or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Optoma H72 - Page 8

post #211 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaman View Post

And maybe also because its a Darkchip2, not a DC3.

Fleaman

It's not the old Darkchip 2. It's an entirely new chip (1280x768) using the old moniker.
post #212 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by braindew View Post

As reported, the main reason for lower cost in this HD2 TI chip is the fact that it multipurposes as a computer resolution as well (1024x768). Therefore, they can get increased volume. I would not be opposed to a 1280x768 three chipper...but I say bring on a 1920X1440 one chipper. That would cover 1080i and likely the next big computer resolution step.

I'd love to see this as well
post #213 of 2915
Since this chip is aimed at lower price points, I think TI wanted to avoid getting any projector manufacturers that made DC3 projectors angry by cutting into their higher end 1 chip 720p DC3 sales by calling this new chipset DC3 as well. From reviews of the HC3000U and the first impressions of the other WXGA projectors like the IN76 and HD72, I'd say these new DC2 chipsets have a clear advantage over "old" DC2 projectors despite being cheaper.
The higher end DC3 projectors will have better optics, possibly an iris, power zoom, I think some have lens shift, but I doubt the DC3 has a hugely higher native contrast advantage.
post #214 of 2915
Yeah, that's what I was wondering about since they have tagged it as a DC2 chip. I figured it was a DC2 with more pixels, but maybe it's more like a DC3, but they are avoiding calling it that for marketing reasons (as noted above).

Wonder if anyone knows anymore real details on this...

I was wondering how the H78DC3 would compare. On paper the H78DC3 should have smoother blacks/dark colors (more color wheel dark segments and higher DLP chip refresh rates of the DC3) and more shadow detail...

Fleaman
post #215 of 2915
I can't wait until this projector ships in early February - I already pre-ordered one from Visual Apex! It's kind of a risk to be one of the "early adopters" on any brand new projector but for some reason I've got a hunch it's going to be the best projector under $2,000 once it arrives. Those could end up being my famous last words, though - we'll see soon enough!
post #216 of 2915
Isn't it about time this thread was sticky? I think this is about the most exciting PJ for the price I've seen in a while.
post #217 of 2915
STICKY PLEASE

anyone know where to download a users guide?
post #218 of 2915
Am I missing something or what ?

If PJ is shipping 1st week of Feb WHERE ARE THE REVIEWS ?
Aren't dealers/distributors/etc supposed to have one in their hands right now ?

Also, can anyone comment on why would somebody want to buy Mits HC3000 instead of H72 right now ? Am I getting something for premium price that I cannot get with H72 ?

Thanks, Davie.
post #219 of 2915
Sticky, please. (I thought I would chime in once more. I am really looking at getting this thing for my next projector but, I am just waiting for some solid reviews, like everyone else.)
post #220 of 2915
CTRL-B or CTRL-D. The fastest way to sticky the thread.
post #221 of 2915
STICKY STICKY STICKY!!! Except change the thread name to Optoma HD72 instead of Optoma H72!
post #222 of 2915
Bump...I don't necessarily need a sticky...maybe an owners thread when it gets delivered.
post #223 of 2915
This may have already been established, but I have problems comprehending deinterlacing and whatnot. Can this projector deinterlace a 1080i signal? Does it "weave" or "bob"? Thanks.
post #224 of 2915
regarding de-interlacing wouldn't everyone be feeding this 720p anyways? (from HD cablebox, HTPC, 360/PS3, HD-DVD/BRD, etc. Why would you feel 1080i to a 720p PJ?
post #225 of 2915
If the projector de-interlaces better than my HD cable box, I'd rather send the projector NBC's 1080i signal, for instance. Part of determining if the projector de-interlaces better than the cable box is determining if it 'weaves' or 'bobs'.
post #226 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinch View Post

regarding de-interlacing wouldn't everyone be feeding this 720p anyways? (from HD cablebox, HTPC, 360/PS3, HD-DVD/BRD, etc. Why would you feel 1080i to a 720p PJ?

As one who is feeding my DVD to a 720p projector at 1080i on component video I will only say "you should always try them both to see which actually looks better. Trust your eyes on it".
post #227 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOHNnDENVER View Post

As one who is feeding my DVD to a 720p projector at 1080i on component video I will only say "you should always try them both to see which actually looks better. Trust your eyes on it".

upscale DVD to 1080i via player then rescale again to 720p looking better is rather peculiar but also perhaps a side-product of "component". out of curiosity, what PJ are you using?
post #228 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by mumbles3k View Post

This may have already been established, but I have problems comprehending deinterlacing and whatnot. Can this projector deinterlace a 1080i signal? Does it "weave" or "bob"? Thanks.


Certainly it CAN deinterlace 1080i, the big question is HOW it does it. Previous Faroudja deinterlacers did bobbing of 1080i; I don't think we know yet if the one in the HD72 will weave or not.
post #229 of 2915
I hadn't seen this posted yet so here's the link to the Optoma HD72 product information page on Optoma's website:
Optoma HD72 product page
post #230 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by myapplebuddy View Post

I hadn't seen this posted yet so here's the link to the Optoma HD72 product information page on Optoma's website:
Optoma HD72 product page

Great find! Last I looked it wasn't on their web site.
post #231 of 2915
It's not officially listed in their projector section yet. I actually had to do a search for "HD72" and it came up in the results. Cheers!
post #232 of 2915
Those of you who placed a pre-order, just out of curiousity, why did you pick this projector with 0 reviews over the infocus with 0 reviews?
Don't be bashful, I'm thinking of pre-ordering myself.
post #233 of 2915
Pre-order here...

I am basing my decision from:
- Similar guts of Mitsubishi (lots of reviews on that)
- Optoma history for excellent DLP machines (and quiet machines)
- $$$
- Warranty...I am dead scared of dead pixels, and Optoma came out and said "Zero Dead Pixel Gurantee"
- I have read enough of the Infocus that, although radically new...it begs to go through a test period. The Optoma HD72 almost feels more like going from a 2005 Honda to a 2006 one (more colors, more interior choices, amd slightly tweeked engine)...Infocus feels like jumping on the new Pontiac GTO...you know it will be a killer ride, but quailty of a first run design is questionable (a similar comparison would be Infocus quality versus Pontiac...both have had a bumpy history).
post #234 of 2915
So, can anyone tell from the manual what the actual offset is?

Nice of Optoma to include US measurements along with metric.
post #235 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbawilly View Post

So, can anyone tell from the manual what the actual offset is?

Nice of Optoma to include US measurements along with metric.

The manual shows a 6.52 degree offset angle. Using the calculator at this web page: http://www.projects.ex.ac.uk/trol/scol/calrtri.htm it appears that the HD72 has a 11.43% offset (rounded). I used a 100" throw with the 6.52 degree angle for simplicity's sake.

Edit:
My understanding of what the offset % is appears to be off. The above shows that for every 100" in throw the top the screen is 11.43" below the center of the lense. All other discussions I'm seeing on offset show the offset % as being a factor of the screen size. I'll leave it to more experienced folks to clear up my confusion.
post #236 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGinAZ View Post

The manual shows a 6.52 degree offset angle. Using the calculator at this web page: http://www.projects.ex.ac.uk/trol/scol/calrtri.htm it appears that the HD72 has a 11.43% offset (rounded). I used a 100" throw with the 6.52 degree angle for simplicity's sake.

If this is true I think you will have a lot of people jumping at this PJ. 11.43% is a far cry from the 32% that was reported earlier...us with <9' ceilings may have some hope yet. Can someone look at page 16 of the manual and explain to us non projector owners exactly what this means. If ceiling mounted, the top angle is 6.52 degrees and the bottom is 25.54. Not sure how this calculates at a throw of 14' for a 102" wide screen. I only took geometry 18 years ago. I'm pretty optomistic it will be much better than the 32% offset though.
post #237 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitarman View Post

Tz what exactly is the color wheel setup RGB/RGBW RGB/RGBG?

According to the HD72 manual it's GRBWGRB.
post #238 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbawilly View Post

So, can anyone tell from the manual what the actual offset is?

The manual states the offset is H' = L * tan(6.52), where L is the distance from the pj to screen.

If you want offset relative to screen height then it's relative to the zoom, since the right triangle with the hypotenuse from the pj lens to the top of the screen is the same size whether you have full zoom or not.

Using the manual formula for H' and projector central's HD72 screen calculator, I get these numbers for a 10' throw:

Offset= 120" * tan(6.52) = 13.7"

At a 10' throw min zoom results in a 36" high screen, max zoom results in a 43" high screen.

13.7"/36" = 38% of screen height offset for min zoom

13.7"/43" = 32% of screen height offset for max zoom

SGinAZ is correct that it has an 11.4% offset *relative to throw distance*. As he mentions this means for every 100" from screen to pj, offset increases by 11.4".
post #239 of 2915
The H31 has a 7.42 throw angle as opposed to the 6.52 of the HD72.

Oddly, with the H' and H listed for the H31 I get 37% offset and HD72 is 36% offset. The offset is less than the H31 but there's something odd about my numbers.

Nigel
post #240 of 2915
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingGimp View Post

At a 10' throw min zoom results in a 36" high screen, max zoom results in a 43" high screen.

13.7"/36" = 38% of screen height offset for min zoom

13.7"/43" = 32% of screen height offset for max zoom

SGinAZ is correct that it has an 11.4% offset *relative to throw distance*. As he mentions this means for every 100" from screen to pj, offset increases by 11.4".

Gimp - thanks for the explanation, that makes sense. If Optoma's plan was to confuse the living hell out of most people with that chart, I think they succeeded. I've never seen offset stated as a function of throw distance before.

The bad news is that the offset appears even worse than originally thought. If you use max zoom, you get 32%, but if you use the more desirable (at least for many people) min zoom you get 38%! Ouch.

While you're at it, do you have any explanation as to why they would possibly define H (the height of the screen) as the width (W0) of the 15:9 image times .86!? By my calcs, that would make the height of an 80" wide screen almost 69" when in fact it would be 48". The multiplier should be .6 ...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home