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 210

post #6271 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

if you don't acknowledge some of the obvious deficiencies in RC gen 1 then there's little point to this discussion / comparison. Maybe some like the overcooked appearance and are mistaking it for sharpness. Scaling from the 4K HTPC creates a more natural PQ than the RC affords. VW600 RC is not as aggressive and looks great.

if you tell us that the HW55 looks better than the 4910 / X500 then it will help explain your viewing preferences.

I have not said that, I know the VW1000 introduses some ringing/edge enhancement, but I dont find it to look very overcooked. The only person I know that thinks the VW1000 RC looks overcooked is you. I also found last years E-Shift to look very digital and a bit overcooked, this years not as digital. I find the HW50/55 RC to have to much edge enhancemant and overcooked look compared to the VW1000 and JVC´s of this year. The VW500 I will test next week.
post #6272 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hatcher View Post

Well, the X700 definitely looks sharp to my eyes. Not saying the Sony isn't "sharper", but I seriously doubt the added sharpness would be very perceivable from 12'+ away. Like I said, unless you have a really large screen and/or sit really close to your screen and can actually benefit from the extra resolution and brightness, it's silly to get a 4K projector at this early point in the game. NOTE: 4K does help when zooming in on static images and text, so if you use your 4K projector for browsing the Internet and photo editing, that would be extremely beneficial. It would also help for passive 3D in getting 1080p to each eye.

I sold my Sony HW55 and got the X700 (was going to get the X500 but stumbled across a killer deal on a X700 so I went that route). I will say the X700 is noticeably sharper (better lens) than the HW55 and is wayyy better in the black level/contrast department. The Sony was a "little" bit brighter, but not by much once they've both been calibrated. Overall, it was definitely worth the upgrade. I'm really happy with the X700 and it will hold me over until 4K LED light engine powered projectors are "affordable" and native 4K content is readily available. We can't even get 1080p from our content providers yet so good quality 4K will take some time to get to us in abundance.

I'll sit back and wait for all the early adopters to drive prices down, report all the wrinkles (bugs) that need ironing out, and more content to be made available before I jump on the 4K bandwagon. wink.gif

This tells me you have not seen a 4K projector!cool.gif
post #6273 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

I have not said that, I know the VW1000 introduses some ringing/edge enhancement, but I dont find it to look very overcooked. The only person I know that thinks the VW1000 RC looks overcooked is you. I also found last years E-Shift to look very digital and a bit overcooked, this years not as digital. I find the HW50/55 RC to have to much edge enhancemant and overcooked look compared to the VW1000 and JVC´s of this year. The VW500 I will test next week.

Do you use one of the 4K Lumagens? If you tried it, maybe you can tell us how the Sony upscaling and the Lumagen looks. Others said the Oppo upscales better than the Sony too, did you ever check one of out too?
post #6274 of 8058
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

I have not said that, I know the VW1000 introduses some ringing/edge enhancement, but I dont find it to look very overcooked. The only person I know that thinks the VW1000 RC looks overcooked is you. I also found last years E-Shift to look very digital and a bit overcooked, this years not as digital. I find the HW50/55 RC to have to much edge enhancemant and overcooked look compared to the VW1000 and JVC´s of this year. The VW500 I will test next week.

There are a number of folks here who acknowledge that VW1000 RC1 needs improving. I avoid it by using the HTPC + MadVR scaling. What is your opinion on this if you have compared the 2?

We both agree that it's a great projector but that doesn't stop me from wishing it had better scaling built in or that it could be as convincing in low APL scenes as the RS57 I just looked at. I would also add less flicker in 3D.

I run multiple projectors to try and avoid some of the bias since each of these models I have here look great with content that shows their unique strengths. I realize that is not a practical setup for most.
post #6275 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

Do you use one of the 4K Lumagens? If you tried it, maybe you can tell us how the Sony upscaling and the Lumagen looks. Others said the Oppo upscales better than the Sony too, did you ever check one of out too?

No, I use the Lumagen XS and I am waiting for the 4K in 4K out Lumagen. And the Oppo upscaling is not better than the VW1000 I think, but I have not tested it enough to make a good comment. But I see some report it to be better than the VW500 that zombie says is better than the VW1000. I will have the VW500 here for a week or two so I will have time to look closly at it and see if I find the same as zombie did regarding the RC. If he is correct the upgrade might be worth the money just to get RC2 if it is included in the upgrade.
post #6276 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

There are a number of folks here who acknowledge that VW1000 RC1 needs improving. I avoid it by using the HTPC + MadVR scaling. What is your opinion on this if you have compared the 2?

We both agree that it's a great projector but that doesn't stop me from wishing it had better scaling built in or that it could be as convincing in low APL scenes as the RS57 I just looked at. I would also add less flicker in 3D.

I run multiple projectors to try and avoid some of the bias since each of these models I have here look great with content that shows their unique strengths. I realize that is not a practical setup for most.

I also think it needs improving to the slight edge enhancement, but I don´t find it to be overcooked like the RC on the HW50/55. I have not tested the MadVR scaling as I dont have a HTPC in my HT, I have a big quite noisy PC I use when I test native 4K, but I take it out of my HT when I am finished. Can you give me a introduction in Mad VR as I tried to innstall it some time ago I did not get it to work with my current PC. I agree with you on the low, but I say very low APL scenes compared to the JVC and 3D is not something I watch. If I was interrested in 3D I would have a 2 projector solution in my HT with a DLP to show 3D.

You also wrote earlier in this tread that the RC in the VW1000 was not so different from the one in the VW500, have you changed your mind on that matter?
post #6277 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

This tells me you have not seen a 4K projector!cool.gif

No, I haven't seen one personally, but going off of science and mathematics and the average human visual perception system one can derive that there will not be a significant increase in perceived sharpness from a given distance. So given your statement, this tells me you're in denial. I would feel the same way if I spent $25,000 on a 4K projector and someone told me it wasn't "WAY BETTER" than a $8000 2K projector. cool.gif

But really, in all honesty I have seen dual 4K gaming monitors at a friends house and they did look great from 1' away. Sit back to 5' and the difference vanishes and looks pretty much like 2K res. So you can argue this mute point all you want, you must have hawk eyes. Maybe you should be on that show Super Humans. rolleyes.gif

And I never said 4K wasn't better than 2K, just not "that" much better from a given viewing distance/screen size. I clearly stated if I had a large enough screen I would rather have a 4K projector.
post #6278 of 8058
Thread Starter 
When I was first comparing the 1000 RC vs the 600, I was fairly certain that I was preferring the 600's RC. As I looked at it more, it seems it's more different in appearance than specifically better / worse. I left the comparison without a solid opinion. I'm curious to see what you think when you get a chance to compare them.

here is the quickest way to experiment with the MadVR scaling:

download Jriver:

http://www.jriver.com/download.html

This is a discussion of the settings, it's pretty straight forward.

http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=80253.0

you're mainly looking for the scaling settings to change to JINC + AR (active anti-ringing filter)

10-image-scaling2dulw.png
post #6279 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hatcher View Post

No, I haven't seen one personally, but going off of science and mathematics and the average human visual perception system one can derive that there will not be a significant increase in perceived sharpness from a given distance. So given your statement, this tells me you're in denial. I would feel the same way if I spent $25,000 on a 4K projector and someone told me it wasn't "WAY BETTER" than a $8000 2K projector. cool.gif

But really, in all honesty I have seen dual 4K gaming monitors at a friends house and they did look great from 1' away. Sit back to 5' and the difference vanishes and looks pretty much like 2K res. So you can argue this mute point all you want, you must have hawk eyes. Maybe you should be on that show Super Humans. rolleyes.gif

And I never said 4K wasn't better than 2K, just not "that" much better from a given viewing distance/screen size. I clearly stated if I had a large enough screen I would rather have a 4K projector.

I have owned a 4K projector for almost two years now and I can assure you there is a difference even at 100" from 15+ feet, and I think many 4K projector owners would say the same. So I don´t think your maths and sience couts in every setting, the same was said when BD arrived that the difference from DVD to BD was not worth it. The difference from 1080p to 4K is not so big, but it is significant. I have tested this many times in my own HT with more than only me in the room and we all se the same and we are not super humans. I am not in denial and I don´t have to justify my 25000$ projector as I could afford it and have no regrets. I am actually looking forward to the day a 8000$ projector is at the same level or better as this is one of the reasons I test projectors every year. If I find something better I will buy it if I can afford it, and if it is a 8000$ projector I will be very happy!smile.gif

And I have a question for you! Do you think your projector looks best with or without 4K E-shift??cool.gif
Edited by Andreas21 - 2/2/14 at 2:16pm
post #6280 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

When I was first comparing the 1000 RC vs the 600, I was fairly certain that I was preferring the 600's RC. As I looked at it more, it seems it's more different in appearance than specifically better / worse. I left the comparison without a solid opinion. I'm curious to see what you think when you get a chance to compare them.

here is the quickest way to experiment with the MadVR scaling:

download Jriver:

http://www.jriver.com/download.html

This is a discussion of the settings, it's pretty straight forward.

http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=80253.0

you're mainly looking for the scaling settings to change to JINC + AR (active anti-ringing filter)

10-image-scaling2dulw.png

Thank you!

I will see if I will try it out some time, since I don´t use a PC all the time in my HT I don´t know when.
post #6281 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

I have owned a 4K projector for almost two years now and I can assure you there is a difference even at 100" from 15+ feet, and I think many 4K projector owners would say the same. So I don´t think your maths and sience couts in every setting, the same was said when BD arrived that the difference from DVD to BD was not worth it. The difference from 1080p to 4K is not so big, but it is significant. I have tested this many times in my own HT with more than only me in the room and we all se the same and we are not super humans. I am not in denial and I don´t have to justify my 25000$ projector as I could afford it and have no regrets. I am actually looking forward to the day a 8000$ projector is at the same level or better as this is one of the reasons I test projectors every year. If I find something better I will buy it if I can afford it, and if it is a 8000$ projector I will be very happy!smile.gif

And I have a question for you! Do you think your projector looks best with or without 4K E-shift??cool.gif

There may be a "discernible"difference with native 4K source material, but I highly doubt at 15' on a 100" screen, 4K upscaling made any significant difference.

I can't tell if e-Shift 3 is on or off until I get < 5' away from a 120" image. You can't add information that isn't present in the source material...I prefer to get what the director intended me to see. I bet it does look "better" displaying a 4K image with 4K content on a large screen, but I don't think it's worth a $20,000 premium. I'll definitely buy a 4K pj in 5 years or so just for that incremental upgrade in PQ, but til then I appreciate all you rich folk driving prices down for me. biggrin.gif
post #6282 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

No, I use the Lumagen XS and I am waiting for the 4K in 4K out Lumagen. And the Oppo upscaling is not better than the VW1000 I think, but I have not tested it enough to make a good comment. But I see some report it to be better than the VW500 that zombie says is better than the VW1000. I will have the VW500 here for a week or two so I will have time to look closly at it and see if I find the same as zombie did regarding the RC. If he is correct the upgrade might be worth the money just to get RC2 if it is included in the upgrade.

Its probably not too smart to get one when less than a year they should have hdmi 2.0 Lumagens. How much does the Darbee add to your image? That's if you use one of course
post #6283 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hatcher View Post

There may be a "discernible"difference with native 4K source material, but I highly doubt at 15' on a 100" screen, 4K upscaling made any significant difference.

I can't tell if e-Shift 3 is on or off until I get < 5' away from a 120" image. You can't add information that isn't present in the source material...I prefer to get what the director intended me to see. I bet it does look "better" displaying a 4K image with 4K content on a large screen, but I don't think it's worth a $20,000 premium. I'll definitely buy a 4K pj in 5 years or so just for that incremental upgrade in PQ, but til then I appreciate all you rich folk driving prices down for me. biggrin.gif

I can see the difference easy from 15`on a 100" screen, are you telling me I am lying??
post #6284 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

Its probably not too smart to get one when less than a year they should have hdmi 2.0 Lumagens. How much does the Darbee add to your image? That's if you use one of course

I use Darbee at HD 35-40%, higher than that I think it ads negative artifacts to the picture. I have a Oppo 105D, and before that I used an external Darbee.
post #6285 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

I can see the difference easy from 15`on a 100" screen, are you telling me I am lying??

Not at all, but you must have "much" better vision than me with my glasses on (corrected to 20/20).

I have an Oppo BDP-103D (4K upscaling + Darbee) going through a Sony STR-DN1040 AVR (4K upscaling - probably similar if not the same to what's built-in to their projectors) to my JVC DLA-X700R (e-Shift 3) and it makes the image look really amazing playing good Blu-ray content. Better than anything I've seen other than OLED.

Now that being said, I can imagine a native 4K projector with native 4K source material being a bit better (sharper), but not that much from a viewing distance of 12' on a 120" screen. Not with my eyes, yours are "clearly" superior and in another league. Maybe I need to go see my optometrist for a checkup. eek.gif

There are many reviews in line with what you are saying and many in line with what I'm saying. And I'm not saying anyone is lying here, but I feel like most blow these comparisons wayyy out of proportion. If you think the Sony 1000 is wayyy better than my setup, suit yourself. But you wont convince me of that until I can do a direct A/B comparison with "my" eyes in "my" viewing environment, I'll believe it when I see it. And I don't think it would be worth the $20,000 premium anyways. To each their own...

And my setup is like looking through a window, so I'm content for now. rolleyes.gif
post #6286 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hatcher View Post

Not at all, but you must have "much" better vision than me with my glasses on (corrected to 20/20).

I have an Oppo BDP-103D (4K upscaling + Darbee) going through a Sony STR-DN1040 AVR (4K upscaling - probably similar if not the same to what's built-in to their projectors) to my JVC DLA-X700R (e-Shift 3) and it makes the image look really amazing playing good Blu-ray content. Better than anything I've seen other than OLED.

Now that being said, I can imagine a native 4K projector with native 4K source material being a bit better (sharper), but not that much from a viewing distance of 12' on a 120" screen. Not with my eyes, yours are "clearly" superior and in another league. Maybe I need to go see my optometrist for a checkup. eek.gif

There are many reviews in line with what you are saying and many in line with what I'm saying. And I'm not saying anyone is lying here, but I feel like most blow these comparisons wayyy out of proportion. If you think the Sony 1000 is wayyy better than my setup, suit yourself. But you wont convince me of that until I can do a direct A/B comparison with "my" eyes in "my" viewing environment, I'll believe it when I see it. And I don't think it would be worth the $20,000 premium anyways. To each their own...

And my setup is like looking through a window, so I'm content for now. rolleyes.gif

I have 20/20 vision without glasses, but I don´t have superhuman vision. And I agree with you that the E-Shift 3 does not make as much of a difference as the VW1000 upscaling with RC, and I have never said the VW1000 is wayyy better than your X700, but it is quite a bit better. And if you want to be inovative in this business it costs and I think the VW1000 is worth every penny, but of corse one day (very soon I hope) it will be beaten and probarbly by a cheaper projector, but that is just the way it is. I am glad you are happy with your setup and so am I, and I could definetly live with a X700 as my projector, but since I own the VW1000 I am not ready to change it out just yet.smile.gif

And concerning A/B/side by side tests is the way I do it and if possible in my own HT and that is because it is the only way you can see the differences. And if you have the chance to test the VW1000 against your X700 I think you should do it and see for yourself.cool.gif
Edited by Andreas21 - 2/2/14 at 3:50pm
post #6287 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

I have 20/20 vision without glasses, but I don´t have superhuman vision. And I agree with you that the E-Shift 3 does not make as much of a difference as the VW1000 upscaling with RC, and I have never said the VW1000 is wayyy better than your X700, but it is quite a bit better. And if you want to be inovative in this business it costs and I think the VW1000 is worth every penny, but of corse one day (very soon I hope) it will be beaten and probarbly by a cheaper projector, but that is just the way it is. I am glad you are happy with your setup and so am I, and I could definetly live with a X700 as my projector, but since I own the VW1000 I am not ready to change it out just yet.smile.gif

See, obviously we're both happy with what we have so there's no point in arguing...especially when I haven't seen a 4K pj (only a 4K monitor) in person. Now if I get a 4K pj in a few years to demo side-by-side with my X700 and it blows it out of the water, then I'll happily eat my own words and upgrade. It will have to blow my mind compared to what I see now though because this setup is ridiculous! I've never seen any display over 70" that looks this good. eek.gif

NOTE: my initial point is based solely on math & science and not general observations so what's perceived in reality could be different than what math & science would infer. I'm simply stating that the two (math & science v/s reality) can't be too far apart in their claims or someone is likely to call BS. biggrin.gif

And I'm not trying to be an @$$, I just hate when people over hype a product, then I buy said product and come to realize it's not "that" much better than what I'm upgrading from, then I'm pissed, LOL! biggrin.gif

As a side note, I have a friend with corrected 20/20 vision and he can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 55" screen. It's really difficult without the proper content and viewing distance.
post #6288 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hatcher View Post

See, obviously we're both happy with what we have so there's no point in arguing...especially when I haven't seen a 4K pj (only a 4K monitor) in person. Now if I get a 4K pj in a few years to demo side-by-side with my X700 and it blows it out of the water, then I'll happily eat my own words and upgrade. It will have to blow my mind compared to what I see now though because this setup is ridiculous! I've never seen any display over 70" that looks this good. eek.gif

NOTE: my initial point is based solely on math & science and not general observations so what's perceived in reality could be different than what math & science would infer. I'm simply stating that the two (math & science v/s reality) can't be too far apart in their claims or someone is likely to call BS. biggrin.gif

And I'm not trying to be an @$$, I just hate when people over hype a product, then I buy said product and come to realize it's not "that" much better than what I'm upgrading from, then I'm pissed, LOL! biggrin.gif

As a side note, I have a friend with corrected 20/20 vision and he can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 55" screen. It's really difficult without the proper content and viewing distance.

And also to be able to see differences in a picture you need to be interested and know what you are doing. My wife has 20/20 vision and she could not see the difference between my VW1000 and a 720p projector if i did not tell her what to look for and she would definetly not see any difference between a X700 and a VW1000 even if I told her...tongue.gif She probarbly wood, but not if I did not tell her what to look for.
post #6289 of 8058
I have the 500 (600 in the USA) and I will say 2 things about the 4k resolution

1: the picture is much much sharper with less artifacts than my old sony vw95 which is known to be a great projector. He difference is very noticeable to the point that when I was comparing the two side by side, the 95 looked soft and dull in comparison. And dim.

2: I use a 4k pc and edit my photos. In this case there is no comparison. The photo and gaming content is much much better than in 1080p. Pictures no longer look like pictures, they look like real life. and the native 4k video content I've seen is extremely good, and if the content becomes available soon (bd4k), people will be able to tell the difference. Large difference on a large screen.

Btw I sit 10 feet back from a 133" screen (16x9).

That said, there are ways that the jvc a do trump the sonys, mainly on off contrast. But resolution is definately better in the sonys case.
post #6290 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

And also to be able to see differences in a picture you need to be interested and know what you are doing. My wife has 20/20 vision and she could not see the difference between my VW1000 and a 720p projector if i did not tell her what to look for and she would definetly not see any difference between a X700 and a VW1000 even if I told her...tongue.gif She probarbly wood, but not if I did not tell her what to look for.

I know what you mean. I'm sure once you "see with your own eyes" the added detail, clarity, and sharpness offered up by native 4K over the course of a couple years, it would be easier to spot the differences between 2K and 4K.

Personally, contrast and black levels are more important to me v/s 4K so until I can get a 4K pj that has the low APL blacks my X700 offers, I wouldn't upgrade anyways.

I'm just ready for the day 4K LED and/or laser light engine powered projectors are affordable. The current UHP lamps we use are my biggest concern/issue with projetors. Having to constantly calibrate over time as the bulb ages is non-optimal, IMO. Though this should be a non-issue by the time I'm able to upgrade again.

And hopefully large screen (120"+) 4K OLED will be available and affordable within the next 10 years. That will be the final nail in the coffin for two-piece front-projection for me. smile.gif

Just for fun, here's some science to back my claim. wink.gif
http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/
Edited by Mr. Hatcher - 2/2/14 at 4:50pm
post #6291 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hatcher View Post

I know what you mean. I'm sure once you "see with your own eyes" the added detail, clarity, and sharpness offered up by native 4K over the course of a couple years, it would be easier to spot the differences between 2K and 4K.

Personally, contrast and black levels are more important to me v/s 4K so until I can get a 4K pj that has the low APL blacks my X700 offers, I wouldn't upgrade anyways.

I'm just ready for the day 4K LED and/or laser light engine powered projectors are affordable. The current UHP lamps we use are my biggest concern/issue with projetors. Having to constantly calibrate over time as the bulb ages is non-optimal, IMO. Though this should be a non-issue by the time I'm able to upgrade again.

And hopefully large screen (120"+) 4K OLED will be available and affordable within the next 10 ye That will be the final nail in the coffin for two-piece front-projection for me. smile.gif

Hopefully in 2 years, JVC will have affordable laser projectors
post #6292 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

Hopefully in 2 years, JVC will have affordable laser projectors

^ +1 smile.gif
post #6293 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post


also after seeing the 4910 last night, I would have harder timing picking the HW50/HW55 if the price was similar, the contrast gap is even furthered. It's more naturally sharp and the 3D has definitely caught up. I was using the new Optoma RF emitter + Optoma glasses from the HD91 and they are much better than my original MV3D transmitter / glasses. They must have changed something in the timing. Monster Vs. Aliens bridge scene was more impressive than I was expecting. Now with CMD in 3D, there is no real advantage to the Sony 3D in this generation vs. the JVC.

I'm very pleased to read that Zombie!

When I was considering buying the Sony 500ES aside from the added brightness and goodies for 2D, I really wanted to have some better 3D performance in my system, since I'm just starting to get into it (on my RS55). To read that the JVC is now doing decent 3D helps alleviate one of my concerns in not going for the Sony. I haven't tried 3D on my RS57 yet.
post #6294 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

I'm very pleased to read that Zombie!

When I was considering buying the Sony 500ES aside from the added brightness and goodies for 2D, I really wanted to have some better 3D performance in my system, since I'm just starting to get into it (on my RS55). To read that the JVC is now doing decent 3D helps alleviate one of my concerns in not going for the Sony. I haven't tried 3D on my RS57 yet.

How are you liking 2D now on your new JVC? Are you happy with the improvements in darker scenes with the iris?
post #6295 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by xb1032 View Post

How are you liking 2D now on your new JVC? Are you happy with the improvements in darker scenes with the iris?

See my new post in the Official JVC DLA-X700R / RS57U Owners Thread.
post #6296 of 8058
I will be going to Craigs demo of the RS4910 and 57 this coming weekend and would like to see the 3D to compare to my RS45. I have a good collection of Bluray 3D's but I don't have Monsters v Aliens or Sammys Adventure. Could anyone kindly tell me some other good "torture test" movies and which scenes would be good to check especially for ghosting. I have Despicable Me and know the scenes that Zombie has shown in the past from that movie but other suggestions would be helpful.
Thanks
Joe
post #6297 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post


also after seeing the 4910 last night, I would have harder timing picking the HW50/HW55 if the price was similar, the contrast gap is even furthered. It's more naturally sharp and the 3D has definitely caught up. I was using the new Optoma RF emitter + Optoma glasses from the HD91 and they are much better than my original MV3D transmitter / glasses. They must have changed something in the timing. Monster Vs. Aliens bridge scene was more impressive than I was expecting. Now with CMD in 3D, there is no real advantage to the Sony 3D in this generation vs. the JVC.

Zombie
How would you compare the 4910 to the Epson 5030/6030 for 3D?
post #6298 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hatcher View Post

I know what you mean. I'm sure once you "see with your own eyes" the added detail, clarity, and sharpness offered up by native 4K over the course of a couple years, it would be easier to spot the differences between 2K and 4K.

Personally, contrast and black levels are more important to me v/s 4K so until I can get a 4K pj that has the low APL blacks my X700 offers, I wouldn't upgrade anyways.

I'm just ready for the day 4K LED and/or laser light engine powered projectors are affordable. The current UHP lamps we use are my biggest concern/issue with projetors. Having to constantly calibrate over time as the bulb ages is non-optimal, IMO. Though this should be a non-issue by the time I'm able to upgrade again.

And hopefully large screen (120"+) 4K OLED will be available and affordable within the next 10 years. That will be the final nail in the coffin for two-piece front-projection for me. smile.gif

Just for fun, here's some science to back my claim. wink.gif
http://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

The difference in very low APL scenes ( where on/off contrast is most important) is quite big between the Sony and JVC, but movies with such dark scenes is very rear, in lov APL scenes that is very commom in most films the difference is not big and the Sony is on par or even better in most scenes and in lighter scenes the Sony is also better. If the difference was in favor of the JVC in low APL and even middle dark scenes I would replace my Sony this year because I find such scenes to be very important for the movie experience, but so far (even after two years on the market) the VW1000 the only scenes the JVC is better are so rear that I don´t think about it. I also have quite a large screen (3m wide 2.35:1) and I like the punch the VW1000 can give in lighter scenes (most films has alot more middle dark to light scenes compared to very dark) that the JVC can´t. When I tested the X500 against the VW1000 it had the same lightoutput with a new lamp in high as the VW1000 had with about 850h on its lamp also in high, the difference was 3 lux in favor of the JVC. So with new lamps the difference will be huge, I think my friends lamp has dimmed about 40% in these 850 hours. And to me light scenes is as important as dark scenes and intrascene/ansi contrast is as important or even more importent than on/off as long as you have decent on on/off, as I think the combination of the two is very important. The JVC this year seems to have higher ansi/intrascene contrast (i did not measure and I don´t have a good enough lightmeter to measure) than the earlier models and this is very positive for them, I think a JVC with a little higher ansi/intrascene contrast and some more lumens the coming JVC will be the PJ´s will be the ones to beat, it has been 5 years since I last owned a JVC and I welcome it back when the time is right.smile.gif

And you can post science stuff as much as you like, I know what I see and I think that is most important.
post #6299 of 8058
It appears that JVC has now lost its native contrast crown to Sony (but maybe not for long -- competition is a good thing), albeit to Sony's premier projector. Nonetheless this is a very impressive accomplishment on the part of Sony.

"It is customary to say that JVC is the champion of native contrast, it might be true before VW1100ES but this is no longer the case now. The image dynamics in mixed scenes (dark and light content) is visually better on the new SONY so much so that the activation of the dynamic iris becomes useless."

The native contrast of the Sony VW1100ES apparently was measured to be 19000:1 and 137,500:1 dynamic contrast.

Here's the review for those interested.

http://translate.google.fr/translate?hl=fr&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.projection-homecinema.fr%2F2014%2F01%2F24%2Ftest-sony-vpl-vw1100es%2F

The problem I have with the VW1100ES is that it has state-of-the-art 2D but falls down for 3D. The 3D ghosting test shows light ghosting or what I call the cross-channel contamination effect (Triple C effect) which may not rear its ugly head often with respect to the main objects in a scene; however, its my suspicion that this bleeding between channels wrecks havoc in the background of scenes causing a hazy appearance that distracts once a viewer becomes aware of it. For me the Triple C effect ruins what could be, and should be, stellar 3D. As part of the $25,000 package Sony should include a DLP projector to do the 3D heavy lifting! biggrin.gif
Edited by Deja Vu - 2/3/14 at 6:51am
post #6300 of 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

It appears that JVC has now lost its native contrast crown to Sony, albeit to Sony's premier projector. Nonetheless this is a very impressive accomplishment on the part of Sony.

"It is customary to say that JVC is the champion of native contrast, it might be true before VW1100ES but this is no longer the case now. The image dynamics in mixed scenes (dark and light content) is visually better on the new SONY so much so that the activation of the dynamic iris becomes useless."

The native contrast of the Sony VW1100ES apparently was measured to be 19000:1 and 137,500:1 dynamic contrast.

Here's the review for those interested.

I'm on my iPhone and don't see the link to the review so I'm not sure where its from. But the native contrast of the top jvc projectors have been measured as far higher than those Sony numbers you just posted (e.g. over 100,000:1 native contrast ratio by Cine4home) So I'm not sure why you think the Sony now beats the jvcs. (That was also the case when AV forums measured the contrast of the VW 1000ES Sony versus the JVC projector of that time).
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