Here's the real
question Darin. Why the heck does it even matter if I or you or my expert is right or wrong when discussing whether 2 sub-frames pass through the lens at the same time
, because that doesn't even happen in anything
home theater that you or I or any manufacturer we know of, uses and is not
relevant to the initial question posed, which I responded to correctly and you refuted incorrectly???
Here below is all
(in the scenario that you posted) that matters in these here parts, and coincidentally, all
that I ever initially said and responded to, which you
then jumped in with your smug attitude and refuted (which was wrong, as I said!):
A: 2K or 2.7K native resolution projector ONLY (no eShift, i.e. - 1080p projector).
B: 2K or 2.7K native resolution projector WITH eShift. (Sub-Frames going through at separate points in time, i.e. - 1080p LCD/DiLA or DLP XPR eShift)
C: 4K native resolution projector ONLY (JVC or Sony 4K DiLA/SXRD, no eShift, which doesn't exist anyway that I know of).
- Scenarios A and/or B have the same lens requirements.
- Scenario C has a higher resolution/MTF lens requirement than scenarios A and B.
This is what you refuted with me initially when I said basically this very thing in my very first post in that thread, replying to
's posts, asking about improved lenses and if they're needed on the UHD60/65, quoted here for your review and pleasure:
Originally Posted by DavidHir
Is the lens improved over the HT2050 (which is actually quite good for the money)?
Originally Posted by sage11x
I would suspect so. The BenQ's get a lot of credit for the glass lens but they have a reputation of suffering some (mild) chromatic aberration. I've yet to see one that is objectionable but it's there. My guess is the lens on the Optoma models would need to be pretty damn good to successfully display a 4k image.
When you consider the features vs the price It looks as though most of the budget went towards the light path.
Originally Posted by Dave Harper
But consider this, and I don't think I've really researched it yet, but it popped into my head as I read this, so I'm bringing it up.......
If this is an eShift projector, which it is, then at any given point in time there's only half the image shining through the lens, unlike true native 4K like the Sonys, which shoot all 8.3 million out of it at the same time.
I'm sure it's more than half really, due to the speed of the switching, but that's the idea I'm thinking anyway. Maybe 2/3rds?
knows lenses pretty well since he is really into pro type cameras, MTF, etc. Maybe he can comment or knows?
Originally Posted by darinp
This one gets a lot of people.
In reality it doesn't matter how many pixels go through the lens at one time. The lens requirements are built around the final composite image, not the image at an instant in time that a human cannot detect.
I tried to explain this in a thread here.
BTW: You are in good company. The vast majority around here thought that the JVC lenses only needed to be good enough for 1080p since that is all that goes through them at one time, but I am confident I am right that it is the full composite image that determines the lens requirements. Hopefully the examples I gave there help explain why that is.
As you can see, you were wrong in your initial contention, so therefore......why can't you be a "stand up guy"
and admit you were wrong when you first posted that incorrect info?
It was only AFTER this point, when I and Ruined were trying, doing and proving you
wrong (which we did, because you were contending that eShift required a better lens because the "composite image" was going through the lens, which it isn't, the sub-frames go through at different times!), did you start throwing all of that in the weeds, off subject and irrelevant info about Es and 3s and going through the lens at the same time
(which does not
and is not
happening, so it is therefore moot
I also have since said that I certainly may have been confused at what you were getting at and that I could be wrong about whether they would interfere if
they go through at the same time, but I also said I didn't particularly care because that is not
what is happening anyway, nor will it ever I suspect from any manufacturers!
So please, this horse has been beaten dead a hundred times over. If all you want to hear is that I was wrong about whether two sub-frames at 1920x1080 or 2.7K XPR going through the lens at the same time would interfere, then fine I was wrong, but I don't particularly care because that isn't what is happening anyway
I was asking my expert the proper questions, thank you very much, and we are in the process of compiling the scenario using his software. If you had any patience and cared what others were saying, doing and thought, then maybe I and others would have responded sooner to your utterly ridiculous rants here and on the other threads.
So please, keep my name out of your posts from now on and stop this personal vendetta against me just because we proved you wrong on the initial question and answer which I and Ruined first gave you correct answers to, which you incorrectly refuted!