Sony 45ES vs Sony 665ES - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 7Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 37 Old 08-12-2016, 01:04 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
Sony 45ES vs Sony 65ES

I went to a Magnolia store a few weeks ago and had the chance to compare a Sony 665ES to a JVC RS400.

They were both playing from a 1080p source using upscaling in the projectors to output to 4K and 4K e-shift.

I much preferred the Sony 665ES. The JVC had better blacks but the Sony had a better overall picture, more lifelike color and the JVC was sharply focused but looked smeary, almost image enhanced. There was much less detail in the shadows and the highlights than the Sony. It is odd because the JVC appeared to have really strong contrast but just less visible detail. Just like an overly enhanced image. The Salesmen claimed both projectors were calibrated and both projectors had all image processing turned off. I really didn't like the JVC image at all.

My question is; How does the Sony HW45ES compare to the 665ES? I know that the 665ES is 4K and I am opting to stay out of the 4K HDR game until prices and standards stabilize. I also know that the 665ES has a DI but does the Iris make that much difference. The 665 is above my budget and I am thinking of either the JVC RS400 or the Sony 45ES, unless something better comes out at CEDIA 2016. Another choice might be the Sony 65ES but again is the DI really worth the $2000 difference.

Do those that have the 665ES or the 65ES like the function of the DI and does it make the higher price tag worth it over the 45ES?

I would like to hear some opinions. Thanks.

Last edited by GregCh; 08-12-2016 at 11:48 PM.
GregCh is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 37 Old 08-12-2016, 02:23 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,927
Mentioned: 168 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5422 Post(s)
Liked: 5785
Magnolia has no idea how to calibrate their projectors, my local store has all the settings completely messed up. You didn't see a good demo of what the RS400 is capable of - which is quite remarkable for it's price point.

I have calibrated several HW65's and definitely wouldn't spend the extra $ for the HW65 vs. HW45.

What will the room look like that you are setting up? (light controlled? white room or dark walls / surroundings?)
DavidHir and nesone1966 like this.
zombie10k is online now  
post #3 of 37 Old 08-12-2016, 06:38 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
It will be predominately light controlled. Only one large window which I intend to use black out shades on.

However, I do like to have some light in the room when watching TV. I also don't want to be sitting in the dark while watching sports. So I expect I will have the window shade up some of the time and/or some lights on.

I plan on using an SI Slate 1.2 120" screen with the throw distance at around 15 feet. Seating will be at 10 - 11 feet back.

I have also seen one youtube video of the JVC RS400. It also looked to be smeary and lacked detail in the blacks and highlights. But again it is hard to tell anything from a youtube video. It just worried me after seeing the demo at Magnolia. But I agree that the setup could have been off. I also think the projector could have had some video enhancement setting turned way up.The contrast on the JVC looked great, Blacks were very black and highlights were very bright. But when I say it looked smeary, I mean that there seemed to be very little detail in the highlights or blacks. Also the colors seemed to be artificial compared to the Sony.

The Sony had blacks that I would describe as very very dark gray and bright whites but there was much more detail in the very dark or very light scenes compared to the JVC. I also thought the color on the Sony was more natural. To me the Sony was much more "cinema like".

However, I haven't taken the JVC off the table as an option. I agree that Magnolia is not the best place to judge a projector. But It was the only option I had.
GregCh is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 37 Old 08-12-2016, 06:45 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: 2594
I'm not going to say you might not favor the 665ES over the RS400, because even with them actually setup and calibrated properly you might prefer the Sony still. With that said, from what you describe it sounds as if the JVC was not setup properly at all. Even at the huge difference in price the RS400 can definitely give the 665ES a run for its money. Not going to say it's definitely true but it almost sounds like they want the $3999 projector to look like crap to sell a $14999 projector.
Andreas21 and DavidHir like this.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #5 of 37 Old 08-12-2016, 06:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
It's possible that they had the projectors setup to push the $15000 Sony. They didn't have a 45ES or a 65ES setup which is really the comparison I wanted to see.

I just wondered how much of a difference the DI makes for the 65? Is it really worth the $2000 difference? I have never owned a projector with a DI so I wasn't sure how it really came into play or if it made that much of an impact on the PQ.

I live out in the sticks, so there isn't much opportunity to see projectors in action. The Magnolia store is closest and it is 300 miles away.
GregCh is offline  
post #6 of 37 Old 08-12-2016, 07:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,758
Mentioned: 255 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12718 Post(s)
Liked: 10341
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Every time I see the title of this thread, I keep taking a double take. It just does not make sense to me, 45 vs 665.
oneeyeblind likes this.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #7 of 37 Old 08-12-2016, 11:45 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
Really it should be 45ES vs 65ES.

The only reason it says 665 is because that is the only projector I have seen operating in person and it was on 1080p content not 4k.

The 665ES is more than I want to spend and I want to stay away from 4k HDR until they get all the standards sorted out and the prices drop. But I figure that the 665 operating in 1080p mode probably doesn't yield too much PQ difference from the 65ES projector. Mainly, because they have similar specs and both have a DI. Whereas the 45ES does not have the DI.
GregCh is offline  
post #8 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 04:02 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,758
Mentioned: 255 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12718 Post(s)
Liked: 10341
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Really it should be 45ES vs 65ES.

The only reason it says 665 is because that is the only projector I have seen operating in person and it was on 1080p content not 4k.

The 665ES is more than I want to spend and I want to stay away from 4k HDR until they get all the standards sorted out and the prices drop. But I figure that the 665 operating in 1080p mode probably doesn't yield too much PQ difference from the 65ES projector. Mainly, because they have similar specs and both have a DI. Whereas the 45ES does not have the DI.
I thought that might have been the case, but then you talk about playing 4K. Who ever showed you these projectors did not know what they were talking about. Neither the 45 nor the 65 can play a 4K source. The RS400 can. This also pretty much confirms to me that the RS400 was not set up properly. On a properly set up RS400 and HW45/65, I doubt a single person viewing the two would pick the 45/65 as the sharper image. The RS400 just has a better lens. This is because the RS400 uses the same lens as the top of the line JVC. So either the RS400 was not set up properly or the RS400 was defective. Now, since we have sold several hundred JVC over the last year and not had one single issue with sharpness, I am inclined to believe the issue was setup related.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #9 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 12:18 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
No I was aware that neither the 45 nor the 65 were 4K projectors.

If you read my comment, I am not in the market for a 4K UHD HDR projector at this time mainly because of the price, lack of content, and lack of standards in the industry for how HDR projectors are calibrated. Just watch the latest Home Theater Geeks podcast and you can see that the entire HDR standard is a mess right now.

I was shown a comparison between a Sony 665ES and a JVC RS400. Both of which can take 4K content but we were watching a 1080p Blu-ray disk. I think upscaling was turned on for the Sony and e-shift was turned on for the JVC. I really wanted to see a comparison between the 65ES and the 45Es to see what difference the $2000 bought you. But they didn't have those models setup.

I never said the JVC wasn't sharp, it was completely in focus and very sharp. The JVC had what I would call very stark contrast. It had very black blacks, and very bright whites, but lacked range in the black to whites. The Sony had far more detail in the dark scenes and far more details in the bright scenes even though the absolute blacks didn't look as black or the absolute white as white. If that makes sense. I have also seen this attribute of the JVC in reviews and on Youtube. So it is kind of scaring me away from the JVC. To me it just looks smooth and lacks the grain of a normal cinema projection. The Sony was much better.

Here is a link to a recent review of the Epson 5040ub. http://www.projectorreviews.com/epso...ure-quality-2/

On page 6 of the review there is a series of screen shots showing the a night train scene from one of the Bond films. The 4th photo in is the Sony VPL-HW65ES, The 5th photo in is the JVC RS400. These were photos taken from calibrated projectors. These photos show exactly what I am referring to.

The Sony photo has deep blacks and white whites but not as absolute black and white as the JVC. However the Sony photo has a lot more detail in the dark areas and the light areas than the JVC photo.

If this truly represents the JVC RS400 then I think I want to stay away from that projector. The last photo is the Epson 5040ub and it actually looks pretty good. Good contrast and yet not crushed like the JVC.

But I think I have decided that my choice is between the Sony 65ES and the Sony45ES. I want to also use my projector for gaming and I don't want to be bothered by a noisy fan when the sound volume is low. I like to watch movies late at night and I try to keep the sound low so as to not bother others sleeping. I don't really like the drone of fans in electronics.

Now I just have to find out if the $2000 for the DI in the 65ES is worth it for PQ over the 45ES. Like I said, I live in the sticks and there are no places close to view projectors setups. I always have to make decisions based on reviews, youtube videos, and forum comments. It's better than nothing but still difficult when making a decision.

Any comments posters could make are welcome.

Last edited by GregCh; 08-13-2016 at 12:33 PM.
GregCh is offline  
post #10 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 01:01 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,086
Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2457 Post(s)
Liked: 1327
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
On page 6 of the review there is a series of screen shots showing the a night train scene from one of the Bond films. The 4th photo in is the Sony VPL-HW65ES, The 5th photo in is the JVC RS400. These were photos taken from calibrated projectors. These photos show exactly what I am referring to.

The Sony photo has deep blacks and white whites but not as absolute black and white as the JVC. However the Sony photo has a lot more detail in the dark areas and the light areas than the JVC photo.

If this truly represents the JVC RS400 then I think I want to stay away from that projector. The last photo is the Epson 5040ub and it actually looks pretty good. Good contrast and yet not crushed like the JVC.
That has to do with the setup, has nothing to do with the projector really. Though I will give you one thing, JVC's have had issues with crushing detail in dark scenes, more so on their older models and more so with default gamma curves. It can be addressed with a calibration, but on newer models should be less of an issue even without a calibration.

You cannot compare projectors like that, it is like racing a car that has a governor / speed limiter on it. Forget online photos, those are worse than completely useless for comparing projectors. Also, it's very difficult to compare two modern projectors even in the correct room, unless you have a lot of experience doing it, and have done it several times before. The issue is unless you are comparing 2 projectors that have huge differences in PQ, then you are likely to make an incorrect conclusion based on content and setup.

There may still be some perceived loss of detail in dark scenes with an extremely high contrast projector even with a proper gamma curve, as in some scenes it has to do with a trick that sometimes occurs to our eyes when you are dealing with high contrast ranges in dark images. I know because at my job I sometimes have to remaster static images professionally, and I've had the problem before. The eye is drawn away from the mid-level details and only drawn towards the darkest and brightest spots on the image simultaneously, so if you had a slight gamma crush to scenes below a certain APL, your eye magnifies the crush with higher contrast devices sometimes, again depends on the scene. That said, it's not an ISSUE overall.

The only real reason 95% to 99.9% of us would prefer a Sony over a JVC is gaming lag, if you are not a big gamer, I am not sure there is a real reason to even consider a Sony... I sure as heck wouldn't even bother with Sony.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 08-13-2016 at 01:06 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #11 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 01:55 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
I agree that photos don't accurately reflect the image that is actually seen on the screen. The exposure of the photo can make a huge difference.

Having said that, Art does a pretty good job of making sure that his photos match what the screen is showing. His experience with creating reviews is impressive. I also think he tries to give an honest review.

And of course when I saw the projector output at the Magnolia store with the same issue then it scared me off of the JVC.

I don't know why you say that you shouldn't bother with a Sony unless you are a big gamer. I have had Sony TVs for years and they have always been a top performer. Sony's color is more realistic and more true than most competitors. In fact, out of the box performance on the new Sonys has been second to none.

I like to game with my PS4 on the big screen but I don't think I would classify myself as a big gamer. Maybe two hours a day at most. But I do like a good responsive system. Lag is annoying.

Back in the 80's I had a Kloss CRT projector. I loved that thing even though it doesn't even compare to todays projectors. Later in the 90s I had an Epson projector for awhile that was for computer display. It was one of the first XGA projectors. I hated that thing. Noisy, finicky, always a problem. Not unlike many of the Epson printers that I have owned.

I have owned Samsung 55" rear projection and Sony 60" rear projection TVs. Then a 50" Pioneer KURO plasma. Currently I am using a Panasonic 55" plasma.

Of all the TVs I have owned the Sonys lasted the longest and performed the best. But I am trying to keep an open mind and get the best bang for buck projector that satisfies my needs for under $4K. The Epson 5040 may be a candidate but I am worried about the game lag and the projector noise. Both issues with the older Epson. However if the PQ is much better for the money then it might be worth the compromise.
GregCh is offline  
post #12 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 02:18 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,086
Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2457 Post(s)
Liked: 1327
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
I don't know why you say that you shouldn't bother with a Sony unless you are a big gamer. I have had Sony TVs for years and they have always been a top performer. Sony's color is more realistic and more true than most competitors. In fact, out of the box performance on the new Sonys has been second to none.
The projector division and TV division of Sony have nothing to do with each other. JVC's have way higher contrast and the color is just as good on the newer JVC's. The Sony's are not as sharp, but do show a bit less noise on movies, though third-party processing with the JVC can probably produce near the same result.

JVC is just ahead of Sony and way ahead on performance per dollar. That said, Sony is the second best thing, so if you love Sony as a company so much, go for it I guess... The contrast is lacking, it's a night and day difference on dark scenes, that's why you'll hear the same thing from all of us in here, we recommend the JVC due to contrast and price.

The Epsons produce a much more "rigid" looking image due to the pixel fill of LCD vs. LCOS being smoother and more film-like. I wouldn't consider the Epson at your budget, the JVC RS-400 or RS-500 is your best bet, or the Sony I guess if you care about the gaming lag, you're going to give up MEGA contrast if you go with the Sony...

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #13 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 02:19 PM
Advanced Member
 
BakeApples's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sweden
Posts: 775
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 493 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
The only real reason 95% to 99.9% of us would prefer a Sony over a JVC is gaming lag, if you are not a big gamer, I am not sure there is a real reason to even consider a Sony... I sure as heck wouldn't even bother with Sony.
That`s your opinion, but it hardly reflects what the majority of users think and especially those who own a Sony themself. I can think of many reasons to chose a Sony instead of a JVC and i am not even a gamer. The only real advantage i see in the RS400 vs the VW665 is the better blacks. Everything else, i like better on the Sony. In my opinion it gives a much more natural looking and calm image which i value more than the higher native cr from the JVC.

But to each his own.
joerod likes this.
BakeApples is online now  
post #14 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 02:23 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,086
Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2457 Post(s)
Liked: 1327
Quote:
Originally Posted by BakeApples View Post
That`s your opinion, but it hardly reflects what the majority of users think and especially those who own a Sony themself. I can think of many reasons to chose a Sony instead of a JVC and i am not even a gamer. The only real advantage i see in the RS400 vs the VW665 is the better blacks. Everything else, i like better on the Sony. In my opinion it gives a much more natural looking and calm image which i value more than the higher native cr from the JVC.

But to each his own.
I am talking "all things considered", including price. I hear what you are saying, but that more natural and calmer image is partly because of a slight loss in sharpness, it's the lens. You can make the JVC do a similar thing with processing. Also, devices with higher contrast are going to produce more edgy experiences, because the variation in contrast is greater and that also causes some of the effect. So Sony has 2 reasons out of the gate to seem "CALMER" being less sharpness and less contrast, but that's not a good thing overall. Then from my understanding Sony has a bit heavier processing to the image, so that's 3 reasons.

I didn't say everyone likes JVC better, I just said the majority due to PRICE for the HIGH CONTRAST you get.

Most people that went with Sony did so because of gaming lag, not making it up, just look at the hundreds of "which projector" threads, and that's usually why. Also Mike G. will generally push people towards the Sony's if they need lower lag, otherwise his first recommendation will probably be a JVC, of course depends what the end-user wants but I am speaking in generalities.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 08-13-2016 at 02:30 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #15 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 02:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
BakeApples's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sweden
Posts: 775
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 493 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
I am talking "all things considered", including price. I hear what you are saying, but that more natural and calmer image is partly because of a slight loss in sharpness, it's the lens. You can make the JVC do a similar thing with processing.

I didn't say everyone likes JVC better, I just said the majority due to PRICE for the HIGH CONTRAST you get.

Most people that went with Sony did so because of gaming lag, not making it up, just look at the hundreds of "which projector" threads, and that's usually why. Also Mike G. will generally push people towards the Sony's if they need lower lag, otherwise his first recommendation will probably be a JVC, of course depends what the end-user wants but I am speaking in generalities.
Really?
I still have not seen a JVC that gives the same natural and tranquil image when i`ve done side by side comparisons. And as for loss in sharpness, even if the Sony lose some sharpness due to the cheaper lens, i still think it`s sharp enough even on the 1080p models. When i had the VW500, i even got rid of my Darbee because i didn`t think it was necessary when using the RC. Not everyone will like what the RC does but everyone has the option to turn it off if they want. Me, i like RC and think it does a excellent job. With my current VW1100, sharpness is the last thing i miss.

To you it sounds almost like the Sony machines would shoot a blurred image which they definitely do not.
BakeApples is online now  
post #16 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 02:57 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,086
Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2457 Post(s)
Liked: 1327
I agree they shoot a clear image, but I like sharpness

Well based on those metrics, I guess even my Viewsonic Pro8200 produces a "cleaner" image than my JVC RS-45 because the Viewsonic does better on SD Content, no it's because the Viewsonic is not resolving all the details properly...

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #17 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 03:01 PM
Advanced Member
 
BakeApples's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sweden
Posts: 775
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 493 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Now I just have to find out if the $2000 for the DI in the 65ES is worth it for PQ over the 45ES. Like I said, I live in the sticks and there are no places close to view projectors setups. I always have to make decisions based on reviews, youtube videos, and forum comments. It's better than nothing but still difficult when making a decision.

Any comments posters could make are welcome.
It`s hard to say if it`s worth the money for you but i can say that for me, the DI is something i wouldn`t want to be without. However, i did read about some light pumping artefacts on the HW65 in this review from HDTVtest so you might want to take this into consideration before making your decision.
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/vplhw...1603284263.htm
BakeApples is online now  
post #18 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 03:02 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
BakeApples,

The VW1100 has a dynamic iris. Do you think that it adds much to the overall PQ? When is it most effective?

The reason I ask is because I am trying to decide between the HW45ES and HW65ES. They sound like identical units except the 65ES has a DI and costs $2000.00 more.
GregCh is offline  
post #19 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 04:12 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,927
Mentioned: 168 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5422 Post(s)
Liked: 5785
I answered your question in post # 2. The HW65 iris is not worth the large amount of extra money vs. the HW45.

I've calibrated a number of copies of each projector and would not spend the difference between the 2.
zombie10k is online now  
post #20 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 04:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dave in Green's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 8,450
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3845 Post(s)
Liked: 3041
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
I answered your question in post # 2. The HW65 iris is not worth the large amount of extra money vs. the HW45.

I've calibrated a number of copies of each projector and would not spend the difference between the 2.
Can you confirm from your experience that the iris represents the only difference in image performance between the HW45ES and HW65ES? In other words would the image from an HW45ES be identical to one from an HW65ES with its iris disabled?
Dave in Green is online now  
post #21 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 04:45 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,927
Mentioned: 168 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5422 Post(s)
Liked: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave in Green View Post
Can you confirm from your experience that the iris represents the only difference in image performance between the HW45ES and HW65ES? In other words would the image from an HW45ES be identical to one from an HW65ES with its iris disabled?
all of the Sony 1080P models are very close in overall appearance. HW45/50/55/65, etc. I was hoping to see a bit higher native on the HW65 but it's basically the same as the previous models.

if extra contrast was important enough to spend that much extra $$, it would make more sense to put it into the RS400 where it's going to be clear difference in a light treated room.
Dave in Green likes this.
zombie10k is online now  
post #22 of 37 Old 08-13-2016, 06:09 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
all of the Sony 1080P models are very close in overall appearance. HW45/50/55/65, etc. I was hoping to see a bit higher native on the HW65 but it's basically the same as the previous models.

if extra contrast was important enough to spend that much extra $$, it would make more sense to put it into the RS400 where it's going to be clear difference in a light treated room.
Thanks for the input. That is what I was wanting to know. It seems like the 45ES will then give by far the best bang for the buck.

I have been seriously considering the JVC RS400 as well. Do you have any experience with gaming on the JVC? I know that it has more lag than the Sony somewhere in the range of 100 ms. more lag. But honestly, I am not sure how noticeable this really is for an average gamer.

Have you played a game like Assassins Creed or Uncharted 4 on the JVC and found it difficult due to lag?
GregCh is offline  
post #23 of 37 Old 08-14-2016, 03:01 PM
Advanced Member
 
TheSony4KRises's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 552
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 413 Post(s)
Liked: 210
@Zombie

Which film is this from out of interest:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/175332

many thanks.
TheSony4KRises is offline  
post #24 of 37 Old 08-15-2016, 08:01 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: 2388
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Thanks for the input. That is what I was wanting to know. It seems like the 45ES will then give by far the best bang for the buck.

I have been seriously considering the JVC RS400 as well. Do you have any experience with gaming on the JVC? I know that it has more lag than the Sony somewhere in the range of 100 ms. more lag. But honestly, I am not sure how noticeable this really is for an average gamer.

Have you played a game like Assassins Creed or Uncharted 4 on the JVC and found it difficult due to lag?
I can't game on my RS49, I kept my Planar for that. If gaming is important and two projectors aren't an option, the Sony or Epson (probably) is a better choice than the JVC.
stanger89 is offline  
post #25 of 37 Old 08-15-2016, 10:29 AM
 
AMartin56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,750
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2166 Post(s)
Liked: 1150
The 45ES is plenty accurate out of the box but if you end up needing to calibrate it (say your screen is not entirely neutral). The 65ES will have more options.

I haven't spent time with the 45ES but I understand that there is very little difference between it and the 40ES that I own.

On my 40ES I was able to get everything within about 5.0 dE on a screen with a little red push. Which isn't bad. But more troubling was the gamma. Even set to '2.4' in the menu it was always around 2.1 or worse. Personally proper gamma is very important to me... I really notice the lack of it.

I picked up a used Lumagen to play around with and everything is pretty much perfect now. So the 40/45ES is capable... They just cripple the controls on the cheaper one a bit.

But if you never intend to calibrate and you screen is relatively neutral you'll never notice the difference (On a Silver Ticket screen that is too blue I actually had good luck with telling the projector to target D55 instead of D65 so you CAN get creative). Go with the cheaper one until 4k comes down in price.

You might also ask this question in the $3000- forum. You aren't allowed to prefer Sony over JVC here.
AMartin56 is offline  
post #26 of 37 Old 08-15-2016, 11:12 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
According to the reviews that I have read. I think the 45ES has changed quite a bit with it's internal software and controls. It has a newer color management system and can be calibrated more easily than the 40ES.

It is also brighter, has newer processing options, and includes an RF 3D emitter rather than the old IR emitter.

The reviews that I saw had no problem calibrating the gamma to spot on 2.4.
GregCh is offline  
post #27 of 37 Old 08-15-2016, 11:15 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 12,927
Mentioned: 168 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5422 Post(s)
Liked: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post

I like to game with my PS4 on the big screen but I don't think I would classify myself as a big gamer. Maybe two hours a day at most. But I do like a good responsive system. Lag is annoying.

Back in the 80's I had a Kloss CRT projector. I loved that thing even though it doesn't even compare to todays projectors. Later in the 90s I had an Epson projector for awhile that was for computer display. It was one of the first XGA projectors. I hated that thing. Noisy, finicky, always a problem. Not unlike many of the Epson printers that I have owned.
was it this one?




it sounds like gaming is important, the HW45 would be the best and least expensive choice for you right now.
zombie10k is online now  
post #28 of 37 Old 08-15-2016, 11:27 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,938
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1960 Post(s)
Liked: 1260
Yes, that is the exact model.

Great projector. Too bad the content back then was 480i networktv.
GregCh is offline  
post #29 of 37 Old 08-17-2016, 12:26 AM
Member
 
Shortman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Plano, TX USA
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 15
About a year ago I had a similar dilemma - 40ES vs 55ES. I ended up getting a pretty good deal on the 55ES for about $2500 and am very happy with it. Having had it for a year, I have to admit that I probably would be just as happy with the 40ES. My biggest fear was getting a projector that wasn't "good enough" and then obsessing over it and regretting not getting a "better" unit. Ultimately, I think I bought a projector that is one step higher than what I would have been happy with. I don't regret getting the 55ES, but the difference for me was only $500, not $2000.

At the time, I convinced myself that I really needed a dynamic iris to get the best possible picture, but it turns out that there are other factors that I did not really consider that can also affect the picture quality: the screen type, the wall and ceiling colors, seating color, and whether the room is light controlled or not. In my case, none of these factors are ideal - I do have dark gray walls, but the ceiling is white, the screen is a gray Silver Ticket 120" (very good, but not great), beige recliners, and the room is not light controlled. While the projector does have good black levels and great contrast, all of these things affect the picture quality to one degree or another.

For a $2000 difference, I would recommend that you get the 45ES and put the difference towards a great sound system, or save it and put it towards a 4K projector in a few years when the prices are more affordable. Sony makes great projectors - I have no doubt you will be happy with either one.

Just my 2 cents worth.
Shortman is offline  
post #30 of 37 Old 08-17-2016, 12:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 485 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
was it this one?

I really want one of those now. The console is also your coffee table. I wonder how many spilled drinks ruined those units. But seriously, I want one.
TheronB is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

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