2010 Mitsubishi 3D DLP Owners Thread (738/838 series) - Page 306 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 71Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #9151 of 9175 Old 08-02-2017, 03:42 PM
Member
 
Johnnyecks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Oak Ridge, NJ
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
So this TV saga continues....

Please bear with me. I'm super pissed.


The same day I picked this (which is going to be very quickly thrown into the street), tv up I ordered from Best Buy glasses that I was told would work. Xpand 102-RF. They did not. They then gave me X102-IR. Those did not work. I was then told to get Xpand 3DG-103 which are DLP link glasses. Those are not working.

They cannot make this any more difficult. I have never, ever, ever had so many problems with home theater electronics before in my life.

These stupid glasses are supposed to "blink" when it connects.

I did some googling and came across this:

"i have Mitsubishi WD-82738 tv that built in IR emitter. just bought 4 pairs of X103. I did try to sync with one blink, then 4blinks ...6blinks, but still not get it sync!:-("

So it has a built in emitter. So do I choose "DLP Link" or "IR Emitter"?

On the phone with Mitsubishi right now and they just told me that I do NOT need the emitter, it has to be set on DLP link (which the glasses are.... apparently)...


So here's another quandary... this goddamn glasses company is out of business or something because I cannot get any information other than Amazon reviews on how to program the glasses. Which is not working right either because they are supposed to "blink" until it detects a signal. Occums Razor tells me that maybe everyone is wrong and I do need the emitter, or the tv is a lemon and the guy I bought it from is wiping his ass with my money.




Sorry if this post is all over the place, but I have brain diarrhea over this.

So here's a list of problems, for recap:

Hazy/Foggy picture
Halo around white text/objects, esp near black objects the white bleeds into the black.
DLP 3D glasses not syncing.
Don't need an emitter.
Mits software is up to date, oddly enough
PS4 software is up to date
Onkyo TX-NR636 was double checked that it supported 3D... it does.

Bulb has been replaced.
Cleaning mirrors will commense on Sat.

Just left a message for a tv repair guy. So he can wipe his ass with more of my money to get everything to work.

TV was sold to me for $300
+ truck $150
+ tie downs, and replacement tie downs when the first pair broke, plus bungees plus tarp $100
+ tolls $25
+ 2 3D movies $60
+ One pair of glasses that did not work and Best Buy would not let me return them b/c I was at 15 days out and their return policy is 14 days $40
+ Replacement remote $40
+ replacement bulb $95
+ these glasses $50

This has now cost me $855


Bear with me while I go shoot myself.
Johnnyecks is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #9152 of 9175 Old 08-02-2017, 05:25 PM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 10,288
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1936 Post(s)
Liked: 2322
^ Not to shoot you while you're down, but it probably wasn't a good idea to invest money in the 3D glasses and movies until you got the TV to the point where it's working well otherwise.

FWIW, I have a WD-82838 (same as the WD-72838, just bigger) and have a 3D IR emitter plugged into the back. I rarely bother watching anything in 3D though because the glasses just aren't even remotely comfortable to wear over regular glasses.

Have you been in contact with the guy who sold you the TV? Did you have a chance to test it when you picked it up?

Best of luck to you; I hope things work out well in the end.
gsr is online now  
post #9153 of 9175 Old 08-02-2017, 11:10 PM
Newbie
 
Barrister2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Hello,

I am an original owner of a WD-73738 and 2nd owner of a WD60-738. I have both sets working perfectly in 3D. I opted for the outboard infrared emitter, because DLP link has some issues with the color. If you get the emitter you need Mitsubishi glasses or 1st generation Samsung glasses. DLP link is standard with your set and does not require an infrared outboard emitter, but requires that you choose the DLP link option in setup and that you have DLP Link glasses which are different from the ones that mate to the infrared emitter. There were some universal glasses out for a while from Dimensional Optics but I do not believe they are made anymore. dimensional optics does not support the Mits any longer, but may be able to steer you in the right direction. The protocol for IR changed a few times and the Mits is the oldest.
Barrister2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #9154 of 9175 Old 08-03-2017, 08:50 AM
Member
 
Johnnyecks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Oak Ridge, NJ
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsr View Post
^ Not to shoot you while you're down, but it probably wasn't a good idea to invest money in the 3D glasses and movies until you got the TV to the point where it's working well otherwise.

FWIW, I have a WD-82838 (same as the WD-72838, just bigger) and have a 3D IR emitter plugged into the back. I rarely bother watching anything in 3D though because the glasses just aren't even remotely comfortable to wear over regular glasses.

Have you been in contact with the guy who sold you the TV? Did you have a chance to test it when you picked it up?

Best of luck to you; I hope things work out well in the end.
Thank you. I have been in contact with the guy, when I demoed it at his house it worked fine. Something happened on the way back to my house that now requires me to clean the mirrors.

If I can get the mirrors cleaned and my picture issue resolved, would you be willing to sell me your emitter and glasses since you say you barely use them?
Johnnyecks is offline  
post #9155 of 9175 Old 08-03-2017, 08:53 AM
Member
 
Johnnyecks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Oak Ridge, NJ
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrister2 View Post
Hello,

I am an original owner of a WD-73738 and 2nd owner of a WD60-738. I have both sets working perfectly in 3D. I opted for the outboard infrared emitter, because DLP link has some issues with the color. If you get the emitter you need Mitsubishi glasses or 1st generation Samsung glasses. DLP link is standard with your set and does not require an infrared outboard emitter, but requires that you choose the DLP link option in setup and that you have DLP Link glasses which are different from the ones that mate to the infrared emitter. There were some universal glasses out for a while from Dimensional Optics but I do not believe they are made anymore. dimensional optics does not support the Mits any longer, but may be able to steer you in the right direction. The protocol for IR changed a few times and the Mits is the oldest.
The glasses that I have are considered universal but, supposedly, are DLP. The tv settings are all correct. Glasses will not connect.

This is a great example of getting conflicting answers...

Mits says I do NOT need an emitter. DLP glasses are fine.

I contacted Xpand, and they amazingly responded, saying that my model tv DOES require an emitter and that my glasses are IR not DLP..... IT SAYS DLP RIGHT ON THE BOX!!!!!!


Seriously, has anyone else had such an issue with this? I find it amazing that two companies do not know their products.
Johnnyecks is offline  
post #9156 of 9175 Old 08-03-2017, 09:30 AM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 10,288
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1936 Post(s)
Liked: 2322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnyecks View Post
Thank you. I have been in contact with the guy, when I demoed it at his house it worked fine. Something happened on the way back to my house that now requires me to clean the mirrors.
If it was working fine before moving it, then my suspicion would be something other than simply having to clean the mirrors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnyecks View Post
If I can get the mirrors cleaned and my picture issue resolved, would you be willing to sell me your emitter and glasses since you say you barely use them?
I don't have current plans to part with my emitter or glasses until I replace the TV with a 4K display.
Johnnyecks likes this.
gsr is online now  
post #9157 of 9175 Old 08-03-2017, 09:42 AM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 10,288
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1936 Post(s)
Liked: 2322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnyecks View Post
The glasses that I have are considered universal but, supposedly, are DLP. The tv settings are all correct. Glasses will not connect.

This is a great example of getting conflicting answers...

Mits says I do NOT need an emitter. DLP glasses are fine.

I contacted Xpand, and they amazingly responded, saying that my model tv DOES require an emitter and that my glasses are IR not DLP..... IT SAYS DLP RIGHT ON THE BOX!!!!!!


Seriously, has anyone else had such an issue with this? I find it amazing that two companies do not know their products.
Part of the problem is that you're working with a TV that has been discontinued for a while at this point and a company (Mitsubishi) that has abandoned the market. Even when Mitsubishi was still selling the DLP rear projection TV's, I doubt they had (m)any support reps who knew them really well, especially the 3D functionality. Now that they've been out of that market for several years, I'd be shocked if they have anyone left who has deep knowledge of these TV's.

Regarding Xpand, they most likely have a list of supported devices and stick to whatever is in that list. So it's quite likely that they have no idea that your TV does actually support DLP Link. Without seeing their response word for word, it's possible their wording was bad and they meant to say that you need IR glasses rather than trying to tell you that the ones you have in hand are IR.

When I bought my WD-82838 many moons ago, I'm pretty sure the general consensus was that the negatives of going with DLP Link glasses outweighed the convenience of not needing the IR emitter. I'm sure that's why I ended up with the emitter and the glasses that I have. It seems to me there were more IR glasses options too or the IR glasses at the time were relatively more comfortable to wear over regular glasses. I honestly don't remember for sure though.
gsr is online now  
post #9158 of 9175 Old 08-03-2017, 10:20 AM
Member
 
Johnnyecks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Oak Ridge, NJ
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsr View Post
Part of the problem is that you're working with a TV that has been discontinued for a while at this point and a company (Mitsubishi) that has abandoned the market. Even when Mitsubishi was still selling the DLP rear projection TV's, I doubt they had (m)any support reps who knew them really well, especially the 3D functionality. Now that they've been out of that market for several years, I'd be shocked if they have anyone left who has deep knowledge of these TV's.

Regarding Xpand, they most likely have a list of supported devices and stick to whatever is in that list. So it's quite likely that they have no idea that your TV does actually support DLP Link. Without seeing their response word for word, it's possible their wording was bad and they meant to say that you need IR glasses rather than trying to tell you that the ones you have in hand are IR.

When I bought my WD-82838 many moons ago, I'm pretty sure the general consensus was that the negatives of going with DLP Link glasses outweighed the convenience of not needing the IR emitter. I'm sure that's why I ended up with the emitter and the glasses that I have. It seems to me there were more IR glasses options too or the IR glasses at the time were relatively more comfortable to wear over regular glasses. I honestly don't remember for sure though.
This is so exhausting. I just want to watch tv... with a nice picture, and every now and then in 3D.

Thank you!
Johnnyecks is offline  
post #9159 of 9175 Old 08-03-2017, 10:36 AM
Newbie
 
Barrister2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Indeed, the answers that you are getting are confusing. The need for an emitter is as much dependent on the glasses you are using, as the TV model. In the 738/838 series, if you are using DLP Link, you do NOT need an emitter. If you are using IR glasses, you DO need the emitter. If that is not confusing enough, I believe that the IR protocol was changed for the 2011 models so even if you have an emitter and IR glasses, those glasses must be compatible with the pre-2011 IR protocol. I seem to remember the original Mits glasses being compatible with both DLP link, as well as IR, but I am not sure. There are plenty of these glasses on ebay. The 2100 series of IR glasses is compatible, but the 3100 series is not, and they look alike. I will try to get more specific information from my sets of glasses. Regarding the IR emitter, you do not need a Mits emitter as long as the plug fits into the back of your TV, because I believe the TV itself controls the IR protocol.
Barrister2 is offline  
post #9160 of 9175 Old 08-03-2017, 01:16 PM
Member
 
Johnnyecks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Oak Ridge, NJ
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrister2 View Post
Indeed, the answers that you are getting are confusing. The need for an emitter is as much dependent on the glasses you are using, as the TV model. In the 738/838 series, if you are using DLP Link, you do NOT need an emitter. If you are using IR glasses, you DO need the emitter. If that is not confusing enough, I believe that the IR protocol was changed for the 2011 models so even if you have an emitter and IR glasses, those glasses must be compatible with the pre-2011 IR protocol. I seem to remember the original Mits glasses being compatible with both DLP link, as well as IR, but I am not sure. There are plenty of these glasses on ebay. The 2100 series of IR glasses is compatible, but the 3100 series is not, and they look alike. I will try to get more specific information from my sets of glasses. Regarding the IR emitter, you do not need a Mits emitter as long as the plug fits into the back of your TV, because I believe the TV itself controls the IR protocol.
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

I saw this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mitsubishi-S...cAAMXQ56ZSA7uJ

If you could let me know of an emitter that will work, I would greatly GREATLY G R E A T L Y appreciate it!
Johnnyecks is offline  
post #9161 of 9175 Old 08-04-2017, 11:10 AM
Newbie
 
Barrister2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Considering that you have never gotten the 3D to work yet, I would be careful of purchasing glasses that are "SSG-2100MG Compatible," but rather you should get the real thing:


Mitsubishi Active-Shutter 3D Glasses SSG-2100MG/ZA Compatible with Samsung TVs - I cannot post the link, but they are $52

The above glasses are identical to the Mitsubishis that Mits sold for our TV.

or:

Samsung SSG-P2100X/ZA 3D Glasses with Cloth Storage Bag - I cannot post the link, but they are $12.95


These had the Samsung logo, but were also identical to the Mits, and not just "compatible"

I believe any emitter with a stereo vesa plug, which is what is on the back of your TV will work. You can search for Mits 3D emitters on ebay and ask that question.

If you get it working, let me know.



Barrister2 is offline  
post #9162 of 9175 Old 08-06-2017, 07:40 AM
Member
 
Johnnyecks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Oak Ridge, NJ
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Another update:

Took it apart, cleaned the mirrors, the lens, dlp chip, dusted the fans, cleaned the inside....

Hazy picture and halos are still there. Albeit, the picture does look somewhat better but now the halos are a bit worse.

So it isn't the lamp, or dirty mirrors/lenses...
What else could be causing the picture to be like this?

Or do I just have a lemon (this is what I am thinking)


What gets me so mad, is the amount of money I sank into this I could've bought that damn projector and screen that I wanted awhile back (prob my first post)
Johnnyecks is offline  
post #9163 of 9175 Old 08-06-2017, 11:08 AM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 10,288
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1936 Post(s)
Liked: 2322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnyecks View Post
Another update:

Took it apart, cleaned the mirrors, the lens, dlp chip, dusted the fans, cleaned the inside....

Hazy picture and halos are still there. Albeit, the picture does look somewhat better but now the halos are a bit worse.

So it isn't the lamp, or dirty mirrors/lenses...
What else could be causing the picture to be like this?

Or do I just have a lemon (this is what I am thinking)
Given that you said that it was working fine when you had a demo at the seller's home before buying it, I suspect something got damaged when you moved it. If it were a lemon, it probably would have been difficult for the seller to give you a demo demonstrating the picture looking good.

Given the age of these TV's, I personally would be hesitant to throw more money at it by having a repair tech come out to look at it. You'd probably be looking at a minimum of a couple hundred bucks PLUS any parts. Speaking of parts, those might be difficult to come by at this point.
gsr is online now  
post #9164 of 9175 Old 08-06-2017, 02:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Augerhandle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: About 25" away from my computer screen
Posts: 5,336
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1252 Post(s)
Liked: 1255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnyecks View Post
Another update:

Took it apart, cleaned the mirrors, the lens, dlp chip, dusted the fans, cleaned the inside....

Hazy picture and halos are still there. Albeit, the picture does look somewhat better but now the halos are a bit worse.

So it isn't the lamp, or dirty mirrors/lenses...
What else could be causing the picture to be like this?

Or do I just have a lemon (this is what I am thinking)


What gets me so mad, is the amount of money I sank into this I could've bought that damn projector and screen that I wanted awhile back (prob my first post)

It's possible that the halo was there all the time, but you didn't have time for enough critical viewing to discover it when you bought the TV, Check this thread out: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/63-rea...re-halo-s.html The UV light from the lamp causes outgassing from the light tunnel plastic, which then slowly builds up as a greasy residue on the inside of the lens.

"The wise understand by themselves; fools follow the reports of others"-Tibetan Proverb
_____________________ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/auger-handle/ ________________________
Augerhandle is offline  
post #9165 of 9175 Old 08-08-2017, 07:45 AM
Member
 
Johnnyecks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Oak Ridge, NJ
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsr View Post
........personally would be hesitant to throw more money at it by having a repair tech come out to look at it. You'd probably be looking at a minimum of a couple hundred bucks PLUS any parts. Speaking of parts, those might be difficult to come by at this point.
I have def come to that conclusion as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Augerhandle View Post
It's possible that the halo was there all the time, but you didn't have time for enough critical viewing to discover it when you bought the TV, Check this thread out: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/63-rea...re-halo-s.html The UV light from the lamp causes outgassing from the light tunnel plastic, which then slowly builds up as a greasy residue on the inside of the lens.

Thank you! I have read on those thread directions on how to get to the iris and lenses on the 57". I can't find directions for the 82", and that just makes me hesitant since mine was made in 2010 and the other was made in 06 or 07. Anyhow, going to attempt it this weekend. If it works, fantastic. If it does nothing, then oh well. I'll deal with it until I have enough packed away to get the proj and screen that I orig wanted to get. If it bricks it... fine. I'm over this.
Johnnyecks is offline  
post #9166 of 9175 Old 08-11-2017, 03:25 PM
Member
 
Johnnyecks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Oak Ridge, NJ
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Well that's the end of that. It's bricked.

I am not spending anymore time on this thing. It is going to the end of the driveway with "FREE" taped to it.


Disgusted. Completely disgusted. Close to $900 for... nothing but stress, stomach aches, and heartache.

Thank you to everyone who tried to help me out. It's greatly appreciated.
GordonTV likes this.
Johnnyecks is offline  
post #9167 of 9175 Old 10-19-2017, 06:45 AM
Member
 
ottoinct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: At the oceanfront in Virginia Beach
Posts: 46
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Now at 6930 hours. Still a stellar picture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ottoinct View Post
Just sharing my experience with my latest bulb replacement, as a pay-it-forward gesture. Six months ago I installed an Osram-Sylvania #69788 (https://www.osram-americas.com/en-us...ion-Lamps.aspx) into the original Mits bulb housing. Before buying it, I went down the rabbit hole to validate it was "the chosen one." ;o) After six months (~2600 hours), edge-to-edge brightness uniformity is stellar.
ottoinct is offline  
post #9168 of 9175 Old 02-22-2018, 04:05 AM
Senior Member
 
Audio Geek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 42
The original bulb on my 73738 finally gave up the ghost and I swapped out the bulb with one I purchased from Shop Jimmy (turns out back in January, 2014). Worked fine. Good thing since I hadn't tested it before.

Still happy with the TV.

Last edited by Audio Geek; 02-22-2018 at 04:11 AM.
Audio Geek is offline  
post #9169 of 9175 Old 02-22-2018, 04:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
Hans Gruber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottoinct View Post
Now at 6930 hours. Still a stellar picture.
I have the 73" C9, not sure if it's a 09 or a 10 model year. I found the golden child of lamps. I have a backup lamp that I call the shogun. Well over a year with flawless performance. Paid less than $20 per lamp.
Hans Gruber is offline  
post #9170 of 9175 Old 05-10-2019, 08:10 AM
Newbie
 
hobbiest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Question What 2 clean on wd82838 ????

I had Mits DLP before I bought WD-82838 DLP. On my previous DLP I removed screen periodically to clean mirrors. I want to give my WD-82838 a good cleaning and wanted to know what I should clean. Does this model have mirrors like my old one? The old had huge mirror mounted to rear and smaller ones by lens. I watched YouTube of 72” and it showed removing light engine and cleaning color wheel and putting reflective tape over areas of overs that have become dull.
hobbiest is offline  
post #9171 of 9175 Old 05-15-2019, 05:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
allargon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,661
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 255 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbiest View Post
I had Mits DLP before I bought WD-82838 DLP. On my previous DLP I removed screen periodically to clean mirrors. I want to give my WD-82838 a good cleaning and wanted to know what I should clean. Does this model have mirrors like my old one? The old had huge mirror mounted to rear and smaller ones by lens. I watched YouTube of 72” and it showed removing light engine and cleaning color wheel and putting reflective tape over areas of overs that have become dull.
It has mirrors, but it doesn't have the vapor deposition flaw that some older models had. I had one of those models in a 57" that I had to take apart and clean every six months. I don't have to do that with the 838 series.
allargon is offline  
post #9172 of 9175 Old 06-07-2019, 05:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
curtishd's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,986
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Anyone know how many nits the 82 outputs?
curtishd is offline  
post #9173 of 9175 Old 06-28-2019, 07:58 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 2
So today I am watching the USA Women's World Cup Game in 4K on my Samsung 4K TV through Verizon FIOS new tv one box. I have a split feed also running to my WD-82738 in the next room as they share the same cable box. I notice that the WD-82738 was also putting out the 4K feed.
So as I type this right now I am watching 4K videos on youtube on my WD-82738 using Nvidia Shield and the picture looks fantastic.
My question is am I really watching 4K video on the WD-82738?
Is that possible?
The youtube settings say 4K
dre22era is offline  
post #9174 of 9175 Old 06-29-2019, 01:21 AM
Senior Member
 
chris431's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 303
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by dre22era View Post
So today I am watching the USA Women's World Cup Game in 4K on my Samsung 4K TV through Verizon FIOS new tv one box. I have a split feed also running to my WD-82738 in the next room as they share the same cable box. I notice that the WD-82738 was also putting out the 4K feed.
So as I type this right now I am watching 4K videos on youtube on my WD-82738 using Nvidia Shield and the picture looks fantastic.
My question is am I really watching 4K video on the WD-82738?
Is that possible?
The youtube settings say 4K
No, you are not watching the videos in actual 4k resolution. The DMD chips used to create the image in these models are not even native 1080p. Instead, the chips use what is called wobulation to create the 1080p resolution. You can read about wobulation and the DMD chips (Texas Instruments) here . Needless to say, the chips are not capable of creating a 4k image.
chris431 is offline  
post #9175 of 9175 Old 06-29-2019, 10:48 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris431 View Post
No, you are not watching the videos in actual 4k resolution. The DMD chips used to create the image in these models are not even native 1080p. Instead, the chips use what is called wobulation to create the 1080p resolution. You can read about wobulation and the DMD chips (Texas Instruments) here . Needless to say, the chips are not capable of creating a 4k image.
Good to know. Thanks
Even at an upscale 1080P I am very impressed by the image quality.
I have been on the fence about upgrading to a 82 inch QLED but ill hold on to my DLP a little bit longer.
Last month I helped a friend successfully replace the DMD chip on his. Thats what I feared the most with my tv in regards to getting the white dots.
After successfully doing that the only thing I fear now is the color wheel going bad.
Seems like these tvs can run forever.
dre22era is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Rear Projection Units

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