Originally Posted by Aztar35
I remember reading somewhere a while ago of talk that HDR and 3D were being added via firmware. But my 9x50 had the latest firmware and I didn't see where it was capable of either HDR or 3D. Is yours an open box or a refurb (it seems the seller knows the specific firmware version on the machine)? If it's an assumption on her part, she can check the build date then confirm her understanding with BenQ tech. that your unit will definitely have HDR and 3D capability.
If your 8050 has those, there wouldn't be much difference between it and the HT8060 except for perhaps some smoother dynamic iris operation. Look at the HT8050 owner's thread and the 8060 thread. It was reported the 8050 DI was pretty fussy with artifacts.
UPDATE: I had an in-person demo of the HT8050 yesterday. It didn't have any HDR added through firmware, that was bull**** they fed me, but I didn't care, just happy to see the porjector... while there, I was able to compare directly with NX5, X790 and the UHZ65, all using the same sources (Panasonic DP-UB820 playing Infinity War UHD BD, and a MacBook pro outputting UHD, running a 4K video file from the desktop.)
All were left uncalibrated with out of the box settings as the dealer said they didn't want to be accused of tweaking or favoring one over the other. They gave me the remotes and let me tweak away. Obviously, I'm not a calibrator, nor did I have proper tools for measurement, so I didn't touch the CMS on any of them, BUT I did tweak the picture controls and lamp modes to achieve the best contrast and color on each tat I could - FYI I'm a news and documentary cameraman/editor, and I work with exposure and color correction all day... as a result, I can recognize tonal curves and color temperature by eye. I know this isn't scientifically verifiable by anyone, so take it at face value; just relaying my experience, not trying to prove anything. As for focus, I stood at the screen first before playing any source and made him manually focus with the menus up and me telling him when to stop while I stood inches from the screen. It was a dedicated Batcave, matte white elunevision screen, 135" 2.35:1. All projectors were left in "Cinema" modes in hopes that it was closest to 6500K
When he loaded Infinity War on the BenQ, it looked totally washed out. The first scene is especially dark in space and inside the ship, then, switches to bright daylight in the park, then to medium lighting inside a building, so its a good stress test for contrast. I was completely shocked at bad it looked, even with me tweaking some settings... so I asked for a desktop view from a laptop or HTPC, saying I needed to confirm it looked like this from all sources. They reluctantly did it, and when they had the desktop up, I noticed the contrast was much better. They played a UHD demo video from JVC that has some Japanese kabuki stuff, high contrast with a lot of colors. After some menu adjustment, it looked fantastic. Extremely detailed, sharp, deep black, solid whites with no clipping. Perhaps not quite bright enough, but they had the projector 24 feet back on maximum zoon, to fill the giant 2.35x1 screen. they were not able to shrink it down to fill a 16x9 with pillars because it was already at the end of its range. had they made it 110" 16x9 like my screen will be, it would have been significantly brighter, especially if it's mounted close enough to use the wide end of the zoom range.
Then they showed me the NX5, from the same BD source, and it looked much much better. I was discouraged and a bit but also confused, as I didn't think the difference was going to be this bad so I asked for a manager to check and it turns out the BD player was outputting HDR BT2020, so the tone mapping wasn't working as the HT8050 doesn't accept HDR signals... they set it to SDR709, and relaunched to better results.
I was impressed. It was sharper, but not necessarily more detailed, than the NX5; The better contrast on the NX5 and native 4K panels sometimes gave more fine detail, especially in the ornate armor with light refraction, or areas with multiple high contrast colors in a small space... whereas the HT8050 had an overall sharper picture, especially with computer source, or far away details in the background of the movie. There were some chromatic aberration and panel misalignment color bleed from the NX5 on close inspection, the corners were not as sharp either. The lens on the HT8050 is pro as advertised, I'd say cinema-grade. No joke, I'd shoot a with that thing, it's even par-focal, so you don't need to refocus when you zoom. This is a feature used in cinema lenses, it's not easy to do and really puts up the cost, size, and QA of glass elements.. this is brilliant, and expensive optics. The HT8050 was obviously much better resolving fine text on the desktop, distinct pixels in webpages or buttons, it looked like a 4k monitor. I'm sure with 4k games it would be freakin bananas (dreaming about playing Mario Galaxy 2 in 4K from Dolphin!)
It did great with skin tones, giving more details of Ms Pots skin definition than the JVC NX5, and a more natural gradation and fall-off in the shading, warm but accurate reds, and no burnt highlights to distract my eyes. I preferred the skin tones to the NX5, but it had good ones too... the HT8050 was about 15-20% brighter so that made them pop a bit more. The highlights were brighter on the NX5 though, as it was actually showing HDR and the BenQ was SDR.
Black levels were not as good as the NX5, obviously, using a small DLP DMD is still limiting no matter how good your lens or light source. That said, the NX5 contrast was NOT as good as the X790 (this was reference blacks for me, so I made them show me). Overall, I was disappointed with the NX5 contrast, it's not where the older JVCs were, but I don't know about the NX7. They did have an NX9 there... I wasn't going to pretend I had that much money to spend lol. Still, the contrast was a measure better on the NX5 than the HT8050, but not by a mile. To me, it is acceptable, even in a completely black room. I would swap the matte white for a grey screen with some gain and I bet it would look comparable or better as its brighter, especially if it was an ALR screen from SI/Elite etc with a bit of ambient light coming in. It's a pity it's not improved by the dynamic iris... that this did very little, basically jumped all over the place, pumping when someone would walk in front of a window on-screen... I think it needed the firmware update, but even if it working, it didn't do that much.
Finally, rainbows... yes, I could see them moderately, but more importantly, feel them constantly, giving me minor nausea. It was at a level where I could ignore it, but I don't know what would happen over an entire movie or long gaming session... maybe I'd get used to it, but I don't know. Motion handling on the NX5 felt more natural, but the native motion on DLP is also good, but I think the rainbows made it seem worse. This is typical of 6x RGBRGB wheel for me. The 3x RGBY on the UHZ65 was unwatchable, and vomit-inducing kaleidoscope of rainbows, especially in HDR mode. I couldn't demo the Optoma much because the effect was so severe.
After all this, I felt happy with the HT8050 EXCEPT for the rainbows. the HT8050 is around half the cost of the NX5 at street prices. It's brighter and better with digital sources like computers and games, or with an ALR screen in ambient light. if it didn't have the rainbows, I'd probably take it but I just can't take the risk.. even now writing about it, u start to feel a bit woozy remembering the feeling it created, so its a deal-breaker for me.
this brings me back to the HT9050 with its LED light source and lack of traditional color wheel... My position is now this: if the contrast of the level of the HT8050 is the same as the HT9050, I'm fine with it. I don't have to worry about bulbs anymore, and since the cost is just a bit more, its overall better value with a potentially wider color gamut and more stable light source.
The problem is, I am ready conflicting information about this...Kris Deering review of the HT9050 in S&V he said "with no dynamic contrast circuitry engaged was only 900:1. This was improved by the new firmware update, which allowed for the LED dimming to push that measurement to 4,000:1"
Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...qiie1yGV5d3.99
in his HT9060 review he said: "the HT9060's contrast ratio was pretty low, measuring 836:1 native and 3,770:1 with Smart Eco dynamic mode engaged."
Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...izOri2aAZUZ.99
that sounds like the HT9050 and HT9060 were roughly the same, but he also said that the HT9060 was improved over the HT9050, as others have said here as well. After reading all the conflicting reports, it still leaves me a bit confused about the HT9050 vs HT9060, so still have a few
1. Does this mean that the improvements are purely when showing HDR sources based on the engagement of HDR enabled on the HT9060? or is the HT9050 actually different in its native and dynamic contrast from the HT906 even with SDR sources?
2. Is there any way around it... can I take advantage of the wider color gamut and potential HDR contrast of the HT9050 by using an outboard tone mapper or HTPC solution?
3. If not, is the improved contrast with HDR sources on the HT9060 over the HT9050 worth double the cost? I know this is for me to decide, but it's hard to know without seeing.
Thoughts/advice welcome. Thanks in advance!
(PS I understand how the ignore system works now...
no freak outs lol)