Originally Posted by Frosteh
Mark, you seem to be contradicting yourself. You have a UH480 and think it's great, but you say it's not a great lens. Which is it? Also, I'm not going to simply sell the lens for a profit. That's dishonest and then I don't have a lens. My original question is the only one I want answered, not plans contingent on me selling the lens.
This of course is a friendly discussion and I hope I am not entering into a political discussion or offending you, but frequently people buy things at a great price because they can immediately flip it for a higher price. I hope to sell my house which I have owned for many years at a higher price then I paid for it but for much less than the price I paid plus the money I have spent err upgrading it.
But buying a whole sale or retail involves normally paying a price higher than the seller paid. Overhead plus profit.
I don't think many people would call buying something for a low price, below market value, and then immediately reselling to be dishonest. The only ethical consideration I suppose would be paying the person you bought it from too little but then again people sell below market because they need cash quickly, all sorts of things. But selling something immediately for a higher price than you paid is not dishonest in our capitalistic economic society.
Now as to the question of A lenses and various aspect ratios, I don't use a lens, nor do I zoom. I only have room for an 8ft wide, 1.78 aspect ratio screen. When I watch HD TV etc, I watch on full screen 1.78. When I watch a higher aspect ratio subject, such as a wide screen movie, I gat black bars which I cover up with automated top and bottom masking. After a movie, people ask to see HD TV and when I open the masking for the full light up, they ooh and ah about the size increase, You get it both ways. If you want a bigger picture (wider) for movies, you need a 2.35 or so screen. You can fill the screen two ways, by zooming, and with that method you give up using about 25% of the vertical pixels and about 25% of the light the projector is capable of putting out. Don't worry about the exact percentages. Using the 2.35 and going to 1.78 full height, you increase by by 33%, going the other way, the base is higher and you decrease by 25%.
Using an A lens, you get to use all the pixels and the full illumination of the projector (with certain caveats) because you electronically stretch the image vertically to light all the pixels. This is a nasty scale to do. All scales except say 2 to one and numbers like that as distinguished from odd number multipliers are nasty and severely screw with the vertical pixels. The lens deals with the horizontal stretch by doing it optically and what comes into play here is the optical qualitty of the lens. The 480 is OK but that's it. There are worse and there are many many much better. You end up losing light from the max capable because anamorphic sets up need long throws for a variety of reasons such as the need to keep the image coming out of the projector lens small and to minimize pin cushioning which all anamorphics cause.
It shuld also be noted that anamorphics cause a minor loss of ANSI contrast and while a 25% increase in light out of the projector may seem like a lot, to your eyes the increased brightness will only look about 5% brighter.
As to what you should buy there is no definative answer. Many like the best deal and your best deal is the lens but only if you plan on keeping it foreever or for a long time and using it. Nothing in home theater should ever be considered a long term investment.
I mean no offense to you by anything I have said and I am trying to be helpful and offer explanations. With a decision to buy and keep the anamorphic, you will need a 2.35 screen if you don't already have one and that alone would clearly bust your budget. Just another thought.
Take care and feel free to ask me anything else, as some will say I am full .... You can insert the rest.
Answers, explanation, BS, whatever. Have fun.Edited by mark haflich - 10/30/12 at 12:13pm