Help me choose: JVC X55 vs X35 vs. Sony 50ES vs. Epson 6020 projector

yeah same boat

Same here.. Perhaps i should stick on my 3010 and wait one year more

If you want a CIH setup w/o using an anamorphic lens, the JVC models are the only ones in the list with lens memory feature.
Panasonic also offer this nice feature.
Other than that, the LCOS models (Sony\JVC) suffer from bright corners and focus uniformity. so you may have to test several units before you find a decent one.

[quote name="opv" url="/t/1450892/help-me-choose-jvc-x55-vs-x35-vs-sony-50es-vs-epson-6020-projector#post_22809587"
Other than that, the LCOS models (Sony\JVC) suffer from bright corners and focus uniformity. so you may have to test several units before you find a decent one.[/quote]

What do you mean with those, can you please tell more

Sure,
the LCOS technology suffers form large process variation; thus different units of the same model aren't identical.
the main differences are in the on off contrast ratio or fade to black performance between the different units.
When testing the units in a light controlled environment, with a black pattern you see that the corners are brighter than the middle. this bright corners problem is the main cause for the difference in contrast ratio between the units.
Another problem is focus uniformity. when testing the units with a resolution pattern or text pattern you'll find that the focus isn't even over the screen and between different units.

I got my JVC DLA-4810 (DLA-X55 equivalent) this week.
I can tell you that there are no bright corners, focus is very uniform and panel alignment (after adjusting horizontal red by one pixel) is perfect.
Also, contrary to what others are saying, in normal viewing, I am not seeing ghosting in 3D.
Very good projector.

X35 + Darblet + Da-Lite High Power =

X35 + Lumagen 125 point calibration + Darbee + Isco II lens + Beamax 1.5 gain screen =

I got my JVC DLA-4810 (DLA-X55 equivalent) this week.
I can tell you that there are no bright corners, focus is very uniform and panel alignment (after adjusting horizontal red by one pixel) is perfect.
Also, contrary to what others are saying, in normal viewing, I am not seeing ghosting in 3D.
Very good projector.

Good to hear. I hope that my replacement 4810 will be as good. My sample had very bright corners, bad panel alignment and focus uniformity, bad color uniformity and nasty smearing. Mike has been working with AVAD for me and I should be getting an RMA anytime now.

Is 1080p ok?

I demoed everyone of those projectors (except the Epson was a 5020 instead of 6020 which spec wise is the same projector). If 2d bluray movies were the only content, I would have went with the JVC (x55 was the one I demoed). However, I watch a lot of different content as you have listed and motion on the JVC was poor (soccer game). I couldn't imagine gaming on it. I know you mention you have a light controlled room (as do I) but if you every have a bunch of friends over and use it for sports you don't want to sit in the dark. In the end I went with the Sony HW50. I found it the best all around. I watched all content but did not do gaming.

I'm also interested in this projector question as I may be purchasing a new projector in the next 6-12 months. However, 3D is very imortant to me. I love JVC for 2D (I have a JVC RS2 now) and really hope that they can start to deliver satisfying no-compromise 3D on their next fleet of machines.

You can get the Benq w1070 for around 1k or so, and it will probably get even a little cheaper as time passes. Otherwise a refurbished Benq w7000 if the w1070 doesn't fit, there is also the w1080st. There are also some really cheap deals on refurbished Optoma hd33's on occasion. So if you are a big 3D fan and like 2D as well, there is no reason to settle, 2 projectors is where its at (let me here a whoop there it is...)...
Edited by coderguy - 1/12/13 at 10:20pm

From what many said the JVC's have high game lag so that may be something to consider.

I went from an RS45 to the HW50 and after spending some time with the HW50 I can now say that I prefer it for both 3D and 2D over my RS45. The JVC will still have better contrast in some scenes but most of the time the Sony is as good. Factor in that motion on the Sony is quite a bit better and comparing my two projectors the Sony is sharper when using RC than the using the JVC and it's enhancements. I use FI and it is much better than JVC's FI. If someone uses FI this in and of itself will make a big difference than you may realize.

As far as 3D is concerned My RS45 ghosted quite a bit along with the fact that 3D isn't as bright. The Sony's 3D is a bit brighter, motion is smoother, and FI works in 3D mode. I still see a little flicker and ghosting is still there on occasion. I held back a month on getting the HW50 to hear more news about the new JVCs but now that I have the HW50 home I am very glad that I made the switch.

I had an RS2 as well and this is a MUCH better projector IMO. The RS2 will have a little better black levels like the RS45 but everything else will be better including brightness, motion, colors, sharpness (with RC), and FI.

only a bit brighter? i thought its a lot of brighter ( %30 more)

There's a very noticeable difference in brightness yes. A bit is just my terminology. If it were only slight I would have said just a little bit.

Couldn't the OP get a SonyVW95 for around his 5K price? I would definitely put that in the mix.

There's actually quite a few selling for ~$4500 brand new on ebay. Quite a good deal if you ask me, especially when the 50ES is selling for less than a thousand dollars below the 95ES. If you're willing to spend just a little more I'd definitely go for the 95 over the 50.

Seegs108 You followin' me in the forum, I'm going to have to get a restraining order against you . In all seriousness though I owned a VW90ES pj and really liked the picture for sports and blurays. Sold it planning on getting the 95 but went through a rough few months so its on delay for awhile.

I wouldn't do the 95es though for 3D, unless he is definitely buying a second projector for 3D usage.
It's too dim in 3D mode and heard it ghosts more than the 30 or 50.

Unless someone A/B's and says otherwise, I'd personally buy an hw50 over the 95es, the hw50 has a lot more brightness, RC, though the 95 has a sharper native lens.

The OP says he isn't very interested in 3D. This is a nicer 2D unit over the 50 for sure. This is all based on his budget though.

Says he has a budget up to 5K...3D was terrible on the Sony 90 better on the 95 with the 50 the best. But for 2D he can't go wrong with the Sony 95 or 90 for that matter...better lens.

I am on the fence with the Sony 50 or the JVC RS 4810.
3D is not really an issue except on rare occasions. No gaming and a mostly light controlled room (no windows but light ceiling and walls.)
The room is 15X18X10 and the screen will be a 120 dia. (2.40 or 16X9...still weighing my options on this one.

Budget is under $5000 for projector. Screen will most likely be a nonHP due to projector placement issues (must be ceiling mounted).

I have zero experience with projectors so I am relying on all of you and your experience in these projectors.

Thanks

If you are deciding between the 4810 and the 50ES I think it's just going to come down to what is most important to you.

The 4810 is going to have better contrast and yes it will be noticeable in some viewing. Also, are you going to use FI during your viewing? If so, the Sony's FI is better and shows less artifacts than the JVC. If not motion will be closer. I typically use FI so I don't have as much experience in comparison but many say the motion is smoother on the Sony's vs. the JVC with FI turned off on both. I tend to be one in that crowd but I've only done this as a quick glance. Others say there's no difference. The Sony is also a bit brighter than the JVC is and this might especially be something to consider with a 120" non-HP screen. As always, brightness is a personal preference so only you can decide what "bright" is to your eyes. My 50ES is quite a bit sharper than my RS45 was but since you are considering the 4810 I won't be able to comment on other than from zombie10k's comparisons is that the 4810 with e-shift on looks similar to using the 50ES with Reality Creation turned on.

3d is very good with my new x35! I sold my x30 and was about to buy the Sony, till I test them in my environment.... Jvc!!! Excellent 2d and huge upgrade in 3d from x30. Contrast, optics and new lamp are also improvements from last years projectors. I haven't seen 4810 but I believe you should rs46since it's brighter to my eyes and with the change buy a lumamagen mini 3d and a darbee.... I liked the Sony for its brightness but I found the black levels very poor next to x35... I also found that jvc in 3d is dimmer than sony but it produces a more ghost free and less flickering image. So jvc Great 2d good 3d better contrast, more filmic look, until 120" sony good 2d good 3d, better motion, better price and you can use it for larger screens.

So with the Sony 50ES, which screen do you use and why?
I am still debating the screen aspect ratio size but would like to see any movie in its' native aspect if possible but cannot do the anamorphic lens right now. I guess that leaves the JVCs with their lens memory or doing something with scalers...not sure which way to go here.

As for FI...not ever even seen it in use. As I said, this is my first projector experience so am naive at many of the technologies.

I'm sure you've seen FI or Frame Interpolation before. If you walk into Best Buy and have looked at an LCD 40" and above you've seen FI in action. Some people call it the "soap opera" effect and others call it the video effect. It adds and extra frame of video (interpolates) for every 4 frames which converts movies which are 24 frames per second to 30 frames per second. This technology smooths motion. Most projectors (including the Sony and JVC) have a high and a low mode. Low mode isn't as aggressive and gives a partial "live" look to video. High mode is typically very aggressive and gives film a "live" on the set look. Some like it, some hate it. YMMV. With FI turned on camera pans and faster action is smoother but FI can induce artifacts. The higher modes typically have more artifacts but in this case the Sony has less artifacts and is smoother than JVC's FI (CMD).

Screen choice is a personal preference. I have the Dalite HP (high power) 2.4 gain screen. This screen significantly makes the picture brighter than standard screens but the projector needs to shelf mounted as light will reflect off the screen back at the projectors lens. So the closer you are to the lens the brighter the pic will be. Unlike many screens the HP screen doesn't have all the dreaded sparkling and uneven picture that some screens have. Also, since light is reflected back at the projectors lens room reflections won't be quite as bad as they would be with a standard screen.

Lastly, the black levels on the Sony are not poor in comparison to the JVC. if you use the dynamic iris (or crank down the manual iris) and put the projector in low lamp mode. The JVC is definitely better agreed but also the differences seen will vary from scene to scene.

Using dynamic iris improves contrast but watching a movie this way it's wrong and unreal. Now that jvc improved finally 3d so much the story ended...

I'm in a very similar boat here; I hope I'm not hijacking the thread.

My plan is a 100" wide 16:9 Seymour AV AT retractable screen, 13' viewing distance, 17' throw.

The room has white walls & ceiling & light carpet, however (1) viewing only at night; (2) right wall has dark curtains; (3) left wall is open to entry way; (4) ceiling is 10'. So all those mitigate the issue of the white room.

Source will be primarily Blu-rays. Don't care about 3D. Don't want frame interpolation (can't stand soap opera effect).

PQ is primary goal. I stuck to a high-end CRT RPTV for a long time and was disappointed when I "upgraded" to a mid-range plasma.

I was considering the JVC X55 or the Sony 50, but maybe I should also look at the X35 and/or Sony 95?