Ive read alot about both, Ive seen them both but in very different conditions. The sharp seems a little less "buggy". I'll have a 92" diag High Power screen. PJ will be directly overhead (low ceiling). Will be watching sports with some lighting in rear of HT. Thanks.
Help me decide between Sharp 12000 and Optoma H77
-
Now Available: Tech Talk Podcast with Scott Wilkinson, Episode 19 Click here for details.
- Status
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Here's a thread from a couple months back, you may have already read it. Lot's of talk and comparisons between the two, (Mitsubishi/H77 & Sharp). http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...ghlight=hc2000
Quote:
All your criteria points to the H77, really nothing to think about. The H77 is not buggy, unless you got one of the pre-released Euro/pal models. The PAL tuned models start in a few weeks.
| Originally posted by tubby Ive read alot about both, Ive seen them both but in very different conditions. The sharp seems a little less "buggy". I'll have a 92" diag High Power screen. PJ will be directly overhead (low ceiling). Will be watching sports with some lighting in rear of HT. Thanks. |
Thanks for the responses, I'm sorry for taking up your time with this question, I probably have read all there is about it. I was hopingthat possibly someone had had both for a while but that is probably unlikely. I guess I am leaning to the H77, but I'm still holding out for the Sharp 2000, in an attempt to save a little money. Thanks again.
Jason
Jason
About your screen choice:
The High Power is retro-reflective. To get the full gain that it promises, requires mounting the PJ near to the same height as the middle of the screen, which typically requires a shelf mount. If you ceiling mount the PJ you will lose some of that screen gain. Additionally, the High Power has some ability to reject light that comes from the sides (it reflects it back where it came from). However, ambient light from the rear of the HT is also reflected back where it came from, to the the rear of the HT, right back at your eyes.
The only perfect solution would be to control ambient light from the rear of the HT. I can't think of an alternative screen that would solve the problem. The 12000 in HighContrast mode isn't bright enough to drive a 100"D Firehawk even with a new bulb, so I doubt that it would drive a 92" Firehawk either, at least not for long.
If you can't control the ambient light, you will almost certainly choose to run the 12000 with the Iris in the mid or wide-open positions during the daylight hours, which isn't all that bad of a solution either. It still produces a very pleasing image, just not the same CR.
I'm not very knowledgable about the H77, and have not seen one in action. It is my understanding that the 12000's brightest mode is considerably brighter than the Optoma's brightest mode. If so, the Sharp will better handle your ambient light situation than the H77 would.
The Sharp has the ability to produce a very low lumen, but high contrast image, which would fit a 92" High Power very well at night. It also has the ability to produce a very bright image, but at lower contrast levels. Frankly, in the presence of ambient light a high contrast image isn't possible anyways, and PJ brightness is what it takes to make a watchable image. The Sharp would seem to be better able to handle both of your situations than any other PJ I can think of.
Glenn
The High Power is retro-reflective. To get the full gain that it promises, requires mounting the PJ near to the same height as the middle of the screen, which typically requires a shelf mount. If you ceiling mount the PJ you will lose some of that screen gain. Additionally, the High Power has some ability to reject light that comes from the sides (it reflects it back where it came from). However, ambient light from the rear of the HT is also reflected back where it came from, to the the rear of the HT, right back at your eyes.
The only perfect solution would be to control ambient light from the rear of the HT. I can't think of an alternative screen that would solve the problem. The 12000 in HighContrast mode isn't bright enough to drive a 100"D Firehawk even with a new bulb, so I doubt that it would drive a 92" Firehawk either, at least not for long.
If you can't control the ambient light, you will almost certainly choose to run the 12000 with the Iris in the mid or wide-open positions during the daylight hours, which isn't all that bad of a solution either. It still produces a very pleasing image, just not the same CR.
I'm not very knowledgable about the H77, and have not seen one in action. It is my understanding that the 12000's brightest mode is considerably brighter than the Optoma's brightest mode. If so, the Sharp will better handle your ambient light situation than the H77 would.
The Sharp has the ability to produce a very low lumen, but high contrast image, which would fit a 92" High Power very well at night. It also has the ability to produce a very bright image, but at lower contrast levels. Frankly, in the presence of ambient light a high contrast image isn't possible anyways, and PJ brightness is what it takes to make a watchable image. The Sharp would seem to be better able to handle both of your situations than any other PJ I can think of.
Glenn
Good points Glenn, the ability to "open it up" when viewing sports with the lights on sounds good. So you think HP is not a good choice? Most of the pj use will be for movies with the lights off. I need an electric screen and the HP at $800 (non tensioned) seems like a pretty decent solution. Should I consider a white screen?
Quote:
I dont know if this is actually the case. Two threads, one on the Mits HC2000 (A H77 Clone) and one on the H77 are reporting that the H77 in its brightest is brighter with better contrast than the Sharp in its brightest mode.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...67#post4266467
But for every post like that, tehre are ones that say it isnt a very bright projector. Who knows what is actually correct.
I wish there wa sa difinitive review. Im trying to decide between the 12k and h77 also.
| Originally posted by glenned It is my understanding that the 12000's brightest mode is considerably brighter than the Optoma's brightest mode. |
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...67#post4266467
But for every post like that, tehre are ones that say it isnt a very bright projector. Who knows what is actually correct.
I wish there wa sa difinitive review. Im trying to decide between the 12k and h77 also.
Quote:
I think the HP will work in your situation. An angular-reflective screen would probably be better though. Let me give you some info to help you decide how you want to go.
Ambient light is bad. The only perfect solution is to eliminate it. If it can't be eliminated, then take whatever practical steps you can to limit it. After that, there are ways to lessen the degrading affect of limited ambient light upon PQ. Your primary weapon against ambient light is high PJ brightness.
The 12000 has two lamp power modes and three iris settings. In High Contrast and Low Lamp Power modes, it produces about 250 lumens after it has been pro-calibrated with a new bulb. (Before calibration it is a little brighter, but a little less color accurate.) In its brightest setting (Low Contrast and High Lamp Power modes engaged), the 12000 is three times brighter. If you use a screen gain that produces an optimal picture at night with the PJ in its dimmest modes (which are also its highest quality modes), you will have the ability to triple the PJ brightness for overcoming ambient light during the day. The 12000 is unique in this aspect.
There is no "great" screen solution for your situation, though Sony has a prototype screen under development that could possibly work for you at some point in the future. Who knows? The problem with ambient light coming from the rear of the HT is that it bounces right back at the viewer, regardless of the screen material type. The best screen for this type of situation is the Firehawk, but it doesn't have sufficient gain to work for your screen size, IMO. I tried a 12000 on a 100" Firehawk, and it was just too dim. If you used a Firehawk, you would probably need to use the PJs other Iris settings, which sort of defeats the purpose of purchasing such a high contrast PJ in the first place.
The HP is retro-reflective. It tends to send light back towards its source. To get its full 2.8 gain it is necessary to mount the PJ at about the same height as the middle of the screen. In a ceiling mount situation it produces a lower gain because it sends the light back towards the PJ versus down towards your seats. The problem is that the ambient light coming from the rear of the HT will probably not have its gain reduced in the same way. I would anticipate seeing more washout from the HP than from an angular-reflective screen because the ambient light is coming from the rear of the HT. In spite of this, I think the HP is workable in your HT because of the 12000s ability to triple its light output
An angular-reflective screen will deliver more of its rated gain when ceiling mounted than would a retro-reflective screen. A 1.8 gain angular reflective screen would be a better alternative to the HP in this situation during ambient light. When I say better I mean that your PQ in ambient light will be mediocre with that screen as compared to being really mediocre with the HP
. How important this kind of difference is to you, only you can decide. The PQ at night would likely be comparable with either screen, and its the night viewing that is most important to you.
The 12000 produces about 250 lumens in Low Lamp / High Contrast mode with a new lamp. A 92" screen is about 25 sq ft. A screen gain of 1.6 would yield a screen brightness level of 16 fL. As the bulb ages, this will drop to 8 fL, which is too dim. However, when you engage High Lamp mode the brightness will be @10.5 fL, which though below the SMPTE standard of 12 fL, is still considered bright enough on a high contrast PJ like the 12000 by many of us. If this isn't good enough, you can always put the PJ in its mid-iris position for increased brightness. A 1.6 gain screen should allow you to use High Contrast mode for the life of a typical bulb. When you engage High Bulb / Low Contrast mode this same combo will produce in excess of 40 fL when the bulb is new. That is enough to combat some ambient light.
Say you used a 1.8 gain angular-reflective screen that yielded an actual gain of 1.6 with a ceiling mounted PJ. The ambient light from the rear of the HT will experience the full 1.8 gain that the screen can produce. With the HP, you would hope to mount the PJ such that you got the same 1.6 effective gain. However, the ambient light is going to experience the full 2.8 gain that the HP can produce. So in effect, the 2.8 gain HP would be expected to significantly increase the ambient light that gets reflected .back to your eyes, compared to an angular-reflective screen of 1.8 gain.
Just what the actual gain from the HP is will vary with how high above your head it is mounted. I would shoot for a location that gives you the 1.6 gain discussed above.
good luck
Glenn
| Originally posted by tubby Good points Glenn, the ability to "open it up" when viewing sports with the lights on sounds good. So you think HP is not a good choice? Most of the pj use will be for movies with the lights off. I need an electric screen and the HP at $800 (non tensioned) seems like a pretty decent solution. Should I consider a white screen? |
Ambient light is bad. The only perfect solution is to eliminate it. If it can't be eliminated, then take whatever practical steps you can to limit it. After that, there are ways to lessen the degrading affect of limited ambient light upon PQ. Your primary weapon against ambient light is high PJ brightness.
The 12000 has two lamp power modes and three iris settings. In High Contrast and Low Lamp Power modes, it produces about 250 lumens after it has been pro-calibrated with a new bulb. (Before calibration it is a little brighter, but a little less color accurate.) In its brightest setting (Low Contrast and High Lamp Power modes engaged), the 12000 is three times brighter. If you use a screen gain that produces an optimal picture at night with the PJ in its dimmest modes (which are also its highest quality modes), you will have the ability to triple the PJ brightness for overcoming ambient light during the day. The 12000 is unique in this aspect.
There is no "great" screen solution for your situation, though Sony has a prototype screen under development that could possibly work for you at some point in the future. Who knows? The problem with ambient light coming from the rear of the HT is that it bounces right back at the viewer, regardless of the screen material type. The best screen for this type of situation is the Firehawk, but it doesn't have sufficient gain to work for your screen size, IMO. I tried a 12000 on a 100" Firehawk, and it was just too dim. If you used a Firehawk, you would probably need to use the PJs other Iris settings, which sort of defeats the purpose of purchasing such a high contrast PJ in the first place.
The HP is retro-reflective. It tends to send light back towards its source. To get its full 2.8 gain it is necessary to mount the PJ at about the same height as the middle of the screen. In a ceiling mount situation it produces a lower gain because it sends the light back towards the PJ versus down towards your seats. The problem is that the ambient light coming from the rear of the HT will probably not have its gain reduced in the same way. I would anticipate seeing more washout from the HP than from an angular-reflective screen because the ambient light is coming from the rear of the HT. In spite of this, I think the HP is workable in your HT because of the 12000s ability to triple its light output
An angular-reflective screen will deliver more of its rated gain when ceiling mounted than would a retro-reflective screen. A 1.8 gain angular reflective screen would be a better alternative to the HP in this situation during ambient light. When I say better I mean that your PQ in ambient light will be mediocre with that screen as compared to being really mediocre with the HP
. How important this kind of difference is to you, only you can decide. The PQ at night would likely be comparable with either screen, and its the night viewing that is most important to you.The 12000 produces about 250 lumens in Low Lamp / High Contrast mode with a new lamp. A 92" screen is about 25 sq ft. A screen gain of 1.6 would yield a screen brightness level of 16 fL. As the bulb ages, this will drop to 8 fL, which is too dim. However, when you engage High Lamp mode the brightness will be @10.5 fL, which though below the SMPTE standard of 12 fL, is still considered bright enough on a high contrast PJ like the 12000 by many of us. If this isn't good enough, you can always put the PJ in its mid-iris position for increased brightness. A 1.6 gain screen should allow you to use High Contrast mode for the life of a typical bulb. When you engage High Bulb / Low Contrast mode this same combo will produce in excess of 40 fL when the bulb is new. That is enough to combat some ambient light.
Say you used a 1.8 gain angular-reflective screen that yielded an actual gain of 1.6 with a ceiling mounted PJ. The ambient light from the rear of the HT will experience the full 1.8 gain that the screen can produce. With the HP, you would hope to mount the PJ such that you got the same 1.6 effective gain. However, the ambient light is going to experience the full 2.8 gain that the HP can produce. So in effect, the 2.8 gain HP would be expected to significantly increase the ambient light that gets reflected .back to your eyes, compared to an angular-reflective screen of 1.8 gain.
Just what the actual gain from the HP is will vary with how high above your head it is mounted. I would shoot for a location that gives you the 1.6 gain discussed above.
good luck
Glenn
Wow, Glenn your response answers most if not all of my questions and concerns. The funny thing about this site is that everyone including me yearns to choose the absolute best solution to one's situation. What I have to accept is at this level of particularity almost all the choices are pretty good and that no matter how much I spend, I WILL have to make some compromises. That said, is there an angular reflective screen that will suit me better than the HP and not break my bank? Thanks.
Alas, I don't have much experience with that type of screen. You would probably get better info from posting in the "screens" forum, but be prepared for a wide variety of opinions.
I am most familiar with the performance of Stewart screens. Stewart's screens are reference quality. IMO, they are the best, but they are also the most expensive. They are state of the art when it comes to color fidelity and white field uniformity. Their StudioTek 130 is the industries reference screen. I have read independent measurements of the color fidelity of many of their screens, and know how well they perform.
The screens from other manufacturers are more of an unknown to me. I do know that some screens can impart some color caste to images. I just don't know which ones do and which ones don't from other manufacturers. It is possible to calibrate out any color change imparted by the screen, but it takes a pro with specialized equipment that can read color off the screen itself.
The HP is used by a number of knowledgeable videophiles on the forum. I don't know exactly how color accurate it is, but I'm sure it is close enough, or they wouldn't be happy with it. If I had an application where I needed the HP, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. As for the other screen materials made by DaLite, Vutec, etc, I just don't know. They are definitely cheaper. Some of them might be just as good as Stewart, and others not.
Stewart makes white screens in their Studiotek, Videomatte, and Ultramatte lines with gains of 1.3, 1.5, 1.8, and 2.0. Some of the fabrics come in a maximum seamless size that is smaller than what you need. You should call their tech support line for further info. They are very helpful. Be warned that they are very knowledgeable about their products, but may not be as knowledgable about individual PJs. They may know the printed specs on the 12000. I have posted for you what it really does.
The 1.3 gain Studiotek 130 screen would be perfect for the 12000 (at 92"D)when the bulb is new. But bulb dimming will force you to use the lower contrast modes during the last 1/3 of the bulbs life. The higher gain screen would let you get more hours of viewing from the bulb before it is too dim to use. That is the reason I recommended the higher gain screen. I would expect you to get close to double the usable bulb life. You may not care about those things and might be willing to replace the bulb sooner or use the lower contrast iris settings. I just wanted it to be clear that you have some options, here.
Stewarts web site is www.stewartfilm.com
AVS sells Stewart, Dalite, and Vutec screens.
AVS member, DarinP2, owns the Sharp and a 92" HP. I recommend you PM him, direct him to this thread, and ask for his opinion. He is very experienced and knowledgeable. I'm sure he would be glad to help.
Glenn
I am most familiar with the performance of Stewart screens. Stewart's screens are reference quality. IMO, they are the best, but they are also the most expensive. They are state of the art when it comes to color fidelity and white field uniformity. Their StudioTek 130 is the industries reference screen. I have read independent measurements of the color fidelity of many of their screens, and know how well they perform.
The screens from other manufacturers are more of an unknown to me. I do know that some screens can impart some color caste to images. I just don't know which ones do and which ones don't from other manufacturers. It is possible to calibrate out any color change imparted by the screen, but it takes a pro with specialized equipment that can read color off the screen itself.
The HP is used by a number of knowledgeable videophiles on the forum. I don't know exactly how color accurate it is, but I'm sure it is close enough, or they wouldn't be happy with it. If I had an application where I needed the HP, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. As for the other screen materials made by DaLite, Vutec, etc, I just don't know. They are definitely cheaper. Some of them might be just as good as Stewart, and others not.
Stewart makes white screens in their Studiotek, Videomatte, and Ultramatte lines with gains of 1.3, 1.5, 1.8, and 2.0. Some of the fabrics come in a maximum seamless size that is smaller than what you need. You should call their tech support line for further info. They are very helpful. Be warned that they are very knowledgeable about their products, but may not be as knowledgable about individual PJs. They may know the printed specs on the 12000. I have posted for you what it really does.
The 1.3 gain Studiotek 130 screen would be perfect for the 12000 (at 92"D)when the bulb is new. But bulb dimming will force you to use the lower contrast modes during the last 1/3 of the bulbs life. The higher gain screen would let you get more hours of viewing from the bulb before it is too dim to use. That is the reason I recommended the higher gain screen. I would expect you to get close to double the usable bulb life. You may not care about those things and might be willing to replace the bulb sooner or use the lower contrast iris settings. I just wanted it to be clear that you have some options, here.
Stewarts web site is www.stewartfilm.com
AVS sells Stewart, Dalite, and Vutec screens.
AVS member, DarinP2, owns the Sharp and a 92" HP. I recommend you PM him, direct him to this thread, and ask for his opinion. He is very experienced and knowledgeable. I'm sure he would be glad to help.
Glenn
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
