or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Official Epson EH-TW 9200 5030UB Owners' Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Epson EH-TW 9200 5030UB Owners' Thread - Page 45

post #1321 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by L0nestar View Post

So, I have an Epson 5300UB proj. and have been firing at the far wall of my theater room for the better part of a week now with no screen......I've got to say....It looks pretty darn good.


So the question I have for you guys is......Do I really need a screen?  Even just on a textured wall it looks awesome, and spending 1400 + on SI 1.1gain screen seems a bit crazy to me. I was looking at the lunette curved screens by elite as well...and they look cool....But how much of a difference does a screen actually make? Truth be told, I thought my wall looked better than the screen presentation they had at Best Buy, which appeared washed out to me.

Thanks!

Joe

Did you look at Carada? They have AWESOME screens at really reasonable prices. If you're getting a fixed frame screen you should check them out. Fantastic customer service too.

E
post #1322 of 2974
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by L0nestar View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

I would say you absolutely need a good screen to get the most out of a good PJ. A PJ and screen, to me anyway, are both components in a two part system. The system will only be as good as the two parts.

 

While you can get acceptable results from throwing onto a wall, a good screen has significant benefits and you can also tailor the choice to your room, its environment (light, dark, reflective etc). The reason yours looks better than BB's is probably because there was a lot of ambient light at BB when you saw it. If your room is light-controlled, your image will be better than theirs even though they have a screen and you only have a wall. They also may not have had the PJ set up well.

 

One of the things about a PJ/screen is that there can never really be a single answer to many issues because the conditions of viewing are so different from one room to another. Throw distance, calibration, preference, light output, 3D/2D, auto-Iris on/off, lamp settings, screen gain, screen type etc etc all have the role to play. I, for example, project from just 9 feet (small room) onto a 92 inch diagonal screen in a totally light controlled environment. So I will never have a problem with brightness, in 3D say, whereas someone throwing from a much bigger distance onto a much bigger screen may have just that issue - and a higher gain screen might, in that case, be a good solution. For me, a high gain screen would be a terrible idea as I have no problems getting the lumens I want on the screen.

 

So I would say, yes, get a decent screen for the environment in which you use the PJ. Without knowing how you use it, it isn't possible to give specific suggestions.

 

The projector is approx: 13.5 ft from the wall. It is a dedicated theater room, and is totally light controlled. No ambient light present. We would like to have at least a 120in viewing area, for movies in both 3D and 2D @ a 16:9 aspect ratio. Regular TV and gaming probably won't be happening in that room much...if at all.

 

According to the calculator at Projector Central, you are right 'in the zone' there for a 22 foot lambert image on screen. That is pretty much a good level, but it will drop off in brightness as the lamp ages.

 

 

You might want to consider a screen with a little bit of gain - 1.3 say, to allow for diminished brightness as the lamp ages, or for 3D if that is important to you. You only need a matt white screen in your room, so you don't have to spend a fortune to get a good screen for your purpose IMO.

post #1323 of 2974
I have my projector ceiling mounted now. I have no horiz. shift, and a few feet of vertical shift, since I have it very close to the ceiling to keep it from being bumped into.

I still see that vertical banding pattern that I showed a few pages ago. It's very subtle and less visible than before but still annoying in bright, panning scenes.

Is it a lens defect, or some sort of lens shift problem?

If there is a way to improve it I'm all ears. If the only solution is "use the warranty" I think I'll just live with it because my convergence, focus, etc are all excellent and uniformity isn't perfect but doesn't bother me at all.
post #1324 of 2974

I could move the projector back some if that would help...say 15ft? It's not mounted yet.

post #1325 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by L0nestar View Post

So the question I have for you guys is......Do I really need a screen?  Even just on a textured wall it looks awesome, and spending 1400 + on SI 1.1gain screen seems a bit crazy to me.
I also didn't like the idea of spending that kind of money on a screen. You might want to consider the lower priced options, whether it's DIY wall painting or a screen. What I opted for was the following screen for a dedicated HT room: http://www.amazon.com/Elitech-Fixed-Frame-Projector-Screen/dp/B00AX9FQWK/ref=sr_1_25?ie=UTF8&qid=1385317611&sr=8-25&keywords=Elitech
post #1326 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by L0nestar View Post

So, I have an Epson 5300UB proj. and have been firing at the far wall of my theater room for the better part of a week now with no screen......I've got to say....It looks pretty darn good.


So the question I have for you guys is......Do I really need a screen?  Even just on a textured wall it looks awesome, and spending 1400 + on SI 1.1gain screen seems a bit crazy to me. I was looking at the lunette curved screens by elite as well...and they look cool....But how much of a difference does a screen actually make? Truth be told, I thought my wall looked better than the screen presentation they had at Best Buy, which appeared washed out to me.

Thanks!

Joe

There are a number of ways to get screens for well under $1,000. Jamestown, Elite, Monoprice, just to name a few. Heck the Elite ER120WH1 is $310 from Amazon. That's a 1.1 gain fixed screen and is way below that $1400 price you quoted. To me it's a no-brainer, I don't see how a textured wall could be as good as a screen. If you're going to spend $2500+ on a projector, spending at least a few hundred on a screen just makes sense.

Also consider this, the screen will likely never need replacing, screen technology changes little over time, at least compared to projectors. You might be tempted to change projectors every few years, but there will be less need to change screens.
post #1327 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuke61 View Post

I also didn't like the idea of spending that kind of money on a screen. You might want to consider the lower priced options, whether it's DIY wall painting or a screen. What I opted for was the following screen for a dedicated HT room: http://www.amazon.com/Elitech-Fixed-Frame-Projector-Screen/dp/B00AX9FQWK/ref=sr_1_25?ie=UTF8&qid=1385317611&sr=8-25&keywords=Elitech


Did the screen come pre-assembled or did you have to put it together?
post #1328 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjenkins95 View Post

Did the screen come pre-assembled or did you have to put it together?
It has to be assembled. I haven't done that yet because I'm still in the process of painting a portion of the HT room black, hanging blackout curtains, and mounting the projector.
post #1329 of 2974
Have any 5030UB owners been able to compare 3D performance, especially 3D crosstalk, to the previous 5020UB model? Epson mentions "improved 3D performance", but I'm wondering if previous 5020UB owners can see it, and if so what has improved?
post #1330 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifhima View Post

Have any 5030UB owners been able to compare 3D performance, especially 3D crosstalk, to the previous 5020UB model? Epson mentions "improved 3D performance", but I'm wondering if previous 5020UB owners can see it, and if so what has improved?

I could be wrong, but I believe it is just the added FI which should greatly reduce judder and make the 3D picture smoother overall. Those who have compared the 5020 and 5030 have said that the FI helps a great bit.
post #1331 of 2974
I just pulled the trigger Friday, we closed on our new house Friday and I ordered my projector...not a bad day. The house is a 1960's ranch and the unfinished basement is all mine. I'm torn between a dedicated theater room or a open area media room. In the next few weeks I'll be knocking down a few walls (two closets) to start from scratch.

Depending on which way and how much room I'll be using, I'm looking at a Monorprice multi-format screen, anyone have experience with them and my bigger question is...in a totally light controlled room, should I be looking at the Grey material or white?

mc
post #1332 of 2974
You should not buy a grey screen for this projector. Digital Projectors have come a long way since grey screens first started getting popular about a decade or more ago and the contrast improvements aren't usually needed.

They are still better than white at rejecting ambient light, but a PJ like the 5030 can handle that pretty good anyway. If you are light controlling your room white is the way to go with just about any modern PJ, including this one.

I use a 1.1 gain white screen myself. If you want to go big and have a long throw distance you might want to consider a 1.4 white instead. Carada and Elite both make nice ones that won't break the bank.
post #1333 of 2974
So I've been reading and playing a bit yesterday on the 5030UB. So as I mentioned, 3D works great with the HTPC and the supplied glasses. I'm even more excited as my 8 year old loves these glasses more than the nvidia ones so now we can watch more 3D movies.
I also found out that I can get both BD and BD 3D working from the PS3 using the optical out since I don't have a 3D receiver. And the PQ was awesome on both counts!!!
So that lead me to ask myself "why bother with the HTPC"? other than it being a DVR and playing rippped BDs from the NAS, why do I feel like the PS3 PQ is better than the HTPC now? So I dug a little deeper and although still confused a bit, I found the differences in the nvidia settings regarding the video levels (0-255 vs 16-235) as well as the gamma settings on the PJ. It just becomes so confusing when you have so many adjustments on 2-3 devices (receiver included but that is set to "pass-thru").
Anyone has any opinions weather it be regarding what to calibrate (PC or PJ) or just PC vs PS3 PQ ?
Not to sound like I'm hijacking the thread, it's just that I see such potential with this PJ that now I'm even more interested in getting the best PQ from this amazing PJ...
post #1334 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjenkins95 View Post

Did the screen come pre-assembled or did you have to put it together?

The Elite screens are easy to assemble. I had a 120" that worked great for 6+ years without any stretching occurring, for the 5030 I went down to a 100" due to installing in a smaller room. You can assemble and install yourself in less than 1 hour, and they have a coupon for a free PJ mount right now.
post #1335 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsdavinci View Post

Anyone has any opinions weather it be regarding what to calibrate (PC or PJ) or just PC vs PS3 PQ ?
Not to sound like I'm hijacking the thread, it's just that I see such potential with this PJ that now I'm even more interested in getting the best PQ from this amazing PJ...

You'd probably be a lot better served by the HTPC forum here, they cover these questions all the time.
post #1336 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

According to the calculator at Projector Central, you are right 'in the zone' there for a 22 foot lambert image on screen. That is pretty much a good level, but it will drop off in brightness as the lamp ages.

 

 

You might want to consider a screen with a little bit of gain - 1.3 say, to allow for diminished brightness as the lamp ages, or for 3D if that is important to you. You only need a matt white screen in your room, so you don't have to spend a fortune to get a good screen for your purpose IMO.

 

That has been a question I have been itching to ask.  I have mine currently placed at about 16' (which was the suggestion from the calculator) for my 120" screen in my completely light controlled room.  It can go anywhere as the room isn't finished yet, what are the advantages/disadvantages to moving it closer?  I see that the brightness increases so wouldn't that be a good thing?  Does it harm picture quality?

post #1337 of 2974
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by blbrchnk View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

According to the calculator at Projector Central, you are right 'in the zone' there for a 22 foot lambert image on screen. That is pretty much a good level, but it will drop off in brightness as the lamp ages.

 

 

 

You might want to consider a screen with a little bit of gain - 1.3 say, to allow for diminished brightness as the lamp ages, or for 3D if that is important to you. You only need a matt white screen in your room, so you don't have to spend a fortune to get a good screen for your purpose IMO.

 

That has been a question I have been itching to ask.  I have mine currently placed at about 16' (which was the suggestion from the calculator) for my 120" screen in my completely light controlled room.  It can go anywhere as the room isn't finished yet, what are the advantages/disadvantages to moving it closer?  I see that the brightness increases so wouldn't that be a good thing?  Does it harm picture quality?

 

With any lens, there is a sweet spot. It usually coincides with a modest aperture and, if it is a zoom, being somewhere in the middle of its zoom range. PJ lenses will not be any different. So the closer you get to the screen the more you will have to zoom in towards the telephoto end of the lens and the further back you are the more you will use the wide end of the lens. At both extremities, the lens will function less well than in the middle. Now with a good quality lens, this won't be a disaster wherever you set the zoom. But if you have a choice, I'd go with a distance towards the centre of the calculator's spread of distances. I don't have the luxury of choice as my room is small and the PJ has to go closer to the screen than ideally I would like.

 

Looking at the calculator, it shows 16 feet for the middle of the range and a 120 inch screen. I'd say you were right in the sweet spot.

 

post #1338 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

With any lens, there is a sweet spot. It usually coincides with a modest aperture and, if it is a zoom, being somewhere in the middle of its zoom range. PJ lenses will not be any different. So the closer you get to the screen the more you will have to zoom in towards the telephoto end of the lens and the further back you are the more you will use the wide end of the lens. At both extremities, the lens will function less well than in the middle. Now with a good quality lens, this won't be a disaster wherever you set the zoom. But if you have a choice, I'd go with a distance towards the centre of the calculator's spread of distances. I don't have the luxury of choice as my room is small and the PJ has to go closer to the screen than ideally I would like.

 

Looking at the calculator, it shows 16 feet for the middle of the range and a 120 inch screen. I'd say you were right in the sweet spot.

Ok thanks.  Just seeing that brightness number increase in the calculator by moving the projector forward is alluring, but I suppose not at the cost of picture quality.

post #1339 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifhima View Post

Have any 5030UB owners been able to compare 3D performance, especially 3D crosstalk, to the previous 5020UB model? Epson mentions "improved 3D performance", but I'm wondering if previous 5020UB owners can see it, and if so what has improved?

Bump

In case anyone missed this, I'm really curious to hear from 5020 and 5030 owners who can confirm if 3D crosstalk has been improved.
post #1340 of 2974
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by blbrchnk View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

With any lens, there is a sweet spot. It usually coincides with a modest aperture and, if it is a zoom, being somewhere in the middle of its zoom range. PJ lenses will not be any different. So the closer you get to the screen the more you will have to zoom in towards the telephoto end of the lens and the further back you are the more you will use the wide end of the lens. At both extremities, the lens will function less well than in the middle. Now with a good quality lens, this won't be a disaster wherever you set the zoom. But if you have a choice, I'd go with a distance towards the centre of the calculator's spread of distances. I don't have the luxury of choice as my room is small and the PJ has to go closer to the screen than ideally I would like.

 

Looking at the calculator, it shows 16 feet for the middle of the range and a 120 inch screen. I'd say you were right in the sweet spot.

Ok thanks.  Just seeing that brightness number increase in the calculator by moving the projector forward is alluring, but I suppose not at the cost of picture quality.

 

I wouldn't over-worry about zooming the lens a little if you need more brightness. A lack of correct brightness is going to be worse than any small quality loss caused by zooming the lens. If I wasn't getting sufficient brightness, I wouldn't hesitate to move the PJ a bit closer to the screen - they put a zoom lens on the PJ with the expectation that it will be used.

post #1341 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I wouldn't over-worry about zooming the lens a little if you need more brightness. A lack of correct brightness is going to be worse than any small quality loss caused by zooming the lens. If I wasn't getting sufficient brightness, I wouldn't hesitate to move the PJ a bit closer to the screen - they put a zoom lens on the PJ with the expectation that it will be used.

Well I guess that creates a new question. What is an appropriate amount of fL? My room is light controlled but I can't say there won't be light as it is a multipurpose room.
post #1342 of 2974
A local dealer offered me a 6030 for $2,800 which sounds pretty good considering the extra warranty, light bulb, ceiling mount (which I don't need), etc...I think it comes with glasses too but not sure. Plus, it's black which matches my room and ceiling. The dealer said there is a significant difference in the 6030/5030 vs. 3010 but I'm sure he is more versed than myself with the details so not sure I would see the differences with my eyes.

Anyway, thoughts on the $2,800? I figured I could sell my 3010 with 567 hours on it for around $500 which would help my sell to the wife :-)
post #1343 of 2974
$2800? That's an awesome deal. I don't know about others, but I paid several hundred more than that for my 6030...
post #1344 of 2974
Thanks Justin, I thought but I need make sure it is nitb, forgot to ask.

Sent from my G S4
post #1345 of 2974
BTW with the 6030 the 2 pairs of glasses should come in the box along with the projector, mount, cable cover and extra bulb.
post #1346 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiltonj View Post

A local dealer offered me a 6030 for $2,800 which sounds pretty good considering the extra warranty, light bulb, ceiling mount (which I don't need), etc...I think it comes with glasses too but not sure. Plus, it's black which matches my room and ceiling. The dealer said there is a significant difference in the 6030/5030 vs. 3010 but I'm sure he is more versed than myself with the details so not sure I would see the differences with my eyes.

Anyway, thoughts on the $2,800? I figured I could sell my 3010 with 567 hours on it for around $500 which would help my sell to the wife :-)

That is a good price. I did get mine for 300 less then yours but even the dealer said the best they could do was 100 less then you paid for future people. Good price, I'd say jump on it
post #1347 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Morgan View Post

BTW with the 6030 the 2 pairs of glasses should come in the box along with the projector, mount, cable cover and extra bulb.


Correct. Pretty big box also. Would look nice under the xmas tree :X
post #1348 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsdavinci View Post

So that lead me to ask myself "why bother with the HTPC"? other than it being a DVR and playing rippped BDs from the NAS, why do I feel like the PS3 PQ is better than the HTPC now? So I dug a little deeper and although still confused a bit, I found the differences in the nvidia settings regarding the video levels (0-255 vs 16-235) as well as the gamma settings on the PJ.

Well, as said this is more appropriate in the HTPC forums. However an advice. Gamma is NOT part of this equation. Do not fiddle with it to "fix" video level problems. If there are video level problems, they will be evident in both the blacks as well as in the whites. Another part of the equation is the renderer. madVR for instance can set video levels as well as the Nvidia setting does. This post covers it. However the simple answer to your question is that video levels should be equal in both ends. I.e full range in HTPC and in Epson full range, PC or extended or whatever it is called. Or limited in HTPC and normal in Epson PJ. If they don't match up you get either washed out blacks or chrushed blacks and clipped whites. The default setting in Epson should be normal when connected to a BD player etc (i.e limited 16-235) as that is what all consumer products works with, BD player, DVD, TV etc. It is ONLY PC's and HTPC that complicates things with full range video. See my referenced post above for more.
post #1349 of 2974
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by blbrchnk View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I wouldn't over-worry about zooming the lens a little if you need more brightness. A lack of correct brightness is going to be worse than any small quality loss caused by zooming the lens. If I wasn't getting sufficient brightness, I wouldn't hesitate to move the PJ a bit closer to the screen - they put a zoom lens on the PJ with the expectation that it will be used.

Well I guess that creates a new question. What is an appropriate amount of fL? My room is light controlled but I can't say there won't be light as it is a multipurpose room.

It's really a matter of preference. I personally aim for the 'industry standard' of about 16 ft Lamberts but I only use my HT for movies. I would probably want sports or TV to be a bit brighter than that. And my room is light controlled and I watch movies in the dark so that has a bearing too. I also calibrate all my displays using Calman software and a colorimeter.

 

I'd say to use one of the setup discs and set the brightness according to the test pattern and then see if it suits the way you sue the room. I don't think there is a right and wrong to this question.

post #1350 of 2974
Quote:
Originally Posted by blbrchnk View Post

Well I guess that creates a new question. What is an appropriate amount of fL? My room is light controlled but I can't say there won't be light as it is a multipurpose room.

I keep my projector about 20' back on a 110 screen and it is plenty bright for me. I don't really know the actual FL but it works for me. Putting it in Dynamic and living room is much brighter but even I thought it was to bright in it's stock settings
Edited by nydennis - 11/26/13 at 4:14am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Official Epson EH-TW 9200 5030UB Owners' Thread