Sony HW50 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5020 / JVC RS55 / JVC RS 46 / JVC RS4810 / JVC RS56 Mini-shootout... - Page 38

I thought this was an interesting comment about the HW50.


"Let's say, hypothetically, the HW50 came without the reality creation software. Like the HW30, people would be complaining of a soft picture. I've seen a bunch of people complain about the optics of the HW30 and from what someone has told me who knows a Sony insider, the HW50 has a very similar optical system in place just like the HW30. In this Sony's price range the optics shouldn't be this bad. For $4-5K, most projectors regardless of display technology use a better lens. What Sony has done is a kind of dick move. Instead of spending the extra money on a better lens they implement software they had already developed and then tweaked for this projector. They are saving a ton of money because of this choice. The point I was trying to make before was that we shouldn't be okay with letting companies use this type of technology in lieu of sub par optics. What this shows Sony is that they don't need to put a good lens in the projector, all they need to do is use software to enhance the picture to add sharpness when there wasn't any there to begin with. I just don't want this to become a trend with projector manufacturers. Like I said, this could be a huge indicator that people will still buy a product in a certain price range even though the quality of the product isn't up the the standard that most other manufacturer's produce."

Just how "bad" are the optics in the Sony? Without RC does the Sony look soft?

I've read only one review that says this. PC rates the 5020 pretty much on par with the Panny and PR rates the 5020 above the Panny and pretty much on par with the Sony. These reviews are all over the place and contradict each other so they're pretty much useless for my purposes.

Hi,

I am about to buy a new projector. As Mits HC9000 is at the same price range of these projectors today, would you think it would be a better option over Sony HW50 or Epson 5020? I really don't care about RC on Sony. For me black levels, uniformity and convergence are the most important features. 3D is impotant too.
I have a dedicated home theater room. A completely dark environment, no lights at all!
Edited by nickba - 11/19/12 at 9:04pm

Exactly, that's why it would be nice to see it compared here.

This is nothing new, you'll likely see personal bias come into play on each and every (comparison) review, including AVS, so if someone is going to base a purchase upon a few select reviews they should read the reviewers history a bit and see where the reviewers bias lands.

Generally that bias is for a particular tech but often times the bias goes as far as a specific model and then even beyond image bias we have to consider brand loyalty and purchase justification.

It's fairly obvious where most reviewers bias comes into play if you pay attention and being the flawed species that we are none of us is immune regardless of claims to the contrary.

Jason

It would be great if we could get one in Zombie's hands. The feature set in conjunction with the price is very appealing with the Panny, but I am curious how it would stack up in pure performance. FI in 3d, low lag, extended masking support which I would LOVE in my setup, lens memory, etc........looks like a lot of bang for the buck and its a shame it cant be apart of the shootout.

I'm not projector guru so feel free to tell me what I'm missing. But this whole idea makes no sense to me. The lens assembly is the final part of the projected image (excluding the screen) before you see it. So if the lens is so bad, and is making the image soft, I can't see how RC could make any difference since that is processing taking place before the lens. What am I missing here? Otherwise I'd have to conclude that perhaps the lens wasn't as bad as some make it to be, but rather the panels and processing.

Where I live the JVC 55 costs literally twice what the 5020 costs and significantly more than the Sony. How does the 3D on the Sony compare with the JVC? Part of the problem is the rather large differences in price. The Sony is about 60% more expensive than the cost of the 5020! We're simply not comparing apples to apples here, but apples to oranges and peaches. If I'm going to pay more then someone convince me that the JVC is significantly better than the Epson since it costs a lot more and the same goes for the Sony. Slightly better doesn't cut it.

When the JVC gets 3D right, it gets it REALLY right! It looks incredible! There's a sparkle and richness to it that I feel in the pit of my stomach. One of the big differences between your setup and mine is the size of the screen. Mine is only 110", so ghosting looks even more exaggerated. Another AVS member from St. Louis invited me over when he saw my posts complaining about the RS45 last year. He had just gotten one, too. I watched several clips on his 126" HP, and while I saw the ghosting, it wasn't as distracting. A 142" screen might make ghosting even harder to perceive. You can test that theory when you get the new JVC. Zoom down to 110" and see how it looks. Does ghosting become more pronounced? I'm really looking forward to your impressions. If JVC has solved the ghosting problem, I'll want one again. I probably won't wait.

what screen size and material are you using and at what seating distance referring to your comments about RBE and too much brightness. thanks

Please don't take what I am going to say the wrong way zombie. I just need some clarification. I have been watching this thread for a while and from what I have gathered you loved the 3d on the benq and hated it on the jvc's and felt the epson was behind the Sony as far as 3d performance. Now that joe has mentioned what he has seen and you have done some testing over again with the new glasses, have you changed your mind? Have these new glasses combined with a dimming bulb changed its abilities? All of the comments seem to be contradictory. You guys have both talked about how wonderful and terrible it is at the same time. Does the good outweigh the bad? Will what you see with your 55 translate to the 35 as far as black level 3d? Please explain what you guys are talking about with the dark line white ghosting. As you can tell I am kinda confused

Thanks

Dont tempt me! Seriously, if I did buy the 8000, I would send it to you for a calibration/evaluation just so we could get this projector in the mix. Why has no 8000 owner taken you up on this???

3d looked good on the JVC??? Have you been drinking? There are some discs that the JVC does good with no doubt. Avatar, Under the Sea, etc.......so I take it the contrast on the JVC is a noticeable difference in 3d vs the BenQ 7000? I still want that ghost/flicker free 3d Zombie that only the 7000 can give me. Just waiting for a smokin deal. Maybe this week being BF and all. I have been stocking up on some new 3d blus in anticipation of landing a new 3d only projector. I am totally turned off with even watching 3d on my 45 at this point..........I think the last 3d I watched on it was when Underworld 4 hit!

Zombie, could you please comment on that?

I've noticed a distinct difference from the beginning with JVC ghosting vs ghosting in other 3D displays. With the JVCs, if you have a dark object against a bright background (such as a telephone pole against a bright sky), you see dark ghosts of the telephone pole on either side - what I call "dark ghosting." With lots of other displays, the ghosting tends to be with bright objects against dark backgrounds (such as headlights coming down a dark road, or Galaxar's slender tentacles against the dark backdrop of his space ship in Monsters vs Aliens). I refer to that as "light ghosting." I'm sure it has to do with how the various displays are able to refresh their pixels - the speed at which they can transition from dark to light or vice versa. Whatever the cause, 3D on the JVCs looks amazing in dark scenes, which are free of light ghosting (no double headlights on dark roads). But they suck in brighter scenes, where the dark ghosting is killer. And this gets worse with each passing day. As the lamp ages, ghosting on the JVCs gets worse and worse. That's why I didn't pick up on it as much when the lamp was new. It's not nearly as noticeable. But the premature dimming of the JVC lamps that plagued so many owners makes the 3D all but unwatchable in just a few hundred hours. Also, the JVCs don't handle 120hz 3D well even if the lamp is brand new. I have a 3D camcorder that shoots at 120hz. Ironically, it's a JVC model. I was never able to watch footage from that camcorder on the JVC without seeing terrible dark ghosting. Side by side 3D video at 120hz has the same problem.

I don't think some reviewers are aware of these issues. They may evaluate 3D performance based on a couple of clips that don't exhibit the problems, or only with a new lamp, or only with Blu-ray 3D movies showing at 24p. If you use the "right" material, you can come away thinking the JVC is a great 3D projector (even a brilliant 3D projector). But push it with challenging material, or try to watch when the lamp has 500 hours on it, and your impression may be quite different. That's why I'm hoping they were able to solve the problems. If heat is the solution (new lamps generate more heat), maybe they just put a little hot plate under the chips that kicks in just for 3D mode.

[quote name="Joseph Clark" url="/t/1434826/sony-hw50-benq-w7000-epson-5020-jvc-rs55-jvc-rs-46-jvc-rs4810-jvc-rs56-mini-shootout-2012-


Thanks!! Your comments were exactly what I was looking for. So simply don't bother with any current jvc and wait and see if the new fix the problems. This is if you are looking primarily for an all around machine.
Edited by jhunt17 - 11/19/12 at 9:35pm

Read all 1131 posts and I apologize if I missed this info if it is posted. Zombie, can you please tell me what is the 2D lumens on the Sony HW50 after the projector was properly calibrated in both eco and high mode? Is it drastically different than a calibrated Benq W7000. thankyou.

I evaluated the new X55/48 and X35/46 over the weekend and talked for hours with the sales manager from JVC Germany. Both models were pre production, X55 beeing closer to final than the X35.
He said if you take the X55 and turn off eShift, you basically have the image quality of the X35. He suggested buying the X55 since then advantage is worth it, I believe it he was honest without financial interests :-)
3D on X35 had no ghosting with this guardian movie with the Owl. But Sammys Aventure, or Turtle something did show some ghosting. I found it to be acceptable, better than my 8090 Samsung LCD TV. The image felt really smooth and the glasses are great, light and comfortable.
Sadly I had only the chance to compare X35 against the new Epson, which had only the advantage of brightness but JVC rules in all other aspects.
And the X55 with HW50 and the Sony 1000, which kind of runied it for me since the image of the Sony 1000 made all others look greatly inferior.

I ordered the X35.
Send with annyoing iPad keyboard :-)

My screen is a 153" Seymour Xd screen rated at 1.2 but probably closer to 1.0. I sit 15' from my screen.

So, X35 was better than new Epson('s) what comes to 3D ?

Being a Canuck I totally agree - that's why I went with the Epson 6020.

Zombie I like to ask a question on the W7000 which I now have. 3D performance is unmatched as anyone can see, but we can all admit that it somewhat lacks with 2D material, I personally can live with the 2D performance. The quest is with reg DVD material, would the Darbee help clean up its washed out looks. This is where this projector dies. I'm switching all material I can over to Blue-ray, but not all movies are in blue-ray. My old Sony did much better with reg DVD material this thing is horrific with reg DVD's IMO. Also like to Thank you for the input on the True Depth glasses they do work very well, Still waiting for the ZD102's to be available in the States, tried ordering from Amazon UK but it seams they will not ship. If anyone knows how to get this from Amazon UK please shine in some info thanks!!!! Sorry reposted due to poor spelling, Don't try to type at 2AM. When Sony or JVC fixes the crosstalk to match DLP's performance I'll return to their displays, cause as for 2D performance they win hands down IMO, but for 3D I can't take the crosstalk I pick it out easily thats where the W7000 is amazing.
Edited by rob47v - 11/20/12 at 2:11am

I have been wondering, is there any hope for epson to upgrade the firmware to apply FI in 3D? Has epson ever done something like this, I mean major upgrade via software?

+1 !

Spiderman was borderline excellent (especially blacks!), on my RS55 but I'm also using the newer IR PKAG2BP USB glasses (which IMO seems to help a bit over the original PKAG1BP and x103 glasses... do the x104's improve on these models IYO??).

My other treat of the week if you're a big Sci-fi fan, was the 3D version of iRobot... Wow was that surprisingly good (and the DTS-HD remaster at THX reference didn't hurt my experience either!)! With the exception of the usual ghosting in spots the conversion was on of the best to date, with excellent fidelity and great contrast (blacks were borderline excellent; no crushing detected). Very enjoyable and as this conversion process seemingly improves, I look forward to more blockbusters getting converted like this!

BTW - I seem to be getting fairly good results lately using the Parallux feature to help reduce perceived ghosting. One or two clicks to the left or right seems to find the best balance between foreground and background alignment (ghosting), and the more I watch 3D the more I realize this is very different from movie to movie. Not sure if this is camera equipment dependent or in post-processing which causes this difference but it is definitely there. Play around with this and tell me what you think. I've also started playing with the crosstalk canceler but have yet to find the right pattern for further reducing perceived ghosting. I'm just thankful I don't suffer "flicker fatigue".

I would be particularly interested in you testing/playing with the Parallux setting Joe to see if you perceive any improvement with your problematic scenes (also your impressions with the crosstalk settings as well!). I usually pause a problematic foregraound and backgrond scene to find the best balance but just know as you improve one the other will suffer.

FYI - Try out TinTin as well... very good transfer IMO.

Sorry have aslo posted the question in HW50 owners' thread.

- Can Sony HW50 use Panasonic TY-EW3D3MU IR glasses?

Really appreciate any input becaue my HW50 is on the way. Try to order two extra glasses asap, and Panasonic glasses are cheaper here.