The 2019 Model SONY vs JVC Projectors Comparison Thread - Page 33 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2716Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #961 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 06:57 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,465
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12501 Post(s)
Liked: 10123
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archibald1 View Post
Hi Nigel.
I wasn't aiming that comment at you.

Looking forward to you proving my educated guess that DFO is simply an unnecessary addition to make the already superb lens used on the 870 look artificially 'better' that it is.

No need for that feature if you ask me.
I agree, no need for DFO on the 995. It might help the lower models, if it does not create more problems than it solves.
Archibald1 likes this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #962 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 07:24 AM - Thread Starter
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,484
Mentioned: 258 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4111 Post(s)
Liked: 6641
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobof View Post
Given a lot of folk don't like dynamic modes, what happens if you turn them off?
Here you go

Note how inefficient the SONY's dynamic contrast functionality is... No wonder the highlights look dim as hell !



markmon1, bobof and Jue Liang like this.
ARROW-AV is online now  
post #963 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 07:30 AM
Senior Member
 
mirodk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 431
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Here you go

Note how inefficient the SONY's dynamic contrast functionality is... No wonder the highlights look dim as hell !



Why is Sony’s nits so much lover on the space station in native, if calibrated and same gamma and lumen.

Last edited by mirodk; 04-29-2019 at 07:36 AM.
mirodk is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #964 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 07:36 AM - Thread Starter
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,484
Mentioned: 258 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4111 Post(s)
Liked: 6641
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirodk View Post
Why is Sony’s nits so much lover on the space station, if calibrated and same gamma and lumen.
That's an excellent question. I believe it's because native is not fully native, in that there is still some dynamic contrast functionality being applied in order to boost contrast performance over and above the SONY 885/760ES, and the SONY's dynamic contrast functionality is very inefficient, as is also evident from the massive drops in white level / space station luminance between Native, Limited, and Full Dynamic Contrast settings

By the way @Kris Deering also found similar when he evaluated the SONY 995ES/870ES, wherein he found it to be dimmer than the 885ES/760ES because of this, despite being rated higher lumens.

mirodk and Archibald1 like this.

Last edited by ARROW-AV; 04-29-2019 at 07:40 AM.
ARROW-AV is online now  
post #965 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 07:38 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,465
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12501 Post(s)
Liked: 10123
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
That's an excellent question. I believe it's because native is not fully native, in that there is still some dynamic contrast functionality being applied in order to boost contrast performance over and above the SONY 885/760ES, and the SONY's dynamic contrast functionality is very inefficient, as is also evident from the massive drops in white level / space station luminance between Native, Limited, and Full Dynamic Contrast settings

Yep. Kris came to that same conclusion.
ARROW-AV and Archibald1 like this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #966 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 07:39 AM - Thread Starter
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,484
Mentioned: 258 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4111 Post(s)
Liked: 6641
ARROW-AV is online now  
post #967 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 07:42 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,465
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12501 Post(s)
Liked: 10123
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Dang it Mike you were too quick... you beat me to it!

I could have posted it months ago, when I found out, rather than just confirm.

Added
Though I know that this is old information for you also.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #968 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 07:43 AM
Senior Member
 
mirodk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 431
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
That's an excellent question. I believe it's because native is not fully native, in that there is still some dynamic contrast functionality being applied in order to boost contrast performance over and above the SONY 885/760ES, and the SONY's dynamic contrast functionality is very inefficient, as is also evident from the massive drops in white level / space station luminance between Native, Limited, and Full Dynamic Contrast settings

By the way @Kris Deering also found similar when he evaluated the SONY 995ES/870ES, wherein he found it to be dimmer than the 885ES/760ES because of this.

Aha would you say that the Sony bulb versions, handle this better, I definitely think that’s the case, my VW550 doesn’t look that flat on the same interstellar scene.
mirodk is offline  
post #969 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 07:44 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,465
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12501 Post(s)
Liked: 10123
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirodk View Post
Aha would you say that the Sony bulb versions, handle this better, I definitely think that’s the case, my VW550 doesn’t look that flat on the same interstellar scene.
I would expect them to do better.
mirodk likes this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #970 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 08:06 AM
aka jfinnie
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Norwich, UK
Posts: 3,262
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2635 Post(s)
Liked: 1733
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Here you go

Note how inefficient the SONY's dynamic contrast functionality is... No wonder the highlights look dim as hell !



Makes almost no sense unless as has been suggested they're now silently applying dynamic dimming not only to full off but also to the single pixel and a few more pixels for good measure... What a load of BS. (not from you, from Sony if that is really how it behaves).

If it is applying still some kind of dynamic dimming you should be able to see this by attaching an AC power meter and watching the power consumption. You'd expect a full white to be consuming the same as single pixel (more or less, there might be some small differences due to the SXRD panel draw and processing, but that should be small). Even though you probably can't measure accurately a small enough field with the colorimeter, you can probably see the laser modulation levels by watching the power consumption.
bobof is online now  
post #971 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 08:24 AM - Thread Starter
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,484
Mentioned: 258 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4111 Post(s)
Liked: 6641
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirodk View Post
Aha would you say that the Sony bulb versions, handle this better, I definitely think that’s the case, my VW550 doesn’t look that flat on the same interstellar scene.
That's another excellent question

BRB

mirodk likes this.
ARROW-AV is online now  
post #972 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 10:09 AM - Thread Starter
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,484
Mentioned: 258 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4111 Post(s)
Liked: 6641
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirodk View Post
Aha would you say that the Sony bulb versions, handle this better, I definitely think that’s the case, my VW550 doesn’t look that flat on the same interstellar scene.
Here you go:

INTERSTELLAR 00:53:30 PERFORMANCE





mirodk, Archibald1 and wombats like this.

Last edited by ARROW-AV; 04-29-2019 at 10:26 AM.
ARROW-AV is online now  
post #973 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 10:19 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,465
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12501 Post(s)
Liked: 10123
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Here you go:

INTERSTELLAR 00:53:30 PERFORMANCE



That surprises me. I thought the lamp based Sony VW695 would do slightly better than the VW995.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #974 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 10:21 AM
Senior Member
 
JohnnyWilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked: 208
Great work. Can you include a Z1 in this comparison?
mirodk and Archibald1 like this.

---------------


My build thread
JohnnyWilkinson is offline  
post #975 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 10:47 AM
Senior Member
 
mirodk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 431
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Here you go:

INTERSTELLAR 00:53:30 PERFORMANCE





I’m surprised, I thought it would be better - the black floor is about the same as NX9, but with a lot darker spaceship.
Based on visual what looks best 570 or 870 - I wonder how the VW760 handle this.
mirodk is offline  
post #976 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 10:55 AM
Senior Member
 
mirodk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 431
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Here you go:

INTERSTELLAR 00:53:30 PERFORMANCE





What’s that - that must be an error 0,0028 native on the Sony VW570 or

If not then again why is the nits so low on the spaceship on this model also
mirodk is offline  
post #977 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 11:06 AM
Senior Member
 
Maestrosc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Riverside SoCal
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frohlich View Post
Man, the JVC owners sure spend an inordinate amount of time watching movies with 100% star scenes in them
JVC strongly outperforms the Sony in 18% of content... yet 99% of screenshots on avs forums are these 18% content. Strange coincidence.

My plan is to buy a super bright projector, and then just keep a basket of Sunglasses on hand. Instead of being 3D glasses, they'll be my JVC glasses. You just have to remember to put them on for space scenes, and then take them off for the rest of the movie.
Archibald1 likes this.

Last edited by Maestrosc; 04-29-2019 at 12:15 PM.
Maestrosc is offline  
post #978 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 11:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DLCPhoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 2,392
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1590 Post(s)
Liked: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
This is one of the more useful graphics I've seen - thank you! Graphics using the other JVC models, as well as lesser Sony models, would be extremely useful if/when this is possible.

If I'm interpreting it right, the JVC has superior contrast to the Sony in the 0-1.5% ADL range, while in the remaining 1.5% to 50%, it has the worst of these 4 projectors.

What do you think of the idea of adding a second Y-axis on the right, showing the cumulative percentage of movies containing those ADL levels, assuming this data is available? It would start at 0,0, with the cumulative percentage going up toward 100% as the ADL level increases to the right.

So, for example (and clearly these figures are wrong, but just used to illustrate what I'm getting at), if 90% of movies had ADL between 0 and 1.5%, then the JVC would provide the overall best performance for actual movie content (with respect to this aspect of projector picture quality) compared with the Sony, while if only 10% had ADL between 0 and 1.5%, then the other models would provide superior performance for the vast majority of actual content.

Thoughts?

JVC RS400, Marantz SR7010, Screen Innovations 160" 2.35:1 Screen
Front L/R: Duntech Sovereigns, powered by 2 bridged Adcom GFA-555
Center: Revel C208 powered by Cambridge Audio Azur 851W
Dolby Bed (4): Sony Core SS-CS5, Atmos (4): Ascend Acoustics CBM-170 SE
Subwoofer: DIY 8' sub with 4 18" SI Drivers, powered by iNuke 6000
DLCPhoto is offline  
post #979 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 11:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 4,098
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2065 Post(s)
Liked: 1360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestrosc View Post
JVC strongly outperforms the Sony in 5% of content... yet 99% of screenshots on avs forums are these 5% content. Strange coincidence.

My plan is to buy a super bright projector, and then just keep a basket of Sunglasses on hand. Instead of being 3D glasses, they'll be my JVC glasses. You just have to remember to put them on for space scenes, and then take them off for the rest of the movie.
You do realize that the JVC bulb offerings are brighter than the Sony bulb based units. I compared the e-shift JVCs and Sony's when I was looking at moving to 4K a few years ago. The JVC's were noticeably brighter in addition to better contrast. Not to say that the Sonys were bad, they weren't at all. But there's no conspiracy on this forum to bias things towards a particular brand. We see a lot of this content because it is some of the hardest to excel at for a projector.

jeahrens is offline  
post #980 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 11:44 AM
Member
 
danam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: paris - france
Posts: 167
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Here are some partial stats regarding movies ADL :

http://projectiondream.com/en/movie-...-measurements/

Based on 57 movies analysed :

90% of all movie pictures have a brightness below 20% (ADL=% of white)
80% of all movie pictures have a brightness below 13%
50% of all movie pictures have a brightness below 5%
The average brightness/ADL of all analyzed movies is 8%
DLCPhoto, nucky and Mike_WI like this.
danam is offline  
post #981 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 11:52 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
JVC RS1000/NX5/N5:

UNBOXING:









CAn you tell me the difference between the model notations? Your "NX5" says DLA-N5W and mine i received says DLA-NX5B

I assume W and B are for the color? Why does yours not have the X in it?

Video: Dedicated Light Controlled Room | JVC NX5 | 100" AT Silver Ticket 1.1 gain Screen
Audio: Sound Controlled Room | Denon X4500h running 5.1.4 | LR/Atmos - Pioneer SP-EFS73, Center - Pioneer SP-EC73, Rear/Atmos - Pioneer SP-EBS73-LR, Sub - SVS PC-2000
Sources: Nvidia Shield | Panasonic UB-820 | Gaming PC
smhunter1983 is offline  
post #982 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 11:56 AM
Senior Member
 
Maestrosc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Riverside SoCal
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by danam View Post
Here are some partial stats regarding movies ADL :

http://projectiondream.com/en/movie-...-measurements/

Based on 57 movies analysed :

90% of all movie pictures have a brightness below 20% (ADL=% of white)
80% of all movie pictures have a brightness below 13%
50% of all movie pictures have a brightness below 5%
The average brightness/ADL of all analyzed movies is 8%
Also should be noted that this is SDR only. Just for sake of the clarity.
Maestrosc is offline  
post #983 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 12:02 PM - Thread Starter
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,484
Mentioned: 258 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4111 Post(s)
Liked: 6641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestrosc View Post
JVC strongly outperforms the Sony in 5% of content... yet 99% of screenshots on avs forums are these 5% content. Strange coincidence.

My plan is to buy a super bright projector, and then just keep a basket of Sunglasses on hand. Instead of being 3D glasses, they'll be my JVC glasses. You just have to remember to put them on for space scenes, and then take them off for the rest of the movie.
Are you pulling that 5% statistic out of the air or just making it up? Because you are totally wrong. Sorry!

Here's some accurate statistics for you:

• 50% of video content = 0% - 5% ADL

• 1/3 of video content = 0% - 3% ADL

• 18% of video content = 0 - 1.5% ADL

• 10% of video content = 0% - 1% ADL


ARROW-AV is online now  
post #984 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 12:08 PM
Senior Member
 
Maestrosc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Riverside SoCal
Posts: 338
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 357 Post(s)
Liked: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Are you pulling that 5% statistic out of the air or just making it up? Because you are totally wrong. Sorry!

Here's some accurate statistics for you:

• 50% of video content = 0% - 5% ADL

• 1/3 of video content = 0% - 3% ADL

• 18% of video content = 0 - 1.5% ADL

• 10% of video content = 0% - 1% ADL


source? But ill change my post to say "on 18%" instead of 5 since yes, I did pull it from the air. But I would like to know where you found these numbers?

Last edited by Maestrosc; 04-29-2019 at 12:15 PM.
Maestrosc is offline  
post #985 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 12:18 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 26,465
Mentioned: 241 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12501 Post(s)
Liked: 10123
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestrosc View Post
Also should be noted that this is SDR only. Just for sake of the clarity.
Correct. The ADL averages for HDR content is even lower.
ARROW-AV likes this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #986 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 12:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Great info. Thanks
fsyed13 is offline  
post #987 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 12:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,909
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1926 Post(s)
Liked: 1215
Arrow, Is your contrast performance graph for the NX9 set for HDR with Iris at 0?

It would be interesting to see how the NX9 curve looks against the Sony 870 with SDR settings iris at -10.

I know you are an advocate for max brightness iris at 0 for HDR but personally I think that raises the black floor too much. I think you get better HDR performance with the color filter in place, Lamp on high, and iris at about -4 or -5. Of course a lot depends on screen size. I am using a 110" diagonal screen. The brightness is still good and the black floor is better. I also think the contrast performance is better which ultimately is what you want for HDR content.
GregCh is offline  
post #988 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 12:22 PM
Senior Member
 
JohnnyWilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregCh View Post
Arrow, Is your contrast performance graph for the NX9 set for HDR with Iris at 0?

It would be interesting to see how the NX9 curve looks against the Sony 870 with SDR settings iris at -10.

I know you are an advocate for max brightness iris at 0 for HDR but personally I think that raises the black floor too much. I think you get better HDR performance with the color filter in place, Lamp on high, and iris at about -4 or -5. Of course a lot depends on screen size. I am using a 110" diagonal screen. The brightness is still good and the black floor is better. I also think the contrast performance is better which ultimately is what you want for HDR content.
Just because it's mentioned elsewhere:

Yes, it's HDR with Iris at 0.
And I believe Nigel is working on SDR equivalent graphs.

(I may be wrong but this is my understanding)
GregCh and ARROW-AV like this.
JohnnyWilkinson is offline  
post #989 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 12:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Archibald1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 3,337
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2031 Post(s)
Liked: 1103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
I agree, no need for DFO on the 995. It might help the lower models, if it does not create more problems than it solves.
Yeah, that is what I have been saying, but I think it would for most people, perceptually from normal seating distances, put the lower models nearer to the picture quality of the 870 and thus, will not happen.

“Remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Be curious. And however difficult life may seem, there is always something you can do and succeed at. It matters that you don’t just give up."
Stephen Hawking.
Archibald1 is offline  
post #990 of 2880 Old 04-29-2019, 12:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Drexler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 1,116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 111
The thing is, all projectors in this class look fantastic with brighter or mixed material. It's the really low APL scenes that is difficult to reproduce and that's what really puts the projectors to the test. That's why these comparisons tend to focus on really dark content. It's no conspiracy to favor JVC...
Drexler is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
2019 , Jvc , projector , 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