4k Projector Worth it? - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 47Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 86 Old 06-06-2019, 07:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRock3x8 View Post
So I’m on the budget end of the spectrum (went from benq 1070 to UHD50) but imho the answer is no.

The only time I definitely notice 4k is when there is text on screen. A proper blu ray disc still looks great 99% of the time.

Now you can definitely find content that is authored to really show off 4k and it certainly does show off and look amazing in those videos. But 95% of movies aren’t made with showing off 4k in mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Unfortunately the 4K DLPs are a substantial step backwards in contrast vs. even the 2K DLPs they replaced. They generally have great sharpness and resolution, but the picture lacks depth in any scene that calls for even moderate contrast. The technology just isn't capable of really showing the advantages of 4K in my opinion. The Epson 4010 is what I would consider the entry level for 4K. I would suggest the OP tonemap and convert 4K to feed it the HW40 (which is a great 2K unit) before considering a 4K DLP. Right now the price/perf champ seems to be the Epson 5050. Under $5k street price my pick would be the JVC NX5.
Dirk504 likes this.

jeahrens is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 86 Old 06-06-2019, 07:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
m0j0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,142
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 455 Post(s)
Liked: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRock3x8 View Post
So I’m on the budget end of the spectrum (went from benq 1070 to UHD50) but imho the answer is no.

The only time I definitely notice 4k is when there is text on screen. A proper blu ray disc still looks great 99% of the time.

Now you can definitely find content that is authored to really show off 4k and it certainly does show off and look amazing in those videos. But 95% of movies aren’t made with showing off 4k in mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is good feedback. I think when I had my UHD60 I would have agreed with you, as only a small percentage of the 4k movies I watched were really great. However, when I hooked up the Panasonic 820 and had proper tone mapping, I began to see the advantages that 4k/HDR could provide, and when I switched to the Sony 695ES and began watching movies I had previously watched on the Optoma, it was like I was watching a different movie entirely, in a good way, so this all depends on the content, the capabilities of the player, the capabilities of the projector and the environment I think.
Ediddy and Archibald1 like this.
m0j0 is offline  
post #33 of 86 Old 06-06-2019, 08:00 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JRock3x8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Northwest Indiana
Posts: 3,695
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1691 Post(s)
Liked: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
Unfortunately the 4K DLPs are a substantial step backwards in contrast vs. even the 2K DLPs they replaced. They generally have great sharpness and resolution

Sigh. Thanks for crapping on my $1200 purchase man.

I love the internet.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JRock3x8 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 86 Old 06-06-2019, 08:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRock3x8 View Post
Sigh. Thanks for crapping on my $1200 purchase man.

I love the internet.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm sorry. I really am. I don't like being negative on DLPs. My first entry into projection was an Infocus IN76 followed by an Infocus X10. I would LOVE it if the current crop of entry level 4K DLPs offered performance I could endorse as a lot of my friends and family ask my opinion on AV. Once you start getting into higher cost projectors they quickly lose interest.

We're in a thread asking about whether 4K projection is worth it. I can't sugar coat the fact that the 2 4K DLPs I have seen in person both showed subpar contrast which resulted in a very washed out unsatisfying picture. This technology isn't, in my opinion, capable of showcasing 4K. So I felt the OP or people interested in the topic should know that this technology may not be the best place to judge 4K projection. Which can look stunning.
Bahn Yuki and Dirk504 like this.

jeahrens is offline  
post #35 of 86 Old 06-06-2019, 06:06 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
I'm sorry. I really am. I don't like being negative on DLPs. My first entry into projection was an Infocus IN76 followed by an Infocus X10. I would LOVE it if the current crop of entry level 4K DLPs offered performance I could endorse as a lot of my friends and family ask my opinion on AV. Once you start getting into higher cost projectors they quickly lose interest.

We're in a thread asking about whether 4K projection is worth it. I can't sugar coat the fact that the 2 4K DLPs I have seen in person both showed subpar contrast which resulted in a very washed out unsatisfying picture. This technology isn't, in my opinion, capable of showcasing 4K. So I felt the OP or people interested in the topic should know that this technology may not be the best place to judge 4K projection. Which can look stunning.
I've never seen a DLP projector in home theater setup. I've been curious about their PQ for a while. Were the 1080p models with the last gen chips any good?
entropy02 is online now  
post #36 of 86 Old 06-06-2019, 07:41 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,950
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2367 Post(s)
Liked: 1278
The big difference for 4k DLP's is a less defined pixel grid.

As far as 4k at the commercial theater, it depends on the theater and the movie. However, some of the movies now shown are mastered in 4k and are shown on a 4k projector. Also, even when it is upscaled from that high bit rate, it still looks very close to 4k as compared to 4k in our home theaters.

Probably pretty much every viewing room in the below list of theaters are using only 4k projectors, but yes actual mastered content resolution will vary depending on the movie.

https://www.dolby.com/us/en/dolby-cinema/locations.html

The real problem with commercial cinemas is some of them have those atrocious EXIT signs in the way. Of course 'crowds' are another issue, but I only go on the most off-hours possible, and even then i only go like once or twice a year usually (if that).

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --

Last edited by coderguy; 06-06-2019 at 08:03 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #37 of 86 Old 06-07-2019, 07:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by entropy02 View Post
I've never seen a DLP projector in home theater setup. I've been curious about their PQ for a while. Were the 1080p models with the last gen chips any good?
Actually there were quite a few that had decent picture quality and represented an excellent value. The Sony HW45ES is still my pick in the affordable 2K arena. But with the Epson 4010 squeaking under $2k it's getting harder to recommend folks sticking with 2K.

One thing to caution with DLPs is that most use a spinning color wheel to produce their picture and some people will see color trails associated with this. It's commonly called "Rainbow Effect" or RBE (since the color abnormalities generally look like little rainbows trailing things). If you are sensitive to this, it can be a non-starter with DLPs. So I strongly suggest viewing one to see if you are before purchase.

jeahrens is offline  
post #38 of 86 Old 06-07-2019, 07:09 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,950
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2367 Post(s)
Liked: 1278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
One thing to caution with DLPs is that most use a spinning color wheel to produce their picture and some people will see color trails associated with this. It's commonly called "Rainbow Effect" or RBE (since the color abnormalities generally look like little rainbows trailing things). If you are sensitive to this, it can be a non-starter with DLPs. So I strongly suggest viewing one to see if you are before purchase.
If you want to call Epson's e-shift technique even 4k given the wide pixel fill, as it's essentially missing a ton of anti-aliasing compared to DLP or LCOS e-shift techniques. Since there is a lot of complex scaling involved in the e-shift techniques, the fact it is using such a wide pixel fill is not helping the matter at all.

DLP E-shift > LCOS E-shift > LCD / Epson E-shift

I would prefer to see a Native 4k LCD Panel by Epson, come on Epson it's taking too long.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #39 of 86 Old 06-07-2019, 07:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
If you want to call Epson's e-shift technique even 4k given the wide pixel fill, as it's essentially missing a ton of anti-aliasing compared to DLP or LCOS e-shift techniques. Since there is a lot of complex scaling involved in the e-shift techniques, the fact it is using such a wide pixel fill is not helping the matter at all.

DLP E-shift > LCOS E-shift > LCD / Epson E-shift

I would prefer to see a Native 4k LCD Panel by Epson, come on Epson it's taking too long.
I agree that it would be awesome for Epson to move to a 4K LCD panel, but I would imagine cost is a big factor. They have a pretty unique position of offering a solid 4K entry below the $2k price point and a even better experience with the 5050 at the $3k price point. Neither of these products is challenged by either Sony or JVC cost wise. At the end of the day 4K is a lot more than resolution and sharpness for me. You have to have contrast, brightness and color rendition to really show off the formats strengths. The 4K DLPs have brightness, sharpness and color. The problem is that even a scene that calls for modest contrast ends up looking washed out. There's just no depth to the image and most of the pop is lost. Go to a scene with a lot of black/shadows and it's even worse. I've seen business projectors pull off better low light material. While the Epson's don't have the pixel fill, they do have good enough contrast and brightness that scenes maintain their depth and this gives the image a pop and life the DLP just can't even come close to. Especially the upper tier model (the 4010 is adequate, but not stellar). So in the end I would choose the Epson alternative all day every day for 4K on a budget.

jeahrens is offline  
post #40 of 86 Old 06-09-2019, 11:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jdlynch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 1,110
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 332 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by entropy02 View Post
I've never seen a DLP projector in home theater setup. I've been curious about their PQ for a while. Were the 1080p models with the last gen chips any good?
I’m still using my 11 year old Marantz VP15s1 DLP, which is only 1080p, but it’s picture still amazes me.

@jeahrens - in your opinion, would any of the new 4K projectors be a noticeable improvement over my Marantz? How much will I need to spend just to not go backwards? Currently sitting 14’ back from a 123” diag 16:9 screen.

Current Equipment: Datasat LS10 w/ Atmos and DIRAC. ATI 6005, AT527NC, Aerial Acoustics LR5's (LCR), SR3's sides, LR3's (rears), Seaton Submersive HP, Marantz VP15s1, 123" diag 16:9 Stewart Cima Neve screen, Oppo BDP-103, Palliser Flicks Theater Seating AC Power: Eaton whole-house surge protector at main panel, three dedicated 20 amp circuits, Surgex XR315 surge protector at equipment rack, Cyberpower 1400VA/900 watt, true sine wave UPS.
jdlynch is offline  
post #41 of 86 Old 06-09-2019, 07:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,950
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2367 Post(s)
Liked: 1278
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdlynch View Post
I’m still using my 11 year old Marantz VP15s1 DLP, which is only 1080p, but it’s picture still amazes me.

@jeahrens - in your opinion, would any of the new 4K projectors be a noticeable improvement over my Marantz? How much will I need to spend just to not go backwards? Currently sitting 14’ back from a 123” diag 16:9 screen.
You could get better contrast with a JVC, but higher resolution won't make much difference at your seating distance, maybe a tiny bit.

I wouldn't bother with 4k at that distance, you'll still get a contrast upgrade even with a newer JVC compared to your Marantz, but at that viewing distance I'd probably just go with the slightly older JVC RS-540 / x790, as the slightly cleaner and higher res image of the NX series is unlikely to be noticeable at that distant seating position. It's possible you'd still notice the difference with Native 4k, but it's going to be mild for sure compared to most people (most sit much closer than you). If you ever plan on sitting closer, go with a newer JVC NX series.

Also, a big upgrade for you would be a scope screen probably.

For myself, even I am debating on the RS-540 vs. NX, but I am in a much more questionable seating position 10' from 120" 2.35... It is a very hard call, because e-shift 4k vs. Native 4k at my seating distance is going to make some difference, but at your seating distance it would make very little I suspect based on my own testing. I never compared e-shift 4k to JVC's Native 4k though technically, I compared e-shift 4k to a 4k 'non-native' DLP at a dealer, but I also saw some native 4k projectors in another room just a couple minutes later.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --

Last edited by coderguy; 06-09-2019 at 07:31 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #42 of 86 Old 06-09-2019, 07:35 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,332
Mentioned: 231 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11661 Post(s)
Liked: 9221
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
I agree that it would be awesome for Epson to move to a 4K LCD panel, but I would imagine cost is a big factor. They have a pretty unique position of offering a solid 4K entry below the $2k price point and a even better experience with the 5050 at the $3k price point. Neither of these products is challenged by either Sony or JVC cost wise. At the end of the day 4K is a lot more than resolution and sharpness for me. You have to have contrast, brightness and color rendition to really show off the formats strengths. The 4K DLPs have brightness, sharpness and color. The problem is that even a scene that calls for modest contrast ends up looking washed out. There's just no depth to the image and most of the pop is lost. Go to a scene with a lot of black/shadows and it's even worse. I've seen business projectors pull off better low light material. While the Epson's don't have the pixel fill, they do have good enough contrast and brightness that scenes maintain their depth and this gives the image a pop and life the DLP just can't even come close to. Especially the upper tier model (the 4010 is adequate, but not stellar). So in the end I would choose the Epson alternative all day every day for 4K on a budget.
Epson is sold out of new 5040's. They are also out of new LS10000's and LS10500's.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #43 of 86 Old 06-10-2019, 07:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdlynch View Post
I’m still using my 11 year old Marantz VP15s1 DLP, which is only 1080p, but it’s picture still amazes me.

@jeahrens - in your opinion, would any of the new 4K projectors be a noticeable improvement over my Marantz? How much will I need to spend just to not go backwards? Currently sitting 14’ back from a 123” diag 16:9 screen.
@jdlynch

I would suggest the Epson 5050 which comes in under $3000. It's native contrast of around 8000:1 betters the Marantz's ~3300:1. The dynamic contrast on the 5050 will of course be much higher. As Coderguy points out you're far enough back that the resolution bump of native 4K won't be huge which means the Epson's use of pixel shifting won't really be much of a negative. Of course UHD is much more than just the resolution. HDR and the expanded color actually make more of a difference in my opinion. The Epson will deliver on both with around 90% P3 coverage (without color filter) and a calibrated light output of around 1800 lumens (again without color filter). The color filter I mentioned increases the P3 color coverage on the 5050, but the lumen hit is to high for it to be practical in most setups. I think ends up being less than 1000 lumens with the filter in place.

The next step up would be the JVC NX5. If offers a native 4K panel with increased contrast compared to the 5050. The optics on the JVC will better the Epson and it has similar calibrated light output. I own it's sibling, the NX7, and can say it's an all around stunning picture.

Both projectors have powered focus, shift and zoom. Both have lens memories allowing you to easily use a wider AR screen. Both have similar color coverage. I think the JVC will overall have an advantage in picture quality, but I think the Epson is very a strong candidate due to cost savings and the particulars of your setup.


Last edited by jeahrens; 06-10-2019 at 09:04 AM.
jeahrens is offline  
post #44 of 86 Old 06-10-2019, 06:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jdlynch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 1,110
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 332 Post(s)
Liked: 128
@jeahrens and @coderguy

Thanks for all the advice. I’m hoping my Marantz still has a few years left, but I’m starting to plan for its replacement.

Current Equipment: Datasat LS10 w/ Atmos and DIRAC. ATI 6005, AT527NC, Aerial Acoustics LR5's (LCR), SR3's sides, LR3's (rears), Seaton Submersive HP, Marantz VP15s1, 123" diag 16:9 Stewart Cima Neve screen, Oppo BDP-103, Palliser Flicks Theater Seating AC Power: Eaton whole-house surge protector at main panel, three dedicated 20 amp circuits, Surgex XR315 surge protector at equipment rack, Cyberpower 1400VA/900 watt, true sine wave UPS.
jdlynch is offline  
post #45 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 06:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bud16415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Erie Pa
Posts: 7,491
Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1987 Post(s)
Liked: 1003
I find it interesting this question popped up in the >3000 forum because in the <3000 forum 1080p talk is all but non existent. 4k entry-level projectors using pixel manipulation are clearly deemed superior.

I still have a dark chip 3 RGBRGB single 1080p chip DLP and I’m very much satisfied. I watch 1080p streaming and regular 1080 BD and 1080 OTA TV. I think many people need to look at what they are watching and make that a factor in this as well.

I’m sure I will move to 4k projection at some point because with every new jump in resolution manufactures stop improving the older tech.

For now I’m in no hurry and who knows what will be around in 3-4 years with projectors disregarding resolution. Things like lower cost alternate light sources etc.

I started a thread on this topic of resolution and seating distance a few years ago and the discussion was very interesting.
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-di...al-acuity.html



Bud
bud16415 is offline  
post #46 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 07:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud16415 View Post
I find it interesting this question popped up in the >3000 forum because in the <3000 forum 1080p talk is all but non existent. 4k entry-level projectors using pixel manipulation are clearly deemed superior.

I still have a dark chip 3 RGBRGB single 1080p chip DLP and I’m very much satisfied. I watch 1080p streaming and regular 1080 BD and 1080 OTA TV. I think many people need to look at what they are watching and make that a factor in this as well.

I’m sure I will move to 4k projection at some point because with every new jump in resolution manufactures stop improving the older tech.

For now I’m in no hurry and who knows what will be around in 3-4 years with projectors disregarding resolution. Things like lower cost alternate light sources etc.

I started a thread on this topic of resolution and seating distance a few years ago and the discussion was very interesting.
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-di...al-acuity.html


The sad part is a DC3 1080P DLP is going to beat the current 4K DLP shifters in contrast and black floor by a sizable margin. As someone who enjoys black and white films I really don't think you would be happy with one. A frugal choice for you would be the Epson 4010. The lens memory would probably make your unique screen setup easier to manage.

Hard to say where we will be in 3-4 years. My guess is laser based light sourcing will be more mainstream and LED will also be making progress.


Last edited by jeahrens; 06-11-2019 at 07:24 AM.
jeahrens is offline  
post #47 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 07:22 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Erod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,755
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1185 Post(s)
Liked: 717
To me, the answer to this question is directly related to what projector you currently have, and how big your screen is in relation to how far you sit. There simply just isn't enough PQ difference between 1080p and 4K blu ray discs to justify the expense if you already have a good e-shift projector that can handle basic HDR.

I've been able to see some calibrated NX5 and NX7 projectors in action, for instance, and the improvement in picture is virtually negligible compared to my RS620. Whatever sharpness advantage that might exist - and I'm not that sure it does - is offset by a lessened black floor than what I currently have. So, it's certainly not worth the hassle of selling my projector and forking out another $7-12K to make up the difference for a projector that only slightly offers anything better, if even that. However, if you're still using a 1080p projector without HDR capability, then yes, it's worth stepping up to at least a pixel-shift projector. You'll improve your experience significantly enough to be worth it.

The problem is largely due to source material, I have no doubt. THIS is the real problem right now. These NX5/7 projectors can do more than their sources allow.

Once refresh rates hit 120Hz+ and broadcast TV hits 4K (if rumors are true that they're skipping 1080p to get to HLG), then an upgrade will be well worth it. But the HDMI 2.1 world seems many years away in terms of broad source content.

My main concern is a sub-35 crowd that seems all too content with watching Netflix on their smart phones. We need that generation to drive the future market, but they seem perfectly content with getting smaller and more mobile with wireless ear buds. High fidelity home theater experience seems off their radar.

Again, it's about content to me. Once that is in place, I'll be buying my next projector.

Video: JVC RS620/X9500 projector, Stewart ST130 screen, Panasonic ub820 UHD player
Audio: Anthem AVM60 preamp, Anthem MCA525 amp, B&K Reference 125.7 amp
Subs: dual SVS PC-12 cylinders
Speakers: Jamo 626k4 in-wall mains, Jamo 631k4 bi/dipole surrounds, DefTech DI6.5R heights
Erod is offline  
post #48 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 07:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bud16415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Erie Pa
Posts: 7,491
Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1987 Post(s)
Liked: 1003
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
The sad part is a DC3 1080P DLP is going to beat the current 4K DLP shifters in contrast and black floor by a sizable margin. As someone who enjoys black and white films I really don't think you would be happy with one. A frugal choice for you would be the Epson 4010. The lens memory would probably make your unique screen setup easier to manage.

Hard to say where we will be in 3-4 years. My guess is laser based light sourcing will be more mainstream and LED will also be making progress.
The up side is the DC3 1080p DLPs can now be had for a song.

I also watch a lot of B&W and old classics and quite often they can only be found as poor transfers or DVDs. The DC3 does a fine job at showing them and I zoom down a little and find increasing the pixel density works to bring the PQ up.

Some people are driven by specs and keeping up with the latest trend. I tend to be more driven by improving overall performance of the entire room and enjoying the media for what it is.

Bud
bud16415 is offline  
post #49 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 07:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
To me, the answer to this question is directly related to what projector you currently have, and how big your screen is in relation to how far you sit. There simply just isn't enough PQ difference between 1080p and 4K blu ray discs to justify the expense if you already have a good e-shift projector that can handle basic HDR.

I've been able to see some calibrated NX5 and NX7 projectors in action, for instance, and the improvement in picture is virtually negligible compared to my RS620. Whatever sharpness advantage that might exist - and I'm not that sure it does - is offset by a lessened black floor than what I currently have. So, it's certainly not worth the hassle of selling my projector and forking out another $7-12K to make up the difference for a projector that only slightly offers anything better, if even that. However, if you're still using a 1080p projector without HDR capability, then yes, it's worth stepping up to at least a pixel-shift projector. You'll improve your experience significantly enough to be worth it.

The problem is largely due to source material, I have no doubt. THIS is the real problem right now. These NX5/7 projectors can do more than their sources allow.

Once refresh rates hit 120Hz+ and broadcast TV hits 4K (if rumors are true that they're skipping 1080p to get to HLG), then an upgrade will be well worth it. But the HDMI 2.1 world seems many years away in terms of broad source content.

My main concern is a sub-35 crowd that seems all too content with watching Netflix on their smart phones. We need that generation to drive the future market, but they seem perfectly content with getting smaller and more mobile with wireless ear buds. High fidelity home theater experience seems off their radar.

Again, it's about content to me. Once that is in place, I'll be buying my next projector.
Hopefully the big studios get their act together and get the 4K effects chain in place. On the few titles that do manage 4K end to end the difference is pronounced. I do agree that pixel shifting is a definite step up from 1080P and offers a noticeable detail bump. I came from an RS520 to an NX7 and I get where you're coming from. Having lived with both day to day the contrast and black floor differences aren't as pronounced as they seem on the surface. The e-shift lineup iris is much more aggressive about fading to black vs. the new ones. However there isn't noticeable pumping on the new units. There are other improvements I've noticed, but overall I agree with your assessment that a good shifting unit that handles HDR well is enough to appreciate 4K.

jeahrens is offline  
post #50 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 07:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud16415 View Post
The up side is the DC3 1080p DLPs can now be had for a song.

I also watch a lot of B&W and old classics and quite often they can only be found as poor transfers or DVDs. The DC3 does a fine job at showing them and I zoom down a little and find increasing the pixel density works to bring the PQ up.

Some people are driven by specs and keeping up with the latest trend. I tend to be more driven by improving overall performance of the entire room and enjoying the media for what it is.
Well watching Blade Runner in 4K (and it is 4K all the way through) is better than any experience of that film I've had since first watching it in the '80s. 4K isn't simply a "keeping up with the Jones" move. It offers an improvement vs. Blu Ray that varies from a little to sizable.

You might find that good upscaling added to shifting technologies may mitigate some of the need to zoom down. Either way moving to a higher contrast projector will be especially helpful in appreciating black and white classics.
Archibald1 likes this.

jeahrens is offline  
post #51 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 10:47 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Erod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,755
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1185 Post(s)
Liked: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud16415 View Post
The up side is the DC3 1080p DLPs can now be had for a song.

I also watch a lot of B&W and old classics and quite often they can only be found as poor transfers or DVDs. The DC3 does a fine job at showing them and I zoom down a little and find increasing the pixel density works to bring the PQ up.

Some people are driven by specs and keeping up with the latest trend. I tend to be more driven by improving overall performance of the entire room and enjoying the media for what it is.
That was me for several years, but I've wised up a bit.

Content has to get moving forward faster, period. Otherwise, this hobby is stuck in the mud.

Ball games are still in 720p or 1080i. Atmos and DTS:X are still mostly unimpressive versus basic 5.1 mixes. HDR still doesn't know what it wants to be or what format to follow. Refresh rates are still the same as 30 years ago. Streamed 4K is still woefully inferior to a UHD disc, as is streamed sound. Panning on a large screen makes your head spin.

Until the content gets its act in order, these cool toys are just potted plants.

Video: JVC RS620/X9500 projector, Stewart ST130 screen, Panasonic ub820 UHD player
Audio: Anthem AVM60 preamp, Anthem MCA525 amp, B&K Reference 125.7 amp
Subs: dual SVS PC-12 cylinders
Speakers: Jamo 626k4 in-wall mains, Jamo 631k4 bi/dipole surrounds, DefTech DI6.5R heights
Erod is offline  
post #52 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 11:07 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 15,692
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6563 Post(s)
Liked: 7589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
That was me for several years, but I've wised up a bit.

Content has to get moving forward faster, period. Otherwise, this hobby is stuck in the mud.

Ball games are still in 720p or 1080i. Atmos and DTS:X are still mostly unimpressive versus basic 5.1 mixes. HDR still doesn't know what it wants to be or what format to follow. Refresh rates are still the same as 30 years ago. Streamed 4K is still woefully inferior to a UHD disc, as is streamed sound. Panning on a large screen makes your head spin.

Until the content gets its act in order, these cool toys are just potted plants.
Atmos and DTS:X both sound simply outstanding in my theater. And HDR looks excellent now on a 4K projector. And my guests say so every week.
Dirk504 likes this.
Craig Peer is offline  
post #53 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 11:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
nonstopdoc1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 737
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 514 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
Atmos and DTS:X both sound simply outstanding in my theater. And HDR looks excellent now on a 4K projector. And my guests say so every week.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
@jdlynch

I would suggest the Epson 5050 which comes in under $3000. It's native contrast of around 8000:1 betters the Marantz's ~3300:1. The dynamic contrast on the 5050 will of course be much higher. As Coderguy points out you're far enough back that the resolution bump of native 4K won't be huge which means the Epson's use of pixel shifting won't really be much of a negative. Of course UHD is much more than just the resolution. HDR and the expanded color actually make more of a difference in my opinion. The Epson will deliver on both with around 90% P3 coverage (without color filter) and a calibrated light output of around 1800 lumens (again without color filter). The color filter I mentioned increases the P3 color coverage on the 5050, but the lumen hit is to high for it to be practical in most setups. I think ends up being less than 1000 lumens with the filter in place.

The next step up would be the JVC NX5. If offers a native 4K panel with increased contrast compared to the 5050. The optics on the JVC will better the Epson and it has similar calibrated light output. I own it's sibling, the NX7, and can say it's an all around stunning picture.

Both projectors have powered focus, shift and zoom. Both have lens memories allowing you to easily use a wider AR screen. Both have similar color coverage. I think the JVC will overall have an advantage in picture quality, but I think the Epson is very a strong candidate due to cost savings and the particulars of your setup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
You could get better contrast with a JVC, but higher resolution won't make much difference at your seating distance, maybe a tiny bit.

I wouldn't bother with 4k at that distance, you'll still get a contrast upgrade even with a newer JVC compared to your Marantz, but at that viewing distance I'd probably just go with the slightly older JVC RS-540 / x790, as the slightly cleaner and higher res image of the NX series is unlikely to be noticeable at that distant seating position. It's possible you'd still notice the difference with Native 4k, but it's going to be mild for sure compared to most people (most sit much closer than you). If you ever plan on sitting closer, go with a newer JVC NX series.

Also, a big upgrade for you would be a scope screen probably.

For myself, even I am debating on the RS-540 vs. NX, but I am in a much more questionable seating position 10' from 120" 2.35... It is a very hard call, because e-shift 4k vs. Native 4k at my seating distance is going to make some difference, but at your seating distance it would make very little I suspect based on my own testing. I never compared e-shift 4k to JVC's Native 4k though technically, I compared e-shift 4k to a 4k 'non-native' DLP at a dealer, but I also saw some native 4k projectors in another room just a couple minutes later.
Guys, I have a RS540 and I find the picture on HDR mode to be pretty dark in some scenes. Will NX7 offer any significant improvement over RS540 or should I wait another year to see what comes out next? WHat about Epson's new 6050? BTW I have 133" wide 2.39:1 screen

My Build Thread
HT - Seymour Centerstage XD 2.39:1 133" W| JVC X790R | Denon AVR | QSC DPA 4.2 | ATI AT528NC | Procella P8/P5V | Revel C763L | Rythmik FV15HP x2
Living Room - LG OLED 65" | Yamaha 2060 | Monolith 3x200 | KEF Q900 L/R | Paradigm Millenia CC | Polk Surrounds | Monolith 12" Subs x 2
nonstopdoc1 is online now  
post #54 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 11:48 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,332
Mentioned: 231 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11661 Post(s)
Liked: 9221
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by nonstopdoc1 View Post
Guys, I have a RS540 and I find the picture on HDR mode to be pretty dark in some scenes. Will NX7 offer any significant improvement over RS540 or should I wait another year to see what comes out next? WHat about Epson's new 6050? BTW I have 133" wide 2.39:1 screen
If you are talking about the difference in tone mapping between the 540 and the RS2000, then yes the 2000 is quite a bit better. You could add a Lumagen to the 540 and get excellent HDR tone mapping, but the Lumagen will be more complicated to set up and you will not get auto change over for HDR.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #55 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 12:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
Atmos and DTS:X both sound simply outstanding in my theater. And HDR looks excellent now on a 4K projector. And my guests say so every week.
I agree for the most part, but I also get what Erod is saying. We have studios with lackluster audio mixes and 4K discs lacking metadata (Disney). Streaming is all over the place for quality and following standards. 4K as a format really needed more defined standards and a better rollout.

But with more and more projectors getting better tone mapping capabilities and studios getting better and better most discs end up being an upgrade over their 2K counterparts with some being a rather sizable upgrade. Atmos/DTS:X range from nice ambiance to a big change to the soundstage, but I'm always glad it's there. Overall I can safely say 4K hits far more than it misses (at least on disc) and it's well worth it.
Craig Peer and Dirk504 like this.

jeahrens is offline  
post #56 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 12:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by nonstopdoc1 View Post
Guys, I have a RS540 and I find the picture on HDR mode to be pretty dark in some scenes. Will NX7 offer any significant improvement over RS540 or should I wait another year to see what comes out next? WHat about Epson's new 6050? BTW I have 133" wide 2.39:1 screen
I had an RS520 so I'll chime in. The Lumagen Mike is suggesting would be an expensive, but great fix for the lack of auto tonemapping on your RS540. Another option which I used with great success on my RS520 would be a Panasonic UB820 with which has an HDR optimizer feature. How do the solutions differ? Well the Lumagen is able to look at each individual frame and adjust the tonemap based on that frames characteristics. The Panasonic will look at the metadata on the disc and set a tonemap based on this. So the Panasonic isn't doing a frame by frame analysis, it's simply setting a range based on the discs authoring. I've not seen what the Lumagen can do, but I have no doubt it would be better than the Panasonic approach. However having paired the Panasonic with my previous RS520 I can say the combo produced fantastic results to my eyes. And it definitely fixed some of the dim poorly authored discs *cough* Disney *cough*.

The Epson 6050 would not be an upgrade to your RS540 in my opinion. It has a better set of HDR tools, but overall the contrast, black floor and optics will fall short. The RS540 also has a usable BT2020 filter (which I preferred on my RS520) where the Epson's filter just has to much of a lumen hit to be usable. The NX7 is a trickier question. Was it an upgrade for me? Yes. Is it worth it? That's up to you. The auto tonemapping in the NX7 and native 4K panel certainly are a bonus compared to the RS5xx (along with other things), but the e-shift units are really good in their own right. I'd suggest auditioning one if you can.

jeahrens is offline  
post #57 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 12:27 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Erod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,755
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1185 Post(s)
Liked: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
Atmos and DTS:X both sound simply outstanding in my theater. And HDR looks excellent now on a 4K projector. And my guests say so every week.
There are a few (Jumanji, Blade Runner 2049, Hacksaw Ridge), but the vast majority of Atmos/DTS:X blu rays don't sound any better than a DTS Master-HD disc, especially with the DSU upmixer applied. And I have a perfectly dimensioned dedicated room with 7.2.4 sound. The Revenant sounds better than almost all Atmos, and it's just 5.1 sound.

HDR adds nice color depth. That's a nice addition. But most 4K doesn't outshine 1080p in sharpness or clarity much, if at all. In fact, some 1080p material looks more "4K" than some actual 4K material.

Content, content, content.

The industry has to pick up its game, and I'm not even talking about the stupid Marvel comics and Fast & Furious nonsense. We need much more intellectual movies with better stories and better production value.

Where is Forrest Gump? Where's Gladiator, Interstellar, Saving Private Ryan, Shawshank Redemption, Schindler's List, Braveheart, Gandi, The Last of the Mohicans, The Godfather, Master and Commander, etc, etc, etc.?

We don't get these movies anymore. We just get preachy garbage and comic book characters. It's disgusting. Hollywood has checked out in favor of overly PC "safe" movies.

Video: JVC RS620/X9500 projector, Stewart ST130 screen, Panasonic ub820 UHD player
Audio: Anthem AVM60 preamp, Anthem MCA525 amp, B&K Reference 125.7 amp
Subs: dual SVS PC-12 cylinders
Speakers: Jamo 626k4 in-wall mains, Jamo 631k4 bi/dipole surrounds, DefTech DI6.5R heights
Erod is offline  
post #58 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 12:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
Fargus777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Arlington, Texas
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
To me, the answer to this question is directly related to what projector you currently have, and how big your screen is in relation to how far you sit. There simply just isn't enough PQ difference between 1080p and 4K blu ray discs to justify the expense if you already have a good e-shift projector that can handle basic HDR.

I've been able to see some calibrated NX5 and NX7 projectors in action, for instance, and the improvement in picture is virtually negligible compared to my RS620. Whatever sharpness advantage that might exist - and I'm not that sure it does - is offset by a lessened black floor than what I currently have. So, it's certainly not worth the hassle of selling my projector and forking out another $7-12K to make up the difference for a projector that only slightly offers anything better, if even that. However, if you're still using a 1080p projector without HDR capability, then yes, it's worth stepping up to at least a pixel-shift projector. You'll improve your experience significantly enough to be worth it.

The problem is largely due to source material, I have no doubt. THIS is the real problem right now. These NX5/7 projectors can do more than their sources allow.

Once refresh rates hit 120Hz+ and broadcast TV hits 4K (if rumors are true that they're skipping 1080p to get to HLG), then an upgrade will be well worth it. But the HDMI 2.1 world seems many years away in terms of broad source content.

My main concern is a sub-35 crowd that seems all too content with watching Netflix on their smart phones. We need that generation to drive the future market, but they seem perfectly content with getting smaller and more mobile with wireless ear buds. High fidelity home theater experience seems off their radar.

Again, it's about content to me. Once that is in place, I'll be buying my next projector.
Would your advice be the same for someone new to the Projector world and trying to purchase their first? eshift JVC over the NX series?

Gamertag: Fargus
Playstation ID: Fargus79
Fargus777 is online now  
post #59 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 12:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Erod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,755
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1185 Post(s)
Liked: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fargus777 View Post
Would your advice be the same for someone new to the Projector world and trying to purchase their first? eshift JVC over the NX series?
That depends obviously on the amount of money you have to spend and how technical you are. For me, I don't buy first generation of a new technology on anything. Let the early adopters work out the kinks (there are many) with those NX projectors, then get the second version that is sure to come out soon with most of the "fixes" intact.

That's what I did with my rs620. The 400/500/600 had a lot of issues with latency, HDR gamma, etc, that were solved for the rs620. Still a couple of gremlins, but largely just a fixed 600 out of the box. It has been an OUTSTANDING projector.

I also love my Anthem AVM60, which has been a flawless performer for me. However, it was far from flawless at release. I bought it a year later with all the firmware fixes in place. I'm sure I'll buy the next version of this, but not until the fixes are in place and not until HDMI 2.1 has real material to work with.
Fargus777 likes this.

Video: JVC RS620/X9500 projector, Stewart ST130 screen, Panasonic ub820 UHD player
Audio: Anthem AVM60 preamp, Anthem MCA525 amp, B&K Reference 125.7 amp
Subs: dual SVS PC-12 cylinders
Speakers: Jamo 626k4 in-wall mains, Jamo 631k4 bi/dipole surrounds, DefTech DI6.5R heights
Erod is offline  
post #60 of 86 Old 06-11-2019, 12:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 3,649
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1733 Post(s)
Liked: 1090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post

HDR adds nice color depth. That's a nice addition. But most 4K doesn't outshine 1080p in sharpness or clarity much, if at all. In fact, some 1080p material looks more "4K" than some actual 4K material.
Honestly I have only one 4K disc that didn't offer a noticeable bump in sharpness vs the Blu Ray. Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Granted when a 2K interpositive is in the mix the bump isn't going to be big. Are you sure your 620 is in focus? Might want to disable e-shift and check it. How far do you sit from your screen and what size is it? Unless the lens sample was better on my RS520 (doubtful) most of my 4K viewing was on it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
Where is Forrest Gump?
Announced and coming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
Where's Gladiator, Interstellar, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Braveheart
All out. Own them all except for Braveheart. Gladiator is amazing in 4K. As is Saving Private Ryan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
Shawshank Redemption, Gandi, The Last of the Mohicans, The Godfather, Master and Commander, etc, etc, etc.?
Not announced yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erod View Post
We don't get these movies anymore. We just get preachy garbage and comic book characters. It's disgusting. Hollywood has checked out in favor of overly PC "safe" movies.
I hope more catalog titles get out there.

jeahrens 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