or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Mitsubishi HC5 vs. Sharp XV-Z30000 as a single PJ solution
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mitsubishi HC5 vs. Sharp XV-Z30000 as a single PJ solution - Page 4

post #91 of 113
Thread Starter 
On one side of the screen the convergence is 1/2 blue pixel off (vertically), on the other side 1/2 red pixel off (vertically). Horizontal convergence is good.
post #92 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Just curious, how far do you estimate your convergence is off by using a test pattern?
It is good you are happy with it though. I also prefer LCOS over the DLP's I've seen thus far, though we'll see what Zombie thinks of the Sharp 20k (older high-end .95" DLP) vs. his LCOS projectors.

I'm waiting to get the null modem cable so I can update the firmware. I bought it last week from J&R (located in NYC) thinking they'd ship it from there. Nope.... Ships from California so I won't receive it until Wednesday. I also talked with Jason to see if I could drive down so I could see the projectors he has and show him the ones I have. This way he can see more than just the Sharp and I can get to view his holy grail RS55 and Sharp 30K. I think he was interested in my HTPC setup so I'd probably bring that down too.

I can tell you the image the Sharp XV-Z20000 is nicer than the HC5's. It's a more refined, clean and transparent representation of the material.
post #93 of 113
@ELIX
That's cool, not bad at all, actually it's good.
I think it's an A- (definitely a keeper)
(sorry I was working on a convergence grading system :P)

@Seegs
Cool deal. You guys will complete the circle of projector recommendation testing hell smile.gif
post #94 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

Right now I'm a happy mother-videophile-cker.


Could you please comment on the H5 fan noise in comparison to the Sharp?

Also, the 80-inch shots look great. Any guess on how it may hold up on a 110" 1.3gain gray screen non-perfect room settings?

Thank you.
Edited by David44 - 5/20/13 at 3:20pm
post #95 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

I can tell you the image the Sharp XV-Z20000 is nicer than the HC5's. It's a more refined, clean and transparent representation of the material.
You're a DLP fan so I'll take that comment with a grain of salt smile.gif It will be much sharper, I guess, but as to "more refined, clean and transparent" I seriously doubt it (knowing single chip DLPs have dithering, problems with color light output and lack of on/off contrast). I'm interested in what Zombie has to say about it when he compares them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

@ELIX
That's cool, not bad at all, actually it's good.
I think it's an A- (definitely a keeper)
(sorry I was working on a convergence grading system :P)
eek.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by David44 View Post

Could you please comment on the H5 fan noise in comparison to the Sharp?
It is very quiet. In normal lamp mode practically unnoticeable. In high lamp mode it is actually usable unlike Sharp. I am not worried too much about using it in high lamp as the lamp ages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David44 View Post

Also, the 80-inch shots look great. Any guess on how it may hold up on a 110" 1.3gain gray screen non-perfect room settings?
I think it will be a piece of cake for this projector in 2D. In 3D I cannot say yet.
post #96 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

You're a DLP fan so I'll take that comment with a grain of salt smile.gif It will be much sharper, I guess, but as to "more refined, clean and transparent" I seriously doubt it (knowing single chip DLPs have dithering, problems with color light output and lack of on/off contrast). I'm interested in what Zombie has to say about it when he compares them.

Cheaper DLP projectors have a problem with dithering. For instance, my Planar PD8150 uses unishape lamp technology that modulates the lamp to basically eliminate dithering in dark scenes. As far as contrast goes both my NuVision and Sharp have over twice as much ANSI contrast and black levels are better on my NuVision and the Sharp is equal to what I saw. Both are considerably sharper. From what I've seen the images from my DLPs are in fact more refined and more pleasing to the eyes, but my guess is that you're only going to take what I have to say to be true until Zombie gives his seal of approval. I don't know if Zombie is going to be free for a day to let me come down, but if that day arrives I'm sure he'll have plenty of great things to say about what I have to offer for comparison.

I still feel that if high, high end companies like Runco, Sim2, Digital Projection, and Projection Design only use DLP that has to say something about what their engineers think makes for the highest picture quality. If they really thought LCOS was nicer they'd have done what Mitsubishi did and created a projector around their SXRD chips. When you make a DLP system with the right compenents, I think it's hard to beat the overall picture quality. Unfortunately you can make a cheaper projector with LCD and LCOS chips and have decent picture quality and outperform what DLP can do with the same budget. You really need nicer components to get it to look and perform better than cheaper LCOS/LCD designs.
Edited by Seegs108 - 5/20/13 at 11:53pm
post #97 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

Unfortunately you can make a cheaper projector with LCD and LCOS chips and have decent picture quality and outperform what DLP can do with the same budget. You really need nicer components to get it to look and perform better than cheaper LCOS/LCD designs.
Cheaper design? Are you referring to an 8000$ HC9000 which HC5 basically is?
post #98 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

Cheaper design? Are you referring to an 8000$ HC9000 which HC5 basically is?

You seriously think that Mitsubishi set the the price of the HC5 at a point where they're losing money on every sale? No, they didn't. This price point has to at least cover the cost of parts and the cost to produce them. They aren't just giving these away at this price to be nice. High MSRP doesn't always equal better parts. You need to read reviews to see what experienced reviewers think of the product to see if it's really a value at its selling price. As an example, my NuVision P2 had an MSRP of $15000 and had a street price of probably $12000 but it is the same projector as the PD8150 just retrofitted with LEDs and tweaked software to run the LEDs instead of a lamp. Then look at the Runco LS-1. It is the same internal design as both the PD8150 and NuVision but at nearly $11000 and $4000 MSRP difference respectively. When you see something like that, you have to take a step back and think someone is making a boatload of profit. The only main difference in production cost with those three I just mentioned is the use of DC2, DC3, and DC4 .95" DMDs respectively. But that hardly justifies the price markup between all three.

My point of all of this is that you don't always get what you pay for. Seeing the HC5, you know that basically anyone who bought it as the HC9000D got ripped off for a lot money because obviously the cost to build it was absolutely no where near the price you paid. I would imagine the street price of both the LS-1 and the HC-5 are pretty close to as low as possible to make a profit overall when everything a manufacturer must do to design, build, market, and warranty each projector is said and done.
Edited by Seegs108 - 5/21/13 at 1:09am
post #99 of 113
Thread Starter 
HC9000 was their first and last LCoS projector. Meaning what? Being first, the cost of initial R&D were high and it showed in HC9000's price. Of course that influenced its commercial success. Being last, it shows that Mitsubishi didn't consider LCoS projectors a viable project. Being both first and last, Mitsubishi must've considered HC9000 a commercial failure meaning lack of profit. It is possible that at this point Mitsubishi is only taking steps to reduce their inventory to improve operating working capital and cash position.
Edited by Elix - 5/21/13 at 3:04am
post #100 of 113
Exactly, but my point was that your post that it cost $8000 at one point is meaningless in regards to quality.
post #101 of 113
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

Seeing the HC5, you know that basically anyone who bought it as the HC9000D got ripped off for a lot money because obviously the cost to build it was absolutely no where near the price you paid.
So you think 2000$ is just the right price for HC9000? Then what's the right price for JVC, Sony projectors selling at 3000$?
post #102 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

So you think 2000$ is just the right price for HC9000? Then what's the right price for JVC, Sony projectors selling at 3000$?

The right price is what the market will bear, or alternatively, what you are willing to pay. A more accurate way of looking at this is which unit is the better value. Your take is that the Mitsubishi, at its current selling point, is a better value than the Sony or the JVC. That is most likely accurate. However in the electronics market the Sony and JVC brands are perceived to offer more value and can command a higher price. Manufacturer cost is irrelevant. Looks as though Mitsubishi decided they were a little late to the the LCoS party and decided to pull the plug. The consumer wins.
post #103 of 113
Thread Starter 
Willie, I agree, and that was my point when I said about 8000$. There were people who bought this projector at this price and they actually thought it was worth it. They compared it to similarly priced Sony VW90 and considered it to be on the same level. Mfr. cost is irrelevant, two years later I get the same projector for 2k, that's where this projector's value is.
post #104 of 113
The limited success of the HC9000 was a result of competition from JVC and Sony. I don't think folks were ready to fork out that much $$ on a first attempt with SXRD at the original selling price. Especially when established models from Sony and JVC were already selling well.

The 3D received average reviews for brightness / x-talk at the dawn of the '3D craze' 2+ years ago. Same as the VW90. So it was seen primarily as a quality 2D projector. Sony fixed much of the original 3D complaints with the VW95 but we never saw a 2nd attempt from Mitsubishi. Now all we have left from them in the DLP's which are nothing special imo.
post #105 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

The limited success of the HC9000 was a result of competition from JVC and Sony. I don't think folks were ready to fork out that much $$ on a first attempt with SXRD at the original selling price. Especially when established models from Sony and JVC were already selling well.

The 3D received average reviews for brightness / x-talk at the dawn of the '3D craze' 2+ years ago. Same as the VW90. So it was seen primarily as a quality 2D projector. Sony fixed much of the original 3D complaints with the VW95 but we never saw a 2nd attempt from Mitsubishi. Now all we have left from them in the DLP's which are nothing special imo.

Mits made a valiant effort for a "better" pj to compete with the upper tier JVC's and Sony. At $8k, by most accounts, it had a great lense, panels from Sony and even better FI processing than Panasonic according to Cinema4home review of 2011. smile.gif

Even had better native contrast then Sony at the time. But a flawed CMS, DI and 3d showed they could not really compete at that price point. Kind of reminds me of Epson's effort to come out with a "better" unit a few years ago- at least Mits got some products out. tongue.gif
Mits fell back to just doing cheap DLP, and Epson "just" cheap lcd's that are both better rounded for their price points.

For $2k, or less, this is a nice value prop, as the Epson one would have been, especially if 3d is not huge to you.

I still need to find something to replace my aging, four year old RS10 so keep the details coming as I am torn between one of these, or waiting until the fall. eek.gifsmile.gif
post #106 of 113
Mitsubishi has always been a premium projector company. Even their "low end" dlp projectors bested those of other manufacturers. They see the big picture. By that I mean they dont just plop in a plastic lens with a 2:1 zoom ratio and then put in the display chip. Mitsubishi has always used high quality glass lenses. The lens is what sets them apart from other manufacturers. Epson has to be the worst when it comes to lenses. Ive had an epson HC720, Epson 6500UB, and an Epson 8500UB. All of them used the same cheap lens that felt like a toy and it showed in the picture. Comparing the old mitsubishi HD1000u to the Optoma HD70, it was no competition. The HD70 was a toy, while the HD1000u felt beefy with a solid lens. The only LCoS projector manufacturer that I feel makes a decent lens is sony, but even then I dont think it rivals the mitsubishi. If you look at mitsubishi's product brochures you will see almost always they flaunt their lens specs. If other manufacturers did that it would read some thing like "All plastic lenses made with no precision in a remote part of china" tongue.gif
post #107 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

The only LCoS projector manufacturer that I feel makes a decent lens is sony, but even then I dont think it rivals the mitsubishi.

?? imo the JVC lens is better than Sony's current offering in the HW50 and VW95. I've seen these all in direct A/B setups in my HT. We'll see how the Mitsubishi lens fits in. The lens in their LCD models were ok, nothing special. I had the HC5500 and HC6800. The HC8000 DLP lens was average at best, the Sharp 30K was sharper with less CA.

@ GoCaboNow - keep an eye out for a HC5 / RS55 compare in the shootout thread.There's been some good bargains recently on the 55/X70.
post #108 of 113
Zombie, The HC5000 and up have been touted as the sharpest 1080p projectors by many reliable review sites such as cine4home and projectorreviews. If your 6800 was average sharpness it was a bad sample. I just sold my RS-40 and it was no where, not even remotely, as sharp as my old HC6000. In fact I have yet to see a projector sharper then the HC6000.
post #109 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Zombie, The HC5000 and up have been touted as the sharpest 1080p projectors by many reliable review sites such as cine4home and projectorreviews. If your 6800 was average sharpness it was a bad sample. I just sold my RS-40 and it was no where, not even remotely, as sharp as my old HC6000. In fact I have yet to see a projector sharper then the HC6000.

They were the sharpest at the time of review. The Samsung SP-A800B/A900B, the Marantz VP11S1/2/15S1 and the Sharp XV-Z20000 are surely sharper. With any three chip solution, convergence is never going to be perfect and that will take a toll on perceived image sharpness no matter how nice the lens is.
post #110 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Zombie, The HC5000 and up have been touted as the sharpest 1080p projectors by many reliable review sites such as cine4home and projectorreviews. If your 6800 was average sharpness it was a bad sample. I just sold my RS-40 and it was no where, not even remotely, as sharp as my old HC6000. In fact I have yet to see a projector sharper then the HC6000.

it must have been sample variance, I've seen JVC's with average focus and others like my RS55 which are dead on. My HC5500 was better than the 6800 that I had for a brief time.
post #111 of 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

They were the sharpest at the time of review. The Samsung SP-A800B/A900B, the Marantz VP11S1/2/15S1 and the Sharp XV-Z20000 are surely sharper. With any three chip solution, convergence is never going to be perfect and that will take a toll on perceived image sharpness no matter how nice the lens is.

I completely agree, however those are much higher end. When you pay for a high end projector you are paying for quality.
post #112 of 113
I am definitely keeping the HC5 (HC9000D replacement) after reading this thread, esp.
since it sits right above the seating position.

Reading the cine4home review describing the air flow i now fully understand why the
thin mesh air filter is plenty in cooling and protecting from dust and maibe I ruined the
HC9000D by covering the intake with a Miele vac pollen filter, which my HC5000 and
HC7000 tolerated very well as they were directly cooled. Mitsubishi was selling the
"supplemental air filter" for those.

I have been a Mitsubishi "badge-polisher" for a while now, the rapid and polite customer
service with the HC9000D replacement convinced me to stay with them until 4K.
post #113 of 113
Thread Starter 
Is it a coincidence I have Mitsubishi CRT monitor as well (2070SB)? And if I happened to choose Sony HW50 over HC5 I have Sony CRT monitor too (FW900). tongue.gif IMO these two brands define and move display technology forward. They are on the crest of the wave.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Mitsubishi HC5 vs. Sharp XV-Z30000 as a single PJ solution