or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Official JVC DLA-RS46 / DLA-X35 owners thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official JVC DLA-RS46 / DLA-X35 owners thread - Page 48

post #1411 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by nezil View Post

White walls are a nightmare to be honest, and much has already been said about the issue, including by me, several posts pack.

I concur 100%. Reflecting walls will serve to reduce the impact of the excellent contrast and blacks that the JVCs are known for. ANYTHING to reduce the reflections (i.e. flat, dark paint, curtains) will make a HUGE difference. I have a dedicated room and painted with a black flat paint and use DIY masking for varying aspect ratios. I was blown away by the difference - the image floats in space...smile.gif
post #1412 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner View Post

Who's projector has a bit of electronic whine?

I've got a bit of electronic wine (high pitch noise, "dog whistle-esk") when I first turn it on, after a few minutes it goes way (you've got to be pretty close to hear it). Should I be concerned at all?
. I get this too. This is fairly common I think so no concern necessary I don't think...
post #1413 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by fightclub View Post

although i have not bought x35 yet, i have become a fan for this model. Maybe this is old news here, JVC confirms to have one firmware update for x35 to include CMS and auto adjustment software capability. Hope this is helpful.
Where? I can't find it on any JVC website. And I'd be surprised if they add CMS to the X35 for free since that's a step-up feature of the higher-end projectors.
post #1414 of 2085
just from reliable source of JVC. And you will see this updated version x35 in the 2014 year beginning... So you could not find anything until next year for this firmware.
post #1415 of 2085
You might consider the new Stewart Firehawk G4 fabric. It keeps light from reflecting to the sidewalls and from accepting reflected light from the side walls. It only has a gain of 1.1 and requires a minimum throw of 1.5 times the screen width.
post #1416 of 2085
Quote:
I've got a bit of electronic wine (high pitch noise, "dog whistle-esk") when I first turn it on, after a few minutes it goes way (you've got to be pretty close to hear it). Should I be concerned at all?

Only if you have a dog.............wink.gif













( sorry - I couldn't resist )
post #1417 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

Only if you have a dog.............wink.gif













( sorry - I couldn't resist )
tongue.gif

Just don't want the "turn-on whine" to become "always-on whine". I sit fairly close to the projector. Do you have any idea on what fightclub is referring to...bringing CMS to the RS46?
post #1418 of 2085
Dream other people have reported this and I think it's just while the PJ starts up and the lamp warms up.

Also, yes is there any backing to fightclubs claims and would that include the RS-46 as well since technically they are different modles?
post #1419 of 2085
Quote:
Do you have any idea on what fightclub is referring to...bringing CMS to the RS46?

Nope, haven't heard anything - I tend to be a " show me when it's actually available and here " type of guy. You can spend too much time here on the forums guessing about this and that rumor.
post #1420 of 2085
Guys, I'm still looking for projector screen options for an RS-46 ..

Till now, I've only been recommended a Da-Lite high powered screen, but some people have also expressed their opinion that they don't like it (because of sparklies, etc, I think) ..

---

Is possible that you guys tell me which screen you went with in your setups ? This will give me more options to consider ..
post #1421 of 2085
Throw distance: ~ approx 17 feet.
Screen size/ratio I'm looking for: 120" diagonal, 16:9

In case someone wishes to know smile.gif
post #1422 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by nezil View Post

White walls are a nightmare to be honest, and much has already been said about the issue, including by me, several posts pack.

The short story is:

Reflected light will wash out the blacks, to the extent of the average picture level of the scene. Dealing with Ambient light is much easier, because you can raise the black level in your calibrations (or more basic settings), to account for the consistently elevated black levels. Depending on the choice of screen, this can result in some really good pictures, although obviously nothing beats a truly dark environment.

Calibrating for reflected light is basically impossible, because the elevated black level from the reflections is constantly changing, and with white walls, this will be changing A LOT, and will also be reflecting A LOT. You could potentially calibrate for this, by raising your black level to account for perhaps a 30% average picture level, but your contrast ratio with white walls will be around 50:1 if you do this, and that's really not an acceptable solution.

My situation is perhaps similar to yours... I watch at night, in a room that is nearly completely black (with the JVC's image blanked, I can see shadows on my screen), but I have white walls, cream carpet and a cream sofa. I was looking for a screen to help with this situation, because I can't paint the walls, and I've basically failed to find a solution. I found screens that handle ambient light very well, and I'm confident that I could calibrate a really nice picture with them, but that's not my situation. The side effect of these screens is also a reduced viewing cone, and sparkles or shimmers as the screen tries to add gain; compromises that I'd rather not make. I found that I was able to increase my ANSI contrast ratio (50% picture level) to about 70:1 with the best screen and white walls, which isn't a great improvement, and the black level is still all over the place!

In the end, I've now gone for black curtains that I pull out to cover a large portion of the side walls, and I've also added a very short (~18") section above the screen, a bit like a roof. The result is a much much more stable black level, and a contrast ratio on my unity gain white screen that exceeds the best screens I tested!

If you must have a screen that rejects reflected light, you'll need to find one that is 'retro-reflective' which means that it reflects light back mostly in the direction from which it came. You'll need to be careful with the placement of your projector, and these types of screens are $$$$$!

I have considered this today, and most probably I will be able to paint my walls/ceiling/floor a dark grey color soon .. Would that help ? Or a pure dead black is still recommended ? frown.gif

Also, which screen are you currently using, and which would you recommend ?
post #1423 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

I'd either go with a 110" screen or a High Power screen if you want a bigger screen.

Going below 120" won't be right I think, because the screen will look too small .. I was actually looking to go bigger than 120" as I have the throw distance needed, but some other room factors have kind of limited me to a 120" screen ..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

Go with a 1.3 gain 120" diagonal screen, watch using low lamp power until it gets too dim for your tastes, then switch to high lamp power. Just plan on changing lamps a bit more often. It's like having a high performance sports car - when you need new tires, you just get new tires.

Criag, didn't you previously recommend a high powered screen ? Why the switch to suggesting a 1.3 gain screen now ?
post #1424 of 2085
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

I'd either go with a 110" screen or a High Power screen if you want a bigger screen.

Going below 120" won't be right I think, because the screen will look too small .. I was actually looking to go bigger than 120" as I have the throw distance needed, but some other room factors have kind of limited me to a 120" screen ..
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

Go with a 1.3 gain 120" diagonal screen, watch using low lamp power until it gets too dim for your tastes, then switch to high lamp power. Just plan on changing lamps a bit more often. It's like having a high performance sports car - when you need new tires, you just get new tires.

Criag, didn't you previously recommend a high powered screen ? Why the switch to suggesting a 1.3 gain screen now ?

What size and gain screen you go with depends on what trade offs you can live with. If you want an even bigger screen I'd recommend a High power screen for sure. There isn't one " right answer ". Just choices on which compromises to make. There are several different screens that would work.
post #1425 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

What size and gain screen you go with depends on what trade offs you can live with. If you want an even bigger screen I'd recommend a High power screen for sure. There isn't one " right answer ". Just choices on which compromises to make. There are several different screens that would work.

Yes, you're right. There's always a tradeoff in these things. So what's the disadvantage of getting a High Powered screen, in comparison to a 1.3 gain one ? Is it the view angle maybe ? Da-Lite states they have a 30 degree view angle range, which is fine for me as my max angle is 6 degrees from the center of the screen ..

What other options are there besides these two ?
post #1426 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by nezil View Post

If you must have a screen that rejects reflected light, you'll need to find one that is 'retro-reflective' which means that it reflects light back mostly in the direction from which it came. You'll need to be careful with the placement of your projector, and these types of screens are $$$$$!

Dalite Hipower is very reasonably priced.
post #1427 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner View Post

Who's projector has a bit of electronic whine?

I've got a bit of electronic wine (high pitch noise, "dog whistle-esk") when I first turn it on, after a few minutes it goes way (you've got to be pretty close to hear it). Should I be concerned at all?
Dreamliner Are you running the original bulb or on A replacement Bulb? Has your X35 done it since new ?..

FWIW I haven't noticed any whistle coming from my 400hr X35B ...

Cheers..
post #1428 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by cinema mad View Post

Dreamliner Are you running the original bulb or on A replacement Bulb? Has your X35 done it since new ?..

FWIW I haven't noticed any whistle coming from my 400hr X35B ...

Cheers..
Just got the JVC projector, did it on first turn on and ever since. Goes away after a couple minutes. Lamp mode doesn't matter, I tried a different lamp, same startup whine.
post #1429 of 2085
Quote:
I have considered this today, and most probably I will be able to paint my walls/ceiling/floor a dark grey color soon .. Would that help ? Or a pure dead black is still recommended ?

Dark grey works quite well. In fact, if you go to a paint store ( I use Sherwin Williams ) you can get some nice dark greys that look good and darken your theater. Use flat paint.
post #1430 of 2085
I was planning on using black for the wall with the screen on it and for the ceiling and dark grey for the side walls.
post #1431 of 2085
Quote:
I was planning on using black for the wall with the screen on it and for the ceiling and dark grey for the side walls.

Perfect. In fact, you are using my color scheme !! smile.gif
post #1432 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner View Post

Just got the JVC projector, did it on first turn on and ever since. Goes away after a couple minutes. Lamp mode doesn't matter, I tried a different lamp, same startup whine.

Mine does the same thing since new and it is fine.
post #1433 of 2085
Are there IP codes in irule for the JVC RS46 does anyone know?
post #1434 of 2085
What calculators are some of you using for FL? I'm going to be running a stacked pair of RS46's with anamorphic lenses on both projecting onto a 160" wide 2.35 AT screen. I know I will have plenty brightness but how many FL?
post #1435 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by 316 View Post

What calculators are some of you using for FL? I'm going to be running a stacked pair of RS46's with anamorphic lenses on both projecting onto a 160" wide 2.35 AT screen. I know I will have plenty brightness but how many FL?
I'd be curious to know what else you looked at to determine RS46+Lens x 2 was the best bang for your buck. As far as FL go, I'd be curious what others would say, I bet it'd be somewhere around 1.3-1.5x.
post #1436 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner View Post

I'd be curious to know what else you looked at to determine RS46+Lens x 2 was the best bang for your buck. As far as FL go, I'd be curious what others would say, I bet it'd be somewhere around 1.3-1.5x.

The very first thing is my screen. Its curved & AT and its big with not much gain 1.0-1.3 if that much. The cure requires an A lens...not compromising there its set in stone just as the screen size is. Obviously the next option is providing a quality picture to light it up which is more important than just getting a bright picture/projector. I should end up around 20fl which is plenty for me and 3D should have good pop.

As far as biggest bang for buck it is for me because not everything I am buying is brand new in the box and I am not buying it all in one shot. I will not be using lens memory but if there is any drifting in convergence (most if not all are electronic but not all have this user feature that I have found) its much easier to have motorized lens functions, shift, zoom, etc for setup and maintenance. Not many projectors offer all I need at under 3K each. I'm not playing the 4K game this early either.

Not interested in Panny (not equal quality to JVC) or Mits (support, & still not to JVC quality) or any DLP (different category of projector and I hate the colors) Epsons (I have had, had flimsy lens adjustments and bloated Lumen claims), and Sony (only serious contender) is non motorized at this price point PLUS JVC picture is hard to beat...I've owned some older models.

I chose the 46 over the 45 due to bulb and the 4810 puts me into a whole different price bracket and right into the 4K trap. (wait for 4 K to become novel and prices will drop)

Remember the A lens will have to be purchased either way so that's a wash and a total non factor. At least one lens has to be purchased either way you look at it.

My goal was 5K for a projector so I stayed pretty close to my budget. If I ever decide to upgrade later one of the 46's will replace my Mits 6800 and I can always sell one. That's assuming the day comes when a projector with 2k + calibrated lumens, the right black levels, contrast etc comes along in the 5K price point...not holding my breath on that one.

Anyway, that's how I see it...others may see it different but its my wallet. smile.gif
Edited by 316 - 11/22/13 at 8:42pm
post #1437 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by 316 View Post

The very first thing is my screen. Its curved & AT and its big with not much gain 1.0-1.3 if that much. The cure requires an A lens...not compromising there its set in stone just as the screen size is. Obviously the next option is providing a quality picture to light it up which is more important than just getting a bright picture/projector. I should end up around 20fl which is plenty for me and 3D should have good pop.

As far as biggest bang for buck it is for me because not everything I am buying is brand new in the box and I am not buying it all in one shot. I will not be using lens memory but if there is any drifting in convergence (most if not all are electronic but not all have this user feature that I have found) its much easier to have motorized lens functions, shift, zoom, etc for setup and maintenance. Not many projectors offer all I need at under 3K each. I'm not playing the 4K game this early either.

Not interested in Panny (not equal quality to JVC) or Mits (support, & still not to JVC quality) or any DLP (different category of projector and I hate the colors) Epsons (I have had, had flimsy lens adjustments and bloated Lumen claims), and Sony (only serious contender) is non motorized at this price point PLUS JVC picture is hard to beat...I've owned some older models.

I chose the 46 over the 45 due to bulb and the 4810 puts me into a whole different price bracket and right into the 4K trap. (wait for 4 K to become novel and prices will drop)

Remember the A lens will have to be purchased either way so that's a wash and a total non factor. At least one lens has to be purchased either way you look at it.

My goal was 5K for a projector so I stayed pretty close to my budget. If I ever decide to upgrade later one of the 46's will replace my Mits 6800 and I can always sell one. That's assuming the day comes when a projector with 2k + calibrated lumens, the right black levels, contrast etc comes along in the 5K price point...not holding my breath on that one.

Anyway, that's how I see it...others may see it different but its my wallet. smile.gif
I'd think it would hard choosing the JVC over the Sony. While I really like my RS46 on my 2.35:1 screen, the lens shift isn't as precise as I expected and it tends to over-shoot, which could be troublesome if you are trying to line up pixels between projectors.
post #1438 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by 316 View Post

What calculators are some of you using for FL? I'm going to be running a stacked pair of RS46's with anamorphic lenses on both projecting onto a 160" wide 2.35 AT screen. I know I will have plenty brightness but how many FL?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 316 View Post

The very first thing is my screen. Its curved & AT and its big with not much gain 1.0-1.3 if that much. The cure requires an A lens...not compromising there its set in stone just as the screen size is. Obviously the next option is providing a quality picture to light it up which is more important than just getting a bright picture/projector. I should end up around 20fl which is plenty for me and 3D should have good pop.

As far as biggest bang for buck it is for me because not everything I am buying is brand new in the box and I am not buying it all in one shot. I will not be using lens memory but if there is any drifting in convergence (most if not all are electronic but not all have this user feature that I have found) its much easier to have motorized lens functions, shift, zoom, etc for setup and maintenance. Not many projectors offer all I need at under 3K each. I'm not playing the 4K game this early either.

Not interested in Panny (not equal quality to JVC) or Mits (support, & still not to JVC quality) or any DLP (different category of projector and I hate the colors) Epsons (I have had, had flimsy lens adjustments and bloated Lumen claims), and Sony (only serious contender) is non motorized at this price point PLUS JVC picture is hard to beat...I've owned some older models.

I chose the 46 over the 45 due to bulb and the 4810 puts me into a whole different price bracket and right into the 4K trap. (wait for 4 K to become novel and prices will drop)

Remember the A lens will have to be purchased either way so that's a wash and a total non factor. At least one lens has to be purchased either way you look at it.

My goal was 5K for a projector so I stayed pretty close to my budget. If I ever decide to upgrade later one of the 46's will replace my Mits 6800 and I can always sell one. That's assuming the day comes when a projector with 2k + calibrated lumens, the right black levels, contrast etc comes along in the 5K price point...not holding my breath on that one.

Anyway, that's how I see it...others may see it different but its my wallet. smile.gif

OK, to calculate fL I would do this.

First determine what mode you will be using the projector in. The projector will be brightest when the image is zoomed to its maximum size. However, this won't work with an anamorphic lens because i) the image wont fit though the glass of the lens, and ii) the shorter the throw the more pincushion you will get. Thus you will have to use medium or more likely telezoom, which will also give you the best image quality with least pincushion. You will also have to decide whether you will be comfortable with high lamp mode or not. To me the JVC's are way to loud in high lamp to be useful (I have an X35=RS46), they sounds like a vacuum cleaner hanging just behind your head. But maybe you have the projector in an adjacent room or you're not sensitive to noise? You will also have to get the lumens capability of the projector from a reliable source. I.e. measured by a reliable independent source and not from the manufacturers spec. sheet. Cine4home is usually a good way to start. They've measured the X35 to 590 lumens in low lamp tele mode and 850 lumens in high lamp tele mode. I would use the 590 lumens figure (since I can't stand the noise of high lamp) and then take into account at least 30% lamp dimming as the bulb ages. That gives you 454 lumens to play with.

An anamorphic lens also will introduce a slight light loss, say 5%. That leaves you with 432 lumens.

Now we can calculate the brightness off of the screen. To do this we will need to know the area and gain of the screen. Again it's important to know the real world gain and not the manufacturers numbers. Thus you will need to get a measurement from an independent source and you will need to know whether your sitting in the right angle to take advantage of the gain. I take it you will be using the Seymour XD material? According to this comparison the real world gain was measured to 0.94. Since the XD screen is more or less a lambertian surface (i.e. it spreads light equally in all directions) you won't have to account for the viewing angle. Otherwise you could have used the "All screen gain calculator"

We also have to calculate the viewing area. A 160'' diagonal 2.35:1 screen is 12.27 times 5.22 = 64 square ft.

Now we have all the numbers to calculate the fL off the screen: 432 lumens x2 projectors x 0.94 gain /64 ft2 = 12.7 fL

Normally one aims for 16 fL so this will be a bit on the dim side but ok in my opinion. However I would say definitely too dim for enjoyable 3D.


If we just for fun would plug in the numbers for the new Sony without an a-lens (using zoom memory to switch between 1.78:1 and 2.35:1):

The VW500/600 has been measured to approx. 1700/1200 lumens in high/low lamp respectively IIRC. That would give 1307/923 lumens after 30% lamp dimming. Since no lens is used the projector can be placed to take advantage of the full zoom and full brightness. However, a bigger area (84.6 ft2) is projected as the black bars would be projected above and below the screen (invisible if the front wall is dark). Plugging in these numbers gives 14.5/10.3 fL in high/low lamp respectively. Keep in mind though that the Sony is considerably quieter than the JVC in high lamp mode, which might make it useful to you.

Looking at brightness in 1.78:1 the Sony would definitely get the brightness advantage. The JVC would here produce about 16.9 fL whereas the Sony would give about 25.4/17.9 fL in high/low lamp respectively.

Looking at these numbers, a Sony seems the be pretty equivalent in brightess to two JVC X35 with anamorpic lenses in 2.35:1 mode and have an advantage in 1.78:1 mode. If they would be in the same ballpark pricewise I would pick the Sony without hesitation. However, maybe they are not? At least you have an alternative to think about.

Cheers!

Oops!!! I calculated for a 160'' diagonal not 160'' wide screen. For a 160'' wide screen the numbers for a 2.35:1 screen would be 15.6/10.8 for the JVCs plus a-lenses and 12.3/8.7 for the Sony in high and low lamp respectively. Again I wouldn't use the JVC in high lamp without having it in another room or ventilated box due to the noise, which would make the JVCs a dim choice IMHO, especially for 3D (calculate 80% light loss through the glasses, which leaves you 3.2/2.2 fL in high/low lamp respectively).
Edited by Drexler - 11/23/13 at 4:49am
post #1439 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamliner View Post

I'd think it would hard choosing the JVC over the Sony. While I really like my RS46 on my 2.35:1 screen, the lens shift isn't as precise as I expected and it tends to over-shoot, which could be troublesome if you are trying to line up pixels between projectors.

Thank you for the reply, yeah that might be a pain but I'm prepared for slight fine adjustments in my mounting plates (custom made in our machine shop) I will use jacking bolts for the finest adjustments. I will not be using lens memory when switching between 2.35 & 16:9 content (CIH, electronic processing) I still believe JVC holds the edge on PQ.
post #1440 of 2085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drexler View Post


OK, to calculate fL I would do this.

First determine what mode you will be using the projector in. The projector will be brightest when the image is zoomed to its maximum size. However, this won't work with an anamorphic lens because i) the image wont fit though the glass of the lens, and ii) the shorter the throw the more pincushion you will get. Thus you will have to use medium or more likely telezoom, which will also give you the best image quality with least pincushion. You will also have to decide whether you will be comfortable with high lamp mode or not. To me the JVC's are way to loud in high lamp to be useful (I have an X35=RS46), they sounds like a vacuum cleaner hanging just behind your head. But maybe you have the projector in an adjacent room or you're not sensitive to noise? You will also have to get the lumens capability of the projector from a reliable source. I.e. measured by a reliable independent source and not from the manufacturers spec. sheet. Cine4home is usually a good way to start. They've measured the X35 to 590 lumens in low lamp tele mode and 850 lumens in high lamp tele mode. I would use the 590 lumens figure (since I can't stand the noise of high lamp) and then take into account at least 30% lamp dimming as the bulb ages. That gives you 454 lumens to play with.

An anamorphic lens also will introduce a slight light loss, say 5%. That leaves you with 432 lumens.

Now we can calculate the brightness off of the screen. To do this we will need to know the area and gain of the screen. Again it's important to know the real world gain and not the manufacturers numbers. Thus you will need to get a measurement from an independent source and you will need to know whether your sitting in the right angle to take advantage of the gain. I take it you will be using the Seymour XD material? According to this comparison the real world gain was measured to 0.94. Since the XD screen is more or less a lambertian surface (i.e. it spreads light equally in all directions) you won't have to account for the viewing angle. Otherwise you could have used the "All screen gain calculator"

We also have to calculate the viewing area. A 160'' diagonal 2.35:1 screen is 12.27 times 5.22 = 64 square ft.

Now we have all the numbers to calculate the fL off the screen: 432 lumens x2 projectors x 0.94 gain /64 ft2 = 12.7 fL

Normally one aims for 16 fL so this will be a bit on the dim side but ok in my opinion. However I would say definitely too dim for enjoyable 3D.


If we just for fun would plug in the numbers for the new Sony without an a-lens (using zoom memory to switch between 1.78:1 and 2.35:1):

The VW500/600 has been measured to approx. 1700/1200 lumens in high/low lamp respectively IIRC. That would give 1307/923 lumens after 30% lamp dimming. Since no lens is used the projector can be placed to take advantage of the full zoom and full brightness. However, a bigger area (84.6 ft2) is projected as the black bars would be projected above and below the screen (invisible if the front wall is dark). Plugging in these numbers gives 14.5/10.3 fL in high/low lamp respectively. Keep in mind though that the Sony is considerably quieter than the JVC in high lamp mode, which might make it useful to you.

Looking at brightness in 1.78:1 the Sony would definitely get the brightness advantage. The JVC would here produce about 16.9 fL whereas the Sony would give about 25.4/17.9 fL in high/low lamp respectively.

Looking at these numbers, a Sony seems the be pretty equivalent in brightess to two JVC X35 with anamorpic lenses in 2.35:1 mode and have an advantage in 1.78:1 mode. If they would be in the same ballpark pricewise I would pick the Sony without hesitation. However, maybe they are not? At least you have an alternative to think about.

Cheers!

Oops!!! I calculated for a 160'' diagonal not 160'' wide screen. For a 160'' wide screen the numbers for a 2.35:1 screen would be 15.6/10.8 for the JVCs plus a-lenses and 12.3/8.7 for the Sony in high and low lamp respectively. Again I wouldn't use the JVC in high lamp without having it in another room or ventilated box due to the noise, which would make the JVCs a dim choice IMHO, especially for 3D (calculate 80% light loss through the glasses, which leaves you 3.2/2.2 fL in high/low lamp respectively).


Thank you for the lengthy thoughts, much appreciated. Using 2.35 I should be able to get more use of the zoom (more brightness)?

I do not want black bars at all so masking with 16:9 content will be done with my electric curtains plus the Sony VW500 is 15K eek.gifsmile.gif, just for fun my option saves me roughly 10K. smile.gif I gave up a little brightness over the Sony HW50 for the JVC but this has more to do with my experience with other JVC and Sony projectors I have owned and my fondness of powered lens features and I want to be close as possible to my screen when focusing, hard to do with manual focus.

I will have a custom mount and it will be contained in a hush box because I do plan on running high lamp. As far as 3D, I hope it will be enjoyable and want the option but in reality I have used 3D and since I wear glasses its always been uncomfortable so that is not a high priority but a nice option of possible.

My main goal is the 16fl and High quality picture, black levels etc. I think I should be able to meet my goals and any more or less is not going to leave me unsatisfied.

In reality its all a waiting game, waiting for 4K prices to come down and technology to continue to the point where the MFG's will produce more brighter pictures without sacrificing PQ and 3D just might be the driving force behind it. Until then I'm content with the JVC's. After all the biggest thrill for me is my curved 2.35 screen and the quality 2D picture the JVC's will provide.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Official JVC DLA-RS46 / DLA-X35 owners thread