or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › The new C3X1080 review.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The new C3X1080 review. - Page 11

post #301 of 877
CM,

so what is the CR figure you get?
post #302 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Turk View Post

Yes...I am becoming more and more convinced there is something wrong with the one I have in. The T2 unit is arriving today so I am going to 1. check on the halo and 2. remeasure the contrast/light output. I'll also check the calibration in the service menu to see what happens.

I'll post an addendum.

You mention chip size in your review - this does have the DC4 chips yes?
post #303 of 877
I have the T1 coming, please don't say that, but thanks for bringing it up as this needs investigated...
post #304 of 877
Jason,

Your numbers always seem to be lower than everyone elses measures. Not that you do anything wrong, but I think its probably attributable to how you measure, how you round, and the environment. It doesnt seem strange to me that you measured 2k to 3k if other are getting 5k.

Is the C3X1080p measuring less than you measured the HT5000?
post #305 of 877
Not always. I have actually tested many higher than others. Remember though, I make sure it is dialed into exactly D65 before I measure. Also remember that different rooms, measuring gear, etc... can make a difference.
post #306 of 877
By the way if anyone of the people claiming to get near 5k contrast want to send me their unit to test, I'd pay for the shipping.
post #307 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spizz View Post

His review is up-

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=949552


Something seems wrong with these numbers. I'm not saying that Jason did something wrong, but my experience with the HT5000 is that it's already in the 5k:1 ballpark and the C3X1080 should do better.

So maybe there's something wrong with the sensor that Jason is using, or the room or maybe software he's using. I was told there's another firmware coming this year as well, as Sim2 made some improvements. So maybe Jason's unit has an older and bugged firmware running. I really don't know, since I don't have one yet it's all speculation. But I'd really be surprised if it's under 5k:1 and was really curious if 10k:1 could be achieved.

I don't doubt it looks good and it might even look like more than 3k:1. We've already seen this with the Qualia 004 which measured around 2k:1 and looked like alot more. But again, the HT5000 measures about 5k:1 already, so the C3X1080 should measure more than that.


It would be nice if others who already have it could provide some numbers. Hello CM...
post #308 of 877
i measure a pre production unit some weeks ago and
i found about 5500:1 cr. iris close short throw but
about the same light output that jason found.

i always measured since long time
lower no. for cr. and light out than most magazines and most internettsides.
post #309 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by antorsae View Post

At what point does the actual HT room start to matter in terms of on/off and ANSI CR?

I saw a demo of a Sim2 HT5000 last week in a local shop and I must say I left the shop very underwhelmed. The room almost no ambient light control: a rack of crazy blue leds right next to the screen (which was not very big anyway - 3 meters wide max), light pollution coming from an adjacent room, plus white ceilings... all that effectively killed the supposedly killer ANSI of the HT5K and made a very hard call to judge on/off.

That may be a very extreme case; but I am sure the PQ I saw for the price of a HT5K could be easily beat by a much cheaper projector and a better room. I have a CRT blend in my pitch-black (even the on LED of the giant Genelec sub behind the screen has been "taped") and while I haven't measured ANSI, the image I have looked punchier (as in objects floating) than what I saw last week - and I know the Sim2 kills my setup in ANSI CR.

There's a big discrepancy between Jason's CR numbers and Sim2's published CR numbers (10,000:1 iirc). Sub 10,000:1 at less 1,000 lumens seems to me a bit more LCD than hi-end 3-chip DLP. Could it be something related to the room?

I think the time has come or will very soon come in which hi-end machines need to be benchmarked in an optimal HT to reflect their strengths.

The HT5000 to date is the best Image i have experienced. Its impact was so good it is forever burned into my memory bank Tons of kick & ANSI. Sadly it sounds like the environment played a roll here Antorsae. While we cannot dispute CRT is king of silky black there is no reason the 5000 should disappoint in any other area
post #310 of 877
Quite surprised at the low light readings, as well as the contrast.

All the more reason why respected reviews are more important than inflated mfg. specs.
post #311 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Health Nut View Post

I have the T1 coming, please don't say that, but thanks for bringing it up as this needs investigated...

Same as Health nut, CR should be > 10000:1, Halo seems troubling
post #312 of 877
CM:

Any measurements you can share assuming your unit is fully calibrated
post #313 of 877
Jason:

Thank you for your honest review I am sure things will be sorted out, are you saying the CX31080 is not reaching 5000:1 when you say

"By the way if anyone of the people claiming to get near 5k contrast want to send me their unit to test, I'd pay for the shipping"?
post #314 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by LJG View Post

CM:

Any measurements you can share assuming your unit is fully calibrated

....same as W.Meyer. Not a full cal, but user D65 (313, 329) but that may not be dead on D65


6000:1...........Proper figure ( almost certainly higher) using PR650 will be up tomorrow
.
post #315 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Gouger View Post

The HT5000 to date is the best Image i have experienced. Its impact was so good it is forever burned into my memory bank Tons of kick & ANSI. Sadly it sounds like the environment played a roll here Antorsae. While we cannot dispute CRT is king of silky black there is no reason the 5000 should disappoint in any other area

Agreed. A total beast of a performer. Makes other "HT" machines weep with embarrassment.
post #316 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldmachine View Post

Well over 5000....same as W.Meyer. Not a full cal, but user D65 (313, 329) but that may not be dead on D65

.

What's "well over 5000"? Obviously there must have been an actual number unless your equipment just says this: >5000
post #317 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlindo View Post

What's "well over 5000"? Obviously there must have been an actual number unless your equipment just says this: >5000

A more appropriate tone may avoid you being ignored in future. Respect costs nothing and is normal on this forum. A simple pleasant request would have sufficed.

I amended the post
post #318 of 877
How can Sim2 be claiming >10000:1 and shipping machines that, at best, are around 5000:1? They didn't use to inflate specs, is this what they have to resort to, to compete?
post #319 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Free View Post

How can Sim2 be claiming >10000:1 and shipping machines that, at best, are around 5000:1? They didn't use to inflate specs, is this what they have to resort to, to compete?


Very weird. Coming from the RS1 where the contrast is around 15k, it *feels* like the C3X1080 is around 10k (equivalent to a plasma), but that's just a guess as I'm not sure I know what 3k feels like.

If someone can tell me how to measure contrast (I usually only do lumens/fL), I'll be happy to measure mine tonight.
post #320 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Roser View Post

I can assure you the C3X 1080 already has the DC4, the one we are demoing in our booth and on the TI booth has these new DMD's, so rest assured if you place an order now they will be included.

A big thank you to all that visited us today, your positive comments about our new products and the Live Colors calibration software is most welcome.

Mr. Roser:

Could you kindly comment on the Contrast Ratio spec of CR> 10,000:1, it seems early units are measuring 50% of that and less.

Thank you
post #321 of 877
One problem is the sensitivity, and therfore the accuracy of light meters in the lower ranges are crap, usually. Tiny errors in low end translate into HUGE differences in CR. For "real" CR numbers one needs at least a Minolta LS100 to measure, IMHO. A CA6X/colorfacts/Sencore tristimulus pod, AEMC 813 meter, or Gretag McBeth spectradiometer, etc won't usually get it in the low range, particularly if the low range is actually really low (i.e. no hand puppets). Their accuracy is poor to say the least at low light levels and again, a hundreth of a lux/Fc will cause a huge difference in a resulting CR calculation.

But I have no idea what Jason is using. Might be a PR650 for all I know. I hope not casue those numbers are obviously disappointing.
post #322 of 877
Well.. I am no expert, but I think you just put up a 100ire window, and a 0ire window, and measure the difference with a light meter.

Edit: Ooops I see it is a bit more difficult than I thought.
post #323 of 877
FWIW, when Arts HT5k was measured, I know Ken has a PR650 and a Minolta LS100 so one or the other of those high end instruments produced his CR numbers.

Carrying some loose logic forward... The C3X720 had slightly better numbers that an equivilant Delta engine 3C 720 (when I measured with lesser instruments, albet a very slight margin better). The C3X1080 is the same light engine as the C3X720, with the 1080 DMD's. So, logic would lead me to expect that the C3X 1080 would have at least the smae and possibly slightly better performance than a delta engine 1080 3C (5k). Add to that the DC4 upgrade and maybe a hair better still. But not a huge leap backwards like these numbers show. Of course there are a lot of factors that could change it, but for those panicking, maybe it will wash out (ahem, not wash out that is )
post #324 of 877
Quote:


Michael Grant >
Then why not get the HT5000?

I wish I had the space...it would be a done deal. Let's see what happens when Jason runs with the T2 lens. Jason's test results have always been a good gauge considering the variation in machines.
post #325 of 877
I merged the thread " Sim2 3 chip DLPs" with this thread to keep everything centralized.
post #326 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Free View Post

Well.. I am no expert, but I think you just put up a 100ire window, and a 0ire window, and measure the difference with a light meter.

Edit: Ooops I see it is a bit more difficult than I thought.

Close but you divide.

Prolem is you'll often run into the limits of a meter there.

Rough:
1. measure a 100% pattern. For a rough measure, I recommend a window, not full screen, to minimize room effects. OFr a more true measure, maybe a fullscreen will test optics more fully and properly. Position meter so meter is reading near top of its range (i.e close to PJ as possible)
2. Measure a 0% pattern in identical position (tripod)
Divide 2 numbers.

There is a more complicated way to do it with 2 different ranges and combine the 2 readings, for PJ's that are hard to read at #2 above. In that method the sensor is at or very near the PJ lens at the low reading. And it's probably the more accurate way.

If rough dosent' suit, you can get into "ANSI". You do same, then average multiple light/dark readings taken at the same points. See ansi pattern on my calibration DVD for places to measure.

Then there's simultaneous ANSI, which is a different thing. I preger Greg Rogers metod for that one.
post #327 of 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldmachine View Post

A more appropriate tone may avoid you being ignored in future. Respect costs nothing and is normal on this forum. A simple pleasant request would have sufficed.

I amended the post

Dude lighten up. You of all people should not be so touchy with your posting here (want me to dig up posts by you where you had a little sarcasm in them? There are plenty but I guess it's OK for you to do) Man...anyway, thanks for posting the actual number. Appreciate it.

BTW I was just JOKING with you. Thought you could see that but I guess I'm not in your special "clique" yet where clear sarcasm is easily seen...sheesh.
post #328 of 877
I too am disapointed that Sim2 has to play the marketing specs game.

Rlindo,
You should be able to infer something when someone talks in vague generalizations.
post #329 of 877
UPDATE: I have been talking with Sim2 and I personally have come to the conclusion there was something wrong with my original test piece. Why? Well I won't get into specifics, but, I have another here that I am at nearly 6000:1 contrast with. Same gear, same room, same setup, same method, etc... Granted this is a T2, but, I highly doubt that the lens will drop the contrast by nearly 1/2. Further, much of the stuff in the review (which we pulled) that I mentioned, did not occur with this piece. I'll give more information as I have it.

Also PLEASE remember that the numbers I am achieving are in my theater...not a controlled testing environment where the rated specs are done. Also the numbers that I achieve are at true D65 with proper contrast and brightness levels are set. For the heck of it I am going to try something...be back.
post #330 of 877
Phew!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › The new C3X1080 review.