Panasonic PT-AX100 - Page 8

FWIW here's the manuall: http://panasonic.com.au/content/libr...es/F001809.pdf

Great times in FP world indeed. Now I need to decide whether to upgrade my 18 month old AE-700 to an AX100 or AE1000. I was planning on holding off for 1080p...but this model sounds like a winner.

djjaeger, would you mind sending me a pm regarding where and how much you purchased the projector for?

Count me in too for the information mentioned above. Sounds like the PJ I've been wanting for some time now. Thanks,

Forgot one thing. Can anyone tell me if the old AE900 mount will fit this new model?

From some of the manual illustrations, it looks like a different mount configuration...

But that's far from definative..

does this new pj use the d6 cine2fine panels?

Ditto for me!

No, it does not.

Phaffendorf, my advice to you is to wait a little while. You're still looking at 2kUSD just for an LCD projector. I've been contemplating the same idea but thought it thru to reasoning. Hey I know we're guys and we get carried away with our toys but if you really think about it what's the rush ? We were lucky enough to buy these from Costco at a great price. We can still return it in a month or two for a full refund anyways. By that time we'll know more about the new AX100, how good it is or isn't and what bugs, issues or weaknesses it might have and in the meantime prices should come down lower than where they are now. The AE900 was not without it's share of issues either, including convergence problems.

Going out and paying full price for a 720p LCD PJ at first release may not be such a great idea if you already have a good pj in hand. Let's face it, we're all buying
a stopgap PJ until 1080p is out and affordable, why pay thru the nose for it?

If you mount the HD6800 now, you can certainly replace it with the AX100 later without any issues due to it's flexibility for installation, but not the other way around.

Just MHO of course.

Though I am not amongst the most patient of men, I have to agree here. The intial reviews might help create some justified or unsjustified desire to the level of a mini-hype perhaps; and since many have already rush-ordered it, we shall soon learn about its performance in actual "field-trials." Not to lessen their commendable efforts, but the projectorcentral review somehow seems to me more like "initial impressions" type. Since essentially the LCD panel seems to be the same generation (D5), the convergence issue of AE900 may also be present - who knows. Let's wait and see.

Projector Review's review is up:

http://www.projectorreviews.com/Manu...100U/index.asp


Have to read it still hoping for confirmation of the projector central review.....back in 15 mins....

What do you expect - you've got an easy conference.

You'll note we have already played #1, and #3, and have #6 in two weeks.

Slacker! -art

Greetings all,

Well, its finally posted, most impressive. I logged over 35 hours on the projector, and found little to complain about. For what they're worth, I must have posted close to 30 images.

If I had to pick two things only out - brightness - enough for a decent football game, and, most surprisingly, pixels are now almost invisible, compared to DLP, probably very close to LCOS, and with it, Panasonic pulled it off, while also getting a sharper image than the old 900U. (Ok, sharpness is typical for the price range, and it definitely isn't as sharp, as my BenQ, but that's 2x the price...

I also caught Evan's review, he seems equally impressed, if not as wordy as I am. I'll just say this - a big year to year improvement, Sanyo is going to be under the gun to match the panny, as will Optoma's HD73, etc...

Oh hell, go read da sucka, (first review on the homepage, of course. I'm heading out for many drinks! -art

Looks like it's better than the Epson 400 he just reviewed, though the panny is about $400 more. Can't wait for his next review on the Mitsubishi HD1000.

As per Art's review:

"The Panasonic PT-AX100U is a phenomenal home theater projector for its price!

This is a breakthrough projector, in that it is the first (hopefully of several) new projectors, that has raised the bar significantly. "

"The peformance is sensational, the improvements, stunning. "

"this is the projector virtually guaranteed to exceed your expectations!"

Sounds pretty convincing to me.

Thanks Art!

I'm going to fire up the HD1000 tomorrow, before I have to ship the Panny back on Friday, so that should be interesting.

It will be great, if all the new projectors sport even half as much improvement as this one has compared to its predecessor.

BTW, I'll still be adding images, including a sequence of images showing all the different modes - photographed at the same exposure, over the next couple of days, === after I recover. This one was an ordeal.

My last viewing (not that anyone cares) was about half of Phantom of the Opera, uninterupted, last night ending a 2:30 in the morning, my Firehawk, Toshiba HD-DVD with the audio cranked and the house rumbling from the pipe organ.

Damn! -a

There appears to be a conflict in your findings and that of Projector Central with regards to the offset. Your findings 13% and theirs 25%. Since this is a critical spec for me, could you comment on why the difference exist? I would need the 25% to keep from hanging the projector on a pipe.

I suspect your findings are accurate since it mirrors the 900 in terms of maximum offset.


Would appreciate your comments.

Thanks,

Henry

Art,

How significant of an improvement is the AX100 vs the Epson 400?

Also, it appears that the projector can do a vertical stretch w/HDMI signals, thus enabling it for use in a CIH setup (w/an anamorphic lens, of course). Can you confirm this?

Thanks for taking the time to do such thorough reviews. Your consistency and completeness are greatly appreciated.

John

Fantastic review Art. I bought my panny 700 and 900 largely based on your reviews. I guess there will be another panny 900 up for sale soon.
Did you notice any VB at all? I had some with my 700. On my 900 you can just about see it on the toughest scenes if you really look hard. I have been checking your site every 20 minutes since 7 pm eastern time, i finally put a shortcut on my desktop.

Art, Considering their price range difference it would seem more fitting to compare the new Panny's sharpness with the previously reviewed Mits HC3000, Infocus IN76, etc. than it would your super nice Benq 8720. Any thoughts on this?

Moe

Very good detailed review. Enjoyed it very much. Thanks Art! I am a DLP guy but the initial reviews of the Panny are convincing me to try it out.

Art, you seemed to be impressed by the menus/controls of the Epson 400 (gamma settings in particular). How does the AX100 stack up?

I didn't measure, but did use the full vertical when viewing in my theater.

More to the point, the manual says: 63% vertically (it also says 25% horizontally, so Evan may have been talking about horizontal?

Anyway, 50% to me means 50% of screen hight, measured from the center of the screen, thus a 50% would allow lens to place as much as even with top or bottom
of the screen. 63 should be 63% of screen height say screen is 101 diag, height would be 50" so 63% would be 31.5 inches above/below the center of the screen, which would be 6.5 inches in that case. Divide 6.5 by the 50 inches and its a 13 percent above. That's how I read it anyway.

The illustration they show is bizzare, it shows the 63% from the top of the screen. Thus, on that 50" high screen that would be 31.5" above the top. Can't be right. -a

Great review. I thought the Epson would be my #1 pick but this has me thinking. Since my basement won't be finished until December I may as well wait for the Epson 400, AX-100, Z5 and HD1000U shootout that is inevitable.

Art,

If you still have the projector, could you physically place the projector below the screen and see what the maximum vertical offset really is? It would be most helpful.

Thank you,

Henry

Hi, last one, joining friends for beers to help me recover from this ordeal.

There are separate gammas for low mid and hi range, like on the old Panny. Never worked with them much, and didn't this time. Gamma on Cinema looked just about right on - I would guess 2.2-2.3 ish. Didn't need to fiddle. Did fool around with the low range a bit in Dynamic, (not a very logical thing to do, but trying to bring up shadow details) .

In other words, can't tell you much. With the Epson, though the linear "equalizer" really is nice, just like bringing up 100 - 200 cycle bass in a stereo system, I could lift a bit the shadow details (ie to fight a very small amount of ambient light without really affectiing mid or brighter areas.

Later - thirsty! Must go! -a

I think the manual diagrams are relatively clear (page 16).

The centerline of the projector can be between 13% of screen height above the top of the screen to 13% of screen height below the bottom of the screen (i.e. 63% above/below the middle of the screen). Using the full range of vertical shift will limit the amount of horizontal shift.

The centerline of the projector can be between 25% of screen width to the right of the center of the screen to 25% of screen width to the left of the center of the screen. Using the full range of horizontal shift will limit the amount of vertical shift.

Hmmm....was thinking Pearl as an upgrade to my panny 700, but now....

So the information provided by Projector Central is inaccurate when it states the vertical shift is 25%??