I'll just go and buy a TV, honestly... - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 31Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:22 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
You are not accounting for differences in lens lens memory, which is why 2.40 which is assumed to use lens memory has different calculations between different projectors that have different amounts of lens shift.

Also, when you change to 2.40 the calculator keeps the diagonal screen size fixed (hence it's basing diagonal off the new 2.40 aspect), so this is a completely different equivalent 16:9 image size then before you chose 2.40 from the dropdown.

The only other way i could have coded that was to automatically switch screen sizes to normalize the data, but it seemed to make more sense to not confusingly change screen sizes automatically.
Well, honestly, I just use 16:9 in all cases, not to confuse things, because the image is actually 16:9 at all times, no need for the 2.40:1 option, really.

Maybe you should make us enter the screen width instead of screen diagonal, it's the width that matters, nothing else.

Add a simple screen width calculator based on your desired aspect ratio, then import that data to the screen size selector.
Vitus4K is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Well, honestly, I just use 16:9 in all cases, not to confuse things, because the image is actually 16:9 at all times, no need for the 2.40:1 option, really.
It's not only the width when it comes to lens memory, because it's constrained by the lens shift and zoom calculation of a given projector. Lens memory is for scope screens, and this changes the calculations. It specifically says "(Lens Memory)" for the aspect changing, that is why it says that in the dropdown text.

You cannot assume this if you have a scope screen, the calculations are NOT the same between 16:9 and 2.40, and as noted this is because of lens memory. The calculations are coded correctly, no known bugs that I am aware. Has been tested by dealers and engineers, other than myself.

If I took your advice, the calculations would become incorrect.

That said, some of the Benq DLP's do have issues in the calculator because of non-centered lens shift or invalid info provided by MFR. I never had time to revise this, but you weren't using any Benq in the calculations anyhow.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 04-13-2020 at 05:28 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #33 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:28 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
It's not only the width when it comes to lens memory, because it's constrained by the lens shift and zoom calculation of a given projector. Lens memory is for scope screens, and this changes the calculations.

You cannot assume this if you have a scope screen, the calculations are NOT the same between 16:9 and 2.40, and as noted this is because of lens memory. The calculations are coded correctly, no known bugs that I am aware. Has been tested by dealers and engineers, other than myself.

That said, some of the Benq DLP's do have issues in the calculator because of non-centered lens shift or invalid info provided by MFR. I never had time to revise this, but you weren't using any Benq in the calculations anyhow.
Ok, I'm not getting it, let's leave it.

For all I know, 16:9 gives the correct calculations, masking a 16:9 image yields a 2.40:1 picture, no need to calculate for 2.40:1, at least not in my case.
Vitus4K is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:30 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
If I took your advice, the calculations would become incorrect.
Could you confirm/deny if a 19.6' throw works with a 118" 2.40:1 screen, using both the Epson 6050UB and the JVC RS540/X790R/X7900?
Vitus4K is offline  
post #35 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,443
Mentioned: 532 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7222 Post(s)
Liked: 6908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Ok, I'm not getting it, let's leave it.

For all I know, 16:9 gives the correct calculations, masking a 16:9 image yields a 2.40:1 picture, no need to calculate for 2.40:1, at least not in my case.
Ok try it this way, lets say you chose your screen based on 16:9 on the calc with your throw, but you are using a physical 2.40:1 screen.

What happens when you watch a 16:9 show? You dont have a 16:9 screen, so you have to zoom the image so it fits all the content, on your 2.40 screen this makes the image smaller, that when you will run out of zoom range.

JVC X9500 (RS620) | 120" 16:9 | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | DIY Modular Towers | DIY TPL-150 Surrounds | DIY Atmos | DIY 18" Subs
-
MadVR Settings | UHD Waveform Analysis | Arve Tool Instructions + V3 Javs Curves
Javs is offline  
post #36 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:31 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
When a projector switches from 16:9 to 2.40, it has to zoom the picture in, because of the positioning, it does it unevenly and the image would not be centered after zooming. To compensate, the projector not only has to zoom the image, but it also has to move it with lens shift.

There is no such CIH method as ONLY the zooming, even though people refer to it as the zoom method, but it also requires lens shift.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 04-13-2020 at 05:35 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #37 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:32 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,443
Mentioned: 532 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7222 Post(s)
Liked: 6908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Ok, I'm not getting it, let's leave it.

For all I know, 16:9 gives the correct calculations, masking a 16:9 image yields a 2.40:1 picture, no need to calculate for 2.40:1, at least not in my case.
Then consider how you will watch 16:9 content on that screen.

JVC X9500 (RS620) | 120" 16:9 | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | DIY Modular Towers | DIY TPL-150 Surrounds | DIY Atmos | DIY 18" Subs
-
MadVR Settings | UHD Waveform Analysis | Arve Tool Instructions + V3 Javs Curves
Javs is offline  
post #38 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:33 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Could you confirm/deny if a 19.6' throw works with a 118" 2.40:1 screen, using both the Epson 6050UB and the JVC RS540/X790R/X7900?
It depends on multiple variables, it depends on how you are doing masking, whether or not you will be using the Zoom method, how much lens shift you are using for 16:9 images before the lens memory switch, and what exact screen and room dimensions may constrain your setup.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #39 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Javs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,443
Mentioned: 532 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7222 Post(s)
Liked: 6908
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
It depends on multiple variables, it depends on how you are doing masking, whether or not you will be using the Zoom method, and what exact screen and room dimensions may constrain your setup.
I think hes referring to screen width being constant in your calc.

If you set screen width to 110" you get a throw with an RS620 of ~25ft in 16:9 but when you change to 2.40 and reset the screen size to stay at 110" wide you then get ~19ft

However in the 25ft throw in 16:9 you actually still have a 110" wide 2.40 image. So you would crop.

I think since yours says lens memory there is something happening there with the 2.40 screen setting, is that to account for changing your image back to 16:9 if you view that kind of content, which requires much more zoon?

JVC X9500 (RS620) | 120" 16:9 | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | DIY Modular Towers | DIY TPL-150 Surrounds | DIY Atmos | DIY 18" Subs
-
MadVR Settings | UHD Waveform Analysis | Arve Tool Instructions + V3 Javs Curves
Javs is offline  
post #40 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
To clarify, there is no 2.40 option in the calculator, the only aspect is to use Lens Memory. I removed the old way because it was confusing too many people, and since 95% of people end up using lens memory, I left it like that from the start.

If I had a vanilla 2.40 only option (it did many years ago), this would make sense. Problem is I used to get PM's from people that didn't know what lens memory was that calculated it incorrectly.

Swapping the dropdown between 2.40 aspect and 16:9 is not meant as a normalized value, you have to change to whatever screen size you prefer after you change. Hence, there is no intended or underlying relationship when switching aspects (with the dropdown) between the screen size, the data is not normalized.

I should change the wording to say "Screen Aspect" instead of "Aspect Ratio".
Javs likes this.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 04-13-2020 at 05:41 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #41 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:45 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
Then consider how you will watch 16:9 content on that screen.
Ok, maybe I wasn't clear.

I will never, ever, watch 16:9 content, I will just let the projector project a 16:9 image, at all times, overscanning my screen.

But I will mask when watching movies (2.40:1 movies is all I watch), so the 16:9 calculation will fit my 2.40:1 needs.

I chose a 2.40:1 physical screen because content being narrower, 2.35:1, 2.20:1 etc, could be masked down to 2.40:1, still filling my screen.

I have absolutely zero needs of using the motorized lens memory, I just zoom once and leave it be.

I will use lens memory for masking ON/OFF only, to see bluray menus etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
It depends on multiple variables, it depends on how you are doing masking, whether or not you will be using the Zoom method, how much lens shift you are using for 16:9 images before the lens memory switch, and what exact screen and room dimensions may constrain your setup.
Well..

19.6' throw, 118" 2.40:1 screen (124" 16:9 in width) makes for a 108" width in both cases.

Epson 6050UB, JVC RS540/X790R/X7900.

2' screen bottom to floor, 2' screen top to ceiling.

Lens center will be 78" from floor, shelf mounted.

The final screen height of my 2.40:1 screen will be 45.3".


I think I have enough lens shift capabilities in the vertical axis on both projectors, and I don't think the 19' 6" throw is any issue.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #42 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:46 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Ok, maybe I wasn't clear.

I will never, ever, watch 16:9 content, I will just let the projector project a 16:9 image, at all times, overscanning my screen.
I think I have enough lens shift capabilities in the vertical axis on both projectors, and I don't think the 19' 6" throw is any issue.
Your case is very unique then, like less than 5% of people, that is why the projector calculator does not try to account for your scenario.

In the older version, the calculator actually had 3 options, A-Lens 2.40, Lens Memory 2.40, and Native 2.40.

I just got tired of explaining it and I removed the 5% that almost no-one ever uses.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #43 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:51 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
Your case is very unique then, like less than 5% of people, that is why the projector calculator does not try to account for your scenario.

In the older version, the calculator actually had 3 options, A-Lens 2.40, Lens Memory 2.40, and Native 2.40.

I just got tired of explaining it and I removed the 5% that almost no-one ever uses.
I understand, explains the confusion between me and Javs about your calculator.

Glad it worked out, I am pretty sure my setup will work 100%.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #44 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:52 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
This website is ace, by the way.

Use it ALL the time.

http://www.screen-size.info/
Vitus4K is offline  
post #45 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 05:58 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 28,581
Mentioned: 289 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14030 Post(s)
Liked: 11694
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javs View Post
I think hes referring to screen width being constant in your calc.

If you set screen width to 110" you get a throw with an RS620 of ~25ft in 16:9 but when you change to 2.40 and reset the screen size to stay at 110" wide you then get ~19ft

However in the 25ft throw in 16:9 you actually still have a 110" wide 2.40 image. So you would crop.

I think since yours says lens memory there is something happening there with the 2.40 screen setting, is that to account for changing your image back to 16:9 if you view that kind of content, which requires much more zoon?
When using the Projector Central calculator, if you enter in a scope size, the calculator uses full panel width of the 4K chip with JVC and Sony projectors. So if you want to maintain 1:1 pixel mapping, you need to use the width of your screen in all cases. If you use the throw distance listed and mount toward the short end of the throw, you will not have enough throw if you do not use full panel width.

Last edited by Mike Garrett; 04-13-2020 at 06:02 PM.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #46 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:10 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Touching on another topic..

I talked to the best calibrator contact that I have, and asked for the 0.52fc vs. 0.56fc difference in black level between the NX7 and 6050UB.

Converted to nits that would be a 0.5 nit difference.

On a 100 nit peak calibrated display, 0.5 nits equals to 10% gray.


Comments on this?


In those terms the JVC seems vastly superior.

And in my case, as of the RS540/X790R/X7900, it has almost twice the contrast ratio of the NX7.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #47 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:12 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
I haven't looked at that other calculator in quite a while, but if I recall, the PJC calculator also gives non-lens memory values for non-4k native 16:9 projectors as well, making people think they have much more range than they really have.

Most people watch 16:9 content using lens memory on scope screens, so if they do not consider the side effects of needing more Zoom and lens shift when switching from 16:9 to 2.40, they will be way off on the throw range.

Edit
That said, I never coded in the adjustments for the 4k projectors, which is why I stopped adding new ones lately. Don't know when I'll ever get back to this project, no time right now.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 04-13-2020 at 06:21 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #48 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:17 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Touching on another topic..

I talked to the best calibrator contact that I have, and asked for the 0.52fc vs. 0.56fc difference in black level between the NX7 and 6050UB.

Comments on this?


In those terms the JVC seems vastly superior.

And in my case, as of the RS540/X790R/X7900, it has almost twice the contrast ratio of the NX7.
If it were between the RS-540 and the NX-7, I would generally recommend the NX-7 for most people. There are too many new features that kind of outweigh the benefits of the black level.

Now NX-5 vs. RS-540, there is quite a hit on the black level, but at or near the same price, I'm taking the NX-5 in most cases. If you really want the absolute darkest blacks, maybe buy an older JVC (RS-500) or RS-56 even (if throw is far back) and then just use the NX-5 for everything else.

You may miss the better black levels, but then you can use dual JVC's if you want. That is what I'd do, though at the time I didn't have the budget to buy that many new projectors, already had to buy other stuff as well.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #49 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:21 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
If it were between the RS-540 and the NX-7, I would generally recommend the NX-7 for most people. There are too many new features that kind of outweigh the benefits of the black level.

Now NX-5 vs. RS-540, there is quite a hit on the black level, but at or near the same price, I'm taking the NX-5 in most cases. If you really want the absolute darkest blacks, maybe buy an older JVC (RS-500) or RS-56 even (if throw is far back) and then just use the NX-5 for everything else.
Thanks for a very useful input, I will go back and read that post several times.

But if you put the 6050UB which has a 0.5 nit higher black floor than the NX7, would you then chose the RS540 over the 6050UB?

10% gray is not fun for blacks.

Will it be a noticeable improvement in a living room with an environment as posted in post #1 ?
Vitus4K is offline  
post #50 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Thanks for a very useful input, I will go back and read that post several times.

But if you put the 6050UB which has a 0.5 nit higher black floor than the NX7, would you then chose the RS540 over the 6050UB?

10% gray is not fun for blacks.

Will it be a noticeable improvement in a living room with an environment as posted in post #1 ?
I wouldn't buy the Epson at all unless you needed the extra brightness. I have myself made people upset on this forum for saying I would personally pick the RS-540 over the NX-5, but I no longer hold that belief, because I sit a little closer than I was sitting last year.

The RS-540 over the NX series only makes sense if you are saving tons of money, are sitting farther back to not see the resolution difference, or you just so die hard on black levels (and then I'd say go for a dual setup with an older JVC).

Order of preference for most people is:

1) Dual JVC's (NX-5 + RS-56/66/67/5xx)
2) NX-5 or NX-7
3) Epson 6050ub (absolute last)

Most people only choose Epson if they need the extra brightness for larger screens.
ivanhoek likes this.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #51 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:30 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
I wouldn't buy the Epson at all unless you needed the extra brightness. I have myself made people upset on this forum for saying I would personally pick the RS-540 over the NX-5, but I no longer hold that belief, because I sit a little closer than I was sitting last year.

The RS-540 over the NX series only makes sense if you are saving tons of money, are sitting farther back to not see the resolution difference, or you just so die hard on black levels (and then I'd say go for a dual setup with an older JVC).

Order of preference for most people is:

1) Dual JVC's (NX-5 + RS-56/66/67/5xx)
2) NX-5 or NX-7
3) Epson 6050ub (absolute last)

Most people only choose Epson if they need the extra brightness for larger screens.
I just fear that a black/dark scene with the Epson would turn out to be something else than black.

I come from an OLED so I know OLED blacks cannot be achieved with projection with an environment like mine.

But if the RS540 gets me closer there, noticeably, more so than the Epson, I'm all hands down in for getting the JVC.


I would not look into getting a dual setup, just a single projector, if JVC at all, it's the RS540.

I use Panny UB820 for tone mapping, or SDR2020.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #52 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:33 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
I just fear that a black/dark scene with the Epson would turn out to be something else than black.

I come from an OLED so I know OLED blacks cannot be achieved with projection with an environment like mine.

But if the RS540 gets me closer there, noticeably, more so than the Epson, I'm all hands down in for getting the JVC.


I would not look into getting a dual setup, just a single projector, if JVC at all, it's the RS540.

I use Panny UB820 for tone mapping, or SDR2020.
The Epson doesn't get anywhere close to the RS-540's black levels really, since the JVC not only has more Native Contrast, but the JVC DI is generally more advanced (though some people still turn it off).

How much you notice the black level difference is hard to say.

It's not even black level being the reason I don't choose Epson, the JVC has a more refined and less jagged looking image. Even more so if you are comparing NX series vs. Epson.

If you are die hard on the blacks, then it's still a hard decision IMO between JVC NX and RS-540. For most people, it's an easy call to go with the NX series (the newer projector), but for those die hard black level fanatics that want to stick with one projector.

It's a problem, cannot have your cake and eat it too (or whatever).

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #53 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:36 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
The Epson doesn't get anywhere close to the JVC's black levels really, since the JVC not only has more Native Contrast, but the JVC DI is generally more advanced (though some people still turn it off).

The Epson's DI is not as good either, how much you notice the black level difference is hard to say.

Well, if you are die hard on the blacks, then it's still a hard decision IMO between JVC NX and RS-540. For most people, it's an easy call to go with the NX series (the newer projector), but for those die hard black level fanatics that want to stick with one projector.

It's a problem, cannot have your cake and eat it too (or whatever).

Fully understand.

I think I would hate a pumping iris, would probably leave it off.

No matter how you turn it, the JVC will always have the increased native contrast.

I lack the experience to tell what's enough and what's not in an environment like mine.

But it's not really assuring know the Epson leaves a 10% gray.

My seating is at 17' and 13'. I don't think the NX5 is of benefit in terms of resolution.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #54 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:39 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
The JVC DI barely ever pumps, the Epson pumps more, but there are very few scenes really for either projector that are problematic, but I guess some people are amazingly picky. The Epson DI works ok, but it's just a lot less native contrast to work with makes it work harder.

The JVC RS-540 is more trouble for HDR stuff too, more calibration work.

That's why most people are better off with the NX series, I guess if you don't mind losing resale value and resolution just to gain some slight extra black.

The RS-540 has the flickery problem on bright content too, when the manual aperture is closed. Something I believe the newer JVC's don't have, so if you are using the HTPC a lot, that may bother you. It doesn't really bother me, I got used to it, but it can be annoying at times. I have an RS-420 though, worse blacks, not the RS-540. Almost the same projector other than a few differences and the big contrast difference.

Still, same issues. Also the RS-540's, at least a few, have some DI motorized failures.

Though I wouldn't really play that into the decision making process.

**Updated Projector Calculator Released NOV 2017**
-- www.webprojectorcalculator.com --
coderguy is offline  
post #55 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:41 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Thanks man!
Vitus4K is offline  
post #56 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
plain fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Denver area
Posts: 1,628
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Vitus4k,

Just a quick question, have you seen either of these projectors actually running? I'm like you, I run all the calculations and prefer to let the math work it out but with projectors, IMHO, you have to experience them first hand with your own eyes.

For reference, I'm comparing the Epson 5050/6050 and the JVC NX5 for my situation. My room will be entirely light controlled and so the contrast that the JVC can provide is very appealing to me, but I also know that HDR really benefits from more lumens. Of all the features offered by both units, the JVC DTM FW is possibly the most appealing feature, for me anyhow. Ultimately, I haven't made up my mind but I can go compare the two in person and plan to do so some more with my own movies. Well, as soon as the stores open up again.

Everyone replying to your questions are making really good points and offering up good advice.

Good luck!

Grady
<<plain fan>>
plain fan is offline  
post #57 of 189 Old 04-13-2020, 06:58 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,068
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3019 Post(s)
Liked: 1604
There are too many variables in live comparisons. If someone comes out liking the Epson better, then it's more than likely a bad comparison, hate to say it.

As an example of how bad comparisons can be, when I saw the NX series vs the RS-540 recently (I finally got to see it after all this time), the RS-540 had worse blacks and was way LESS sharper. The blacks were exactly the opposite of reality. There was something severely wrong with the RS-540 calibration, and there was a chroma error from (Yamaha I believe) being passed to the RS-540. I had to tell the guy to bypass the receiver and he wasn't happy.

I felt the comparison was a complete waste of time, and I left, I gathered nothing from it.

Then I ended up having to also change the settings on the NX-5, even though the dealer told me there was nothing wrong with it. I told him I know there is. Both projectors were configured incorrectly, miscalibrated, wrong signals, and on and on... It was a nightmare.

The difference between Epson and NX series is so huge that even if the JVC is misconfigured, you'll probably still see a difference.

9 out of 10 dealers won't have it setup perfectly enough to compare one JVC to another, especially places like Magnolia. I was at a mainstream large dealer before all this crud broke out, and now everyone is closed. Point being, you need a pro-run shootout to compare projecotrs, or a calibrator showing you, not a demo room. That's not always true, but it often is.

You are better off going to a forum run shoot-out, but right now neither option is possible.

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

Last edited by coderguy; 04-13-2020 at 07:13 PM.
coderguy is offline  
post #58 of 189 Old 04-15-2020, 03:43 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by plain fan View Post
Just a quick question, have you seen either of these projectors actually running? I'm like you, I run all the calculations and prefer to let the math work it out but with projectors, IMHO, you have to experience them first hand with your own eyes.

No, I have never seen either of these projectors in reality.

Times are hard right now, I called a store yesterday, talking to their best calibrator, he offered me setting up an NX7 next to the 6050UB in an environment like mine.

However, I'm not really up for traveling 400 miles only to let the guy know I prefer the NX7, then letting him know I'm looking at the older generation of JVC's which he doesn't sell...


That's basically the only chance I have of seeing these.

Knowing that, I would have to stick with what's been said in this thread, only go for the Epson if you need the extra lumens.

Thanks for being on my side in all of this!

Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post
There are too many variables in live comparisons. If someone comes out liking the Epson better, then it's more than likely a bad comparison, hate to say it.

These are my worries as well, 400 miles just ending up realizing that nothing good really came out of the comparison, I'd hate that.

I'd much rather use the good return policies in my country and test in my own environment, sending back if it's not working at all.



At this point I feel it's all about the brightness.

After all, I want to watch 'The Dark Knight' and not the 'The Gray Knight', no offense.

Pretty much considering the JVC at this point.

Talked to several people yesterday who indeed implied that the JVC would benefit even from a darkened living room, even more so with a high contrast screen.

I have a dealer which has the very last RS-540/X790R/X7900 in stock, trying to figure out of I should pull the trigger on this one, I'm really tempted.


Summarizing the the thread somewhat, here's what it'd look like with the JVC:

+ 108" wide screen, 1.0 gain.

+ More realistcally looking at a 18.5' throw than 19.6'.

+ Actually looks like I would be at the wide side of zoom, 1.54x.


Taking this in mind, considering the JVC would leave 1500-1600 lumens calibrated, filter in the path, here's my thinking:

IIRC, at 1.0x zoom, brightness loss is around 27%.

1.54x zoom leaves me with a 12.42% brightness loss (2.00-1.54=0.46) (27/100=0.27) (0.27*46=12.42%)


1300 lumens (with filter, full wide @Javs) 28.6fL (97 nits), fresh lamp, -12% = 1144 lumen (1.54x zoom) 25.2fL (86 nits)

1440 lumens (with filter, full wide @Mike Garrett) 31.7fL (108 nits), fresh lamp, -12% = 1267 lumen (1.54x zoom) 27.9fL (95 nits)

1500 lumens (without filter, full wide), 33fL (113 nits), fresh lamp, -12% = 1320 lumen (1.54x zoom) 29.1fL (99 nits)

1600 lumens (without filter, full wide), 35.2fL (120 nits), fresh lamp, -12% = 1408 lumen (1.54x zoom) 31fL (106 nits)


Above calulations are with lamp in High.


What to expect with filter, 1144 (86 nits) or 1267 (95 nits) lumen?

Could always remove the filter and get 1320 (99 nits) or 1408 (106 nits) lumen.


With these maths, I'm all over the JVC.

Last edited by Vitus4K; 04-15-2020 at 05:09 AM.
Vitus4K is offline  
post #59 of 189 Old 04-15-2020, 05:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Adamd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,208
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1298 Post(s)
Liked: 722
I’m very happy with my setup. I have a 110 inch alr screen with a x790r in a non light controlled room as well. I have white ceilings and a wood floors. I get a incredible picture and could not be more happy. I have no issues with brightness in hdr. My screen is supposed to be 1.5 gain but people say it’s more like a 1.2. I used to have a 77 oled before I went to the projector and I would do it again in a second. I also mounted a frame tv for days I don’t want the room in darkness.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	C4CEA360-D28E-498A-B246-3FFCD2F0908B_1586952512173.jpg
Views:	51
Size:	69.8 KB
ID:	2710284   Click image for larger version

Name:	2B8AF65C-820B-4E52-9864-D8BAA48B93F3_1586952651925.jpg
Views:	59
Size:	31.1 KB
ID:	2710286  
rboster likes this.
Adamd is offline  
post #60 of 189 Old 04-15-2020, 05:32 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Moderator
 
rboster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 26,096
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1839 Post(s)
Liked: 2786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitus4K View Post
Spoiler!
Spoiler!


Sorry, but I haven't read your whole thread, just this page. Couple of thoughts:

What city do you live in or what city would be near your town? My reason for asking is that we over a million members at AVS. It maybe that someone within a reasonable drive might have one or both of the projectors you are looking at? I know I've hosted and gone to members homes in Kansas City to view their set up. We have a forum dedicated to regional/city meets.

As far as JVC....I'm a huge fan, so I definitely have bias. I wouldn't be able to compare the JVC to the epson. I haven't owned an epson in years. That being said, I recently sold our home, which included all the home theater equipment. When it came time to restart my HT and pick out a projector, I decided to stay with the same model vs the newer JVC's. Why? I liked the image and knew it's pros and cons. I didn't want to deal with relearning a new projector and working through the bugs of a new model. It's a lazy proposition, but firing up my JVC 540, I was happy to (re)own that model.

Feel free to send me a PM, I'll see if I can help

Ron

FS: RUIPRO 8K Fiber DisplayPort Cable 33 feet : https://www.avsforum.com/forum/211-a...d-support.html
rboster is online now  
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