810's arrival. I remember going to a meet at your house, Cliff, where a friend brought over his brand new, newly released RS1 and we were all pretty impressed. I am thinking the 4810 is going to combine the strong features from my SP-A800B and the old Sony G70.
post #1461 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

I thought you might find this interesting http://www.avsforum.com/t/1436473/first-active-projector-screen

Impressive. A bit on the high side price wise, but impressive smile.gif
post #1462 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by edfowler View Post

Hey Cliff, haven't heard from you in years. I haven't been on AVS for years since I got a Sammy 800 DLP. Anyway, I just added a Panamorph 480 and it GREATLY reduced the pixel visibility. Do you still have better than 20/20 vision? That may be part of your problem.
hanging around AVS is dangerous to the wallet. I am now anxiously awaiting my pre-ordered 4810's arrival. I remember going to a meet at your house, Cliff, where a friend brought over his brand new, newly released RS1 and we were all pretty impressed. I am thinking the 4810 is going to combine the strong features from my SP-A800B and the old Sony G70.

Good to see you Ed! You just missed the most recent meet, Curt Palme drove all the way from Vancouver Canada to hang. It was fun smile.gif The stack is still cranking away all though one of the projectors has been flakey lately, they are still going strong with about 1200 hours on new tubes.

Hard to believe they have been in service over 6 years. eek.gif

I'm sure that JVC is gonna be very nice. I may have to take the ride down to check it out smile.gif

Now that I passed the age of 40, my eye site is beginning to crumble, but only on near side (I need to get reading glasses), other than that anything over 1.5ft away from me is still crystal clear thank goodness. I may be picking up this BenQ to compliment the stack. I am hoping I have enough throw distance in my room to pull it off. I would like to keep the stack in service until they are worth nothing, and I have to give away the PJ's. cool.gif
post #1463 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

...New JVC models - of course the natives are restless. For 2D PQ, the JVC's have been considered one of the best in class projectors for those who love watching blurays. There are early reports from some very trusted sources (Cine4home / AreaDVD) that the e-shift2 has noticeable improvements over the current version, plus numerous reports that 3D has been improved when watching the same tough content I've used in the shootout threads. I know many folks are anxious to hear about these new models.

Indeed - I am really looking forward to your findings. I'm sure you will be anxious to dive right in, but hopefully you'll calibrate it for 2D and 3D sooner than later so the initial impressions are "balanced" (pun intended).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

...There is one problem that doesn't get talked about much, though, and it's the drop in gamma the JVCs undergo as the projector ages. This shows up as bright scenes that have less pop and impact. It can be calibrated out, but simply raising the gamma in the menu doesn't get rid of the problem...

Indeed it is an issue that has been brought up many times. No one seems to care unfortunately, either that or they do not fully appreciate the impact on the PQ. Fortunately with auto calibration or advanced calibration it is fully correctable so its not a major concern for those who do so, assuming they recalibrate fairly often. The ones that it effects the most are those who do not calibrate at all or who calibrate it once when they get it and don't touch it again. I have not owned recent model JVC so I can't say to what extent the issue still exists.
post #1464 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by xb1032 View Post

If not, then I guess I'll go fly a kite (in 3D of course). biggrin.gif

Now you're talking!!! That's my favorite hobby, more of an addiction really.



post #1465 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post

Indeed - I am really looking forward to your findings. I'm sure you will be anxious to dive right in, but hopefully you'll calibrate it for 2D and 3D sooner than later so the initial impressions are "balanced" (pun intended).
Indeed it is an issue that has been brought up many times. No one seems to care unfortunately, either that or they do not fully appreciate the impact on the PQ. Fortunately with auto calibration or advanced calibration it is fully correctable so its not a major concern for those who do so, assuming they recalibrate fairly often. The ones that it effects the most are those who do not calibrate at all or who calibrate it once when they get it and don't touch it again. I have not owned recent model JVC so I can't say to what extent the issue still exists.

Well, I know it existed for the RS40. The gamma dropped significantly after a few hundred hours on mine.
post #1466 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post

Well, I know it existed for the RS40. The gamma dropped significantly after a few hundred hours on mine.
With those early lamps so did lumen output decline substantially after several hundred hours....mad.gif
My RS55 also suffered from gamma droop and I believe it's a "jvc characteristic" across several models and generations. I ended up redoing GS and gamma calibrations before 100 hours elapsed else the pop and wow factor declined. I sure hope that improves some with the "Longer-life/slowing-dimming" lamp but it will be interesting to see if my time between re-calibrations is affected at all by the new lamp.
post #1467 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by overclkr View Post

Just wanted to post in this thread my opinion of the W7000. Being a CRT guy, I have been extremely LEARY over the years to switch to digital, and I have seen LOTS of them.
Blee0120 was gracious enough to let me, a total stranger, over to check out his setup on the Da-Lite HP. Darin P if you remember has praised this screen over again, and I finally got to see it in person. Blee0120 has a 9ft wide 16:9 HP paired with the W7000, and I have to admit DAMN IT WAS BRIGHT! NICE! 3 CHIP BRIGHT!
Holy crap it was bright. Had to be throwing easily 30 Foot Lamberts. and for DLP, combined with the Iris, the blacks were great.
I do have to admit though, I did see RAINBOWS. Yes, the W7000 reminded me how much I HATE RAINBOWS. In BenQ defense though I will admit, it was minimal. Actually acceptable. Blee, however didn't see them. He is lucky. I wish I was as gifted.
3D was KICK ASS. I like the motion on the stack better, but NO GHOSTING. Very nice.
I have to admit at my old age, DLP needs 4K just to reduce VISIBLE pixel count. Once 4K DLP becomes mainstream in our type of theaters, look out. Combined with the new techs coming to fruition, digital looks to be finally TRULY advancing past what us old farts here considered reference back in the day.
I'm looking foward to showing Blee0120 the stack. I don't think he has ever seen true insane on/off. I think he will be impressed. cool.gif



I have a W7000 and an old school 2.8 gain Hi Power at 8.5' wide 16x9. But until my 4810 comes am usually running the RS50 JVC. And their previous models since RS1. I have always preferred higher than theater spec foot lamberts. Just curious though, are you referring to the W7000's auto iris (which to me doesn't help blacks a whole great deal) or have I missed recently someone figuring out in the professional sub menu how to manually iris it down? Like the W6000 I believe I have read that used to be possible.
post #1468 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonF View Post

I have a W7000 and an old school 2.8 gain Hi Power at 8.5' wide 16x9. But until my 4810 comes am usually running the RS50 JVC. And their previous models since RS1. I have always preferred higher than theater spec foot lamberts. Just curious though, are you referring to the W7000's auto iris (which to me doesn't help blacks a whole great deal) or have I missed recently someone figuring out in the professional sub menu how to manually iris it down? Like the W6000 I believe I have read that used to be possible.

According to what I was just reading in the 7000 thread on AVForum.com, you can adjust the iris and reduce the light output through a setting in the service menu. Zombie was going to check this out as well at some point.
post #1469 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post

According to what I was just reading in the 7000 thread on AVForum.com, you can adjust the iris and reduce the light output through a setting in the service menu. Zombie was going to check this out as well at some point.

Toe.
I think that it is with the 6000 only. Not the 7000.
post #1470 of 8048
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerfan33 View Post

Toe.
I think that it is with the 6000 only. Not the 7000.

I just confirmed with Soupdragon via PM over on AVForum that this also works on the 7000 which he owns. The only downside is there is no known way to save whatever you set it to so once you turn it off and then back on you have to go back in and reset it. No biggie for my needs as I am just glad there is a way to further tame the light for what little 2d I will watch if I end up getting this projector for mainly 3d duties.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014