Originally Posted by Steve Bruzonsky
Using the Radiance Pro (no anamorphic lens), my Sony VW5000 picture is sharpest scaling to 3840, not 4096. Easily discrenable. If you use the Paladin lens, then you will need to scale to 4096 and I assume would lose sharpness, as the ISCO IIIL (I have one I don't use anymore) will pass through the 3840 but not the 4096 pixels! And all consumer video sources are 3840, not 4096!
This is the case indeed . Content delivered to home is in fact 3840 not 4096. To take advantage of the full 17:9 panel you need to scale 3840 to 4096 . I also used my Lumagen to do this scaling when I had the Paladin DCR in place, I didn't really look closely at the image as the DCR was removed shortly thereafter . This is a good point to consider moving forward at there really is not content 17:9 that fits the panel without requiring some kind of scaling away from one to one . Before I make up my mind which lens to retain , I should have a closer look at the image when scaled , see if it lowers resolution or introduces artifacts that may be unacceptable . Then again there are always compromises. Even when I don't use the anamorphic and zoom( crop the 17:9 image) to fill a 2.40:1 screen image I can see the pixels increase, the resolution decrease. Which is the lesser of the two evils becomes a choice we all have to rationalize and accept.
Most of us make some kind of compromise with our projectors, screens, even the room characteristics , very few are set up for absolute best image . Best image from many projectors are achieved using a long throw for best contrast, short throw achieves the brightest image for a larger screen . We use higher gain screen materials and then there are AT screens with perforations , another compromise . Trick is to minimize the compromises, the lower end projectors often need a lot of help to make up deficiencies . The VW5000 is the only projector with the reserve lumens to allow a long throw without suffering losses , the long throw zoom also uses a much smaller portion of the lens surface area , this benefits a precision lens that shorter throw does not realize fully . If we all wanted the best image possible , screen sizes would drop in size dramatically, we would only use a matte white unity gain material and so on . Most also forget the Paladin DCR is a plastic lens. All those trying to discredit the plastic lens used in the VW885 and other 4K models forget that increased detail and resolution they have ever seen is achieved with a plastic element ( Paladin DCR) up front, in fact it is by far the biggest one .
The Paladin DCR is an excellent product, I have owned and used every last one of their products . The latest Paladin DCR , probably their best to date and most accurate , suffers less negative effects of any previous glass lens , it also just happens to be plastic . There are a lot of all glass lens projectors with this plastic element up front, their owners are bragging about the increased light and resolution, some of the same individuals trying to discredit the single plastic element used in the VW885 . Imagine that.