AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello everyone, I am faced with dilemmas similar to

those you have faced prior to taking the 2:35 plunge.


I currently run a Sony HS10 through my HTPC on a 118â€

by 64†16:9 screen. The setup is beautiful, however,

for months I have sat on the 2:35 fence. Here’s why.


1) Price – the costs of a decent lens were $500 to

$1000 USD. What particularly caught my interest was

the H series lenses by Prismasonic, however, the cost

of 750 Euros deterred me

2) Projector type – while the Sony HS10 is a decent

projector, I am not sure that it is an ideal candidate

for an anamorphic lens, in particular, because its own

lens is recessed about 2†into the projector. Right

off the bat, I found out that the H series Prismasonic

would not work

3) Future use – if I upgrade my projector in the

future, can I use the lens I buy today?

4) Visual impact – I was actually inline to buy a

Panamorph during the Avsforum PowerBuy, however, when

I heard of all the problems I cancelled my order right

away.


Believe me, I understand how grand a native 2:35

screen will be, but until I get over these issues I

will not buy a lens.


Now, if I decide to go with the clearance Panamorph

P752, how good of a lens is it? Will there be any pin

cushioning or distortion? Also, would I be able to use

this lens on future projectors?


Also, if I do decide to go with the H series

Prismasonic, what is the projector that will give me

the best bang for my buck? I don’t want to buy a Sony

Q, but I do want something decent.


Please help me out with my questions everyone – I know

how knowledgeable everyone is. I will cross-post this

message on the Prismasonic message board and on

avsforums.


Thank you, in advance, for all your help. Noel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,093 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noel Sequeira
Now, if I decide to go with the clearance Panamorph

P752, how good of a lens is it? Will there be any pin

cushioning or distortion? Also, would I be able to use

this lens on future projectors?
The P752 has a mild amount of pincushioning, the degree of which will be affected by your projector's throw distance (shorter throw = more distortion). If you use screen masking with hard straight edges, this will also make the effect more noticeable when the image doesn't perfectly line up. I think the lens is a great value for the money and don't find the negative side effects too distracting, but you may spend a lot of time setting it up at first to find the right compromise position that minimizes distortion without cropping off parts of the image.


The P752 is a universal lens. It can be used with just about any projector. It does not actually attach to the projector; it sits in front of the light path.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,212 Posts
The P752 is the best bang for buck lens at the moment. You cant go wrong with the price. The Prismasonics are also great from what I hear. The ISCO's are better still. The prices do jump however as you go up.


As Josh said the 752 is the most universal of the current crop of lenses. It has a large aperture.


Whichever lens you go for you can be assured that it's a good investment. Definately can be used for future projectors.


Basically once you experience 2.35 you wont go back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,268 Posts
I have an HS10 and a 2.35:1 setup, I just use the power zoom and an HTPC to relocate the picture. No, I don't use the full panel when zooming to the 2.35 size, but I really only notice the quality degradation on bad DVDs. And since my viewing is now 80% HD sources, that's not as big of a problem. The great thing is the cost, which was nothing. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,723 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Thank you for the insightful comments. Will zooming degrate the picture quality? I will soon be moving my projector into a new house (unfinished basement), and I figure that if I just move the projector further away from the wall, I can achieve a higher quality picture than one with the zoom lens. Is this true?


Can someone please explain how one gains 33% resolution? I figure that if you are watching a 16:9 movie on your native 16:9 projector without an anamorphic lens, the resolution will be the same as a 2:35 movie on a 16:9 projector (without an anamorphic lens). Basically all you are doing is blocking off the black bars. Am I not correct? I, like Craig Peer said earlier, would not like trading sharpness and focus for resolution that is not encoded in the native film print.


Can someone please explain the gain in resolution?


Thanks. Noel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
338 Posts
As I understand it, when you watch 235:1 movies on a 16:9 projector, some of the pixels your projector delivers are painting the black bars on the top and bottom of the screen. If you just zoom the picture bigger, then your projector is still using some of it's pixels to paint black bars that are now no longer visible, but you do have the 235:1 format now visible if you have a 235:1 screen, albeit less bright and with compromised resolution, because the pixels being used by the projector to paint the picture are stretched over a bigger area, so you have fewer pixels per inch on the screen.


When you use an anamorphic lens you first alter the image displayed by the projector to only display the picture portion of the frame excluding the black bars. What results is a distorted picture. The lens removes the distortion and you end up with a 2.35:1 picture being painted by all the pixels in your projector. It does not increase the source resolution, but it increases the number of projector pixels painting the resulting image on the screen.


Some here feel the loss of brightness and resolution resulting from combination of the zoom expansion of the picture and masking the black bars is acceptable given the cost of the lens to do it otherwise, others feel the lens softens the picture. Others disagree, and for them the additional cost of the lens is the best choice, and for them it is just a question of which is the best lens for them.


Others think it's best to just watch 2.35:1 with black bars. Whatever floats your boat.


Allen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,096 Posts
Quote:
As I understand it, when you watch 235:1 movies on a 16:9 projector, some of the pixels your projector delivers are painting the black bars on the top and bottom of the screen. If you just zoom the picture bigger, then your projector is still using some of it's pixels to paint black bars that are now no longer visible, but you do have the 235:1 format now visible if you have a 235:1 screen, albeit less bright and with compromised resolution, because the pixels being used by the projector to paint the picture are stretched over a bigger area, so you have fewer pixels per inch on the screen.
All true Allen. The thing is, as much as I wanted to like anamorphic lenses ( I've owned 2 ), they do introduce negative aspects to the picture that in my mind outweigh the increased resolution and brightness. But I feel I still get 95% of the benefit just by having a dedicated 2.35:1 screen ( dedicated for 2.35:1 movies, that is ), with only 5% of the hassle ( zooming for 2.35:1 and 1.78:1 screens )!!! The picture with a H79 and an iScan HD scaler, plus a SDI modded RP56 dvd player is first rate without the lens. There isn't anything to complain about now!!


BUT, if you can pony up 3.5K for an Isco lens, it might be different!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,399 Posts
FYI, a Panamorph has zero pincushion. Rather than pincusion, the distortion they exhibit is barrel roll, which is where the sides bow out, rather than the top and bottom bowing in like pincusioning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,093 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Poindexter
FYI, a Panamorph has zero pincushion. Rather than pincusion, the distortion they exhibit is barrel roll, which is where the sides bow out, rather than the top and bottom bowing in like pincusioning.
Hmmm... I definitely get pincushioning on my P752, but no barrel roll.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,268 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer
No lens can help a crappy dvd - a bad dvd looks bad no matter what!
True, but some of the marginal ones look OK on my 1.78 size screen but terrible when zoomed out. "The Last Emperor" comes to mind...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,096 Posts
Those are the first DVD's to b replaced with BR or HD - DVD's , eh?? I've watched dozens of movies " zoomed out " on my 2.35:1 screen, and if they look good on the 1.78:1 screen, they look better on the 2.35:1 screen. If they suck, they suck at any size ( anyone want a copy of Bladerunner or Tombstone - they both suck picture wise at any size - might make good targets though - " pull " )!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,958 Posts
My lens is DIY so I accept that there has to be limitations to what it can do verses a commercial version. The one problem I find, and I'm sure this is a mounting thing only, is a blue line (think a beautiful bright electric blue) that appears mid way up at the right side. I say a mounting issue, because if I get the tilt right, I can make it go away.


My new mount allows the lens to be swiveled left to right, slid left to right and or front to back and moved up and down as well as titled.


The strange part is that it (the blue line) is dependent on what is on screen, IE something dark, and it is not visible, but add some light to the scene and it might appear from anything as small a one inch blue dash to as long as one and half feet. It is a very thin line, one a few scan lines high. I am thinking maybe a reflection through the prisms but it is not there all the time.


Does any else had (or have) this or a similar issue.


Mark
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,212 Posts
Is it internal reflections?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,958 Posts
Well I'm not sure. I spent about half an hour having another play, and tonight whilst watching a film, did not see it once. So maybe I have got the alignment right finally...


Mark
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top