or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Official JVC DILA-X500R / RS49U / RS4910U Owners Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official JVC DILA-X500R / RS49U / RS4910U Owners Thread - Page 9

post #241 of 1219
That's very interesting, thanks.

So it seems that the higher model chips do have significantly higher CR, vs. being largely due to dual and/or tighter closing irises.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cine4Home View Post

Well, the dynamic contrast ist about the same with the X700 (around 300,000:1). So measurement wise, the X700 does not show any benefit.

However in dark movie-scenes, where the DI closes, the native contrast increases more with a X700 than with a X500.

If you use the static Iris and open it, there never was much of a benefit of a DLA-X7(x) model over a DLA-X3(x) or DLA-X55 model anyway. (30k:1 vs. 25k:1)
That is nothing new or exclusive to the new X-series.
post #242 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

That's very interesting, thanks.

So it seems that the higher model chips do have significantly higher CR, vs. being largely due to dual and/or tighter closing irises.


The X700/X900 still employ the dual Iris System.
post #243 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwa View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by logicators View Post

Hi Guys,

I received my JVC X500R today and am having a hard time with finding a ceiling mount that fits.

I ordered this monoprice mount in advance but it doesn't fit:

http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=109&cp_id=10911&cs_id=1091102&p_id=3010&seq=1&format=2

I then went to BestBuy and picked up this mount but it doesn't fit either:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/universal-ceiling-mount-for-front-projectors/7119646.p;jsessionid=1EA21C85BC5B87CC37A248439C8BF1AA.bbolsp-app01-126?id=1109233829974&skuId=7119646&st=projector%20mount&cp=1&lp=2

Seems like universal mounts are do not have long enough arms to reach the four screws which are in the corners (by removing legs).

What are you guys using?
I use this mount and it works great (the arms are the perfect length); the only thing is that you'll have to run to Home Depot or Lowe's to get some longer M5 screws since the ones included with the mount aren't long enough. AVS sells a Chief mount that has a custom mount plate that lots of folks swear by if you don't like the spider look, but with the Peerless mount I linked to, the spider fits so well it practically looks custom.

Ordered!
post #244 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cine4Home View Post

Yes, actually we already measured and checked two X700 today.

And we did encounter and can confirm major HDMI-handshake problems. Same symptoms like already described (black screen / frozen Picture / only quarter Screen used and so on).
Only solution was to turn it of and pull the power. Afterwards it worked again.

Not good at all..

Regards,
Ekki

Yep same here as you know. If you are using an external VP and force a 1080p/60 or 24p output it will allow the resolution changes. There are a lot of us on the X700 owners thread that would very much appreciate your quick review and opinions. The forcing of 1080p should allow you to check picture quality. wink.gif

Thank you Ekki!
post #245 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cine4Home View Post

Well, the dynamic contrast ist about the same with the X700 (around 300,000:1). So measurement wise, the X700 does not show any benefit.

However in dark movie-scenes, where the DI closes, the native contrast increases more with a X700 than with a X500.

In a light controlled environment, how much of a benefit would you say that X700 has over the X500 in dark scenes with the DI closed? Is it obvious or is it just a slight advantage? Trying to get a feel for whether the extra expense of the X700 is worth it in this regard.
Quote:
If you use the static Iris and open it, there never was much of a benefit of a DLA-X7(x) model over a DLA-X3(x) or DLA-X55 model anyway. (30k:1 vs. 25k:1)
That is nothing new or exclusive to the new X-series.


Regards,
Ekki

I assumed that is the case if you open the iris all the way in both cases. However let's say you only open up the iris 25% or 50%. Does the X700 still hold a noticeable CR advantage in dark scenes? Or is it the case that you really have to run with the manual iris all the way closed down (even with the DI engaged) to get a worthwhile advantage in the CR in dark scenes?

I read your comments about the green color issues on some X500 units. For those units affected, how noticeable is the error?

Looking forward to your detail review including numbers for on/off CR, ANSI CR and other calibration points.

Thanks for your great information as always!
post #246 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cine4Home View Post

Well, the dynamic contrast ist about the same with the X700 (around 300,000:1). So measurement wise, the X700 does not show any benefit.

However in dark movie-scenes, where the DI closes, the native contrast increases more with a X700 than with a X500.

After further thought, this is puzzling - native CR is without use of the DI.

Whatever kind of contrast you call it, if the 700's CR is better than the 500's with DI closed, and max brightness is similar (because static irises are open, right?), then better CR with the DI closed means lower black levels.

What am I misunderstanding here?
post #247 of 1219
Some DI's can increase native on/off or have varying native on/off from their varying positions from what I understand, but I'm not sure if this applies to the JVC's new DI's. I guess this is what cine4 is saying, that as the DI closes the native on/off increases and not just the dynamic on/off?

Hence, if you could freeze the DI in time like a static aperture and then do the native on/off test, it would be higher when the DI was farther down?
post #248 of 1219
ll the static irises are open for max and presumably same brightness with 500/700/900 , I don't see why the latter two would benefit more with a closed DI.

Unless the additional iris on the 700/900 just catch stray/scattered light and not any image light.
post #249 of 1219
Maybe the dynamic gamma feature is different, who knows. I also do not see why it would make much difference because I don't think the JVC's DI affects native on/off since the IRIS wouldn't be in the correct light blocking position (the other aperture is in its way), but usually we take Cine4's finding as they are.
post #250 of 1219
I think when the ILA closes the gamma adjustment is to compensate for the shadow detail that will be lost due to lowering of the light, but the compensation needs to be such as to still lower the black floor visually. I feel some shadow detail has to be sacrificed, I believe this will be the case with the JVCs'.
post #251 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Some DI's can increase native on/off or have varying native on/off from their varying positions from what I understand, but I'm not sure if this applies to the JVC's new DI's. I guess this is what cine4 is saying, that as the DI closes the native on/off increases and not just the dynamic on/off?

Hence, if you could freeze the DI in time like a static aperture and then do the native on/off test, it would be higher when the DI was farther down?


That is exactly what I was trying to say. wink.gif
And it is actually easy to understand since the DI of the JVC is the same as the static one (in the center of the optics, which improves the native contrast by closing).

Regards,
Ekki
post #252 of 1219
Its all a question of semantics. If without the II in operation, the iris (or irises) can only close to a given point, that establishes the native contrast at a given zoom. If the II allows the iris (or irises)) to close more than can be set with the II off, that establishes another native contrast at a given zoom. All would be measured at low lamp and longest zoom.
post #253 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Its all a question of semantics. If without the II in operation, the iris (or irises) can only close to a given point, that establishes the native contrast at a given zoom. If the II allows the iris (or irises)) to close more than can be set with the II off, that establishes another native contrast at a given zoom. All would be measured at low lamp and longest zoom.

Indeed. I'm wondering if the manual range of the aperture has been changed this year. 2 gens before this, the range showed that closed was just over 40% brightness of open. It now appears from initial measurements posted here somewhere, that that range has been increased and closed seems to be only 30% the brightness of open on this years models. Its only 1 machine measured though so don't know if these results would be consistent. I wonder if this is how they are getting the increased native contrast numbers this year - just by being able to clamp with iris down even further (and will anyone actually be able to use 30% brightness of maximum at a given throw? You could be looking at around 200 lumens in high lamp at the long end....not many people will be using that output!
post #254 of 1219
True. The only native contrast that matters is what one can obtain given the set up. Now there are two. Onenative without the II and one with. sand then a dynamomic contrast depending on setting andset up. The published specs are not germain given that few wouls choose the set up and settings which they are obtained.
post #255 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cine4Home View Post

That is exactly what I was trying to say. wink.gif
And it is actually easy to understand since the DI of the JVC is the same as the static one (in the center of the optics, which improves the native contrast by closing).

Regards,
Ekki

That is interesting, if native contrast increases by the ILA closing, the peak white is reduced as is the black floor by a corresponding level, thus gamma can either be lowered to give brighter whites or gamma can be raised to give better blacks without crushing shadow detail...?...is this what setting 1 & 2 do?
post #256 of 1219
Spoke with a 6710 customer that also was experiencing HDMI problems, using a 30' heavy duty Blue Jeans HDMI cable. He switched to a 30' Redmere HDMI cable and all of the HDMI problems went away. Customer had a Lumagen in the system and with the heavy duty BJ HDMI cable it did not matter if he placed the Lumagen near the projector or near the AVR. He tried running a short 1.5' and 6' HDMI cable to the Lumagen and still had problems. As soon as he switched to the 30' Redmere everything started working well and he was able to place the Lumagen near the AVR, feeding the Lumagen with a 6' HDMI cable from the AVR.
Reply
Reply
post #257 of 1219
I don't have a Lumagen in my signal chain and I'm using a wireless HDMI solution to "connect" my source equipment to my projector. I never had any HDMI issues with my 4810 or VW60 prior to this so it sure seems like the problem lies with the projector, especially given how widespread this problem appears to be.

I sure hope JVC's answer isn't "switch around your HDMI cables until you find one that works" because that's unsatisfactory and, quite frankly, impossible in my situation.
post #258 of 1219
Unfortunately, I already use use a 40' redmere cable (with RS57) but have the HDMI issue (was absolutely fine with the 4810).
post #259 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwa View Post


I sure hope JVC's answer isn't "switch around your HDMI cables until you find one that works" because that's unsatisfactory and, quite frankly, impossible in my situation.

That's for darned sure. My 45ft HDMI cable (which has worked perfectly with my last two JVC projectors) is run through my walls and floor. No way will I be switching that out, at great expense and effort, just to solve a bug on JVC's end.

I loath HDMI handshake issues and there's no way I want to put a defective projector into my system that has known issues driving other people nuts. So I don't think I'm going to accept shipment of my RS57 until JVC works this stuff out.

What a bummer this is. I hope JVC is on this soon.
post #260 of 1219
Everyone please try the HDMI2 input and report back as to whether or not it makes any difference with the handshake problem.

In the X700 thread, Denis has said that he has the problems with HDMI1 but HDMI2 seems to be working fine. I won't be able to try myself until later this afternoon, but clearly everyone having this issue should try HDMI2.
post #261 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

That's for darned sure. My 45ft HDMI cable (which has worked perfectly with my last two JVC projectors) is run through my walls and floor. No way will I be switching that out, at great expense and effort, just to solve a bug on JVC's end.

I loath HDMI handshake issues and there's no way I want to put a defective projector into my system that has known issues driving other people nuts. So I don't think I'm going to accept shipment of my RS57 until JVC works this stuff out.

What a bummer this is. I hope JVC is on this soon.

If you don't replace that cable Rich there is no point in moving to 4K (at least for HDMI 2.0a speed). HDMI 2.0 is only compatible with existing high speed cable up to around 10' as I recall. Anything above that and you'll need a new active cable certified for 4K throughput above 10.2Gbits/s (which are not available yet but should be very soon).

Not to excuse for JVC's HDMI bug (or to suggest you should swap your cable to make it work with this JVC model), but if you move to 4K at some stage that cable will have to go smile.gif.
post #262 of 1219
Not saying this is a solution for all, just pointing out that it was a solution for him. In some situations, it may be that the old projector had a strong enough HDMI link to work and the new projector does not. The Redmere HDMI cable may provide a stronger link and solve the problem as it did in this customer's case. Just like if I place my Darbee close to my AVR and then try to run a long heavy duty HDMI cable to my projector, it does not work. That does not mean the project, Darbee or AVR are defective, it just means the configuration does not work. Now when I move the Darbee up by the projector, everything works fine.

I will say this, HDMI is a very fickle connection. A while back I reworked my projector shelf and in doing so disconnected my Lumagen and Darbee from the system. I put everything back using the same HDMI cables in the same order, using same inputs and could not get the system to connect up consistently. Before reworking the shelf, everything worked perfectly, afterwords, not.
Reply
Reply
post #263 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Not saying this is a solution for all, just pointing out that it was a solution for him. In some situations, it may be that the old projector had a strong enough HDMI link to work and the new projector does not. The Redmere HDMI cable may provide a stronger link and solve the problem as it did in this customer's case. Just like if I place my Darbee close to my AVR and then try to run a long heavy duty HDMI cable to my projector, it does not work. That does not mean the project, Darbee or AVR are defective, it just means the configuration does not work. Now when I move the Darbee up by the projector, everything works fine.

I will say this, HDMI is a very fickle connection. A while back I reworked my projector shelf and in doing so disconnected my Lumagen and Darbee from the system. I put everything back using the same HDMI cables in the same order, using same inputs and could not get the system to connect up consistently. Before reworking the shelf, everything worked perfectly, afterwords, not.

Trying to push 1080P 3D 40'/50' is tough to do.
Reply
Reply
post #264 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post

If you don't replace that cable Rich there is no point in moving to 4K (at least for HDMI 2.0a speed). HDMI 2.0 is only compatible with existing high speed cable up to around 10' as I recall. Anything above that and you'll need a new active cable certified for 4K throughput above 10.2Gbits/s (which are not available yet but should be very soon).

Not to excuse for JVC's HDMI bug (or to suggest you should swap your cable to make it work with this JVC model), but if you move to 4K at some stage that cable will have to go smile.gif.

I know I'll have to do that for the eventual 4K standard. But I don't want to do it now, and not on account of a bug with a JVC projector.

(The ony 4K I might output now is 1080p upscaled to 4K from the Lumagen. Though from Zombie's comments it doesn't seem so far like there's much benefit with the new JVCs, like
there is with the Sony, so maybe I won't bother doing even that. From what I've read, my existing HDMI cable *should* likely do ok passing upscaled 4K signals, though it will be a try-and-see situation. I'm having some Cat6 installed soon too, which I understand should help pass the eventual 4K standard to my projector).

ETA: Both my Belden 45 foot and 50 foot HDMI cables pass 1080p 3D with no problem to my projector (from Oppo Blu Ray player).
post #265 of 1219
My Mitsubishi HC4000 has a setting for HDMI cable length. I would imagine that the signal is some how boosted for the longer cable length setting. How hard can it possibly be for the designers and engineers to add a feature like this? Seems that something this simple could correct quite a few of these handshake issues.
post #266 of 1219
I have a very similar setup to the setup Mike posted about and only experienced the occasional lock up issues with my RS40. 25' BJC HDMI to projector, Lumagen, Darbet. On Monday I swapped out my main three HDMI cables (Oppo to AVR, to Lumagen to Darblet) with 6' BJC cables. Had another brand in there which all were 6' as well.

I find it interesting that the 4910 doesn't really lock up like the 40 did. At lest I am able to shut the projector down properly, rather than just pulling the plug.

When I'm done using the projector I have been pulling the plug in hopes that will help with things. Seems to be... It's an annoying issue, but hey.. it's a brand new projector.. bound to have some bugs to work out which us early adopters are the Guinea pigs for. tongue.gif It sucks, but honestly there are far more important things in life to get up in arms about.

Changing out the cable to the projector is not really an option for me either. The Redmere cables were impossible to find in stock anywhere when I installed the BJC one.. I did run two CAT5e cables, so in a pinch I could try HDMI over those... Rather not add another form of compression/conversion into the chain if I can help it.

One last thing to add. I ran a Sanyo 720p LCD for about 6 weeks when I was without my RS40. Only thing in the chain that was different was the projector. In that time I never experienced the Sanyo locking up or any other issues. The Sanyo was much faster to lock onto 24p material than either of my JVC's. So in the end I really think it is in the projector given it's a new HDMI board and chipset.

Hope everyone had a good New Years!
post #267 of 1219
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanbryan View Post

Everyone please try the HDMI2 input and report back as to whether or not it makes any difference with the handshake problem.

In the X700 thread, Denis has said that he has the problems with HDMI1 but HDMI2 seems to be working fine. I won't be able to try myself until later this afternoon, but clearly everyone having this issue should try HDMI2.

I had problems with HDMI1, did a factory reset and switched to HDMI2 and it hasn't happened again (not sure which worked, wasn't trying to troubleshoot...just trying to get a picture) Im Im Running a 50' BJC through walls/ceiling from a Marantz SR6006. Haven't tried 3D yet. The unusable HDMI won't work for people without an HDMI switcher.

Watched KUNG-FU PANDA 2 on BD and House of Cards and never saw the Iris on either mode 1 or 2. This projector has some serious depth to the image and the inter scene contrast is better than my past DLPs. It scatters MUCH LESS light off the ceiling and walls than many other pjs.
post #268 of 1219
Fwiw, I had hdmi issues with my 4810 that sound a lot like the ones here. Hdmi2 worked better than Hdmi1 but neither was 100% when using the expensive BJC cable (50'). Switched to Redmere, worked great.
post #269 of 1219
Did anyone test what is better? 1080p 24Hz or 4k upscaling from AV receiver to put a Full HD signal into the JVC projector?
post #270 of 1219
That would depend on the quality of the UHD at 24 scaling in your AV receiver.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Official JVC DILA-X500R / RS49U / RS4910U Owners Thread