The 2019 model projectors comparison thread - Page 80 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 3346Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2371 of 2783 Old 03-25-2019, 03:14 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 172
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 35
How does the noise level of the RS3000 compare against the RS4500 ? Noise in terms of image noise. While some movies have grain intentionally added to them, others however have some amount of noise on them due to the projector and screen.
abinav555 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2372 of 2783 Old 03-25-2019, 04:15 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 100 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4418 Post(s)
Liked: 2768
Quote:
Originally Posted by abinav555 View Post
How does the noise level of the RS3000 compare against the RS4500 ? Noise in terms of image noise. While some movies have grain intentionally added to them, others however have some amount of noise on them due to the projector and screen.
When we had the RS4500 and RS3000 here 2 weeks ago side-by-side, I'd say both images were equally clean. However, I have since gotten a better RS4500 and its image is a little calmer yet. The RS3000 image is calm though nothing like the older JVC line. More like how Sony image looks calm but with far less bulb flicker. Sony lamps flicker a lot.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" screen in pure black room no light, htpc nvidia 1080ti.
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, 2 sub arrays both infinite baffle: 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 4x12 fi audio running on 2nd ep4000.
markmon1 is offline  
post #2373 of 2783 Old 03-25-2019, 08:25 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Industry Insider
 
Cleveland Plasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 23,813
Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6308 Post(s)
Liked: 6310
Quote:
Originally Posted by coxy2416 View Post
I have dealt with some iris issues on my X790 with the JVC Mississauga Canada and they were great trying to diagnose my issue and in the end replaced my projector. However I am not even sure what the warranty coverage time is in Canada
Call your dealer
Cleveland Plasma is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2374 of 2783 Old 03-25-2019, 06:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Sittler27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,461
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by coxy2416 View Post
I have dealt with some iris issues on my X790 with the JVC Mississauga Canada and they were great trying to diagnose my issue and in the end replaced my projector. However I am not even sure what the warranty coverage time is in Canada
Thanks for this. Bought my projector in Sept 2017, should be good for warranty then (don't ask me why I was thinking it was just a year). I'll get this going then.
coxy2416 likes this.
Sittler27 is offline  
post #2375 of 2783 Old 03-25-2019, 10:39 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 172
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
When we had the RS4500 and RS3000 here 2 weeks ago side-by-side, I'd say both images were equally clean. However, I have since gotten a better RS4500 and its image is a little calmer yet. The RS3000 image is calm though nothing like the older JVC line. More like how Sony image looks calm but with far less bulb flicker. Sony lamps flicker a lot.
Thanks. So I believe the difference would be negligible to the human eye.
abinav555 is offline  
post #2376 of 2783 Old 03-26-2019, 12:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Sittler27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,461
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Could someone tell me again why the 695ES is better than the NX7?

695 is $1.5K more than the NX7 up here in Canada
Sittler27 is offline  
post #2377 of 2783 Old 03-26-2019, 01:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,635
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 567 Post(s)
Liked: 564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
Could someone tell me again why the 695ES is better than the NX7?

695 is $1.5K more than the NX7 up here in Canada
I can post the reasons why its better for me.

1. It was available when the NX7 wasn't.
2. Input Lag - I do PC gaming and I want the lowest input lag possible.
3. Sports/TV - I do watch a lot of TV and Sports
4. Resolution Switching - For whatever reason I have always had issues with any JVC and my Lumagen and the input switching, its just slow and a lot slower than any of the Sonys and seems to get hung up at times. This is pry not an issue for most as most don't run with the Lumagen, I have also seen other people not have issues. The Sony just doesn't ever seem to get hung.

Below is a review that was posted and kind of sums it up. I honestly don't think anyone can go wrong with either projector. I remember when I was blown away with a Epson 1080UB, we have come a long way with any of the projectors out today and outside of us being picky with projectors I truly believe most people would be happy with either a NX7 or 695.

Near the RS2000's price point, only one projector comes to mind that offers true competition to the JVC: the Sony VPL-VW695ES priced at $9,999. Like the RS2000, the Sony is a native 4K HDR capable projector offering, on paper, very similar performance and features. I was fortunate enough to have both of these projectors here at the same time and was able to do a shootout between them. The most obvious difference between these two projectors was in contrast performance on darker video content. The JVC simply has more apparent contrast and a much darker level of black. Beyond that, both projectors looked remarkably similar in terms of image sharpness, native motion handling, shadow detail, and color reproduction. While the Sony gives up a little in ultimate contrast performance, it makes up for it with better video processing. Sony's motion smoothing software, called Motion Flow, offers better subjective performance and more modes over the RS2000. Input lag on the Sony, an important metric for gamers, is more than 10 ms faster. I also think Sony's smart sharpening software, called Reality Creation, does a noticeably better job compared to JVC's smart sharpening software, called Enhance in the MPC menu, for those who like to artificially sharpen the image.

If you're someone who is primarily watching movies, I'd recommend the JVC. If you're someone who plans on gaming or watching a lot of sports, I think the Sony is a better fit. Both projectors offer good performance in all areas; however, each have a small lead in these specific areas. Choosing which to buy ultimately comes down to the type of content you view more.

https://hometheaterreview.com/jvc-dl...ctor-reviewed/
jbrinegar and Jacob92175 like this.

Lind Family HT
HT - RS2000/VW695ES - ST130 - Emotiva RMF-1 - XPA-7 - XPA-5 - GE Triton 2 - GE Supercenter XXL - GE Invisa 650 x 8 - Xbox One X - PS4 Pro - Oppo BDP-203 - Kalediscape Strato - HTPC 1008ti- Dual SVS PB16-Ultra's - Lumagen Radiance Pro
kaotikr1 is online now  
post #2378 of 2783 Old 03-26-2019, 05:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Sittler27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,461
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaotikr1 View Post
I can post the reasons why its better for me.

1. It was available when the NX7 wasn't.
2. Input Lag - I do PC gaming and I want the lowest input lag possible.
3. Sports/TV - I do watch a lot of TV and Sports
4. Resolution Switching - For whatever reason I have always had issues with any JVC and my Lumagen and the input switching, its just slow and a lot slower than any of the Sonys and seems to get hung up at times. This is pry not an issue for most as most don't run with the Lumagen, I have also seen other people not have issues. The Sony just doesn't ever seem to get hung.

Below is a review that was posted and kind of sums it up. I honestly don't think anyone can go wrong with either projector. I remember when I was blown away with a Epson 1080UB, we have come a long way with any of the projectors out today and outside of us being picky with projectors I truly believe most people would be happy with either a NX7 or 695.

Near the RS2000's price point, only one projector comes to mind that offers true competition to the JVC: the Sony VPL-VW695ES priced at $9,999. Like the RS2000, the Sony is a native 4K HDR capable projector offering, on paper, very similar performance and features. I was fortunate enough to have both of these projectors here at the same time and was able to do a shootout between them. The most obvious difference between these two projectors was in contrast performance on darker video content. The JVC simply has more apparent contrast and a much darker level of black. Beyond that, both projectors looked remarkably similar in terms of image sharpness, native motion handling, shadow detail, and color reproduction. While the Sony gives up a little in ultimate contrast performance, it makes up for it with better video processing. Sony's motion smoothing software, called Motion Flow, offers better subjective performance and more modes over the RS2000. Input lag on the Sony, an important metric for gamers, is more than 10 ms faster. I also think Sony's smart sharpening software, called Reality Creation, does a noticeably better job compared to JVC's smart sharpening software, called Enhance in the MPC menu, for those who like to artificially sharpen the image.

If you're someone who is primarily watching movies, I'd recommend the JVC. If you're someone who plans on gaming or watching a lot of sports, I think the Sony is a better fit. Both projectors offer good performance in all areas; however, each have a small lead in these specific areas. Choosing which to buy ultimately comes down to the type of content you view more.

https://hometheaterreview.com/jvc-dl...ctor-reviewed/
I watch about 50% HD TV Series, 25% movies and 25% sports. (I do game, but on a Sony LCD TV that does HDR that I have as a monitor with my Xbox One X).

I have an opportunity right now to get a Sony 885ES demo (open box) with full 3 year warranty for a killer price ($15K Cdn), and I'm wondering if it's worth it to jump on that over an NX7 even though it's a lot more money even for a demo.

My current projector is a X970R.
Sittler27 is offline  
post #2379 of 2783 Old 03-26-2019, 05:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,635
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 567 Post(s)
Liked: 564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
I watch about 50% HD TV Series, 25% movies and 25% sports. (I do game, but on a Sony LCD TV that does HDR that I have as a monitor with my Xbox One X).



I have an opportunity right now to get a Sony 885ES demo (open box) with full 3 year warranty for a killer price ($15K Cdn), and I'm wondering if it's worth it to jump on that over an NX7 even though it's a lot more money even for a demo.



My current projector is a X970R.


The 885 is a hell of a projector and would be hard to pass up at that price.

Lind Family HT
HT - RS2000/VW695ES - ST130 - Emotiva RMF-1 - XPA-7 - XPA-5 - GE Triton 2 - GE Supercenter XXL - GE Invisa 650 x 8 - Xbox One X - PS4 Pro - Oppo BDP-203 - Kalediscape Strato - HTPC 1008ti- Dual SVS PB16-Ultra's - Lumagen Radiance Pro
kaotikr1 is online now  
post #2380 of 2783 Old 03-26-2019, 05:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Sittler27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,461
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaotikr1 View Post
The 885 is a hell of a projector and would be hard to pass up at that price.
Yeah, was thinking that. Plus it's likely already depreciated so if I resold down the road I shouldn't lose too much.

So what would I expect to notice most with an 885 over my lowly X970R?
Sittler27 is offline  
post #2381 of 2783 Old 03-31-2019, 02:55 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 75
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Here's a brief review of the upcoming Epson shifters. https://www.avhub.com.au/news/sound-...2u0ut-J4xU1Md8
ShadowBoy is offline  
post #2382 of 2783 Old 03-31-2019, 03:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,782
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2220 Post(s)
Liked: 1141
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowBoy View Post
Here's a brief review of the upcoming Epson shifters.
Thanks for sharing. No native 4K here, but good glass, brightness, and color. The announcement compares to the .47 chip single chip found in DLP shifters. But the XPR DLPs also use the .67 chips.

I tried a .47 chip DLP PJ ...and well, ok...my parents taught me at a young age that if I had nothing nice to say...I think you know how the rest of the saying goes.
Aztar35 is offline  
post #2383 of 2783 Old 03-31-2019, 03:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,782
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2220 Post(s)
Liked: 1141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
I watch about 50% HD TV Series, 25% movies and 25% sports. (I do game, but on a Sony LCD TV that does HDR that I have as a monitor with my Xbox One X).

I have an opportunity right now to get a Sony 885ES demo (open box) with full 3 year warranty for a killer price ($15K Cdn), and I'm wondering if it's worth it to jump on that over an NX7 even though it's a lot more money even for a demo.

My current projector is a X970R.
That's a ridiculous price for the laser.

I would demo both the 885 and the NX7 before you made any final decision, assuming they will keep the offer open too, I guess.
Aztar35 is offline  
post #2384 of 2783 Old 03-31-2019, 03:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,782
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2220 Post(s)
Liked: 1141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
Yeah, was thinking that. Plus it's likely already depreciated so if I resold down the road I shouldn't lose too much.

So what would I expect to notice most with an 885 over my lowly X970R?
I demo'd the 885 and had the X990. I would say a calmer, more stable picture, lesser black levels down deep, brighter picture for longer, better resolution detail with the native 4K panels. Did you feel that 885 was a good lens sample?
Aztar35 is offline  
post #2385 of 2783 Old 04-01-2019, 09:07 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,341
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1613 Post(s)
Liked: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
I watch about 50% HD TV Series, 25% movies and 25% sports. (I do game, but on a Sony LCD TV that does HDR that I have as a monitor with my Xbox One X).

I have an opportunity right now to get a Sony 885ES demo (open box) with full 3 year warranty for a killer price ($15K Cdn), and I'm wondering if it's worth it to jump on that over an NX7 even though it's a lot more money even for a demo.

My current projector is a X970R.
I have had the 885ES / 760ES for a couple week and it throws a stunning picture. I have seen both the N5 and the NX9 and I would still prefer the 760ES over them. Lasers is a game changer for many reasons.

Today the 870/995ES arrived and I'll be doing a lot of viewing to see how it compares to the 760.
Spizz, woofer and Aztar35 like this.
coolgeek is offline  
post #2386 of 2783 Old 04-05-2019, 08:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,341
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1613 Post(s)
Liked: 890
Intro:

Before I post my review of the Sony 760 and 870, here are some caveats and background information to go along with.
  1. I have had the Sony 760ES for 3 weeks to play with. So one might say I have had an extensive idea of how this projector performs under most content.
  2. I only had the 870ES for 3 days. But while I have the 870, I also have the 760 together so I can do a lot of side by side comparisons. Most of my 870 viewings were with the sole idea of comparing it with the 760ES.
  3. The 870 had only 7 hour on it, so it was practically brand new. The 760 had I think less than 100 hours on it when I got it.
  4. I am using a 138 inch 16:9 screen. 1.8 gain, silver, micro perf. Projected with maximum zoom, basically the brightest possible.
  5. These are out of the box, non-calibrated. I used Cinema Film 1 on both. Then adjusted the Contrast, Brightness, and other normal user settings available to me without going into the Service Menu.

New SXRD Panels?


This is actually confirmed by the Sony Engineer and their Marketing person. At the Sony Laser projector launch event, they had a slide comparing their projectors, and those that started from the 760ES had the newer panels. All of these panels are made in Japan with very high quality control. They showed a video on how they make the SXRD panels. Essentially looked like a NASA clean room. They also confirmed a better contrast between the newer panels and the older ones. Their main purpose was to work on Contrast as they realize that that is the ONLY single variable they lose to JVC. I tend to agree with them on this assessment. To me the Sony is better in every way compared to the JVC other than contrast and in real environment, it’s not going to be night and day difference… some might disagree, but I am willing to bet 99% of people who aren’t looking for it on purpose won’t even notice it.

Lenses

At the Sony Launch Event, they also showed slides of the glasses they used vs JVC’s N5, N7, and according to them their lens are superior. This could be marketing hype. I won’t comment on it. But later when I do the comparison between the Arc-F lens of the 870 vs the 760, I’ll give my comment and it may prove this point moot.

Review / My Subjective Observation

Now on to my observation of these laser projectors. These are my own subjective review. I am not going to post numbers, etc. You can get those from the professional reviewers. Mine is what a regular AV enthusiast who spends a lot of time and effort trying to do the best for my own Home Theater, for my own enjoyment. My review will be mostly comparisons between what I see on these Lasers vs the Lamp based counterparts. So, for those that own the lamp based ones, you can basically see what you’ll get out of these in relatively. I owned the 500ES for 3 years so I am very familiar with the Sony lamp based projectors. I have also recently reviewed the 360ES in my Cinema for a week or so.
Here are some of the things that JUMPS out at you with the 760/870
  1. CALMNESS. This is purely due to the laser light source vs lamp. Same thing with the JVC Z1 (which I have also reviewed). The biggest difference is the eerie calmness of the laser light source. With bulb based projectors, you’ll see a very slight inconsistency with the light. With lasers, this all goes away, because the laser light source is very calm and very consistent. You won’t even know you’re looking at a projected image, but rather more like seeing thru a glass to the other side. The picture would be so stable, so calm, like you can touch it, whether it’s natural objects like trees, flowers, sand or a human being. I can’t stress this enough. If this were the ONLY difference, I would be sold on the lasers already. In fact, I was so sold I went ahead and bought the 760ES even though I didn’t think I’ll get it in the first place. I would say that the difference going from lamp based to lasers would be the same as going from an AT woven screen to a solid screen. The clarity increase is astounding. Just like I’ll never go back to AT screen, I’ll never go back to Lamp. If you put the lasers with a solid screen together, you’ll literally be able to walk thru the screen and touch whatever is on the other side. Last but not least, lasers have the advantage of very, very long life as compared to bulbs. You never have to worry about changing out your bulbs anymore as they get dimmer. You’ll be able to enjoy your projector at near full brightness for at least 10,000 hours. That’s a lot of movies you can watch! By the time you’re thinking the picture is getting a little dimmer, it’s probably time to buy a new projector.
  2. Next, you’ll notice the vibrancy of the colors. I don’t know quite how to explain it, but lasers can give you a more intense, more vivid picture than their bulb based counterparts. The intensity of the lasers will pierce right thru certain picture elements. For instance, when you’re looking at a star field, or a candle light, they seem to shine brighter and more incandescent. This gives you a more realistic image. This is all more apparent with HDR. As others have described it, HDR on these projectors is very close to watching a 3D image.
  3. I love the instant switch on/off. No more slow wait times. I can keep switching it off and on at will without worrying about the lamp.
  4. Fade to black is great! I won’t go too much into all the other aspects of this projector as I want to concentrate on only the Picture Quality. For the specs and details, one can easily look them up.

Now that we have touched upon what Sony 4K laser projectors bring to the table, let’s talk a bit about the differences between the 760Es and the 870ES model.

The Sony Marketing person actually called the 870Es the replacement of the 760ES, but that they will continue to make available the 760ES. This made me feel that in the future they may just consolidate both into just 1 model. At which point I believe to get the lasers, you’ll have to fork out more money. If they really plan on consolidating the 760/870 eventually into 1 model, I think the price point would be something inbetween the 2.

Without further adeu, The 870ES.. .

When I fired up the 870, and started going thru the same content I went thru with the 760ES, I did notice a slight improvement in clarity. Also, noticed a slight improvement in contrast in lower APL scenes or even mixed scenes like the car chase scenes in Korea of Black Panther. This is consistent with all the reviews I read about the 870 vs the 760. So, to re-cap, the consistency of the improvement of the 870 vs the 760 could be boiled down to:
  1. Better lens translate to more clarity
  2. Dynamic IRIS translate to more contrast.
  3. 200 extra lumens which should translate to ‘brighter image’ but I just can’t notice it subjectively. I am sure if you use a light meter, you’ll be able to measure it, but to me, I simply can’t see it.

Ok, that’s what it SHOULD be right? Everyone says so, and all the data measurement says so. Here’s the rub… and this is where it gets controversial. For the longest time, we have all complained about Sony’s decision to not put a dynamic iris on the 760ES and their decision to use only their laser engine as the dynamic contrast. We all assumed that there would be a far far superior black to be gained correct? I too fell into that trap. Also, the lens, why Sony didn’t just put their most expensive lens on the 760? Sony keep telling us that their new and improved lens are really, really good already, but we insist on the ARC-F… it should be way, way better correct?

At first, I was like, OK, the lens and the IRIS did make a difference. But then I remembered something at the launch event. Sony showed us the 760/870 side by side comparison (by blocking half the image on each projector). They displayed some very sharp patterns and characters so you can go right up front and see it for yourself. At the patterns, you can see that the lines were a little more pronounced on the 870, thinner lines, vs the a bit bloated ones on the 760 (blooming? I don’t know the term).

Then the Sony guys showed some images with fine patterns on dresses, etc.. and showed off their Digital Focus Optimizer. For those that don’t know what this is, here’s what’s written on their website:

Optimum focus is achieved, not only optically but digitally, by the Digital Focus Optimiser. It compensates the possible optical degradation of the lens in advance then outputs the optimum corrected images, so that even the focus in the corners is better than ever.

This is supposed to work with their ARC-F lens to ensure even the edges are ‘sharp as tact’. At least that’s the marketing of it. But when they showed how it worked, they switch it on and off while showing some intricate pattern on a girls dress. You can clearly see that it sharpens the patterns quite a bit while it’s on compared to when it’s off. At first I was like damn, I want that feature on the 760. I even asked them and they say it’s only available on the 870.

Now, why did I go on a tangent talking about the Digital Focus Optimizer, which does not seem to really matter, especially for people who don’t care much about digital enhancements.

And this is where the idea suddenly came into my mind. What if the so called Digital Focus Optimizer is doing something similar to their ‘Reality Creation’? Could I simulate the sharpness of the 870 by increasing my RC? I paused at some images, and turned the DFO off and on many times and I can’t see any difference between what it’s doing vs the regular RC… so, what I did was this… I picked a screen in Black Panther where they showed those warrior women with their intricate costumes. This is what I did. I switched on the 760ES, set the RC to 60. I usually only use 20 or 30. Then I did the on/off test of RC.. guess what? The difference I saw was the exact same difference between using the 870 DFO on/off. I can NOT tell the difference at all. Then I just went to many different scenes. Take the Avengers Infinity war, close up pictures of faces, especially Pepper Pots, during her conversation with Tony Start at the beginning of the movie. There are some close up shots of both their faces. I did this scene many times with the 870 with on/off DFO (RC set at 20), vs the 760 on/off RC set at 60. I do not see any difference between the two at all.. both will show the exact amount of sharpening. When the DFO on the 870 were off, the clarity of the supposedly ARC-F lens disappear. Now, based on my limited testing, I am starting to believe the lenses on the 760 is already so good, what the ARC-F lens being to the table is only extra costs. Any improvement in image quality is explained away with their image processing of the DFO which you can simulate with the RC at 60. Now, most people won’t like RC at 60, and I believe most also won’t like the DFO turned on for that matter. I personally liked it though, so I kinda settled on RC at 40 or 50.

So, one of the advantages of the 870, ie, clarity basically disappeared on normal viewing content after you adjust the RC.
What about the Contrast advantage? Again, here’s the rub. For most content that are bright, there are ZERO differences as the IRIS is wide open. For content where you can see the IRIS closing down a little is where you’ll notice a slightly blacker black… so, again, I was thinking, can I simulate that ‘blacker black’ on the 760? I tried by turning down the brightness on the 760. And viola, at -3 (from whatever you set both to, say starting from 50), you’ll again, no longer see any difference between the two. In reality, if you actually measured it, you’ll prob see a contrast difference. But in real life viewing, I can’t tell the difference. The black floor goes down (I suppose the brightness also goes down at the top end, but at only -3 I don’t really notice the top end at all). So, in real life viewing, lowering the brightness by -3, will give you almost exactly the same thing the dynamic IRIS does. Again, I watched many scenes between these two projectors with this settings and I can’t tell the difference.

Long story short. If you were to set your 760’s RC to 50 or 60, and your brightness to -3 (relative to the 870), all the advantages of the 870 disappears. I think this is because the 870 is only 200 lumens brighter. So, the effect of the dynamic iris isn’t as noticeable. If the 870 is 3000 lumens for instance, the hit you get from turning down the brightness may then seem more apparent.

So, to summarize, the 870 do indeed have better lens, but since the lens of the 760 is already so good, it’s really not noticeable on real life content. That may be why they introduced the DFO, to maybe artificially show a sharper image. And almost every comparison video you’ll see online or even reviews, the ‘noticeable clarity’ or ‘as if a fog is removed’ comments can be explained by the DFO working rather than just the lens. And that’s basically some sort of RC. Maybe not the same, but the effect is very similar. And the Dynamic IRIS isn’t going to add that much more to the picture really, unless you have enough lumens to spare to begin with. I think Sony engineers already knew this when they designed the 760, and that may be their decision on not including it in. But after reading all the complains, they put it into the 870 to satisfy everyone. Remember, the consumer is always correct? Cause they are willing to pay more money for a feature they ASK for. I think Sony would have more to improve on with a better algorithm with their laser dimming feature, and also, with their Tone Mapping. If they improve those two, you’ll likely see a significant step up. But not with the ARC-F lens nor the Dynamic IRIS. The biggest difference they could make in my opinion is adding lumens. If Sony combines the 760/870 into a new model called the 990 and price it at exactly the same as the 760 today, but add up to 3500 lumens, they’ll have a winner. And then maybe put a laser engine and 2000 lumens into the 590. Leave the 290 as is but add the dynamic iris.

Lastly the added 200 lumens is a bonus rather than a true step up.
JohnnyWilkinson likes this.
coolgeek is offline  
post #2387 of 2783 Old 04-05-2019, 09:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
roxiedog13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North 48 °
Posts: 3,877
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2739 Post(s)
Liked: 1414
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
Intro:

Before I post my review of the Sony 760 and 870, here are some caveats and background information to go along with.
  1. I have had the Sony 760ES for 3 weeks to play with. So one might say I have had an extensive idea of how this projector performs under most content.
  2. I only had the 870ES for 3 days. But while I have the 870, I also have the 760 together so I can do a lot of side by side comparisons. Most of my 870 viewings were with the sole idea of comparing it with the 760ES.
  3. The 870 had only 7 hour on it, so it was practically brand new. The 760 had I think less than 100 hours on it when I got it.
  4. I am using a 138 inch 16:9 screen. 1.8 gain, silver, micro perf. Projected with maximum zoom, basically the brightest possible.
  5. These are out of the box, non-calibrated. I used Cinema Film 1 on both. Then adjusted the Contrast, Brightness, and other normal user settings available to me without going into the Service Menu.

New SXRD Panels?


This is actually confirmed by the Sony Engineer and their Marketing person. At the Sony Laser projector launch event, they had a slide comparing their projectors, and those that started from the 760ES had the newer panels. All of these panels are made in Japan with very high quality control. They showed a video on how they make the SXRD panels. Essentially looked like a NASA clean room. They also confirmed a better contrast between the newer panels and the older ones. Their main purpose was to work on Contrast as they realize that that is the ONLY single variable they lose to JVC. I tend to agree with them on this assessment. To me the Sony is better in every way compared to the JVC other than contrast and in real environment, it’s not going to be night and day difference… some might disagree, but I am willing to bet 99% of people who aren’t looking for it on purpose won’t even notice it.

Lenses

At the Sony Launch Event, they also showed slides of the glasses they used vs JVC’s N5, N7, and according to them their lens are superior. This could be marketing hype. I won’t comment on it. But later when I do the comparison between the Arc-F lens of the 870 vs the 760, I’ll give my comment and it may prove this point moot.

Review / My Subjective Observation

Now on to my observation of these laser projectors. These are my own subjective review. I am not going to post numbers, etc. You can get those from the professional reviewers. Mine is what a regular AV enthusiast who spends a lot of time and effort trying to do the best for my own Home Theater, for my own enjoyment. My review will be mostly comparisons between what I see on these Lasers vs the Lamp based counterparts. So, for those that own the lamp based ones, you can basically see what you’ll get out of these in relatively. I owned the 500ES for 3 years so I am very familiar with the Sony lamp based projectors. I have also recently reviewed the 360ES in my Cinema for a week or so.
Here are some of the things that JUMPS out at you with the 760/870
  1. CALMNESS. This is purely due to the laser light source vs lamp. Same thing with the JVC Z1 (which I have also reviewed). The biggest difference is the eerie calmness of the laser light source. With bulb based projectors, you’ll see a very slight inconsistency with the light. With lasers, this all goes away, because the laser light source is very calm and very consistent. You won’t even know you’re looking at a projected image, but rather more like seeing thru a glass to the other side. The picture would be so stable, so calm, like you can touch it, whether it’s natural objects like trees, flowers, sand or a human being. I can’t stress this enough. If this were the ONLY difference, I would be sold on the lasers already. In fact, I was so sold I went ahead and bought the 760ES even though I didn’t think I’ll get it in the first place. I would say that the difference going from lamp based to lasers would be the same as going from an AT woven screen to a solid screen. The clarity increase is astounding. Just like I’ll never go back to AT screen, I’ll never go back to Lamp. If you put the lasers with a solid screen together, you’ll literally be able to walk thru the screen and touch whatever is on the other side. Last but not least, lasers have the advantage of very, very long life as compared to bulbs. You never have to worry about changing out your bulbs anymore as they get dimmer. You’ll be able to enjoy your projector at near full brightness for at least 10,000 hours. That’s a lot of movies you can watch! By the time you’re thinking the picture is getting a little dimmer, it’s probably time to buy a new projector.
  2. Next, you’ll notice the vibrancy of the colors. I don’t know quite how to explain it, but lasers can give you a more intense, more vivid picture than their bulb based counterparts. The intensity of the lasers will pierce right thru certain picture elements. For instance, when you’re looking at a star field, or a candle light, they seem to shine brighter and more incandescent. This gives you a more realistic image. This is all more apparent with HDR. As others have described it, HDR on these projectors is very close to watching a 3D image.
  3. I love the instant switch on/off. No more slow wait times. I can keep switching it off and on at will without worrying about the lamp.
  4. Fade to black is great! I won’t go too much into all the other aspects of this projector as I want to concentrate on only the Picture Quality. For the specs and details, one can easily look them up.

Now that we have touched upon what Sony 4K laser projectors bring to the table, let’s talk a bit about the differences between the 760Es and the 870ES model.

The Sony Marketing person actually called the 870Es the replacement of the 760ES, but that they will continue to make available the 760ES. This made me feel that in the future they may just consolidate both into just 1 model. At which point I believe to get the lasers, you’ll have to fork out more money. If they really plan on consolidating the 760/870 eventually into 1 model, I think the price point would be something inbetween the 2.

Without further adeu, The 870ES.. .

When I fired up the 870, and started going thru the same content I went thru with the 760ES, I did notice a slight improvement in clarity. Also, noticed a slight improvement in contrast in lower APL scenes or even mixed scenes like the car chase scenes in Korea of Black Panther. This is consistent with all the reviews I read about the 870 vs the 760. So, to re-cap, the consistency of the improvement of the 870 vs the 760 could be boiled down to:
  1. Better lens translate to more clarity
  2. Dynamic IRIS translate to more contrast.
  3. 200 extra lumens which should translate to ‘brighter image’ but I just can’t notice it subjectively. I am sure if you use a light meter, you’ll be able to measure it, but to me, I simply can’t see it.

Ok, that’s what it SHOULD be right? Everyone says so, and all the data measurement says so. Here’s the rub… and this is where it gets controversial. For the longest time, we have all complained about Sony’s decision to not put a dynamic iris on the 760ES and their decision to use only their laser engine as the dynamic contrast. We all assumed that there would be a far far superior black to be gained correct? I too fell into that trap. Also, the lens, why Sony didn’t just put their most expensive lens on the 760? Sony keep telling us that their new and improved lens are really, really good already, but we insist on the ARC-F… it should be way, way better correct?

At first, I was like, OK, the lens and the IRIS did make a difference. But then I remembered something at the launch event. Sony showed us the 760/870 side by side comparison (by blocking half the image on each projector). They displayed some very sharp patterns and characters so you can go right up front and see it for yourself. At the patterns, you can see that the lines were a little more pronounced on the 870, thinner lines, vs the a bit bloated ones on the 760 (blooming? I don’t know the term).

Then the Sony guys showed some images with fine patterns on dresses, etc.. and showed off their Digital Focus Optimizer. For those that don’t know what this is, here’s what’s written on their website:

Optimum focus is achieved, not only optically but digitally, by the Digital Focus Optimiser. It compensates the possible optical degradation of the lens in advance then outputs the optimum corrected images, so that even the focus in the corners is better than ever.

This is supposed to work with their ARC-F lens to ensure even the edges are ‘sharp as tact’. At least that’s the marketing of it. But when they showed how it worked, they switch it on and off while showing some intricate pattern on a girls dress. You can clearly see that it sharpens the patterns quite a bit while it’s on compared to when it’s off. At first I was like damn, I want that feature on the 760. I even asked them and they say it’s only available on the 870.

Now, why did I go on a tangent talking about the Digital Focus Optimizer, which does not seem to really matter, especially for people who don’t care much about digital enhancements.

And this is where the idea suddenly came into my mind. What if the so called Digital Focus Optimizer is doing something similar to their ‘Reality Creation’? Could I simulate the sharpness of the 870 by increasing my RC? I paused at some images, and turned the DFO off and on many times and I can’t see any difference between what it’s doing vs the regular RC… so, what I did was this… I picked a screen in Black Panther where they showed those warrior women with their intricate costumes. This is what I did. I switched on the 760ES, set the RC to 60. I usually only use 20 or 30. Then I did the on/off test of RC.. guess what? The difference I saw was the exact same difference between using the 870 DFO on/off. I can NOT tell the difference at all. Then I just went to many different scenes. Take the Avengers Infinity war, close up pictures of faces, especially Pepper Pots, during her conversation with Tony Start at the beginning of the movie. There are some close up shots of both their faces. I did this scene many times with the 870 with on/off DFO (RC set at 20), vs the 760 on/off RC set at 60. I do not see any difference between the two at all.. both will show the exact amount of sharpening. When the DFO on the 870 were off, the clarity of the supposedly ARC-F lens disappear. Now, based on my limited testing, I am starting to believe the lenses on the 760 is already so good, what the ARC-F lens being to the table is only extra costs. Any improvement in image quality is explained away with their image processing of the DFO which you can simulate with the RC at 60. Now, most people won’t like RC at 60, and I believe most also won’t like the DFO turned on for that matter. I personally liked it though, so I kinda settled on RC at 40 or 50.

So, one of the advantages of the 870, ie, clarity basically disappeared on normal viewing content after you adjust the RC.
What about the Contrast advantage? Again, here’s the rub. For most content that are bright, there are ZERO differences as the IRIS is wide open. For content where you can see the IRIS closing down a little is where you’ll notice a slightly blacker black… so, again, I was thinking, can I simulate that ‘blacker black’ on the 760? I tried by turning down the brightness on the 760. And viola, at -3 (from whatever you set both to, say starting from 50), you’ll again, no longer see any difference between the two. In reality, if you actually measured it, you’ll prob see a contrast difference. But in real life viewing, I can’t tell the difference. The black floor goes down (I suppose the brightness also goes down at the top end, but at only -3 I don’t really notice the top end at all). So, in real life viewing, lowering the brightness by -3, will give you almost exactly the same thing the dynamic IRIS does. Again, I watched many scenes between these two projectors with this settings and I can’t tell the difference.

Long story short. If you were to set your 760’s RC to 50 or 60, and your brightness to -3 (relative to the 870), all the advantages of the 870 disappears. I think this is because the 870 is only 200 lumens brighter. So, the effect of the dynamic iris isn’t as noticeable. If the 870 is 3000 lumens for instance, the hit you get from turning down the brightness may then seem more apparent.

So, to summarize, the 870 do indeed have better lens, but since the lens of the 760 is already so good, it’s really not noticeable on real life content. That may be why they introduced the DFO, to maybe artificially show a sharper image. And almost every comparison video you’ll see online or even reviews, the ‘noticeable clarity’ or ‘as if a fog is removed’ comments can be explained by the DFO working rather than just the lens. And that’s basically some sort of RC. Maybe not the same, but the effect is very similar. And the Dynamic IRIS isn’t going to add that much more to the picture really, unless you have enough lumens to spare to begin with. I think Sony engineers already knew this when they designed the 760, and that may be their decision on not including it in. But after reading all the complains, they put it into the 870 to satisfy everyone. Remember, the consumer is always correct? Cause they are willing to pay more money for a feature they ASK for. I think Sony would have more to improve on with a better algorithm with their laser dimming feature, and also, with their Tone Mapping. If they improve those two, you’ll likely see a significant step up. But not with the ARC-F lens nor the Dynamic IRIS. The biggest difference they could make in my opinion is adding lumens. If Sony combines the 760/870 into a new model called the 990 and price it at exactly the same as the 760 today, but add up to 3500 lumens, they’ll have a winner. And then maybe put a laser engine and 2000 lumens into the 590. Leave the 290 as is but add the dynamic iris.

Lastly the added 200 lumens is a bonus rather than a true step up.


Well, nothing surprising, it's exactly as I expected . Without a doubt the ARC-F is a better element however to take advantage of what the difference is between the hybrid/acrylic and the glass the image needs to be much, much bigger. The VW5000 is the only projector with the ability to display on a larger screen and take advantage of the pinpoint accuracy it offers, even then you'd have to be nose to the screen, at normal seating differences , good luck . The LK990/LK790 thread has already shown what is handicapping these flagship projectors and that is, the triple panels which require constant alignment/convergence to remain sharp. Variances with internal temperatures affect the alignment of panels and those with cooling issues seem to have more trouble than others. If you want the sharpest image on a smaller screen right now that domain is occupied by single-chip DLP projectors, all the other much more expensive flagship projectors have to take a back seat to the king of sharpness. Good thing the flagship projectors have remote focus and panel alignement, the BenQ LK990 is tack sharp from the get go, no warm up or adjustment is ever necessary except for initial set up. When/if single chip DLP can up the game for native contrast ( ANSI at 520:1 is already way ahead) it's going to be a game changer, Sony and JVC will have to up their game a notch and lower pricing to remain competitive. I've already seen the VW885, RS4500 and NX9 , they are tack sharp by my eye, hard to believe the LK990 is that much better , thanks to @woofer and others we have seen a level of sharpness that sets a new benchmark. Even if Sony went back to the superior Carl Zeis lens, alignment would still be an issue IMHO. At 4K micro levels and becasue of the issues with thermal expansion I doublt they will ever resolve this problem. There is only one solution I can think of and that is to remove the light engine from the projector and use fiber optic cables to deliver the light, keep the light engine in a seperate box removed from the lens and panels. One single chip is cheaper and easier , it's the smart alternative, a few other improvements as I said, a possible game changer.
coolgeek and Aztar35 like this.

Dedicated Theater: Sony VPL VW 885ES , Panamorph DCR & ISCO III L Anamorphic Lens, Draper TecVision XT1800X Screen, 2.40:1 134" diagonal curved , Denon AVR-X8500 , 9.2.6 Atmos, Panasonic UB900, Oppo 203, Lumagen Pro 4440 , (3) Paradigm CI Elite E7-L+C+R fronts, , (2) CI Pro P80-IW Rear, (2) Paradigm SA-ADP In-wall Surround, (6) SIG-1.5R-30 v.3 In-Ceiling, Subwoofers: (2) SVS SB-16 Ultra , SVS PC13-Ultra .
roxiedog13 is offline  
post #2388 of 2783 Old 04-05-2019, 09:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1785 Post(s)
Liked: 1111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
Could someone tell me again why the 695ES is better than the NX7?

695 is $1.5K more than the NX7 up here in Canada
The 695 isn't better. Some may have chosen to go with the 695 for various reasons but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is better for everyone.

The NX7 specs on brightness, native contrast, black level, and color space are all superior to the 695. Also the NX7 includes new auto-tone mapping for HDR that the Sony doesn't have. Input lag specs are better for the 695 but just barely with the Sony around 27 ms and the JVC at 33 ms for 4k content. Motion on the Sony and JVC are nearly the same now. The JVC has a better lens and does a better job displaying with 4k test patterns (less color moire and pixel distortions). The Sony has better 4k upscaling.
Reddig and Dandlj like this.
GregCh is online now  
post #2389 of 2783 Old 04-05-2019, 10:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frohlich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 4,342
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1957 Post(s)
Liked: 2122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
Could someone tell me again why the 695ES is better than the NX7?

695 is $1.5K more than the NX7 up here in Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
The 695 isn't better. Some may have chosen to go with the 695 for various reasons but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is better for everyone.

The NX7 specs on brightness, native contrast, black level, and color space are all superior to the 695. Also the NX7 includes new auto-tone mapping for HDR that the Sony doesn't have. Input lag specs are better for the 695 but just barely with the Sony around 27 ms and the JVC at 33 ms for 4k content. Motion on the Sony and JVC are nearly the same now. The JVC has a better lens and does a better job displaying with 4k test patterns (less color moire and pixel distortions). The Sony has better 4k upscaling.
Here is the opinion of one recent reviewer:

https://hometheaterreview.com/front-...d-information/

Comparison and Competition
Near the RS2000's price point, only one projector comes to mind that offers true competition to the JVC: the Sony VPL-VW695ES priced at $9,999. Like the RS2000, the Sony is a native 4K HDR capable projector offering, on paper, very similar performance and features. I was fortunate enough to have both of these projectors here at the same time and was able to do a shootout between them. The most obvious difference between these two projectors was in contrast performance on darker video content. The JVC simply has more apparent contrast and a much darker level of black. Beyond that, both projectors looked remarkably similar in terms of image sharpness, native motion handling, shadow detail, and color reproduction. While the Sony gives up a little in ultimate contrast performance, it makes up for it with better video processing. Sony's motion smoothing software, called Motion Flow, offers better subjective performance and more modes over the RS2000. Input lag on the Sony, an important metric for gamers, is more than 10 ms faster. I also think Sony's smart sharpening software, called Reality Creation, does a noticeably better job compared to JVC's smart sharpening software, called Enhance in the MPC menu, for those who like to artificially sharpen the image.

If you're someone who is primarily watching movies, I'd recommend the JVC. If you're someone who plans on gaming or watching a lot of sports, I think the Sony is a better fit. Both projectors offer good performance in all areas; however, each have a small lead in these specific areas. Choosing which to buy ultimately comes down to the type of content you view more.


Those looking to upgrade from a JVC e-shift model will be pleased overall with the RS2000. While falling a little behind in contrast performance from the previous mid-tier models, it's an upgrade in most areas. Even though it's using the same lens found on previous models, I found the increase in native resolution made a large difference in perceived sharpness, image stability and three-dimensionality. Especially with UHD and HDR10 content, the RS2000 possesses a level of image finesse that overtakes anything I've witnessed from previous JVC projectors.
Reddig, Todd G. and GregCh like this.
Frohlich is offline  
post #2390 of 2783 Old 04-06-2019, 10:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Sittler27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,461
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
The 695 isn't better. Some may have chosen to go with the 695 for various reasons but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is better for everyone.

The NX7 specs on brightness, native contrast, black level, and color space are all superior to the 695. Also the NX7 includes new auto-tone mapping for HDR that the Sony doesn't have. Input lag specs are better for the 695 but just barely with the Sony around 27 ms and the JVC at 33 ms for 4k content. Motion on the Sony and JVC are nearly the same now. The JVC has a better lens and does a better job displaying with 4k test patterns (less color moire and pixel distortions). The Sony has better 4k upscaling.
Does that "new auto-tone mapping for HDR"'s effects get negated if I'm using the more superior HDR that a madVR setup would provide?
Sittler27 is offline  
post #2391 of 2783 Old 04-06-2019, 10:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 100 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4418 Post(s)
Liked: 2768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
I watch about 50% HD TV Series, 25% movies and 25% sports. (I do game, but on a Sony LCD TV that does HDR that I have as a monitor with my Xbox One X).

I have an opportunity right now to get a Sony 885ES demo (open box) with full 3 year warranty for a killer price ($15K Cdn), and I'm wondering if it's worth it to jump on that over an NX7 even though it's a lot more money even for a demo.

My current projector is a X970R.
Yea its going to be a question of coming from the JVC how important black levels are to you. The black levels on the 885ES won't be anywhere near where you are use to. The other aspects may outweigh this for you. The new line of JVC lamp projectors already have better motion and a much calmer image so those things won't be as much a factor. If you watch a lot of scifi tv shows and stuff, this may be a big problem for you. It sure was for me. Other people coming from epson and other sony or dlp probably dont notice it as much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sittler27 View Post
Does that "new auto-tone mapping for HDR"'s effects get negated if I'm using the more superior HDR that a madVR setup would provide?
Yes.

But man I came from an RS500 (x750r) to a 675ES and was sure unhappy. I cant see paying more for a 695ES over an NX7.
Reddig and llang269 like this.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" screen in pure black room no light, htpc nvidia 1080ti.
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, 2 sub arrays both infinite baffle: 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 4x12 fi audio running on 2nd ep4000.

Last edited by markmon1; 04-06-2019 at 10:19 PM.
markmon1 is offline  
post #2392 of 2783 Old 04-07-2019, 12:02 AM
Senior Member
 
JohnnyWilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 308 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
Yea its going to be a question of coming from the JVC how important black levels are to you. The black levels on the 885ES won't be anywhere near where you are use to.
Out of interest - how did you find the black levels on the NX9 vs the RS4500?
JohnnyWilkinson is offline  
post #2393 of 2783 Old 04-07-2019, 01:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 100 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4418 Post(s)
Liked: 2768
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyWilkinson View Post
Out of interest - how did you find the black levels on the NX9 vs the RS4500?
The black levels on the RS4500 were better. However, we never tried to set the NX9 to brightness -3, which a lot of people recommend. I've said it a few times, but I don't find the RS4500 black levels to be excellent. Instead, the RS4500 black levels (to me) are the absolute minimum where I am content. I was disappointed in the black levels of the NX9 mainly because I feel that JVC didn't get the iris cranking down like I know it can. It was still far better than my 675ES was. I still have high hopes that JVC will make the iris more aggressive like their previous products. Also other users have indicated having to turn brightness down and then the iris does its job properly. I wish I was able to verify that when we had it.
Reddig and JohnnyWilkinson like this.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" screen in pure black room no light, htpc nvidia 1080ti.
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, 2 sub arrays both infinite baffle: 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 4x12 fi audio running on 2nd ep4000.
markmon1 is offline  
post #2394 of 2783 Old 04-10-2019, 04:34 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 75
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 43
I need some help from the brains trust.

I am going on Saturday to Absolute Hifi here in Sydney to demo the JVC N5 and the Epson 5050UB. I don't know what the set-up will be: whether they've been calibrated, will they have 3D available, etc, but what I want advice on is what are some suggestions for discs to demo.

I want suggestions for DVD, Blu-Ray, 4k, and 3D. Discs that test overall picture quality, motion, ghosting(3D), and clarity. I don't know that I will have time or capability to test individual scenes for things like blooming and such, but am just getting a sense of the overall viewing experience of the two projectors.

I am really wanting to get the JVC N7, but am facing that old question of "if the Epson is close to the quality of the JVC, do I buy the cheaper Epson and spend the saved money on an upgrade to Atmos receiver and screen improvement? The N7 is nearly 2 and a half times the cost of the Epson.

Options: 1) get the Epson now, then upgrade to a second or third generation 4K JVC in several years time.

2) get the JVC now and save for the Atmos and screen later.

3) Get a JVC 7900 ( although no stores seem to have these in stock anymore, and despite claims JVC were keeping this line, they don't seem to be making more. The available 7000 models are so expensive I might as well buy an N5.

What do you think? (Either projector should be a major step up from my 14 year old Epson and give me 3D).

Anyway, what discs do you suggest? Don't mention Lucy as I don't have that in any format yet. I have about 2500 movies with about half dvd and the other half mostly blu-ray but with an growing amount of UHD.

Thanks.
ShadowBoy is offline  
post #2395 of 2783 Old 04-11-2019, 03:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,341
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1613 Post(s)
Liked: 890
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowBoy View Post
I need some help from the brains trust.

I am going on Saturday to Absolute Hifi here in Sydney to demo the JVC N5 and the Epson 5050UB. I don't know what the set-up will be: whether they've been calibrated, will they have 3D available, etc, but what I want advice on is what are some suggestions for discs to demo.

I want suggestions for DVD, Blu-Ray, 4k, and 3D. Discs that test overall picture quality, motion, ghosting(3D), and clarity. I don't know that I will have time or capability to test individual scenes for things like blooming and such, but am just getting a sense of the overall viewing experience of the two projectors.

I am really wanting to get the JVC N7, but am facing that old question of "if the Epson is close to the quality of the JVC, do I buy the cheaper Epson and spend the saved money on an upgrade to Atmos receiver and screen improvement? The N7 is nearly 2 and a half times the cost of the Epson.

Options: 1) get the Epson now, then upgrade to a second or third generation 4K JVC in several years time.

2) get the JVC now and save for the Atmos and screen later.

3) Get a JVC 7900 ( although no stores seem to have these in stock anymore, and despite claims JVC were keeping this line, they don't seem to be making more. The available 7000 models are so expensive I might as well buy an N5.

What do you think? (Either projector should be a major step up from my 14 year old Epson and give me 3D).

Anyway, what discs do you suggest? Don't mention Lucy as I don't have that in any format yet. I have about 2500 movies with about half dvd and the other half mostly blu-ray but with an growing amount of UHD.

Thanks.
If it were my choice, at the price you can get the Sony 295 at, it's a no brainer. It's not far from the Epson's price, maybe 1K difference street. I have seen both of them and it's no contest in terms of colors, contrast, etc. Initially I was thinking of getting the older 5040UB as I got a super discount on it, but after seeing the Sony lasers, I decided to fork out the money for that.
coolgeek is offline  
post #2396 of 2783 Old 04-11-2019, 03:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,238
Mentioned: 100 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4418 Post(s)
Liked: 2768
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
If it were my choice, at the price you can get the Sony 295 at, it's a no brainer. It's not far from the Epson's price, maybe 1K difference street. I have seen both of them and it's no contest in terms of colors, contrast, etc. Initially I was thinking of getting the older 5040UB as I got a super discount on it, but after seeing the Sony lasers, I decided to fork out the money for that.
Sorry to say, but in terms of contrast, the Epson 5050 destroys the 295ES. And I'm not an Epson fan at all.
alebonau and sddawson like this.

Video: JVC RS4500 135" screen in pure black room no light, htpc nvidia 1080ti.
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, 2 sub arrays both infinite baffle: 4x15 fi audio running on behringer ep4000 + 4x12 fi audio running on 2nd ep4000.
markmon1 is offline  
post #2397 of 2783 Old 04-11-2019, 05:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alebonau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Land of Contentment :)
Posts: 4,621
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1799 Post(s)
Liked: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
Sorry to say, but in terms of contrast, the Epson 5050 destroys the 295ES. And I'm not an Epson fan at all.
the epson runs a dynamic iris doest it ? at the price the sony goes for its very hard to believe it cant manage to have an iris !

"Technology is a drug. We can't get enough of it."


Welcome to my lounge room :)
alebonau is offline  
post #2398 of 2783 Old 04-11-2019, 05:24 AM
Member
 
syoung298's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 0
This may have already been covered but does anyone have experience with the new wolf projectors. They are reported to use some of the JVC engine.


Thanks in advance.
syoung298 is online now  
post #2399 of 2783 Old 04-11-2019, 05:36 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 75
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 102 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
If it were my choice, at the price you can get the Sony 295 at, it's a no brainer. It's not far from the Epson's price, maybe 1K difference street. I have seen both of them and it's no contest in terms of colors, contrast, etc. Initially I was thinking of getting the older 5040UB as I got a super discount on it, but after seeing the Sony lasers, I decided to fork out the money for that.
There are no Sony 295's that I've seen available at any shops in Australia. Additionally they are nearly $3000 more expensive than the Epson with currency conversion. Plus the lack of transparency on Sony's part regarding the panel degradation issue doesn't inspire me to outlay that level of money.
ShadowBoy is offline  
post #2400 of 2783 Old 04-11-2019, 06:29 AM
Newbie
 
rcreff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 10
BenQ HT3550 vs Epson Home Cinema 5050UB

So, Amazon told me I would get my HT3550 yesterday and now they are telling me May 20th. While I was angry I reviewed Epson's press release. How do you think the BenQ HT3550 will compare to the Epson Home Cinema 5050UB?

https://www.projectorcentral.com/Epson-Home-Cinema-5050UB-5050UBe.htm
rcreff is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
2019 , Epson , Jvc , Projectors , Sony

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