[ddnathan]

I have Mitsubishi HC5500 and plans to apply anamorphic lens, but I noticed that the HC5500's lens is significantly recessed and even worse HC5500 has maximum throw ratio is 1.74. Accordingly it is very hard to find right anamorphic lens to securely house the light path of my HC5500.


My measurement (and calculation) is as follows:


With minimum zoom (i.e., maximum throw ratio of 1.74), right at the end of PJ lens housing the image width is approximately 5.8cm (2.3") and at a distance from 15cm(5.9") away from the PJ lens housing, the image width is approximately 14.4cm (5.7") and when 8.5" (21.6cm) away, the width is 7.16"(18.2cm).


From my measurement the formula is as follows:


y (cm) = Image width from x (cm) distance off the lens housing


y= (x/353 * 202)+5.8


Is there anyone who successfully installed and enjoyed anamorphic lens with HC5500 or any projector with similarly recessed lens? Or, Should I have to change HC5500 for one with no or minimum recessed lens? Please help!! Thank you.

 

[bmwracer3]

I am using a Cavx MkII lens with my HC6500, which I believe has the exact same body as your PJ. So far, I think it looks very good with real world material, however on test material, it is blurred pretty bad on the edges. I'm going to build a curved screen and see if that helps that out. That's more due to the lens than using this PJ with a lens, so I think you should be just fine.

 

[ddnathan]

Thank you, bmwracer3. But, HC5500's body is quite different from that of HC6500. HC5500 is kind of value model and therefore despite of all improvements from previous model it lacks some of the features that HC6500 has. In addition, the body shape is different. You can confirm it at projectorreviews.com.


I am planning to remove the lens housing portion of the body, which Mitsubishi guys confirmed is removable.

 

[bmwracer3]

Oh your right...I remember now what the 5500 looks like. I had an HD80 before that, and it didn't exactly have a flush-mounted lens either. Sounds like you have a plan though. Good luck!

 

[ddnathan]

Thank you, bmwracer3!


Has you measured the image width right at the end of the lens housing of your projector? Mine is 5.8cm. I am just curious what is the typical size of the image width if PJ lens is not recessed. Or anyone?

 

[ddnathan]

Thank you, bmwracer3!


Has you measured the image width right at the end of the lens housing of your projector? Mine is 5.8cm. I am just curious what is the typical size of the image width if PJ lens is not recessed. Or anyone?

 

[bmwracer3]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ddnathan /forum/post/15466394


Thank you, bmwracer3!


Has you measured the image width right at the end of the lens housing of your projector? Mine is 5.8cm. I am just curious what is the typical size of the image width if PJ lens is not recessed. Or anyone?

I think that depends on throw distance and screen size...you get some variation, but probably not much. I think if I were a betting man, 5.8cm is close to what mine was. The image was almost too big on the far end anamorphic prism, but it worked.

 

[ddnathan]

Thank you, bmwracer3!


Can you let me know what your throw ratio is? Mine is 1.74, which is the maximum TR HC5500 has.

 

[bmwracer3]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ddnathan /forum/post/15470382


Thank you, bmwracer3!


Can you let me know what your throw ratio is? Mine is 1.74, which is the maximum TR HC5500 has.

I believe mine is 1.875 (156" throw / 83.2" wide 16:9 image).

 

[Lonely Raven]

I'm tagging this thread.


I have an HC5500 and I have a HTB lens on the way. I'm still waiting on my screen material though.


Looks like lots of people talking about doing this, but I don't see any photos of anyone having done it.


One guy PM'd me and said he removed the plastic housing around his lens to make it work...but then that could let in dust I'm thinking.

 

[ddnathan]

I did have the plastic housing removed by Mitsubishi service center guy. That gives me 1-2cm (half inch) closer to the PJ lens. And then to prevent dust coming into the PJ freely, I sealed the space between the lens and the body with black masking paper tape. I think it worked but the PJ now looks not so beautiful. As my anamorphic lens is arriving today, I will let you know if it works or not after installing it in front of my HC5500.....

 

[CRGINC]

I don't know why so many projector manufacturers design their enclosures with clearance issues for mounting an anamorphic lens. Many of them even have video processors for stretch and say their product is anamorphic ready.


I would think it is best to have prime the lens centered and no obstructions around the unit that would require a hugh lens or very long throw ratio. I consider myself fortunate of have purchased a Sony Pearl as its design is well suited for an external lens. Just luck on my part as it wasn't until a year later that I decided to give up a decade of zooming and go anamorphic.

 

[ddnathan]

I totally agree with you!! What's the point of putting video processing function of anamorphic stretching mode in the projector when its hardware makes it impossible to apply anamorphic lens?

 

[Aussie Bob]



Quote:
What's the point of putting video processing function of anamorphic stretching mode in the projector when its hardware makes it impossible to apply anamorphic lens?

Hardware and software departments in different rooms, different factories, most likely different countries. It's a lot easier to tack on a v-stretch function than it is to junk a working mechanical design for a few desperates like us who like weird lenses.

 

[CAVX]

Nothing weird about it

 

[Ken Tripp]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ddnathan /forum/post/15850330


I totally agree with you!! What's the point of putting video processing function of anamorphic stretching mode in the projector when its hardware makes it impossible to apply anamorphic lens?

Who said vertical stretch is included for anamorphic lens use. It could be there for those idiots who don't like black bars and would rather watch everything tall and skinny but filling the screen and they find it preferable to using the Zoom function on the projector or player and missing out on seeing some of the image.

 

[CAVX]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ddnathan /forum/post/15850330


I totally agree with you!! What's the point of putting video processing function of anamorphic stretching mode in the projector when its hardware makes it impossible to apply anamorphic lens?

Not if you have an ISCO III L or that new beast from Schnieder

 

[Craig Peer]

Not sure if my old Optoma H79's lens was as recessed as your Mitsubishi HC5500, but Prismasonic's lens worked pretty well when mounted almost touching the projector case.

 

[JargonGR]

Well I went ahead and cut my Infocus IN83 chassis (just a small part of the lip) to make my Prismasonic HD-5000R work and I finally got excellent results.


I was about to get the ISCOIII L but after seeing this solution I changed my mind and invested elsewhere in the system. Just a thought if you don't want to buy an ISCO.

 

[CRGINC]



Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVX /forum/post/15856646


Not if you have an ISCO III L or that new beast from Schnieder

Isn't it better to mount an anamorphic lens as close as possible to the prime lens to have the smallest input and output picture area no matter how large a lens you have?


Charles