AVS Forum banner

41 - 60 of 6791 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
937 Posts
Discussion Starter · #41 ·
I hope 3d will be full supported, even sbs


My understanding is that it will. The TK800 which is very similar to the HT2550 got a 1.03 update that enabled the manual SBS 3D setting. Not sure if that hit the HT2550 yet though?

Regardless, the biggest issue with 3D on this gen of .47” projectors is that amount of time it takes to engage. I believe the 3D in the HT3550 will be automatic engaged similar to the W1070 and HT2050.

Interestingly 3D works so much better on the 1.4a HDMI port in 1080p in the HT2550 but both the HT3550 ports will be HDMI 2.0 so hopefully the 3D will be smooth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
937 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
Total guess here, but I have a feeling they put the cinema filter on half of the rgb/rgb wheel. This way if you want it of for higher brightness you could slow down the wheel and ignore the segments with the color filter coating. Kind of like the way brilliant color works.


I’m a fan of the Brilliant Color setting set to on. My 160” screen needs every lumen possible and BC offers a good middle ground of color and brightness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,952 Posts
I think given the fact that it will have an updated DMD it will have better contrast. ...
Someone mentioned that the updated S316 DMD is a running change on existing projector models that previously used the DMD that produced the annoying light border. If true they would have comparable performance. The dynamic iris would certainly provide better dynamic contrast.

EDIT: The above S316 reference is incorrect. Gregory on passioncinema.fr actually said the new DMD with the greatly reduced light border will be offered in other new models from multiple brands in 2019. I incorrectly thought I remembered that as a running change on existing models. My mistake.

passionhomecinema.fr/blog/index.php/02/11/2018/benq-w2700-dlp-a-simulation-4k-puce-0-47-sans-cadre-lumineux/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
937 Posts
Discussion Starter · #44 ·
Someone mentioned that the updated S316 DMD is a running change on existing projector models that previously used the DMD that produced the annoying light border. If true they would have comparable performance.


However in the technical document that you posted, the documentation still makes reference to a pond of micromirrors. I need to dig in more versus a cursory overview though. Where did you hear this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,322 Posts
Someone mentioned that the updated S316 DMD is a running change on existing projector models that previously used the DMD that produced the annoying light border. If true they would have comparable performance. The dynamic iris would certainly provide better dynamic contrast.


Key word there is “think”. I should change it to hope. I’m hoping the large light pond was responsible for the poor contrast. I won’t count on it but wouldn’t be surprised if there is a contrast improvement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,952 Posts
However in the technical document that you posted, the documentation still makes reference to a pond of micromirrors. I need to dig in more versus a cursory overview though. Where did you hear this?
I was in error about the running change and have edited my post above with an accurate reference. It's my understanding that all of TI's DMDs have a pond of micromirrors. The original 0.47" XPR DMD for some reason just had more of an issue with the light border than other DMDs.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
868 Posts
I was in error about the running change and have edited my post above with an accurate reference. It's my understanding that all of TI's DMDs have a pond of micromirrors. The original 0.47" XPR DMD for some reason just had more of an issue with the light border than other DMDs.
That's because the black level pretty much sucks on the newer chips vs the older ones. If the contrast had been the same this border problem would be basically invisible and thus moot, like it is on 0.65 inch DLPs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
937 Posts
Discussion Starter · #49 ·
That's because the black level pretty much sucks on the newer chips vs the older ones. If the contrast had been the same this border problem would be basically invisible and thus moot, like it is on 0.65 inch DLPs.


The border isn’t there because of the contrast, the decreased contrast I there, in part, because of the border. Chicken and egg.

That said I don’t mind the border on the current projectors. Next generation will be better though.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
868 Posts
Total guess here, but I have a feeling they put the cinema filter on half of the rgb/rgb wheel. This way if you want it of for higher brightness you could slow down the wheel and ignore the segments with the color filter coating. Kind of like the way brilliant color works.
I don't see how they can achieve a 94% P3 coverage with half the colour wheel being P3 native and half rec 709.

This projector is likely P3 native and rec 709 mode would be dimmer (the mirrors are never fully "on" even for pure white / red / green / blue inputs, encoded to rec 709). Which is appropriate for a 4K UHD HDR projector. If you want the brightest Rec 709 gamut just buy a 1080p projector.

I'm fine with the filter being always in the light path here, and if they can do 94% P3 with reasonable lumens via a lamp based projector then finally we can put to be the notion that we absolutely need LEDs to do decent P3. I'm not really sure how that meme got started, but lamps reach higher lumens than LEDs, maybe not HLD LEDs but certainly non-HLD.

So throwing away some (25-50%) of those extra lumens could likely give you something brighter than LED but still hitting high P3 gamut levels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,322 Posts
I don't see how they can achieve a 94% P3 coverage with half the colour wheel being P3 native and half rec 709.



This projector is likely P3 native and rec 709 mode would be dimmer (the mirrors are never fully "on" even for pure white / red / green / blue inputs, encoded to rec 709). Which is appropriate for a 4K UHD HDR projector. If you want the brightest Rec 709 gamut just buy a 1080p projector.



I'm fine with the filter being always in the light path here, and if they can do 94% P3 with reasonable lumens via a lamp based projector then finally we can put to be the notion that we absolutely need LEDs to do decent P3. I'm not really sure how that meme got started, but lamps reach higher lumens than LEDs, maybe not HLD LEDs but certainly non-HLD.



So throwing away some (25-50%) of those extra lumens could likely give you something brighter than LED but still hitting high P3 gamut levels.


If they put it the cinema filter on the lens then it would be darker no matter what unless they have a complicated lens system that can move the filter in and out of the light path. Putting it on the color wheel would be a simpler and equally effective solution. In addition it could be completely bypassed simply by syncing the dmd on off angles with the desired color segments. I don’t know if this is what they’ve done but it’s certainly possible.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
868 Posts
I agree that it's pointless to apply two separate colour filters, one for RGB then one for the P3.

On that note, I came across this interesting German site showing they can boost contrast by 40-50% simply by adding a filter tuned to correcting the colours in the highest-measuring contrast mode:

http://cine4home.de/epson-tw9300-projektor-tuning-kontrastoptimierung-per-glasfilter/

It makes perfect sense, as if you lose 40% of your lumens to correct the colours digitally, to the most accurate mode, then that must mean it's done by limiting the max brightness level of each primary to some degree. So if you use a filter which allows you to simply use the full bit depth range of each colour channel, then you've boosted the contrast since you can go brighter, but meanwhile the filter actually reduces the black level, hence the contrast is boosted by the same percentage that calibration loses it. Lots of DLP projectors start off at 2000:1 then in the best calibration mode drop to 1400:1 or less. It's also interesting how they put the filter at an angle to avoid shadows being reflected back into the primary lens, which is curved.

Moral of the story: always avoid correcting brightness digitally when you can, it reduces bit depth and contrast. But thankfully you can gain that contrast back using an additional filter.

A smart move for projector manufacturers who are torn between having good rec 709 vs P3 contrast performance and lumens, is having the projector be Rec 709 native at the colour wheel but have a P3 filter that can be clipped on, outside the projector. That might be less convenient than having a filter mechanically in the light path, but many Epson owners had problems with their Cinema filters breaking and it adds costs and inconvenience when you have to send in the projector for repairs. An outboard P3 filter is a good idea, I think.

I wish @Cine4Home would make some contrast-preserving filters for rec 709 DLP projectors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Depending on the (US) price, this looks like it might be a winner for me. I don’t do any gaming. I’d use it for live sports, uhd movie disks, and streaming of 1080p and UHD.

I have a 120” and a budget of $2000. I have a dedicated room where virtually all light can be removed.

Based only on the specs and needs, does anyone see any potential pitfalls for me with this projector?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
937 Posts
Discussion Starter · #55 ·
Limited zoom range could be a problem.


For some… Yes. However it is the same zoom range as the hugely popular W1070 and HT2050. Upgrading that user base is a key target audience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
937 Posts
Discussion Starter · #56 ·
Depending on the (US) price, this looks like it might be a winner for me. I don’t do any gaming. I’d use it for live sports, uhd movie disks, and streaming of 1080p and UHD.



I have a 120” and a budget of $2000. I have a dedicated room where virtually all light can be removed.



Based only on the specs and needs, does anyone see any potential pitfalls for me with this projector?


Sounds like it could be a winner. If you can wait for reviews and for it to be released in 2-3 months.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
Sounds like it could be a winner. If you can wait for reviews and for it to be released in 2-3 months.
Yes, I can wait until early next year. I got an entry level epson 1080p projector a year ago to tide me over to 4k after my old Sony was on its last leg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,286 Posts
I leave for a couple of weeks...

So someone over at BenQ goofed and leaked the HT3550 early huh? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,322 Posts
For some… Yes. However it is the same zoom range as the hugely popular W1070 and HT2050. Upgrading that user base is a key target audience.


I honestly don’t see how a shorter zoom range is “limiting” in anyway. You can always move the projector closer, you can’t always move it further back. I think this is why many who chose the w1070/hf2050 did. I could have easily afforded a much more expensive projector when I bought my ht1075(same throw as the w1070), however I would have been stuck with an 80”-100” screen. At that size a projector just doesn’t make much sense, you can just move your seating a foot or two closer and buy a big tv and have better picture quality. I think the ability to have a 120” screen less 11’ away is perfect. Rarely are rooms built with less than 12’ in either direction, so as long as the throw is less than 1.2 it’s perfect. For projection THX recommends .85 so even then a
 
41 - 60 of 6791 Posts
Top