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/)
-   -   Official JVC DLA-RS400 (X550/X5000) Owner's Thread (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-digital-hi-end-projectors-3-000-usd-msrp/2279010-official-jvc-dla-rs400-x550-x5000-owners-thread.html)

john2910 01-06-2016 09:13 PM

Official JVC DLA-RS400 (X550/X5000) Owner's Thread
 
Leave here your impressions and questions about this projector.


There was no official owners thread so i started one.


I just sold my sony hw55es and bought the JVC rs400.


I realy like the 2d and 3d from this new JVC..

chriso1671 01-06-2016 09:51 PM

Difference
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by john2910 (Post 40399322)
Leave here your impressions and questions about this projector.


There was no official owners thread so i started one.


I just sold my sony hw55es and bought the JVC rs400.


I realy like the 2d and 3d from this new JVC..

Hey John, could you expand on the difference between the sony and the jvc I have 6030 and am thinking about getting the 400, regards Chris.

Rosano 01-07-2016 06:40 AM

I am also looking at this PJ.....its the x550 up here in the great white north. I currently have an HD750 and its time to upgrade. Does anyone know if the my chief mout will fit the new PJ or will I need a new adaptor bracket?

I am curious as to how much of a difference I will see in pic quality. I have a 96x54 screen.

Thanks

john2910 01-07-2016 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chriso1671 (Post 40400170)
Hey John, could you expand on the difference between the sony and the jvc I have 6030 and am thinking about getting the 400, regards Chris.


Hello there,


The difference is cleary visable in the bigger contrast and better deep blacks on the jvc


Also the 3d is a big improvement over the sony,far less ghosting and brighter..


The only downside is that there is more lag in gaming on the JVC.


For the rest a great upgrade from the sony hw55es.

slateef 01-07-2016 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by john2910 (Post 40413674)
Hello there,


The difference is cleary visable in the bigger contrast and better deep blacks on the jvc


Also the 3d is a big improvement over the sony,far less ghosting and brighter..


The only downside is that there is more lag in gaming on the JVC.


For the rest a great upgrade from the sony hw55es.

Will have my RS400 in hand by next Tuesday. Will post my impressions at that time.

Can't wait!

slateef 01-07-2016 11:15 AM

Oh, and if any current owner's want to post their calibrated settings, that would be awesome!

john2910 01-07-2016 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slateef (Post 40416434)
Will have my RS400 in hand by next Tuesday. Will post my impressions at that time.

Can't wait!


You will love it!!

Nexgen76 01-07-2016 12:23 PM

I want to upgrade from my RS49u but I will wait a little & see how you guys like the 400. I dont like giving up my deep black levels. If the black levels is on par with this PJ it will be a instant buy for me.

slateef 01-07-2016 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nexgen76 (Post 40419258)
I want to upgrade from my RS49u but I will wait a little & see how you guys like the 400. I dont like giving up my deep black levels. If the black levels is on par with this PJ it will be a instant buy for me.

Hey, Nexgen, I live in Waxhaw, just down the road from Charlotte. Once I get my RS400 up and running, you're welcome to come over to take a look.

Deja Vu 01-07-2016 03:26 PM

I've done a head-to-head comparison between the 500 (750) and the 400 (550) -- I own them both so I don't think I bring any bias to the table (well maybe a little since the 500 cost a fair chunk of change more).

In our opinion (with a forum guest attending) the 400 is pretty much the 500 without the 500's black floor, which seems to only be an advantage in fade scenes. In other words the 400 hangs in there with its big brother in all the various scenes we threw at it -- both 2D and 3D. I lived with the 400 for a few weeks before my 500 arrived so I knew the 500 was in for a rough ride. The 500 is an amazing projector so where does that leave the 400? An even more amazing projector since it doesn't have the 500's specs or price. Now, this was with 1080p material, which is what we'll mostly be watching for some time I believe. I don't think you guys are going to be disappointed.

My guest, who has a long history setting up, repairing and rebuilding CRT projectors, and currently has what used to be my Sony G90 (I gave it to him) said the following: "The JVC's are sharper, brighter and have all the contrast of the best CRTs" (my feelings exactly). He asked me how the image could get any better. No doubt it will but for now I'm enjoying what I'm seeing.

Nexgen76 01-07-2016 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slateef (Post 40424546)
Hey, Nexgen, I live in Waxhaw, just down the road from Charlotte. Once I get my RS400 up and running, you're welcome to come over to take a look.

Actually I'm closer than that I'm in Monroe off Griffith rd....Bro i really would appreciate that because I'm really on the fence right now.

stuartbrown21 01-07-2016 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deja Vu (Post 40426306)
I've done a head-to-head comparison between the 500 (750) and the 400 (550) -- I own them both so I don't think I bring any bias to the table (well maybe a little since the 500 cost a fair chunk of change more).

In our opinion (with a forum guest attending) the 400 is pretty much the 500 without the 500's black floor, which seems to only be an advantage in fade scenes. In other words the 400 hangs in there with its big brother in all the various scenes we threw at it -- both 2D and 3D. I lived with the 400 for a few weeks before my 500 arrived so I knew the 500 was in for a rough ride. The 500 is an amazing projector so where does that leave the 400? An even more amazing projector since it doesn't have the 500's specs or price. Now, this was with 1080p material, which is what we'll mostly be watching for some time I believe. I don't think you guys are going to be disappointed.

My guest, who has a long history setting up, repairing and rebuilding CRT projectors, and currently has what used to be my Sony G90 (I gave it to him) said the following: "The JVC's are sharper, brighter and have all the contrast of the best CRTs" (my feelings exactly). He asked me how the image could get any better. No doubt it will but for now I'm enjoying what I'm seeing.

This is incredibly encouraging to read. I've always been a guy that has had to settle for the basic model and make it last......hence why I've been watching a HD350 for the past 7 years! I was thinking this year may be the time that I finally upgrade, but was dismayed when the basic model took a step backwards in contrast spec whilst the higher models moved forward.

My fear was that taking a demo and watching for instance The Dark Knight, the 400 would look greyish on the darkest scenes compared to a really solid near black on the next model up. Also that general contrast in all scenes would suffer in comparison, but it seems like that is not the case.

I suppose the reports of the higher end models being 'brutal contrast monsters' apply to the 400 now aswell!

I guess even on a total fade to black, with its higher native contrast and dynamic iris, the 400 should destroy my current pj (brightness matched of course).

mpyw 01-08-2016 01:58 AM

Any 400 owner having a"Drop Corner" i.e. the right bottom corner of the projected image is slightly lower than the left corner
The top end of the image is perfectly ok

Jon S 01-08-2016 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpyw (Post 40439330)
Any 400 owner having a"Drop Corner" i.e. the right bottom corner of the projected image is slightly lower than the left corner
The top end of the image is perfectly ok

This is usually a result of the projector not being perfectly aligned with the screen. I think it has to be shifted left and tilted a bit up to fix.

billqs 01-08-2016 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon S (Post 40448298)
This is usually a result of the projector not being perfectly aligned with the screen. I think it has to be shifted left and tilted a bit up to fix.

Mike Garrett over in the RS500/600 Owners Thread gave really good advice on how to properly align the projector to the screen. It was helpful to me and I've mounted 10 projectors before.

billqs 01-08-2016 01:54 PM

I think the RS400 is the up till now "unsung hero" of this year's JVC lineup. It brings major new brightness, while keeping really good native contrast (40k to one) and better uniformity and stability by keeping the same light engine from the very successful line up last year. It is also terrific for 3D viewing and is HDMI2.0 and HDCP 2.2 so that you can view UHD Blu-ray.

The new light engine and panels from the RS500/600 are extremely promising, (but as with any new advance there are some issues that need to be worked through) and you do miss a few important features such as a P3 filter to reproduce DCI colorspace, but the RS400 is an unbelievable bargain at this price level.

Seegs108 01-08-2016 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deja Vu (Post 40426306)
I've done a head-to-head comparison between the 500 (750) and the 400 (550) -- I own them both so I don't think I bring any bias to the table (well maybe a little since the 500 cost a fair chunk of change more).

In our opinion (with a forum guest attending) the 400 is pretty much the 500 without the 500's black floor, which seems to only be an advantage in fade scenes. In other words the 400 hangs in there with its big brother in all the various scenes we threw at it -- both 2D and 3D. I lived with the 400 for a few weeks before my 500 arrived so I knew the 500 was in for a rough ride. The 500 is an amazing projector so where does that leave the 400? An even more amazing projector since it doesn't have the 500's specs or price. Now, this was with 1080p material, which is what we'll mostly be watching for some time I believe. I don't think you guys are going to be disappointed.

My guest, who has a long history setting up, repairing and rebuilding CRT projectors, and currently has what used to be my Sony G90 (I gave it to him) said the following: "The JVC's are sharper, brighter and have all the contrast of the best CRTs" (my feelings exactly). He asked me how the image could get any better. No doubt it will but for now I'm enjoying what I'm seeing.

Just curious who's argued against this? I mean this is always how it's been with the JVCs. The top models share the same parts as the bottom end ones except some modifications and extra parts are used in the top two models to increase contrast. Your conclusion is as expected. It's always been a question of how much more are you willing to spend to get that last bit of performance. If JVC really wanted to screw the bottom end unit out of something they could have not included the dynamic iris, then there would have been quite the difference in contrast between this model and the two on the top.

Craig Peer 01-08-2016 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpyw (Post 40439330)
Any 400 owner having a"Drop Corner" i.e. the right bottom corner of the projected image is slightly lower than the left corner
The top end of the image is perfectly ok


Your projector is pointed towards the right then. Rotate it slightly to the left, and use lens shift to shift the image back right. Keep making small adjustments until it's perfect. If the bottom is concave, it's tilted too far up. Convex - too far down.


I had both my RS600 and VW600 perfectly aligned to my two screens. Perfect rectangle. Perfect corners. Then I removed and re-installed my electric screens. Now I have an RS600 whose image " droops down " on the right corner, and a VW600 whose image " droops down " on the left corner. It's not the projector - it's the mounting position in relation to the screen.

Craig Peer 01-08-2016 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seegs108 (Post 40460210)
Just curious who's argued against this? I mean this is always how it's been with the JVCs. The top models share the same parts as the bottom end ones except some modifications and extra parts are used in the top two models to increase contrast. Your conclusion is as expected. It's always been a question of how much more are you willing to spend to get that last bit of performance. If JVC really wanted to screw the bottom end unit out of something they could have not included the dynamic iris, then there would have been quite the difference in contrast between this model and the two on the top.


More and more money for smaller and smaller performance gains as you move to better projectors is true of all projectors and brands, eh?

coderguy 01-08-2016 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seegs108 (Post 40460210)
...clip.... If JVC really wanted to screw the bottom end unit out of something they could have not included the dynamic iris, then there would have been quite the difference in contrast between this model and the two on the top.

Don't give them any ideas :)

billqs 01-08-2016 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seegs108 (Post 40460210)
If JVC really wanted to screw the bottom end unit out of something they could have not included the dynamic iris, then there would have been quite the difference in contrast between this model and the two on the top.

I think JVC's done a really good job of providing very great value all the way through their product lines year after year. This year, I think many folks initially looked beyond the RS400 (I know I did) because of the "carryover parts" and slightly lower reported contrast figure off the previous year's lower tier model. Now that all three models are "out in the wild" I think folks are reappraising the 400's worth and realizing just what a wonderful projector it is.

You're right that JVC could have hobbled the lower tier model and pulled the Dynamic Iris but that's more the modus operandi of an electronic company that rhymes with "pony".

Seegs108 01-08-2016 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billqs (Post 40468786)
I think JVC's done a really good job of providing very great value all the way through their product lines year after year. This year, I think many folks initially looked beyond the RS400 (I know I did) because of the "carryover parts" and slightly lower reported contrast figure off the previous year's lower tier model. Now that all three models are "out in the wild" I think folks are reappraising the 400's worth and realizing just what a wonderful projector it is.

You're right that JVC could have hobbled the lower tier model and pulled the Dynamic Iris but that's more the modus operandi of an electronic company that rhymes with "pony".

I would say this year the bottom end model sits just a hair below last year's bottom model in terms of contrast performance difference to the next model up. So JVC did "maim" this model just a tad more. Last year the delta in native contrast at full brightness was ~15% between the bottom end unit and mid-tier unit. This year it's doubled to a 30% contrast delta. This is main reason why many opted for the higher end units this year. But, whether or not you're willing to pay the extra ~$1500 street for the next model up, is something subjective. Though using the dynamic iris will lessen the visible difference in native contrast quite a bit. Though not everyone likes using the DI and if you're one of these people the next model up makes more sense. There's no denying that the RS400 packs the most bang for the buck still.

As far as bright corners go, I doubt this is something better or worse depending on the model. All three models use the exact same DiLA panels but I think it may stick out more on the higher end models due to the level of black being that much "blacker". I feel lucky as my unit has extremely light "bright" corners. A little better than my previous X500 and the "lens streaking" issue is noticeably better on my RS500 as well. Convergence is quite excellent too. Overall I think I got a pretty good unit. These issues really are lucky of the draw in terms of severity.

coderguy 01-08-2016 07:50 PM

You said the JVC iris was about as good as an iris gets though, no?

Seegs108 01-08-2016 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coderguy (Post 40470138)
You said the JVC iris was about as good as an iris gets though, no?

Are you asking me? If so, no, I never said that. It's definitely a good performing iris and feels like a multi-generation improved up implementation. But it still needs a little refinement in my opinion, but in general I doubt most would have complaints. The Sony 1100ES, except in dark scenes (it can close too much), performs better imo. I'd say the best DI I've ever seen was in the Sony HW30ES and HW50ES (same implementation if I'm not mistaken).

Deja Vu 01-08-2016 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seegs108 (Post 40460210)
Just curious who's argued against this? I mean this is always how it's been with the JVCs. The top models share the same parts as the bottom end ones except some modifications and extra parts are used in the top two models to increase contrast. Your conclusion is as expected. It's always been a question of how much more are you willing to spend to get that last bit of performance. If JVC really wanted to screw the bottom end unit out of something they could have not included the dynamic iris, then there would have been quite the difference in contrast between this model and the two on the top.

I've seen a number of posts on the 500/600 thread where people who have not seen the 400 commented that it was definitely inferior to the 500 -- IMO it is only inferior with respect to published specs but not with the image it throws, albeit it does not have the contrast of the 500; however, this does not distract from the image in all the content I've seen with the exception of fade to blacks (even with the DI on its fades are not quite as convincing as the 500's fades).

Tomorrow I spend some quality time with the LS10000.

jjcook 01-08-2016 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deja Vu (Post 40472058)
Tomorrow I spend some quality time with the LS10000.

I'm very interested to hear about your observations. Will you be doing a side by side comparison or at least demoing in the same room?

gitongisip 01-08-2016 10:55 PM

Is this right, the difference between the 2 models the powered zoom lens for the 400 and manual for the 550? Also the outer lens ring, 400 is gold and the 550 black?

http://www.projectorcentral.com/part...pare_list=9080

gitongisip 01-08-2016 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deja Vu (Post 40426306)
I've done a head-to-head comparison between the 500 (750) and the 400 (550) -- I own them both so I don't think I bring any bias to the table (well maybe a little since the 500 cost a fair chunk of change more).

In our opinion (with a forum guest attending) the 400 is pretty much the 500 without the 500's black floor, which seems to only be an advantage in fade scenes. In other words the 400 hangs in there with its big brother in all the various scenes we threw at it -- both 2D and 3D. I lived with the 400 for a few weeks before my 500 arrived so I knew the 500 was in for a rough ride. The 500 is an amazing projector so where does that leave the 400? An even more amazing projector since it doesn't have the 500's specs or price. Now, this was with 1080p material, which is what we'll mostly be watching for some time I believe. I don't think you guys are going to be disappointed.

My guest, who has a long history setting up, repairing and rebuilding CRT projectors, and currently has what used to be my Sony G90 (I gave it to him) said the following: "The JVC's are sharper, brighter and have all the contrast of the best CRTs" (my feelings exactly). He asked me how the image could get any better. No doubt it will but for now I'm enjoying what I'm seeing.

What about the 1000 lumens difference between the two, is it noticeable or a factor?

mpyw 01-09-2016 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Peer (Post 40463786)
Your projector is pointed towards the right then. Rotate it slightly to the left, and use lens shift to shift the image back right. Keep making small adjustments until it's perfect. If the bottom is concave, it's tilted too far up. Convex - too far down.


I had both my RS600 and VW600 perfectly aligned to my two screens. Perfect rectangle. Perfect corners. Then I removed and re-installed my electric screens. Now I have an RS600 whose image " droops down " on the right corner, and a VW600 whose image " droops down " on the left corner. It's not the projector - it's the mounting position in relation to the screen.

Thanks, done the adjustment, it's perfectly rectangle now :):kiss:

billqs 01-09-2016 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seegs108 (Post 40469586)
I would say this year the bottom end model sits just a hair below last year's bottom model in terms of contrast performance difference to the next model up. So JVC did "maim" this model just a tad more. Last year the delta in native contrast at full brightness was ~15% between the bottom end unit and mid-tier unit. This year it's doubled to a 30% contrast delta. This is main reason why many opted for the higher end units this year. But, whether or not you're willing to pay the extra ~$1500 street for the next model up, is something subjective. Though using the dynamic iris will lessen the visible difference in native contrast quite a bit. Though not everyone likes using the DI and if you're one of these people the next model up makes more sense. There's no denying that the RS400 packs the most bang for the buck still.

As far as bright corners go, I doubt this is something better or worse depending on the model. All three models use the exact same DiLA panels but I think it may stick out more on the higher end models due to the level of black being that much "blacker". I feel lucky as my unit has extremely light "bright" corners. A little better than my previous X500 and the "lens streaking" issue is noticeably better on my RS500 as well. Convergence is quite excellent too. Overall I think I got a pretty good unit. These issues really are lucky of the draw in terms of severity.

I'm glad you got a really good unit, Seegs! Gives me hope for my replacement. Except for the bright corners being more evident from seating level, my current unit has excellent convergence and unnoticeable streaking from where I sit. I wasn't getting noticeable Iris pulsing either. I think your reasoning makes sense, and it looks we all agree that RS400 has a large bang for the buck quotient.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.