BenQ W1070, Mits HC4000, Epson 8350

The Benq if it fits.

Coder, do you have experience with the HC4000 vs the W1070?

I really want to upgrade my HC3800 (primary reason being adding 3D support) which I know to be very similar to the HC4000.

Do you think the W1070 is really a decent upgrade over the HC3800? I have a fully light controlled room and have been thoroughly happy with the HC3800, but a brighter image with possibly slightly better better blacks and 3D support is what I'm aiming for.

I cannot consider the W7000 as it will not fill my 136" screen from my max available throw distance which is a 16' room.

I was looking at the Sharp XV-Z30000, but I'm afraid it wont be bright enough in 3D once the bulb wears.

@JOEY
Well, the Benq w1070 has such a short throw, that you may want to wait for the Benq w1500 to come out which will have a normal throw. The w1070 will need to be mounted almost over your head usually or in front between the screen and you.

@Sir Master
I have experience with the Benq w7000 which is very close looking to the w1070 (almost the same), as well as the hc3800 and hc4000. The w7000 is the big older brother so to speak to the Benq w1070. Many people compared the w1070 and w7000 and they are definitely very similar overall.

I also have experience with both the Mits hc3800 and LOTS and LOTS of experience with the Mits hc4000. I owned both of them, have calibrated both, and a friend still owns the hc4000.

The w1070 is an upgrade over the Mits in some ways but not others. The black levels are probably similar but the Mits wins in intrascene contrast and dark contrast I would think. The Benq should have more uniform focus and look better in HTPC.

In bright very detailed reference level scenes with no IMAGE noise, the Benq will look better. In some movies, the Mitsubishi will look better, but the Mits has a lot more RBE than the Benq, and the Benq is tons brighter and has 3D.

The Mits is only 60hz and cannot do "smoother looking" 24p motion known as 5:5 pulldown, whereas the Benq can do 5:5 pulldown for 2D I believe.

Comparing Benq w7000 to Mits hc4000 would be like this (might not match up exactly as 1070 would, but should be close):

Benq = Win for Sports, win for TV, win for gaming clarity, win for documentaries, win for color accuracy, win for SOME movies, win for brightness, win for placement flexibility

Mits = Quieter FAN in low, win for movies that have lots of image noise in them, and a win in some darker movies (depending on how much the w1070's lamp dimmer really helps)

Mits can do 2.35/16:9 swapping so you can watch re-formatted 16:9 on a 2.35 screen. The Benq does not support this.

The Mits is better in some movies then the Benq, but it's probably a tossup, the Benq is sharper and brighter and more feature-rich.
Edited by coderguy - 3/22/13 at 9:07am

http://www.benq.com/microsite/projector/throwratiocalculator/
shows it can fill that size screen at 16 feet. So the w7000 could still be a good choice. Not sure what other settings you are using but at 16 feet it seems quite able to fill the size of the screen

Thanks. I'll really have to consider all this.

I thought my HC3800 did do well on 24Hz content though? It allows me to set my HTPC to 24Hz native and the color wheel can be heard slowing down from 60Hz to 48Hz when I send a 24Hz signal. Things like slow panning seems to have less judder in 24Hz mode but it could be placebo as I've never done a blind test.

I do have a fully light controlled room and 136" screen so the extra brightness on the BenQ W1070 would surely be welcomed, especially in 3D. I have no idea what my screen gain is though as my screen is a DIY painted screen.

I actually have a Panasonic AE8000 coming to my place tomorrow, but I'm worried about convergence, and 3D cross-talk and the overall differences between 3LCD and DLP. I think i really do like DLP. When I got the HC3800 I did see RBE at first as it was my first DLP, but after awhile I stopped noticing it. Maybe it's because I got used to it or maybe because the bulb got dimmer, it has 2050 hours on it at the moment. After 1000 hours I bumped the lamp mode up to "normal".

I really do like the picture from my HC3800. So you think I shouldn't really be disappointed upgrading to the W1070? When you say "dark contrast" you mean "shadow details?" Art's review of the W1070 said it has "excellent shadow details".

Feels weird upgrading my $1200 projector with a $1000 one. I know it is 3 years newer and had DC3 vs my HC3800 DC2. I really wanted a larger upgrade though and have a ~2800 budget for the projector itself, but seems like I might be stuck to DLP if I want my 3D to look so great.

If the Panasonic in 3D mode and other things don't really blow me away over my HC3800 tomorrow then it's probably going back to ProjectorPeople and I will start considering the W1070 and such.

Yah the Mits can do 2:2 pulldown I think they call it, just that 5:5 pulldown looks a bit smoother on 120hz projectors.

It's hard to say Benq vs. Mits, there are mixed opinions on it throughout this forum. Dark contrast means in black levels like Harry Potter movies, Underworld, rock concerts, night scenes in Westerns, space scenes, SCI FI, etc...

Neither the Benq or Mits are particularly great at darker contrast shots, so even if you see the Benq as being worse, well it probably isn't that much worse. Though in some scenes the higher Native on/off of the Mits can be noticed.

If it were me, I'm taking the Benq over the Mits generally speaking, but I wouldn't say the BENQ is a huge upgrade over the Mits if you primarily just watch movies (heck you might like the Mits better), but in most other cases the Benq is better. It's going to end up as a personal preference on these two other than the obvious differences I noted before.
Edited by coderguy - 3/22/13 at 9:28am

Yeah, thanks again.

Here are some shots of my old uncalibrated HC3800 still.

http://i.imgur.com/kbZi2.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ARLhp.jpg

They still look beautiful to me.

If i decide to go for the W1070 maybe I'll have to buy from another place like VisualApex so I can return under 5hrs if I'm not satisfied once again.

Or maybe I should just keep both and use one for 2D and one for 3D. I do actually have a spare brand new bulb for my HC3800 in box that came with it as a bonus rebate way back when. I was planning to sell the HC3800 though with that new bulb. What do you think that would even be worth? I was thinking 600 but if I cant even get 500 I'd probably just keep it.

True if you sit close to the screen relative to the screen size, you can mount it a couple feet behind you, but it's still going to be relatively close to seating.

It probably won't bother you, though sitting that close to the screen does bother some, I don't see any reason not to get the Benq.
I sit about 8' to 9' away from a 106" screen (forgot exactly), so sitting 10' to 11' away from a 110" screen should be do-able.

I sit 14' away from my 136" screen and it seems perfect. Perfect to all my guests as well. My projector lens is pretty much directly above me with the body going back farther. If I get a BenQ w1070 it looks like I can make a 136" image with the projector lens at 14' 2" which is right under the seating viewers head and is where my current projector is located.

I was in the same boat on trying to decide which projector to get. I pretty much decided to go with the Benq as well as it seems to be the best bang for the buck. However i did see that Newegg has the Mits HC7800D with 2 pairs of glasses for a couple hundred more than the Benq. Wonder if that is a big step up compared to the Benq
Edited by tza88 - 3/22/13 at 1:12pm

Looks like the HC7800D is too dim for good 3D.

http://www.projectorreviews.com/mitsubishi/hc7800d/performance.php

If I were to buy another PJ right now, I'd wait for the w1500 so I could get FI and wireless HDMI, the hdmi ports are not that great on the w1070. It's probably one of the few downsides to the projector, considering its cost.

Any idea of the timeframe for the release of the W1400 and W1500? I saw an original article saying March 2013 but that obviously isnt happening

Although the Mitsubishi and Benq are quite close in a lot of ways, I find that dark scenes are just as good on the Benq as the Mits. Couple this with a considerably brighter image, better sharpness, really nice colour, and you have what I would consider an upgrade option from the HC3800/4000.

Coderguy is bang on regarding image noise. The mits is very, very clean. But overall I'd take the Benq.

Cool, I really appreciate your take on it Nimoy.

Panasonic 8000 arriving tomorrow and If I'm not somewhat blown away as an upgrade vs the HC3800 as well as don't see a ton of crosstalk I very well might be ordering a w1070 soon. Maybe i'll get a Darbee with all that extra cash haha! I heard it works best on sharp pictures to begin with and the w1070 sounds like it's up there for sharpness.

Let us know how the Panasonic compares to the mits?. Always interesting for evaluation purposes.

Are you speaking about the Benq w7000 vs. Mits hc4000, if yes then I'd say this:

The Benq can do darker blacks in LOW APL with the IRIS enabled, but actual intrascene contrast in these dark scenes will be lower than the Mits.

So which looks better, a projector that does blacks darker with lower contrast (lower white peaks), or a projector that maintains a higher intrascene contrast and white peak but offends the blacks in doing so. Well this is complicated, but overall I'd say it depends on how much distance there is between the IRS's dynamic on/off and the competing projector's Native On/Off, and what foot lamberts your peak white is set to. Keep in mind the Benq starts at about 1/4th the native on/off the Mits, so even with an IRIS the BENQ has a lot of catching up to do at times. Some people will prefer the IRIS others will prefer the higher intrascene, and more notably it will vary from scene to scene. I also do realize that gamma boosts and "cheats" are used in conjunction with the Benq's IRIS response, but even so it doesn't improve intrascene much in a low APL scene (a little). If you are watching the image above 14 fL, the projector with the IRIS will beat it more easily (because it brings the entire APL down), but if you are watching both projectors much darker at under 12 fL, the Mits can still win in some cases. This last statement does not affect contrast, but it does greatly affect our perception of how dark the blacks are.

As far as vs. the Benq w1070, I am not sure because it doesn't have an IRIS (just a lamp dimmer), but it's rumored to have about double or more the Native On/Off of the w7000. The big problem here though is in these lower native on/off ranges (below 4000:1), a well trained IRIS often looks better on dark scenes than the overly bright blacks of a projector without an IRIS.

The one advantage of the w7000 IRIS is you can tune it to your heart's desire and make it as least noticeable or as high contrast (more noticeable) as you wish. This last point is what leans me towards the Benq for space scenes and what not, so yah in a way the Benq is better in dark scenes, but only if you like the IRIS and/or are willing to tune it up properly.

There is one caveat to all this, to really get the Mits hc4000 looking its best in dark scenes, this requires the Mits be near farthest throw, because the On/Off drops pretty quickly on the Mits as you get a shorter throw (3,500:1 at farthest, about 1,400:1 at closest).

I've always kept my projectors mounted near farthest throw if I can to maximize contrast, so in my case I was seeing the Mits at its max potential. If you have the Mits mounted close, then the Benq is going to look a lot better even with an uncalibrated IRIS.

So if you mount your Mits even at half-throw or closest throw, the Benq will really kill it in blacks because the IRIS has a much shorter distance to go to beat the Mits in comparison to the Mits's natural range.

Cheers...
Edited by coderguy - 3/23/13 at 7:18am

Interesting.

My HC3800 is mounted at its closest throw in order to fill my screen.

The w1070 if I get it would be mounted at its farthest throw. Roughly 14ft for both either way. They just have vastly different throw ratios.

Yeah, interesting that there is such a decrease in contrast with the hc4000 at its shortest throw; I realised there would be some loss of contrast but not to that extent.

My comparison was between the hc4000 and the W1070. All completely subjective of course, but I find the BenQ just has that winning combination of sharpness, and vibrance whilst still looking pretty natural (skin tones especially). Black levels are close, but I feel that the BenQ does win here as well. However I didn't have the Mits set at its farthest throw, so perhaps not a fair fight in terms of black levels. Both units produce a really nice image out of the box though, far preferable to my old Sony VPL-HW20.

So I am here reporting back on my experience with my Mitsubishi HC3800 upgrade to the Panasonic PT-AT8000u. (I know at least Nimoy wanted to hear about it)

After evaluating for about 4 hours, I absolutely loved my experience with the Panasonic and I'm keeping it.

I definitely got pretty lucky from what I can tell on the quality of my Panasonic as everything seems pretty much flawless. Convergence, focus uniformity, color, uniformity, sharpness, etc all look excellent on my product.

As far as as a comparison to my old previous HC3800 it's easy to make. Everything is significantly better. First off I immediately notice the much brighter image. According to projector central reviews, the HC3800 is about 1000 lumens in the bright accurate mode, and the accurate Cinema 2 mode on the Panasonic is around 1600 lumens.

Next, the black levels were immediately noticeable as considerably better. I have had the Iris enables on the Panasonic now these 2 days and I haven't heard it make sound or anything and don't ever really notice it moving. I can tell it does work though when I change what I am looking at on my computer as my source is an HTPC. So when I launch a video into full screen for example I can see the progress bar get lighter and darker and stuff. Blacks are so dark compared to what I was used to on my HC3800 and the image pops considerably with the much higher brightness than I'm used to. Shadow detail in movies like The Hobbit and Harry Potter really impressed me as well. Overall it so much more closely resembles how I remember The Hobbit looking in the Theater.

None of this should be a surprise though as the Panasonic was significantly more expensive than the HC3800 at any point.

The other main thing i spent a lot of time checking during my evaluation was 3D. My only other 3D display is my computer monitor, it's a 120Hz 2nd generation 3D vision display with LightBoost tech and such. I have seen lots of 3D at the store and I was at CES just last January as well.

Well, I can say the 3D from the Panasonic thoroughly pleased me. I was able to set the Panasonic to Dynamic mode with some slight tweaks to the color contrasts and it produces an extremely bright (~2400 lumens) picture with reasonably accurate color. Nothing that screams green or blue in the color to me, especially with the glasses on. Coupled with that I was able to set my Panasonic third generation glasses to the "Light" mode and I went ghost hunting. I was able to see some crosstalk in the reference scenes that most people here talk about (space ticket in Despicable Me) but over all the crosstalk was very minimal in my opinion and far from distracting. In the vast majority of films I never saw any crosstalk, especially when I wasn't actively hunting for it. I sampled long scenes from Avatar, the Avengers, Harry Potter, Toy Story 3, Despicable Me, and The Hobbit. After all that I only saw a handful of ghosts and they were pretty slight and again IMO not distracting to me. I also played some Guild Wars 2 and Team Fortress 2 in nVidia 3DTV Play and saw no ghosting in TF2 and only a small bit in GW2, but not enough to cause me any problems or distract me from the awesome immersive 3D game play.

Sorry I wont be getting the BenQ w1070 to compare to my Mits.

I'll leave you with a few pics I took of my screen so you can see the quality of the product I "lucked out" on.

http://imgur.com/a/byO1p#0

The red seems a bit off to the side, but this was taken on the edge of my screen. In the middle the red is aligned perfectly and on the other side its off by that 1/2 pixel or so in the other direction, so it's very uniform overall.