or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Digital projection cine 1000 led discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Digital projection cine 1000 led discussion - Page 4

post #91 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post

Does anybody have a link to exact numbers about how much resolution the average human eye can resolve exactly at which viewing angle?

What I've seen, (search for Dr. Soniera's critique of Apples use of the term "retina display") is the number is right around 100 pixels/degree. So at a typical viewing distance of three screen heights, that's about 18.9 degrees * 100 = 1890 pixels, or almost UHD/2160p/4K. Certainly much more than 1080p. At 2 picture heights it's more like 2800, at 4 picture heights it's about 1425 lines.
Quote:
My personal opinion about the cine 1000 is that it looks like a quite attractive projector. However, the VW1000 was somewhat of a game changer. If you look at B stock VW1000, it's not that much more expensive than this projector, and from what I've read, the VW1000 should have superior image quality, even with 1080p content.

It is quite a bit more than the post-CEDIA special pricing though.
Quote:
I think that's the key reason why the interest in the cine 1000 might not be as high as one might have expected. Personally, I'm a bit short of money at the moment, but I'm kinda waiting for my ultimate dream machine, which would be something like the VW1000 with an LED/laser light source. Maybe we'll get that next year, we'll have to wait and see...

I wonder if that Optoma HD90/HD91 will have that special "LED look" that so many rave about? Reason I ask is I have a Vivitek Qumi, which uses LEDs but I've not been very impressed with it (maybe I should hook it up to my Radiance and calibrate it and give it a fair shake.
post #92 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

What I've seen, (search for Dr. Soniera's critique of Apples use of the term "retina display") is the number is right around 100 pixels/degree. So at a typical viewing distance of three screen heights, that's about 18.9 degrees * 100 = 1890 pixels, or almost UHD/2160p/4K. Certainly much more than 1080p. At 2 picture heights it's more like 2800, at 4 picture heights it's about 1425 lines.

Cool, I'm sitting at less than 2.75x screen height.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

It is quite a bit more than the post-CEDIA special pricing though.

Damn. *La la la*. I'm not being tempted. I'm not. Seriously..............

Hmmmm... Is that special pricing still available, and does it apply to German customers, as well? redface.gif
post #93 of 212
Quote:
Hmmmm... Is that special pricing still available, and does it apply to German customers, as well?

Until the end of the month.

If you are a German living in the US, yes. smile.gif
post #94 of 212
Well, I guess I'm relieved, I don't have to fight with myself to *not* buy this projector! tongue.gif
post #95 of 212
The Cine 1000 LED uses Dark chip 4. I was asked this and a few other questions, so I thought I would post the answer here. When I get the rest of my answers, I will post.

Added
It looks like this projector has a CMS. Will get full confirmation tomorrow, if it is a full CMS.

Added 10/09/13
The DPI projectors with Colormax have full CMS. The M series, which includes the Cine 1000 LED, does not have full CMS. You do have controls for gain and lift of RGB and you also have control of hue, saturation and gamma. Of course a meter and software is needed.

Was asked if this model had fast frame. The answer is no.
Edited by AV Science Sales 5 - 10/9/13 at 10:53am
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 212
Thanks for tracking down answers Mike, I look forward to hearing the rest.
post #97 of 212
Bright, dark chip 4, CMS, good motion and long lasting light source, not much to dislike about this projector. smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 212
It is looking like we have enough to meet the minimum CEDIA special. If anybody else is interested, give us a call. smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 212
The CEDIA price is tempting, but without seeing one I'm afraid to take the plunge for fear I'll be disappointed with black levels; currently I have a JVC RS10.

Is there any way to see one in the SF Bay Area before the end of the month?
post #100 of 212
The black levels are good
post #101 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by blee0120 View Post

The black levels are good

Yes they are good. Using DC4 chip.
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 212
But JVC good? Better than Planar 8150 good? wink.gif

I mean it's tough to buy a projector these days that has black levels that aren't "good".
post #103 of 212
Good enough that I don't miss my jvc at all, well my 600 lumen dpi
post #104 of 212
Which JVC did you have, and have you seen any other DLPs?
post #105 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

Which JVC did you have, and have you seen any other DLPs?

I have a JVC and I would have been happy with the Cine 1000 LED. Like I said, my finalist were, Cine 1000 LED, JVC RS6710/57 and Sony VW600ES. If you want my pros and cons, call me.
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

Which JVC did you have, and have you seen any other DLPs?

I had the rs40, 48, and 55. The DLPs I owned are Benq W7000, W1070, and Marantz VP8600. A bunch of other cheaper DLPs too.
post #107 of 212
I currently have an Epson 9500UB in my completely light-controlled theater, projecting onto a 120" wide 2.35:1 Enlightor 4K screen. I sit about 9.5 feet away, just under one screen width. I never bothered to get the Epson calibrated, but run it in Cinema mode which is theoretically the most accurate out of the box setting as I understand it. How significant an upgrade would the Cine-1000 be in my room? Specifically I'm interested in brightness in zoomed 2.35 mode, and expected contrast, when properly calibrated. Part of the draw for these projectors is never dealing with decreasing brightness and change in color balance over the life of the projector.

On another note, I can just make out pixel structure on films zoomed for 2.35 viewing. I'm assuming that with a single-chip DLP this could be more of an issue. In my setup, would I actually benefit from a Sony 4K machine with upconverted 1080p material?

Lastly, are zoom and focus done manually as on the Epson, or by remote control? If by remote, can settings be saved? The worst part about the Epson for a CIH setup is the very sloppy manual adjustment dials.

Thanks in advance.
post #108 of 212
Well probably the first thing, it doesn't have a 2.35:1 "mode". It should have vertical stretch (for using a lens) but doesn't have lens memory. Zoom and focus are manual (if I looked at the manual correctly) and shift requires a tool.

As far as pixel visibility, it should be less on a DLP, DLP has a higher fill factor than LCD.
post #109 of 212
Manual zoom and focus. I have the users manual - send me an email if you want it and I can send it to you.
post #110 of 212
We talking about the DPI correct?

The tool is a little Allen key as I recall. That was the 600 lumens.
post #111 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

Well probably the first thing, it doesn't have a 2.35:1 "mode". It should have vertical stretch (for using a lens) but doesn't have lens memory. Zoom and focus are manual (if I looked at the manual correctly) and shift requires a tool.

As far as pixel visibility, it should be less on a DLP, DLP has a higher fill factor than LCD.

Thanks regarding pixel visibility, I didn't know about the difference in fill factor. I incorrectly used the word "mode", but understand what you're saying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

Manual zoom and focus. I have the users manual - send me an email if you want it and I can send it to you.

That's helpful. Manual zoom is no biggie. Manual focus is tougher because I need a second set of eyes at the screen, or I do a lot of running back and forth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmiles View Post

We talking about the DPI correct?

The tool is a little Allen key as I recall. That was the 600 lumens.

Responded to your PM, thanks. It sounds like the allen key is for horizontal and vertical shift, which is nice as this knocks out of alignment all the time on the Epson during bass heavy scenes, and I presume it would remain more firmly fixed with this adjustment method.
post #112 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by uscmatt99 View Post

Manual focus is tougher because I need a second set of eyes at the screen, or I do a lot of running back and forth.

or use binoculars
post #113 of 212

Cheapskates. :mad:

post #114 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by uscmatt99 View Post

It sounds like the allen key is for horizontal and vertical shift, which is nice as this knocks out of alignment all the time on the Epson during bass heavy scenes, and I presume it would remain more firmly fixed with this adjustment method.

The problem is, you probably need to use the vertical shift to center the zoomed image, it's "rare" that the zoom works just right to keep the scope portion centered on the screen when you zoom. It's not really meant to be used daily (hence a tool instead of a hand control).

The other issue is, depending on lens choice, the max zoom range is a bit under 1.3, not enough for zooming for CIH (you need 1.33x, ideally more for some placement flexibility).

I guess what I'm trying to say is, like most DLPs (at least the higher end/older designs) it really doesn't support zoom method CIH.
post #115 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

The problem is, you probably need to use the vertical shift to center the zoomed image, it's "rare" that the zoom works just right to keep the scope portion centered on the screen when you zoom. It's not really meant to be used daily (hence a tool instead of a hand control).

The other issue is, depending on lens choice, the max zoom range is a bit under 1.3, not enough for zooming for CIH (you need 1.33x, ideally more for some placement flexibility).

I guess what I'm trying to say is, like most DLPs (at least the higher end/older designs) it really doesn't support zoom method CIH.

That is very helpful, thanks so much. I do need to do vertical adjustments when I change the zoom for 2.35 vs. 1.78 material. I hadn't done the math yet on the zoom range either. That is a bummer. Sounds like I'd have to use an A-lens in my room with this line of projectors. Back to the drawing board....
post #116 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by uscmatt99 View Post

Sounds like I'd have to use an A-lens in my room with this line of projectors. Back to the drawing board....

Or you could do it all with a video processor using AR and image shift controls.
post #117 of 212
N.Katz,

I wonder what method would yield the better image? Probably get more brightness going the VP route.

Would be interesting to see.

I use the ISCO III lens with the Cineslide [from GetGray (Scott from HT Tech) with the original 600 lumen DPI M260 LED. Results have been fantastic.

Now doing an MSRP to MSRP comparison the VP is 40% of the cost of the lens and slide. Now there are alternatives but the ISCOIII is top of the line.
post #118 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmiles View Post

Now doing an MSRP to MSRP comparison the VP is 40% of the cost of the lens and slide. Now there are alternatives but the ISCOIII is top of the line.

A much lower % if you're willing to buy used, older Lumagen Vision VP's that do this can be had for a couple hundred$.
post #119 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmiles View Post

N.Katz,

I wonder what method would yield the better image? Probably get more brightness going the VP route.

All else equal (ie throw) Lens will give you the most brightness, zoom and vp (squeeze) will have equal brightness.
post #120 of 212
Stranger,

So what is it? Looks like you said both give the same brightness?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Digital projection cine 1000 led discussion