go view the image on one. let that speak for itself.
my personal view is that it is just a powerhouse. the first time I opened the box and saw it I said "this is the projector for me" Just as a stock business projector I think it destroys many many projectors out there. Then once you start tweeking it it only gets better.
other projectors take a weeker base unit and and tweek it to it's home theater potential. The base unit of the D-ILA of starts off with the bar so high it is already better in many ways then the others.
Finally if you love HDTV, a high definition signal will absolutely astound you. gauranteed!
[This message has been edited by Tryg (edited 09-14-2001).]
Several brands of digital projectors today offer good contrast, black levels and resolution, but in my experience, only the DILA's offer a virtually pixel-free picture, while at the same time offering the necessary level of brightness that many want. Also, I found the noise and heat issue to be substantially overrated, and while the bulb cost is high, it's not so high if you only have to buy one once every two to three years, especially in relative terms if you are willing to pay $10K+ in the first place for the projector. When I watch a DVD on my DILA now, I am extremely satisfied, and I haven't even finished tweaking it yet. With the other projectors I have owned or seen, I felt the picture was good and that I was or would be "pretty close" to being satisfied.
But, as always, there is the question of how much is a better picture worth. For $5K, maybe cheaper, you can get a pretty darn good projector, which would satisfy many. On the other hand, if you've got the $$ to spend and a great picture is really important to your HT concept, than the DILA's are worth a serious look.
[This message has been edited by smitty (edited 09-14-2001).]
I think (although I am certain that there will be those who disagree! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif ) that there has been a general consensus on the forum for some time that, among the currently available digital FP's under $15,000, the DILA's have the best image quality. The new 1280x720p DLPs with new color wheels may change the calculus somewhat on absolute image quality, but they do cost more than current DLPs.
There is much more divided opinion on whether the image quality is worth the extra $$$. Certainly it was for me, and I bought a DILA, but $10k-11k (with DILARD and hushbox) is a lot to pay for a FP for many people.
From a picture quality perspective, the D-ILA FPTVs have represented the best that digital technology has to offer for several years, especially with calibration and a high quality scaler/HTPC or HD feed.
Certainly the newest offerings of 16:9 panel DLP and LCD FPTVs are rising to to the challenge, and having some better features (quieter fans, cheaper/long life bulbs) and comparable brightness and resolution for less money.
And of course CRT FPTVs are also competitive in picture quality with some elements better than the D-ILA and some not as good. And used CRT FPTV prices make them quite competitive in many ways.
No display technology is perfect, but there is a lot to praise with the D-ILA FPTVs, so it's not just blind hype.
In the $4K-$8K range used, and $8K-$15K new they match many people's needs for a quality HT projector.
I'd seen a lot of LCD and DLP projectors in controlled shootouts (where I got to tune them) and at Infocomm (which included a DILA, but I couldn't get close or touch the controls). The DLPs generally had poor colors, too high CCT, and VERY annoying temporal artifacts (like crawlies). Some of the new DLPs have fixed the first two. The LCDs are all plagued with screen door, which I am sensitive to even at reasonable viewing distances, and very poor black levels (I haven't yet seen the new Sanyo's, which are supposed to be better). I haven't seen a version of either that I would be willing to buy.
A few months ago, I saw a G20 at a small show and had a lot of time to see it closely and talk to the JVC guy. I didn't have a chance to tweak it, but I don't think it would have mattered. The picture was the best digital picture I'd ever seen, BY FAR. It had great color, resolution, contrast and rock solid images (due in part to the external scaler).
Then, last week, I was at CEDIA. I saw a G15 with an ISCO lens and Vigatec processor. I WAS BLOWN AWAY (and I'm pretty picky). I'd seen the Sony G90 10 minutes before, which also blew me away (at $43K, it should have). For absolute picture quality, the G15 (or G20) with an ISCO lens (or probably the Panamorph) is the best under $20K solution I've ever seen. Until you see 1.3 M pixels with a 90+% aperature ratio, you won't believe how good it can be.
Don't take me as a JVC enthusiast. The bulb power and life are show stoppers for me. I've seen the 3010/DS1 and the Primax, which are UHP bulbs with DILA panels, and I wouldn't buy either of these either, but they are getting close.
In the end, it's a matter of trade-offs and what you're sensitive to (rainbows, screen door, black level, etc.). But I'd urge anyone who is considering spending >$10K for an HT PJ to at least see a well set up G15 or 20, preferably with an anamorphic lens and good scaler, so they know what the "reference standard" is.
Perhaps the upcoming LCOS projectors from Hitachi and Christie should be noted as a compromize. At least the Hitachi (not sure about Christie) will be a little cheaper than the JVC projectors and use UHB lamps instead of Xenon lamps, making it less hot and less noisy.
I really like the color, image solidity, and contrast of the D-ILA machines.
One of the reasons I am sticking with my inexpensive Infocus 400 for right now is that when I look at better machines--mostly DLP's--I am not that impressed that they are worth doing the upgrade.
My criterion for replacement of my current machine has become: anyone entering the room should immediately perceive that I have something much much better on any plausible program source. Only the D-ILA's do this.
I think that b-man might have mentioned whether or not he has seen a D-ILA in action. I doubt he would have asked the question if he has seen a well set up machine. The question of its drawbacks and cost is an individual one. I have never seen anyone deny the quality of he picture. I have not ever seen a three panel DLP. Maybe it does have a better picture than a D-ILA. I don't know. I do know that one can buy three or four or five G15's for the reported price of a three panel DLP. It ought to be much better for that kind of meney. Art
[This message has been edited by Art Lloyd (edited 09-17-2001).]
Not sure if anyone's mentioned JVC's so-called hybrid interlace/progressive technique. Essentially, because of the 'limited' matrix resolution of D-ILA panels, pixels that aren't displayed in the first half of an HDTV frame are displayed in the second.
Apple VP engineering Mark Foster outlined the D-ILA's hybrid interlace/progressive display technique here some time back. This copy of his description now appears to be missing from the archived digital projectors section.
OK - I'll try to tackle this one again. The D-ILA uses a very unique hybrid progressive+interlaced scanning method to display 1080i signals. To understand this, it's important to understand the way that 1080i works, so a brief review is in order.
1080i HDTV signals are transmitted as 1920 pixels per line, with 1080 visible lines/frame. However, as an interlaced transmission format, all the lines on the screen aren't sent sequentially. Instead, the even scan lines are transmitted during the first 1/60th of a second, and the odd scan lines are transmitted during the next 1/60th of a second. Each of these two "fields" are collectively called a frame": together, they comprise the complete 1920x1080 image. Your eye responds slowly enough that you are able to perceive the two fields as a single picture.
This very high resolution does create an interesting challenge: very few display devices are capable of resolving all of the information present in a high-quality 1080i image. The D-ILA, as the highest resolution digital projector on the market, is no exception. Its native panel resolution of 1365x1024 would appear to show "only" about 51% of a 1080i image ((1365 * 768) / (1920 * 1080)), as compared to XGA projectors, which show 28% of a 1080i image, or SVGA projectors, which show 17%. However, the D-ILA uses a very cool trick to place even more pixels on the screen than its native panel resolution would suggest!
What the D-ILA does is to create its own type of interlaced display which is quite different than broadcast 1080i. The first step in the process is that the D-ILA will receive a complete 1080i frame, loading all 1920x1080 pixels into its internal scaler memory. Next, the D-ILA will display as much of the information as it can during the following 1/60th of a second, placing 1365x768 pixels from the memory onto the screen. If you think about this for a moment, this means that there are still (1920 - 1365 =) 555 pixels/scan line which haven't been displayed yet, in addition to (1080 - 768=) 312 scan lines which didn't make it onto the screen. What happens in the next 1/60th of a second is what really sets the D-ILA apart for viewing HDTV!
What the projector does is to selectively replace the pixels on the screen with the pixels that haven't been displayed yet. Of the 768 scan lines on the screen, 312 of them will be completely replaced with new information (the 312 scan line that weren't displayed in the first pass), and the remaining scan lines will have 555 pixels replaced with new data. In other words, about 2 out of five scan lines are replaced, and about 2 out of 5 pixels are replaced on the remaining scan lines. The D-ILA then displays this new field, leaving the remaining 60% of its pixels unchanged.
If you reflect on this for a second, you'll realize that not quite all of the pixels from the 1080i image made it onto the screen. Specifically, for the 312 scan lines that were completely replaced, you never got a chance to see the 555 pixels that would have been replaced along those scan lines, if they had been on a non-replaced scan line. In other words, (312*555 / 1920*1080 =) 8.35% of the information never made it onto the screen, meaning that the D-ILA managed to cram 91.65% of the pixels from a 1080i image on the screen!
Note that this process is quite different than the interlacing method used in a CRT. In a CRT, interlaced scan lines are physically offset from one another, while the D-ILA actually overwrites existing pixels. Nonetheless, the effect is amazing: 1080i HDTV signals on the D-ILA are simply stunning!
As an aside, I had an interesting debate with another AVS Forum member about the advantages and disadvantages of this approach a while back. He felt that the approach used by the D-ILA was "crude", noting that the overwriting process would cause a loss of perceived information. It is true that this technique will cause you to perceive less of the image than if you had used a true interpolating 1080i scaler (so far, only the Faroudja 5000 can perform this task). However, compared to other digital projectors, which don't even attempt to utilize the additional information in a 1080i signal, the method used by the D-ILA yields a dramatic improvement in display quality! When playing with the scaler, it is easy to turn this feature off: when you do, the resulting image is far less lifelike than the method that the D-ILA normally uses. As a result, I think of the technique used by the D-ILA as a very elegant solution to the limits of the state of the art. By utilizing a unique hybrid progressive+interlaced scanning system, the D-ILA is
able to deliver a dramatic mprovement in its 1080i display. However, it is also true that once affordable interpolating 1080i scalers become available, D-ILA owners will be able to see an even better HDTV image than they do now!!!
[This message has been edited by John Mason (edited 09-17-2001).]
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!