BenQ 9050 gets destroyed! - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 4Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 03:32 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 5
BenQ 9050 gets destroyed!

Sound and vision just destroyed the BenQ 9050. The review on it was unreal. I'm not sure which Texas instrument chip was being used in it, but they said it was pretty much trash.

Hopefully this wasn't the new Texas instrument 4k chip that recently came out in the news.

https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...ector-review-0
NStelmaschuk is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 03:34 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 5
NStelmaschuk is offline  
post #3 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 04:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darinp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,735
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 543 Post(s)
Liked: 749
I saw this projector. It is one of the XPR DLPs with 1528p chips and eShift.

The native on/off CR was so horrendous compared to what I'm used to that I had trouble looking beyond that.

I've said before that the weakest link can ruin images even if they are great for other parameters. That is what I saw here. It was like somebody was standing there pointing a flashlight at the screen.

I told Kris that BenQ should hire someone that understands how to get good contrast ratio out of a DLP projector. This isn't the first time I've seen what looks like pure incompetence on BenQ's part with respect to contrast ratio.

--Darin
darinp is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 05:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,811
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2240 Post(s)
Liked: 1166
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp View Post
I saw this projector. It is one of the XPR DLPs with 1528p chips and eShift.

The native on/off CR was so horrendous compared to what I'm used to that I had trouble looking beyond that.

I've said before that the weakest link can ruin images even if they are great for other parameters. That is what I saw here. It was like somebody was standing there pointing a flashlight at the screen.

I told Kris that BenQ should hire someone that understands how to get good contrast ratio out of a DLP projector. This isn't the first time I've seen what looks like pure incompetence on BenQ's part with respect to contrast ratio.

--Darin
Notwithstanding this Benq's apparently excellent lens, it would be very difficult for me to go to sub-1000:1 native contrast from my current projector that does 160,000:1 native, let alone its 1,600,000:1 dynamic. Besides, I already have the XPR chip Vivitek HK2299 whose native contrast is more than twice that of this $8,000 behemoth.
Aztar35 is offline  
post #5 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 05:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DavidK442's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 1,661
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 866 Post(s)
Liked: 726
These new 4K-ish consumer DLP chips see to have worse contrast than the old 2K DarkChip 3's they hope to replace.
Is it that smaller, more plentiful mirrors tend to splash more light around?
Is there something about the maximum possible on/off angle?
I don't understand the technical side well enough to speculate, but they seem to be bumping up against some inarguable law of physics.
I prefer to take that "most respectful" interpretation rather than the popular position that Texas Instruments is resting on their monopolized laurels and have not put any effort into improving the contrast of their technology.
DavidK442 is offline  
post #6 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 06:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darinp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,735
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 543 Post(s)
Liked: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidK442 View Post
These new 4K-ish consumer DLP chips see to have worse contrast than the old 2K DarkChip 3's they hope to replace.
Is it that smaller, more plentiful mirrors tend to splash more light around?
With DLP I believe the biggest problem with the black floor is the 4 corners of each mirror. As you make the mirrors smaller you still have the limits of the 4 corners. With a smaller chip you have to focus the light to a smaller area, meaning that there is more light for each of the 4 corners to reflect. Double the number of mirrors with the same chip size and you double the number of mirrors corners, so I expect the white level to go down slightly from more gaps between more pixels, but the black floor to go up due to double the mirror corners.

That explains why it is harder to get good contrast ratio, but even beyond that BenQ seems to have done an especially poor job with contrast ratio with this particular model.

I've said it before, but given the way doubling the number of mirrors hurts native on/off CR with DLP chips, I think some people would have been happier if TI had added 2 way eShift to 0.67" 1080p chips instead of doubling the mirror count for 1528p. That is, for many setups I think the better native on/off CR would have more than made up for the lower resolution.They couldn't have pushed these as effectively as true 4K If they had done that though.

--Darin
coug7669 likes this.
darinp is offline  
post #7 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 06:18 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 5
I was hopeful for this projector because I plan on getting the BenQ 2550. This has me worried for the 2550.

Should I be?

Is the 9050 chip in the 2550?

Does this mean that the 2550 is destined to fail?
NStelmaschuk is offline  
post #8 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 06:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,792
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2584 Post(s)
Liked: 1223
Quote:
Originally Posted by NStelmaschuk View Post
Sound and vision just destroyed the BenQ 9050. The review on it was unreal. I'm not sure which Texas instrument chip was being used in it, but they said it was pretty much trash.

Hopefully this wasn't the new Texas instrument 4k chip that recently came out in the news.

https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...ector-review-0
I have never really been fond of BenQ's execution with this model, now or back when it was called the X12000 when released internationally in Feb 2017. The X12000 was missing features at the start of the year, especially dynamic contrast and HDR, and also had motion issues with no FI. When it came to the US 6 months later as the HT9050 it was too little, too late and still missing features; I actually thought it would have been wise for BenQ to skip the US launch of the HT9050 if they didn't plan on it launching with all new firmware, but they decided to launch it in the same state as when it was the X12000. It has aged quite a bit in the time since it was announced.

Biggest problem was no dynamic contrast firmware up until just recently, still no HDR firmware and apparently not coming, and no 3D firmware either. A few strikes too many for a projector that expensive.

The shame of it is that the hardware concept was good, the firmware just didn't expose enough of the needed features in a reasonable time period and still hasn't especially at that price point. The BenQ HT2550 coming out in a month basically has more features than the HT9050 which costs many multiples more... The contrast performance on the HT9050 is worse than the UHD65 that is a fraction of the price (and the HT9050 also performs worse in contrast than the UHZ65, which is also much cheaper and also solid state).

If they could take this same chassis, add in the 2-rod Philips ColorSpark (5000 lumens), add some contrast optimizations, add HDR, add 3D - then you'd have a winner IMO. But as-is its not a great package for the price.

Last edited by Ruined; 12-08-2017 at 07:06 PM.
Ruined is online now  
post #9 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 07:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,792
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2584 Post(s)
Liked: 1223
Quote:
Originally Posted by NStelmaschuk View Post
I was hopeful for this projector because I plan on getting the BenQ 2550. This has me worried for the 2550.

Should I be?

Is the 9050 chip in the 2550?

Does this mean that the 2550 is destined to fail?
The two are completely unrelated, totally different designs, etc. The chip is only a small part of the equation. Optoma and Vivitek have out a number projectors a fraction of a price of the HT9050 with significantly better overall performance than the HT9050, while using the same chip as the HT9050.

I'd be more questioning why you'd get the HT2550 when the Vivitek HK2288 is on super sale right now in the same range and I'd wager the latter will look better than the former.

Last edited by Ruined; 12-08-2017 at 07:13 PM.
Ruined is online now  
post #10 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 07:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Verge2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: arkansas
Posts: 3,324
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 915 Post(s)
Liked: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidK442 View Post
These new 4K-ish consumer DLP chips see to have worse contrast than the old 2K DarkChip 3's they hope to replace.
Is it that smaller, more plentiful mirrors tend to splash more light around?
Is there something about the maximum possible on/off angle?
I don't understand the technical side well enough to speculate, but they seem to be bumping up against some inarguable law of physics.
I prefer to take that "most respectful" interpretation rather than the popular position that Texas Instruments is resting on their monopolized laurels and have not put any effort into improving the contrast of their technology.

And the old 2k DC3 chips have worse contrast than the older larger 1080p DC3's from 10 years ago. Seems CR gets worse with each release from TI.
Verge2 is offline  
post #11 of 32 Old 12-08-2017, 08:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,792
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2584 Post(s)
Liked: 1223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verge2 View Post
And the old 2k DC3 chips have worse contrast than the older larger 1080p DC3's from 10 years ago. Seems CR gets worse with each release from TI.
I think darinp2 was correct in very simply the more dense the DMD the worse the contrast is going to be. Whether it is reducing size or increasing resolution, it will result in lower contrast. But, whether its reducing prices of projectors by making a smaller chip, or increasing chip resolution to stay up to date with the current media formats, making denser DMDs was bound to happen.

But the DMD itself does not determine the absolute contrast, it is just a contributing factor.

There are a lot of things you can do to the lightpath to push up the native contrast, and separately it appears Coretronic has nailed 8x multiplier laser dimming based on Dave Harper's and others report of the UHZ65 (no noticeable artifacts). So add some of those contrast opts + high multiplier and you can get very satisfying overall contrast.

The biggest issue with the HT9050 is that it had both zero contrast optimization (HT9050 performs worse or at best on par with the under $2k RGBCY/high brightness color wheel Optoma UHD60 with same DMD) and also lacked dynamic contrast entirely just until recently, putting you under 1000:1 at all times which isn't going to work for most people at $9000. Not to mention lacking HDR, no 3D, motion wonky with no FI, etc. Overall very bad execution for this model and I cringed when they launched it unchanged from the X12000 in the USA.

Last edited by Ruined; 12-08-2017 at 08:26 PM.
Ruined is online now  
post #12 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 05:11 AM
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 1,471
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 801 Post(s)
Liked: 462
DLP is a dying technology for home theater. It has been unable to even remotely improve the amount of contrast in any of today's models. Contrast has been low for the last 10 years. This is unacceptable with today's technology.
LumensLover is offline  
post #13 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 05:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,792
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2584 Post(s)
Liked: 1223
Quote:
Originally Posted by LumensLover View Post
DLP is a dying technology for home theater. It has been unable to even remotely improve the amount of contrast in any of today's models. Contrast has been low for the last 10 years. This is unacceptable with today's technology.
Funny how the "dying" technology remains also somehow actually the best selling one (as it has been for a long time) for home theater in reality.

Let me correct this statement. "DLP is currently selling worse than the technology I like for some particular $5000-$10000 niche price bracket of lamp-based home theater projectors that I personally shop in, which is only a small piece of the pie of projector sales." In other words, it ain't goin nowhere. Especially as in 2018 and beyond we will likely be seeing 3500-5000 lumen laser projectors in this price bracket. allowing people to get blindingly bright HDR with massive screen sizes where competitively priced LCD/LCOS projectors will look positively dim in comparison.

Contrast is actually not that important to consumers in reality. In every major mainstream technology battle, contrast has been an absolute non-factor for the winning technology (winning defined as, the one that outsold or completely eliminated its competitor from the market). In fact, in almost every case in display technology history the high contrast technology was supplanted, outsold, or entirely defeated by the low contrast technology. Consumers actually only care about contrast up until a certain point, then diminishing returns kick in and other things become more important. Some of the things consumers have found more important than contrast in the past as voiced by the technology that tops sales and/or displaces other technologies: size, weight, resolution, brightness, price, power consumption, screen burn-in immunity.

Last edited by Ruined; 12-09-2017 at 06:17 AM.
Ruined is online now  
post #14 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 07:15 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 15,174
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4173 Post(s)
Liked: 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
Funny how the "dying" technology remains also somehow actually the best selling one (as it has been for a long time) for home theater in reality.
Here we go again... Because we all know the buyers of $500 projectors are discerning folk who demand only the best and as a result the sales number of DLP projectors prove they are the best projectors. You know the same way the that the sales numbers for the Honda Civic (the best selling car in the US so far in 2017) means it is a better performance car than a Corvette, Porsche 911, or other actual sports cars.
Stereodude is online now  
post #15 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 07:17 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,792
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2584 Post(s)
Liked: 1223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Here we go again... Because we all know the buyers of $500 projectors are discerning folk who demand only the best and as a result the sales number of DLP projectors prove they are the best projectors. You know the same way the that the sales numbers for the Honda Civic (the best selling car in the US so far in 2017) means it is a better performance car than a Corvette, Porsche 911, or other actual sports cars.
I see a much better chance of the Corvette or Porsche 911 "dying" than the Honda Civic.

BTW if you want to go "highest priced projectors are best," route DLP wins there too. The only place DLP doesn't dominate is a niche cross section of mid range lamp projectors.

Last edited by Ruined; 12-09-2017 at 07:21 AM.
Ruined is online now  
post #16 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 07:37 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 15,174
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4173 Post(s)
Liked: 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
I see a much better chance of the Corvette or Porsche 911 "dying" than the Honda Civic.
In the sense that he meant it, no. The Civic has a better chance being replaced by electric ride sharing vehicles that people don't own than sports cars like Corvette or Porsche 911.

Quote:
BTW if you want to go "highest priced projectors are best," route DLP wins there too. The only place DLP doesn't dominate is a niche cross section of mid range lamp projectors.
But I wasn't talking highest priced. I said best performing (in the home theater context). However, LED video walls destroy even those most expensive DLP projectors in terms of image quality and performance if you really want to talk about most expensive.
Stereodude is online now  
post #17 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 08:06 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by NStelmaschuk View Post
I was hopeful for this projector because I plan on getting the BenQ 2550. This has me worried for the 2550.

Should I be?

Is the 9050 chip in the 2550?

Does this mean that the 2550 is destined to fail?
The two are completely unrelated, totally different designs, etc. The chip is only a small part of the equation. Optoma and Vivitek have out a number projectors a fraction of a price of the HT9050 with significantly better overall performance than the HT9050, while using the same chip as the HT9050.

I'd be more questioning why you'd get the HT2550 when the Vivitek HK2288 is on super sale right now in the same range and I'd wager the latter will look better than the former.
Everything I've read says the Vivitek is at the bottom of the new faux-4k projectors (I'll admit it's a good price now). I'm shocked that you would recommend it.

Plus BenQ has superior lens quality, don't they use all glass.

I'm trying to find a comparison of the Sony 45es and how it compares to the best faux-4k projectors. I'm guessing that it might be better than most of them.
NStelmaschuk is offline  
post #18 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 08:10 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,792
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2584 Post(s)
Liked: 1223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
In the sense that he meant it, no. The Civic has a better chance being replaced by electric ride sharing vehicles that people don't own than sports cars like Corvette or Porsche 911.
Off topic now and probably a silly tangent to go off on, but for fun I will say I'd take that wager. Sports cars are not a surefire thing. Take the Camaro and its class for instance, one of the most famous and bestselling sports cars of all time, which was discontinued by Chevy for a long period of time in modern history due to lackluster sales. The civic and its class will never go away IMO, too much value there. Electric ride sharing vehicles while again may be appealing to a subset of people living in large cities, will never replace cars like the civic. Mainly because, the whole idea of both not owning a car and also putting your faith in a computer AI (assuming you are talking about Google cars etc) involves a large loss of personal mobility control and freedom. I don't see it being compatible with the values of America on a whole, really, and becomes very impractical outside of large cities - if not unusable in rural areas.

Quote:
But I wasn't talking highest priced. I said best performing (in the home theater context).
That depends on your definition of "performance." For me, "performance" is *much* more than just contrast. I have been a longtime tech nerd of all different sorts of technologies well beyond home theater, so my definition of "performance" is larger in scope than just black-level & contrast for movies. There are so many factors (including many not related to picture quality) that come into play here that trying to nail it down to just one is kind of hard. Even the BenQ HT9050, despite being an overall failure, has many traits very appealing to me that similarly priced JVC/Sony lacks. I really do see the draw to the JVC/Sonys, believe me, but for my personal performance standards they aren't quite there at their price.

Also, even for picture quality alone I would not say its universally agreed upon that contrast is most important. Brightness is arguably even more important than contrast. And with laser becoming affordable and HDR being an area where that brightness can be put to good use, this is a new area where DLP can grow in the $3k+ price bracket.

Quote:
However, LED video walls destroy even those most expensive DLP projectors in termof image quality and performance if you really want to talk about most expensive
As you know this wouldn't count as a projector anymore.

But from the bit I have read about them they look extremely promising, yes. They seem to have a lot of the advantages of both flatpanel TVs and projectors, and doesn't share most of the disadvantages of each. Probably a long, long, long, long time before it becomes even remotely affordable, though.

Last edited by Ruined; 12-09-2017 at 08:25 AM.
Ruined is online now  
post #19 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 08:35 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 15,174
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4173 Post(s)
Liked: 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
That depends on your definition of "performance." For me, "performance" is *much* more than just contrast. I have been a longtime tech nerd of all different sorts of technologies well beyond home theater, so my definition of "performance" is larger in scope than just black-level & contrast for movies. There are so many factors (including many not related to picture quality) that come into play here that trying to nail it down to just one is kind of hard. I really do see the draw to the JVC/Sonys, believe me, but for my personal performance standards they aren't quite there at their price.

Also, even for picture quality alone I would not say its universally agreed upon that contrast is most important. Brightness is arguably even more important than contrast. And with laser becoming affordable and HDR being an area where that brightness can be put to good use, this is a new area where DLP can grow in the $3k+ price bracket.
Apparently your definition of performance is only includes resolution and brightness. The only thing going for the "faux-k" DLPs is resolution. The HT models in the under $10k range so far not any brighter than the JVC's. They have vastly inferior contrast, visual artifacts from slow sequential color, inability to deliver high bit depth color due to temporal dithering at too slow of a frequency, a small color gamut, etc. If someone could pop out a "faux-k" DLP under $10k tomorrow that was 3000+ lumen, had near JVC dynamic range, no perceptible sequential color artifacts, 100% DCI-P3 color space coverage, and no banding I'd be at the front of line cheering them on even if it isn't true "4k".

Quote:
As you know this wouldn't count as a projector anymore.
And? It's about making a large image high fidelity image. No one with a theater is going to refuse a large high resolution / small pitch LED screen because there's no projector used and they can get >500cd/m^2 from it.
Stereodude is online now  
post #20 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 08:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,792
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2584 Post(s)
Liked: 1223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Apparently your definition of performance is only includes resolution and brightness. The only thing going for the "faux-k" DLPs is resolution.
That is false. There were some hiccups with early 4K UHD XPR models due to immature software, yes. Arguably one could say TI released the hardware with software unfinished (which is actually what happens with most technology these days). And still we haven't seen a grand slam over $3k though the pieces are starting to come together. These temporary setbacks do not doom the class as a whole, and under $3k we have seen many successful models actually outperforming this expensive BenQ ht9050

A lot of the things that some consistently brought up as "permanent" downsides of the chip such as no native 24p, no 3D, etc, in early 2017 were added by TI over the course of the year to the core chipset, and actually were just temporary setbacks due to unfinished software.

Quote:
The HT models in the under $10k range so far not any brighter than the JVC's.
I will note your "HT models" tag here, because as you well know it is just a matter of time before there is a way brighter HT DLP option under $10k. As the Optoma 4K500 is 5000 lumens and well under $10k. The UHZ65 is also extremely bright and under $5k. BenQ LK970 is around $10k and 5000 lumen laser. And at $20k price point there are 4k DPI and Vivitek models with 7500 lumens, cheaper and far brighter than the cheapest 4k lcos laser. New RB laser tech can push that up to 10k-12k lumens as demonstrated at 2017 ISE.

The entire class of XPR DLPs just came out this year and laser is just coming into affordability range. This is an area where DLP has tremendous growth potential, especially as HDR can soak up all that brightness.

Quote:
They have vastly inferior contrast
Optoma UHZ65 has 9300:1 dynamic contrast as measured by Dave Harper when fully calibrated, with no reported significant dynamic contrast artifacts. Arguably this is fine for most people. Laser appears to be more amenable to high multiplier, low artifact dynamic contrast dimming likely due to its fast speed and high durability. If it looks good with dynamic contrast, most people aren't going to care what the native contrast is (btw, proven time and time again with flatpanel TV sales).

Quote:
visual artifacts from slow sequential color
Fully solved already by fast 18x RGB LED / RGB Laser cycling as the Runco Q750i, DPI Cine LED 1000, Vivitek H9090, etc, did a long time ago. Rapid cycling could in time come to solid state xpr projectors as well.

Would likely be fully solvable on the BenQ HT9050 design specifically , actually, if BenQ sticks with the RGB LED design in future iterations. If they transition to laser for its brightness advantage, there will be a temporary period where it will be necessary to have some RBE until RGB laser is more affordable, and buyers should take that into account. Rapid cycling probably wasn't implemented at launch due to the color flash timing for faster than 6x speed not being ready yet for XPR.

Quote:
inability to deliver high bit depth color due to temporal dithering at too slow of a frequency
If by "high bit depth" you mean 12bit, irrelevant as HDR10 is clearly the standard and it is 10-bit which single chip DLP does no problem.

Quote:
a small color gamut
HT9050 was 95%+ DCI-P3. The other aforementioned RGB LEDs cover tremendously more of BT2020 than any JVC/Sony under $10k does. A yellow notch filter like the Epson LS uses can add 95%+ DCI-P3 to blue or red/blue laser projectors with ~15-20% brightness sacrifice. So again, the potential is there and very possible with the right components.

Quote:
etc. If someone could pop out a "faux-k" DLP under $10k tomorrow that was 3000+ lumen, had near JVC dynamic range, no perceptible sequential color artifacts, 100% DCI-P3 color space coverage, and no banding I'd be at the front of line cheering them on even if it isn't true "4k".
And if JVC/Sony came out with a solid state projector under $10k that didn't have the motion issues of JVC or panel reliability issues of Sony then I'd certainly give it a lot of consideration. Or if Epson were able to get a much sharper and brighter image in their LS series, that would be a possibility. I haven't bought a 4K UHD DLP projector yet because I haven't found any that fully meet my requirements. But they seem closer to meeting my requirements than any 4K LCOS projector.

I'll also add I wouldn't be surprised if TI launches a native 4k 0.95" DMD in 2019-2020. It would have same density as 0.66" XPR so very doable, and as 8K XPR pro projectors are coming in 2018 using 1.38" chip, would pave the way for 8K XPR consumer projectors using 0.95" chip.

Quote:
And? It's about making a large image high fidelity image. No one with a theater is going to refuse a large high resolution / small pitch LED screen because there's no projector used and they can get >500cd/m^2 from it.
Okay? I don't see how this is relevant to the argument at hand about projectors.

Last edited by Ruined; 12-09-2017 at 09:35 AM.
Ruined is online now  
post #21 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 10:24 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 15,174
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4173 Post(s)
Liked: 2957
So, basically if you could cherry pick the single best performance aspects from a handful of different DLP projectors (that are otherwise lackluster machines) and put them together in a mythical projector you'd get something that could maybe best the current LCOS offerings from Sony, Epson, or JVC (aside from contrast). Got it. Unfortunately, the fact is no such DLP projector currently exists coming all those aspects and putting all those together in a single machine apparently is impossible or someone would have done it already. It's not like DLP is a new tech and the mid market DLP projectors are generally going backwards in performance aside from resolution, meanwhile LCOS projectors and OLED & direct view LCDs are marching forward in all areas.

PS: Single chip DLP is not 10-bit for 60Hz content. Not even close. Lets do the math. (((1/60)/3)/2^10) = 5.42uS per subfield and that's ignoring that still isn't actually 10-bit color resolution because that's 1024 linear brightness steps per channel, not 1024 gamma corrected brightness steps like required. TI brags that their mirrors can switch up to 10000 times a second. So, that's 100uS vs. 5.42uS. Only ~18.4 times slower than necessary to achieve 10-bit linear color (not the target). So, it is just short of 6-bit linear color which is not 10-bit gamma corrected color no matter how you slice it.

Lets recalculate at 24/1.001Hz to try to toss DLP a lifeline. (((1/(24/1.001))/3)/2^10) = 13.57uS per subfield. The mirrors are still 100uS. So now we're only ~7.3x slower than necessary for 10-bit linear color (not the target). Here you can get just better than 7-bit linear color.
Stereodude is online now  
post #22 of 32 Old 12-09-2017, 07:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Verge2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: arkansas
Posts: 3,324
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 915 Post(s)
Liked: 244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post

But the DMD itself does not determine the absolute contrast, it is just a contributing factor.
I was going to reply to this and say its 90%, but I'm not even sure that's accurate. It seems to me from a theoretical perspective, the higher the CR you are trying to achieve, the higher the % the DMD will factor in.

Like a car with 1200 HP, but a crap transmission that can only deliver 800 HP(lens). At some point even with perfection, the engine has to be better. The optics on some of these projectors are pretty great.. I'm not sure how you can't blame TI.

Ever see an old sharp would hammer these. Inline chips seems the only option, and for the 9050 price, it should freaking have them.
Verge2 is offline  
post #23 of 32 Old 12-10-2017, 06:48 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New England
Posts: 11,345
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 1460
I have always been a fan of DLP. My last three home theater projectors were DLP and I have owned several LCD over the years as well. I got a good deal ($2K) on a UHD 65 recently and had it a total of 24 hours. I don't even think the contrast was as good as sub $800 DLP's I have owned in the past. It was very sharp with UHD Blu-Ray from my Oppo 203. But I knew I was leaving too much on the table in terms of contrast considering that I will have a completely light controlled room with dark walls, ceiling, and floor.

I also game and the input lag was a little higher than I would have liked.

I ended up going with a closeout JVC RS520. My opinion on this but for under $1500 I think the new faux DLP projectors make a lot of sense if you are focused on 4K and sharpness. For more ch over that I think they need to improve contrast to warrant $2K+ pricing.
ack_bk is offline  
post #24 of 32 Old 12-10-2017, 08:13 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 209
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
...

Lets recalculate at 24/1.001Hz to try to toss DLP a lifeline. (((1/(24/1.001))/3)/2^10) = 13.57uS per subfield. The mirrors are still 100uS. So now we're only ~7.3x slower than necessary for 10-bit linear color (not the target). Here you can get just better than 7-bit linear color.
They are at 30khz now per mirror , but binary PWM is an unwinnable race against time. Plus error diffusion and what not .
IMO it doesn't need lifeline but color scrolling plus giving up binary PWM,

give it the same scanning line per line updating of LCD and use comparator at every pixel.
This way there is no racing against time, because it's analog PWM.

Then you get almost ~2/3 light extra out of color scrolling http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...31745/abstract

wouldn't hold my breath, projectors seem to be a dying market entirely.

Last edited by gain3; 12-10-2017 at 08:17 AM.
gain3 is offline  
post #25 of 32 Old 09-15-2018, 01:34 PM
Senior Member
 
mark_k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Was close to replace my stoneage JVC HD1 with this BenQ 9050 until I found this thread. I have to see myelf

Mark K
mark_k is offline  
post #26 of 32 Old 09-15-2018, 10:31 PM
MJ1
Senior Member
 
MJ1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 234
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark_k View Post
Was close to replace my stoneage JVC HD1 with this BenQ 9050 until I found this thread. I have to see myelf
HT9050 is being replaced with HT9060 in Nov that includes HDR, better blacks and 3D. There is a thread in 3000+ forums under x12000h (HT9060). You can read more about it. If you are thinking of getting HT9050, the refurbished model is being sold at bargain prices. See above deal section.
MJ1 is offline  
post #27 of 32 Old 09-16-2018, 05:34 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sage11x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Howell, MI
Posts: 6,269
Mentioned: 176 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2569 Post(s)
Liked: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark_k View Post
Was close to replace my stoneage JVC HD1 with this BenQ 9050 until I found this thread. I have to see myelf


To be fair, not everyone hated it: https://hometheaterhifi.com/reviews/...jector-review/

But the contrast was an obstacle for a lot of people which is understandable considering how much this model originally cost. Honestly, the omission of a dynamic iris at it’s original price point seems like a glaring omission. But, IMO, the real Achilles heel of the 9050 is it’s inability to accept and display HDR. The ansi contrast of the HT9050 is actually quite high at 500:1. Ansi contrast is important for projectors when (attempting) to display HDR material and could have given this projector an edge.

BenQ has developed a replacement for this model as MJ1 linked to above. It seems to address the biggest complaints of it’s predecessor by now including a dynamic iris and actually accepting HDR.

What to do if you find yourself stuck with no hope of rescue:
Consider yourself lucky that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far, which given your present circumstances seems to be more likely, consider yourself lucky that it won't be troubling you much longer...

-- Excerpt from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
sage11x is online now  
post #28 of 32 Old 09-16-2018, 07:23 PM
Senior Member
 
mark_k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Thank you guy. It seem odd me, that being a display giant, BenQ can omit certain essentials for a modern HT projector

Mark K
mark_k is offline  
post #29 of 32 Old 09-17-2018, 02:08 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 11,031
Mentioned: 599 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3761 Post(s)
Liked: 3530
Quote:
Originally Posted by sage11x View Post

projectorreviews also rated it quite nicely - saying it barely missed a year end award because of it's lack of HDR, but it was quite nice to use for sports and blurays and it was the sharpest looking display he'd seen anywhere near the pricepoint. He said the lens optics is where they spent the money and the focus uniformity was excellent.
https://www.projectorreviews.com/ben...jector-review/
Art states the contrast isn't up to the likes of JVC or Epson, but that it still lands into the ultra black projector category in his opinion.


Makes me wonder if S&V got a bad unit?


At any rate when it was $9k MSRP - that's a bit higher standard and more competitive bracket, than the $2400 it is now on the refurb sale about 1 year after launch.
sage11x likes this.

Archaea's 9.8.4 Home Theater Room
(13) JBL CBT 70j-1 | Denon x7200wa | Sherbourn PA 7-350 amplifier | (8) Ultimax 18" sealed subwoofers | (4) iNuke DSP 6000 amplifiers | (4) MB Quart 12" subwoofers mounted direct mounted to Berkline theater chairs BOSS style | Epson 5040UB Projector | Jamestown 144" acoustic transparent 2.35:1 screen w/ Seymour XD fabric

Last edited by Archaea; 09-17-2018 at 02:49 PM.
Archaea is online now  
post #30 of 32 Old 09-28-2018, 06:47 AM
Member
 
kaldek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 55
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I would like to add that I recently purchased one of these (X12000) and the price was recently halved locally to under $5000 AUD. No evidence of a firmware upgrade beyond v1.0.0. It replaced a Sanyo PLV-Z3000 3LCD 1080p projector and the image clarity on the X12000 is miles above the old unit.

Would love to know how I can get a newer firmware. Higher speed LED pulsing would be nice as I can see DLP rainbow artefacts on some material, most notably The Expanse Blu-Ray where there are a lot of scenes that are almost black and white in their colour space.
kaldek is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Projectors - Under $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