Originally Posted by RadiantHT
"Especially now that HDR10 is the standard. Which is why I put SO much emphasis on HDR tone mapping in my review.
It’s not going to be that high. My eyeball guesstimate when comparing head to head with an HT2050A is native contrast will fall just behind the best 1080p models but the addition of HDR, the Dynamic Black with iris, and the awesome color volume of the HT3550 pushes it’s dynamic contrast or perceived contrast well beyond what that model is capable of.
Everyone needs to remember that the Epson 4010, a projector praised for it’s contrast/blacks, measures the same native contrast as an HT2050A"
So that BenQ model at 1000:1 native contrast falls right back behind a Sony 45ES at 7,000:1?Numerous people have praised the Epson 4010 for its glorious blacks? None of those statements are true.
Where is the untrue statement? Everything up there is true.
The Ht2050A measures around 1300:1 native. 2000:1 with lamp dimming. The only instrumented test of the HT3550 so far that I’ve seen claimed 800-1000:1 native and between 2000 and 3000:1 with the iris.
So my statement was spot on. In fact, humble brag time, I wrote that well before any of the tests were made so I’m going to go ahead and take credit for my eyes working well there.
As for the Epson. Ever heard of Secrets of HT and HiFi?
“I missed some detail in the darker areas though. That motivated me to try the different HDR dynamic range settings. Auto is the default, but I quickly found that Auto Bright was the better choice. Detail suddenly appeared without increasing the black levels. The 4010 won’t quite plumb the inky depths like a JVC LCoS display but it comes pretty close for a third the cost.”
“It seems that one no longer must spend $5000 or more to get great HDR, rich color, and a razor-sharp image. Budget DLPs win the clarity contest with their single chip designs and lightning-fast DMD devices. But contrast is still king and that is where Epson has no competition in this price class.”
I like that part at the end— price class— mmm context is a wonderful thing.
Or how about projectorcentral?
“Though the 4000's overall contrast and black level is highly satisfying and never takes the viewer out of the scene with apparent deficiencies, direct comparisons with the Epson Home Cinema 5040UB step-up model, with rated contrast five times higher than the 4010's, did reveal the limit of its black floor. Still, it fared surprisingly well against a projector that carries a $500 premium. Our shoot-out report will be issued separately.”
Sound and Vision?
“AT A GLANCE
Good brightness and contrast
Blacks could be better
High fan noise with picture optimized for HDR”
Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...mDdjz3FhY5u.99
What about the older 4000 that the 4010 is based on? RHT actually discussed how it compared to the much higher contrast Sony...
“After testing the Epson HC4000 extensively, it is easy to give it a recommendation to those after a projector for their home. It looks fantastic, it offers flexibility in setup and installation, and it stays nice and quiet while watching a movie. It is ready for the future with HDR and WCG support, even if you haven’t moved to that point yet but you likely will before you know it.
I only add two caveats to my recommendation. If you only watch 1080p content and never want to upgrade, the Sony VPL-HW45ES offers better blacks and slightly better motion quality for about the same price. It lacks all of the easy setup features like a motorized lens, it can’t accept 4K content and doesn’t do HDR or WCG, but it does look a little bit better with 1080p. Two years ago I’d have probably picked the Sony, but with more content coming out in HDR and WCG now, I would get the Epson.”
That sounds pretty far from “abysmal” performance to me.