Sony HW50 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5020 / JVC RS55 / JVC RS 46 / JVC RS4810 / JVC RS56 Mini-shootout... - Page 97

I've a quick question on JVC high lamp/low lamp settings.

By way of extreme good fortune, I've ended up with a JVC X90. I've been running it for the last couple of nights now. I've a maximum throw of about 15 or 16ft, lens to screen. The 1st night I set it at minumum zoom, aperture shut right down to -15 just to get a look at its maximum 120k contrast - pretty good! The front 1/3 of my room is pure black material and then some black treatment on the side and rear walls but not full blackout at these sections.

I didn't measure the screen size on this 1st night but it was only about 80" or so and I'll not be watching that small too often. When I fill my 16:9 ratio it will be at 1/3 zoom for 106" and when I zoom further to about 80/90% full zoom it will fill the 132" 2.35 scope ratio. I understand that the more I zoom, the more contrast I lose. I also understand that the more I have the iris closed down, the more contrast I retain.

In this situation, I'm guessing to get maximum contrast and yet still have enough brightness, its best to run it in high lamp mode with a fully closed aperture rather than run in low lamp mode with a half closed iris?

Last night I watched at -15 aperture, high lamp at 132" (80/90% zoom) with MPC at 3 and the picture was stunningly good - and it was only a 1080i satellite tv broadcast. Incedently, I read on the x90 owners thread that MPC doesn't work unless its a 1080p source - this isn't what I found as MPC1 2 and 3 changed the image from my 1080i broadcast. Strange.

Any time I've watched satellite tv at 132" there was always a slightly digital look to the image. With e-shift engaged it looks stunning, really really solid. I've always wondered what e-shift was like and for this reason alone, the extra cost of these e-shift projectors is worth every penny IMO.

I am considering buying a sony50 es and replacing my sony 90es projector, i know that there will be big improvement in the 3d, but how about the 2d? will the 50es still outshine the 90es in 2d.my other option would be to pick up a second projector like the benq 7000 for 3d only. anyone have any thoughts on this?

definitely want the extra lumens for 3d especially because of the 90es not being that great, wondering if the 50es will give me the overall appearance of more punch and color because of the brightness, definitely don't want to loose anything in the sharpness and contrast by replacing it though, I use it in a family room at night only which is pretty dark but by no means dedicated, with a firehawk g3 1.3 gain screen.

Zombie, whats the difference between the two with motion/ judder in 2D with motionflow turned off? I want the smoothest image without enabling motion flow. Thanks for your continued feedback.

@zombie... did you try the HC8000 with the Darbee? coderguy mentioned you thought it was not quite as sharp (perceived) as the HW50 with RC... Was this due to a 'could be sharper' lens on the Mitsu or just the benefit of RC?

Jason hello what do you think about combo , i mean sony hw50es + darbee?

thank you Jason you are the man! Last question what about the combo epson 5020 + darbee? any benefit from darbee with epson

I watched the w7000 in 3D today, no ghosting is definitely an entirely different experience from the JVC (knew that already from watching Epson though). 3D is actually pretty easy on the eyes.
Haven't watched that much stuff yet though, maybe 10 minutes. Hard to compare to Epson without A/B'n. JVC is so broken in 3D it don't matter.

Going back to watch more :P

Yes to right glasses, and no to seeing RBE, the Benq doesn't have that much RBE compared to most 4x wheels I've seen. 3D was clean, very nice.

I do LOVE the manual IRIS ability, and YES it can save the IRIS settings between restarts. There is no need for an ND filter for this projector at all, unless someone wants to keep the DI enabled and make it darker at the same time. It holds my IRIS settings just fine. Just you have to set the Min IRIS position and current position to whatever you need, then turn off dynamic black. Boom, IRIS settings saved forever.

If I want it fully bright again for 3D instead of 2D, just turn the IRIS up a couple notches or let it change modes (I think it can hold some IRIS settings in different modes, haven't messed with it that much).

Edit:
Technically DB doesn't work in 3D mode, so you might have to go back to service menu to get max brightness after messing with the IRIS, but still not a big deal (just noticed this). Tell you what though, man this thing is bright in 3D holy cow!

It's set it once and forget it.
Edited by coderguy - 1/10/13 at 4:48pm

I want to say it's mostly the higher contrast, but I can't say for sure that's 100% the reason. Perhaps they are using different color wheel designs.
I do know though that higher contrast projectors show more RBE, that is probably one reason why the real high-end projectors tend to really need 6x wheels. The Mits hc4000 was the highest native on/off DLP I ever owned (3,500:1), and it by far has the worst RBE of any 4x wheel projector I've seen.

Viewsonic barely has any, pretty much tied with Benq, though the VS does have 7 segments instead of 6.

What JVC did you use to watch 3D? Because I'm not seeing any ghosting at all on my RS4810 (I just watched Avengers 3D). 3D definitely sucked hard on the pre-firmware RS46, but it's a completely different animal on the RS4810. I'm using the JVC RF glasses -- wonder if that might have anything to do with it...?

Granted, I haven't seen 3D on a DLP, but I know ghosting when I see it, and it's virtually non-existent on my RS4810.

Same here. I have now watched several 3D movies, including Hugo and Avengers, with no ghosting issues.
I am using the JVC RF glasses. My un educated guess is that the brightness through the glasses drops 25%
My set up is a total light controlled bat cave, with black ceiling and very dark brow/maroon walls.
I am projecting onto a 150" Cinewhite 1.1 EliteScreene Lunette, from about 16', projector centered on screen.

I have not measured the lumens, but the projector is so bright that my calibration allowed me to close the lens aperture to -15 in cinema mode.
Also, this projector has very unifom focus accross the whole screen, no bright corners. It also, had almost perfect panel alignment - only adjusted the red panel horizontally by 1/2 pixel.
For 3D I do not have to put it in 3D mode (which is lamp on high) - I get sufficient brightness with stage mode on low lamp.
And again this is on a 150" screen. And no ghosting.
Thus I have plenty of room to raise brightness as the lamp ages.

I really do not see what people are talking about when complaining about lack of lumens in 3D with this projector.
3D is much, much brighter than in movie theaters.
The complainers either do not have light control in their HT or they want to see Best Buy type, uncalibrated cranked -up plasma like brightness, that is completely in-accurate.

Great projector for both 2D and 3D (plenty bright and no ghosting)

I have one bright corner on my RS4810 (lower left) but it's the best of the three recent JVC samples I've seen. Since it seems hit or miss with bright corners I think I'd better leave well enough alone since my focus uniformity is perfect, convergence is very good, and color uniformity, while not perfect, is far, FAR better than my VW60's ever was. Honestly I'm getting tired of focusing on the anomalies and would like to just watch some movies.

This thread is dangerous. Now I'm gonna be looking for all these problems on my RS4810. Any little thing I see now, is gonna set me off.

Or...you could just put a film on and enjoy it instead of looking for defects. Even the Sony VW1000ES seems to have issues, so I don't think we can expect a 'perfect' projector at our budget. In fact I'm sure that some models with six zeros on their price tag probably have issues too if you looked hard enough. You could drive yourself mad otherwise.

Exactly. But I know how I am, if I know what to look for, I can't help but look for it. I'm already partially crazy for it. I'm more picky with audio then video so I'm sure whatever short comings I may find, imagined or not, will soon be forgotten with my preoccupation in the audio department.

I don't think anyone, in good conscience, could complain about the VW1000ES

Excellent advice and good point. I did get around to watching some of The Avengers in 3D last night and the projector indeed looked fantastic.

First of all, all that really matters is that YOU are happy with your setup. If you are truly happy with what you are seeing for 3d, more power to you and enjoy! The ultimate goal for all of us is to be happy with our setups whatever we deem that to be. Having said that............

The great thing about the Zombie threads is they take posts that are largely subjective like the one quoted above and put it into perspective. Terms like "so bright", "sufficient brightness", etc.........are VERY subjective comments. I would also point out that issues like ghosting and flicker become harder to see the dimmer the image gets. In the above quoted scenario, 3d brightness is so low that I am betting these type of issues could easily go unnoticed to the untrained eye especially. I mean no disrespect by that, it is just the facts if we actually broke down what kind of brightness behind the glasses Dionyz is getting in his setup. This is not to suggest that JVC has NOT made gains as far as reduced ghosting goes, but that has come at some expense which is well documented at this point.

To throw out another scenario with some subjective thoughts to show why subjectivity is largely useless I will use my own setup. Right now I am using a BenQ W7000 for 3d in a HP 2.8 setup where I am getting ~2.4 real world gain. I am squeezing every bit of brightness I can out of the projector and would still welcome more if I had it on tap. Compared to the setup above, I am running a smaller screen (~126" 1.78 image to fill my 2.35 screen vs 150"), MUCH more screen gain (1.1 vs ~2.4) and with the way we are both running our projectors, I am getting somewhere around 2.5x-3x (going off the fact that the 7000 is putting out ~1100 high lamp lumens in 3d and the 4810 ~560 in high lamp, but the poster above is running low) the light output from the projector alone. If you add all this up, I am getting a MUCH, MUCH brighter image and subjectively I would say my image is "pretty bright" and "bright enough", but I would absolutely welcome another ~1000 lumens before the glasses to play with. Some of these lumens I would use right off the bat and some I would love to have in the tank for reserve as the lamp ages. In light of all this, there is absolutely no way I could be satisfied with the type of brightness that Dionyz is getting. What he is calling "sufficient brightness", I would no doubt be VERY disappointed with compared to what I am used to. This large swing of subjective interpretation as far as what is "bright enough" is EXACTLY why things like lumens measurements, through the glasses shots, etc........are SO valuable as they take this large degree of subjective swing from one user to another out of the equation.

We also have to remember that we are in the comparison thread where we break all these units down good and bad to really understand what they are doing vs one another. There is no perfect projector that does both 2d AND 3d the "best". As far as the JVCs go this year, it is obvious they have improved ghosting, but it has come at the expense of light output, contrast and detail from the tests posted. The fact is that the 4810 is putting out almost 1/2 of what the Sony is in 3d, IS putting out 1/2 the 7000 3d lumens and the Epson is literally 2.5x brighter (!!!) in comparison at 1400 lumens. Those are not small differences. Factor in crosstalk, flicker and motion and everyone can come to their own conclusions, but it is pretty obvious from my perspective that JVC is OVERALL bringing up the rear yet again as far as 3d goes. 2d is a different story.

I absolutely love my RS45 for 2d just like my RS40 and RS1 before it, but 3d needs a major overall in the JVCs when you start comparing these units to the competition. What JVC has done this year is not a fix, but a workaround squeeze another year out of the 3d band aid approach and a lot of us owners who have been on board the last two years are just not impressed (myself included). I really thought this would be the year that JVC did that overhaul going off their every 2 year history of making significant changes to their projectors, but apparently not. I would have to think that the models announced at Cedia this year WILL get that much needed overhaul, but time will tell.

Oh yeah? If someone wants to send me one, I am sure I will find something I dont like. There is no perfect projector at ANY price. Just like there is no perfect screen, speaker, etc.............
Edited by Toe - 1/11/13 at 8:15am

You might consider medication.

We have 3D lumen measurements for the hd33 and Optoma hd8300 now as below. With some torch calibration trickery you might be able to boost that about 10% or more. Optoma hd33 3D lumens looking good, hd8300's 3D lumens a bit on the low side. I guess I'm glad I got the Benq instead of the Optoma hd8300 considering the Optoma will have no flexibility to be mounted as low to near center gain of HP as the Benq, meaning for me the Benq is almost 2x brighter!

HD33: 925 lumens in 3D
HD8300: 770 lumens in 3D
--I would like to see more measurements though, considering most reviewers measured hd8300 at 800-1000 in 3D mode, that said we can safely say it's probably 750-1000 lumens max torched in 3D.

There you have it folks, after asking more than 20 times from owners to measure the hd33 and hd8300 in 3D, someone finally did!

Benq w7000 is 1000-1100 (I didn't measure my Benq lumens yet, did take a quick fL measurement so going by Zombie's earlier number)

The hd33 for people with non-HP screens is pretty close to the w7000, otherwise the w7000 beats all the others we know about in brightness except the Epsons I think, and not sure about Benq w1070.

I didn't say that it was perfect. Nothing is. I'm just saying that what ever is "wrong" with it would be so minor compared to all the good, and considering I, and probably some other demented individuals, would give their left test... (you know where I'm going lol) to have one, I don't think it would be good form to complain about it not being completely perfect.

Now if they were doing it so that us mere mortals who didn't have one, feel like we aren't missing anything, then I guess that would be OK. Altruistic even lol.

You have to wait until the lamp ages a few hundred hours on the JVC, then it gets much much more intense. I can even see a tiny bit more ghosting on an Epson when the lamp ages. On my Benq DLP, ZERO.

DLP is the only projector type that isn't haunted these days