Sony HW50 / BenQ W7000 / Epson 5020 / JVC RS55 / JVC RS 46 / JVC RS4810 / JVC RS56 Mini-shootout... - Page 2

guys - remember this is a running review, I wanted to see how it looked 'out of the box' and give some closeups of the RC vs. Darbee, etc. IMO, the setting is too high out of the box, but the PQ becomes quite pleasant once I turned down the resolution setting.

The RC is very different than the Darbee processing. The RC is an obvious sharpening process whereas the Darbee is enhancing certain areas of contrast and a bit more subtle in comparison.

I didn't get a chance to update the other thread with this information, but here it now:

of all the projectors from last year (RS45, Epson 5010, RS55, HW30, BQW700) - IMO, the Darbee had the LEAST effect on the HW30 compared to the others. I am not sure if it's due to the pixel structure technique they use, but cranking the Darbee to 50% on the HW30 didn't have the same net effect that it did on the others. In other words, the more naturally sharp the projector, the better the Darbee works.

Having said that, the RC is definitely a nice sharpening technique to offset the somewhat softer image (with RC turned off). I watched a number of 2D clips I am familiar with and they looked very good with the RC resolution @ minimum and the Darbee @ 30%.

@ Conan - I hear you on the screen shots, they are most valuable with the 3D screenshots. On post #2, I did a closeup of the changes of the RC on/off, + Darbee, etc. I do think these are valuable since we are looking at what's happening at the pixel level, then working our way back from there.

I think my relatively large 142" @ a close seating distance is a perfect venue for the RC vs. E-shift vs. Darbee comparisons. Some of this could be less obvious on a small screen @ 1.6 - 2.0SW, etc. which is why we saw such a wide range of opinions last year when discussing e-shift.

I also watched a number of 3D clips last night and the RC looks great in with 3D mode - especially with 3D animations. I watched Despicable Me and this looked great on the HW50. With the glasses brightness turned down to 3 from Max, there is minimal ghosting. I know exactly where it is, but overall, most folks are going to like the 3D on the HW50, it's quite an improvement over the HW30. It's noticeably bright (I'll get some measurements in 3D tonight) and the RC does a great job of bringing up the sharpness on this sized screen.

I am hearing the buzzing in 3D mode the other HW50 owners are talking about. I have the projector 3 feet behind my head for Max gain on the HP. It does vary when lowering the screen brightness, but it's always there. I'll have to see if I can get the external transmitter to see if it happens as suggested in the HW50 thread. When I put my ear near the built in transmitter, the sound does seem to come from that general area. I have to spend more time with this later tonight.

I feel asleep at 4:30am (with the 3D glasses still on).

are you getting one of these to check out? The lumen output is impressive out the box, it's blasting my 2.8HP - overly bright.. just how I like it.

I have to rig up my table mount so I can stack the HW50 & RS55 for 2D comparisons and the HW50 / W7000 for 3D. I have an HDMI splitter than can pass a 3D signal, so that should allow me to go back and forth with some A/B testing.

overall, it's a nice improvement over the HW30 (better black floor and brighter and sharper in 3D with the RC). Colors look great out of the box. If this is relatively consistent between copies, it should be a very good 'out of the box' experience for new owners.

thanks for your feedback on the HW50 so far. The RC, E-shift and Darbee device PQ enhancements are no doubt deviations from from the regular conversations about 2D PQ that existed just a few years ago. They all have their benefits to varying degrees. Just like the Darbee settings, I can see there will wide variances on settings for each particular setup and personal preferences. My goal is to take a close look at what's happening at the pixel lexel and work our way back from there.

We'll have to ask Sony if they are aware of the buzz. I just realized they didn't include the external transmitter in the packing since it's technically not necessary. I'll have to try and locate one and try it out.

I haven't used my MV3D's in ages so I had to charge them last night. I was going back and forth between the Sony glasses and the Xpand 104's. I like the 104's fit, nice and comfortable, but the tint is a bit more noticeable than the Sony glasses. I'll have to try and calibrate both behind glasses since the Xpand's are lightweight and good for prescription glasses.

I'll check out the MV3D's tonight. I have a number of 3D titles I have seen yet. Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter was one of my favorites recently.

Here's some initial impressions I'll add to the first few pages.

HW30 vs HW50 - Image sharpness with RC=OFF

1. The HW30 and HW50 appear very similar when RC is turned off. The pixel structure is similar to last year. It's going to vary based on different samples, but very close nonetheless. Neither have the defined pixel structure as seen on the 5010, W7000 or current JVC's.

2. If folks were here with me looking at these side by side, I think most would agree on a 142" screen, that the Sony's would be the seen as optically softer (no software enhancements) than the other models from JVC, Epson and BQ. The RC helps reverse that perception. When used in moderation, it's a nice enhancement for this projector. With it set to the minimum in 2D, the positives out-weigh the negative since most folks eyes are going to be drawn to the perceived increase in sharpness.

However, we can't ignore though that it applies the effect across the entire image, so certain movies with strong film grain might be affected. I have to watch 'Road Warrior' later on BD which has strong grain, I'm curious to see how the RC performs here.

Optical Sharpness Sony vs JVC

1. The current RS45/RS55 (no-eshift) are optically sharper than the HW30 and HW50 (without the RC) if we are inspecting each system at the pixel level. Even the entry JVC has a very good lens which resolves a well defined pixel grid from edge to edge. My particular RS55 is exceptional in this regard, A+ lens copy.

HW30 vs. HW50 - 3D comparison

1. The HW50 is brighter. I should be able to get some 3D lumen measurements tonight while the lamp is still new.

2. Motion flow in 3D works as good as it did before in the HW30. Some will remember I was quite vocal in a positive way about the FI in 3D and the quality processing here continues to look good.

3. Crosstalk- Very similar, and possibly a hair better than the HW30. I have to get some 'through the glasses' screenshots later, I've been too busy playing around with 2D content. The majority of folks are going to be very happy with the overall 3D performance. The key ingredient is the RC in 3D. It's does a great job of sharpening up animations in 3D and combined with the FI, it's looks good. I wish the flicker was a bit more subdued (I can always detect it compared to the 3D DLP's) but it's not likely to bother unless you are conscious of flicker or have been tainted by 3D DLP's abilities to produce a rock solid image.

HW50 Contrast performance

1. Definitely an improvement over the HW30. Not night and day, but the 142" 2.8HP is very unforgiving for the black floor. 1st ten minutes of Underworld Evolution are a benchmark, there isn't a whole lot the iris can do here. I would say it's similar to the 5010 now, but will need to stack the HW50 and upcoming 5020 to be fair here on the comment.

2. Bright and mixed contrast scenes look great overall, no concerns here. The DI works well and was generally undetectable.

3. HW50 vs.the RS55 with Dark sci-fi / Native contrast - None of the current models are quite the same as the RS55 @ -13 if were looking for that top level of black floor performance. We can't take everything away from JVC and the native contrast of this projector is still phenomenal and is in a class of it's own. Having said that, the majority of new owners should be quite happy with the performance of the HW50.

RC vs. E-shift

1. The reality creative is a clever sharpening technique. I think they went too high with the default settings, but it's going to elicit big 'WOW's when it's first seen. It's quite dramatic. When turned down, it's a nice sharpening trick to fool the eye that the image is sharper than it really is. All the sharpening techniques have some artifacts, but to what degree? The RC can make rough-shot of any noise when used with the default settings, it has to be used in moderation to balance it's effect vs. bringing unwanted artifacts into the image

2. The RC and e-shift are very different, but attempting to achieve the same things. Make 1080P content look better than it really is on a large screen. The 142" is unforgiving. Sitting close makes an even tougher audience when comparing these processes.

If we are praising the RC based on the initial impressions, we have to give equal accolades to JVC's E-shift technique. My first impression is that the e-shift does it with more finesse than the RC. It's more subtle and natural due to the increase in pixel density. Both have their appeal which we'll look at more closely soon. The RC is a good addition to the all-ready solid HW30 platform. It was something that was quite necessary to stay competitive.

We will continue to explore the RC vs. E-shift 1 vs. E-shift 2.





Sony HW50 Overall - This is a nice projector for the price point. I liked my HW30 and this HW50 is a good upgrade. Better brightness, Sharpness (due to the RC) and very good 3D. I do wish it had the power lens and native optical sharpness of the VW95 lens, but that might not be possible at this price point. We do need to investigate the buzzing in 3D mode as I can definitely hear it during the movie.

Of course there are still a number of upcoming models which can't be ignored, so we'll look at those as well when they are released.



Since this is the AV(Science) forum - we're going to continue to pick and prod at the new models and continue to compare because that is what people who are obsessed with front projectors do.

This is a running review discussion with no specific conclusions at the end of page 4 like the typical published reviews. I encourage anyone with actual firsthand experience of the old and new models to please join in on the conversation. This is what made the last shootout such a success, great input from the AVS enthusiasts.

I watched my favorite benchmark, 1st ten minutes of Underworld Evolution. Overall a progressive upgrade to the HW30, better and now more similar to the 5010, but still not quite the same as my RS55.

3D - I ended up preferring the 5010's 3D last year to the HW30, mainly due to the sharpness. I found the HW30 a bit dull in 3D that even the Darbee couldn't really make up for. I like the RC in 3D more than in 2D mode, it's looks good and is equally as sharp as the 5010 is now in 3D mode.

We should get the 5020 sometime soon and will try to give more feedback once I see both on the same screen with the same content.

The W7000 is still a force to be dealt with, the naturally razor sharp image + completely ghost free / flicker free 3D PQ quality needs some comparison to the HW50 when I get time. Overall though, the HW50 3D is very good.