AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-digital-hi-end-projectors-3-000-usd-msrp/)
-   -   Owners of Sony VPL-VW665 (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-digital-hi-end-projectors-3-000-usd-msrp/2180537-owners-sony-vpl-vw665.html)

robdman 12-04-2015 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robdman (Post 39452178)
After seeing a demo of the new Sony vpl vw 665 on a Black Diamond 128 inch screen and after seeing the Sony 600 vpl vw with less than 300 hours on it with the same screen and with both projectors that have been calibrated the new Sony vpl vw
In my opinion had that extra pop with the extra brightness That I really liked so I just purchase my Sony vpl vw 665 Today will get it very soon!

Does anybody know what the 3D RF glasses model# are for this Sony VPL 665
projector so I can order them?

Peak 12-04-2015 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robdman (Post 39477634)
Does anybody know what the 3D RF glasses model# are for this Sony VPL 665
projector so I can order them?

I bought the Samsung SSG-5100, since they were quite cheap.
They seem to be verified to work as I wrote in this thread.

zombie10k 12-04-2015 04:13 PM

the Sony glasses are this model below, but just about any RF glasses will work fine. I have these glasses and they are nice and comfortable.

http://www.sony.com/electronics/tele...ses/tdg-bt500a

joerod 12-07-2015 06:29 PM

665ES Report
 
1 Attachment(s)

joaquin 12-07-2015 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lovingdvd (Post 39459938)
Is there an 18 Gb/s rated cable for 40' or more? Only saw options up to 15'.

Monoprice has a new series that support 18Gbs up to 50 ft. They are CL3 rated.

http://www.monoprice.com/category?c_...&cs_id=1024019

joez28ls1 12-09-2015 07:01 AM

Hi everyone! I just ordered a VW665ES yesterday from a local home theater shop. I should have it Friday and I'm so excited! I'm coming from an Epson 8700UB. Anyway, can someone tell me if my Chief RPAU will work as is for the VW665ES? If not, what should I get for a nice close mounting to the ceiling? Thanks everyone and I look forward to continuing to this thread very soon!

Peak 12-09-2015 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joez28ls1 (Post 39598098)
Hi everyone! I just ordered a VW665ES yesterday from a local home theater shop. I should have it Friday and I'm so excited! I'm coming from an Epson 8700UB. Anyway, can someone tell me if my Chief RPAU will work as is for the VW665ES? If not, what should I get for a nice close mounting to the ceiling? Thanks everyone and I look forward to continuing to this thread very soon!

I believe that the universal Cheif mount would work for the Sony. However, I would advise you to take a look at the Sony specific SLB020 Chief plate mount, and perhaps order that as well. I feel that it is very much easier to attach to the projector, virtually done in seconds. It is also very rigid.

joez28ls1 12-09-2015 07:53 AM

I'll look into that, thanks!

maglito 12-09-2015 03:05 PM

cine4home review posted
 

Andreas21 12-09-2015 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maglito (Post 39612834)

It looks like my worries from watching a pre production model a while back that the iris on the 520/665 is not very well implemented. When I saw it it was pumping a lot and it seems like the cine4home unit did exactly the same. Other than that it looks good and I am really looking forward to do a side by side test with a VW520 and a JVC RS600.

Naylorman32 12-09-2015 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andreas21 (Post 39612898)
It looks like my worries from watching a pre production model a while back that the iris on the 520/665 is not very well implemented. When I saw it it was pumping a lot and it seems like the cine4home unit did exactly the same. Other than that it looks good and I am really looking forward to do a side by side test with a VW520 and a JVC RS600.


That side by side is what I am really looking forward to. If I move from my 600ES, it will be to one of these (1100 probably still out of price range).

Seegs108 12-09-2015 03:48 PM

I like how frank cine4home is. I love that Sony has increase native contrast to roughly the same level as the 1100ES. Why can't they just use THE EXACT SAME dynamic iris algorithm as the 1100ES? That would be perfect because it's a VERY good DI implementation. It does worry me that they saw so much variation with the lens in terms of focusing abilities. In this instance, it might make more sense for a German to buy a cine4home edition model to ensure there's no lens issue with their unit. Then Mi4K/Reality Creation issues are also a bit worrisome, but this is something they can fix via firmware, just like the dynamic iris. I just hope this is something they do fix... let's hope Sony addresses this issue and informs people a fix is on the way.

I think they sum things up nicely:

Quote:



Our series check has shown that a revision / correction of the main image features is useful in order to be the best image performance safely. The VPL-VW520 Sony convinced like his big brother with exact working tolerances, which shall be evaluated as above average.

Encouraging the significant increase is the native contrast without causing losses in brightness must be taken into account, on the contrary: 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 VW500.

But where there is light, there is shadow: Through software bugs the adaptive iris and the Reality Creation signal processing of VW520 costs a portion of its contrast and sharpness potential one, here would be recommended an update. The large series dispersion in the optical focus is not so, we encounter in the previous generations. This is particularly annoying as affected by this device can be corrected hardly.

By determining the Series section, we again set realistic tolerances, thus ensuring that all Cine4Home Editions according to the device-specific performance work and deliver such a good image quality...

jabz 12-09-2015 07:35 PM

I noticed in the manual for the VW520ES / VW665ES , the installation menu has a Anamorphic Lens setting.
Does this mean the PJ will perform vertical stretch on both HD and 4K sources?

Also what are the implications of viewing a UHD bluray through this projector, considering it is native 4096 vs 3840 for UHD, will there be black bars on the sides that need to be zoomed off?

Seegs108 12-09-2015 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabz (Post 39618978)
I noticed in the manual for the VW520ES / VW665ES , the installation menu has a Anamorphic Lens setting.
Does this mean the PJ will perform vertical stretch on both HD and 4K sources?

Also what are the implications of viewing a UHD bluray through this projector, considering it is native 4096 vs 3840 for UHD, will there be black bars on the sides that need to be zoomed off?

If you check out page 62 of the user manual it states that the vertical stretch modes can only be used on standard definition and high definition (720p and 1080p) input signals and specifically states that 4K and UHD signals are not compatible with vertical stretch.

For your second question, the answer is not a simple one. There is still a lot of ambiguity in terms of the types of proper communication the display device needs with the UHD BD player to get most/all of the features. For instance, if the player doesn't know whether or not the display can accept and display the 10bit video will it convert the content to 8bit? What about HDR and wide color gamut. There are standards in place for this (SMPTE 2084 and SMPTE 2086 for example) but this Sony model doesn't seem to support them all, including all the data throughput needed (18Gbps) through it's HDMI ports. It's currently limited to 10.2Gbps which isn't enough bandwidth to display all that UHD BD has to offer in it's specification. So I guess it's a situation where someone will need to test to see what works when we start to see UHD BD players hit the market in a couple months. There's nothing in the literature or on Sony's website that claims this unit actually supports UHD BD which is a little discouraging considering the timing of this unit's release.

Peak 12-10-2015 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maglito (Post 39612834)

Comparing to the stuff he did in VW500 calibration (google-translated below), I think it looks very promising. Virtually doubled native contrast with a little bit better light output. Well done, Sony!

VW500:
The native contrast moving average of between 5.800:1 (Zoom max / iris) and 9.500:1 (min Zoom / Iris to).
The average is 7.100:1, the lower limit for the Cine4Home Edition in 6.100:1.

VW520:
The native contrast moving average of between 12.000:1 and 19.000:1 (zoom min).
Here the new VW520 lays over its predecessors once a Schippre it, Sony is JVC on the heels: After calibration remain thereof 11.000:1 to 17.000:1, the series average of around 13500: 1. The lower limit for the Cine4Home Edition we move accordingly at 12500:1 calibrated.

Kris Deering 12-10-2015 08:53 AM

7 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Peak (Post 39622546)
Comparing to the stuff he did in VW500 calibration (google-translated below), I think it looks very promising. Virtually doubled native contrast with a little bit better light output. Well done, Sony!

VW500:
The native contrast moving average of between 5.800:1 (Zoom max / iris) and 9.500:1 (min Zoom / Iris to).
The average is 7.100:1, the lower limit for the Cine4Home Edition in 6.100:1.

VW520:
The native contrast moving average of between 12.000:1 and 19.000:1 (zoom min).
Here the new VW520 lays over its predecessors once a Schippre it, Sony is JVC on the heels: After calibration remain thereof 11.000:1 to 17.000:1, the series average of around 13500: 1. The lower limit for the Cine4Home Edition we move accordingly at 12500:1 calibrated.

Darin and I will do some CR measurements on the 665 tomorrow. I've done some preliminary ones using a CR-100 off the screen and I've been getting numbers more like the VW500, but we will do more controlled numbers tomorrow. We will also have a RS600 on hand and measure it as well to see how much the Sony is truly on its heels.

R Harkness 12-10-2015 11:48 AM

The rise in native contrast is great. Also, it looks like it's really bright even after calibration.

But aside from that the Cine4home review seemed to point to a fairly problematic projector.
Discoloration spots/uniformity issues. And given how badly it seems to fail in resolving 4K can this really be considered a true 4K model?

Seegs108 12-10-2015 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Harkness (Post 39636554)
The rise in native contrast is great. Also, it looks like it's really bright even after calibration.

But aside from that the Cine4home review seemed to point to a fairly problematic projector.
Discoloration spots/uniformity issues. And given how badly it seems to fail in resolving 4K can this really be considered a true 4K model?

There might be a bit of loss in translation. I think he was saying that some, not all, of the units he tested showed an inability to focus properly. But the loss of sharpness and color issues with RC and Mastered in 4K modes should be fixed as well as the problematic dynamic iris via firmware if it's not a hardware issue.

DavidHir 12-10-2015 12:54 PM

97 Attachment(s)
My biggest concern would be the panel degradation/loss of contrast over time that has been reported with the previous models. I assume Cine4home will continue to monitor and track the issue.

Deja Vu 12-11-2015 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris Deering (Post 39630818)
Darin and I will do some CR measurements on the 665 tomorrow. I've done some preliminary ones using a CR-100 off the screen and I've been getting numbers more like the VW500, but we will do more controlled numbers tomorrow. We will also have a RS600 on hand and measure it as well to see how much the Sony is truly on its heels.

I am very much looking forward to what you and Darin discover regarding these CR measurements.

Peak 12-11-2015 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris Deering (Post 39630818)
Darin and I will do some CR measurements on the 665 tomorrow. I've done some preliminary ones using a CR-100 off the screen and I've been getting numbers more like the VW500, but we will do more controlled numbers tomorrow. We will also have a RS600 on hand and measure it as well to see how much the Sony is truly on its heels.

I think he is referring to the X5000. It would be unrealistic to believe that it's anywhere near the X9000! :)

And before someone says that it's not fair to compare projectors with a 4x price difference, remember that the VW520 is just 80% more expensive than the X5000 with current Swedish street prices. The VW520 is currently slotted in the middle between the X7000 and the X9000 in price.

Doug Blackburn 12-12-2015 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wse (Post 38347633)
My question is do they still have plastic lens?

Whether there are plastic elements in the lens or not is completely unimportant. Optical plastic can actually perform better than glass, In addition, optical plastic lenses are not necessarily less expensive than glass elements. You apply the proper contours and coatings to an optical plastic lens element and it can outperform glass in the same application. It all depends on the overall design of the lens. Computer optimization of lenses is getting so good that the software can decide when a plastic element will provide superior performance.

Bottom line, the presence or absence of plastic lens elements in a projection lens really tells you nothin about the quality of the lens. With 34 years of engineering experience in imaging systems, I can tell you that the lens and light engine in the 665ES produce images with superior clarity... they look REALLY good. You'll never know just how good they are, though, unless you have a projection screen that has a surface that does not create grain in UHD images that isn't present in the projected images. I'm using a Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 100 screen... reference quality in every possible way. And I haven't ever seen better-looking 2D images from HD or UHF sources and the short sample of HDR I've see looks incredible and makes me want to see more. I wish I was say9ng this about a projector that sells for 1/5 the price but the tech just isn't there yet.I used Sony's first 4K projector in prototype and early production form 3 years ago... the 665 is better.

Andreas21 12-12-2015 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn (Post 39680946)
Whether there are plastic elements in the lens or not is completely unimportant. Optical plastic can actually perform better than glass, In addition, optical plastic lenses are not necessarily less expensive than glass elements. You apply the proper contours and coatings to an optical plastic lens element and it can outperform glass in the same application. It all depends on the overall design of the lens. Computer optimization of lenses is getting so good that the software can decide when a plastic element will provide superior performance.

Bottom line, the presence or absence of plastic lens elements in a projection lens really tells you nothin about the quality of the lens. With 34 years of engineering experience in imaging systems, I can tell you that the lens and light engine in the 665ES produce images with superior clarity... they look REALLY good. You'll never know just how good they are, though, unless you have a projection screen that has a surface that does not create grain in UHD images that isn't present in the projected images. I'm using a Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 100 screen... reference quality in every possible way. And I haven't ever seen better-looking 2D images from HD or UHF sources and the short sample of HDR I've see looks incredible and makes me want to see more. I wish I was say9ng this about a projector that sells for 1/5 the price but the tech just isn't there yet.I used Sony's first 4K projector in prototype and early production form 3 years ago... the 665 is better.

This is correct in many ways, but I can tell you the VW1100 has a 100% glass lens and it outperforms the VW500/520 in all aspects when it comes to lens performance...;)

Doug Blackburn 12-12-2015 02:17 AM

Someone mentioned that this projector failed to reproduce some test patterns somewhere (in a foreign language review perhaps?) so I took a look at 1920x1080 test patterns with full-screen single pixel alternating black & white lines... horizontal and vertical. Neither one was reproduced right... you can see the single pixel lines, but instead of the test pattern appearing to be a 50% white screen (half the lined are 0%, the other half of the lines are 100%), there are a few pink/red tinted snakes and irregularly shaped areas of slight green or slight blue tint. None of the screen remains a uniform gray. However, full-screen grayscale patterns from 5% to 100% have excellent uniformity without any discolored areas. I also looked at the singe pixel black & white checkerboard pattern called Pixel Clock & Phase from Joe Kane's DVE HD Basics Blu-ray also in 1920x1080 and that pattern is not reproduced correctly either and moving most of the controls in the Picture menu causes the appearance of this pattern to change in strange ways.

The only displays I've ever seen reproduce those patterns correctly are DLP and plasma (have not looked at those patterns on OLED so can't say). I don't recall any LCD-based imager technology reproduce those kinds of patterns properly. But now that I have seen this happen on a UHD projector which is CLEARLY reproducing UHD levels of detail (UHD content is freaking incredibly detailed, so much more so than HD that it is impossible to not be impressed, that there is simply NO WAY those single pixel line and single pixel 1920x1080 test patterns not reproducing right has ANYTHING to do with the image quality performance of this projector. And now, I'll go as far as saying other LCD based displays that can't reproduce those patterns right are NOT resolution limited either. There is simply SOMETHING different about LCD imager technology that causes those patterns to fail in spite of the display really being able to reproduce the resolutions the manufacturers say they can reproduce. I think that it is simply wrong to say that a display that can't reproduce those patterns has a high-frequency problem that doesn't permit the display to reach the advertised resolution. I believe the 665 projector is reproducing the full UHD resolution... there is simply NO WAY native UHD content could look this good (so obviously better than Blu-ray it's silly to even compare them) if the projector couldn't reproduce every pixel in UHD video correctly. It may have something to do with how LCD imagers (mostly) work... the video display does all the imaging processing as it would for any other display, but just before the processed digtal data is sent to the LCD imagers (LCoS is an LCD imaging technology too), the digital data is converted to an analog signal. There are some LCDs display devices in development (not sure if they are in any products yet) that are trying to move to direct digital drive to eliminate the analog conversion, but I think that may only be a technicality as these new devices may simply do the digntal to analog conversion inside the the imager or support chip set instead of externally in circuiry before the imager(s). Bottom line, I don't believe any longer that the failure of this projector or other displays that use LCD technology to reproduce those single pixel line/checkerboard patterns means anything... it's just an anomaly that says nothing about the real-world performance of the display.

Think about it... if the projector's high frequency performance was really indicated by those patterns, you'd expect the problem to become visible maybe 2/3 or 3/4 of the way towards full UHD resolution... NOT at 1920x1080. The failure of 1920x1080 patterns to display correctly (if what is said about those types of test pattern is true) then this projector doesn't even have 1920x1080 resolution so it shouldn't look a lick better at UHD than it does with HD sources. But as I've said alreasy, it is VERY obvious that this projector is reproducing UHD resolution because the amount of detail present in UHD content... it far exceeds the detail present in 1080p images. I have a DLP projector here right now as well and it has nowhere near the amount of detail in HD images that the 665 has in UHD images. So the 665 has to have resolution much higher than 1920x1080 in spite of the failure to reproduice this specific type of test pattern.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. I've asked Sony for an explanation about why those patterns fail on their prokectors (HD and UHD). They know about the issue and this time I may get an actual answer to the "Why?" question... fingers crossed.

Doug Blackburn 12-12-2015 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andreas21 (Post 39681074)
This is correct in many ways, but I can tell you the VW1100 has a 100% glass lens and it outperforms the VW500/520 in all aspects when it comes to lens performance...;)

Nevertheless, the glass in the lens is not the reason the 1100 looks better than the other projectors... it's the overall design of the lens -- and the ENTIRE optical path including the light engine. Some of the best lenses in the world, even very expensive ones, have 1 or more plastic elements--it's all in the design, not the material the elements are made from.

darinp2 12-12-2015 11:05 AM

77 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn (Post 39681170)
But now that I have seen this happen on a UHD projector which is CLEARLY reproducing UHD levels of detail (UHD content is freaking incredibly detailed, so much more so than HD that it is impossible to not be impressed, that there is simply NO WAY those single pixel line and single pixel 1920x1080 test patterns not reproducing right has ANYTHING to do with the image quality performance of this projector.

I think we can agree that e-shift with a 1080p panel is not true 4K, yet in a direct comparison of a JVC RS600 and a Sony 665 there were many times where the JVC had clearer looking fine detail than the Sony, and this was with what looked like high quality 4K content and even pausing. They were close and generally people would have trouble telling which was which, with the visibility of certain fine detail not always going to the same projector. This was also on an ST100 screen.

Maybe we didn't find the right settings, but had the same problems with getting a screen with a big snake or river when feeding super high resolution 4K or 3840 patterns to the Sony.

That the Sony looks good and detailed doesn't tell us that it is really resolving 8 million pixels properly. I think there may be a limitation in the Sony's signal path.

I wonder what a test pattern that just had the single pixel fine detail in the center of the screen with the rest of the screen black (or white) would look like, since this pattern would have less overall bandwidth, but just as much resolution within that window.

--Darin

DavidHir 12-12-2015 11:34 AM

97 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by darinp2 (Post 39689938)
I think we can agree that e-shift with a 1080p panel is not true 4K, yet in a direct comparison of a JVC RS600 and a Sony 665 there were many times where the JVC had clearer looking fine detail than the Sony, and this was with what looked like high quality 4K content and even pausing. They were close and generally people would have trouble telling which was which, with the visibility of certain fine detail not always going to the same projector. This was also on an ST100 screen.

That's very impressive. Were you able to compare either projector to your RS500 yet? I assume the RS500 and RS600 would be the same in this regard.

darinp2 12-12-2015 12:13 PM

77 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidHir (Post 39690626)
That's very impressive. Were you able to compare either projector to your RS500 yet? I assume the RS500 and RS600 would be the same in this regard.

We just used the RS600 for that, but Kris should get an RS500 soon.

--Darin

Peak 12-12-2015 12:28 PM

I have seen the Sony reproduce blu-ray with a calm that was not present with the new JVCs. I look forward to seeing 4K native material.

I tend to believe what Doug describes above more than the other view described above that the new JVCs would be sharper with 1080 panels over a 4K one.

Why on earth, when UHD Blu-ray material arrives, would a non native panel reproduce the resolution better? In 2-3 years the discussion will be moot, and all displays will be 4K. Why fight the future?

Andreas21 12-12-2015 12:39 PM

What I saw of the VW520 a while ago it did not impress me that much with BD material, the iris pumping was very distracting. But I did not have time to do much testing, but I will as soon as my RS600 arrives as I will do a side by dise test of a brand new VW520 and a RS600. I highly doubt the VW520 will be better than the RS500 at much when fed 1080p BD, I will not be able to test with 4K other than demo material witch is mostly just show off material with slow camera pans and has nothing to do with the movies we are going to watch when 4K BD arrives.

And @Peak , have you seen the Sony and the JVC side by side?? It is the only way to truly see the difference. Turning off e-shift makes the JVC much calmer and with much less noise in the picture and I think most people seeing them side by side will prefer the JVC, but as I have not seen them side by side yet I am not 100% sure. We will be at least 5 enthusiasts/experts present at the test and I am actually very eager to known the result at the end.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.