The Great JVC vs. Sony Projector Shootout - Dec. 9 and 10 - No price talk, please! - Page 16 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 665Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 729 Old 12-23-2017, 09:31 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,743
Mentioned: 94 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2008 Post(s)
Liked: 2516
I'm going to say this again:

NO PRICE TALK.

It's right in the title of this thread.

John Schuermann
The Screening Room Home Theater Sales and Design
JS Music and Sound Film Scoring and Sound Design
John Schuermann is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 729 Old 12-23-2017, 10:44 AM
 
Dave Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Paradise on Earth
Posts: 6,554
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3159 Post(s)
Liked: 1723
Quote:
Originally Posted by baseball0618 View Post
.........Edit: The 5000es also has the same panels as the rest of their 4k line.

Great info. What's the source?
Dave Harper is offline  
post #453 of 729 Old 12-23-2017, 01:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,952
Mentioned: 214 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4146 Post(s)
Liked: 7334
When the 5000ES came out at cedia a few years ago they said the panels were the same as the 1100ES but the light engine was obviously changed.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #454 of 729 Old 12-23-2017, 02:08 PM
 
Dave Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Paradise on Earth
Posts: 6,554
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3159 Post(s)
Liked: 1723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
When the 5000ES came out at cedia a few years ago they said the panels were the same as the 1100ES but the light engine was obviously changed.

Thanks Kris! I just read the other AVS site and saw discussion there from Seegs and others and agree now after the explanations that they're the same. That was a real tricky marketing line that Sony used regarding the DCI technology being used in the 5000ES, but it was easy to see the contradiction that Seegs pointed out about it only having the .74" SXRD panels as compared to 1.55" for the DCI units. I knew he was the right guy to clear that up. I can see how it caused confusion though. Damn they're good!
Dave Harper is offline  
post #455 of 729 Old 12-23-2017, 05:57 PM
703
Senior Member
 
703's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked: 49
For those who missed it

X7900

"At £5,600 the DLA-X7900 is up against some very good competition both above and below it’s price point. It certainly gives the much more expensive Sony VPL-VW360ES (and VW260ES) a real run for its money and actually does a better job when it comes to dynamic range, black levels and image accuracy and gamma tracking. The Sony offers a subtle difference with HDR tone mapping that some may prefer over the JVC, but there is very little in it. Certainly you get all the high-end features of the VW360ES along with better image quality for far less and that has to be a good thing. Yes the Sony is a native 4K machine, but that isn’t the be all and end all here. "

https://www.avforums.com/review/jvc-...ionAnchor53458


360ES:

"One thing that stood out with SDR and HDR viewing material was the gamma manipulation and dimming which affected the image. The dynamic iris was switched off yet the image still dimmed oddly during scene switches and hand shakes and with viewing material we were seeing more in the shadows than we should. This points back to the gamma results in our testing where there is no accuracy in the selections made, so 2.0 measures closer to 2.4 but with a slight s-curve. Trying to adjust for this usually ended up in crushing detail and robbing the image of any dynamic range, but at the same time images also tended to look a little less glossy and punchy due to the gamma shifts with shadow detail. Scenes such as the cigar reveal in Oblivion (a scene I have viewed a few times with the grader and colourist on reference screens as it should be viewed) displays too much detail in the blacks where it should be solid black. A scene the JVC nails every time but where the Sony just reveals too much"

https://www.avforums.com/review/sony...r-review.14126

Last edited by 703; 12-23-2017 at 06:04 PM.
703 is offline  
post #456 of 729 Old 12-27-2017, 04:15 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,743
Mentioned: 94 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2008 Post(s)
Liked: 2516
Summary of Shootout Results

At the request of many, here is a summary of the shootout results. I have quoted several attendees with permission:

​As a preface to this review and summation of our recent “JVC vs. Sony” projector shoot-out, I’d like to share a little perspective gleaned from my own experience working with several of the major Hollywood studios while UHD / 4K standards were being finalized.

About four to five years ago, I was involved with a project that attempted to get the major studios on board with higher resolution, anamorphic Blu-rays. Shawn Kelly of Panamorph had developed a technology where 33% more resolution could be “hidden” behind the black letterbox bars on Scope / 2.35:1 movies, and then reintegrated into the image when decoded by properly equipped projectors or Blu-ray players. At one point we had three of the major Hollywood studios seriously interested in this technology. As a side note, the timing of this corresponded with the rise of 4K flat panels in the consumer electronics industry.

As a result of my involvement with this project, I attended two events that were eye-opening. The first was one of the first tests of high resolution 4K native material at one of the major studios. It was a comparison of 4K scanned IMAX footage shown side by side on a Panasonic 1080P plasma and a Samsung 4K display. From anything approaching a normal viewing distance, differences were very hard to make out. In this test, the Panasonic "won out" thanks to its higher contrast and better screen uniformity. We were actually in the room with the XXXXXXX studio techs who were going back and forth trying to see differences in detail. They were there, but you had to get close to the screen to see them.

My take-away – the differences between 1080P and 4K material is in the ability to make out fine details and textures, not in overall sharpness. As we got deeper into this project and I started playing with native 4K footage myself, it became obvious to me that we needed picture content with ultra-fine textures or patterns to reveal any improvement at all with 4K displays and content. Examples would be fine textures on fabrics, leaves on trees, fine patterns containing lots of geometric shapes, etc. Sometimes differences could be seen in fine details on objects far away from the camera (such as being able to read the license plate numbers of cars during some of the helicopter shots in the film SICARIO).

It was also clear to me that you needed to be close enough to the display in order to actually see these differences. Typically, this means having to be less than 3 times the picture height from the screen. To put that into perspective, if you own a 65” 4K flat panel, you would need to sit less than 8 ft. from the display to see the improvement that 4K resolution brings. And you had to go looking for it, when it was present in the types of objects described in my previous paragraph.

The second event was a meeting of the Hollywood Post-Production Alliance in Palm Springs, CA. We witnessed Dolby making their argument that "we don't need more pixels, we need BETTER pixels." This is where the move toward HDR and wider color gamut was really kicked into high gear. Their argument was – and is - that differences in brightness, color and contrast can be seen at ANY viewing distance, while differences in resolution can only be seen at relative viewing distances. To be clear, this is not to say that differences in resolution are UN-important, just perhaps less important. That was Dolby’s point of view, and it has grown to be my own as well.

I’ll give another perspective, this time from a filmmaker's point of view. Having high resolution 4 to 6K cameras like the RED, Arri and others means that filmmakers can be that much looser framing the image during production because there is so much excess resolution captured by the camera sensor. Filmmakers and editors know they can go in during post-production and zoom and crop the image to their heart's content without losing sharpness (I did this myself when I edited the proof of concept trailer for my upcoming feature film, which was shot on a RED).

It’s also true that most movies – even if they are filmed and edited at 4K resolution or greater – are finalized on what is known as a 2K Digital Intermediate (2K DI). This means that the actual final product that makes it to Digital Cinemas and even UltraHD Blu-ray is actually only 2K in resolution. The reason? Right now, it’s simply because even the most modest films these days have some kind of digital, CGI based FX, and it’s much cheaper to render these FX at 2K resolutions than 4K resolutions. Of course, as with almost everything technology related, the cost and difficulty of doing 4K renders becomes less and less, so more and more true 4K movies and content will be coming down the pipeline. (For anyone interested in finding out if their favorite UHD movie is actually sourced from a 4K master, here is an excellent resource: https://realorfake4k.com/).

All of that said, one of the great advantages of projection systems is the ability to deliver extremely large images. With a projection system, it’s not unusual for a viewer to be sitting within 3 picture heights of the screen, so differences in fine detail can be easier to make out (assuming native 4K material, of course). One of the major goals of our shootout was to determine how important ALL the different factors that go into the creation of UHD content (High Dynamic Range, Wider Color Gamut, and 4K resolution) are when viewing such content on the four excellent projectors we brought in for our shootout.

To begin, here is a list of the projectors we were able to test, with list prices and a basic feature breakdown:

Sony VPL-VW385ES: $7999 MSRP, native 4096 x 2160 4K panels, 1500 lumen light output, 13.5 Gbps HDMI inputs, dynamic iris, lens memory, 200,000:1 dynamic contrast, native contrast unpublished (from independent sources, likely around 15,000:1), approximately 80% reproduction of the DCI / P3 color gamut (unpublished, figure from independent sources)

JVC DLA-RS640: $7999 MSRP, 4K / 3840 x 2160 resolution capable via eShift5 “pixel shifting” processing of native 1920 x 1080 panels, 2000 lumens light output, 18 Gbps HDMI inputs, lens memory, 160,000:1 native contrast, 1.6 million to one dynamic contrast, 100% reproduction of the DCI / P3 color gamut (72% of REC2020)

Sony VPL-VW885ES: $24999 MSRP, native 4096 x 2160 4K panels, 2000 lumen light output, 18 Gbps HDMI inputs, lens memory, Infinity:1 dynamic contrast, approximately 100% reproduction of the DCI / P3 color gamut, 20,000 hour laser light engine

JVC DLA-RS4500
: $34,999 MSRP, native 4096 x 2160 4K panels, 3000 lumen light output, 18 Gbps HDMI inputs, lens memory, Infinity:1 dynamic contrast, greater than 100% reproduction of the DCI / P3 color gamut (80% of REC2020), 20,000 hour laser light engine

Before we get to the results, it's worth noting that the Sony VPL-VW385ES at $7999 is essentially the same projector as the Sony VPL-VW285ES (the famed "4K for $5K" projector stirring up so much buzz), only with the benefit of an automatic iris to bump up dynamic picture contrast as well as zoom memory for use with Scope / 2.35:1 screens. Native contrast and resolution on the VW285 and VW385 are the same, so we thought the VW385 was an ideal test candidate since it is essentially two projectors in one.

Similarly, the JVC DLA-RS640 ($7999) used during our test is practically the same unit as the JVC DLA-RS540 ($5999), only with hand-selected optics and DILA chips for the ultimate "tweaked" performance. However, the RS640 and RS540 have almost identical specs and feature sets. Much like the Sony VW385 served as a stand in for the VW285, the RS640 serves as a stand in for the RS540.

The other two projectors compared – the JVC DLA-RS4500 ($34,999) and Sony VPL-VW885ES ($24,999)– represent the state of the art of home theater 4K projection, or close to it. Both have native 4K panels, laser light engines, and can reproduce the entire P3 color gamut of the Digital Cinema Industry (DCI) spec). The JVC RS4500 is spec’d out at 3000 lumens, the Sony VW885ES at 2000 lumens. Most of the cost difference between the two has to do with the optics in the JVC RS4500 – a precision all glass lens system vs. the acrylic / glass hybrids in the others.

All projectors were compared one after the other on the 144” diagonal Scope / 2.35:1 Stewart StudioTek130 reference screen in our showroom.

We were able to compare the pictures sequentially and immediately by simply blocking light from one while examining the picture from the other.

To level the playing field, THX Worldwide Video Calibration Instructor Gregg Loewen spent the night before the shootout calibrating all the projectors to make sure they were operating at their very best. In our opinion, Gregg’s presence was critical – he “kept us honest” and made sure we had a level playing field. We shot out all four projectors side by side for two days straight with a variety of 4K / HDR content.

On the lower end (sub $10,000 MSRP), it became a battle of Sony's true 4K resolution vs. JVC's "eShift" 4K, plus high dynamic contrast (Sony) vs. high native AND dynamic contrast (JVC). On the high-end laser based projectors, the differences mainly came down to brightness and the quality of the optics. What follows are all my personal thoughts to date, mixed in with some comments from attendees. While I spent 5 hours each day running my mouth and juggling remotes, I was also standing at the front of the room, so most of the time was about 2 ft. from the screen

Here, broken down by model number, are my own personal thoughts:

JVC DLA-RS640: the deepest blacks and best native contrast of all projectors tested, very good picture detail, best overall HDR “pop” thanks to the high native contrast of the projector panels. Fine details in native 4K material were slightly obscured at close seating distances compared to the “native” 4K projectors (certainly at my vantage point of about 2 – 3 ft from the screen), some video noise in high detail areas noticeable right at the screen (literally inches away), slight red cast to the picture even after calibration (Gregg commented that color biases could be completely dialed out with a more sophisticated calibration; our calibrations were deliberately done with the calibration software built into each projector), slight black crush and loss of shadow detail in very dark areas of the HDR picture (though this could be mitigated by raising the “dark level” control in the JVC’s HDR Gamma setting menu), definite sense of “three dimensionality” and depth thanks to the high native contrast

Sony VPL-VW385ES: very good blacks, excellent picture detail (slightly better detail than the JVC DLA-RS640 in fine textures and patterns), transparent auto-iris operation, definition in items such as lettering on menus slightly crisper than the JVC RS640, during dark and moody scenes looked somewhat “flat” compared to the JVC DLA-RS640, very good HDR implementation when the HDR contrast setting was set to a maximum of 60, slight greenish cast to the picture (again, Gregg commented that color biases could be completely dialed out with a more sophisticated calibration, such as what is attainable from a Lumagen video processor), very good shadow detail, inability to get very fine focus at the screen resulting in some softness at the pixel level (could be a limitation on the lens)

Before we get to the laser projectors, I’d like to comment a bit on the two projectors discussed above to put things into context. Make no mistake – both projectors threw an excellent image. With bright, native 4K material (such as PLANET EARTH II), at typical seating distances most people were hard pressed to tell a difference between them at all. There were slight differences in color reproduction, contrast, and brightness, but when we “blinded” the comparison people were just as likely to think the JVC was the Sony and vice versa.

Here are some comments from others at the event. From attendee Todd Smith:

":…what amazed me the most is just how similar the 640/385 are when calibrated. I purposely sat at about 1.5 screen widths (when leaning forward from the back row) since I sit 1.45 screen widths at home so all my comments should be read with that in mind. In motion especially, it was really splitting hairs for me trying to pick ANY differences in the material we watched even doing an A/B. Both projectors looked fantastic and I could be very happy with either. Some random thoughts...

-Sony was a HAIR sharper, but I couldn’t see it in everything and really needed something like letters, numbers, or some type of texture (in Sully for example when he's running through Times Square) to see it at all. There were even times when I didn't know which projector was playing and I would say to myself "that must be the Sony" and it was the JVC and vice versa. Splitting hairs most of the time.

-Contrast there was a slight real-world difference in favor of the JVC, but nowhere near as big as I expected and I really couldnt see any difference most the time. This surprised me. - I couldn’t see any difference in native motion going back and forth."


From attendee Chris Lind:

"My wife and I were lucky enough to be the last ones there tonight, but our 8 hour round trip of driving meant we needed to get the most out of the event. Like (Todd) said early this was an awesome event and I had a load of fun, the only thing I regret is not being able to leave the demo with a JVC RS4500. I feel the like results of the 640 and 385 were the same as when I did a small shootout in my own room. The 385 is sharper when it comes to text and fine detail, but you have to pause the image and look for it. There were times that myself along with (Todd) and my wife who attended were forcing ourselves to be blind to which unit was playing and we would get it wrong at times on which was the sharper unit. One thing for me, that was easier to spot was the contrast advantage of the JVC, I felt like I could pick out the JVC when focusing on contrast and depth of the picture. At the end of the day, we are truly splitting hairs or pixels when it comes to picking a winner."


My own thoughts: in bright scenes, I would agree almost completely with the comments above. With fine details like clothing texture and street signs in the distance, etc, the Sony was sharper up at the screen. However, sometimes the "fine detail" differences disappeared at a typical seating distance. In dark scenes, though, the difference in image contrast was obvious to me in most shots, especially in the below scenes from SULLY. This is where the JVC excelled. As a result, the JVC image had more “pop” and a greater sense of three dimensionality where the Sonys looked a little flat. The JVC E-shift 5 seems to be an upgrade over previous iterations, and the new “HDR” preset presents a wider color gamut than the Sony while retaining brightness and contrast.

To illustrate some of the differences graphically, I have pulled a couple of screen shots from the SULLY Blu-ray to better help me illustrate the differences. NOTE: these are NOT 4K screengrabs, nor are they HDR. They are simply used for illustration purposes. Even if I could grab 4K UHD images, the time and effort would be wasted unless you were reading this on a HDR, 4K capable monitor. However, I can still use these standard Blu-ray screen grabs to make some points:



Looking at the above screen shot, you can see that this Times Square scene from SULLY really poses a challenge for HDR. We have the black of the night sky combined with the intense highlights of the neon and LED signage. With the JVC DLA-RS640, the black of night was rendered a bit darker than the Sony VW385, while at the same time the white highlights of the electronic billboards and American flag were brighter. This would be attributable to the high native contrast of the JVC combined with its higher lumen output. This is what I mean by HDR “pop.”

If you look just to the left of Tom Hanks, you can see a food truck with the name “Tapas Papas” emblazoned on it far in the background. This logo was easier to read on the Sony VW385ES (and 885ES, for that matter) from my vantage point right up at the screen:



Of course, since this is a standard 1080P Blu-ray screen grab, the lettering is a bit blurry and hard to make out. However, it was quite distinct on the two Sonys with the 4K Blu-ray as its source. Up at the screen, on the JVC the lettering was readable, but not as crisp (but still more legible than the Blu-ray screen shot you see here). Quick note – on the native 4K laser JVC RS4500 this was even crisper than the two Sonys, but more on that in a bit.

Here's another “torture test” screen grab from SULLY:



Note the “pools of light” on the side of the aircraft carrier, and the bright highlights of the actual lights themselves (on the UHD Blu-ray, these pools of light and highlights are even more pronounced). With this scene, the JVC once again showed brighter highlights while retaining the deep blacks of the letterbox bars and night sky. In comparison, the Sony looked somewhat “flat” and lacked a certain sense of dimensionality. However, this scene also revealed slightly crisper detail on the Sony, noticeable in the superstructure area of the aircraft carrier. The JVC also crushed the blacks a bit in the dockyard area on the lower left of the screenshot. Elevating the “dark level” control on the JVC helped bring back out the shadow detail, but it was at the expense of some three dimensionality and “pop.”

NOTE: as mentioned, we chose the Sony VW385ES for the shootout as disabling the automatic iris essentially turns it into a VW285ES, the $4999 Sony entry level projector. It was in scenes like what you see above that the difference became most apparent. For example, in the shot of the aircraft carrier, disabling the automatic iris resulted in a brighter overall picture with brighter highlights. However, at that point black levels suffered and appeared more like a dark grey. Turning on the iris distinctly improved the black level, but at the cost of some brightness. As the blacks got deeper, the white lights on the ship got a bit dimmer as well.

One other title we used to show the differences between these two $7999 projectors was another torture test: BILLY LYNN'S LONG HALFTIME WALK. This title is unique in that it outputs a full 60 frame per second image in a 4:4:4 HDR P3 color space. As the 13.2 Gbps HDMI inputs of the Sony VPL-VW385ES won’t handle the full bandwidth of the UHD signal coming off the disc, it will reduce the 10 bit color to 8 bit, which can result in visible “banding” in the image (banding is where fields of color don’t show smooth gradations between various shades, instead breaking up into what appears to be “bands” of color adjoining one another). Actually, we did not see any real evidence of banding on the Sony VW385ES, however, what was most noticeable to me was the limitations in the overall color gamut. As the JVC DLA-RS640 is capable of reproducing approximately 100% of the P3 color space (vs. approximately 80% on the Sony VW385), the colors appeared richer and more vivid on the JVC than the Sony (most noticeable in the reds and greens). This was obvious in scenes like what you see in the screengrab below (although, of course, the reds and greens you see below are limited by the capabilities of your computer monitor or mobile device screen, plus the fact that this screen grab is from the standard REC709 Blu-ray). Once again, though, the Sony revealed a bit more fine detail in the bright LED lights making up the backdrop, and in the texture of Billy Lynn’s uniform when you were up very close to the screen:



So, while the Sony has true 4K resolution at $5K and $8K price points, the JVC at almost the same price points has a wider color gamut and deeper contrast - plus will accept a 4:4:4 60P 4K HDR signal while retaining the full 10 bits of color information, which the Sony will not. This is due to the fact that the JVC models will all accept 18 Gbps inputs, while the Sony units are limited to 13.5 Gbps - until you get up to the Sony VPL-VW885 laser projector at $24,999 (which we will get to in a moment).

(NOTE: In fairness to the Sony, right now we are talking about exactly ONE movie that the Sony will not display in all its HDR glory. However, because there is only one film right now with this kind of bandwidth does not mean there will not be more video content like this in the future. I am also told that certain video games with HDR capabilities and 4K resolution have this problem with the Sony as well. I am not a gamer, so am going by online reports here. If this is important to you, I suggest doing some additional research.)

Before wrapping up on these two sub-$10K projectors, I’d like to post the thoughts of attendee Jerry Shinn, who had a very different view of the JVC vs. Sony comparison (thanks to Jerry for allowing me to share his comments):

"I was there today and sat in the prime seating position. I was mainly there to choose between the 285 and the 540 (NOTE from John – it was actually the JVC RS640). The 385 has dynamic iris off so PQ wise it was Identical. The picture on the Sony was the clear winner for me. The difference in sharpness and resolution between the Sony and JVC was very dramatic. The motion and brightness were also noticeably better on the Sony. The JVC did have better contrast but in practice it was much harder to detect which surprised me. The kicker was the 4K60hz banding. I didn’t see any Banding at all despite all the reports."


Taking in all the comments above, I honestly don't think you would go wrong with either of these models - it's more a matter of picking which picture performance parameters are more important to you. Much of what I describe above is splitting fine hairs in performance, and it’s always important to remember that without another projector side by side to compare to, the deficiencies of one or the other are not readily apparent.

(Short side-bar: I have found that for a small minority of people, HDR "pop" is hard on the eyes. I have had two people in as many months tell me they actually prefer a lower contrast image, as the bright highlights of HDR displays cause them some eyestrain. This was true of not only projectors for these individuals but for flat panels as well. I would like to stress that for the vast majority of people the opposite is true, however I am posting this here in the spirit of honestly reporting all the feedback shared with me.)

Moving on to the two laser projectors, you would expect the comparison to be closer, as both the Sony VPL-VW885ES and JVC DLA-RS4500 offer true 4K panels (at a resolution of 4096 x 2160), 18 Gbps inputs (meaning no limitation on titles like BILLY LYNN), and the ability to fully render the wider DCI / P3 color gamut. The major differences between the two – other than the $10,000 price differential – have to do with the quality of the optics (all glass on the JVC, vs an acrylic / glass hybrid on the Sony), light output (2000 lumens on the Sony vs. 3000 on the JVC), and a slight difference in color gamut (the JVC is capable of pushing *just* beyond P3 / DCI color space to get up to about 80% of the new REC2020 standard, though there is no currently no content out there to test this). One would expect the differences between the two projectors to be subtle, and for the most part, you’d be correct. However, at times, there were some clear differences.

From initial perceptions, both projectors look very similar in terms of their color reproduction and “purity” of the image. The laser light engine on both really does add punch and purity to the colors, and Billy Lynn in particular “popped” on both models. For most of the testing, we left the JVC at its middle laser setting, as that brought it in line with the brightness of the Sony. We also did this because the JVC is so noisy in high laser mode that it really needs to be put in a hush box or a projection room to compensate. In mid-laser mode, both the Sony and JVC have about the same amount of fan noise. Noticeable, but not distracting, IMO.

Once again, I will share some of the comments from the attendees. From Todd Smith:

"…as far as the 4500/885 goes, the 4500 was the clear winner. The 4500 was clearly the best image seen all day and if I had the $$$$ this is the projector that would be in my theater. The 885 looked good, but clearly softer in comparison to the 4500 which I can only assume is due to the superior lens in the 4500."

Additionally:

"… we did watch a few minutes of the Bronco game on the 4500 yesterday and it looked unreal! In fact, I was raving to my GF and her two boys about it when I got home yesterday as they're huge Bronco/football fans."


From Chris Lind:

"When it came to the 4500 vs the 885ES it really opened my eyes as to why the 4500 is so expensive and how much difference 10k worth of optics can bring to the table (that’s just a guess of mine for the 10k) but the RS4500 was easily the sharper unit even from the back row. This was evident at all times, I was truly amazed at how well the JVC did, I had never seen one in person and all the way home I couldn't forget how amazing it looked… One spot we focused on was in Guardians of the Galaxy 2, near the start where a queen or something is sitting on a throne and she is almost dead center so focus at that spot was on point for both projectors and the RS4500 was clearly superior at bringing out all the detail, the 885ES looked a bit blurry. We even asked John to re-focus the Sony and it didn't help. These are my thoughts and I am just sharing my experience. It's how I saw them through my own eyes. I honestly don't care which one throws a better image, I just wanted to be in a room with some of the best projectors available and I am happy I made the trip. It was worth it and I now want a 4500."

Speaking for myself, I would generally agree with the above comments. One of the things I've always said about the 4500 is that it has a "purity" and integrity to its image that's unique. The obvious reason would be the quality of the optics - picture is just razor-sharp corner to corner and uniformity is outstanding. But all of that comes at a $10K premium over the Sony VW885ES. My only objection to the 4500 is how loud it is in high laser, but I run mine in mid-laser (plenty bright for my 144" 2.35:1 StudioTek130 screen). I also wish it had blacks on a level of the 640, however, even though the blacks are not quite as deep that "purity" makes up for it.

So, in comparison, IMO the VW885 just seems to lack the razor-sharp optics. In just about every other regard, it and the JVC RS4500 perform about the same, in terms of contrast and color reproduction. Obviously, the JVC can also get brighter, but is loud enough at that point that I'd want to put it in a hush box. At mid-laser where I run it, the JVC does not pose a noise problem, IMO.

There was also some brainstorming with Gregg Loewen of THX and Shawn Kelly of Panamorph that some of the Sony's slight "softness" issues could be attributed to the fact that some lens shift was being used, or that they were sitting on a shelf vs. ceiling mounted. However, both felt that the visible differences were more likely attributable to the difference in the JVC's optics (a big part of the cost difference). This conclusion - superior optics - seems to be borne out by others who have compared the two projectors.

I also think it’s important to keep in mind that the “sharpness” difference between the JVC RS4500 and Sony VW885ES is relative – we found the VW885ES to be sharper than the JVC RS640, plus it has the advantages of the laser light engine compared to the less expensive JVC. I personally did not find the difference in sharpness between the RS4500 and the VW885ES “night and day,” but I did think it was clearly visible in many shots.

If I had to pick a "winner," I would say that the RS4500 "won" both days, with the VW885ES a strong runner-up. However, sometimes making a statement like that leads some to believe that the RS4500 "trounced" the VW885ES, while nothing could be further from the truth. IMO, both did extremely well, the 4500 just did a bit better. And you also must keep in mind the $10,000 price difference.

At the end of the day, I honestly think both JVC and Sony make outstanding products, and never did any of them throw anything less than a great image. Yes, there were differences, and I have tried to find the words and images that would best illustrate those differences for those who weren’t able to attend the shootout. All in all, I found it fun and educational, and I hope everyone who attended felt the same way.

As a result of all this, we have elected to keep the JVC DLA-RS4500 as the main projector in our showroom, and keep the DLA-RS640 and VPL-VW385ES permanently on hand (at least, until new models come out ).

Lastly, I’d just like to thank everyone who took the time to spend the weekend with us and share their thoughts and opinions – especially a few who travelled great distances to experience this event! Thanks also to THX calibrator extraordinaire Gregg Loewen for taking the time to calibrate all the projectors used at our event and answer our guest's questions!
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	vlcsnap-2017-12-21-10h15m12s469.png
Views:	2308
Size:	2.36 MB
ID:	2336212   Click image for larger version

Name:	tapas papas.png
Views:	2200
Size:	111.6 KB
ID:	2336218   Click image for larger version

Name:	vlcsnap-2017-12-21-10h17m06s759.png
Views:	2307
Size:	1.83 MB
ID:	2336220   Click image for larger version

Name:	vlcsnap-2017-12-22-16h48m02s015.png
Views:	2339
Size:	2.64 MB
ID:	2336222  

John Schuermann
The Screening Room Home Theater Sales and Design
JS Music and Sound Film Scoring and Sound Design
John Schuermann is offline  
post #457 of 729 Old 12-27-2017, 08:06 PM
 
Dave Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Paradise on Earth
Posts: 6,554
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3159 Post(s)
Liked: 1723
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
At the request of many, here is a summary of the shootout results. I have quoted several attendees with permission:



​As a preface to this review and summation of our recent “JVC vs. Sony” projector shoot-out, I’d like to share a little perspective gleaned from my own experience working with several of the major Hollywood studios while UHD / 4K standards were being finalized.



About four to five years ago, I was involved with a project that attempted to get the major studios on board with higher resolution, anamorphic Blu-rays. Shawn Kelly of Panamorph had developed a technology where 33% more resolution could be “hidden” behind the black letterbox bars on Scope / 2.35:1 movies, and then reintegrated into the image when decoded by properly equipped projectors or Blu-ray players. At one point we had three of the major Hollywood studios seriously interested in this technology. As a side note, the timing of this corresponded with the rise of 4K flat panels in the consumer electronics industry.



As a result of my involvement with this project, I attended two events that were eye-opening. The first was one of the first tests of high resolution 4K native material at one of the major studios. It was a comparison of 4K scanned IMAX footage shown side by side on a Panasonic 1080P plasma and a Samsung 4K display. From anything approaching a normal viewing distance, differences were very hard to make out. In this test, the Panasonic "won out" thanks to its higher contrast and better screen uniformity. We were actually in the room with the XXXXXXX studio techs who were going back and forth trying to see differences in detail. They were there, but you had to get close to the screen to see them.



My take-away – the differences between 1080P and 4K material is in the ability to make out fine details and textures, not in overall sharpness. As we got deeper into this project and I started playing with native 4K footage myself, it became obvious to me that we needed picture content with ultra-fine textures or patterns to reveal any improvement at all with 4K displays and content. Examples would be fine textures on fabrics, leaves on trees, fine patterns containing lots of geometric shapes, etc. Sometimes differences could be seen in fine details on objects far away from the camera (such as being able to read the license plate numbers of cars during some of the helicopter shots in the film SICARIO).



It was also clear to me that you needed to be close enough to the display in order to actually see these differences. Typically, this means having to be less than 3 times the picture height from the screen. To put that into perspective, if you own a 65” 4K flat panel, you would need to sit less than 8 ft. from the display to see the improvement that 4K resolution brings. And you had to go looking for it, when it was present in the types of objects described in my previous paragraph.



The second event was a meeting of the Hollywood Post-Production Alliance in Palm Springs, CA. We witnessed Dolby making their argument that "we don't need more pixels, we need BETTER pixels." This is where the move toward HDR and wider color gamut was really kicked into high gear. Their argument was – and is - that differences in brightness, color and contrast can be seen at ANY viewing distance, while differences in resolution can only be seen at relative viewing distances. To be clear, this is not to say that differences in resolution are UN-important, just perhaps less important. That was Dolby’s point of view, and it has grown to be my own as well.



I’ll give another perspective, this time from a filmmaker's point of view. Having high resolution 4 to 6K cameras like the RED, Arri and others means that filmmakers can be that much looser framing the image during production because there is so much excess resolution captured by the camera sensor. Filmmakers and editors know they can go in during post-production and zoom and crop the image to their heart's content without losing sharpness (I did this myself when I edited the proof of concept trailer for my upcoming feature film, which was shot on a RED).



It’s also true that most movies – even if they are filmed and edited at 4K resolution or greater – are finalized on what is known as a 2K Digital Intermediate (2K DI). This means that the actual final product that makes it to Digital Cinemas and even UltraHD Blu-ray is actually only 2K in resolution. The reason? Right now, it’s simply because even the most modest films these days have some kind of digital, CGI based FX, and it’s much cheaper to render these FX at 2K resolutions than 4K resolutions. Of course, as with almost everything technology related, the cost and difficulty of doing 4K renders becomes less and less, so more and more true 4K movies and content will be coming down the pipeline. (For anyone interested in finding out if their favorite UHD movie is actually sourced from a 4K master, here is an excellent resource: https://realorfake4k.com/).



All of that said, one of the great advantages of projection systems is the ability to deliver extremely large images. With a projection system, it’s not unusual for a viewer to be sitting within 3 picture heights of the screen, so differences in fine detail can be easier to make out (assuming native 4K material, of course). One of the major goals of our shootout was to determine how important ALL the different factors that go into the creation of UHD content (High Dynamic Range, Wider Color Gamut, and 4K resolution) are when viewing such content on the four excellent projectors we brought in for our shootout.



To begin, here is a list of the projectors we were able to test, with list prices and a basic feature breakdown:



Sony VPL-VW385ES: $7999 MSRP, native 4096 x 2160 4K panels, 1500 lumen light output, 13.5 Gbps HDMI inputs, dynamic iris, lens memory, 200,000:1 dynamic contrast, native contrast unpublished (from independent sources, likely around 15,000:1), approximately 80% reproduction of the DCI / P3 color gamut (unpublished, figure from independent sources)



JVC DLA-RS640: $7999 MSRP, 4K / 3840 x 2160 resolution capable via eShift5 “pixel shifting” processing of native 1920 x 1080 panels, 2000 lumens light output, 18 Gbps HDMI inputs, lens memory, 160,000:1 native contrast, 1.6 million to one dynamic contrast, 100% reproduction of the DCI / P3 color gamut (72% of REC2020)



Sony VPL-VW885ES: $24999 MSRP, native 4096 x 2160 4K panels, 2000 lumen light output, 18 Gbps HDMI inputs, lens memory, Infinity:1 dynamic contrast, approximately 100% reproduction of the DCI / P3 color gamut, 20,000 hour laser light engine



JVC DLA-RS4500
: $34,999 MSRP, native 4096 x 2160 4K panels, 3000 lumen light output, 18 Gbps HDMI inputs, lens memory, Infinity:1 dynamic contrast, greater than 100% reproduction of the DCI / P3 color gamut (80% of REC2020), 20,000 hour laser light engine



Before we get to the results, it's worth noting that the Sony VPL-VW385ES at $7999 is essentially the same projector as the Sony VPL-VW285ES (the famed "4K for $5K" projector stirring up so much buzz), only with the benefit of an automatic iris to bump up dynamic picture contrast as well as zoom memory for use with Scope / 2.35:1 screens. Native contrast and resolution on the VW285 and VW385 are the same, so we thought the VW385 was an ideal test candidate since it is essentially two projectors in one.



Similarly, the JVC DLA-RS640 ($7999) used during our test is practically the same unit as the JVC DLA-RS540 ($5999), only with hand-selected optics and DILA chips for the ultimate "tweaked" performance. However, the RS640 and RS540 have almost identical specs and feature sets. Much like the Sony VW385 served as a stand in for the VW285, the RS640 serves as a stand in for the RS540.



The other two projectors compared – the JVC DLA-RS4500 ($34,999) and Sony VPL-VW885ES ($24,999)– represent the state of the art of home theater 4K projection, or close to it. Both have native 4K panels, laser light engines, and can reproduce the entire P3 color gamut of the Digital Cinema Industry (DCI) spec). The JVC RS4500 is spec’d out at 3000 lumens, the Sony VW885ES at 2000 lumens. Most of the cost difference between the two has to do with the optics in the JVC RS4500 – a precision all glass lens system vs. the acrylic / glass hybrids in the others.



All projectors were compared one after the other on the 144” diagonal Scope / 2.35:1 Stewart StudioTek130 reference screen in our showroom.



We were able to compare the pictures sequentially and immediately by simply blocking light from one while examining the picture from the other.



To level the playing field, THX Worldwide Video Calibration Instructor Gregg Loewen spent the night before the shootout calibrating all the projectors to make sure they were operating at their very best. In our opinion, Gregg’s presence was critical – he “kept us honest” and made sure we had a level playing field. We shot out all four projectors side by side for two days straight with a variety of 4K / HDR content.



On the lower end (sub $10,000 MSRP), it became a battle of Sony's true 4K resolution vs. JVC's "eShift" 4K, plus high dynamic contrast (Sony) vs. high native AND dynamic contrast (JVC). On the high-end laser based projectors, the differences mainly came down to brightness and the quality of the optics. What follows are all my personal thoughts to date, mixed in with some comments from attendees. While I spent 5 hours each day running my mouth and juggling remotes, I was also standing at the front of the room, so most of the time was about 2 ft. from the screen



Here, broken down by model number, are my own personal thoughts:



JVC DLA-RS640: the deepest blacks and best native contrast of all projectors tested, very good picture detail, best overall HDR “pop” thanks to the high native contrast of the projector panels. Fine details in native 4K material were slightly obscured at close seating distances compared to the “native” 4K projectors (certainly at my vantage point of about 2 – 3 ft from the screen), some video noise in high detail areas noticeable right at the screen (literally inches away), slight red cast to the picture even after calibration (Gregg commented that color biases could be completely dialed out with a more sophisticated calibration; our calibrations were deliberately done with the calibration software built into each projector), slight black crush and loss of shadow detail in very dark areas of the HDR picture (though this could be mitigated by raising the “dark level” control in the JVC’s HDR Gamma setting menu), definite sense of “three dimensionality” and depth thanks to the high native contrast



Sony VPL-VW385ES: very good blacks, excellent picture detail (slightly better detail than the JVC DLA-RS640 in fine textures and patterns), transparent auto-iris operation, definition in items such as lettering on menus slightly crisper than the JVC RS640, during dark and moody scenes looked somewhat “flat” compared to the JVC DLA-RS640, very good HDR implementation when the HDR contrast setting was set to a maximum of 60, slight greenish cast to the picture (again, Gregg commented that color biases could be completely dialed out with a more sophisticated calibration, such as what is attainable from a Lumagen video processor), very good shadow detail, inability to get very fine focus at the screen resulting in some softness at the pixel level (could be a limitation on the lens)



Before we get to the laser projectors, I’d like to comment a bit on the two projectors discussed above to put things into context. Make no mistake – both projectors threw an excellent image. With bright, native 4K material (such as PLANET EARTH II), at typical seating distances most people were hard pressed to tell a difference between them at all. There were slight differences in color reproduction, contrast, and brightness, but when we “blinded” the comparison people were just as likely to think the JVC was the Sony and vice versa.



Here are some comments from others at the event. From attendee Todd Smith:



":…what amazed me the most is just how similar the 640/385 are when calibrated. I purposely sat at about 1.5 screen widths (when leaning forward from the back row) since I sit 1.45 screen widths at home so all my comments should be read with that in mind. In motion especially, it was really splitting hairs for me trying to pick ANY differences in the material we watched even doing an A/B. Both projectors looked fantastic and I could be very happy with either. Some random thoughts...



-Sony was a HAIR sharper, but I couldn’t see it in everything and really needed something like letters, numbers, or some type of texture (in Sully for example when he's running through Times Square) to see it at all. There were even times when I didn't know which projector was playing and I would say to myself "that must be the Sony" and it was the JVC and vice versa. Splitting hairs most of the time.



-Contrast there was a slight real-world difference in favor of the JVC, but nowhere near as big as I expected and I really couldnt see any difference most the time. This surprised me. - I couldn’t see any difference in native motion going back and forth."




From attendee Chris Lind:



"My wife and I were lucky enough to be the last ones there tonight, but our 8 hour round trip of driving meant we needed to get the most out of the event. Like (Todd) said early this was an awesome event and I had a load of fun, the only thing I regret is not being able to leave the demo with a JVC RS4500. I feel the like results of the 640 and 385 were the same as when I did a small shootout in my own room. The 385 is sharper when it comes to text and fine detail, but you have to pause the image and look for it. There were times that myself along with (Todd) and my wife who attended were forcing ourselves to be blind to which unit was playing and we would get it wrong at times on which was the sharper unit. One thing for me, that was easier to spot was the contrast advantage of the JVC, I felt like I could pick out the JVC when focusing on contrast and depth of the picture. At the end of the day, we are truly splitting hairs or pixels when it comes to picking a winner."





My own thoughts: in bright scenes, I would agree almost completely with the comments above. With fine details like clothing texture and street signs in the distance, etc, the Sony was sharper up at the screen. However, sometimes the "fine detail" differences disappeared at a typical seating distance. In dark scenes, though, the difference in image contrast was obvious to me in most shots, especially in the below scenes from SULLY. This is where the JVC excelled. As a result, the JVC image had more “pop” and a greater sense of three dimensionality where the Sonys looked a little flat. The JVC E-shift 5 seems to be an upgrade over previous iterations, and the new “HDR” preset presents a wider color gamut than the Sony while retaining brightness and contrast.



To illustrate some of the differences graphically, I have pulled a couple of screen shots from the SULLY Blu-ray to better help me illustrate the differences. NOTE: these are NOT 4K screengrabs, nor are they HDR. They are simply used for illustration purposes. Even if I could grab 4K UHD images, the time and effort would be wasted unless you were reading this on a HDR, 4K capable monitor. However, I can still use these standard Blu-ray screen grabs to make some points:







Looking at the above screen shot, you can see that this Times Square scene from SULLY really poses a challenge for HDR. We have the black of the night sky combined with the intense highlights of the neon and LED signage. With the JVC DLA-RS640, the black of night was rendered a bit darker than the Sony VW385, while at the same time the white highlights of the electronic billboards and American flag were brighter. This would be attributable to the high native contrast of the JVC combined with its higher lumen output. This is what I mean by HDR “pop.”



If you look just to the left of Tom Hanks, you can see a food truck with the name “Tapas Papas” emblazoned on it far in the background. This logo was easier to read on the Sony VW385ES (and 885ES, for that matter) from my vantage point right up at the screen:







Of course, since this is a standard 1080P Blu-ray screen grab, the lettering is a bit blurry and hard to make out. However, it was quite distinct on the two Sonys with the 4K Blu-ray as its source. Up at the screen, on the JVC the lettering was readable, but not as crisp (but still more legible than the Blu-ray screen shot you see here). Quick note – on the native 4K laser JVC RS4500 this was even crisper than the two Sonys, but more on that in a bit.



Here's another “torture test” screen grab from SULLY:







Note the “pools of light” on the side of the aircraft carrier, and the bright highlights of the actual lights themselves (on the UHD Blu-ray, these pools of light and highlights are even more pronounced). With this scene, the JVC once again showed brighter highlights while retaining the deep blacks of the letterbox bars and night sky. In comparison, the Sony looked somewhat “flat” and lacked a certain sense of dimensionality. However, this scene also revealed slightly crisper detail on the Sony, noticeable in the superstructure area of the aircraft carrier. The JVC also crushed the blacks a bit in the dockyard area on the lower left of the screenshot. Elevating the “dark level” control on the JVC helped bring back out the shadow detail, but it was at the expense of some three dimensionality and “pop.”



NOTE: as mentioned, we chose the Sony VW385ES for the shootout as disabling the automatic iris essentially turns it into a VW285ES, the $4999 Sony entry level projector. It was in scenes like what you see above that the difference became most apparent. For example, in the shot of the aircraft carrier, disabling the automatic iris resulted in a brighter overall picture with brighter highlights. However, at that point black levels suffered and appeared more like a dark grey. Turning on the iris distinctly improved the black level, but at the cost of some brightness. As the blacks got deeper, the white lights on the ship got a bit dimmer as well.



One other title we used to show the differences between these two $7999 projectors was another torture test: BILLY LYNN'S LONG HALFTIME WALK. This title is unique in that it outputs a full 60 frame per second image in a 4:4:4 HDR P3 color space. As the 13.2 Gbps HDMI inputs of the Sony VPL-VW385ES won’t handle the full bandwidth of the UHD signal coming off the disc, it will reduce the 10 bit color to 8 bit, which can result in visible “banding” in the image (banding is where fields of color don’t show smooth gradations between various shades, instead breaking up into what appears to be “bands” of color adjoining one another). Actually, we did not see any real evidence of banding on the Sony VW385ES, however, what was most noticeable to me was the limitations in the overall color gamut. As the JVC DLA-RS640 is capable of reproducing approximately 100% of the P3 color space (vs. approximately 80% on the Sony VW385), the colors appeared richer and more vivid on the JVC than the Sony (most noticeable in the reds and greens). This was obvious in scenes like what you see in the screengrab below (although, of course, the reds and greens you see below are limited by the capabilities of your computer monitor or mobile device screen, plus the fact that this screen grab is from the standard REC709 Blu-ray). Once again, though, the Sony revealed a bit more fine detail in the bright LED lights making up the backdrop, and in the texture of Billy Lynn’s uniform when you were up very close to the screen:







So, while the Sony has true 4K resolution at $5K and $8K price points, the JVC at almost the same price points has a wider color gamut and deeper contrast - plus will accept a 4:4:4 60P 4K HDR signal while retaining the full 10 bits of color information, which the Sony will not. This is due to the fact that the JVC models will all accept 18 Gbps inputs, while the Sony units are limited to 13.5 Gbps - until you get up to the Sony VPL-VW885 laser projector at $24,999 (which we will get to in a moment).



(NOTE: In fairness to the Sony, right now we are talking about exactly ONE movie that the Sony will not display in all its HDR glory. However, because there is only one film right now with this kind of bandwidth does not mean there will not be more video content like this in the future. I am also told that certain video games with HDR capabilities and 4K resolution have this problem with the Sony as well. I am not a gamer, so am going by online reports here. If this is important to you, I suggest doing some additional research.)



Before wrapping up on these two sub-$10K projectors, I’d like to post the thoughts of attendee Jerry Shinn, who had a very different view of the JVC vs. Sony comparison (thanks to Jerry for allowing me to share his comments):



"I was there today and sat in the prime seating position. I was mainly there to choose between the 285 and the 540 (NOTE from John – it was actually the JVC RS640). The 385 has dynamic iris off so PQ wise it was Identical. The picture on the Sony was the clear winner for me. The difference in sharpness and resolution between the Sony and JVC was very dramatic. The motion and brightness were also noticeably better on the Sony. The JVC did have better contrast but in practice it was much harder to detect which surprised me. The kicker was the 4K60hz banding. I didn’t see any Banding at all despite all the reports."





Taking in all the comments above, I honestly don't think you would go wrong with either of these models - it's more a matter of picking which picture performance parameters are more important to you. Much of what I describe above is splitting fine hairs in performance, and it’s always important to remember that without another projector side by side to compare to, the deficiencies of one or the other are not readily apparent.



(Short side-bar: I have found that for a small minority of people, HDR "pop" is hard on the eyes. I have had two people in as many months tell me they actually prefer a lower contrast image, as the bright highlights of HDR displays cause them some eyestrain. This was true of not only projectors for these individuals but for flat panels as well. I would like to stress that for the vast majority of people the opposite is true, however I am posting this here in the spirit of honestly reporting all the feedback shared with me.)



Moving on to the two laser projectors, you would expect the comparison to be closer, as both the Sony VPL-VW885ES and JVC DLA-RS4500 offer true 4K panels (at a resolution of 4096 x 2160), 18 Gbps inputs (meaning no limitation on titles like BILLY LYNN), and the ability to fully render the wider DCI / P3 color gamut. The major differences between the two – other than the $10,000 price differential – have to do with the quality of the optics (all glass on the JVC, vs an acrylic / glass hybrid on the Sony), light output (2000 lumens on the Sony vs. 3000 on the JVC), and a slight difference in color gamut (the JVC is capable of pushing *just* beyond P3 / DCI color space to get up to about 80% of the new REC2020 standard, though there is no currently no content out there to test this). One would expect the differences between the two projectors to be subtle, and for the most part, you’d be correct. However, at times, there were some clear differences.



From initial perceptions, both projectors look very similar in terms of their color reproduction and “purity” of the image. The laser light engine on both really does add punch and purity to the colors, and Billy Lynn in particular “popped” on both models. For most of the testing, we left the JVC at its middle laser setting, as that brought it in line with the brightness of the Sony. We also did this because the JVC is so noisy in high laser mode that it really needs to be put in a hush box or a projection room to compensate. In mid-laser mode, both the Sony and JVC have about the same amount of fan noise. Noticeable, but not distracting, IMO.



Once again, I will share some of the comments from the attendees. From Todd Smith:



"…as far as the 4500/885 goes, the 4500 was the clear winner. The 4500 was clearly the best image seen all day and if I had the $$$$ this is the projector that would be in my theater. The 885 looked good, but clearly softer in comparison to the 4500 which I can only assume is due to the superior lens in the 4500."



Additionally:



"… we did watch a few minutes of the Bronco game on the 4500 yesterday and it looked unreal! In fact, I was raving to my GF and her two boys about it when I got home yesterday as they're huge Bronco/football fans."





From Chris Lind:



"When it came to the 4500 vs the 885ES it really opened my eyes as to why the 4500 is so expensive and how much difference 10k worth of optics can bring to the table (that’s just a guess of mine for the 10k) but the RS4500 was easily the sharper unit even from the back row. This was evident at all times, I was truly amazed at how well the JVC did, I had never seen one in person and all the way home I couldn't forget how amazing it looked… One spot we focused on was in Guardians of the Galaxy 2, near the start where a queen or something is sitting on a throne and she is almost dead center so focus at that spot was on point for both projectors and the RS4500 was clearly superior at bringing out all the detail, the 885ES looked a bit blurry. We even asked John to re-focus the Sony and it didn't help. These are my thoughts and I am just sharing my experience. It's how I saw them through my own eyes. I honestly don't care which one throws a better image, I just wanted to be in a room with some of the best projectors available and I am happy I made the trip. It was worth it and I now want a 4500."



Speaking for myself, I would generally agree with the above comments. One of the things I've always said about the 4500 is that it has a "purity" and integrity to its image that's unique. The obvious reason would be the quality of the optics - picture is just razor-sharp corner to corner and uniformity is outstanding. But all of that comes at a $10K premium over the Sony VW885ES. My only objection to the 4500 is how loud it is in high laser, but I run mine in mid-laser (plenty bright for my 144" 2.35:1 StudioTek130 screen). I also wish it had blacks on a level of the 640, however, even though the blacks are not quite as deep that "purity" makes up for it.



So, in comparison, IMO the VW885 just seems to lack the razor-sharp optics. In just about every other regard, it and the JVC RS4500 perform about the same, in terms of contrast and color reproduction. Obviously, the JVC can also get brighter, but is loud enough at that point that I'd want to put it in a hush box. At mid-laser where I run it, the JVC does not pose a noise problem, IMO.



There was also some brainstorming with Gregg Loewen of THX and Shawn Kelly of Panamorph that some of the Sony's slight "softness" issues could be attributed to the fact that some lens shift was being used, or that they were sitting on a shelf vs. ceiling mounted. However, both felt that the visible differences were more likely attributable to the difference in the JVC's optics (a big part of the cost difference). This conclusion - superior optics - seems to be borne out by others who have compared the two projectors.



I also think it’s important to keep in mind that the “sharpness” difference between the JVC RS4500 and Sony VW885ES is relative – we found the VW885ES to be sharper than the JVC RS640, plus it has the advantages of the laser light engine compared to the less expensive JVC. I personally did not find the difference in sharpness between the RS4500 and the VW885ES “night and day,” but I did think it was clearly visible in many shots.



If I had to pick a "winner," I would say that the RS4500 "won" both days, with the VW885ES a strong runner-up. However, sometimes making a statement like that leads some to believe that the RS4500 "trounced" the VW885ES, while nothing could be further from the truth. IMO, both did extremely well, the 4500 just did a bit better. And you also must keep in mind the $10,000 price difference.



At the end of the day, I honestly think both JVC and Sony make outstanding products, and never did any of them throw anything less than a great image. Yes, there were differences, and I have tried to find the words and images that would best illustrate those differences for those who weren’t able to attend the shootout. All in all, I found it fun and educational, and I hope everyone who attended felt the same way.



As a result of all this, we have elected to keep the JVC DLA-RS4500 as the main projector in our showroom, and keep the DLA-RS640 and VPL-VW385ES permanently on hand (at least, until new models come out ).



Lastly, I’d just like to thank everyone who took the time to spend the weekend with us and share their thoughts and opinions – especially a few who travelled great distances to experience this event! Thanks also to THX calibrator extraordinaire Gregg Loewen for taking the time to calibrate all the projectors used at our event and answer our guest's questions!

Awesome summary John, and I agree 100% regarding Gregg!!!

Only a couple quick corrections though. 13.2Gbps should be enough bandwidth to handle the Billy Lynn UHD Bluray at 4K60p 4:2:0 10 or 12 bit. I was able to play this UHD Bluray's resolution and frame rate on my VW675ES with no issues. What happens is that for some reason (the panel drivers on the Sony according to Seegs I think) the Sony converts/dithers 10 and 12 bit down to 8 bit when it receives a 60p signal.

Also, the Sonys should be able to do about 87% of DCI-P3 color gamut, not only 80% as stated.

Great job guys, now bring that dog and pony show over here to Hawaii!!!
Dave Harper is offline  
post #458 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 09:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
baseball0618's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Chadds Ford PA
Posts: 634
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 441 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Harper View Post
Awesome summary John, and I agree 100% regarding Gregg!!!

Only a couple quick corrections though. 13.2Gbps should be enough bandwidth to handle the Billy Lynn UHD Bluray at 4K60p 4:2:0 10 or 12 bit. I was able to play this UHD Bluray's resolution and frame rate on my VW675ES with no issues. What happens is that for some reason (the panel drivers on the Sony according to Seegs I think) the Sony converts/dithers 10 and 12 bit down to 8 bit when it receives a 60p signal.

Also, the Sonys should be able to do about 87% of DCI-P3 color gamut, not only 80% as stated.

Great job guys, now bring that dog and pony show over here to Hawaii!!!
He actually states 4:4:4 60p that they can't support and that is true. I had a 665es and I could watch Billy Lynn @ 4k60p 4:2:0 8bit but you can't at 4:4:4 chroma without full 18gbps hdmi inputs.

JVC RS4500 projector/Lumagen Radiance Pro /Oppo 203/Oppo 103D/Apple tv 4K
St 130 138" scope screen
Marantz 7704 /Integra DTA 70.1
7.2.2 Atmos (3) B&W CWM 7.3 fronts (4) B&W CCM 7.4 surrounds
(2) B&W CCM 682 Atmos (2) JL Audio E112 subs

Last edited by baseball0618; 12-28-2017 at 09:09 AM.
baseball0618 is offline  
post #459 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 09:10 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,952
Mentioned: 214 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4146 Post(s)
Liked: 7334
Quote:
Originally Posted by baseball0618 View Post
He actually states 4:4:4 60p that they can't support and that is true. I had a 665es and I could watch Billy Lynn @ 4k60p 4:2:0 8bit but you can't at 4:4:4 chroma without full 18gbps hdmi inputs.
There are no ports that support 4:4:4 chroma at 10 bit. For 60p your best option is 4:2:2, which is 12 bit.

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 #460 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 09:39 AM
Advanced Member
 
baseball0618's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Chadds Ford PA
Posts: 634
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 441 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
There are no ports that support 4:4:4 chroma at 10 bit. For 60p your best option is 4:2:2, which is 12 bit.
Thanks for the clarification. Still the lamp based Sony's 13.2gbps can't support that and the units w/ 18gbps can so what John was mentioning in theory is still correct?

JVC RS4500 projector/Lumagen Radiance Pro /Oppo 203/Oppo 103D/Apple tv 4K
St 130 138" scope screen
Marantz 7704 /Integra DTA 70.1
7.2.2 Atmos (3) B&W CWM 7.3 fronts (4) B&W CCM 7.4 surrounds
(2) B&W CCM 682 Atmos (2) JL Audio E112 subs
baseball0618 is offline  
post #461 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 10:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,987
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2027 Post(s)
Liked: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by baseball0618 View Post
Thanks for the clarification. Still the lamp based Sony's 13.2gbps can't support that and the units w/ 18gbps can so what John was mentioning in theory is still correct?
Actually Sony's 13.5 Gbps HDMI chipset can support 4:2:2 12 bit color for [email protected] . There is a chart floating around that shows the speed required to support the different video modes and 13.5 supports all necessary modes.

The issue is with the video processor not the HDMI ports. Sony has stated that the video processor has to convert 10 and 12 bit color to 8 bit for 4K60p. It just isn't currently fast enough to handle all their video processing for true 4K video at 60 fps. There is a slight possibility that this could be corrected with better streamlined processing algorithms in future firmwares or improved 10/12 bit color to 8 bit conversion. But right now it is causing certain color issues for that video content.


JVC can handle [email protected] HDR10 but then again it is only working with 1080p panel data. So the processing throughput isn't as much of an issue with 1080p native video data.

I don't know why Sony chose to under power the video processing on these new models. The X1 Extreme processor in the 885 has no such limitation and can even handle DolbyVision processing for flat panels. It would have been nice if Sony went with the X1 Extreme processor across the board for all the new projectors. My guess is that the current circuit board wouldn't take an X1 extreme without a lot of modification.
John Schuermann likes this.

Last edited by GregCh; 12-28-2017 at 10:15 AM.
GregCh is offline  
post #462 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 10:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PioManiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 6,449
Mentioned: 306 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3371 Post(s)
Liked: 8600
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Actually Sony's 13.5 Gbps HDMI chipset can support 4:2:2 12 bit color for [email protected] . There is a chart floating around that shows the speed required to support the different video modes and 13.5 supports all necessary modes.
17.8 Gbps is required for 4K/60 HDR 4:2:2 12 Bit



Source: http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/uhd-101-v2/


The Unfinished Basement Theater & Whisky Guitar Lounge | Bass EQ for Filtered Movies
JVC DLA X750 4K Projector | 120" Powered Drop Screen | 65" LG 65B6P OLED | Panasonic DMP UB900 | Oppo UDP 203 | HDFury Vertex
Yamaha RX-A3070 | 7.4.4.4 | Mission M3i x11 | Funk Audio 18.0 x2 | Velodyne DLS 5000R x2 | Crowson LvL3 MA x4 | miniDSP 2x4HD

Last edited by PioManiac; 12-28-2017 at 10:21 AM.
PioManiac is offline  
post #463 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 12:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,987
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2027 Post(s)
Liked: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by PioManiac View Post
17.8 Gbps is required for 4K/60 HDR 4:2:2 12 Bit



Source: http://www.acousticfrontiers.com/uhd-101-v2/

Ok, thanks. Yeah, I was thinking of 4:2:0 10 and 12 bit.
GregCh is offline  
post #464 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 03:32 PM
 
Dave Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Paradise on Earth
Posts: 6,554
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3159 Post(s)
Liked: 1723
Quote:
Originally Posted by baseball0618 View Post
He actually states 4:4:4 60p that they can't support and that is true. I had a 665es and I could watch Billy Lynn @ 4k60p 4:2:0 8bit but you can't at 4:4:4 chroma without full 18gbps hdmi inputs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by baseball0618 View Post
Thanks for the clarification. Still the lamp based Sony's 13.2gbps can't support that and the units w/ 18gbps can so what John was mentioning in theory is still correct?
This is what I replied to from John:

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann
.....As the 13.2 Gbps HDMI inputs of the Sony VPL-VW385ES won’t handle the full bandwidth of the UHD signal coming off the disc, it will reduce the 10 bit color to 8 bit, which can result in visible “banding” in the image (banding is where fields of color don’t show smooth gradations between various shades, instead breaking up into what appears to be “bands” of color adjoining one another). Actually, we did not see any real evidence of banding on the Sony VW385ES, however, what was most noticeable to me was the limitations in the overall color gamut. As the JVC DLA-RS640 is capable of reproducing approximately 100% of the P3 color space (vs. approximately 80% on the Sony VW385).....
He says the HDMI Inputs ..."won't handle the full bandwidth coming off the disc"... (which is 3840x2160 60p 4:2:0 10 bit UHD HDR WCG). He doesn't say... "4:4:4 60p" as you state above. As I stated they certainly do accept what is coming off the disc (4K60p 4:2:0 10 bit). Then I go on to say what was confirmed here later, that the limitation is in the processor (panel driver?), which dithers down the 10 (or 12) bit to 8 bit, resulting in the possible banding he mentions, which is not from the HDMI inputs. My VW675ES would accept and show the 10 bit signal in the info screen and the Panasonic UB900 would confirm it is sending 10 bit in its menu as well. It never said "8 bit" as being received and the EDID of the Sony never told the UB900 to only send 8 bit as you seem to be alluding to with the above quotes. I don't believe your 665 has the higher bandwidth 13.5Gbps HDMI inputs. It only has 10.2Gbps HDMI inputs, so that is why yours only received 8 bit. The 675 and the newer 285 and 385 have the higher bandwidth HDMI inputs.

I also went on to say that the Sony can reach about 87% of DCI-P3 Color Gamut, instead of the 80% he mentions.

That is the only part I was responding to in his great summary, and I believe it stands as correct.
SJHT likes this.

Last edited by Dave Harper; 12-28-2017 at 03:43 PM.
Dave Harper is offline  
post #465 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 05:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MOberhardt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,549
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1122 Post(s)
Liked: 803
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
About four to five years ago, I was involved with a project that attempted to get the major studios on board with higher resolution, anamorphic Blu-rays. Shawn Kelly of Panamorph had developed a technology where 33% more resolution could be “hidden” behind the black letterbox bars on Scope / 2.35:1 movies, and then reintegrated into the image when decoded by properly equipped projectors or Blu-ray players. At one point we had three of the major Hollywood studios seriously interested in this technology. As a side note, the timing of this corresponded with the rise of 4K flat panels in the consumer electronics industry.
That is really interesting. I remember reading an article by James Cameron on this in the late 90s or early 2000s, where he was proposing this back in the old NTSC/PAL days.
MOberhardt is offline  
post #466 of 729 Old 12-28-2017, 06:06 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 14,411
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2634 Post(s)
Liked: 2334
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOberhardt View Post
That is really interesting. I remember reading an article by James Cameron on this in the late 90s or early 2000s, where he was proposing this back in the old NTSC/PAL days.
I remember back in the late 90s when this was the advantage of certain standard def 4:3 displays that could do the anamorphic "squeeze" with anamorphic DVDs. I recall some of the Sony TVs had this ability.
Dave Harper likes this.
DavidHir is offline  
post #467 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 03:25 AM
Member
 
gago1101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Had not visited AVS for a while, but ran into this thread and had a quick superficial read. Great information and comparisons. It confirms my own experience. I have an old JVC RS57u in my theatre and can play and view 4K with no HDCP problems through my Oppo 203. I have auditioned the Sony projector and have the latest top Sony 4K TV and LG OLED in my other rooms. Overall, JVC picture is in another league. It all comes down to black levels and color rendering. Nothing out there can match JVC for now. And sorry for the out of the blue post!

HT JVC RS57U Projector with Elite Lunette 120" Curved Screen
ATMOS setup with B&W speakers, Yamaha CX-A5100 and Wyred4Sound ST-1000 & mAMP, Emotive XPA-100 & XPA-3
TV Room LG 65" 4K OLED LG65EF9500, in wall speaker set up
2-channel Oppo-105, Mcintosh Mc275 50th, W4S, Consonance, Klipsch RF7ii active, modded with Fostex tweeters and Radian midrange
gago1101 is offline  
post #468 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 09:47 AM
Toe
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 16,794
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2765 Post(s)
Liked: 3678
Quote:
Originally Posted by gago1101 View Post
Had not visited AVS for a while, but ran into this thread and had a quick superficial read. Great information and comparisons. It confirms my own experience. I have an old JVC RS57u in my theatre and can play and view 4K with no HDCP problems through my Oppo 203. I have auditioned the Sony projector and have the latest top Sony 4K TV and LG OLED in my other rooms. Overall, JVC picture is in another league. It all comes down to black levels and color rendering. Nothing out there can match JVC for now. And sorry for the out of the blue post!
Well, that is not the conclusion I came to when I attended this shootout. Neither projector is in a "different league" once they are both calibrated and set up the same. You'd be surprised just how similar the two are when doing an A/B. JVC had slightly better real world contrast and the Sony had slightly better sharpness/detail at times. Both throw great images and neither one is head and shoulders above the other, not even close. There were times when we would even guess wrong which was which. That's how close they were in general.

Considering my 790 issues and JVC issues in general in 2017, I'd jump ship to the Sony if it were not more expensive, lacked 4k FI and had the 60hz HDR banding.
Dave Harper and ccool96 like this.
Toe is offline  
post #469 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 12:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,658
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post
Well, that is not the conclusion I came to when I attended this shootout. Neither projector is in a "different league" once they are both calibrated and set up the same. You'd be surprised just how similar the two are when doing an A/B. JVC had slightly better real world contrast and the Sony had slightly better sharpness/detail at times. Both throw great images and neither one is head and shoulders above the other, not even close. There were times when we would even guess wrong which was which. That's how close they were in general.

Considering my 790 issues and JVC issues in general in 2017, I'd jump ship to the Sony if it were not more expensive, lacked 4k FI and had the 60hz HDR banding.
I echo what Toe has said, we both attended on Sunday and can confirm that many times throughout the shootout we got it wrong on which one was displaying at anytime. This was between the 385 and 640. I could pick out a bit better contrast but again we were pausing images and calling it out, same with the extra detail on the 385 vs the 640.

Before I headed up to the shootout I had pre-ordered the 885ES, I wanted laser, constant brightness, low input lag, 4k and 4k FI, an no 60hz HDR Banding. The Sony fit all of those, but there was a possibility of me taking home the 4500 at the end of the show, so I had cancelled the order for the 885ES with hopes that I would be driving back home with the JVC. Well, that didn't happen and it's my wife who sat me down to tell me that I was likely making a mistake not getting the 885ES. Yes, the JVC was sharper, but that I shouldn't let that spoil the awesome image the 885ES threw.

I went ahead and got the 885ES and right now, I couldn't be happier. It throws an excellent image, and it has excellent focus across the entire image. I am really impressed with it and really at the end of the day, all of these projectors throw an amazing image and we are all pretty lucky to be watching images on any of them.
Toe, SJHT, John Schuermann and 4 others like this.
kaotikr1 is online now  
post #470 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 04:25 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
John Schuermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,743
Mentioned: 94 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2008 Post(s)
Liked: 2516
I pretty much echo Toe and Kaotikr1, but with a bit of a greater preference for the black levels and colors on the JVC. This was all very content dependent, though, which is why I used the screen grabs. During bright scenes, the Sony and JVC were very very similar. During dark scenes, though, my eyes kept being drawn to the JVC 640.

It also depends on whether or not the material being viewed is mastered with P3 / DCI color space. One of the titles we didn't get to test out on Saturday due to the Epson sync issues is SPIDERMAN - HOMECOMING. During subsequent, post-shootout comparisons, the JVC units were able to convey a deeper, richer red in the Spiderman costume.

Lastly, just to illustrate that some of this is personal preference, my own brother ended up with a VW385ES instead of the RS640, as the extra crispness of the Sony was important to him.

This also illustrates that my brother and I don't agree on anything
Tom Bley, ccool96 and Todd G. like this.

John Schuermann
The Screening Room Home Theater Sales and Design
JS Music and Sound Film Scoring and Sound Design
John Schuermann is offline  
post #471 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 05:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
christoffeldg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,375
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1310 Post(s)
Liked: 527
What I do find regretful is that the difference seems smaller between the Sony and JVC in terms of sharpness because the source material not really being all that great.

My kids are big fans of Despicable me and I wanted to test out pre-rendered material in 4k and I was really dissapointed. I found there was hardly a difference between the UHD and the HD version of Despicable me 3.

I'd also like movies to progress a little in terms of motion, the sharpness is just awful at 24hz. I don't really get the need for 4k if every little movement that happens on screen blurs the entire screen into an unrecognizable mess.

But then when I take out a game like Witcher 3 on my PC, fully rendered in real-time native 4k at 60FPS. That's the only time when the difference feels truly massive between 1080p and 4k with superb clarity and detail.

Video: Sony VPL-VW760ES, Elite screen Aeon 135" Cinewhite + JVC X7900, Magicscreen Reference ALR 120"
Speakers: Bowers and Wilkins 802 D3 front, JBL 580, JBL 520c, JBL 550p
Amplifiers: Lyngdorf stereo TDAI 2170, Lyngdorf SDA 2400, Denon 4300H Home Theatre
Equipment: PC/PS4/Xbox One/Switch/Synology 2415+
christoffeldg is offline  
post #472 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 05:46 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,063
Mentioned: 501 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6937 Post(s)
Liked: 6654
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Schuermann View Post
I pretty much echo Toe and Kaotikr1, but with a bit of a greater preference for the black levels and colors on the JVC. This was all very content dependent, though, which is why I used the screen grabs. During bright scenes, the Sony and JVC were very very similar. During dark scenes, though, my eyes kept being drawn to the JVC 640.

It also depends on whether or not the material being viewed is mastered with P3 / DCI color space. One of the titles we didn't get to test out on Saturday due to the Epson sync issues is SPIDERMAN - HOMECOMING. During subsequent, post-shootout comparisons, the JVC units were able to convey a deeper, richer red in the Spiderman costume.

Lastly, just to illustrate that some of this is personal preference, my own brother ended up with a VW385ES instead of the RS640, as the extra crispness of the Sony was important to him.

This also illustrates that my brother and I don't agree on anything
Is it correct that during this shootout you used the DI on the Sony 385 but no DI on the JVC 640?

I know you did mention that earlier in this thread but I wanted to clarify, if that is the case, there is the reason why the Sony would have appeared very close in contrast during some scenes to some observers.

The Sony's are known to only be able to reach a 2-3x contrast multiplier ratio or so with regards to the DI whereas the JVC can reach significantly deeper than that, up to 10x if the iris was wide open. If the DI was left disabled on the JVC, I feel you perhaps crippled its absolute best and most powerful weapon.
DavidHir likes this.

JVC X9500 (RS620) | 120" 16:9 | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | DIY Modular Towers | DIY TPL-150 Surrounds | DIY Atmos | DIY 18" Subs
-
MadVR Settings | UHD Waveform Analysis | Arve Tool Instructions + V3 Javs Curves
Javs is online now  
post #473 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 05:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,063
Mentioned: 501 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6937 Post(s)
Liked: 6654
Quote:
Originally Posted by christoffeldg View Post
What I do find regretful is that the difference seems smaller between the Sony and JVC in terms of sharpness because the source material not really being all that great.

My kids are big fans of Despicable me and I wanted to test out pre-rendered material in 4k and I was really dissapointed. I found there was hardly a difference between the UHD and the HD version of Despicable me 3.

I'd also like movies to progress a little in terms of motion, the sharpness is just awful at 24hz. I don't really get the need for 4k if every little movement that happens on screen blurs the entire screen into an unrecognizable mess.

But then when I take out a game like Witcher 3 on my PC, fully rendered in real-time native 4k at 60FPS. That's the only time when the difference feels truly massive between 1080p and 4k with superb clarity and detail.
If you are using a current gen JVC in 1080p you are missing 50% of its possible resolution power anyway, so, I am not surprised.

Also Despicable Me 3 is actually a 2k master up-scaled to 4k for the UHD Disc.

JVC X9500 (RS620) | 120" 16:9 | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | DIY Modular Towers | DIY TPL-150 Surrounds | DIY Atmos | DIY 18" Subs
-
MadVR Settings | UHD Waveform Analysis | Arve Tool Instructions + V3 Javs Curves
Javs is online now  
post #474 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 05:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
jbn008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 842
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 281 Post(s)
Liked: 153
John-

In post #424 you noted the below

All "picture enhancements" were shut off or greatly reduced - i.e., DRC, eShift "enhance" settings, clear black, etc. On the second day, dynamic iris. With the VW385 sometimes the dynamic iris was on, sometimes it was off, as I've described.

As I also mentioned, on the second day, we did tweak a few things - cycled Sony's DRC on and off, turned the eShift enhance setting all the way down, etc. We did not use auto iris on the JVCs."

Was JVC auto iris ever used in the shootout or was it just turned off for the 2nd day? Just curious if the VW385 and RS640 were compared with each having their auto iris engaged at the same time? I know they both are recognized as having great implementations in this area.

I apologize if this was mentioned earlier.

Thanks
DavidHir and Javs like this.
jbn008 is offline  
post #475 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 05:50 PM
Advanced Member
 
jbn008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 842
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 281 Post(s)
Liked: 153
Sorry JAVS, I missed your posts while I was typing. hahaha
Javs likes this.
jbn008 is offline  
post #476 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 05:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,063
Mentioned: 501 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6937 Post(s)
Liked: 6654
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post
Well, that is not the conclusion I came to when I attended this shootout. Neither projector is in a "different league" once they are both calibrated and set up the same. You'd be surprised just how similar the two are when doing an A/B. JVC had slightly better real world contrast and the Sony had slightly better sharpness/detail at times. Both throw great images and neither one is head and shoulders above the other, not even close. There were times when we would even guess wrong which was which. That's how close they were in general.

Considering my 790 issues and JVC issues in general in 2017, I'd jump ship to the Sony if it were not more expensive, lacked 4k FI and had the 60hz HDR banding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaotikr1 View Post
I echo what Toe has said, we both attended on Sunday and can confirm that many times throughout the shootout we got it wrong on which one was displaying at anytime. This was between the 385 and 640. I could pick out a bit better contrast but again we were pausing images and calling it out, same with the extra detail on the 385 vs the 640.

Before I headed up to the shootout I had pre-ordered the 885ES, I wanted laser, constant brightness, low input lag, 4k and 4k FI, an no 60hz HDR Banding. The Sony fit all of those, but there was a possibility of me taking home the 4500 at the end of the show, so I had cancelled the order for the 885ES with hopes that I would be driving back home with the JVC. Well, that didn't happen and it's my wife who sat me down to tell me that I was likely making a mistake not getting the 885ES. Yes, the JVC was sharper, but that I shouldn't let that spoil the awesome image the 885ES threw.

I went ahead and got the 885ES and right now, I couldn't be happier. It throws an excellent image, and it has excellent focus across the entire image. I am really impressed with it and really at the end of the day, all of these projectors throw an amazing image and we are all pretty lucky to be watching images on any of them.
John seems to state on the previous page that the JVC's DI was switched off on the second day, which I am assuming is the Sunday that you both attended? Do you guys happen to know if the JVC's DI was on or off while you were both there?

If it was off, and the 385's was On, that is a huge handicap to the JVC.

JVC X9500 (RS620) | 120" 16:9 | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | DIY Modular Towers | DIY TPL-150 Surrounds | DIY Atmos | DIY 18" Subs
-
MadVR Settings | UHD Waveform Analysis | Arve Tool Instructions + V3 Javs Curves
Javs is online now  
post #477 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 05:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
christoffeldg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,375
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1310 Post(s)
Liked: 527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by christoffeldg View Post
What I do find regretful is that the difference seems smaller between the Sony and JVC in terms of sharpness because the source material not really being all that great.

My kids are big fans of Despicable me and I wanted to test out pre-rendered material in 4k and I was really dissapointed. I found there was hardly a difference between the UHD and the HD version of Despicable me 3.

I'd also like movies to progress a little in terms of motion, the sharpness is just awful at 24hz. I don't really get the need for 4k if every little movement that happens on screen blurs the entire screen into an unrecognizable mess.

But then when I take out a game like Witcher 3 on my PC, fully rendered in real-time native 4k at 60FPS. That's the only time when the difference feels truly massive between 1080p and 4k with superb clarity and detail.
If you are using a current gen JVC in 1080p you are missing 50% of its possible resolution power anyway, so, I am not surprised.

Also Despicable Me 3 is actually a 2k master up-scaled to 4k for the UHD Disc.
Are there any animated movies that were mastered in 4k?

Also, not using a JVC, only a Sony

Video: Sony VPL-VW760ES, Elite screen Aeon 135" Cinewhite + JVC X7900, Magicscreen Reference ALR 120"
Speakers: Bowers and Wilkins 802 D3 front, JBL 580, JBL 520c, JBL 550p
Amplifiers: Lyngdorf stereo TDAI 2170, Lyngdorf SDA 2400, Denon 4300H Home Theatre
Equipment: PC/PS4/Xbox One/Switch/Synology 2415+
christoffeldg is offline  
post #478 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 06:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,063
Mentioned: 501 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6937 Post(s)
Liked: 6654
Quote:
Originally Posted by christoffeldg View Post
Are there any animated movies that were mastered in 4k?

Also, not using a JVC, only a Sony
No animated films mastered in 4k to my knowledge.

JVC X9500 (RS620) | 120" 16:9 | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | DIY Modular Towers | DIY TPL-150 Surrounds | DIY Atmos | DIY 18" Subs
-
MadVR Settings | UHD Waveform Analysis | Arve Tool Instructions + V3 Javs Curves
Javs is online now  
post #479 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 06:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,658
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
John seems to state on the previous page that the JVC's DI was switched off on the second day, which I am assuming is the Sunday that you both attended? Do you guys happen to know if the JVC's DI was on or off while you were both there?

If it was off, and the 385's was On, that is a huge handicap to the JVC.
Unless I am mistaken, both of them were OFF when we were there.
kaotikr1 is online now  
post #480 of 729 Old 01-02-2018, 06:59 PM
Toe
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 16,794
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2765 Post(s)
Liked: 3678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
John seems to state on the previous page that the JVC's DI was switched off on the second day, which I am assuming is the Sunday that you both attended? Do you guys happen to know if the JVC's DI was on or off while you were both there?

If it was off, and the 385's was On, that is a huge handicap to the JVC.
Both were off unless I'm remembering wrong. I'm sure John will confirm one way or the other.

What did you end up doing with your second 9900? Refund?

Last edited by Toe; 01-02-2018 at 07:04 PM.
Toe 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