Help me understand why a JVC is better than an EPSON - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 85Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 92 Old 09-18-2018, 09:04 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 13,221
Mentioned: 185 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5674 Post(s)
Liked: 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by kheiden View Post
Ugh! This is depressing. I REALLY don't want to change screens. I also don't want to have to choose between that nice contrast on the JVC, and proper polarity. I don't mind having to rebuy glasses but if they won't ever look proper with my screen the point seems kind of moot.

Does anything else have comparable contrast to the JVCs but without the polarity strangeness with my Silverstar screen?

So close.

Hi, which Silverstar screen do you have? I see these 2 options 3D/3D-A (active technology) and SilverStar 2D/3D-P (passive technology). I see some discussion on their site about polarization for passive DLP setups but not sure that will pertain to JVC's active setup.

If I can get them to send a sample of your specific material I can test it with the JVC.
tico1970 likes this.
zombie10k is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 92 Old 09-19-2018, 04:27 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
kheiden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 369
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
Hi, which Silverstar screen do you have? I see these 2 options 3D/3D-A (active technology) and SilverStar 2D/3D-P (passive technology). I see some discussion on their site about polarization for passive DLP setups but not sure that will pertain to JVC's active setup.

If I can get them to send a sample of your specific material I can test it with the JVC.
I bought the one that was optimized for use with a Panasonic projector that uses active lenses on my glasses.

I told the people at Vutek what my projector was before I purchased the screen. I might be able to find the receipt somewhere.
kheiden is offline  
post #33 of 92 Old 09-22-2018, 06:05 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
kheiden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 369
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I confirmed I have their passive screen, which is optimized for LCD projectors like the JVC. That thread I saw was probably involving people who bought the active Silverstar which is designed for DLP projectors. I think I’m good to go on a JVC.

If you can get a passive sample and want to try it with your projector I’m happy to wait until you have seen it first hand to hear your opinion. I appreciate the kind offer and if not that’s okay too.
kheiden is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 92 Old 09-22-2018, 06:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ScottieBoysName's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,369
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1483 Post(s)
Liked: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
Both Mike and Craig from avscience are well respected. I've bought several projectors from avscience.
I can vouch for Mike, and if he hadn't gotten back to me so fast, I've have gone through Craig who reached out to me as well.

They're both top notch guys and you'd be well advised if someone told you to deal with them.

I will (and I am) purchasing things from them in the future, 100%
Mike Garrett likes this.
ScottieBoysName is offline  
post #35 of 92 Old 09-24-2018, 07:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ScottAvery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Great Falls, VA
Posts: 2,003
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 871 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by kheiden View Post
Ugh! This is depressing. I REALLY don't want to change screens. I also don't want to have to choose between that nice contrast on the JVC, and proper polarity. I don't mind having to rebuy glasses but if they won't ever look proper with my screen the point seems kind of moot.

Does anything else have comparable contrast to the JVCs but without the polarity strangeness with my Silverstar screen?

So close.
It seems like you may be misunderstanding the polarization issue. You don't need to buy a new screen, unless it would cost less than new glasses. It is not the screen and projector that are not compatible, but the fact that the projector and glasses are not an ideal match and having a reflective screen that retains polarization will make that mismatch very obvious, effectively causing the light to be filtered out if the direction of polarization is not the same. If you DO retain polarization and have the correct glasses, 3D will be brighter than in other configurations. On a screen that does not retain polarization at all, the glasses configuration won't matter.

You said you bought an Active screen, which may actually mean it does not retain polarization. Passive 3d requires polarization retention, which tends to need a shiny silver screen. It is easy to confirm with your current projector by turning your head sideways while watching 3d. If it gets dimmer, your screen retains polarization. The dimmer it gets, the more it retains. The more it retains, the more important it will be to switch to the other style of glasses.



EDIT: I missed the reply where you said it is indeed a passive screen. It is weird that they would recommend it for a non-dedicated commercial 3d space. You should confirm with the sideways view on current system.
kheiden likes this.
ScottAvery is offline  
post #36 of 92 Old 09-24-2018, 09:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dkersten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 1,238
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 783 Post(s)
Liked: 1377
As an Epson 5040 owner, I can say that the biggest issue with Epson right now is lack of 18gbps hdmi.

Here is what it means in the real world:
  • Netflix - I haven't an issue with HDR content. It runs at 30hz, so perhaps the Shield I use to play it is cutting frame rate in half.. ? Not sure, but I can for sure get HDR at 30hz.
  • PS Vue - have to run in Rec709. If I run in BT2020 I can only get 30hz, and it starts dropping frames after a few seconds, to the point where you get about 3 frames per second, sometimes less. No issues in Rec709, but with a Shield it means manually changing the color space back to Rec709.
  • Blu Ray - Movies filmed at 24 or 23.976 hz will play just fine with BT2020 color. However, motion (at 4k) is not great. A little smoothing here would go a long way. I notice a difference between when I am at BT2020 color and 30hz max vs Rec709 and 60hz max. The Rec709 mode allows the projector to double the frame rate for a slightly smoother image.
  • UHD - Again, any wider color gamut comes with the caveat of lower frame rate. Usually not a huge deal outside of Netflix UHD and gaming, but when used with a Shield, it means manually switching color spaces a lot (you can't just leave it in BT2020 mode).

Color is very brilliant with the Epson, as mentioned, but a little too hot without calibration. I was much happier with my last Sony in terms of color out of the box. But without calibration, you get a lot more lumens than either other brand, so if you have a bigger screen it is helpful. This is a tradeoff between color accuracy and brightness. It isn't BAD per se, but skin tones can get a little too red or green depending on the source. Often I wonder if all actors spent too much time in the sun before shooting, they can look perpetually sun burnt. But most of the time the Epson looks fantastic.

4k vs e-shift: IMHO I don't think this is a big deal. In static images, like running a PC on the projector, the true 4k would be better, but for moving images, it just doesn't seem to matter. I am VERY happy with the sharpness and clarity of 4k on a 150" wide scope screen. Any more sharpness would be lost on me, sitting 13 feet back from this rather large screen. For people with smaller screens, I can't see spending the extra money on native 4k. So this becomes an e-peen thing (I have native 4k so I am better than you)

Lamps - as mentioned, lamps are 2-3 times more from JVC. This is a big deal when you have a bigger screen and have to run in high lamp. If I have to replace my lamp twice a year, I would rather spend $300-400 vs $800-1000.

Contrast - I'm happy with my contrast, but I am not overly concerned with black levels. At least it is not worth 2-3 times more just for slightly better blacks. I also think this is a relative issue. I started with a DLP, and then went to a Sony and saw a major improvement in contrast. Then I went to the Epson, and it seems just as good if not better than the Sony. So I'm good with what I have. The blacks are as good as my flat screens when the room is blacked out, but I also don't own an OLED. So my point of reference is not on the extreme edge.

Frankly, I will probably sell my 5040 when the 5050 comes out just for the 18gbps hdmi. This is a major thorn in my side. I use ONLY the NVidia Shield as my source for all my media, and since it won't automatically change color spaces, I have to manually switch depending on content. And even if I didn't, I just want to get the full color range no matter the framerate. It seems minor but it is just a major annoyance factor. Gaining the better e-shift, a better tone map for HDR, and a few other little things are all nice, but the real value for me is the HDMI spec.

But I am also looking at JVC. Three times the price for the one I am looking at compared to the Epson and while it is a stretch to justify it, the JVC is the "next level up". Better blacks, some motion smoothing, better lens, etc. It is really like going from a good LCD flatscreen to an OLED (minus the brightness of course). And if I decide to add an anamorphic lens later, it can do most of the image processing to allow me to get rid of black bars and do the stretching. Really the thing holding me back is cost. The Epson will be around $3k, the JVC around $7k, and if I add a lens, another $4k. Even in a $50k theater, that is a big gap and a monster stretch, especially since I already spent my budget. Add another $1000 per year in lamps and the incremental differences just don't seem worth it. I'm still on the fence myself, but leaning toward the Epson 5050.
dkersten is offline  
post #37 of 92 Old 09-24-2018, 11:58 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkersten View Post
As an Epson 5040 owner, I can say that the biggest issue with Epson right now is lack of 18gbps hdmi.


Here is what it means in the real world:
  • Netflix - I haven't an issue with HDR content. It runs at 30hz, so perhaps the Shield I use to play it is cutting frame rate in half.. ? Not sure, but I can for sure get HDR at 30hz.
  • PS Vue - have to run in Rec709. If I run in BT2020 I can only get 30hz, and it starts dropping frames after a few seconds, to the point where you get about 3 frames per second, sometimes less. No issues in Rec709, but with a Shield it means manually changing the color space back to Rec709.
  • Blu Ray - Movies filmed at 24 or 23.976 hz will play just fine with BT2020 color. However, motion (at 4k) is not great. A little smoothing here would go a long way. I notice a difference between when I am at BT2020 color and 30hz max vs Rec709 and 60hz max. The Rec709 mode allows the projector to double the frame rate for a slightly smoother image.
  • UHD - Again, any wider color gamut comes with the caveat of lower frame rate. Usually not a huge deal outside of Netflix UHD and gaming, but when used with a Shield, it means manually switching color spaces a lot (you can't just leave it in BT2020 mode).
Color is very brilliant with the Epson, as mentioned, but a little too hot without calibration. I was much happier with my last Sony in terms of color out of the box. But without calibration, you get a lot more lumens than either other brand, so if you have a bigger screen it is helpful. This is a tradeoff between color accuracy and brightness. It isn't BAD per se, but skin tones can get a little too red or green depending on the source. Often I wonder if all actors spent too much time in the sun before shooting, they can look perpetually sun burnt. But most of the time the Epson looks fantastic.

4k vs e-shift: IMHO I don't think this is a big deal. In static images, like running a PC on the projector, the true 4k would be better, but for moving images, it just doesn't seem to matter. I am VERY happy with the sharpness and clarity of 4k on a 150" wide scope screen. Any more sharpness would be lost on me, sitting 13 feet back from this rather large screen. For people with smaller screens, I can't see spending the extra money on native 4k. So this becomes an e-peen thing (I have native 4k so I am better than you)

Lamps - as mentioned, lamps are 2-3 times more from JVC. This is a big deal when you have a bigger screen and have to run in high lamp. If I have to replace my lamp twice a year, I would rather spend $300-400 vs $800-1000.

Contrast - I'm happy with my contrast, but I am not overly concerned with black levels. At least it is not worth 2-3 times more just for slightly better blacks. I also think this is a relative issue. I started with a DLP, and then went to a Sony and saw a major improvement in contrast. Then I went to the Epson, and it seems just as good if not better than the Sony. So I'm good with what I have. The blacks are as good as my flat screens when the room is blacked out, but I also don't own an OLED. So my point of reference is not on the extreme edge.

Frankly, I will probably sell my 5040 when the 5050 comes out just for the 18gbps hdmi. This is a major thorn in my side. I use ONLY the NVidia Shield as my source for all my media, and since it won't automatically change color spaces, I have to manually switch depending on content. And even if I didn't, I just want to get the full color range no matter the framerate. It seems minor but it is just a major annoyance factor. Gaining the better e-shift, a better tone map for HDR, and a few other little things are all nice, but the real value for me is the HDMI spec.

But I am also looking at JVC. Three times the price for the one I am looking at compared to the Epson and while it is a stretch to justify it, the JVC is the "next level up". Better blacks, some motion smoothing, better lens, etc. It is really like going from a good LCD flatscreen to an OLED (minus the brightness of course). And if I decide to add an anamorphic lens later, it can do most of the image processing to allow me to get rid of black bars and do the stretching. Really the thing holding me back is cost. The Epson will be around $3k, the JVC around $7k, and if I add a lens, another $4k. Even in a $50k theater, that is a big gap and a monster stretch, especially since I already spent my budget. Add another $1000 per year in lamps and the incremental differences just don't seem worth it. I'm still on the fence myself, but leaning toward the Epson 5050.

Great post. I am in the same situation. Except I have a Epson 4000. I agree with basically everything in this post.
I am leaning Epson 5050 price depending. If the 5050 is over 3k then I will have to look really hard at the 790!
kheiden likes this.
gunlife is offline  
post #38 of 92 Old 09-24-2018, 12:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
talon95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 1,697
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 477 Post(s)
Liked: 278
A RS540 is nowhere near 3x the cost of a new Epson. The 5050 will probably be $2500 or more. RS540 is $4k at worst depending on discounts.

I own both a 5030 and RS540. Wouldn't even consider the Epson for that price delta.
markmon1 and Snow-Okami like this.
talon95 is offline  
post #39 of 92 Old 09-24-2018, 12:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DavidinGA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: GA
Posts: 1,132
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 621 Post(s)
Liked: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlife View Post
Great post. I am in the same situation. Except I have a Epson 4000. I agree with basically everything in this post.
I am leaning Epson 5050 price depending. If the 5050 is over 3k then I will have to look really hard at the 790!
How do you like the CR and blacks on the 4000? I'm debating the 4000/4010 vs the 5040.



Here's my dilemma and question...

My room is a 2nd living room area that measures 14.5ft x 22ft. Pj mounted to shoot longways. Walls are light Grey, ceiling is white and carpet is tan. I am planning to make a black curtain setup that will cover the two side walls and ceiling all out about 5ft from the screen. Will only watch movies at night, so no other ambient light to worry about from outside windows. Will put down a dark (hopefully black) throw rug on the floor out in front of the screen too.

Will this create enough of a cave environment to see the CR benefits of the 5040 over the 4000/4010?
DavidinGA is offline  
post #40 of 92 Old 09-24-2018, 05:08 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidinGA View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlife View Post
Great post. I am in the same situation. Except I have a Epson 4000. I agree with basically everything in this post.
I am leaning Epson 5050 price depending. If the 5050 is over 3k then I will have to look really hard at the 790!
How do you like the CR and blacks on the 4000? I'm debating the 4000/4010 vs the 5040.



Here's my dilemma and question...

My room is a 2nd living room area that measures 14.5ft x 22ft. Pj mounted to shoot longways. Walls are light Grey, ceiling is white and carpet is tan. I am planning to make a black curtain setup that will cover the two side walls and ceiling all out about 5ft from the screen. Will only watch movies at night, so no other ambient light to worry about from outside windows. Will put down a dark (hopefully black) throw rug on the floor out in front of the screen too.

Will this create enough of a cave environment to see the CR benefits of the 5040 over the 4000/4010?
Yes you will notice the black floor between the 4000 and the 5040. Remember the colors and motion will be the same. But the 5040 is quite a bit brighter as well if you want to use it with some lights on.

5040 also has a manual iris that you can stop down to increase contrast.

I wouldnt spend the money for a 5040 right now. To much for a projector that should have a 18gps chipset. All IMO
gunlife is offline  
post #41 of 92 Old 09-24-2018, 06:04 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DavidinGA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: GA
Posts: 1,132
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 621 Post(s)
Liked: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlife View Post
Yes you will notice the black floor between the 4000 and the 5040. Remember the colors and motion will be the same. But the 5040 is quite a bit brighter as well if you want to use it with some lights on.

5040 also has a manual iris that you can stop down to increase contrast.

I wouldnt spend the money for a 5040 right now. To much for a projector that should have a 18gps chipset. All IMO
Right, that's my other problem, it's hard to justify getting a 5040 when it's replacement is on the way and hopefully without the power failure issues and a host of upgrades.

I have a epson 4000 still in the box that I got on sale for $1600 and so I'm still debating whether to keep it or not. $1600 seems dirt cheap, so I'm leaning towards keeping it and maybe upgrading down the road is in 1-2 years. I just hope I'm happy with the CR on the 4000 (not so concerned with black levels). I'm coming from a 1070w so either should be a vast improvement.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

--------------------------------------------------
Epson 5040, 150" 16:9 1.1gain, Source: HTPC w/madVR, Audio: Onkyo RZ 830 avr, 5.1.4 Atmos setup. 5 speaker Energy C Series: L/R C300's, C C-C100, SR/SL C50's, 4 in-ceiling Micca R-8c. Subwoofers: 1 MiniMarty um18 w/NX3000D. 4 diy Slim VBSS 18" Subs w/NX3000D.
DavidinGA is offline  
post #42 of 92 Old 09-25-2018, 06:14 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidinGA View Post
Right, that's my other problem, it's hard to justify getting a 5040 when it's replacement is on the way and hopefully without the power failure issues and a host of upgrades.

I have a epson 4000 still in the box that I got on sale for $1600 and so I'm still debating whether to keep it or not. $1600 seems dirt cheap, so I'm leaning towards keeping it and maybe upgrading down the road is in 1-2 years. I just hope I'm happy with the CR on the 4000 (not so concerned with black levels). I'm coming from a 1070w so either should be a vast improvement.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

I did exactly what you thinking of doing. Bought the 4000 for cheap enough and then was looking to upgrade in 1-2 years. I bought mine around Christmas last year. For me the only thing that annoys me with the 4000 is the HDMI limitation. I watch a lot of Netflix with my wife. If I was you I would unbox that projector and enjoy it ASAP!
DavidinGA likes this.
gunlife is offline  
post #43 of 92 Old 09-25-2018, 06:33 AM
Member
 
Mike Johnson 3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Clearwater, FL
Posts: 88
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 65
A bit of Epson --> JVC excitement!

For you guys who own or are considering buying an Epson, I wouldn't...
I just sold my Epson 5040UBe a few days ago and it was the lack of 18gbps that ultimately did it for me!

I bought it at BestBuy 2 years ago, so at full retail + tax I paid more for the Epson than I just did for the JVC rs540/x790r!! My Epson cost me MORE!!!

Now I have a cheaper projector that is FAR FAR FAR superior in EVERY WAY!! I cannot tell you guys how much of a waste of money Epson is at the moment, but I hope you see it now. Don't hold off, move to JVC for similar price and TONS better!

MUCH better contrast, better blacks, better HDR highlights when calibrated, better 3D! Better 4K e-shift! Better warranty!! (3 years vs. 2 years). Can watch any content on it!

If JVC didn't exist, Epson would be great for the money, it's just a joke considering where the 540/790 prices are right now!
kheiden, markmon1, jbn008 and 1 others like this.

JVC NX7, Paladin DCR, 125" 2.40:1 Seymour Center Stage XD
(previous: JVC 540/790, Epson 5040UBe,+more)
Sony 75XZ9D, 75X900E, 65X850C, 800E, Panny 4K, Plasma, & more...
(Previous: 65" 930E, 940D, LG 65" C7, 65" 900E, Samsungs, etc...)
speakers: Dynaudio M1's, M3A's, BM15A's, NS10's, dozens of Bryston amps
Mike Johnson 3 is offline  
post #44 of 92 Old 09-25-2018, 01:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dkersten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 1,238
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 783 Post(s)
Liked: 1377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Johnson 3 View Post
If JVC didn't exist, Epson would be great for the money, it's just a joke considering where the 540/790 prices are right now!
Frankly, if I had paid $4k+ for my 5040 (I didn't, I paid closer to $2400),
and I had a little 110" screen (I don't, mine is around 170")
and there was a calibrator in my area that could calibrate and create a custom curve for me (there isn't)
then sure, selling the 5040 and getting an rs540 would be a no-brainer.

With the Epson I have the lumens (uncalibrated of course) to just get bright enough for HDR without a custom luminance curve (i.e. tone mapping) with Epson's latest 5040 firmware and the brightest possible settings. And it looks pretty darn good, just a hair dimmer than SDR content, but with quite a bit more dynamic range in the lighting. Granted, I will burn up my bulbs faster, but at $200 per it is not a big deal. The lack of 18gbps is annoying, but not a deal breaker by any means.

With the JVC rs540, I would be a little short on lumens, even if left uncalibrated. To compensate I would need a custom luminance curve to get HDR to look as good as SDR on this size of screen. If it can't be done with a file, I might need to fly in a calibrator who can do it, and I might even need a Lumagen Pro for $5k more to get it to look right. I would still need to blaze that lamp on high all the time, and at $400-500 per lamp, that gets expensive fast. This is on top of the already $1500 more for the projector. Then when I do have to switch resolution, I get to wait, and wait, and wait... And as long as I don't get any of the QC issues with the rs540, like bright corners, all I gained for the trouble was deeper blacks and a slightly wider color gamut on Netflix UHD content. To me that is trading off issues, not just gaining more for my money.

I realize my situation is not the same as everyone else's, but to just say the JVC is the right choice over the Epson for everyone is simply not true. The rs540 with the new price is an incredible value. Still more expensive than the Epson, but close enough that for most people in a modest home theater room it would be the better choice.

Now the N7 (or rs2000 or whatever they are going to call it in the U.S.) with the better lens, faster source switching, and adjustable tone mapping to be able to get it to look at least as good as SDR on my larger screen makes good sense. At $7k, it is nearly 3x the price of the Epson though, and I am sure I will still need to blast the JVC on high lamp and be dropping $400-500 every 6-8 months for a new one to keep a decent image up. But it seems the only trade-off is pure cost here, so it makes a lot more sense. More money = improvements all around.

Last edited by dkersten; 09-25-2018 at 02:12 PM.
dkersten is offline  
post #45 of 92 Old 09-25-2018, 03:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ccotenj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the toxic waste dumps of new jersey
Posts: 22,119
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 170 Post(s)
Liked: 356
^

good post. TODAY, for certain users, the rs540 is a better choice. that is TODAY, however, and for certain, not all, users. i would also wager that very few of us paid full boat for the 5040.

i am trying with all my might NOT to pre-order a rs2000. and it isn’t because the 5040 is junk. for many, it would still be a “better” choice over the jvc offerings.

- chris

 

my build thread - updated 8-20-12 - new seating installed and projector isolation solution

 

https://www.avsforum.com/t/1332917/ccotenj-finally-gets-a-projector

ccotenj is offline  
post #46 of 92 Old 09-25-2018, 06:56 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 dkersten View Post
Frankly, if I had paid $4k+ for my 5040 (I didn't, I paid closer to $2400),
and I had a little 110" screen (I don't, mine is around 170")
and there was a calibrator in my area that could calibrate and create a custom curve for me (there isn't)
then sure, selling the 5040 and getting an rs540 would be a no-brainer.

With the Epson I have the lumens (uncalibrated of course) to just get bright enough for HDR without a custom luminance curve (i.e. tone mapping) with Epson's latest 5040 firmware and the brightest possible settings. And it looks pretty darn good, just a hair dimmer than SDR content, but with quite a bit more dynamic range in the lighting. Granted, I will burn up my bulbs faster, but at $200 per it is not a big deal. The lack of 18gbps is annoying, but not a deal breaker by any means.

With the JVC rs540, I would be a little short on lumens, even if left uncalibrated. To compensate I would need a custom luminance curve to get HDR to look as good as SDR on this size of screen. If it can't be done with a file, I might need to fly in a calibrator who can do it, and I might even need a Lumagen Pro for $5k more to get it to look right. I would still need to blaze that lamp on high all the time, and at $400-500 per lamp, that gets expensive fast. This is on top of the already $1500 more for the projector. Then when I do have to switch resolution, I get to wait, and wait, and wait... And as long as I don't get any of the QC issues with the rs540, like bright corners, all I gained for the trouble was deeper blacks and a slightly wider color gamut on Netflix UHD content. To me that is trading off issues, not just gaining more for my money.

I realize my situation is not the same as everyone else's, but to just say the JVC is the right choice over the Epson for everyone is simply not true. The rs540 with the new price is an incredible value. Still more expensive than the Epson, but close enough that for most people in a modest home theater room it would be the better choice.

Now the N7 (or rs2000 or whatever they are going to call it in the U.S.) with the better lens, faster source switching, and adjustable tone mapping to be able to get it to look at least as good as SDR on my larger screen makes good sense. At $7k, it is nearly 3x the price of the Epson though, and I am sure I will still need to blast the JVC on high lamp and be dropping $400-500 every 6-8 months for a new one to keep a decent image up. But it seems the only trade-off is pure cost here, so it makes a lot more sense. More money = improvements all around.
I went through a similar thought process and settled on the Epson over the JVC. I demoed both and preferred the Epson though all the data says the JVC is superior. I only need my black levels to be good enough but am awestruck by high ANSI contrast which the Epson delivered with aplomb. It was also easily the better choice for HDR on a large screen. It does have shortcomings that are a showstopper for some and one needs keep these in mind when considering the Epson. I also want to put it out there that not everyone buying the Epson is cheap or cannot afford a JVC, you may be surprised at what some can afford.
kheiden and dimi123 like this.
LumenChip is offline  
post #47 of 92 Old 09-25-2018, 10:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,865
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6580 Post(s)
Liked: 4731
I've never seen an Epson with "pretty good" black levels. They're always not good, not acceptable etc. Definitely not good enough. I do watch a lot of scifi. I can't imagine enjoying a show like "The Expanse" on an epson. I'd be too distracted by grey space.
kheiden likes this.

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 online now  
post #48 of 92 Old 09-27-2018, 10:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dkersten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 1,238
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 783 Post(s)
Liked: 1377
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
I've never seen an Epson with "pretty good" black levels. They're always not good, not acceptable etc. Definitely not good enough. I do watch a lot of scifi. I can't imagine enjoying a show like "The Expanse" on an epson. I'd be too distracted by grey space.
My blacks look inky black to me. Perhaps to you they would not. Either I can't discern deeper blacks as well as you can, or I just don't notice the difference between very black and very very black. Either way, it doesn't mean I am not satisfied with my blacks.

Perspective. My daughter can't see the difference between a DVD, BluRay, and UHD Bluray on my 150" screen. So does that mean she is missing out when she watches a DVD?
dkersten is offline  
post #49 of 92 Old 10-01-2018, 08:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
pheroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA
Posts: 950
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkersten View Post
My blacks look inky black to me. Perhaps to you they would not. Either I can't discern deeper blacks as well as you can, or I just don't notice the difference between very black and very very black. Either way, it doesn't mean I am not satisfied with my blacks.
You didn't mention if you've seen a JVC in action - have you? After migrating from a Sony HW55ES to a JVC RS500 last year, even in an only imperfectly light controlled room, I find it noticeably better than the Sony. Seeing the Sony 285ES 4K at a dealer last year was a disappointment due to the noticeably bright blacks, which is what led me to pull the trigger on a JVC e-shift model. I've had a couple of Epsons in my room from friends and they were certainly no better than the Sony in black level. If I hadn't gone to the JVC, the Sony HW55ES was pretty good and like you I was satisfied with it - until I experienced the JVC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkersten View Post
Perspective. My daughter can't see the difference between a DVD, BluRay, and UHD Bluray on my 150" screen. So does that mean she is missing out when she watches a DVD?
How old is your daughter and what's her eyesight like?

For most people, reasonably healthy eyes should be able to discern a significant difference in not only detail but color palette on a 150" screen. DVD's NTSC based color is significantly limited compared to what's available on Bluray, much less UHD. My wife is not an enthusiast by any stretch but even on my 110" screen at a viewing distance that's not as close as I'd like (15') she'll complain about a "bad picture" if we have streaming that is compressed or non-HD level video showing.

My system info.
Spoiler!
pheroy is offline  
post #50 of 92 Old 10-01-2018, 02:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dkersten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 1,238
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 783 Post(s)
Liked: 1377
Quote:
Originally Posted by pheroy View Post
How old is your daughter and what's her eyesight like?
Not really relevant, because it is all relative. At 19 years old, she just doesn't care about contrast, or even clarity of image or immersive sound. It isn't that she hasn't seen it, she just doesn't place any importance on it. Relative to that, any improvements would be unjustifiable. If you are completely satisfied with something, why seek improvement?

I get your point, anyone should be able to see a difference, especially if it is pointed out. But whether they CARE about that difference is an entirely different matter. And whether they would spend money to gain that difference is the most important factor.

I have not seen a JVC projector in a light controlled room with a 1.3 gain 150" wide screen in a light controlled room. Any other situation means NOTHING as it is not how that projector would look or perform in my space. I am the type who would blow $7k for a slighly better image, but I am NOT the type who would do it without a guarantee that the image will be better than what I already have. Unfortunately, I am not going to be able to demo anything on that kind of setup, so it makes it really tough to decide on an upgrade that may or may not be an improvement in every way.
dkersten is offline  
post #51 of 92 Old 10-02-2018, 07:37 AM
Advanced Member
 
pheroy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Raleigh, NC, USA
Posts: 950
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Well, that's what I was suspecting - she doesn't care about the differences, which is completely different than not being able to perceive them. Subjective interest isn't something anyone else can argue against. (The other possibility I wondered is if she might be very young and not really capable of perceiving the difference.)

I didn't really care much about the JVC level blacks until I experienced them in my system, and the extra dimensionality and "pop" it gives an image are hard to give up once you've had it. I get what you're saying about not wanting to spend a good bit more for no perceived gain - who does? - but it's been very objectively demonstrated for several years now that JVC has an advantage. Especially in a light controlled room - that's actually the ideal situation to be able to take advantage of the JVC's qualities. Seriously, if you're at all interested I'd talk to Mike or Craig about at least a 540, and as long as you have a return guarantee what do you have to lose?

My system info.
Spoiler!
pheroy is offline  
post #52 of 92 Old 10-02-2018, 07:37 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 28,313
Mentioned: 284 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13829 Post(s)
Liked: 11481
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Every time I read the thread title, I keep waiting for someone to reply with: "because I said so"
Said in a parent to little kid voice.
Alaric, ccotenj and lucacow like this.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #53 of 92 Old 10-02-2018, 08:07 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: 1726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Every time I read the thread title, I keep waiting for someone to reply with: "because I said so"

Said in a parent to little kid voice.

But the title doesn’t specify which Epson nor which JVC.
Dave Harper is offline  
post #54 of 92 Old 10-15-2018, 10:22 AM
Senior Member
 
fatallerror's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 426
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 313 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidinGA View Post
How do you like the CR and blacks on the 4000? I'm debating the 4000/4010 vs the 5040.



Here's my dilemma and question...

My room is a 2nd living room area that measures 14.5ft x 22ft. Pj mounted to shoot longways. Walls are light Grey, ceiling is white and carpet is tan. I am planning to make a black curtain setup that will cover the two side walls and ceiling all out about 5ft from the screen. Will only watch movies at night, so no other ambient light to worry about from outside windows. Will put down a dark (hopefully black) throw rug on the floor out in front of the screen too.

Will this create enough of a cave environment to see the CR benefits of the 5040 over the 4000/4010?
If you do this then the room will be even JVC "ready". I don't really think that everything need to be black to enjoy JVC's contrast, at least there are JVC owners with light grey walls but screen surroundings are black.

I think that the most important is to make black the areas of the room where the picture reflections are very noticeable which depends on how close are the edges of the screen to the side walls and ceiling but generally speaking, covering 1.5-2 meters (5-7ft) of the side walls and ceiling (and obviously the whole screen wall itself) will boost the contrast to the level where more coverage will just marginally improve contrast.

Of course hardcore AVS JVC owners will say that it's not enough and even wear black gloves if your skin is light colored because it ruins your contrast
DavidinGA likes this.
fatallerror is offline  
post #55 of 92 Old 10-15-2018, 11:35 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 28,313
Mentioned: 284 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13829 Post(s)
Liked: 11481
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Harper View Post
But the title doesn’t specify which Epson nor which JVC.
It was a joke, but in his first post he says the X990 vs the Epson Pro 4050.
Dave Harper likes this.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #56 of 92 Old 10-15-2018, 12:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,058
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2112 Post(s)
Liked: 1358
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkersten View Post
My blacks look inky black to me.
Try this.

Pause your movie on a dark scene, sci-fi or anything that has the inky blacks you say you are seeing.

Next walk up to the screen and place your hand in front of the screen creating a shadow next to the so-called inky black scene. My guess is that the shadow will look very dark and the inky black will look light gray. Now imagine if your entire image could have blacks as dark as that shadow you created. Think how the colors would pop and the bright highlights would look specular in nature.

That is close to understanding the difference between appearing black and being black. Contrast can make a huge difference in appearance of the entire picture.
GregCh is offline  
post #57 of 92 Old 10-15-2018, 01:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DavidinGA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: GA
Posts: 1,132
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 621 Post(s)
Liked: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Try this.

Pause your movie on a dark scene, sci-fi or anything that has the inky blacks you say you are seeing.

Next walk up to the screen and place your hand in front of the screen creating a shadow next to the so-called inky black scene. My guess is that the shadow will look very dark and the inky black will look light gray. Now imagine if your entire image could have blacks as dark as that shadow you created. Think how the colors would pop and the bright highlights would look specular in nature.

That is close to understanding the difference between appearing black and being black. Contrast can make a huge difference in appearance of the entire picture.
"what if I told you there is no spoon..."

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
AVTimme likes this.

--------------------------------------------------
Epson 5040, 150" 16:9 1.1gain, Source: HTPC w/madVR, Audio: Onkyo RZ 830 avr, 5.1.4 Atmos setup. 5 speaker Energy C Series: L/R C300's, C C-C100, SR/SL C50's, 4 in-ceiling Micca R-8c. Subwoofers: 1 MiniMarty um18 w/NX3000D. 4 diy Slim VBSS 18" Subs w/NX3000D.
DavidinGA is offline  
post #58 of 92 Old 10-15-2018, 01:22 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: 1726
Help me understand why a JVC is better than an EPSON

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
It was a joke, but in his first post he says the X990 vs the Epson Pro 4050.

I know, but you did say “Every time I read the thread title”, not “Every time I read the first post.
Dave Harper is offline  
post #59 of 92 Old 10-15-2018, 01:30 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
kheiden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 369
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Ordered my DLA-RS540U from ProjectorPeople today.

Definitely looking forward to seeing the difference between that and my Panasonic PT-AE8000U!

Thanks for all the feedback here. SUPER helpful!
kheiden is offline  
post #60 of 92 Old 10-15-2018, 08:36 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 519 Post(s)
Liked: 295
Do any of the new (or older) JVC projectors support 1080p at 120hz? I know I'm a broken record on this, but I'd love to have JVC blacks and 120hz native for gaming than DLP. Hopefully JVC is listening! E-shift is basically 120hz operation and 18 gbps HDMI 2.0 can do up to 196hz in 4:4:4 HDR10, so 120hz HDR10 in 4:4:4 should be possible too. Even if LCoS isn't as fast as DLP 120hz vs 60hz should still offer a substantial benefit in terms of motion resolution. I suspect the LCoS can't quite do 144hz or they'd have had triple flash 3D. They could at least do 1080p at 96hz which is what their 3D runs at. But their e-shift runs at 120hz (for 60hz content), unless I'm mistaken, so their panels should be able to do 120hz relatively well.
BattleAxeVR 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