AVS Forum banner

981 - 1000 of 1275 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
I agree! I've been chatting with Dave about lots of projectors outside of the forum and think he could contribute a lot if allowed back in here.
Funny I miss Dave's comments as well. I find him passionate about the subject but no more so than many who continue to contribute. I appreciate that level of expertise and passion. Cant afford much of the equipment but gives me something to shoot for.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: markmon1

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,407 Posts
Sorry, for stressing this aspect, but for me the main driver to have the GTZ-380 and the Griffyn HC in the portfolio is light.
Enough light to get +200 nits on a +180" screen.
If that´s not a requirement, i wouldn´t actually look into this price range. And in that respect, only the GTZ-380, the Griffyn HC and the Eclipse are on the shortlist, the NX9 definitely not.
I get that, but I still think the 380 is massively over priced if the only thing that is improved or relevant is the light output and and words like yours kind of giving Sony a free pass on the fact that nothing had been visually/technically improved in any real sense over their entry level machine too.
Fact is there is no excuse for the performance to fall so far short unless the price is at least halved.
I venture the NX9 is completely in context in this case, especially when you consider it is actually the resident projector in the theatre we were watching them all in. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reddig

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
Sorry, for stressing this aspect, but for me the main driver to have the GTZ-380 and the Griffyn HC in the portfolio is light.
Enough light to get +200 nits on a +180" screen.
If that´s not a requirement, i wouldn´t actually look into this price range. And in that respect, only the GTZ-380, the Griffyn HC and the Eclipse are on the shortlist, the NX9 definitely not.
I have been contemplating the HC for my theater. . I would be changing my screen from 15' wide(.9 gain) to 17' wide(.9 or .93 gain). The HC should be able to hit near 270 nit with the laser at max. My 15' screen would be just over 300 nits. I know I would probably run my theater at 50-55fc/171-188 nits with either screen. I would never want to run the laser at max. I would hope the HC would last for 40,000+ hours(being run at 65%) before I would need a laser replacement.

One thing about Christie Projectors, they are Tanks. Built for 24/7 running. I have a WU7K-M that is at 55,000 hours and a WU12K-M with 23K(ish) hours. I know you can replace the laser module on the HC in the field.

Disclaimer haha-- The FC/Nits numbers are from my own calculations ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,598 Posts
I agree! I've been chatting with Dave about lots of projectors outside of the forum and think he could contribute a lot if allowed back in here.

A good example of someone banned from the forum with excellent contributions who is not a child molester.
Cineramax is another example. Don't forget we participate in a commercially owned forum and decisions can be made to ban based on shall we say "other" considerations. If you read audio and video magazine reviews, notice how some companies who do not pay to advertise do not ever get reviews?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
706 Posts
I venture the NX9 is completely in context in this case, especially when you consider it is actually the resident projector in the theatre we were watching them all in. :)
Well, that doesn´t help if it´s not bright enough for the requirements listed above.
I get your point on the too high price-tag of the Sony for it´s performance, but after all that doesn´t change that it´s bright and throws a decent picture onto a large screen.
And if the customer is not willing (or able) to pay the extra for the Griffyn HC, then the Sony remains the only choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,598 Posts
One thing that is a bit confusing - the German folks here that were testing the Gryffin, is that the same version that Nigel is measuring / Archibald1 has seen? Or is it different? If so in what way?
That is a good question.
As I previously stated, one must read the German review carefully. He states that he reviewed the Griffyn 4k32, he doesn't state he reviewed the HC. He doesn't state he used the HC lens. He simply states the option as available.
I pointed that out earlier, and he liked my post without any further explanation. And there is no further clarification.
And Nigel has stated that he and his partner Alan have been working with Christie Digital to develop the solely distribute the Griffyn HC and that they be exhibiting at upcoming CEDIA. So unless new info comes to light this is what we have.
And obviously more info is forthcoming. And yes, it will be nice to get more info, more evaluation, and better info to justify spending such big bucks. I suspect that Sony coming out with the 380 led to Nigel perhaps coming out earlier with some info on the Griffyn HC that might have occurred otherwise, which makes us the "lucky" ones!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,598 Posts
I have been contemplating the HC for my theater. . I would be changing my screen from 15' wide(.9 gain) to 17' wide(.9 or .93 gain). The HC should be able to hit near 270 nit with the laser at max. My 15' screen would be just over 300 nits. I know I would probably run my theater at 50-55fc/171-188 nits with either screen. I would never want to run the laser at max. I would hope the HC would last for 40,000+ hours(being run at 65%) before I would need a laser replacement.

One thing about Christie Projectors, they are Tanks. Built for 24/7 running. I have a WU7K-M that is at 55,000 hours and a WU12K-M with 23K(ish) hours. I know you can replace the laser module on the HC in the field.

Disclaimer haha-- The FC/Nits numbers are from my own calculations ;)
So are you and I going to be founding members of the "Well On The Way To Going Broke Club" thanks to Nigel and now Archibald? And Art apparently is the founding member of "Eclipse Broke The Bank Club"! :p :p :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,866 Posts
A good example of someone banned from the forum with excellent contributions who is not a child molester.
Cineramax is another example. Don't forget we participate in a commercially owned forum and decisions can be made to ban based on shall we say "other" considerations. If you read audio and video magazine reviews, notice how some companies who do not pay to advertise do not ever get reviews?

Be careful ... Steve's house when administrators read his post:

Frankenstein (8/8) Movie CLIP - Windmill Burns Down (1931) HD - YouTube
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,598 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
So are you and I going to be founding members of the "Well On The Way To Going Broke Club" thanks to Nigel and now Archibald? And Art apparently is the founding member of "Eclipse Broke The Bank Club"! :p :p :p
Possibly Steve Possibly ;)

But it is still very up in the air as of right now. We are also looking at buying an investment property in Florida. So if that happens, my HT upgrading will be taking a back seat for about 12-18 months. I love my theater and it works well, but I know once I see the HC, all bets might be off. Plus, I easily have enough room behind my main theater area for the HC(I could even enclose it if I wanted) and just enough room for a 17' screen.

All the work would be done by myself, so my labor costs are Zero :)

So we will see what happens.........:ROFLMAO:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,407 Posts
Well, that doesn´t help if it´s not bright enough for the requirements listed above.
I get your point on the too high price-tag of the Sony for it´s performance, but after all that doesn´t change that it´s bright and throws a decent picture onto a large screen.
And if the customer is not willing (or able) to pay the extra for the Griffyn HC, then the Sony remains the only choice.
Absolutely. The nx9 was only in play because it is considered one of the best and is rssident in the theatre we were in. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Die Zwei

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,407 Posts
Also, use of the nx9 was more about my choices at the time than competing against the other two machines. But the fact that it could hold its own to a large degree against these two heavyweights actually speaks volumes about how good machines in the 15-30k bracket really are. :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Remind me to do this.... I will need to find the time to do this later... too much to do right now 🙂
Hi, can you also post how contrast drops when the max lumens is reduced for smaller screens? I think HC should be better as it's contrast does not drop as much as 380 when lumens is reduced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,407 Posts
Hi, can you also post how contrast drops when the max lumens is reduced for smaller screens? I think HC should be better as it's contrast does not drop as much as 380 when lumens is reduced.
I think a chart for that has already been posted in the 380 thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
304 Posts
He doesn't state he used the HC lens. He simply states the option as available.
I paid close attention to this - this is inaccurate. Both German folks reviewed the Base Gryffin with the high contrast lens measuring from 10k:1 to 11k:1 contrast and their impressions comparing it to the 380 were based on that lens, they were explicit about it.

So I don't understand what Gryffin HC is as a product compared to the base Gryffin with the HC lens those 2 gentlemen have used and I would like to learn.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
304 Posts
The argument that the 380 is overpriced can't really be made given how vastly better it is to 5000 in every regard: banding, color, useable brightness, contrast, sharpness, processing.

There's just no competitor for it in that price range.

Gryffin is really not in the same price bracket putting the somewhat peculiar mental gymnastics with GBP conversion rate aside. For someone like me (and I assume most of folks) there's 50+% or even 60% difference between the two.
Gryffin is seemingly a better projector, but it better be for that amount right? :)

The only question is if the image it throws on the screen is that much better to warrant the extra cost and the "hassle" of trying to get rid of the existing 380, etc.
That everyone will need to decide for themselves but only after seeing both projectors, well calibrated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,407 Posts
The argument that the 380 is overpriced can't really be made given how vastly better it is to 5000 in every regard: banding, color, useable brightness, contrast, sharpness, processing.

There's just no competitor for it in that price range.

Gryffin is really not in the same price bracket putting the somewhat peculiar mental gymnastics with GBP conversion rate aside. For someone like me (and I assume most of folks) there's 50+% or even 60% difference between the two.
Gryffin is seemingly a better projector, but it better be for that amount right? :)

The only question is if the image it throws on the screen is that much better to warrant the extra cost and the "hassle" of trying to get rid of the existing 380, etc.
That everyone will need to decide for themselves but only after seeing both projectors, well calibrated.
From my point of view, which is all I can convey accurately, having seen them both I can say that the Gryffin is simply better to watch. You are right though, for the extra money it should damn well be better!
However, the criteria you listed as being better than the 5000, whilst being technically correct, simply does not, to my eyes (or anyone else's in attendance), make itself known in any meaningful and visual way. Not to mention the same old underlying issues simply have not been addressed. Meaning the underlying tech is still the same. The 5000 actually was overpriced too, but they had a monopoly in that segment at the time and could charge what they wanted with nothing that came close to the contrast with that brightness.
Well, serious competition is a great attention grabber and will quickly sober up the complacent bods at Sony, no doubt!
If the price you can get a 380 for is a great deal less, as you say would be the case for you, then the choice is already made I would say. You simply won't get better for the cost in that scenario. Whether it is worth the cost is a completely personal thing. The 380 will please greatly if that is the situation you find yourself in.
However, my advice in that scenario, would be to not view a Gryffin HC if you don't want to/can't spend that much. Because I can pretty much guarantee you will end up wanting to save/borrow some more money for the Gryffin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Art Sonneborn

·
Registered
Joined
·
304 Posts
However, the criteria you listed as being better than the 5000, whilst being technically correct, simply does not, to my eyes (or anyone else's in attendance), make itself known in any meaningful and visual way. Not to mention the same old underlying issues simply have not been addressed. Meaning the underlying tech is still the same. The 5000 actually was overpriced too, but they had a monopoly in that segment at the time and could charge what they wanted with nothing that came close to the contrast with that brightness.
Okay this is where it starts to sound a bit weird to me as absolutely every reviewer so far (Ekki, the German youtube dude, the Italian youtube dude, my calibrator, DieZwi etc) have all pointed out that it clearly is much more superior to the 5000 and in very tangible ways, far from just measurements. "A different ballgame" to be exact. The measurements all confirm it, but that's icing on the cake.

So something doesn't add up here and I think I'll have to wait for more impressions from people that have seen a well calibrated 380, at least when it comes to being able to compare it to the 5000 and other Sony projectors.

The sharpness of the image and the lens is another peculiar point to add to many here. We can only assume that you've seen the best calibrated version of the 380 for this shootout but there's just too many things that don't quite add up to me personally.

I hope I'll get to see it in person eventually and that the mist will clear with more independent reviews coming in.
To be clear, I fully expect the Gryffin to be better, however the way the 380 is described relative to other projectors and the performance delta we know, it just feels questionable making this shootout a bit inconclusive to me personally when it comes to knowing how much of an upgrade this would be for me (if at all).
 
981 - 1000 of 1275 Posts
Top