AVS Forum banner

Panamorph DCR Paladin Owners Thread

322K views 3K replies 236 participants last post by  LouM5 
#1 · (Edited)
UPDATE: November 29, 2020
Panamorph has now added some “direct attach” DCR lens models under the flagship Paladin DCR and updated their website so Shawn has asked me to guide people to the Panamorph home page instead of the earlier links that are no longer active. Since these new lenses are just smaller, customized versions of the Paladin DCR please feel free to add to the discussion here.

Key distinctions between the direct attach DCR lenses and the Paladin DCR (per Panamorph):
  1. Direct attach DCR lenses should be used with a 2.4:1 screen. Because these lenses fit directly into the projector lens opening there is very little adjustability for the older 2.35:1 format (as is possible with the Paladin DCR). If used with a 2.35:1 screen then 2.4:1 movies will overscan the screen border on both left and right sides by about 1% of screen width each. This can be absorbed by a typical 3”+ screen border or masked with projector blanking if available but will represent that much of the content being cut off on a 2.35:1 screen.
  2. Direct attach DCR lenses are intended as a customized conversion lens for specific projector models and are not intended to be modified or retrofitted for other models. The much larger size and exterior mounting of the Paladin DCR means that it will likely work with a future 17:9 projector if a suitable new mounting system for projector becomes available.

UPDATE: January 5, 2019

Well it has been almost a year since my first posting (below) and this owner’s thread has grown to 40,000 views (so far) so I thought I’d update. As a summary of my own experience, with a serious amount of money invested in my theater – the DCR is very high in my component list and has a huge return on investment. Enough said there. You can read my findings and those of many others in the hundreds (so far) of posts below. More significantly - just a year ago there were only two projector models with the internal modes to work with the Paladin DCR lens. Now it seems that for 2019 every true 4K home theater projector from Sony and JVC have those DCR modes. I think that says a lot, so more in line with other AVS owner’s threads I’ll include links to the relevant Panamorph info …


Paladin DCR compatibility with Sony 4K/4096 projectors
Paladin DCR compatibility with JVC 4K/4096 projectors
Panamorph Cinema Design Guide
And especially if an anamorphic home theater may be unfamiliar to you Panamorph has a blog series on the basics of anamorphic home cinema.
- Ash


Thanks to Mark at AVS and Shawn Kelly from Panamorph - I placed the order for my DCR A Lens (before the price doubles on Monday the 15th).
I have been a using the ISCO 3 lens with Cineslide for years with my Sony Qualia and then my Sim 2 Lumis Host... so I am no stranger to the A Lens.
I am super excited about getting this lens and installing it very soon - Shawn Kelly gave more confidence on the product by offering a return with 20% restocking fee for the first 30 days.
Selling products to us AVS Nerds (and offering restocking fee return) is not for the faint of the heart as we measure - get calibrators to measure - analyze - yada yada...
My motivation to get this A Lens is:
1. Achieve 38 to 40% brightness (advertised) - I will be using a Sekonic Meter to measure this after install.
2. Using all 4K pixels.
3. AR Management without Zooming from Sony Menu - I don't have a outboard processor like Lumagen.
4. Ease of install - the mount and the way it will adapt to my Hush Box (which is packed with he ES5000.
5. I keep hearing how the ISCO lens is so heavy etc (and I know first hand because I had one for years) but I love the fact that this A Lens is light in weight - time moves and so does technology - you don't have to have a 20 pound glass to get a good image IMHO.
6. Sony 5000 has a built in Anamorphic Mode - Cool...
7. It looks bad ass...
If I come up with more reasons I sill post later..
Ash
 
See less See more
#4 ·
When you setup the lens bring up the zone convergence screen ( the one with small squares all across the screen ) . It gives a decent idea of pincushioning and geometric distortion . I have my setup so that you can see very slight pincushioning one the very top and bottom lines and that too a difference of less than one inch from the middle to the corner of the 16 ft wide screen . Try to setup sobthat the lines are as straight as possible from side to side and top to bottom . Of course there will be some distortion but try to find the setup with minimum of it
 
#9 ·
I also have one on order, my only thought is how will Christopher Nolan films work with aspect ratio switching in his films. I may need to plan to remove use of the lens on films that switch between wide and IMAX frames.
 
#10 ·
I assume it’s like my current 1080p set up with A-lens. You don’t notice it. The top and bottom are slightly cropped with IMAX material and unless it’s a real close up face shot it’s seamless. The face shots cut off the top of their heads which can be annoying.

I’ve got the DCR on order with my 885. Agree can’t wait. The wife ok’d a major theater upgrade. Now I’m consumed with the planning. Hoping to light up a 16ft screen with the 885 and A-lens and keep HDR decent?
 
#13 ·
Thanks to Mark at AVS and Shawn Kelly from Panamorph - I placed the order for my DCR A Lens (before the price doubles on Monday the 15th).
I have been a using the ISCO 3 lens with Cineslide for years with my Sony Qualia and then my Sim 2 Lumis Host... so I am no stranger to the A Lens.
I am super excited about getting this lens and installing it very soon - Shawn Kelly gave more confidence on the product by offering a return with 20% restocking fee for the first 30 days.
Selling products to us AVS Nerds (and offering restocking fee return) is not for the faint of the heart as we measure - get calibrators to measure - analyze - yada yada...
My motivation to get this A Lens is:
1. Achieve 38 to 40% brightness (advertised) - I will be using a Sekonic Meter to measure this after install.
2. Using all 4K pixels.
3. AR Management without Zooming from Sony Menu - I don't have a outboard processor like Lumagen.
4. Ease of install - the mount and the way it will adapt to my Hush Box (which is packed with he ES5000.
5. I keep hearing how the ISCO lens is so heavy etc (and I know first hand because I had one for years) but I love the fact that this A Lens is light in weight - time moves and so does technology - you don't have to have a 20 pound glass to get a good image IMHO.
6. Sony 5000 has a built in Anamorphic Mode - Cool...
7. It looks bad ass...
If I come up with more reasons I sill post later..
Ash
Thanks for starting this thread Ash!

I have ordered as well, can’t wait to receive it!

Best,

Kostas
 
#15 ·
Panamorph DCR Palladin Owners Thread

*Mori*; said:
How many nits you are exspecting to have on your screen with a dual stack ?

Around 180 nit (52fL) to 220 nit (64fL) depending on if I use ST100 or ST130 fabric.

Currently I use ST130 with my single 5000ES, but will probably change this to ST100 for the stack.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
#17 ·
Received a very smart looking XM2 Mount (premium feel) from Panamorph today - the kit contains detailed instructions and nifty Stanley Screw driver with bits and glow in the dark cover :)
My handyman is working on a contraption to install the mount in the hush box.
Shawn has been like... Johnny On the Spot with all my nagging questions to prepare for the mount to be installed - he is passionate about what Panamorph is all about ... that I can tell.
 
#19 ·
I recorded my light output readings with the current setup without the A Lens.
Methodology used is simple - used 1080P signal from a calibration disc on my Kaleidescape 100% IRE window. Used a Preset which is calibrated for Rec 709 for watching 2:40 Content with 100 laser setting..the ES 5000 HDMI 2 (I use HDMI 2 for 1080P sources switching through the Trinnov and HDMI 1 for UHD 4K).

Measurements came as follows:
Preset User 1 - 24 Jan 2018
16:9 - 30 FTL
2:40 - 21

The 2:40 FTL measured using my Sekonic light meter were same as what my calibrator measured using his super duper equipment - so it seems my light meter is not too shabby.

All I will do is once I install the DCR Lens is that I will measure the same preset (User 1) with same 100% IRE Window and use 2:40 and also 16:9 with Squeeze just to see on 16:9 if I use the squeeze to maintain the right AR what I get - that should give me the compare..

Let me know If I am going in the right direction.

With regards to distortion - my calibrator told me that in the current setup he did not see any distortion (I have a picture of this pattern in my setup) - but since I am more interested in light output that will be my first goal.
 
#23 · (Edited)
My Paladin DCR impressions.

In summary, I’m happy to say this is a home run for me.

First – the details most have been asking for (FWIW I have a Sony VPL-VW5000ES and about a 1.8:1 throw ratio from around 26 feet):

1. Light output – 23% gain in 1.24x Anamorphic V Stretch over the 2:35:1 Zoom projector mode prior to A Lens - my process is simple – I chose a 100% IRE 1080p slide and used a Rec 709 calibration preset and used the same slide to compare. This was a bit of a disappointment as I was expecting a 38% bump in brightness which is not the case.

2. Distortion – what distortion? There’s so little bowing at the edges that I can call it negligible. Will post Sony internal pattern.

3. Chromatic aberration – I am tempted to say none – I see some red fringing when I am closer than 2 feet from the Sony Panel Alignment Zone pattern – but I am sure a little bit was there even before I installed the A Lens. I am pretty sure I cannot catch it on my camera if I stand more than two feet from the screen. Will post Sony internal pattern.

4. Sharpness – As soon as the A Lens covered the Sony internal green pattern - the lines became clean and sharp – way better than without A lens – the menu system is not fuzzy anymore in 2:40 and looks very sharp. I don’t know if it is perception or what but there is no reduction in sharpness when watching a movie after the lens is installed – I think contrary to what people say, sharpness has improved quite a bit. At some point I will have my calibrator review the A Lens setup and will report back.

5. Contrast – I didn’t measure. Honestly I couldn’t see any visual change in black level at all so I didn’t go through the testing. If there is a change then the increase in overall “pop” overpowers it. As I have stated earlier all movies are mastered differently and it depends on the transfer how a picture looks so if ANSI has suffered by say 2% you cant tell for which movie unless you plan to watch the same movie over and over again and compare.

6. Installation - The install was a breeze even for a guy like me who needs a handyman to hang a picture on the wall. Followed the measure twice and cut once principle – the lens was level, no roll or yaw – about 1.3 degree of pitch that was corrected by the lens tilt adjustment. I was done in 30 minutes.


Second – experiences:

Last night we watched the movie UP in 1080P (using Kaleidescape) to celebrate a English Cream Golden Retriever joining our family - in 16:9 using V Squeeze to get the correct AR – calibration used was REC 709 – 100 Laser (although you lose light output when viewing 16:9 with the A Lens – since the 16:9 was way too bright prior so all I did was to increase the light output). The picture looked Glorious – I cannot explain what magic this lens was doing that the picture rivaled many 4Kransfers – very sharp and colors popped.

Watched bits of Guardian of the Galaxy – fireworks funeral scene – opening song/fight/Groot dance scene – 23% is a bump in brightness is enough that on my 14 foot wide Snomatte 2:40 AT screen it made all the difference when watching in full REC 2020 HDR with Contrast Slider at 70. The Rec 2020 image is now very watchable unlike before when I was only watching Colorspace 2 calibration. Going forward I can choose Rec 2020 calibration or Colorspace 2 calibration on UHD 4K HDR Content depending the on the movie transfer whereas before I could only watch Colorspace 2.

Needless to say that Colorspace 2 HDR Lite calibration picture is very very bright and looks awesome even in a movie like Revenant.

I watched a bit of ‘Stranger Things’ on Netflix HDR10 in V Stretch so it filled the screen (AR for this is 2:0) – filling up the entire 2:40 screen was a treat.

I have not watched the Nolan movies yet with the A Lens but it will be nice NOT to have a AR headache now that the A Lens is in place ...

3D mutant Ninja: 2:40 just pops now - 3D is looking very very good (off course in Rec 709).

Shawn’s service has been impeccable – he worked with me in advance to support my install which is upside down and shipped everything earlier than expected - answered my questions until late night on the day of install.

And – It does look ‘Bad Ass’ – see pictures.

As a final thought, my goal was to significantly increase the brightness of my movies, which I just did and I love the convenience of the A Lens. But I’ve also heard over the years that an A lens comes with a trade-off of softening the image – either from the lens itself or from the anamorphic upconversion process. I can honestly say that this can’t be farther from the truth. Maybe it’s just the result of that higher brightness – I’m not sure. But in my situation it was very obvious that adding a couple million more pixels processed by my Sony and sent through the Paladin DCR definitely increased the visual clarity and detail of everything I watched. Maybe anamorphic lenses and processing have finally come into their own.

Now - since I love the DCR - I may be biased so I will let my calibrator comments once he is here late February as I know he will give me his candid opinion .... and he told me not to get any A Lens... so he will be critical I am sure.

And lets see what other users say as the lenses start getting delivered.
 
#24 ·
Home run? More like a Grand Slam! Congrats!!!@@@

As your increase in light output is 23+%, it seems the added sharpness is not only due to some increased fl but also due to the increased pixel count/density. Interesting.

I know you love your Sony UDP-X1000 4k blu ray player. Now that Oppo has just posted beta firmware on their site for your Oppo UDP-203 (if you still have it), you have to try this and see if this, vs the Sony player, can make your HDR picture as good or better! (As well as perhaps the Lumagen Radiance Pro down the line, as Art states that even with his stacked VW5000s he still uses the Radiance Pro's tone mapping and finds it necessary for best HDR picture quality).
 
#26 ·
@Ash Sharma, maybe I missed it but can you clarify a few things. I was trying to do the math on the light output/loss/gain but I might have a few assumptions incorrect.

1. Is the Palladin a horizontal expansion or vertical compression lens? I thought Panamorph only did HE lenses.

2. The initial FtL measurements:
A. Did I calculate that right where you have about 1,817 Lumens coming from the Sony 5KES?
B. Were with no lens, 16:9 normally filling the screen and then you zoomed out to get a 2.40:1 image, correct?
 
#27 ·
@ash sharma, maybe i missed it but can you clarify a few things. I was trying to do the math on the light output/loss/gain but i might have a few assumptions incorrect.

1. Is the palladin a horizontal expansion or vertical compression lens? I thought panamorph only did he lenses.

2. The initial ftl measurements:
A. Did i calculate that right where you have about 1,817 lumens coming from the sony 5kes?

b. Were with no lens, 16:9 normally filling the screen and then you zoomed out to get a 2.40:1 image, correct?
Vertical compression.

Not sure how THE LUMENS was calculated I am using a Sekonic light meter to measure FTL.

You are correct zoomed and shifted to display 2:40 picture measured the ftl without the dcr and then placed the dcr used v stretch and made a measurement and gained 22% - 23% in ftl.

In 16:9 the ftl were lower after using the dcr lens - using the v squeeze (same as 2:40) so in effect lost brightness in 16:9
 
#38 · (Edited)
Before I installed the DCR - for 2:40 (which is what I mostly watch) - the wasted pixels were on top and bottom of the screen - my screen stage is a black hole but my room is all kinds of colors and the soffit above and below is painted in gold and blue (See picture below) - this light would spill on the soffit and cause all kinds of havoc on my picture (I am guessing ANSI??) ...
With the DCR Palladin the picture is perfectly projected on my screen area only with very slight spill which is on my screen velvet and thus vanishing - this is giving a big boost of picture quality to my eyes...


 
#39 ·
I think Sony's A lens menu options work the same whether it's VC or HE - with HE the 16:9 image in the middle of the screen has black bars above and below the scope image and the HE lens expands the width, The Sony will vertically stretch the image to remove the black bars and restore the geometry.

With a VC lens, you zoom the image to fit the width on the screen and the scope image fills the 2.40 screen, with black bars above and below the screen. When you add the VC lens, you compress the image and bring the black bars onto the screen and the image is now too thin, just like it was on with the HE lens. Using the Sony to vertically stretch the image to remove the black bars gives the same result as with the HE lens.

I'm not sure how the 16:9 sideways 'squish' would work if you keep the lens in place and use that to scale 16:9 movies to fit CIH without removing the lens, but I've a feeling it will work just the same. I prefer that method over removing an A lens for 16:9 as it keeps the pixel density and fL levels the same for both formats, and don't miss the loss of res that it entails. If most of your viewing is BD, you'll only be losing res for UHD 16:9 movies, so it's only going to be a very small amount of movies overall.
 
#40 ·
Correct. It is also why a VC lens requires a longer throw and can have less pincushion. With HE lens, you are required to fill the height, with VC you are required to fill the width.
 
#41 ·
Wow, thanks very much Ash for the many kind words. Seeing your remarks was a great way to start a week! :)

Some general comments and answers to questions:

Pre-order Shipments: All pre-order units are still scheduled to ship no later than this Wednesday. FedEx will email tracking to the email address used for each order once it’s in their system.

Brightness Enhancement: 38% brightness enhancement should be achieved compared to zooming up a 3840 letterbox image. This includes a factor of about 1.14 from upconversion to 4096 multiplied by a factor of about 1.22- 1.23 or so from the anamorphic process. If you start with 4096 due to the projector already having that mode (ie in Ash’s case he started from “2.35:1 Zoom” at 4096 wide in the Sony) then only the anamorphic enhancement factor will apply (1.25x minus transmission losses).

Horizontal Expansion (Mani): The full width of the 4096 image is all produced by the projector zoom lens itself. That’s part of the setup – first zoom the image out to fill the width. This of course makes the height of the projector image scan onto the wall above and below the screen but then the Paladin vertically compresses this all down to fit into the screen.

Increased Clarity: Ultimately this has always been the goal of anamorphic theater beyond the brightness enhancement but is completely dependent on the maintained clarity through the lens and the quality of upconversion processing. A deficiency in either can compromise the benefits but while we’re proud of the clarity the Paladin provides we’re actually pretty excited about how the algorithms (and processing horsepower) are evolving to take advantage of the extra 2.5+ million pixels (from 3840 letterbox). It is a complex blend of art and science to take full advantage of those pixels but the fact is that they are now there and now provide at least the potential for that much more detail whether real or artificially generated or some combination thereof. Kudos to Sony. It was seeing the processing on the new VPL-VW885ES that inspired the creation of the DCR lens.
 
#43 ·
Wow, thanks very much Ash for the many kind words. Seeing your remarks was a great way to start a week!


Some general comments and answers to questions:

Pre-order Shipments: All pre-order units are still scheduled to ship no later than this Wednesday. FedEx will email tracking to the email address used for each order once it?s in their system.

Brightness Enhancement: 38% brightness enhancement should be achieved compared to zooming up a 3840 letterbox image. This includes a factor of about 1.14 from upconversion to 4096 multiplied by a factor of about 1.22- 1.23 or so from the anamorphic process. If you start with 4096 due to the projector already having that mode (ie in Ash?s case he started from ?2.35:1 Zoom? at 4096 wide in the Sony) then only the anamorphic enhancement factor will apply (1.25x minus transmission losses).

Horizontal Expansion (Mani): The full width of the 4096 image is all produced by the projector zoom lens itself. That?s part of the setup ? first zoom the image out to fill the width. This of course makes the height of the projector image scan onto the wall above and below the screen but then the Paladin vertically compresses this all down to fit into the screen.

Increased Clarity: Ultimately this has always been the goal of anamorphic theater beyond the brightness enhancement but is completely dependent on the maintained clarity through the lens and the quality of upconversion processing. A deficiency in either can compromise the benefits but while we?re proud of the clarity the Paladin provides we?re actually pretty excited about how the algorithms (and processing horsepower) are evolving to take advantage of the extra 2.5+ million pixels (from 3840 letterbox). It is a complex blend of art and science to take full advantage of those pixels but the fact is that they are now there and now provide at least the potential for that much more detail whether real or artificially generated or some combination thereof. Kudos to Sony. It was seeing the processing on the new VPL-VW885ES that inspired the creation of the DCR lens.
Thanks .... . I was not aware of the zooming part as setup . Makes sense now
 
#44 ·
Just a note on Ash's distortion and chromatic aberration observations. Both these are dependent on throw ratio. At 1.8:1 they are indeed very difficult to see even on test patterns but down to a throw ratio of 1.4:1 they will increase slightly. At 1.4:1 throw ratio the chromatic aberration (ie color separation) on a test pattern can be seen at the top and bottom of the image from about 2/3 screen width from the screen. It is still very sharp though and naturally at normal viewing distances it's invisible but panel alignment is an option to totally eliminate it at closer inspection. The residual edge distortion (and yes, it is barrel shaped) at the minimum 1.4:1 ratio can require a border up to about 0.005 times the screen diagonal to fully mask. It's still very difficult to see in actual images once masked by the screen border but especially if you're watching 16:9 with black bars left and right without masking you may want to use the advanced Sony software for dialing out the distortion. Again, the higher the throw ratio the less visual these things are even in test patterns and most people don't bother with the fine tuning at any throw ratio, but the options are there if desired.
 
#46 ·
VC provides more light output than HE and is one of the reasons we've developed the Paladins over the past few years. For the same screen size and throw distance VC means you zoom out a lot more with the projector zoom lens so the projector itself puts out more light - around 10% more than HE. The other reason is that VC with integrated astigmatism correction provides much higher sharpness than HE to a large degree because the image is angularly smaller in the vertical vs. horizontal direction.
 
#59 ·
For the same screen size and throw distance VC means you zoom out a lot more with the projector zoom lens so the projector itself puts out more light - around 10% more than HE.
I'm curious about this comment. I may be remembering incorrectly, but every projector calculator I've tried for various projectors, shows the opposite is true. Namely, that you'd get the most lumens out of a projector, at any given size at its maximum zoom. Meaning as close to the screen as possible and projecting the biggest image at that distance that it can. Is that not correct?

If so, then even if a VC lens is better than an HE lens in terms of light restoration for Scope content on a 16:9 projector, you are going to lose out on some lumens vs an HE lens since you'd always use max zoom on that type of lens.

I always assumed that a VC lens would be perfect for a projector whose throw ratio would place it at the precise distance from the screen, such that for your screen size, you are at max zoom. That a lot of variables to consider, but what I calculated at my home is that I'd need a 1.6 throw ratio projector or thereabouts with max zoom.
 
#48 ·
Was looking forward to my shipped DCR for delivery today after a week long travel, got home and missed FedEx by 2 mins (sign on door), will be on travel tomorrow and won't be able to manually pick mine up until Monday sometime..

Pissed...
 
Top