Thinking of Changing to 2.35:1? Now May Be the Time - Panamorph - Page 3

I can see how it would be "odd" advice if I was suggesting that those people who possess a lens system with a motorized or manual transport instead leave the lens in place at all times. But that is not what I was doing. I was talking specifically about how a fixed lens system works. Panamorph makes both kinds. The CineVista is our budget, entry level lens system, and to hit the price point ($1500) we designed it to be used in a fixed configuration, since designing and adding a full blown transport system would have pushed the price way over our pricing target. Again, it is our entry level product so I think one would expect compromises in performance compared to the high end systems that we offer.

As I mentioned above:

"The CineVista can be also be removed for 16:9 material if desired."

It can be, but it is not a simple "just grab it and pop it out of place" operation - you have to unscrew it from the mount and then of course go through the reverse operation to put it back. We don't think the target consumer for the CineVista would typically be inclined to do that. For our UH480 and DC1, at their much higher price points, we do expect people to care about such things and that's why we offer both manual and motorized transports for those lens systems. BTW, the CineVista mount also allows for sliding the lens to the side, but it was not really designed ultimately for that purpose. Over time the pieces can loosen and the lens will become "wobbly" in relation to the mount. Of course, you could always then just re-tighten the screws

To me, this all makes sense if you put the CineVista in context of where it fits into the Panamorph lineup. Just like a speaker company's mall bookshelf speaker will not have the same full range frequency response of their top of the line tower, the CineVista does not have the same overall performance of our top of the line motorized DC1.

Question - did you think I was suggesting that, even though the lens can be removed for 16:9 content, that I thought the better solution was to simply leave it in place? That would explain your "odd advice" comment. Perhaps I should have explained more thoroughly that although you can remove the lens for 16:9 content, it is not a simple operation and that the system was not really designed with that in mind.

I just don't see the point of a low-cost lens vs doing CIH without a lens. You end up having to advise users to do things that are normally advised against in the projector world. e.g. use multi-zone convergence correction to dial out chromatic abberation (bad because it softens the image and/or produces artifacts), and scale down 16:9 content to avoid having to remove the lens.

I've been happy using a fat border of black velvet to hide black bars when zoomed for 2.35:1. I don't expect you to agree because of the business you're in, so I'll try not to turn this into a another lens vs zooming thread.

I appreciate you setting down your thoughts. Hopefully you will appreciate what I have to say even if you don't fully agree.

RE: multi-zone convergence. While I cannot speak to every single projector out there since I have not tested them all, I can say that the Epson and Sony models we tried it on had literally zero visible impact to the picture sharpness or overall quality. In fact, in our tests using this feature only improved the picture, whether or not the CineVista was in place. In our tests we used HTPC generated single pixel wide text, etc, to specifically look for any visible softening. In these tests, the only difference we saw was that the color fringing disappeared when ECC was engaged. I have put out a challenge to anyone on the Forum to reproduce our test and post their results, since I think it is perfectly natural to be skeptical of manufacturer claims.

When you say "in the projector world," it would help to know how exactly that is defined. If you are talking about the AVS (type) projector world, where people concern themselves with such things as chromatic aberration, scaling artifacts, and the visible effects of having an automatic iris control your contrast, etc, I agree with you. However, after literally 28 years in the business of dealing with the general public and trying to explain such basic concepts as what an aspect ratio is (and why they would care about it), I have come to realize that 97% of the public could not care less about aspect ratios, automatic irises, chromatic aberration, scaling artifacts, and the like. As purists (and I count myself as one), we may not like this, but that is the case. However, they do want to eliminate the black bars from the movies they watch, and they do like the fact that by using the anamorphic process they also get an 80% larger image.

"How do I eliminate the black bars from the movies I rent" is one of the top questions received by the editors at Sound and Vision magazine. A recent poll conducted by the CEA found that one of the top complaints people had with their new HDTVs is "I thought I was buying a widescreen television. Why do I still have black bars at the top and bottom of my movies?" I have personally taught classes on "The History of Widescreen Movies" to rooms full of people who are literally in the home theater industry, both dealers and manufacturer's reps alike, who when I ask the question, "who here knows why there are black bars at the top and bottom of most of the DVDs you own or rent," maybe 3% of the crowd puts their hands up.

My point here is simply this: that the vast majority of the consumer base we are targeting the CineVista at are not the types of folks who would ever put black velvet onto their walls, nor would they like that the movie menu is projected onto the wall when they first load in their new 2.40:1 Blu-ray. One of the things that the market place proves over and over again is that simplicity will always win out over complexity. Putting velvet onto the walls and taking the time to set up (and explain) the zoom settings necessary for 'Scope - plus the time it takes for the average "zoom" projector to change modes - is the opposite of "simple." With a fixed lens like the CineVista, all a consumer needs to do is push a single button on the remote to change aspect ratios (if they even care to do so). No black velvet, no menus projected onto walls, and no waiting for the zoom mode to do its thing.

After working with the folks at Panamorph over the last 6 years, I have found that the vast majority of end users simply leave the lens in place all the time - even if they have a motorized transport. And those people do not scale down the 16:9 content either - they simply watch the 16:9 content stretched out to 2.35:1. (Honest - this is based on hundreds of tech support calls and end user surveys.) While those of us like you and I would find such a "desecration" of the image unacceptable, the truth of the matter is that most of the rest of humanity does not care about these things. And I am not about to tell them that their preferred way of watching movies or television is "wrong." They just want the black bars to go away and for the picture to fill the entire screen.

What we are doing with the CineVista is bringing a true widescreen experience to the mass audience at a reasonable price, one that actually gets rid of the black bars rather than just project them onto the wall. We also do this while at the same time giving consumers a much simpler and "true to the director's intent" experience than they would get by simply hacking off the sides of the image like folks do when they zoom on their 16:9 flat panels (which is how most people "solve" the black bar problem). For people who DO care about chromatic aberration and reduced resolution for 16:9 sources, we still offer the 480 and DC1 systems with either manual or motorized sled systems. It's not as if those products are going away

John, just wanted to say thanks for your clarifying my question about zoom and throw length on my earlier post. Very clear and good news given my short room.

Best,

Dave M

Happy to help

I'm probably gonna get the Cinevista, but for the time being I am thinking of buying a 16:9 AT screen and using masks for the top and bottom (note, I am not a typical user), just because there are some super easy DIY solutions for that, and I like the flexibility of when I ever wish to remove the lens, I can then use my extra height, because I play a lot of videogames (in fact, I make them), and at least on consoles, it's just the norm. On PC games, you can force the new aspect ratio but that's also a pain quite often (especially when you get into 2:35 gaming in 3D at wierd custom resolutions and refresh rates). I'll also look into building an AT curved scope screen eventually, just because it's way cool, since buying one is out of my budget range. I just think 'Scope screens are more expensive and when I get one, I want one that corrects pincushion and that means curved. So for now I'm happy getting a 16:9 screen for cheap and building a better one later, it's not like I won't ever have a use for it, or that they can't be sold on craigslist easily. (I might even buy it that way)

NB I am not the average target consumer for this! But I will think about leaving the lens in place all the time. So long as the aspect ratio isn't wierd, I'm okay. I usually watch 720p shows, not only because they are smaller, but because I use SVP and enjoy the frame interpolation, which my budget projector doesn't have built-in, and my PC/video card isn't powerful enough to FI 24p->60p in 1080. My next projector in a few years down the line should have 4k and all types of other features, but for now, I need something good / cheap enough, and a lens that I can re-use later on is great. No matter what, I guess projectors will have 16:9 native for a long time to come, and anamorphic lenses will always be useful to those of us who detest black bars and lost brightness (tbh, I need the extra brightness in 3D, my cheap BenQ w1070 isn't very bright in 3D). That said, it's really annoying that the vertical stretching on my PC is broken in 3D, but they should fix that in an upcoming firmware release.
Edited by RLBURNSIDE - 3/9/13 at 9:38am

I just wanted to state quickly in this thread that I did not mean to insinuate that the CineVista is not designed for the enthusiast as well, because it is. While the experiences I shared above indicate to me that the specific audience we are targeting - the more casual home theater consumer - will never even notice (or care about) something like chromatic aberration or reduced resolution for 16:9 sources, we also realize that there are potential customers that will. That is why we are working with projector manufacturers to incorporate the chromatic correction into any model likely to be paired with this lens, and to make sure that this correction is seamless and without negative impact to overall PQ. While probably 80 - 90% of those who buy the lens would never mess with such a feature, that means that 10 - 20% would.

So, to be clear:

• Those who care about chromatic aberration yet do not have the budget for a higher end lens can dial out CA with Electronic Color Correction, already available on many current HT projectors.
• Those who want to move the lens out of the way for 16:9 material can do so, but need to be aware that they will need to occasionally re-tighten mount screws (which is why we do not market this capability).

As stated above, our target audience would probably never mess with these types of adjustments, etc, but we are aware there are those (like the people here on this Forum) that will. We are trying to come up with reasonable solutions for both types of consumer, while still staying within our sub- $1500 price point.

Hope all of this makes sense!

Hey John,

Appreciate the additional answers you have been giving. I am very interested in this lens.

Regarding the removing of the lens for 1.77 material. I am very handy with tools etc. and I wonder if I would be able to buy the Cinevista (most likely without the mount) and set up some rails so that the lens can be slid in front of, or away from, my projector. Is this a non-starter in the sense of tolerances required and things like distance between the projector lens and Cinevista?

I don't mind to refocus slightly and for the moment I am letting aside whether this would simply not work for reasons of throw distance etc. in my room. Just want to better understand whether a DIY savvy enthusiast can get into a CineVista even more cheaply (i.e. just buying the lens, not the mount and lens combo) and taking the time to rig up a DIY mount that allowed for removing the lens for 1.77 material.

Best,

Dave M

Hi Dave!

You can build your own hardware, certainly, or work with the mount we supply in the manner I suggested above. There are some design concerns you need to be aware of, though. The lens needs to be tilted in most installations to follow the light path of the projector. For example, if the projector is ceiling mounted, the lens will most likely need to be tilted down at the screen. Since the CineVista is very similar to our UH480 lens it installs in a very similar fashion. I would highly suggest taking a look at the 5 minute 480 installation video to get an idea how all of this works before taking on this task:

http://www.panamorph.com/8-support/videos

You also need to make sure that the lens stays parallel to the projector lens surface, but that should not be very difficult. The distance between the lens and projector lens should be an inch or less. Refocusing should not be an issue since the lens was designed to maintain focus in or out.

Good luck!

Are there any official retailers in Europe preferably Germany?

John, I have a question about the recommended mounts. My new place, I think I need a mount that's not perfectly flush with the ceiling like those two are, i.e. I need a bit of a vertical drop to the projector. Is there any particular reason only those two mounts will work with the Cinevista? I want to get the right mount from the start, but it has to work with my setup. maybe I can mount either of those mounts to a block of wood to add an extra gap to the ceiling? is this a good idea or no?

Both mounts we recommend take standard 1 1/2" threaded pipe if you want to use an extension pole, so no problem. You just need a ceiling mount as well. We engineered the CineVista mount to work primarily with Chief because most installers/dealers prefer this mount. The CineVista will work with any SLB or RPA mount from Chief along with the OmniMount 3N1PJT. We can’t develop a mounting system that will work with every mount out there so we had to pick our favs/industry favs

We have many dealers located across Europe. Please check the dealer locator on the Panamorph site. You can also contact Screen Professionals in Germany, our distributor.

If no dealers are local / convenient, you can always contact Panamorph directly

Chris Heinonen's review of the CineVista is up on Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/video-accessories-misc/video-accessories-misc/affordable-anamorphic-system.html

Chris paired with a Sony HW50 projector and an SI screen. Enjoy!

Great review! Looks like a good lens.