[M-dub]

I left my old Sony 400Q projector behind when I recently sold my house (even older technology home theaters are a sweet selling point!). I'm looking to hear from some people who have moved on to another projector from a VPLW400Q. What did you upgrade to? How does it compare (brightness, artifacts, etc.)? Are you happy with the upgrade? I've been a lurker on this forum for some time now. Although I have read a lot of information about what's available out there, I'd really value some opinions from people who have been in this situation. Although it was old, I really liked the 400Q. Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Norde]

I still own my 400Q and have been willing to upgrade for a year or two. Until the I saw the Sharp 9000 I hadn't seen anything that I thought justified the expenditure.


An added plus for this projector is that the throw is roughly the same as the Sony for my set up. I assume this wouldn't be of a concern to you as you have moved.


I am mighty tempted.

 

[Spizz]

As a current Sony 400QM owner I will be placing my Sony 400QM for sale this week and if it sells I will be ordering the Sharp XV-Z9000E straight after.


Spero D.

 

[NickW]

See my other 9000 review thread - I owned a 400Q

 

[dynamike2000]

My 400Q has just been exchanged for a G11 (not calibrated yet, no HTPC and no scaler).


The picture is already quite improved due to the added resolution, brightness and better contrast. After having the G11 only for a short while I have to admit that it deserves a better scaler than the one built in.


The two fans of the G11 even manage to be a tad louder than the 400Q.


Mike

 

[Georgeb]

I have owned a VPL400 for three years now and I have yet to see anything that compares.The new Sharp Z9000 sounds like it could be the upgrade for me, but so far I haven't seen a demo of one in this neck of the woods. I also suspect the Canadian price will be somewhere around $15,000. which is more than double the price of the 400. So I don't see me doing anything for some time-- that is, as long the the 400 holds up.

 

[mrbadog]

Several old hands at the 400Q forum including myself and interestingly Jeff McNeil have migrated to DILA's. Beats the Sony in brightness, color, resolution, and screen door. Matches the Sony in terms of throw distance (if you prefer the PJ behind the back wall of the home theater). Ease of setup is a toss-up if you were using the 400Q for HTPC and HDTV, but probably favors the Sony. Price unfortunately is a step up (currently around 10K)

 

[dynamike2000]

Quote:

Originally posted by mrbadog Several old hands at the 400Q forum including myself and interestingly Jeff McNeil have migrated to DILA's. Beats the Sony in brightness, color, resolution, and screen door. Matches the Sony in terms of throw distance (if you prefer the PJ behind the back wall of the home theater). Ease of setup is a toss-up if you were using the 400Q for HTPC and HDTV, but probably favors the Sony.

Actually the G11 has a longer throw distance compared to the 400Q - if you want to achieve identical screen width. I had to increase the distance between projector and screen by 3'.


BTW: I had my 400Q for almost three years. It is still very competitive nowadays in terms of price/performance IMHO.

 

[RJM3]

I'm thinking about the Infocus LP350 unit since it has DVI input. After spending much time (and many posts on the W400 forum) I finally got my W400Q to listen to my HTPC. Since I've gone through all of the trouble to build a good HTPC I want a projector that will take advantage of its digital output. Sadly, the new Sharp 9000 doesn't have DVI-but it does have a great picture. From what I've read the InFocus does an outstanding job with a digital signal source. The only question for me is the dreaded rainbow effect, which I have no idea if the LP350 has conquered. If it has the same rainbow (or lack of) level as the 9000, then there's a good chance that a 350 will be in my home tomorrow.


Anyone have any experience with this projector?


Bob

 

[M-dub]

Thanks for everyone's input...I have seen the 9000 as well as a NEC LT150 coupled with a Panamorph (Thanks to XP800 on this forum - his theater setup is quite impressive). Both exhibited bright images with excellent contrast vs. the 400Q. Although I did not get to spend a lot of time viewing the LT150, I did have a chance to do so with the 9000. I don't have any complaints about the quality of the image. However, viewing it seemed kind of fatiguing (that's the only way I can desribe it) after some time. I don't know if this had to do with the particular setup at the dealer or something else. I'm wondering if this might be a DLP related thing...I need to spend some additional time viewing the 9000 and some other DLP's to determine this. Does this sound crazy, or has anyone else perceived this?

 

[catullus]

M-dub:


Your comment about "DLP fatigue" is interesting. I owned two different 400Q's, and logged hundreds of hours of viewing time. I have also had lengthy exposures to the NEC 150 and the Infocus 350, as well as the LCD-based Mitsubishi X80U, all fed by top-quality DVD players. For my own eyes, there is no question that LCD is less fatiguing to watch. After a few hours watching either of the DLP units, I began invariably to visually drift from the movie to the elusive "abrasiveness" of the DLP image. On the other hand, I could watch the 400Q or the Mits for a whole day and never grow tired of the picture. The only reason I ever sold the 400Q's was the quest for better shadow detail (same with the Mits). At this point I am thinking seriously of going the Sanyo PLV-60HT route, or maybe wait for the new LCOS Hitachi technology to reach my price range. In any case, the 400Q deserves a place in the HT Hall of Fame.


Mike