New Sony 285es vs. 295es - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 7Likes
  • 1 Post By avsBuddy
  • 1 Post By jbn008
  • 1 Post By avsBuddy
  • 2 Post By GregCh
  • 2 Post By BattleAxeVR
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 28 Old 11-20-2018, 04:16 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
New Sony 285es vs. 295es

I have chance to buy a new in box Sony 285es for $3,999. Only one left. Should I pull the trigger or get the new 295es? Your help please!
shall72769 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 28 Old 11-20-2018, 05:29 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 14,265
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2532 Post(s)
Liked: 2198
Quote:
Originally Posted by shall72769 View Post
I have chance to buy a new in box Sony 285es for $3,999. Only one left. Should I pull the trigger or get the new 295es? Your help please! [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/confused.gif[/IMG]
I would give Mike Garrett of AVScience a call first.
DavidHir is offline  
post #3 of 28 Old 11-20-2018, 05:30 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,555
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11822 Post(s)
Liked: 9353
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by shall72769 View Post
I have chance to buy a new in box Sony 285es for $3,999. Only one left. Should I pull the trigger or get the new 295es? Your help please!
If you plan to do 4K streaming HDR or 60P 4K gaming, then I would look at the 295. If not, then 285 would be fine.
Mike Garrett is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 28 Old 11-20-2018, 06:33 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
If you plan to do 4K streaming HDR or 60P 4K gaming, then I would look at the 295. If not, then 285 would be fine.
I do use Apple TV for most movies, tv, etc. So should I spring for the 295?
shall72769 is offline  
post #5 of 28 Old 11-20-2018, 07:34 PM
Member
 
avsBuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 70
295 benefits 4K streaming by using reality creation to enhance detail and minimize compression artifacts. 285 can’t apply RC to 4K. However it does apply it to 1080p and below.
avsBuddy is offline  
post #6 of 28 Old 11-20-2018, 07:38 PM
Member
 
lordx2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 73
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
295 benefits 4K streaming by using reality creation to enhance detail and minimize compression artifacts. 285 can’t apply RC to 4K. However it does apply it to 1080p and below.
I just bought the 285es - and noticed that as well - no RC for 4k... so I will have to set my HTPC output to 23.976 fps to get perfect stutter free reference quality from movies. I don't consider that too much (if any) of a trade off, since I am watching the movie exactly as it was encoded/filmed.

Streaming I don't know about though - does streaming vary its FPS throughout the stream??? Or does a stream keep the same FPS and just vary its bitrate (and possibly resolution) as bandwidth allows?
lordx2 is offline  
post #7 of 28 Old 11-20-2018, 08:03 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,555
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11822 Post(s)
Liked: 9353
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by shall72769 View Post
I do use Apple TV for most movies, tv, etc. So should I spring for the 295?
The problem with streaming is, 4K HDR at 60P requires more than the 13.5Gbps HDMI that the 285 can't do, so you get banding.

Last edited by Mike Garrett; 11-21-2018 at 06:32 AM.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #8 of 28 Old 11-20-2018, 10:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,787
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1801 Post(s)
Liked: 1116
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
295 benefits 4K streaming by using reality creation to enhance detail and minimize compression artifacts. 285 can’t apply RC to 4K. However it does apply it to 1080p and below.
No you can run RC on 4k content with the 285 as well. The only difference between the two is that you can run motion processing on 4k content with the 295 and you aren't limited to 4K @24p HDR10 with the 295.

Otherwise the two are identical.
GregCh is offline  
post #9 of 28 Old 11-21-2018, 07:30 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
No you can run RC on 4k content with the 285 as well. The only difference between the two is that you can run motion processing on 4k content with the 295 and you aren't limited to 4K @24p HDR10 with the 295.

Otherwise the two are identical.
Ok so sounds like the consensus is that the 285 at $1,000 less is a pretty good deal. Right?
shall72769 is offline  
post #10 of 28 Old 11-21-2018, 07:54 AM
Member
 
avsBuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by shall72769 View Post
Ok so sounds like the consensus is that the 285 at $1,000 less is a pretty good deal. Right?
Yes. The bottom line is that new 295 is a 285 with a 18Gbp HDMI port (should've been there since 2015) and a faster processor, capable of applying Reality Creation to 4k. Image sensor, bulb, lens and most importantly, light output, are identical.

For pure blu-ray watching, including 4k HDR 24fps - both Sony models are nearly identical. 295 can apply Reality Creation to 4K, but in my brief viewing of that feature, it's only really needed for non-4k sources, and 285 can already do that.
If you plan to stream 4k 60fps HDR, then 285 will show slight banding in colors because it can't take that signal in full color. That's also its limitation with 4k HDR gaming because that happens at 60 frames per second as well.

If you play latest games, I would go with 295 over 285. Otherwise 285 is a better deal at closeout prices.

This year refresh of Sony models was a long planned token update. I don't think Sony expected JVC to come out with a true 4k projector. For many years Sony has a luxury of crippling their projectors because they had no real competition in a true 4k market. That's why they could get away with selling $7,000 projectors with 13Mbps HDMI ports, while you get full 18Gps HDMI on a $200 Insignia TV.
yakapo likes this.
avsBuddy is offline  
post #11 of 28 Old 11-21-2018, 08:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
jbn008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 807
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 257 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
No you can run RC on 4k content with the 285 as well. The only difference between the two is that you can run motion processing on 4k content with the 295 and you aren't limited to 4K @24p HDR10 with the 295.

Otherwise the two are identical.
Exactly, it's the motion processing that is unavailable in 4K. Reality Creation works great on 4K content.

Sony's native motion handling is fantastic so I've never felt the need to turn on "motionflow" in any situation.
markmon1 likes this.
jbn008 is offline  
post #12 of 28 Old 11-21-2018, 12:09 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,787
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1801 Post(s)
Liked: 1116
Quote:
Originally Posted by shall72769 View Post
Ok so sounds like the consensus is that the 285 at $1,000 less is a pretty good deal. Right?
Yes, I would think the savings would more than make up for the differences if your primary use is AppleTV streaming (ATV4k will output to 24p), 1080p sports & TV, and UHD 4K Blu-ray movies.

If you are a big gamer or stream with a device that outputs 60 fps and can't output at 24 fps then you want the 295. The 285 will handle up to 4k @30Hz HDR10 without color banding, if you need to go to 4k @60hz HDR10 without color banding then you need the 295. Otherwise the two will perform nearly identical.
GregCh is offline  
post #13 of 28 Old 11-21-2018, 12:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,787
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1801 Post(s)
Liked: 1116
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
Yes. The bottom line is that new 295 is a 285 with a 18Gbp HDMI port (should've been there since 2015) and a faster processor, capable of applying Reality Creation to 4k. Image sensor, bulb, lens and most importantly, light output, are identical.

For pure blu-ray watching, including 4k HDR 24fps - both Sony models are nearly identical. 295 can apply Reality Creation to 4K, but in my brief viewing of that feature, it's only really needed for non-4k sources, and 285 can already do that.
If you plan to stream 4k 60fps HDR, then 285 will show slight banding in colors because it can't take that signal in full color. That's also its limitation with 4k HDR gaming because that happens at 60 frames per second as well.

If you play latest games, I would go with 295 over 285. Otherwise 285 is a better deal at closeout prices.

This year refresh of Sony models was a long planned token update. I don't think Sony expected JVC to come out with a true 4k projector. For many years Sony has a luxury of crippling their projectors because they had no real competition in a true 4k market. That's why they could get away with selling $7,000 projectors with 13Mbps HDMI ports, while you get full 18Gps HDMI on a $200 Insignia TV.
Reality Creation has nothing to do with the 295, 285 difference. Both can use RC on 4k material. I don't know why you think you can't use RC on 4K content with the 285 because you definitely can. The difference is motion processing. You can't run Frame Interpolation on 4K material with the 285 like you can on the 295. But almost no one uses FI because of the Soap Opera effect, so it really isn't a big deal.
GregCh is offline  
post #14 of 28 Old 11-21-2018, 12:46 PM
Member
 
avsBuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Reality Creation has nothing to do with the 295, 285 difference. Both can use RC on 4k material. I don't know why you think you can't use RC on 4K content with the 285 because you definitely can. The difference is motion processing. You can't run Frame Interpolation on 4K material with the 285 like you can on the 295. But almost no one uses FI because of the Soap Opera effect, so it really isn't a big deal.
I go by what Sony rep told me. He demonstrated RC on 1080p stream on a still frame projected to a 120" screen. Toggling RC on improved detail greatly, without making it look artificial. And being opposed to any picture enhancements, including Soap Opera, I really liked what RC did to a 1080p image. RC is completely separate from the MotionFlow setting which provides Soap Opera effect to which you referred. We didn't use that. When we switched to 4k blu-ray, 285 still had RC option available but the only setting available in it is Black Frame insertion. That option supposed to improve fast movement but does nothing for cleaning up resolution. Rep agreed with my assumption that RC is less important for 4K blu-rays because they are already high bit-rate and have all the detail you need. But he believed it still benefits streaming 4k content because it's typically highly compressed.

For these reasons, I believe that for someone who is only interested in watching blu-ray movies on 2x series Sony projectors, it makes sense to go with 285 over 295 and save a good chunk of change.
avsBuddy is offline  
post #15 of 28 Old 11-21-2018, 01:04 PM
Advanced Member
 
DJR662's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 607 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
I go by what Sony rep told me. He demonstrated RC on 1080p stream on a still frame projected to a 120" screen. Toggling RC on improved detail greatly, without making it look artificial. And being opposed to any picture enhancements, including Soap Opera, I really liked what RC did to a 1080p image. RC is completely separate from the MotionFlow setting which provides Soap Opera effect to which you referred. We didn't use that. When we switched to 4k blu-ray, 285 still had RC option available but the only setting available in it is Black Frame insertion. That option supposed to improve fast movement but does nothing for cleaning up resolution. Rep agreed with my assumption that RC is less important for 4K blu-rays because they are already high bit-rate and have all the detail you need. But he believed it still benefits streaming 4k content because it's typically highly compressed.

For these reasons, I believe that for someone who is only interested in watching blu-ray movies on 2x series Sony projectors, it makes sense to go with 285 over 295 and save a good chunk of change.
You're still getting it mixed up though.

With 4K UHD, it's BFI that becomes available as the only option for motionflow. RC is completely separated from motionflow settings as you have already correctly stated, and that is still available for 4K content.

Having said that, it seems to me RC works differently and far less agressive with 4K than with 2D + 3D 1080p content.
DJR662 is offline  
post #16 of 28 Old 11-21-2018, 01:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,787
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1801 Post(s)
Liked: 1116
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
I go by what Sony rep told me. He demonstrated RC on 1080p stream on a still frame projected to a 120" screen. Toggling RC on improved detail greatly, without making it look artificial. And being opposed to any picture enhancements, including Soap Opera, I really liked what RC did to a 1080p image. RC is completely separate from the MotionFlow setting which provides Soap Opera effect to which you referred. We didn't use that. When we switched to 4k blu-ray, 285 still had RC option available but the only setting available in it is Black Frame insertion. That option supposed to improve fast movement but does nothing for cleaning up resolution. Rep agreed with my assumption that RC is less important for 4K blu-rays because they are already high bit-rate and have all the detail you need. But he believed it still benefits streaming 4k content because it's typically highly compressed.

For these reasons, I believe that for someone who is only interested in watching blu-ray movies on 2x series Sony projectors, it makes sense to go with 285 over 295 and save a good chunk of change.
You are confused. Reality Creation is full featured and available for both 1080p and 4k feeds for both the 285 and 295.

The motionflow settings are the ones that change with the 285 and 295. Black Frame insertion is in the MotionFlow settings not the Reality Creation settings as it is related to motion enhancement. RC has nothing to do with motion.

Trust me. I have seen and used 385, 285, and 295. The only difference is in the MotionFlow processing not the Reality Creation processing.

Sony does claim that RC is improved with the new processor but I have my doubts. Sony claims every year with advertising that the SXRD panels are improved, RC is improved, black levels improved and yet they seem identical in testing.
GregCh is offline  
post #17 of 28 Old 11-22-2018, 07:08 AM
Member
 
avsBuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 70
I’m sure you guys are correct about RC and Motionflow settings.

I don’t own either projectors. Was thinking either new 295 or JVC NX5. After seeing 285 in person and comparing it to JVC e shift models I’m conteplating whether 285 is the better bang for the buck for me since I’m primarily interested in movies and do not game. I plan to stream 4K but don’t think any of broadcast or streaming is in 60fps HDR. Mad at Sony for artificially crippling their projectors with slow hdmi.

Had opportunity to see JVC NX9 and it’s awesome. Will push Sony to innovate.
avsBuddy is offline  
post #18 of 28 Old 11-22-2018, 07:38 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,555
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11822 Post(s)
Liked: 9353
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
I’m sure you guys are correct about RC and Motionflow settings.

I don’t own either projectors. Was thinking either new 295 or JVC NX5. After seeing 285 in person and comparing it to JVC e shift models I’m conteplating whether 285 is the better bang for the buck for me since I’m primarily interested in movies and do not game. I plan to stream 4K but don’t think any of broadcast or streaming is in 60fps HDR. Mad at Sony for artificially crippling their projectors with slow hdmi.

Had opportunity to see JVC NX9 and it’s awesome. Will push Sony to innovate.
Any broadcast 4K will be 60P. All streaming is 60P. Now some devices will allow you to stream movies at native frame rate, so anything filmed at 24P will be able to be changed from 60P to 24P.
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #19 of 28 Old 11-22-2018, 09:04 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Industry Insider
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 24,022
Mentioned: 75 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6404 Post(s)
Liked: 6398
Quote:
Originally Posted by shall72769 View Post
Ok so sounds like the consensus is that the 285 at $1,000 less is a pretty good deal. Right?
285ES is no slouch, only you can make that choice......No one else's opinion matter except what you think There is no wrong answer either...
Cleveland Plasma is online now  
post #20 of 28 Old 11-22-2018, 10:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,787
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1801 Post(s)
Liked: 1116
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
Mad at Sony for artificially crippling their projectors with slow hdmi.
Actually Sony didn't intentionally cripple the 285 with slow HDMI.

The issue was that the existing video processing chip wasn't powerful enough to handle 10 bit color for 4k content at 60hz. Sony had an HDMI chipset that matched the video chipset. They were primarily thinking about handling 4K HDR10 at 24p because that is what almost every blu-ray movie is. However, when the buying public made it clear that color banding was an issue with streaming some content and gaming, Sony updated the processor to a higher end unit. That fixed the color banding issue, allowed 18 Gbps bandwidth, and allows 4k MotionFlow processing.

JVC didn't have this issue because they were still using 1080p panels and 18Gbps HDMI at 1080p 60hz 10/12 bit color was easier for slower video processors to handle. By the time JVC, released their true 4k versions then the higher end video processors were cheaper and readily available.
GregCh is offline  
post #21 of 28 Old 11-22-2018, 08:13 PM
Member
 
lordx2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 73
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Another thing I noticed - just streamed a show on Hulu (chrome as the browser) - there was some stuttering during panning. I tried setting the output to 23.976, 25, and 30 hz settings (all 3840x2160), and it did it on all of those hz.

Do I need to bump it to 50 or 60 hz for hulu streaming from a HTPC?
lordx2 is offline  
post #22 of 28 Old 11-24-2018, 04:58 PM
Advanced Member
 
jbn008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 807
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 257 Post(s)
Liked: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Any broadcast 4K will be 60P. All streaming is 60P. Now some devices will allow you to stream movies at native frame rate, so anything filmed at 24P will be able to be changed from 60P to 24P.
With streaming I've found that most US content is shot natively at 24fps so all the more reason (for VW285 owners) to use a device that has framerate matching. Otherwise it'll convert all content to 60fps.
jbn008 is offline  
post #23 of 28 Old 11-24-2018, 06:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JeffR1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,670
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1055 Post(s)
Liked: 510
Seems to me there is a setting in the Smooth Motion menu called "True Cinema" or something like that.
I thought that setting takes 60 frame motion and makes it look like film.
In other wards in mimics the look of 24 fps with 60fps content.

This setting may only be available on the 295es though if you're dealing with 4K content at 60 fps.
JeffR1 is offline  
post #24 of 28 Old 11-26-2018, 06:00 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Thanks to everyone for the thoughtful and insightful responses! I’m going with the 285 marked down to a very good price.
shall72769 is offline  
post #25 of 28 Old 11-26-2018, 09:42 PM
Member
 
avsBuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
Mad at Sony for artificially crippling their projectors with slow hdmi.
Actually Sony didn't intentionally cripple the 285 with slow HDMI.

The issue was that the existing video processing chip wasn't powerful enough to handle 10 bit color for 4k content at 60hz. Sony had an HDMI chipset that matched the video chipset. They were primarily thinking about handling 4K HDR10 at 24p because that is what almost every blu-ray movie is. However, when the buying public made it clear that color banding was an issue with streaming some content and gaming, Sony updated the processor to a higher end unit. That fixed the color banding issue, allowed 18 Gbps bandwidth, and allows 4k MotionFlow processing.

JVC didn't have this issue because they were still using 1080p panels and 18Gbps HDMI at 1080p 60hz 10/12 bit color was easier for slower video processors to handle. By the time JVC, released their true 4k versions then the higher end video processors were cheaper and readily available.
Love Sony projectors, but I’m not buying it. I bought a $1k 2017 Sony LED TV that’s capable of handling full hdmi. Quick search indicates HDMI 2.0 was introduced in 2013, with capable TVs coming out in 2014.

That’s 4 years ago! Me thinks Sony was just milking the cow. Gotta have reason for your to upgrade next year. If not for JVC, there would’t be real competition in true 4K projector arena. You’ll see, next year Sony will release brighter projectors. And when JVC will about to release laser projectors in the 5k range, all of a sudden Sony will announce one as well.
Archibald1 likes this.
avsBuddy is offline  
post #26 of 28 Old 11-30-2018, 12:23 AM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
Love Sony projectors, but I’m not buying it. I bought a $1k 2017 Sony LED TV that’s capable of handling full hdmi. Quick search indicates HDMI 2.0 was introduced in 2013, with capable TVs coming out in 2014.

That’s 4 years ago! Me thinks Sony was just milking the cow. Gotta have reason for your to upgrade next year. If not for JVC, there would’t be real competition in true 4K projector arena. You’ll see, next year Sony will release brighter projectors. And when JVC will about to release laser projectors in the 5k range, all of a sudden Sony will announce one as well.
Would agree some healthy competition will be better for us as consumers, but 5k laser projectors still feels like a pipe dream. We will probably have shifted to 8k content if we ever see a 4k laser projector at that price, but we will probably be discussing 8k laser projectors by that time being the High end main stay hence doubt the cost of the laser projectors will ever reach that median of price
tianzo is offline  
post #27 of 28 Old 11-30-2018, 10:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,787
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1801 Post(s)
Liked: 1116
Quote:
Originally Posted by avsBuddy View Post
Love Sony projectors, but I’m not buying it. I bought a $1k 2017 Sony LED TV that’s capable of handling full hdmi. Quick search indicates HDMI 2.0 was introduced in 2013, with capable TVs coming out in 2014.

That’s 4 years ago! Me thinks Sony was just milking the cow. Gotta have reason for your to upgrade next year. If not for JVC, there would’t be real competition in true 4K projector arena. You’ll see, next year Sony will release brighter projectors. And when JVC will about to release laser projectors in the 5k range, all of a sudden Sony will announce one as well.
HDMI 2.0 wasn't the issue with the 2017 Sonys. 18 Gbps HDMI was dirt cheap. You could get it on Apple TVs and other devices for under $100. The problem was processing 3 4K panels at 60 HZ with full 12 bit color. The current processors in the 2017 Sony Projectors couldn't keep up. They were limited to 8 bit color when they went above 30 hz. So they didn't need 18Gbps HDMI because it was overkill. They could only handle up to a maximum of 13.5 Gbps in full 12 bit color processing.

LED TVs work differently and are a different market. They get updates faster. The same chips that were in the Z9D Sonys finally made it to the 2018 projectors. But last year's model had the slower processing chips.
BattleAxeVR and SpykeSIK like this.
GregCh is offline  
post #28 of 28 Old 12-01-2018, 12:06 PM
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 519 Post(s)
Liked: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
The problem with streaming is, 4K HDR at 60P requires more than the 13.5Gbps HDMI that the 285 can't do, so you get banding.
13.5 gbps is enough to deliver 4K60 in HDR10 in 4:2:0, though.

I read that the real problem with last years' Sonys is that their internal processing can't handle 10-bit at 60hz.

4:2:0 instead of 4:2:2 won't introduce significant banding on its own, if at all, especially since chroma upscaling done quite well these days and smooths out any kinks. Banding isn't really limited by spatial resolution, but by bit depth, and HDR10 in 4:2:0 is just fine. I mean, that's literally what UHD Blurays are encoded in, and virtually every other source, so why wouldn't it be perfectly acceptable? Why would 4:2:0 be OK vis-a-vis HDR banding at 24 fps but not 60 fps? That does not compute.

Sony cheaped out on their processor too much, and had they not done so, 13.5 gbps would have been just fine for gaming streaming sources at 60hz in HDR10 without banding. Thankfully they fixed that this year. Streaming is too important these days, and it's often set to 60hz. Even if you don't play games you likely still want banding-free HDR at 60hz. So I wouldn't recommend the 285 at all unless it's 100% dedicated to 24 fps upstream electronics and content, only. Which might be fine for some. If someone gave me a Sony 285 for free, I'd sell it and buy the 295, or buy something cheaper and keep the money (most likely).

HDMI bandwidth being 13.5 gbps is not the cause of banding in the 285. That's what Billy Lynn is encoded to (4:2:0 4K60 HDR10), and I 100% doubt that any other streaming services are actually delivering 4:2:2 which is what 18 gbps HDMI maxes out at. The only real source of 4:2:2 native is games, and even there, it doesn't matter. I'm not even sure that 4:2:2 is much better than 4:2:0, because 4:2:0 is evenly compressed in X and Y dimensions, whereas 4:2:2 is only compressed by 50% in Y. So you get better horizontal resolution than vertical. The only argument in favour of 4:2:2 I think is that upscaling to 4:4:4 is simpler. But aside from games, there is no content that's streamed in 4:2:2 as far as I'm aware.

All video is shipped to consumers in 4:2:0 and 13.5 gbps is just fine for that, even at 60hz and in HDR10. I'd even argue that it doesn't matter for games either, because the main factor limiting games from looking real isn't really their resolution, it's the quality of their pixels and how they are produced. Games are still a ways off before they can compete with a UHD Bluray like Billy Lynn, in terms of realism.

In short, chroma doesn't matter. Except for PC text, but even HDMI 2.0b's 18 gbps isn't sufficient for HDR10 there, as you need 4:4:4 for 1:1 text and graphics. So even the 295 isn't good enough. We need HDMI 2.1, which is getting closer and closer! Hopefully next years' 4K projectors will have 4K 120hz in 4:4:4 HDR10+ and Dolby Vision too.
GregCh and Tank6585 like this.

Last edited by BattleAxeVR; 12-01-2018 at 12:15 PM.
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