[johnsmith808]

I have been reading various posts about this topic and it has gotten my interest. I have a Benq pe7700 and am concerned about the throw ratio. It has one of the shorter throws as far as I know. Can I still use an anamorphic lense with much success? Or wil the the image be distorted. Do I have any good options? I don't have a big budget so I am looking for a $500 solution. Thank you.

 

[johnsmith808]

Someone please help. At least if I know I can't do this I can get on with life.

 

[stanger89]

I'm running a Panamorph P752 with my MT700 (Tosh clone of the BenQ). Works well, the two things I've noticed.


If installed "correctly" , the lens drops the image quite a bit.


If installed "incorrectly" (upside down), it creates noticeable (on test patterns/desktop, but not movies) geometric distortion.


Overall, if you can find a P752 (or other large lense) in your pricerange, it's worth it.

 

[johnsmith808]

Thanks stranger89 for your help. By the way, how much of an improvement to you is using the Panamorph lense for the 2.35:1 image versus not using the lense and just masking off the black bars. Is it really significant? I read the statistical improvements(percentage more bright, pixels) but if you could just explain what you actually see that makes it better. Also, since you have the Benq clone, would it be a problem if I maxed out the zoom so as to get the largest image at the closest throw distance. I table mount so I try to keep the projector as far from my sofa as possible. Any closer and someone's feet will knock it over. I'm just glad to here that someone's using the lense for our short throw projectors.

 

[Tukkis]

Quote:

By the way, how much of an improvement to you is using the Panamorph lense for the 2.35:1 image versus not using the lense and just masking off the black bars. Is it really significant? I read the statistical improvements(percentage more bright, pixels) but if you could just explain what you actually see that makes it better.

I dont use a Benq but with my AE700 the lens makes it more filmlike. A smoother less digital looking picture.


Also the lens adds convenience.

 

[stanger89]

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnsmith808 Thanks stranger89 for your help. By the way, how much of an improvement to you is using the Panamorph lense for the 2.35:1 image versus not using the lense and just masking off the black bars. Is it really significant?

Honestly, I never tried it without.

Quote:

I read the statistical improvements(percentage more bright, pixels) but if you could just explain what you actually see that makes it better. Also, since you have the Benq clone, would it be a problem if I maxed out the zoom so as to get the largest image at the closest throw distance.

My intuition tells me yes, it would be a problem. If I remember correctly, at almost minimum zoom, where I have it now, the image fills most of the lens. That said I also remember that I have a bit (maybe an 0.5-1 inch) of leeway each way to move the lens so you might be OK.


I can't try for sure because my bulb died last night . But Tosh is sending me a new one no questions asked

 

[johnsmith808]

Not another early bulb death on these machines(mt700 and benq pe7700). My Benq has almost 500 hours so hope it either dies real soon so I can get a free replacement or lives a long, long time. Thanks for the input on the panamorphic lense. I guess it probably is too risky in my situation then. I'm going to give plan B a shot and mask off the black(more like dark gray) bars.

 

[stanger89]

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnsmith808 Not another early bulb death on these machines(mt700 and benq pe7700). My Benq has almost 500 hours so hope it either dies real soon so I can get a free replacement or lives a long, long time.

Yeah, though both of my lamps were from before the fix. I'm guessing if you're over 300, you've probably got a new lamp, and hopefully will be fine