Projector Mini-Shootout Thread - Page 467 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 4903Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #13981 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 06:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1886 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
To be fair the light loss is linear over the course of time. Epson has rated it's half life of lumen output at 17000 hours (or whatever they've changed it to again). So light loss does not occur at "6-10" years down the road, but linearly over the time you use it. And that number will obviously vary depending on how fast you put the hours on this unit over the years.
Epson hasn't stated if their rating is to half brightness or 80% like other laser projectors like Christie, Barco, etc.. Some assume 50% because that is what used for lamps, that rating criteria is not necessarily the same for this technology. The reality is we don't know and time will tell. It won't matter to you anyway, do any of your projectors ever make it through one bulb change
Ellebob is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #13982 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 06:19 AM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
Epson hasn't stated if their rating is to half brightness or 80% like other laser projectors like Christie, Barco, etc.. Some assume 50% because that is what used for lamps, that rating criteria is not necessarily the same for this technology. The reality is we don't know and time will tell. It won't matter to you anyway, do any of your projectors ever make it through one bulb change
That's besides the point and has no bearing whatsoever on the topic at hand. I just want people to understand light loss is linear over time and not how your previous post was insinuating it would start at some extended period down the road. But I bow to the laser expert on the forum.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #13983 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 07:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 5,517
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 992 Post(s)
Liked: 1039
So far only Sony and Epson offer a laser solution for HT projectors (unless you want to pay $100,000 or more for a projector) albeit the Sony is rather expensive -- in fact it lists at over 6 times the cost of the Epson. It offers much more light output but I believe about the same native contrast.


Other manufactures like JVC will most likely be offering a laser solution in the next year or two -- at what price and what will their warranties look like? -- should be interesting.


For those few who like 3D the Epson currently offers 2D to 3D conversion, which is actually usable -- JVC has dropped it in their latest projectors. Samsung has dropped 3D altogether for their 2016 T.V.s. For those into 3D this is another plus for the Epson.


Don't forget we seem to be in a game of catch up between manufactures. The Epson was basically a 2015 projector, which is now competing with 2016 projectors. In 2015 Epson had the 4K advantage against JVC -- not anymore. Next year should be interesting. Here's hoping competition helps to push the envelop some more.
DavidHir likes this.
Deja Vu is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #13984 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 07:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1886 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
My other post wasn't meant to be insulting but just tired of the repeated misinformation on what happens if the laser fails. Unless they have a bad power supply design like Frank corrected with his X-30 (nice job BTW) a laser is unlikely to fail. Lasers do like good power though. Any projector could have a major part fail out of warranty where it might make more sense to replace it than repair it. I just don't see many threads on other projectors about what happens if one of their major parts fail out of warranty. On a shoot out thread I would rather see more discussion on the merits of the projectors.
darrellh44 and lancenell like this.
Ellebob is offline  
post #13985 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 08:51 AM
Member
 
lancenell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Spokane
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerfan33 View Post
You can turn the lens shutter to off in the settings.
Perfect!! That's good to know. I knew one of you would have come to my rescue!!
lancenell is offline  
post #13986 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 09:34 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,587
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3731 Post(s)
Liked: 6337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post
So far only Sony and Epson offer a laser solution for HT projectors (unless you want to pay $100,000 or more for a projector) albeit the Sony is rather expensive -- in fact it lists at over 6 times the cost of the Epson. It offers much more light output but I believe about the same native contrast.


Other manufactures like JVC will most likely be offering a laser solution in the next year or two -- at what price and what will their warranties look like? -- should be interesting.


For those few who like 3D the Epson currently offers 2D to 3D conversion, which is actually usable -- JVC has dropped it in their latest projectors. Samsung has dropped 3D altogether for their 2016 T.V.s. For those into 3D this is another plus for the Epson.


Don't forget we seem to be in a game of catch up between manufactures. The Epson was basically a 2015 projector, which is now competing with 2016 projectors. In 2015 Epson had the 4K advantage against JVC -- not anymore. Next year should be interesting. Here's hoping competition helps to push the envelop some more.

Technically JVC already offers a laser projector, they've had one for their simulation market for a couple years now that uses the same chassis as their existing consumer model. I don't remember the price though and it doesn't offer near the CR specs as the consumer model.
Ericglo likes this.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #13987 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 09:36 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 14,251
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2520 Post(s)
Liked: 2196
Does laser make it harder for the projector to achieve the contrast of a lamp?
DavidHir is offline  
post #13988 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 10:50 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 23,130
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4156 Post(s)
Liked: 2384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
Technically JVC already offers a laser projector, they've had one for their simulation market for a couple years now that uses the same chassis as their existing consumer model. I don't remember the price though and it doesn't offer near the CR specs as the consumer model.
Looking at this, the contrast spec is actually right in line with what the RS49 does with the iris wide open (per Cine4Home's measurements). Is the contrast really worse or do they just specify it differently for the simulation market?
stanger89 is offline  
post #13989 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 11:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1886 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
Laser doesn't make it harder to achieve contrast. The JVC projectors with Laser are rated slightly higher than their lamp based brothers (20k:1 vs. 18k:1). Plus lasers can be modulated similar to an iris so you could get a higher dynamic contrast. I think the lower contrast in the simulation market is because they use different LCOS chips for lower latency and possibly longer life. Also, laser and LED make it easier to achieve a wider color gamut over most type of lamps.

The JVC laser projectors are very smartly designed. They are rated for 40,000 hours at low power and 20,000 hours at high power. They are designed to give consistent light over their lifespan by using an auto power feature. As the laser/phosphor decreases over time the auto power increases the power to the brightness stays consistent. This consistency of brightness and color is important in the simulation market. An area that most enthusiasts don't think about is long term cost, myself included. For non-enthusiasts and commercial applications it can get expensive to change lamps if their projector is used often. Not only because of the lamps cost but for many it is the cost of the service to change the lamp and the cost for recalibration.

In time I think you will see more of the projector market switch to laser or LED light sources especially as prices decrease. I predict lamp prices to decrease too so they don't get left out of the picture. Already some projector models have $99 lamps, that was unheard of years ago.
RonF and DavidHir like this.
Ellebob is offline  
post #13990 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 11:29 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,391
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11706 Post(s)
Liked: 9253
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
Epson hasn't stated if their rating is to half brightness or 80% like other laser projectors like Christie, Barco, etc.. Some assume 50% because that is what used for lamps, that rating criteria is not necessarily the same for this technology. The reality is we don't know and time will tell. It won't matter to you anyway, do any of your projectors ever make it through one bulb change
I was told that it was the rating to half life.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #13991 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 01:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1886 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
It is 50% if you turn off the auto brightness function and crank it up but you will get more than the rated lumens, it is not rear twice as many though. I forget what they said but when you go brighter it does wear out phosphor quicker, similar to when you overdrive a plasma or CRT which are another form of phosphor technologies. They still stated said a minimum of 20,000 hours. Simulation and some other markets consistency is a bigger factor, plus many of those markets super high lumens aren't needed as the lighting is often controlled.
Ellebob is offline  
post #13992 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 01:40 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellebob View Post
It is 50% if you turn off the auto brightness function and crank it up but you will get more than the rated lumens, it is not rear twice as many though. I forget what they said but when you go brighter it does wear out phosphor quicker, similar to when you overdrive a plasma or CRT which are another form of phosphor technologies. They still stated said a minimum of 20,000 hours. Simulation and some other markets consistency is a bigger factor, plus many of those markets super high lumens aren't needed as the lighting is often controlled.
In a competitive light output mode to the other high contrast units the minimum is 17000 hours for 50% output as rated in the user manual. Unless you have a pretty small screen I would imaging most are using the brighter modes. So you can figure 75% light output at around 8-9k hours. Originally it was rated for 14000 hours and then they changed it to 17000 hours out of the blue without explanation as to why the unit gained an extra 3000 hours minimum. It goes higher from there depending on usage.

Last edited by Seegs108; 02-17-2016 at 01:47 PM.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #13993 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 03:05 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darrellh44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: North Dallas
Posts: 1,532
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1032 Post(s)
Liked: 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
In a competitive light output mode to the other high contrast units the minimum is 17000 hours for 50% output as rated in the user manual. Unless you have a pretty small screen I would imaging most are using the brighter modes. So you can figure 75% light output at around 8-9k hours. Originally it was rated for 14000 hours and then they changed it to 17000 hours out of the blue without explanation as to why the unit gained an extra 3000 hours minimum. It goes higher from there depending on usage.
The LS10000 manual says up to about 17000 hours in High Power mode, and up to about 30,000 hours in ECO Power mode. It doesn't say anything about the percentage of brightness remaining after this many hours. I'm not sure why anyone would use High Power mode exclusively unless they had a very large and low power screen or watched everything in 3D.
MovieAddictUk likes this.
darrellh44 is offline  
post #13994 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 03:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,366
Mentioned: 67 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1886 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
Are you referring to the JVC or Epson? My last post about auto brightness was from the rep for JVC's laser projector used in the commercial markets. Epson's manual doesn't state 50% or how its rated for that matter. It states only up to 17,000 or 30,000 hours in respective high/low mode. I don't have the manual for the JVC laser projector but it would be interesting if their manual states 17,000 and their other literature states 20-40,000.
Ellebob is offline  
post #13995 of 19415 Old 02-17-2016, 04:15 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2593
Quote:
Originally Posted by darrellh44 View Post
The LS10000 manual says up to about 17000 hours in High Power mode, and up to about 30,000 hours in ECO Power mode. It doesn't say anything about the percentage of brightness remaining after this many hours. I'm not sure why anyone would use High Power mode exclusively unless they had a very large and low power screen or watched everything in 3D.
That's why my post said "in a competitive light output mode". And yes, Mike was told by Epson themselves that it's a 50% quote in the manual that 170000 hours for bright mode. This is the only mode that competes with other high contrast projectors near it's price range, aka Sony HW65ES, Sony 4K units, current generation JVCs.

Last edited by Seegs108; 02-17-2016 at 04:25 PM.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #13996 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 10:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
curtishd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,979
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked: 25
So do we have any direct comparisons of the Sony 665 and the JVC rs500 with ultra bluray content?
curtishd is offline  
post #13997 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 01:40 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thezaks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Laveen, AZ
Posts: 1,590
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 609 Post(s)
Liked: 125
In this month's issue of Widescreen Review magazine, Doug Blackburn proclaims the Sony VPL-VW665ES "is the best 2D projector I've seen for HD sources so far". I will probably read the article this weekend. The last JVC projector he reviewed was the DLA-RS6710.

Dave
thezaks is offline  
post #13998 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 01:55 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,707
Mentioned: 159 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5232 Post(s)
Liked: 5468
he'll need to check out the current JVC's (A/B stack, + split source, no other way to properly compare 2 projectors) and see if that opinion still matches. Best 2D images from my perspective includes something better than average native contrast. Epson and JVC have both exceeded Sony here (JVC by a large margin) and this makes a huge difference when watching any content with low APL scenes.

This is one of the primary reasons I sold the VW1100. In it's best day, it simply wasn't convincing in low APL scenes. The perception became worse over time the darker my room became. imo, not acceptable at that price point.
Kris Deering and Mr. Hatcher like this.
zombie10k is online now  
post #13999 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 02:07 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,587
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3731 Post(s)
Liked: 6337
Quote:
Originally Posted by thezaks View Post
In this month's issue of Widescreen Review magazine, Doug Blackburn proclaims the Sony VPL-VW665ES "is the best 2D projector I've seen for HD sources so far". I will probably read the article this weekend. The last JVC projector he reviewed was the DLA-RS6710.

Dave
Hmm. For 2D HD images the projector is about the same as the previous year, except that the DI is more noticeable. I look at the 665ES as a mid-cycle upgrade at best that only added a bit of brightness and an HDR mode that allows for almost no user adjustment. My review will publish sometime soon, but we actually took away our Top Pick status on it given the issues I had with it and its lack of proper future proofing compared to its competitors (especially at its price point).
Dave Vaughn likes this.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #14000 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 02:23 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
Hmm. For 2D HD images the projector is about the same as the previous year, except that the DI is more noticeable. I look at the 665ES as a mid-cycle upgrade at best that only added a bit of brightness and an HDR mode that allows for almost no user adjustment. My review will publish sometime soon, but we actually took away our Top Pick status on it given the issues I had with it and its lack of proper future proofing compared to its competitors (especially at its price point).
Sony has apparently recently updated the firmware (last week if I remember correctly) so this firmware wouldn't have been available in time for either Doug's or your review. With that said, I haven't heard what the firmware fixes. And there were many issues that cine4home has already posted about. I originally posted this in the 1000ES thread when someone asked about the 665ES's performance. I don't know how the 665ES could be "the best 2D image ever" according to Doug with it's average on/off native contrast, relatively poor lens quality, and it's terrible dynamic iris performance among other issues. For those interested I've loosely translated cine4home's review of the 665ES. It's one complaint after another. Yes, lumen output and native contrast has gone up a bit but without a proper DI I can't see how this unit is competitive, especially when you consider nothing else is better with this unit than the JVCs or higher end Sony units. Ekki had an open house and let people come to see both the 665ES and current generation JVC with native 4K content being fed to both. The unanimous consensus was that both had the same level of detail and sharpness with this content. I don't think the lens on this model cuts it if it can't even beat the JVC for detail with native 4K material.


Quote:
1.2 Color Uniformity & illumination

The predecessor VW500 showed with deviations of up to 260 Kelvin acceptable tolerance by Sony, but by no means is this outstanding results. The FullHD entry projectors (SONY HW40 / 55/65) in this discipline are better, for example.
Unfortunately, this has not improved in this generation, the tolerances have become even larger with up to 280 Kelvin deviation. In this price range of a small car, one should expect more perfection.


Also worthy of criticism is the influence of the frame interpolation on the color uniformity: Depending on how strong the color homogeneity in the factory was digitally corrected, show the settings that insert black frames for movement improvement, stronger color clouds than normal inter-frame calculation (see photos). Devices with unacceptable deviations (as shown above) does not qualify for the Cine4Home Edition because they are the high price class do not do justice.

1.3 brightness after calibration
The new VPL-VW520 lamp is intended to provide not only around 1,000 more hours of life, but also show 100 lumens more light output to the screen. But we measured real units in this review (not manufacturers claims): We measure and record all units for the maximum uncalibrated brightness and net brightness remaining after calibration. For the highest possible output we determine the lumen output at max zoom.
The factory specifications are approximately met when set to the native color temperature (not D65): All projectors tested were in the range of 1750-1890 lumens. The calibration as usual has some light output lost, but with an average of 1680 Lumen no great loss for the benefit of accurate colors occur.
As a lower limit for the Cine4Home Edition we set the "official" declaration of Sony's engineers: 1770 gross lumens and 1620 lumens net must reach a VW520, in order to qualify for the C4H-Edition.

Note:
The brightness given relate to new lamps, with less than 10 hours duration. When it comes to long-term stability, the lamp re-used the VW520 has also improved. In the first 1000 hours they will only lose 10% of its brightness. If this is confirmed in practice, that would be an excellent value, we will report!


1.4 Contrast after calibration
Unlike the brightness level, there are no manufacturer's claim for native contrast performance of the VPL-VW520, which is why we measure this for ourselves:
Depending on the zoom, the native contrast is at an average of between 12,000: 1 (zoom max) and 19,000: 1 (zoom min). Here the new VW520 improves on it’s predacessors, Sony is on the heels of JVC: After calibration though contrast remains at 11000: 1 to 17.000: 1, the series average of around 13500: 1. The lower limit for the Cine4Home Edition we move accordingly at 12500: calibrated 1. The adaptive iris closes depending on what’s in the displayed image with a factor of 10 to 20 this generation, but unfortunately, there is disturbing image pumping in dark image content, since the shutter closes suddenly when passing a certain contrast threshold. Hitting with test patterns (to 10IRE) this threshold, the panel flickers unpredictable (hysteresis effect).


The adaptive iris does not operate correctly and shows pumps
(banding is due to GIF image)

The Chessboard (ANSI) contrast amounts to 410: 1, this represents a very good value from an LCOS projector and also in bright image scenes good contrast allowed.


1.5 Sharpness / convergence
In the last generation, convergence had already significantly improved: Just a few minutes after switching the image appears without much color fringing. Most projectors seen by us had good convergence.


Perfectionists seek the convergence correction

Those who wish can optimize convergence on with the "Panel calibration". As a result, a sharp image without color fringing is also in stark contrast transitions.


Not so good it looks sadly out at the optical focus: Four units we saw had issues with sharpness and were not able to bring the full 4K brilliance to the screen. These devices not qualified for Cine4Home Edition



Some VW520 have difficulty focusing

The Reality Creation has very little potential for good, as with the previous generation: Only the first 10 steps have an effect on the picture, the remaining 90 levels are of no effect. The optimum range from previous generations between 20 and 30 may thus not be reached.

Above: Native sharpness of an error-free Sony VW520
Below: blur filter the erroneous "Mastered in 4K" function

The "Mastered in 4K" function is also flawed: It changes the entire image by significantly blurring it and therefore ruining any sense of sharpness. The mistakes of Reality Creation are obviously related to software errors that can have no influence on the selection for Cine4Home Edition. All units are affected. A common firmware update would be recommended.

3. Conclusion & Sources

Our check on several units has shown that several changes to some of the main image features should be done in order to get the best image performance from this model. It is encouraging to see a significant increase in native contrast without causing losses in brightness. The VW520 is a bit brighter than its predecessor, even after calibration and holds brightness thanks to longer lamp life over a longer period than its predecessor, the VW500.

But where there is light, there is a shadow: Through software bugs the adaptive iris, Mastered in 4K and the Reality Creation signal processing of VW520 costs a portion of it’s potential contrast and sharpness, here we’d be recommend Sony to software update this model to fix them. The large variation from unit to unit in optical focus was problematic. This is particularly annoying as devices affected by this focus issue cannot be corrected (hardware malfunction, not a software malfunction).

Last edited by Seegs108; 02-19-2016 at 02:36 PM.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #14001 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 02:31 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,587
Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3731 Post(s)
Liked: 6337
I had the same issues with focus uniformity no matter how much I tried to fix it. Didn't have that issue with the previous model. But I didn't seen any increase in native contrast performance with my unit. I measured the CR in short and long throw, iris closed/open and dynamic on/off. Native contrast was nearly identical. I definitely saw the Mastered in 4K issue but don't remember having any issues with white uniformity that stuck out.


I was also disappointed by the lack of full bandwidth HDMI ports and not at least supporting full P3. The lack of HDR adjustments may also end up an issue as we get more content.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #14002 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 06:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wizziwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 3,476
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2187 Post(s)
Liked: 1467
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
he'll need to check out the current JVC's (A/B stack, + split source, no other way to properly compare 2 projectors) and see if that opinion still matches. Best 2D images from my perspective includes something better than average native contrast. Epson and JVC have both exceeded Sony here (JVC by a large margin) and this makes a huge difference when watching any content with low APL scenes.

This is one of the primary reasons I sold the VW1100. In it's best day, it simply wasn't convincing in low APL scenes. The perception became worse over time the darker my room became. imo, not acceptable at that price point.
So based on what you guys are saying, the VW665's nearly double ANSI contrast advantage over JVC means nothing? That's kind of hard to understand when you look at data from reviews that examine contrast over a wider APL range than simply 100% on/off or 50% ANSI.

Since I don't have data handy for the new JVC, let's look at VW520 and Epson LS10K for example. According to this review, it has 12.5K:1 worst-case native and 251:1 ANSI. The VW520 review list on/off as 15K:1 and it looks like ANSI falls somewhere around 500-600. According to their study of 53 films, average APL found was 8%. If we take that 8% and look up actual contrast of each projector on their respective graphs, the Sony gives ~4100:1 contrast while the Epson ~1900:1. I'm sure a JVC would do better than the Epson but would it come close to the Sony? Heck, even the Epson LCD projectors beat the Epson LCOS if you look at it this way.

So which projector has the best real-world contrast across a wide range of content? Maybe @darinp2 can weight in on the accuracy of the numbers from this site.
Wizziwig is offline  
post #14003 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 06:56 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,707
Mentioned: 159 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5232 Post(s)
Liked: 5468
it's just what I prefer after running a stack of 2 4K Sony and several different JVC projectors for months looking at different content that I like to watch. As the room got darker, high native is what became more important for my viewing preferences.

I wanted the VW1100 to work but it unfortunately wasn't as convincing in low APL scenes. The VW600 to an even lesser degree with it's more aggressive iris. in low APL scenes, there is only so much the DI can do. With JVC and Epson leading in this area, hopefully Sony will make changes here in future models.



my room is now a black velvet pit and it's very cool to watch a movie and see absolutely nothing else in the room. Very immersive and really draws our guests into the movie. -13 on the big 2.8HP I am good until at least the fall.


zombie10k is online now  
post #14004 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 07:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wizziwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 3,476
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2187 Post(s)
Liked: 1467
Well, according to those APL vs. Contrast studies, your VW1000 would probably have beaten the JVC in virtually any scene using 2%+ APL. Is it really worth it to give up contrast in the majority of movie/sports scenes just to get better blacks in those few <2% APL really dark scenes? I guess I'm just trying to find an objective measure for why so many people favor the JVC and Epson given typical content.
Wizziwig is offline  
post #14005 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 09:12 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,707
Mentioned: 159 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5232 Post(s)
Liked: 5468
It's hard to say how well those study's line up with how we actually interpret the final image. I ran split source for many viewing sessions. Differences in mid / high APL scenes were not obvious, in your face. But when it comes to low APL scenes - there was a noticeable difference the majority of the time.

I think most agree high native and high ANSI would be the ideal projector qualities but if I have to choose one or the other for now, I'm personally going with high native.
zombie10k is online now  
post #14006 of 19415 Old 02-19-2016, 09:31 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,188
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Liked: 1767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizziwig View Post
Well, according to those APL vs. Contrast studies, your VW1000 would probably have beaten the JVC in virtually any scene using 2%+ APL. Is it really worth it to give up contrast in the majority of movie/sports scenes just to get better blacks in those few <2% APL really dark scenes? I guess I'm just trying to find an objective measure for why so many people favor the JVC and Epson given typical content.
People can weigh these advantages differently, but here is an analogy I'll try.

Imagine that you are a person who prefers their work environment to be a steady 72 F degrees.

At one company it is 71 degrees most of the time, but every hour it drops to 65 degrees for a couple of minutes.

At a second company they keep it 72 degrees most of the time, but every hour it drops to 40 degrees for a couple of minutes.

Which do you think you would prefer?

--Darin
Wizziwig and zombie10k like this.
darinp2 is offline  
post #14007 of 19415 Old 02-20-2016, 05:02 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,993
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2403 Post(s)
Liked: 1302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizziwig View Post
So which projector has the best real-world contrast across a wide range of content? Maybe @darinp2 can weight in on the accuracy of the numbers from this site.
We always knew JVC is going to have the best across real-world content, since any difference in ANSI is neglible by eye for the most part. The problem is that ANSI contrast differences are harder to see by our eyes than native on/off, because of the brightness sensitivity of our eyes to brighter color spectrums.

This is the reason

It's never really been up for debate in recent years, the improvement of a good JVC in dark scenes is just a lot larger than the tiny improvements you used to get with DLP's (or Sony LCOS) in bright scenes (but people say this year's JVC's are closer looking to DLP in bright scenes anyhow).

When you add bright colors to an image when watching a huge screen, even just the mid-APL ranges having slightly more contrast compared to the darkest color in a scene isn't going to be very noticeable on most bright scenes, whereas the increased native on/off is easily noticeable as the scene gets darker.

Hence, once you get the colors in an image bright enough looking and enough contrast between the brightest and darkest, how much "brighter and darker" do you need in a bright image for it to look better.

Just using common sense and watching images on DLP's vs. a JVC, you can tell this by eye, sure tiny bits of differences here and there, but they are small compared to how much better the JVC does as the scenes just get slightly darker, I mean the difference is ANSI being barely perceivable differences vs. Native On/Off being a swat in the face of a difference.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --

Last edited by coderguy; 02-20-2016 at 05:10 AM.
coderguy is offline  
post #14008 of 19415 Old 02-20-2016, 05:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
George Kouzev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Canada
Posts: 864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 240 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
People can weigh these advantages differently, but here is an analogy I'll try.

Imagine that you are a person who prefers their work environment to be a steady 72 F degrees.

At one company it is 71 degrees most of the time, but every hour it drops to 65 degrees for a couple of minutes.

At a second company they keep it 72 degrees most of the time, but every hour it drops to 40 degrees for a couple of minutes.

Which do you think you would prefer?

--Darin
Let me give anither analogy:

At a company they keep it 72 degrees most of the time, but every hour it drops to 40 degrees for a couple of minutes.

At a second company they keep it 72 degrees, but every hour it smells like poo for only 40 secs.

Which do you think you would prefer? It will depend on what you can tolerate better I think.
d.j. likes this.

Last edited by George Kouzev; 02-20-2016 at 05:48 AM.
George Kouzev is offline  
post #14009 of 19415 Old 02-20-2016, 06:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
12GAGE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 717
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 341 Post(s)
Liked: 386
At the end of the day, I think everyone should go for what suits their viewing preferences and environment. There is no single best unit, as viewing content and personal preference vary from person to person. It is nice to live in an age when even a 1,000 dollar unit can throw a good image. Most of the units now are actually pretty good at most of the important viewing characteristics.
12GAGE is offline  
post #14010 of 19415 Old 02-20-2016, 06:52 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,391
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11706 Post(s)
Liked: 9253
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
I had the same issues with focus uniformity no matter how much I tried to fix it. Didn't have that issue with the previous model. But I didn't seen any increase in native contrast performance with my unit. I measured the CR in short and long throw, iris closed/open and dynamic on/off. Native contrast was nearly identical. I definitely saw the Mastered in 4K issue but don't remember having any issues with white uniformity that stuck out.


I was also disappointed by the lack of full bandwidth HDMI ports and not at least supporting full P3. The lack of HDR adjustments may also end up an issue as we get more content.
Yeah, I was pretty surprised that Sony did not implement a new full spec HDMI board.
Mike Garrett is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Benq W7000 Home Projection System , Jvc Dla Rs55 Bundle , Jvc Dla Rs45 Home Theater Projector 1080p Hdmi , Epson V11h502020 Powerlite Home Cinema 3020e 2d And 3d 1080p Wireless Home Theater Projector , Sony Vpl Hw50es 3d Projector , Epson 5010 Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector , Epson Powerlite Home Cinema 3010 2d And 3d Projector V11h421020 , Panasonic Ptae8000u Hd Projector , Mitsubishi Hc7900dw Home Theater 3d Projector , Mitsubishi Hc8000dbl Dlp 3d Home Theater Projector With Spare Lamp 1300 Ansi 12 6 Lbs , Darbeevision Darblet Hdmi Video Processor , Epson 5020ub Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off