NEW JVC RS3000/NX9 RS2000/N7 RS1000/N5 Native 4K Projectors Anticipation Thread - Page 117 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 13021Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #3481 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 05:48 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 10,542
Mentioned: 128 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5731 Post(s)
Liked: 4843
Quote:
Originally Posted by farsider3000 View Post
Man I want that RS3000. I am just hesitant due to:
1.) potential new projector bugs
2.) unknown about how HDMI 2.1 will affect my resale value

Ugh... I may just wait and see how the reviews are and order one in the spring after this thread goes gaga over the performance.... not sure I can keep my cash in the bank that long and fight off the urge.
Do NOT resist the urge!!

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2018-09-09 at 8.45.17 PM.png
Views:	215
Size:	228.8 KB
ID:	2453396  
OzHDHT, Craig Peer and ARROW-AV like this.

Last edited by audioguy; 09-09-2018 at 08:02 PM.
audioguy is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #3482 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 06:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,868
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6586 Post(s)
Liked: 4738
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapalloAV View Post
So if one is using madvr with the new projectors should the video card be set to 4096x2160 rather than 3840x2160 which I have set for my X9900?
If this is the case how is 4:3 material look?
16:9 takes on a more cinema look of 185.1 I supose
And if we are using an IscoIII is the ratio different to the normal 2.35?
No. You set the resolution to 3840x2160 and center the image on your 16:9 screen. The projector internally masks off the difference. This is also how my sony works. For practical purposes, you should ignore the fact that the unit is capable of 17:9 resolutions. I've considered getting a 17:9 screen just for games. But that's a big cost for small change.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is offline  
post #3483 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 06:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,868
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6586 Post(s)
Liked: 4738
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapalloAV View Post
Theoretically 4096 should be slightly better shouldnt it since it uses the whole panel?
It would be slightly worse because it would have to scale the image. 1920x1080 perfectly scales to 3840x2160 but not to 4096x2160.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #3484 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 06:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,868
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6586 Post(s)
Liked: 4738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwa View Post
I just sent my RS4910 in to have its dynamic iris fixed (depending on cost) and the RS540 dropping to $3999 MSRP is music to my ears. I was planning to eventually upgrade to the N5 but didn't really want to give up contrast performance of my RS4910. Since I'm only lighting up a 110" screen, the improved contrast and dual irises of the RS540 will mean 3D performance will be vastly improved and I won't lose the awesome black floor I currently have. Plus, I get HDR and WCG out of the box vs. the kludged solution I'm currently running. Finally, at my relatively small screen size, I suspect the difference between faux-K and 4K (of the N5) will be pretty hard to notice...not to mention the RS540 will be at least $2k cheaper!

Bottom line - I suspect that, in my room, the RS540 will outperform the N5, and for $2K less!
What kind of repair cost for an out of warranty iris repair? This is the only real moving part in the projector and i can see it eventually dying in every unit.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is offline  
post #3485 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 06:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
Bachiano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Orlando, Florida
Posts: 677
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by farsider3000 View Post
Man I want that RS3000. I am just hesitant due to:
1.) potential new projector bugs
2.) unknown about how HDMI 2.1 will affect my resale value

Ugh... I may just wait and see how the reviews are and order one in the spring after this thread goes gaga over the performance.... not sure I can keep my cash in the bank that long and fight off the urge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
HDMI 2.1 is so close. Buying in 2018 is a bit risky if you want to buy for the long term. IMHO.
I'm not happy about that. But I will have to wait also. 😢
Bachiano is offline  
post #3486 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 06:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,355
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1285 Post(s)
Liked: 1352
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
What kind of repair cost for an out of warranty iris repair? This is the only real moving part in the projector and i can see it eventually dying in every unit.
I’m not sure yet...Mendtronix just got my unit on Friday and they haven’t yet delivered the bad news. What’s more, mine wasn’t completely broken, it just stopped working correctly the longer the unit was on, so it’s not exactly trivial to troubleshoot. I guess if the repair cost is too high I’ll be upgrading sooner than anticipated!
Schwa is offline  
post #3487 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 06:58 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Industry Insider
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 26,145
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7526 Post(s)
Liked: 7561
Cleveland Plasma is offline  
post #3488 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 07:22 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 17,891
Mentioned: 149 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7978 Post(s)
Liked: 10389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx View Post
Absolutely!

If JVC was going to do a chip revision for the consumer space it would be a UHD chip. Perhaps we'll see such a revision in a year or two.
I think the industry has decided that this is the way the chip is going to be for 4K. I don't really know why either, but there it is !
Craig Peer is online now  
post #3489 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 07:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Highjinx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,553
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1323 Post(s)
Liked: 538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
I think the industry has decided that this is the way the chip is going to be for 4K. I don't really know why either, but there it is !
It's quite likely these 4096x2160 were originally designed with DCI 4k in mind, for production house screening rooms being the main target, where they make perfect sense. They subsequently found their way to the consumer space., but they are a bit of a mismatch.

Removing those 256 superfluous pixels should give the chip designers some extra wiggle room to improve thing further, perhaps in the next revision or two. More light, larger pixels, improved chip level contrast, let's hope!

May the success of a Nation be judged not by its collective wealth nor by its power, but by the contentment of its people.
Hiran J Wijeyesekera - 1985.
Highjinx is offline  
post #3490 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 07:47 PM
Senior Member
 
LumenChip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 370
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 222 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
I believe yes you could.

Thinking about it though, I probably would pick one and stick with it so as to not have HDMI syncing due to resolution changes.

I will actually have a look at just using 4096 and slightly cropping 16:9 films rare as they are. Scope films will gain more brightness than using 16:9 panel size, so the lumens on tap will be utilised properly.

A LOT of people are forgetting. Being 17:9 panels, the 1900 lumens spec on the NX7 is with the full 17:9 panel By using the 16:9 panel you are already losing lumens (was it 7% quoted earlier? - 1767 lumens if so) which you did not previously lose on the prior models. With 100+ hours on a new lamp which then settles, thats going to possibly start being a consideration.

It might be worth scaling in Madvr or lumagen for 2.35 content to get that 7% brightness back.
This is the point I have been making all afternoon that you have summarized very well with actual data.
LumenChip is offline  
post #3491 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 07:58 PM
Senior Member
 
LumenChip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 370
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 222 Post(s)
Liked: 125
[QUOTE=lovingdvd;56782168]What aspect ratio is that? And is that 150" diag or width? I have a 140" wide 2.37 0.94 gain screen and I can tell you it is a big challenge for proper HDR.[/ QUOTE]

16:9 and 150 diagonal and HDR is definitely challenging with this setup.
LumenChip is offline  
post #3492 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:04 PM
Senior Member
 
LumenChip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 370
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 222 Post(s)
Liked: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
Not so fast buddy! Well see about that, those stamps dont just get handed out that easily!

I would be happy with the lens sample of the images Nigel shared though, it definitely looked quite acceptable to me. I also would still be itching in the back of my mind for the NX9 lens though for a purchase the next go around, I think in a couple years I will look at whats available at the NX9 level. By then I should have a new house and a large built theatre.

I am still very keen to see the NX7 to see if I can actually rather clearly see the 4k pixel structure in that lens. I am hoping so. I dont actually clearly see any in the curent shared photos, maybe the pixel gap is too small now.
LOL, this was just the pre-certification step. I am anticipating full certification after a proper instrument testing and shootout against the Golden lens sample residing in the e-shifter.
LumenChip is offline  
post #3493 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
enricoclaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 331 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4312 Post(s)
Liked: 5678
I my case those 256 pixels (128 per side) means 2.8" of black bar on the sides that should be easily covered by the 3.5" velveted screen frame. My question is, does the NX7 do a physical masking on those extra side pixels when sending UHD content (3840 x 2160) or still there is light passing through the panel on those 128 pixels per side?

Enrico Castagnetti @ Rythmik Audio - Dialing In Rythmik Audio Subwoofers - REW for macOS
Media Room: Sierra Towers w/RAAL, Horizon w/RAAL, Sierra 2s & Lunas | Rythmik G22 (x2) + FV25HP | Denon X6500H | Panny 820 + ATV 4K | Bluesound Node 2 | Sony 77A9G OLED |
Desktop: Dynaudio BM5 mkIII | Rythmik L22 | Apogee Quartet | 27" iMac| Bedroom: B&W 685 S2 | Rythmik LVX12 | Marantz SR6013 | Sony X700 + ATV 4K | Sony XBR-65Z9D |
enricoclaudio is offline  
post #3494 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,389
Mentioned: 528 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7167 Post(s)
Liked: 6864
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post
I my case those 256 pixels (128 per side) means 2.8" of black bar on the sides that should be easily covered by the 3.5" velveted screen frame. My question is, does the NX7 do a physical masking on those extra side pixels when sending UHD content (3840 x 2160) or still there is light passing through the panel on those 128 pixels per side?
My guess is it's just like the Sony's where its digital masking, so they will be projecting black essentially.
enricoclaudio 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 offline  
post #3495 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,389
Mentioned: 528 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7167 Post(s)
Liked: 6864
Quote:
Originally Posted by LumenChip View Post
LOL, this was just the pre-certification step. I am anticipating full certification after a proper instrument testing and shootout against the Golden lens sample residing in the e-shifter.

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 offline  
post #3496 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 17,891
Mentioned: 149 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7978 Post(s)
Liked: 10389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
My guess is it's just like the Sony's where its digital masking, so they will be projecting black essentially.
In all the time I've been using my RS4500 - and for 16:9 I still watch 3840 x 2160 - the extra pixels on the side have never been an issue.
Craig Peer is online now  
post #3497 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,868
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6586 Post(s)
Liked: 4738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwa View Post
I just sent my RS4910 in to have its dynamic iris fixed (depending on cost) and the RS540 dropping to $3999 MSRP is music to my ears. I was planning to eventually upgrade to the N5 but didn't really want to give up contrast performance of my RS4910. Since I'm only lighting up a 110" screen, the improved contrast and dual irises of the RS540 will mean 3D performance will be vastly improved and I won't lose the awesome black floor I currently have. Plus, I get HDR and WCG out of the box vs. the kludged solution I'm currently running. Finally, at my relatively small screen size, I suspect the difference between faux-K and 4K (of the N5) will be pretty hard to notice...not to mention the RS540 will be at least $2k cheaper!

Bottom line - I suspect that, in my room, the RS540 will outperform the N5, and for $2K less!
The RS540 has a better back floor than the RS4910. You'll be pleasantly surprised. I agree if your screen is small that eshift will be hard to notice from native 4K. The RS540 really may be the right choice for you. Unless you're big into games. If you're playing a lot of games on the projector the N5 will be noticeable over eshift and contrast/blacks are less important in games.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is offline  
post #3498 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,868
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6586 Post(s)
Liked: 4738
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post
I my case those 256 pixels (128 per side) means 2.8" of black bar on the sides that should be easily covered by the 3.5" velveted screen frame. My question is, does the NX7 do a physical masking on those extra side pixels when sending UHD content (3840 x 2160) or still there is light passing through the panel on those 128 pixels per side?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
My guess is it's just like the Sony's where its digital masking, so they will be projecting black essentially.
On my Sony, it's probably digital black but it's so dark you cannot see anything at all. It's nothing even like black bars you get watching scope content on 16x9 screen. It's so dark its completely unnoticeable and you forget its even that way until you discuss it.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is offline  
post #3499 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wizziwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 3,645
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2334 Post(s)
Liked: 1612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post
If getting "only" 80,000:1 is the price to pay to not get bright corners, I'm very happy with that (provided we get at least 25,000:1 or more with the N7 and the iris fully open, and no more DI artifacts than with the current mid-high range e-shift models).
)
Same here. Heck, I might even settle for a consistent 40K:1 if there was a guarantee of no bright corners. Some of us like Toe and I can't use the highest contrast modes on the JVC anyway due to the perception of high flicker.

I've had very poor luck on this uniformity issue and even the two low contrast (50K:1 spec) RS40 units had the problem for me. What I find encouraging is that last year they apparently couldn't even find a single RS640 unit without bright corners for their booth while this year neither unit seemed to have it (although I'm not 100% confident on the NX5 due to the poor room lighting).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post
Bright corners have always been my biggest beef (grey uniformity too, but JVCs have usually been excellent here) so if they fixed these and even minimized lens streaking more, big kudos to JVC.
After coming back from Cedia, I'm starting to think that the vertical lens streaking is not actually anything to do with the lens. If it was a lens issue, why would it have changed from vertical to horizontal streaking on the new models? I've also seen it on every single LCOS variant on the market (JVC, Epson, and Sony) despite them all using very different lenses. What might actually be causing it is some kind of limitation of how LCOS panels operate. It reminds me of a very similar problem with Plasma and many CRT TVs. Google "plasma line bleed" to see what I mean. Maybe JVC oriented the panels differently on these models which changed the orientation of the streaks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post
Great post. # 4 in particular is my biggest complaint with current JVC projectors.

Arrow, Mike, etc.....can any of you guys ask JVC if the pulsating/flicker which gets worse the more you close down the iris has been improved with these 4k models? Would appreciate an answer to this!
So I actually brought up the issue to their rep at the booth and he immediately knew what I was talking about. So they are definitely aware of the problem for some of their customers. He wouldn't commit to any specific changes being made to address it but admitting you have a problem is the first step towards finding a solution. Hopefully this is the year. Unfortunately, because very few people seem sensitive to it around here (probably even less than DLP rainbows), one of us will have to be the guinea pig and try one. I think having a bright HP screen like we do also makes us more prone to seeing the flicker/pulsing problem since we're actually able to utilize the highest contrast iris modes of these projectors.
David Mathews, Toe and DavidHir like this.

Last edited by Wizziwig; 09-09-2018 at 08:47 PM.
Wizziwig is offline  
post #3500 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 08:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,389
Mentioned: 528 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7167 Post(s)
Liked: 6864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
In all the time I've been using my RS4500 - and for 16:9 I still watch 3840 x 2160 - the extra pixels on the side have never been an issue.
I think my estimates of the lumens drop off when using the 17:9 vs 16:9 panel are completely wrong.

While there is about 7% less pixels in use when going from one to the other, it seems that does not translate to the same value of lumens missing.
@coderguy any chance you can update your amazing web calculator to include 17:9 screens?

Lets say you have a 120" 16:9 screen and you wish to use that.

The 17:9 panel spill seems to be around 3 inches larger generally than that, so lets just say 123" in size for the sake of it. Lets say you do actually get 1900lm at 123" full panel projection, that would read ~460LUX. I dont know the exact figures since the aspect has also changed, but lets just go with this for some very dirty calculation.

By recalculating your LUX reading for your actual 120" 16:9 screen size the value is now 1830lm. So you are only really losing about 70lm?

Thats not so bad at all if so?

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 offline  
post #3501 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
enricoclaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 331 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4312 Post(s)
Liked: 5678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
I think my estimates of the lumens drop off when using the 17:9 vs 16:9 panel are completely wrong.

While there is about 7% less pixels in use when going from one to the other, it seems that does not translate to the same value of lumens missing.
@coderguy any chance you can update your amazing web calculator to include 17:9 screens?

Lets say you have a 120" 16:9 screen and you wish to use that.

The 17:9 panel spill seems to be around 3 inches larger generally than that, so lets just say 123" in size for the sake of it. Lets say you do actually get 1900lm at 123" full panel projection, that would read ~460LUX. I dont know the exact figures since the aspect has also changed, but lets just go with this for some very dirty calculation.

By recalculating your LUX reading for your actual 120" 16:9 screen size the value is now 1830lm. So you are only really losing about 70lm?

Thats not so bad at all if so?
A 120" diagonal 16:9 screen will have 3.5" black bar per side for a total of 7" total spill.

(105"(W)/3840) x 256/2 = 3.5"

Enrico Castagnetti @ Rythmik Audio - Dialing In Rythmik Audio Subwoofers - REW for macOS
Media Room: Sierra Towers w/RAAL, Horizon w/RAAL, Sierra 2s & Lunas | Rythmik G22 (x2) + FV25HP | Denon X6500H | Panny 820 + ATV 4K | Bluesound Node 2 | Sony 77A9G OLED |
Desktop: Dynaudio BM5 mkIII | Rythmik L22 | Apogee Quartet | 27" iMac| Bedroom: B&W 685 S2 | Rythmik LVX12 | Marantz SR6013 | Sony X700 + ATV 4K | Sony XBR-65Z9D |

Last edited by enricoclaudio; 09-09-2018 at 09:04 PM.
enricoclaudio is offline  
post #3502 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,389
Mentioned: 528 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7167 Post(s)
Liked: 6864
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post
A 120" diagonal 16:9 screen will have 3.5" black bar per side for a total of 7" total spill.

(105"(W)/3840) x 256/2 = 3.5"
I guess I am trying to do a calculation in my head which is not easy to do.

I suppose basically by using a 17:9 panel, you will be effectively only be losing about as much light vs a native 16:9 panel projector as going to a screen about 3 inches larger diagonally. If both were spec'd at 1900lm.

So it would be something like, if you were getting 44fl before with the 16:9 panel projector on your screen, you might get 42fl now with the 17:9 panel, but spilling off the sides on the same screen.

Thats really negligible. For some reason I thought it would be considerably worse. Bulb variance is going to eat any of that spread from being quantifiable.
David Mathews and Craig Peer like 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 offline  
post #3503 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
enricoclaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 331 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4312 Post(s)
Liked: 5678
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
I guess I am trying to do a calculation in my head which is not easy to do.

I suppose basically by using a 17:9 panel, you will be effectively only be losing about as much light vs a native 16:9 panel projector as going to a screen about 3 inches larger diagonally. If both were spec'd at 1900lm.

So it would be something like, if you were getting 44fl before with the 16:9 panel projector on your screen, you might get 42fl now with the 17:9 panel, but spilling off the sides on the same screen.

Thats really negligible. For some reason I thought it would be considerably worse. Bulb variance is going to eat any of that spread from being quantifiable.
That's something that I hope for @ARROW-AV to check/measure when he gets the production units. How much is the real lost in lumen going from 17:9 to 16:9 without using A-lens, of course.
ARROW-AV likes this.

Enrico Castagnetti @ Rythmik Audio - Dialing In Rythmik Audio Subwoofers - REW for macOS
Media Room: Sierra Towers w/RAAL, Horizon w/RAAL, Sierra 2s & Lunas | Rythmik G22 (x2) + FV25HP | Denon X6500H | Panny 820 + ATV 4K | Bluesound Node 2 | Sony 77A9G OLED |
Desktop: Dynaudio BM5 mkIII | Rythmik L22 | Apogee Quartet | 27" iMac| Bedroom: B&W 685 S2 | Rythmik LVX12 | Marantz SR6013 | Sony X700 + ATV 4K | Sony XBR-65Z9D |
enricoclaudio is offline  
post #3504 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Does anyone know if they are planning on launching the "updated" 790/540 stock with the N5/7/9 stock in October or November? Or if that is going to be a quicker turn around?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Schwa likes this.
Mark Anderko is offline  
post #3505 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:29 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SED <--- Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 1,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 274 Post(s)
Liked: 216
Question about black floor/contrast ratios and the dynamic iris. The JVC RS35 has 60,000:1 native and no DI. How much of a real-world difference will I see with the black floor and contrast ratio with the RS2000, which has 80,000:1 native plus implementation of the DI (and supposedly higher ANSI contrast)? This is assuming the theater is a true batcave. Thanks!
David Mathews likes this.
SED <--- Rules is offline  
post #3506 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,868
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6586 Post(s)
Liked: 4738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
I think my estimates of the lumens drop off when using the 17:9 vs 16:9 panel are completely wrong.

While there is about 7% less pixels in use when going from one to the other, it seems that does not translate to the same value of lumens missing.
@coderguy any chance you can update your amazing web calculator to include 17:9 screens?

Lets say you have a 120" 16:9 screen and you wish to use that.

The 17:9 panel spill seems to be around 3 inches larger generally than that, so lets just say 123" in size for the sake of it. Lets say you do actually get 1900lm at 123" full panel projection, that would read ~460LUX. I dont know the exact figures since the aspect has also changed, but lets just go with this for some very dirty calculation.

By recalculating your LUX reading for your actual 120" 16:9 screen size the value is now 1830lm. So you are only really losing about 70lm?

Thats not so bad at all if so?
I calculated you'd lose 106 lumens on the NX9 due to 17:9 internal res and 16:9 actual res.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is offline  
post #3507 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,868
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6586 Post(s)
Liked: 4738
Quote:
Originally Posted by SED <--- Rules View Post
Question about black floor/contrast ratios and the dynamic iris. The JVC RS35 has 60,000:1 native and no DI. How much of a real-world difference will I see with the black floor and contrast ratio with the RS2000, which has 80,000:1 native plus implementation of the DI (and supposedly higher ANSI contrast)? This is assuming the theater is a true batcave. Thanks!
The difference will be huge. I remember going from my RS35 to an x500r and it was a really big gain as the black floor was much lower. The N7/RS2000 should be much better than that. Not to mention you'll be getting a huge increase in lumens and a lower black floor. The combination of those two thins will be really massive of an upgrade. I think you'll find that part of the upgrade much better than the resolution upgrade.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" ST130 G4 screen in batcave, htpc nvidia 1080ti madVR.
Audio: Anthem mrx720 running 7.1.4, McIntosh MC-303, MC-152, B&W 802d3 LR, B&W HTM1D3 center, B&W 805d3 surround, B&W 702S2 rear, B&W 706s2 x 4 shelf mounted for atmos, Infinite Baffle Subs 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 2x12 fi audio mounted in main chair firing into back.
markmon1 is offline  
post #3508 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:39 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,682
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2564 Post(s)
Liked: 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post
Yes I forgot all about that. Are you referring to how the glass next to the bulb built up a film-like residue and had to be cleaned? I think that was my RS20 but can't recall.

Yes, IIRC it was the glass of the lamp housing enclosing the lamp.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Was not specifically asked, but I can tell you, they are going away. Also I would expect native contrast to slowly improve over the years, just like it did with the 1080P chips.

I guess it will be the same as flat panel TV's; I was waiting for killer prices on 1080P but they just stopped making them in favor of 4k.



Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
How do you clear this?

Per above, use a lens cleaning cloth to clean the glass around the lamp.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
I think my estimates of the lumens drop off when using the 17:9 vs 16:9 panel are completely wrong.

While there is about 7% less pixels in use when going from one to the other, it seems that does not translate to the same value of lumens missing.

To first order, it is that simple.

If uniformity is perfect, 7% less area means 7% less L.

Since in actuality the center is probably brighter than the edges, it will be a bit less than that.

Either way, 7% is likely unnoticeable except in direct A/B comparison.

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #3509 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SED <--- Rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 1,145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 274 Post(s)
Liked: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
The difference will be huge. I remember going from my RS35 to an x500r and it was a really big gain as the black floor was much lower. The N7/RS2000 should be much better than that. Not to mention you'll be getting a huge increase in lumens and a lower black floor. The combination of those two thins will be really massive of an upgrade. I think you'll find that part of the upgrade much better than the resolution upgrade.
Haha, well if that's the case mark, then the JVC RS540 will be even better because if it's 130,000:1 native contrast ratio! Or will it? RS2000 or RS540? I have a 110 inch diagonal Carada BW screen. Not too big. I sit around 10 feet away from it (maybe 9.5).
SED <--- Rules is offline  
post #3510 of 13667 Old 09-09-2018, 09:43 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 17,891
Mentioned: 149 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7978 Post(s)
Liked: 10389
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
The difference will be huge. I remember going from my RS35 to an x500r and it was a really big gain as the black floor was much lower. The N7/RS2000 should be much better than that. Not to mention you'll be getting a huge increase in lumens and a lower black floor. The combination of those two thins will be really massive of an upgrade. I think you'll find that part of the upgrade much better than the resolution upgrade.
The picture on the RS1000 looked clean and sharp at Cedia ( as best as could tell ), so the resolution increase will be nice too. The " sum of the parts " increase in picture quality from an RS35 - that's an 8 generation jump - should be very nice indeed !
SED <--- Rules likes this.
Craig Peer is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
eshift , Jvc , native 4k , projector , uhd

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