Yes I did, last night. Here is what I found from limited testing. I might do some more " A / B " experiments tommorrow night -
1 - mounting is really easy.
2 - I do believe that using the panamorph lens increases picture brightness somewhat.
3 - scaling seemed easy. Actually, everything scales automatically with the HT1000 just like without the lens, as far as I can tell. But I'm not completely satisfied with 4:3 material.
4. I can't say what kind of picture quality increase this lens gives you. It is subtle, kind of like the D1 and DVI. It may make more difference with DVD's that need help from 33% more pixels. I watched some of Black Hawk Down, some of Gladiator. I'm not convinced either way yet.
5. How you have your pj set up ( distance from screen etc. ) may be critical. I think my pj is just a little too close to the screen according to Panamorph's guidelines. I seem to get some barrel distortion ? on the sides of the picture ( the sides are somewhat curved ) and the picture is not quite as wide as the screen. I think my mounting position is too close.
Conclusion - I can't honestly say if it is worth the cost quite yet. If your HT1000 is further than 12' ( at least 12'6", 13' better still ) it will probably work much better. My advise is to order one and try it out. It isn't a " night and day " difference. But then again, having recently seen a Marantz pj that cost what - 3 times what a HT1000 costs - it didn't have a " night or day " better picture either! If it doesn't seem worth it to you, send it back!
Follow up - indeed, my barrel distortion problem is a result of my HT1000 being installed too close to my screen ( to use a anamorphic lens anyway ) and being zoomed wide. It is not the fault of the lens. I had severe constraints on where to mount my pj. If yours is mounted more like 13' or 14' from your 92" screen ( or you have a smaller screen ), you won't have this problem.
Alright, since I never give up on anything easily ( heck - I've been a rock climber / mountain climber off and on for 30 years ), I've decided to re - mount my HT1000 12" to 18" back from where it is now, and give the Panamorph PSO - UNI model a whirl. I like the idea of sliding it out of the way for 4:3 material even if it is ceiling mounted. I'm going to give this one more shot, just to make sure ( I'd hate to miss out on making an incredible picture even better )! I should have a verdict by the end of next week
Originally posted by PRH It's a very odd notion that the PSO-UNI might be able to accomodate the HT1000 at a wider zoom than the PSO-HT1000.
I have the PSO-UNI mounted about 1/8" away from the HT1000 lens. I find I can use the full zoom range of the HT1000 without any image being cut off.
There are two factors that seem to come into play if you are cutting off the image thru the Panamorph. The vertical position of the lens in the bracket and any tilt of the lens from square with the HT1000 lens.
I don't know if the PSO - UNI can accomodate a wider zoom. That's why I'm going thru the not trivial hassle of re - mounting the pj about 16" further back on a beam on my cathedral ceiling. Shawn Kelly of Panamorph said that would do the trick as far as image being cut off! I will no longer be at the wide end of the zoom. Plus, the UNI model may be a little more forgiving in that regard too.
OK, now I'm in business! Spent 3 hours last night moving my Ht1000 back 14" and fabricating a mount for the Panamorph PSO - UNI lens. I then tested a few DVD's. I'll still say the improvement is subtle, but the opening battle scene in Gladiator was most definitely brighter looking! When Russell Crowe rides into battle, the gold and silver colored armor on his horse looked brighter and more vibrant. I also like the rail idea so I can just slide it out of the way for giant 92" x 70" 4:3 video!!
I'll be doing some adjustments and more testing tomorrow. But I'm about 90% sure I'm keeping it. Just to put things in perspective, I thought the increase in picture quality from the marantz 12S2 / Stewart Firehawk combo I saw at a store near me was subtle too - but the panamorph cost less than 1 grand and the marantz / FH would have cost me probably 7 grand more than my HCCV / HT1000.
1) Just so I'm sure I understand - you prefer the "general" Panamorph PSO lens over the one specifically made for the HT1000? I only have a 16x9 screen - do you find any visual/performance differences between the one for HT1000 and the UNI?
2) Where did you purchase the lens? (I know some forum rules prohibit vendor information, particularly price, but anything you can share about the vendor and service levels would be appreciated)
I got it directly from Panamorph. I only prefer the general model because of the sliding rail arrangement. I have a 4:3 screen. Since you don't have a 4:3 screen the dedicated model probably makes more sense for you. Changing my throw difference was / is the key to making it work correctly, whatever model you choose.
Sure. On the top of the lens housing are two nylon covered " dovetail " like blocks. Panamorph gives you a machined aluminum " rail " with a lengthwise slot that the " dovetailed blocks " slide in. The rail is also sporting countersunk mounting holes. The rail is roughly twice as wide as the lens. You mount the rail to whatever however so as the lens is mounted right in front of your pj lens. Then, when you decide tonight is the night for a huge 4:3 IMAX video, voila - slide that sucker to the side and do your 4:3 thing. Slide it back - you're ready to go 16:9 again!
My set up was complicated by the fact that my HT1000 is mounted on a 54" tall Draper Aero mount attacked to a sloping cathedral ceiling 14' or so off the floor. So I made a mount out of flat steel stock that bolts to mt pj and the ceiling mount and attached the rail to that with bolts and nuts so I can fine tune the vertical height of the lens. Works pretty darned good!
A) DVD player on 16:9 display, HT1000 on 4:3 screen, cinema aspect, no lens.
B) DVD player on 16:9 display, HT1000 on 4:3 screen, normal aspect, lens in place.
I'd recommend switching back and forth with the DVD player looping the same few seconds before deciding how dramatic the improvement is. When I did this exercise (using several different DVD loops), I couldn't discern any improvement at all.
" A) DVD player on 16:9 display, HT1000 on 4:3 screen, cinema aspect, no lens." -
Is this how most people run their pj / dvd players? I've been using the dvd player on 4:3 and the HT1000 set for 4:3 screen on normal. For everything. Been working just fine. I'll be doing more A/B testing tomorrow night. Like I said, I do see improvements, but they are subtle. I guess I'm not the only one to see improvements, but I'll report back on Friday after I A/B some more.
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!