or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › WSR Greg Rogers Sony VPL-VW60 Review, official thread!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WSR Greg Rogers Sony VPL-VW60 Review, official thread! - Page 5

post #121 of 481
I am in the same boat as you. Need every lumen I can get for my 10' wide Screen Research screen.
post #122 of 481
It would seem to me that the specs are somewhat fraudulent. Sony should specify the luminance something like -> 650L +- 30%.

Man .. I'm beating this one to death.
post #123 of 481
Agreed. But Sony isn't the only guilty one. I almost never find the actual specs are what they are posted as. Brightness simply is never as high (when measured at D65).

Contrast is almost always lower as well. But, contrast is measured in labs vs. a "dedicated" HT like mine. I should mention that though the RS1 isn't always at 15000:1 as spec'd, it is one of the only ones that usually averages that range (I have had lower, but also higher (which I have never seen).
post #124 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott B View Post

I am in the same boat as you. Need every lumen I can get for my 10' wide Screen Research screen.

Scott,

Have you seen the VW60 with the CP2 screen? I'm about to buy the combo sight unseen, somewhere around 100 to 110 inches wide in a light controlled room and was just assuming the combo would work out...
post #125 of 481
Greg..........you mentioned in your review that the vw60 does inverse telecine on 1080i .
Does this mean that someone with a 1080i only hd player can input this and the sony will convert this to 1080p24 and output it as such?
jeff. melbourne .australia
post #126 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post

Scott,

Have you seen the VW60 with the CP2 screen? I'm about to buy the combo sight unseen, somewhere around 100 to 110 inches wide in a light controlled room and was just assuming the combo would work out...

I have not seen the VW60 at all, however, I have seen the RS1 on the exact same screen as I have and the combination looked VERY nice. The lamp was on high mode and the projector was positioned at minimum throw, so it would have been producing 600-700 lumens resulting in an image with around 10 FtL. I would assume that the VW60 would be fine with a CP2 screen 100-110 inches wide provided you position the VW60 at minimum throw and use it with the DI engaged.
post #127 of 481
Well, shoot. I'm finishing up my HT/basement project and was about to pull the trigger on the RS1, and now I read this. Now I don't know what to do. I'm a newbie here and want to know to which projector you all think is the better overall projector. I know this is very subjective, but I need other opinions and don't know where else to go. Does anyone think one is a better overall projector than the other? Why or why not? It seems to me like the general performance is comparable between the RS1 and VW60, but the Sony is brighter. Is this reasonably accurate? Thanks!
post #128 of 481
treefrog,

Probably not the best place for your question. There simply is not a simple, satisfactory answer to your question. Please take some time and read, read, read through several of the posts in this forum, which will provide you with all the info you need to make an intelligent decision.

There are so many factors to take into account, just a few of which include color decoder accuracy, on/off contrast, ANSI contrast, brightness, panel convergence, display artifacts, brightness compression, internal processing among many others I've read.

I think you'll find a general consensus of preference for each of the above named topics with fairly brief reading of several topics at the very top of this forum.

Kevin
post #129 of 481
Just to add something that may or may not actually be helpful!!!:

I began my home theater life with a Sony VPH1271Q CRT projector, and I absolutely loved it. I toyed with it (i.e. astigmatism adjustment, etc) endlessly to the point where the picture was perfect for me. I sold the projector when I moved, though. I am on the verge of creating a new, dedicated theater room in a home I am building. I have thus begun to search in detail for a new front projector. As much as I loved the Sony CRT, I just don't want to deal with lugging around and mounting another 145lb projector.

I began my search looking at DLP front projectors. I don't care for the 'edgy' quality of the picture. I want something smoother, like a CRT. LCoS seems to fit the bill in this regard. I am thus considering both the JVC and Sony. Color accuracy is paramount to me. I believe the slightly oversaturated greens of the JVC will distract from my viewing enjoyment. +1 for the Sony. Next, I love the ability to panel converge in .1 pixel increments. I am extremely anal and actually briefly adjusted the RGB convergence of my old Sony CRT before each movie viewing. +2 for the Sony. ANSI contrast is similar in the projectors. While not as good as a DLP, probably still better than my old CRT, which was fine to my eyes. Off/on contrast clearly favors the JVC in this case. This is a bit troubling to me. I could just go with the Sony and use Auto iris 1, which would even best the JVC. Problem then arises with brightness compression. I don't like it. Given that I seem to favor the other major attributes of the Sony, though, I will probably do 1 of 2 things. First, I may adjust down the manual iris of the Sony to the point where I have adequate brightness on my smallish 106" screen (i.e 15-16 foot lamberts) and see how I feel about the on/off contrast at that point. If I don't like it, I may compromise and use Auto iris 2 to get me closer to the JVC without the same level of brightness compression issues that would be present on Auto iris 1. THEN I will only have to decide how quickly to have the iris adjust itself. Seems to me thus far that FAST is TOO fast and SLOW will eliminate some of the benefits of the auto iris itself. Probably best to stick with normal in that case.

Lastly, it seems to me in my reading thus far that the VW60 picture is somewhat cleaner in terms of artifacts than the JVC. Don't know if everyone agrees with that sentiment thus far, though. Also seems in my reading thus far, though, that the internal processing of the JVC bests the Sony. I'll have to be sure to feed a 1080p signal from my sources.

So, that is my thought process in comparing these projectors. I have certain desires which one of the projectors seems to meet while compromising a bit on the other issues. Your priorities may vary.

Rant off.!!!

Kevin
post #130 of 481
I hope I'm not going to regret this but . . .

what exactly is brightness compression?
post #131 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by ricwhite View Post

I hope I'm not going to regret this but . . .

what exactly is brightness compression?

See post #52 from this thread!
post #132 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonHoyaFan View Post

See post #52 from this thread!

A . . . yeah. I read that post (and this whole thread). It referred to "brightness compression" several times but never fully explained what it was. I do some research elsewhere.

Edit: I take it from reading of several threads and articles that "brightness compression" results in high white areas being somewhat crushed or blown to the point where there is a lack of detail in those areas. Brightness compression is notable in projectors with DI activated. I take it that "brightness compression" is relatively rare and the positives of DI far outweigh this negative artifact. I assume that all projectors using a DI will have some level of "brightness compression".
post #133 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by ricwhite View Post

A . . . yeah. I read that post (and this whole thread). It referred to "brightness compression" several times but never fully explained what it was.

Hopefully gregr will not mind me quoting from his 2 year old Ruby review, since he coined the term, and has explained it on the forum in the past
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Rogers WSR Ruby Review View Post

The Auto Iris provides a dramatic improvement in virtually all dark scenes. When the droids are imprisoned in the Jawa transporter there is substantial bright image detail, but the background is hazy, which obscures image definition and depth in the Iris Off mode. In the Iris On mode the black level is lower and the haze is gone, but the detail is also darker, so the image is still partially veiled. But in the Auto mode the detail is brightened to its original levels and the image contrast is much improved.

The dynamic iris produces marvelous images in dark scenes, but there is a price to pay for this performance. An ideal Auto Iris would always maintain the same image brightness that is produced in the Iris Off mode, but that’s not possible. The iris aperture would be fully open whenever there is a peak brightness signal, and then reduce to minimum size to lower the black level in the darkest scenes. At an intermediate scene brightness the iris aperture would be partially reduced to improve the contrast in those scenes. However, image brightness is also reduced when the iris aperture is reduced, so the signal levels must be increased to maintain the original brightness levels. But it’s impossible to produce the original maximum brightness level when the aperture is reduced, and as the aperture is made smaller the peak brightness that can be created becomes lower. So, to maintain the original brightness levels in the darker areas, the brightest levels must be compressed to avoid clipping as the aperture size is reduced. In effect, the contrast in bright areas is reduced for improved contrast in dark areas. When the iris aperture is reduced in scenes that have very bright areas there is a substantial “brightness compression” artifact as the brighter levels are compressed together and bright detail is lost.

The trash compactor scene in Star Wars is an example of a moderately dark scene where the contrast is considerably improved without significant brightness compression. But, in the opening scene of Star Wars, after the star cruiser flies by, there is brightness compression in its engine nozzles. There is detail within the engine nozzles using the Iris On or Iris Off modes, but when the Auto Iris mode is enabled that detail disappears, and there is a white glare surrounding the engines. A more dramatic example of brightness compression occurs as the first battle is about to take place on the ship. The fixtures lining the white interior walls are visible through most of the scene, but just prior to the storm troopers bursting through the door the fixtures are almost completely obscured by brightness compression. If you watch this scene, you can’t miss it, because suddenly the fixtures on the wall practically disappear when the Auto Iris is enabled. These examples illustrate that, in some cases, you may not realize that the image has been degraded unless you have previously seen it without the Auto Iris mode enabled. In the last example, the brightness compression is unmistakably obvious.

The most common situations that produce severe brightness compression are brightly lit background windows, lamps, and light fixtures. In the opening scene of Back To The Future, the detail in the brightest windows in Doc’s lab is obscured, but the detail in the darker windows is mostly unaffected. Later, the bright white portion of the Twin Pines Mall sign blurs the edges of the green pine trees on the sign and narrows the lettering on the sign. On the other hand, the contrast in the wet parking lot is improved, as is the contrast in many other scenes, including when Marty plows the DeLorean into Peabody’s barn and the farmer stands at the doorway holding a bright lantern. The bridal suite scene at the beginning of Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me provides examples of how brightness compression affects lamps and light fixtures.

For every example of brightness compression there are more examples where the Auto Iris produces virtually CRT quality images. Dark City looks incredible, as I have never seen it before on a fixed-pixel projector. Manhattan also looks spectacular, with an exceptional black level and excellent contrast as Woody and Michael Murphy walk along the street after leaving Elaine’s. There are some occasional examples of brightness compression, but they are surpassed by the improved contrast and image depth throughout the film.

IIRC a year later with the intro of the Pearl, the DI algorithms had been fine tuned such that those specific cases were not visible on the Pearl. The Black Pearl as gregr stated is even further improved.
post #134 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonHoyaFan View Post

Hopefully gregr will not mind me quoting from his 2 year old Ruby review, since he coined the term, and has explained it on the forum in the past

Thanks for the additional information, HoustonHoyaFan. I appreciate it.
post #135 of 481
Yeah, HoustonHoyaFan, thanks for the good read.
I actually did not realize that the algorithms had been improved substantially. I suppose it is up to each of us individually to decide where to set the iris based on preference. I really hope that AutoIris1 is not objectionable. I would love to keep the >20,000:1 ratio!

Kevin
post #136 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonHoyaFan View Post

IIRC a year later with the intro of the Pearl, the DI algorithms had been fine tuned such that those specific cases were not visible on the Pearl. The Black Pearl as gregr stated is even further improved.

Nonetheless, one should still go into the VW60 (or any DI based projector for that matter) knowing that they are sacrificing peak white in exchange for the benefits of a DI.

What I'd really like to see is a projector with the refinements and advantages of the VW60, combined with the native resolution of the RS1 (no DI).

JVC is way ahead of Sony with regards to native CR. Its hard to imagine that in the year that JVC managed to improve their panels to go from an already whooping 15,000:1 CR to an astounding 30,000:1, all that Sony has done on the native CR front is go from about 3,000:1 to 6,000:1. What's up with that?

Why doesn't Sony just buy the JVC division already and incorporate these panels into their projectors and high end TVs?...
post #137 of 481
Quote:


Why doesn't Sony just buy the JVC division already and incorporate these panels into their projectors and high end TVs?...

So next year's model would be the Sony RS-3?
post #138 of 481
Damn, good review. I am getting closer and closer to selling my Ruby. I really do want to be able to do 1080p/24 one day straight into a pj. I think investing more than 5,000 for a pj these days is not the way to go. I will tkae a substantial bath on my Ruby today but at least if I were to get a BLACK PEARL (cracks me up) it won't be such a hard hit if I decide to sell it 2 years from now...
post #139 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod View Post

it won't be such a hard hit if I decide to sell it 2 years from now...


Very true. I sold my Pearl yesterday but do not feel that it was to bad of a loss for the upgrade. When I spent over $6k on a projector and sold it a year later at a nearly 70% loss, that sucks.
post #140 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott B View Post

The lamp was on high mode and the projector was positioned at minimum throw, so it would have been producing 600-700 lumens resulting in an image with around 10 FtL. I would assume that the VW60 would be fine with a CP2 screen 100-110 inches wide provided you position the VW60 at minimum throw and use it with the DI engaged.

Hmmmm...I was thinking of mounting it further back than min throw, does it not have the light output for that size screen from close to max throw?
post #141 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bogg View Post

Hmmmm...I was thinking of mounting it further back than min throw, does it not have the light output for that size screen from close to max throw?

I don't remember exactly how much light the VW/60 / RS1 outputs at maximum throw, but I think it is around 500 lumens in high lamp mode (maybe a bit more for the VW60 if you go by WSRs numbers). There is definitely quite a drop in light output. You would probably still be fine with a 100" wide SR screen provided you have no ambient light whatsoever in the room. With a 110" wide SR screen you are probably going to wish for more light output which means moving the projector closer to the screen. You may also want to plan on replacing the lamp every few hundred hours.
post #142 of 481
So does the VP60 sony logo light up when it is on like my Ruby?
post #143 of 481
I just ordered a BLACK PEARL from AVS so I will post about it soon...
post #144 of 481
I bought too. From AVS.

It's my very first projector, so I'm facing a project. I'm aware through the reading that it's going to be a compromise. You lose certain things and gain others. Then I'll have the troubling quality control issue - large variations between units of the same model. I did it though. I'll order my screen soon.

I figure it'll take me a few weeks to set it all up - I an installing it in a wall on a shelf.
I'm also recessing my audio and video components in another wall.
post #145 of 481
I.m new to this site. When you say you ordered from AVS does that mean you ordered on this site. I can't seem to find any info about ordering on this site.
post #146 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post

Nonetheless, one should still go into the VW60 (or any DI based projector for that matter) knowing that they are sacrificing peak white in exchange for the benefits of a DI.

What I'd really like to see is a projector with the refinements and advantages of the VW60, combined with the native resolution of the RS1 (no DI).

JVC is way ahead of Sony with regards to native CR. Its hard to imagine that in the year that JVC managed to improve their panels to go from an already whooping 15,000:1 CR to an astounding 30,000:1, all that Sony has done on the native CR front is go from about 3,000:1 to 6,000:1. What's up with that?

Why doesn't Sony just buy the JVC division already and incorporate these panels into their projectors and high end TVs?...

I would vote for high native with a DI--after all every pj with a DI has the ability to turn it off if desired..not surprisingly, very few ever do.

Also, isn't there some talk on these forums that the method that JVC used to get the very high native crs may also have some other non-desirable effects on pq?
post #147 of 481
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaaybags View Post

I.m new to this site. When you say you ordered from AVS does that mean you ordered on this site. I can't seem to find any info about ordering on this site.

Call or email Jason, tell him scottyb sent ya.

Jason Turk
877-823-4452
jason@avscience.com

Scottyb
post #148 of 481
Oh yeah, call them!
post #149 of 481
Someone raised (about post #105) a question about " screen image motion blur" and gregr's review comment regarding resolution pumping (blurring) with slight movement during Conan's (NBC) show really grabbed my attention. Recall some previous hardware reviews, perhaps involving the newest pixel-by-pixel deinterlacing chips, that this resolution pumping and motion blurring had been practically eliminated. Perhaps it's only a factor with original 1080/60i-sourced material (interlaced TV cameras vs 24p film/video), but can't imagine having to watch most fine 1080/60i details becoming blurred with slight motion. Seems this would require a costly external processor to cure. Great review. -- John
post #150 of 481
If that is the case then thank God for my crystalio II!

BTW, my VP60 just arrived!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › WSR Greg Rogers Sony VPL-VW60 Review, official thread!