Sub-$10k projector for this new theater - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 15Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 02:11 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,027
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
Liked: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
That review does not mention a lot of things. When you calibrate HDR mode, you lose brightness with the HT9060, per a reviewer I trust. You lose almost the same percentage as you do with an RS2000. Note I was using the manufacturers gain spec, which I think is a little high and the projector at minimum throw. The BenQ would do better than either the Sony or JVC, brightness wise until it got too dim. None of these projectors would be my recommendation for a 0.8 gain screen at 143" or larger size. The BenQ is rated at 20,000 hours, we do not know if that is using high or eco. Projector Central lists it for eco mode, but if we assume it is high, then we have.

1,600 hours calibrated new
20,000 hours 800 calibrated lumens
10,000 hours 1,200 calibrated lumens
5,000 hours 1,400 calibrated lumens
2,500 hours 1,500 calibrated lumens
I think expecting 10,000 hours from a unit is probably enough for most people. I use my projector often and would want it to go 15,000 hours, but that's just me.
So a good rule of thumb might be someone having a buffer of at least 30% more lumens than they need, and for that mode to be at least a 'very watchable' almost calibrated mode.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 02:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,807
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2597 Post(s)
Liked: 1240
Red face

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Not at all. In the argument, I said the JVC and Sony would be worse. I said you would be lucky to get 500 hours out of the JVC or Sony. Try to keep up, rather than just slander me. The argument was use on a 143" or larger screen, when the customer was thinking of using Screen Excellence NEO, which has a gain spec of 0.8. Actual gain may even be slightly lower than that. For that application, all three suck.
It's not slander, how can you justify the below:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
The manufacture even lists the LED life at 20,000 with this footnote: " Lamp life results will vary depending on environmental conditions and usage."
So 20,000 hours could mean zero lumens after 20,000 hours, 20,000 hours is half life in high, 20,0000 is half life in eco or 20,000 hours before it begins to fade. We can be pretty sure the first one would be a wrong assumption, just like we can be pretty certain the last one would be a wrong assumption.
...when we already have a study proving that HLD LED retains 95+% of lumens after 12000hr, (and not eco mode, in mode that allows for full peak brightness) - a study that you are aware of?

It's pretty clear that HLD LED retains the majority of it's brightness for a very long time. A study has proven so. Not much else to say about it... Saying it loses half it's brightness after 20000hr or implying it is going to lose some large brightness before this is just plain false when there is study proving otherwise, and this study has been discussed multiple times in threads you have participated in.

Again it's hard to see it as something other than protecting outdated lamp models by creating a fear about LEDs losing brightness that has been proven not to occur.

If you have a projector that retains 95% of lumens for 20000hr the fact is for most the projector will be severely outdated and of little resale value by the time that 20000hr is up (even if the lightsource was new) - as it will take many years to accrue that many hours even for a power user like myself - so worrying about what happens after the 20000hr for a projector under $10k doesn't really matter. After that amount of time you'd be lucky to get $1k for a projector with such old tech, so if you didn't invest much to begin with it's no significant loss.

Although you could argue if you invest a lot (ie $25k+ for a Sony or JVC laser) then it becomes more difficult to swallow discarding a pj at the end of solid state lifespan.

Last edited by Ruined; 06-26-2019 at 02:27 PM.
Ruined is offline  
post #33 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 02:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,565
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11828 Post(s)
Liked: 9358
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
I think expecting 10,000 hours from a unit is probably enough for most people. I use my projector often and would want it to go 15,000 hours, but that's just me.
So a good rule of thumb might be someone having a buffer of at least 30% more lumens than they need, and for that mode to be at least a 'very watchable' almost calibrated mode.
10,000 hours is more than I would expect a projector to last, completely trouble free, but on the screen the one poster was recommending, the customer would never get to 10,000 hours, because the projector would be way too dim for HDR. Per manufacturer spec, he would be too dim at 2,500 hours for HDR. A 143" or larger 0.8 gain screen is just too big for the HT9060, unless you want to completely give up HDR.
Mike Garrett is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 02:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,565
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11828 Post(s)
Liked: 9358
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
It's not slander, how can you justify the below:



...when we already have a study proving that HLD LED retains 95+% of lumens after 12000hr, (and not eco mode, in mode that allows for full peak brightness) - a study that you are aware of?

It's pretty clear that HLD LED retains the majority of it's brightness for a very long time. A study has proven so. Not much else to say about it... Saying it loses half it's brightness after 20000hr or implying otherwise is just plain false when there is study proving otherwise, and this study has been discussed multiple times in threads you have participated in.

Again it's hard to see it as something other than protecting outdated lamp models by creating a fear about LEDs losing brightness that has been proven not to occur.
What do you mean, how can I justify that. I used the manufacturers spec. I even provided a link. If you think the manufacturer is wrong, take it up with him, rather than try to argue with me. I can play your game also. All incandescent lights should last 110 years, because I can find one that has lasted that long.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...ears-17441176/

Once again, where am I trying to protect anything? Show me where I made a recommendation in this thread for a lamp based projector? The original poster did not answer my questions about his room, so I made no recommendation. Then another poster said he should get at least a 143" screen, if not a 160" screen. I mentioned he is considering an AT screen with at best 0.8 gain. I disagreed with the recommendation. Now if the recommendation for the 143" or larger 0.8 gain screen had been for the LK990, I would have been fine with that, since that actually can do that job.

Last edited by Mike Garrett; 06-26-2019 at 02:30 PM.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #35 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 02:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,807
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2597 Post(s)
Liked: 1240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
What do you mean, how can I justify that. I used the manufacturers spec. I even provided a link. If you think the manufacturer is wrong, take it up with him, rather than try to argue with me. I can play your game also. All incandescent lights should last 110 years, because I can find one that has lasted that long.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...ears-17441176/

Once again, where am I trying to protect anything? Show me where I made a recommendation in this thread for a lamp based projector?
JVC and Sony only offer lamp projectors in this price range. BenQ is offering a disruptive high quality solid state projector for the same price or less. If JVC/Sony is your recommendation lamp is your only option for recommendation in the price bracket. A study has already proven HLD LED is a long lasting reliable lightsource that retains near full brightness even after 10000+ hours. We already know from owner experience if you put a lamp on anything other than eco both the lumens and lifespan are going to take a nosedive in comparatively short order unlike HLD LED.

How often do you recommend BenQ over JVC/Sony? How many of your posts lean negative in the ht9060/lk990 thread vs JVC threads? How often do you post about the blue line flashing that's been plaguing many JVC NX units as a very real issue after less than 3000 hours vs wondering aloud about what may or may not happen to these BenQ units after 10000-20000 hours with no evidence to support the claims?

You could observe that I post very postively about DLP and solid state, but a key difference is that I am fully absent from LCOS pj threads and do not stir the pot in those threads. Just an observation.

Last edited by Ruined; 06-26-2019 at 02:39 PM.
Ruined is offline  
post #36 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 03:04 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 505 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post
Sigh. You made a statement that the competitors mentioned didn't have a P3 mode that didn't involve using a filter. I merely pointed out that one of them did. Then you added a stipulation of 100% coverage which wasn't in the initial statement and implied that the 9060 hit that figure without a filter. The review I linked measured otherwise. Yes other sources will like have other results with minor variances. That's sample and instrumentation variance at work. I'm not implying or stating that the 9060 doesn't have good P3 coverage or is lacking here. In fact the review I linked was quite positive on this aspect. Just trying to clear up some inaccuracies with regards to the NX7.
I stated:
Solid state lamps have many advantages and the HT9060 seems to maintain nearly full output when in wide colour gamut mode (DCI-P3) where most lamp based unit take a real hit to display DCI-P3. The HT9060 has a light source that can display DCI-P3 without a WCG filter, unlike the other two projectors mentioned by the OP.
I never specifically mentioned P3 Mode on the NX-7. In my first sentence I was referring to the widest gamut that the HT9060 could display.

Many projectors have P3 modes including the lowly BenQ TK800:

"Color Gamut refers to the range of colors that can potentially be displayed by a
device. There are some standards to define difference levels of color gamuts for
display devices, such as CIE 1976, sRGB, Adobe RGB, NTSC, etc.
With this projector, selecting Auto will automatically apply the most suitable color
gamut to the image source. You can also select BT. 709, BT. 2020, or DCI-P3
according to your needs."


but that doesn't mean much, as it's intent on the BenQ is to change the way WCG sources are remapped to REC709. The only way to accurately display P3 color on the NX-7 is to place the projector into Rec2020 mode which engages the filter.

Last edited by DunMunro; 06-26-2019 at 03:26 PM.
DunMunro is online now  
post #37 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 03:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 505 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
10,000 hours is more than I would expect a projector to last, completely trouble free, but on the screen the one poster was recommending, the customer would never get to 10,000 hours, because the projector would be way too dim for HDR. Per manufacturer spec, he would be too dim at 2,500 hours for HDR. A 143" or larger 0.8 gain screen is just too big for the HT9060, unless you want to completely give up HDR.
BenQ doesn't state a dimming factor versus lamp life.
DunMunro is online now  
post #38 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 03:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 505 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Okay, so the test was a continuous test. That will give you much better results that turning off and on regularly. Even a regular lamp based projector will dim much slower if left on all the time, but that is not how projectors are used.
The testing showed that varying the duty cycle had no effect on lamp output. HLD LEDs seem not to be effected by on/off cycles. However, the underlying circuitry is effected by the thermal shock of repeated on off cycles:

"3.5 Reliability aspects of copper IMS boards with highly stressed pump LEDs
As the pump LEDs are being operated at relative high drive current, it’s necessary to assess the reliability of these emitters
as mounted on the PCB. We therefore investigated both the solder interconnect reliability as well as the radiative flux
maintenance. For the solder reliability, both thermal shock and module power cycle tests were performed. Thermal shock
tests are performed with the devices in off-state, while in the power cycle tests the ΔT is the difference in solder temperature
in on vs off-state. The results are presented in Figure 10. From the left graph we see that the 10% failure point for
temperature shocks from -40 to +125˚C is above 2000 cycles. As these cycles to failure scale with about the square of the
temperature variation, this means that for an ambient of 25˚C and a max Tsolder in operation of 75˚C this would correspond
with a 10% failure point at more than 20,000 cycles. And even with a max Tsolder of 95˚C this corresponds with 10% failures
after more than 11,000 cycles. The power cycle test results with the complete HLD modules (see Figure 10, right) show
the failure times and the predicted 10% and 50% failure curves (i.e., the points of failure for different temperature
differences during the power cycles). For a ΔT of 75˚C the 10% failure time is at about 11,000 cycles. These results are in
excellent agreement with the thermal shock results."


So in a typical home environment we could expect 20,000 on/off cycles (at 4 cycles day = ~14 years) with a failure rate of 10%.
DunMunro is online now  
post #39 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 03:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
gravi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 354 Post(s)
Liked: 183
The brightness argument here is mind numbing, to be sure. But the light source tech argument is equally asinine. Most projector owners never change a lamp as they put less than 500 hours a year and/or sell and upgrade after a couple of years. So anything lasting 20,000 hours is just a theoretical benefit. And the argument that any projector that is lamp based is not worth discussing is ridiculous. It's like saying a Tesla model 3 is automatically superior to a BMW 750i because the latter uses antiquated gasoline engine technology.
gravi is offline  
post #40 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 04:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 505 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravi View Post
The brightness argument here is mind numbing, to be sure. But the light source tech argument is equally asinine. Most projector owners never change a lamp as they put less than 500 hours a year and/or sell and upgrade after a couple of years. So anything lasting 20,000 hours is just a theoretical benefit. And the argument that any projector that is lamp based is not worth discussing is ridiculous. It's like saying a Tesla model 3 is automatically superior to a BMW 750i because the latter uses antiquated gasoline engine technology.
The OP intends to use it for many purposes and could well put ~1500 hrs/year on it.

I would argue that the 750i is automatically inferior...there's a reason we're not using horse and buggies anymore and lamp based PJs are clearly on the way out.
DunMunro is online now  
post #41 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 04:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
gravi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 354 Post(s)
Liked: 183
Quote:
Originally Posted by DunMunro View Post

I would argue that the 750i is automatically inferior...there's a reason we're not using horse and buggies anymore and lamp based PJs are clearly on the way out.
Really? With its cheap vinyl and plastic interior, for almost $50K? No thanks.
gravi is offline  
post #42 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 04:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 505 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravi View Post
Really? With its cheap vinyl and plastic interior, for almost $50K? No thanks.
I can sell you a horse and buggy; the horse is fitted out with the finest leathers and the buggy has extensive hardwood trim and real leather upholstery...
DunMunro is online now  
post #43 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 04:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
gravi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 541
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 354 Post(s)
Liked: 183
Quote:
Originally Posted by DunMunro View Post
I can sell you a horse and buggy; the horse is fitted out with the finest leathers and the buggy has extensive hardwood trim and real leather upholstery...
Right, and the horse/buggy can travel at 150 mph, has a 400 mile range without stopping, takes 5 minutes to refuel anywhere in the world, has great reliability and also easy to fix if needed.

The analogy is silly and not worth continuing to argue.
gravi is offline  
post #44 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 05:13 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,027
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
Liked: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
...when we already have a study proving that HLD LED retains 95+% of lumens after 12000hr, (and not eco mode, in mode that allows for full peak brightness) - a study that you are aware of?
LED and Laser are a nice advantage for very heavy users, but it certainly isn't a huge advantage for everyone (still some advantage, but not as huge). I shelf mount everything, and the average person just does not use their projector enough, with recent JVC lamps showing high lumens even at 1500 hours, it's not as big of an issue as it once was.

That said, it's hard to beat a Benq ht9060 refurb for long-term budget, for many it would be as cheap or cheaper than a lamp-based Benq ht3550, if they keep the projector 7-10 years and use it very heavily, but only if used heavily.

Just like anything, there is going to be an average and an overall spread, it's unlikely the average is to hold that much brightness after 12k hours, but I'm not going to say it's impossible. I don't think any of us can really know for certain, though I will say that on cheaper LED projectors, there have been quite a few posters about LED Lamp failures.

It is probably pretty rare for a Benq though, especially outside the warranty period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
10,000 hours is more than I would expect a projector to last, completely trouble free, but on the screen the one poster was recommending, the customer would never get to 10,000 hours, because the projector would be way too dim for HDR. Per manufacturer spec, he would be too dim at 2,500 hours for HDR. A 143" or larger 0.8 gain screen is just too big for the HT9060, unless you want to completely give up HDR.
For an LCD projector, I completely agree, not for a JVC LCOS or most DLP's. There are tons of them going over 10,000 hours, though I don't know the actual average. As I've noted in prior threads, I've seen DLP's with over 40k hours on them that still function, but yes LCD will go first -- then LCOS -- then DLP (on average).

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

Last edited by coderguy; 06-26-2019 at 05:21 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #45 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 05:17 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,027
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
Liked: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake View Post
I have budgeted $10k for a projector for a basement, dedicated HT in our new house build underway. My short list:

Sony vw695es
JVC rs2000 / nx7
BenQ HT9060

1. The room will be 16’ wide by 20’ long. 2 rows of seating.

2. Screen: Seymour Screen Excellence new TRIM series (“less expensive” motorized masking 16:9 / 2.40). AT screen (either Enlightor Bright or Enlightor Neo - gain 1.1 and 1.0 respectively). Not sure on size yet - either 110”, 114” or 126” diagonal. Size suggestion for this setup ?

3. Use case : 50% movies (Apple TV 4K and probably Kaleidoscope at some point), 30% 1080p broadcast/TV, 20% gaming (PC and Xbox One).

All these projectors are +\- $2k. So if you take price out of the equation , which would you recommend and why ?

The Sony was my favorite as it has the best video processing (upscale, motion), response time for gaming, and blacks, but it lacks on color space and brightness compared to the others. Thoughts ?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sounds like the perfect match for a JVC, since you said 'if money is no object'. If budget is the main factor, refurb Benq ht9060. People are going to have their own opinions on which projector is better (Benq vs. JVC), but at your screen size, it's hard to argue against a JVC.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #46 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 05:51 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,565
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11828 Post(s)
Liked: 9358
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
JVC and Sony only offer lamp projectors in this price range. BenQ is offering a disruptive high quality solid state projector for the same price or less. If JVC/Sony is your recommendation lamp is your only option for recommendation in the price bracket. A study has already proven HLD LED is a long lasting reliable lightsource that retains near full brightness even after 10000+ hours. We already know from owner experience if you put a lamp on anything other than eco both the lumens and lifespan are going to take a nosedive in comparatively short order unlike HLD LED.

How often do you recommend BenQ over JVC/Sony? How many of your posts lean negative in the ht9060/lk990 thread vs JVC threads? How often do you post about the blue line flashing that's been plaguing many JVC NX units as a very real issue after less than 3000 hours vs wondering aloud about what may or may not happen to these BenQ units after 10000-20000 hours with no evidence to support the claims?

You could observe that I post very postively about DLP and solid state, but a key difference is that I am fully absent from LCOS pj threads and do not stir the pot in those threads. Just an observation.
Do you even bother to read what I post. For the third time, I did not make a single projector recommendation in this thread to the original poster. I only said the HT9060, RS2000 and Sony VW695 were not bright enough for HDR on a 143" or larger 0.8 gain screen, when another poster recommended he purchase that size screen. Funny you ask about me recommending a BenQ, in post 34, right above your post, I said the LK990 would be a more appropriate projector for that size and gain screen, if looking at the under 10k price point. Unlike you that parrots DLP for everything, I ask the person requesting recommendations, questions about his room, screen size, screen aspect ratio, budget and what he wants to use the projector for. In this case, poster did not answer my question about his room, so I did not make a recommendation.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #47 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 06:02 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,027
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
Liked: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Do you even bother to read what I post. For the third time, I did not make a single projector recommendation in this thread to the original poster. I only said the HT9060, RS2000 and Sony VW695 were not bright enough for HDR on a 143" or larger 0.8 gain screen, when another poster recommended he purchase that size screen. Funny you ask about me recommending a BenQ, in post 34, right above your post, I said the LK990 would be a more appropriate projector for that size and gain screen, if looking at the under 10k price point. Unlike you that parrots DLP for everything, I ask the person requesting recommendations, questions about his room, screen size, screen aspect ratio, budget and what he wants to use the projector for. In this case, poster did not answer my question about his room, so I did not make a recommendation.
I agree, you are very thorough with your recommendations because it would make for unhappy clients if you sent them back with a non-working setup. I have to take your side on that because it is rather silly of Ruined

I think anyone that doesn't default to the JVC as the recommendation for smaller screens has a screw loose personally. Sure someone COULD like the laser function better, but in a videophile forum, contrast matters. If it didn't, we are back to the Sony vs. Westinghouse TV debate. I mean people are looking for top notch contrast, not just sharpness, otherwise oLED wouldn't exist and everyone would buy cheap LED/LCD TV's, which are just as sharp.

The NX series vs. older JVC's is a debate, but I'd lean towards recommending the NX series for most (especially given few units left for RS-540 - if any). The main issue is for most people the resale value is probably going to be a lot higher in 2-3 years for the NX series, and it is sharper, and still has good contrast. For me personally, the yellow DI just bothers me and the price points of the newer JVC's, but if I had a bigger budget, I'd wait 1 more year for next year's models probably (just because it's first revision of newer series).

You cannot blame me given I've gone through (7) RS-45 lamps, but at least they were pretty cheap...

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

Last edited by coderguy; 06-26-2019 at 06:06 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #48 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 06:08 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,027
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
Liked: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
BenQ is offering a disruptive high quality solid state projector for the same price or less.
Look, I'm sensitive to price, and you're probably 'somewhat' sensitive to price, but not everyone is. People with those big budgets often don't care about lamp costs, or don't even use their projectors that much. You do have a valid argument, it just doesn't apply to what the OP asked (he said at any price). For any budget, contrast matters. Not to say the Benq would look awful, but it's got its limits when it comes to contrast which may or may NOT bother people, but they should know what they are getting into.

If the study were absolute on LED lamps, then manufacturers would be quoting higher numbers, that simple. They already exaggerate UHP lamps, so why would they underrate LED's that much. If anything, I would expect to get less hours out of an LED than the MFR claims, unless you believe some cheap DLP lamp based projectors can really get 15,000 hours out of a lamp and still have 'usable brightness' for almost anyone, I doubt it, but that's what some of them are claiming.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 06-26-2019 at 06:17 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #49 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 06:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Out West
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 505 Post(s)
Liked: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
I agree, you are very thorough with your recommendations because it would make for unhappy clients if you sent them back with a non-working setup. I have to take your side on that because it is rather silly of Ruined

I think anyone that doesn't default to the JVC as the recommendation for smaller screens has a screw loose personally. Sure someone COULD like the laser function better, but in a videophile forum, contrast matters. If it didn't, we are back to the Sony vs. Westinghouse TV debate. I mean people are looking for top notch contrast, not just sharpness, otherwise oLED wouldn't exist.

The NX series vs. older JVC's is a debate, but I'd lean towards recommending the NX series for most (especially given few units left for RS-540 - if any). The main issue is for most people the resale value is probably going to be a lot higher in 2-3 years for the NX series, and it is sharper, and still has good contrast. For me personally, the yellow DI just bothers me and the price points of the newer JVC's, but if I had a bigger budget, I'd wait 1 more year for next year's models probably (just because it's first revision of newer series).

You cannot blame me given I've gone through (7) RS-45 lamps, but at least they were pretty cheap...
The issue here is that the JVCs don't have the lumen output for a larger screen, especially given their short lamp life in high lamp, and this is being more than tacitly admitted. 4K is no better than 1080p when viewed on a ~120in screen at more than about 10ft away, IMHO. If you want to really enjoy 4K in a larger space then you need a big screen. My UHD50 is tested at about 1600 lumens in HDR bright mode and it is completely watchable and enjoyable on my 143in low gain (~.6-.7) grey screen. I have the advantage that TI has developed usable dynamic lamp dimming so that in Dynamic Black the lamp spec is 15K hours (4K hrs in high lamp) , so I can keep it in DB and have full power available when the content requires it.

It's time that we move away from a JVC centric look at screen size and look at the actual sizes needed to enjoy 4K content.
DunMunro is online now  
post #50 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 06:34 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,027
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
Liked: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by DunMunro View Post
The issue here is that the JVCs don't have the lumen output for a larger screen, especially given their short lamp life in high lamp, and this is being more than tacitly admitted. 4K is no better than 1080p when viewed on a ~120in screen at more than about 10ft away, IMHO. If you want to really enjoy 4K in a larger space then you need a big screen. My UHD50 is tested at about 1600 lumens in HDR bright mode and it is completely watchable and enjoyable on my 143in low gain (~.6-.7) grey screen. I have the advantage that TI has developed usable dynamic lamp dimming so that in Dynamic Black the lamp spec is 15K hours (4K hrs in high lamp) , so I can keep it in DB and have full power available when the content requires it.

It's time that we move away from a JVC centric look at screen size and look at the actual sizes needed to enjoy 4K content.
The OP originally asked 'Not sure on size yet - either 110”, 114” or 126” diagonal. Size suggestion for this setup ?'

So that is well within the ranges of a JVC. I would never use a projector in HIGH lamp, but there are people that just don't care about the lamps. I think 'brightness for HDR' is totally subjective, and is not the biggest concern as long as it starts out bright enough. You can lose some HDR brightness and replace the lamp later, no big deal.

I would be more concerned about contrast than HDR brightness, not everyone has the same preferences, but that is why there are so many arguments in this forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DunMunro View Post
4K is no better than 1080p when viewed on a ~120in screen at more than about 10ft away, IMHO
There is a big difference for 120" screen from 10 feet away if you are talking 'reference level' disk...

The real problem is the lack of 4k, so we cannot really judge everything that much yet, as there are only a few titles from my understanding (I posted a video about it in the other thread). Yes, the upscaling methods they do are better than real-time computational upscaling, but it's still mostly upscale converted disks that are mostly benefiting from higher bit rates rather than actual original higher resolution. I believe Black Panther movie was around 3k or something, but most are still 2k and then upscaled. Not sure about documentaries.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 06-26-2019 at 06:41 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #51 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 06:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,867
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2284 Post(s)
Liked: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake View Post
I have budgeted $10k for a projector for a basement, dedicated HT in our new house build underway. My short list:

Sony vw695es
JVC rs2000 / nx7
BenQ HT9060

1. The room will be 16’ wide by 20’ long. 2 rows of seating.

2. Screen: Seymour Screen Excellence new TRIM series (“less expensive” motorized masking 16:9 / 2.40). AT screen (either Enlightor Bright or Enlightor Neo - gain 1.1 and 1.0 respectively). Not sure on size yet - either 110”, 114” or 126” diagonal. Size suggestion for this setup ?

3. Use case : 50% movies (Apple TV 4K and probably Kaleidoscope at some point), 30% 1080p broadcast/TV, 20% gaming (PC and Xbox One).

All these projectors are +\- $2k. So if you take price out of the equation , which would you recommend and why ?

The Sony was my favorite as it has the best video processing (upscale, motion), response time for gaming, and blacks, but it lacks on color space and brightness compared to the others. Thoughts ?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry I'm late to the party.

I'm posting because I had the 695ES and now have the HT9060. The Sony's Triluminos color looks pretty good though and you could still get close to 90% of P3. I like its motion handling so much. It has low lag. Black levels are good. And I had no issues with it except some occasional banding which was virtually eliminated once I did the service tweak.

Calibrated high lamp should get you close to around 1,600 lumens. But high lamp is loud.

Are you considering the BenQ because it's a solid state machine or because of its lens, or both?

The BenQ will not have the contrast of the Sony or the JVC.

As far as its light life, it doesn't operate in just high or low mode. It has Smarteco which activates its best contrast via dynamic dimming and is likely the mode most will use all the time. That may be why there's an asterisk added to the 20,000 hour spec. Engaging Smarteco will have the LEDs run in high for the brightest scenes and in low for lower APL scenes. So, let's say an hour-long video has 50% (1/2 hour's worth) low APL content; so, what you have then is for a 1/2 hour, the projector was run in its low mode and for the other half in high.

Calibrated HDR will be more than bright enough for you. I have a 1.1 gain 125 inch screen and I have to run the HT9060 in HDR -1 brightness (HDR separate brightness mode) and it's still too bright at times. I calibrated mine to full DCI p3 too. See the photo below.
Pushing that HDR brightness mode in the projector to 2+ would be very bright, which I'd estimate to be over 1900 "calibrated" lumens on mine. I put calibrated in quotation marks because 2+ will cause some white to be blown out. By the way, calibrating SDR actually increased the brightness on mine because Cyan was raised.

Know that the projector will run near silent when projecting those high lumens whereas the Sony in high lamp will be pretty audible. I did not see the NX7, but you can read in those threads to see if it's reported as pretty audible in high lamp mode also.

As far as losing lumens in HDR on the 9060, I wonder if that's a result of tone mapping. When I use external tone-mapping rather than doing it in the projector, I do see the brightness come down a bit. To explain this in a very simple way is to say that projectors, even something as bright as this HT9060, don't have the light output of most LED TVs. So let's say a specular highlight in the mastered content appears at certain nits but is 30 steps brighter than the darker content in the image. Proper tone-mapping will scale down that ratio on the projector and reduce the total brightness of the image to match the 30 step difference.

The lens on the 9060 is outstanding! --better than the Sony 695's and I would be very surprised if someone can prove the JVC NX7 lens is as good as the 9060's; my guess is that you'd have to move up to something like the NX9 to get comparable high-end optics.

Some of the negatives on the Sony 695ES that I had with mine include high price, some banding, although the service menu tweak should take care of that, or at least mostly. Also, while the iris action is not aggressive and does not manipulate gamma, it also does not make dark images with bright highlights pop like the JVC's DI I've seen in the past.

I haven't seen the NX7, so you'll have to go to those related threads to see what owners are reporting.

Negatives on the HT9060: Watching 3D was not what I was used to from DLP; it was a bit soft and fatiguing. Dimming on the HT9060 is excellent and I haven't seen any pumping artifacts, but I just wish it was a bit more aggressive to bring down black levels even more, like an 8x factor. The weak point of the 9060 is its contrast when compared with the two lamp options you mention. If your room is not light controlled with at least dark walls, you might not fully appreciate the better contrast of the Sony or JVC projectors anyway. The HT9060 appears to be upconverting to 60hz, although I haven't officially confirmed this as of yet. Lastly, if automated lens controls are important to you, the HT9060 doesn't have them.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Benq HDR P3 .jpg
Views:	21
Size:	1.18 MB
ID:	2584882  
jherring69 and markmon1 like this.

Last edited by Aztar35; 06-26-2019 at 07:46 PM.
Aztar35 is offline  
post #52 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 07:40 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,867
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2284 Post(s)
Liked: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
Look, I'm sensitive to price, and you're probably 'somewhat' sensitive to price, but not everyone is. People with those big budgets often don't care about lamp costs, or don't even use their projectors that much.
Hi, Coder.

But is the cost/hassle of changing out a lamp the only issue?

What about solid state having a rock solid picture, no lamp flicker, no fear of lamp explosions, fewer repeated and less frequent calibrations as lamps dim more rapidly, native wider color from solid state light, and all that?
Aztar35 is offline  
post #53 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 08:01 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,027
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
Liked: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aztar35 View Post
Hi, Coder.

But is the cost/hassle of changing out a lamp the only issue?

What about solid state having a rock solid picture, no lamp flicker, no fear of lamp explosions, fewer repeated and less frequent calibrations as lamps dim more rapidly, native wider color from solid state light, and all that?
It's a personal decision everyone has to make for themselves. For me, I want the contrast above all else, for others, totally up to them. So probably no perfect answer.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #54 of 71 Old 06-26-2019, 08:27 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,565
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11828 Post(s)
Liked: 9358
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by DunMunro View Post
The issue here is that the JVCs don't have the lumen output for a larger screen, especially given their short lamp life in high lamp, and this is being more than tacitly admitted. 4K is no better than 1080p when viewed on a ~120in screen at more than about 10ft away, IMHO. If you want to really enjoy 4K in a larger space then you need a big screen. My UHD50 is tested at about 1600 lumens in HDR bright mode and it is completely watchable and enjoyable on my 143in low gain (~.6-.7) grey screen. I have the advantage that TI has developed usable dynamic lamp dimming so that in Dynamic Black the lamp spec is 15K hours (4K hrs in high lamp) , so I can keep it in DB and have full power available when the content requires it.

It's time that we move away from a JVC centric look at screen size and look at the actual sizes needed to enjoy 4K content.
The OP'er was not asking about lighting up a larger screen. All three projectors he was considering were capable of lighting up the screen sizes he was considering. The BenQ has the advantage of longer light output, but at the cost of lower contrast, higher gaming lag and worse HDR tone mapping. But without knowing what the guys room was like, I do not know how much contrast matters to him.

As for your claim that there is no advantage of 4K over 1080P on a 120" screen from 10', that is not correct.
https://www.rgb.com/display-size-res...ewing-distance
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #55 of 71 Old 06-27-2019, 02:14 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
blake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Posts: 146
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Not at all. In the argument, I said the JVC and Sony would be worse. I said you would be lucky to get 500 hours out of the JVC or Sony. Try to keep up, rather than just slander me. The argument was use on a 143" or larger screen, when the customer was thinking of using Screen Excellence NEO, which has a gain spec of 0.8. Actual gain may even be slightly lower than that. For that application, all three suck.



Added

As for the original poster, I never recommended a projector, because he never answered my questions about the room. So you are wrong there also.

Two things :

1. My theater footprint (pre framing, acoustic treatment etc) will be 21’ long by 15’ wide. Just starting the layout phase, but I am aiming for two rows of 4 recliner seatings (riser for second row). hopefully the back row will be 24” off the rear wall. I haven’t calculated exactly, but I would estimate viewing distance if front row of about 10’feet. I would like 45-50’ horizontal viewing angle front row, so I’ll have to find a proper online calculator to figure out my screen size. I thought 110” diagonal would be good, but based on responses here probably need larger.

2. Seymour screen excellence. Isn’t B/M gain the important number ? Enlightor Bright and Neo are 1.1 and 1.0 respectively. Un B/M gain are the lower numbers I saw quoted (1.0, 0.8). What’s the difference ? Google was no help !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
blake is offline  
post #56 of 71 Old 06-27-2019, 02:28 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
markmon1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,522
Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4657 Post(s)
Liked: 2951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
The 20,000 hour number is Benq's spec on the projector. If you think BenQ's spec is wrong, take it up with them, don't just say it is untrue, based on some test that may not correctly apply to the way Benq is using the LED's. You do understand there is a huge difference in continuous use and off on usage? Off on usage is much harder on lamp life. Heck, I have two fans in my house that have run 24 hours a day, seven days a week since March of 1988. If I turned them off and on all the time, I doubt they would have lasted near as long.

Sorry, but I do not get my numbers from consumers using uncalibrated consumer meters. I also do not just use any reviewer out there that I think supports my cause. For example if you wanted to prove that JVC's contrast was much lower than specced, I would use the French projector reviewers work. You can find bogus support for most anything out there. Even ridiculous things like the earth is flat.
https://www.benq.com/en-us/projector...fications.html
On / Off usage doesnt matter for LED / Laser sources like lamp sources. Also, BenQ's rating is 20,000 hours on high no dimming to half life. They list 60,000 hours on eco. I also think your lumen numbers are way low. No way you're down to 1520 lumens on a 3000 lumen projector. Other users aren't running that dim.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Okay, so the test was a continuous test. That will give you much better results that turning off and on regularly. Even a regular lamp based projector will dim much slower if left on all the time, but that is not how projectors are used.
Nah, dont matter on LED tech.
jherring69 and Aztar35 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; 06-27-2019 at 02:36 AM.
markmon1 is offline  
post #57 of 71 Old 06-27-2019, 05:49 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,565
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11828 Post(s)
Liked: 9358
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake View Post
Two things :

1. My theater footprint (pre framing, acoustic treatment etc) will be 21’ long by 15’ wide. Just starting the layout phase, but I am aiming for two rows of 4 recliner seatings (riser for second row). hopefully the back row will be 24” off the rear wall. I haven’t calculated exactly, but I would estimate viewing distance if front row of about 10’feet. I would like 45-50’ horizontal viewing angle front row, so I’ll have to find a proper online calculator to figure out my screen size. I thought 110” diagonal would be good, but based on responses here probably need larger.

2. Seymour screen excellence. Isn’t B/M gain the important number ? Enlightor Bright and Neo are 1.1 and 1.0 respectively. Un B/M gain are the lower numbers I saw quoted (1.0, 0.8). What’s the difference ? Google was no help !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BM gain is benchmark gain. They are saying that is the number you would use if comparing to everyone else. In other words, they are saying pretty much everyone lies on the gain numbers and if you are going to compare ours to their, use this number. Then they list the lower actual gain of the material and even that number could be off slightly, but it will be very close. At 10' you need to use a fine weave, or you will see the weave. That would knock out Enlightor Bright for me. I view my AT screen from about 9' and use DreamScreen V6. As for screen size, the 126" diagonal 2.40 is the more appropriate of the three you are looking at. I hope you are doing dark colors for the walls and ceiling?
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #58 of 71 Old 06-27-2019, 05:59 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 25,565
Mentioned: 232 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11828 Post(s)
Liked: 9358
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
On / Off usage doesnt matter for LED / Laser sources like lamp sources. Also, BenQ's rating is 20,000 hours on high no dimming to half life. They list 60,000 hours on eco. I also think your lumen numbers are way low. No way you're down to 1520 lumens on a 3000 lumen projector. Other users aren't running that dim.



Nah, dont matter on LED tech.
The projector being discussed is the HT9060. It is rated as 2,200 lumens, not 3,000 lumens. As for Rec709 calibration numbers and BT2020 calibration numbers, we will see, once Sound & Vision review is out. I take consumer measurements with a large grain of salt. Pretty much do the same for many reviewers, because most of them are using cheap, non calibrated instruments and some just don't know what they are doing. Have seen cheap light meters off more than 30%. I said 1,600 and I think someone else was saying 1,700. Meter error could easily account for that difference.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #59 of 71 Old 06-27-2019, 06:57 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,867
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2284 Post(s)
Liked: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by markmon1 View Post
On / Off usage doesnt matter for LED / Laser sources like lamp sources. Also, BenQ's rating is 20,000 hours on high no dimming to half life. They list 60,000 hours on eco. I also think your lumen numbers are way low. No way you're down to 1520 lumens on a 3000 lumen projector. Other users aren't running that dim.



Nah, dont matter on LED tech.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
The projector being discussed is the HT9060. It is rated as 2,200 lumens, not 3,000 lumens. As for Rec709 calibration numbers and BT2020 calibration numbers, we will see, once Sound & Vision review is out. I take consumer measurements with a large grain of salt. Pretty much do the same for many reviewers, because most of them are using cheap, non calibrated instruments and some just don't know what they are doing. Have seen cheap light meters off more than 30%. I said 1,600 and I think someone else was saying 1,700. Meter error could easily account for that difference.
Hi, Mike. I also think your numbers are too low. I'm not sure how your're getting to 1520 lumens.

We also should not make the mistake of disregarding all of Markmon's post/analysis just because of a slip of the tongue on the BenQ's lumen output. He's right. If the BenQ is in Smarteco, the LED life will be extended.
jherring69 likes this.
Aztar35 is offline  
post #60 of 71 Old 06-27-2019, 07:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,867
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2284 Post(s)
Liked: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by blake View Post
Two things :

1. My theater footprint (pre framing, acoustic treatment etc) will be 21’ long by 15’ wide. Just starting the layout phase, but I am aiming for two rows of 4 recliner seatings (riser for second row). hopefully the back row will be 24” off the rear wall. I haven’t calculated exactly, but I would estimate viewing distance if front row of about 10’feet. I would like 45-50’ horizontal viewing angle front row, so I’ll have to find a proper online calculator to figure out my screen size. I thought 110” diagonal would be good, but based on responses here probably need larger.

2. Seymour screen excellence. Isn’t B/M gain the important number ? Enlightor Bright and Neo are 1.1 and 1.0 respectively. Un B/M gain are the lower numbers I saw quoted (1.0, 0.8). What’s the difference ? Google was no help !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You can go larger but if you opt for a negative gain screen, that has to be taken into account also.

I would get the screen with the least artifacts.

One official review recorded 200 Nits from 10 feet, but that was on a 92 inch screen. See: https://r.search.aol.com/_ylt=AwrE1x...Na0QAO8n0FVx4-
Aztar35 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