[ckolchak]

the place i first saw a Sony VW10HT set up , now has a DreamVision DLP replacing it. they said it was being fed off a progressive player and it was being thrown on a 120" 1.8(?) gain screen.

they want $6500 for it


i was seriously unimpressed.

i saw, from about 14' back, screendoor, and some nasty artifacts. resolution looked poor and the Fifth Element they had playing looked sorely ho-hum.

can't wait to get a breakout cable so i can take my LT150 there to demo some progressive players. i really think the set-up in my basement, with home-made screen and s-video connection, blows their set up out of the water at less than 1/3 the price.


man, if i'd have known it would be this good, i would have seriously considered ordering 2...if noth9ing else, just to have a spare bulb and extra parts ready http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif



THANKS DELL!!!

 

[ckolchak]

obviously, i would be remiss in not thanking AVS forum too.

- without whom, i would still be going to stores like this, seeing expensive, unimpressive set-ups and thinking ...

" man, i can't wait till a few years from now when this stuff gets better and cheaper...oh well, might as well shuffle back home to my beloved 53" "

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

 

[clopez]

ckolchak,

Please, show little respect the former King http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif .

The Dreamvision DL500 and The Davis DL450 need three things to shine.


a) Better Cables and a VGA converter to replace the original cord.


b) Must be running at 800x600 72Hz


c) Driven by a Radeon Card.


d)The gamma table updated


Strengths


a) Very few reported rinbow effects (None of my 100 viewers every complained, even had outdoor movie parties)


b) triple buffering (no tearing)


c) one of the DLP projectors that produce deeper blacks.


d) 2000Hr, 4000Hr, and 6000Hr bulb life


(Using DVDO and a progressive scan players on these units are a waste of time and yield sub-par results because the image has to be rescaled)


I have noticed that many the new guys haaven't seen a true set-up of a DL450 and how some of us find it very hard to replace when it comes to DVD playing with HTPC.



clopez
http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif


[This message has been edited by clopez (edited 08-15-2001).]

 

[Jim Tittle]

I have a DL450 being run by a Radeon based HTPC and I have seen the LT150 at a fellow forum members house being run on a Radeon-based HTPC. So I may be one of the few people to see an "apples-to-apples" comparison of the two.


My take was that the LT150 was a nice looking projector, but it did NOT look significantly better than my DL450. In fact, rainbow is definitely more noticable on the LT150 than on the DL450. Even the owner of the LT150, who has seen my DL450 setup, acknolwedged that rainbows were more visible on his projector than mine.


I did think the LT150 had better color saturation than the DL450, and it is definitely brighter, but the DL450 seemed to have better black level to me. I thought the extra resolution would make a big difference, but at least for DVD it did not look better and I did not find the screen door on my Davis noticably worse than the screen door on the LT150. My newly thumperized DL450 arrives home on Thursday and I expect the color saturation to be significantly improved. I was amazed to see posts in which the LT150 had a measured contrast of 600:1. The image did have punch, but the contrast did not seem that much greater than on my projector, which has a contrast ratio well below 600.


In short, the LT150 looks damn good, but it definitely does not blow away a properly setup DL450. in fact, on the question of rainbow artificat it is demonstrably worse than the DL450(this may be the downside of greater brightness...rainbow should be easier to see the brighter the image is). I left the demo not feeling even the slightest regret for not buying this summer's deal of the century. Last summer's deal of the century (Davis DL450) still holds up well. my observtions apply only to DVD, with HDTV I expect the LT150 to be quite a bit better than the DL450. However, I don't find anything on TV even worthy of being shown in the hometheater so I am not too worried about that.


[This message has been edited by Jim Tittle (edited 08-15-2001).]

 

[Grant Smyth]

I have seen the Dreamvision and thought it looked good with s-video. With a proper HTPC I bet it looks fantastic, which is a testament to the potential of the projector and how HTPCs can unlock that potential.


I don't dispute what some people are seeing when they view the LT150, however, what they are seeing and what many of us are seeing with the LT150 are two different things - the setup makes a huge difference! My system is infinitely better than the Dreamvision setup I saw - why? Well I am using a HTPC, my room is calibrated and I use a screen that gives the image huge punch! Not a fair comparison? You're right, it isn't! And that's my point - when people make comparisons, one projector often has the advantage since it's in it's home setting while the other isn't! The LT150 works with a HTPC + Da-lite Hipower + proper masking etc. Its colours are vibrant, it creates the illusion of deep blacks, great contrast (Thumper measured it at 1000:1 with white segment on!!!) and a ton of punch. How much incentive is there for others who already own a projector to set this thing up for optimum viewing? Not much!


There are a number of projectors out there that I would love to have, however, this one (actually three) satisfies me for now and gee the Dell price was hard to beat!


My suggestion is that if we think our particular projector is better than another that we don't name the other projector - can't help but offend someone, and rightly so. Often the comparisons aren't fair anyway! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif


Cheers,


Grant

 

[Frode]

Grant,


Just thought of something to make your LT150 a couple of steps better:


Sell one of the other LT150s you have and use the money to buy a Panamorph and an extra bulb http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif . Then.. when Thumper has finished tweaking his mods and Milori is finished with Dilard for the LT150 sell the second one and use the money to finance that and a couple of bulbs. Can you say high quality custom home theater...


------------------

/frode

 

[Jim Tittle]

The whole point of my post was that I saw the LT150 and the DL450 in virtually identical conditions. Both being driven at their native resolution by a Radeon-based HTPC and shown on DA-Lite model B screens. I did not say that either projector had been optmized, but they were certainly seen in nearly identical circumstances.


My main point was that when seen in a comporable way they both looked good. I was trying to be nice, but --let's face it -- comparing an HTPC driven projector to one being given a 480i signal on s-video is just ridiculous.


I have seen these two projectors in nearly identical setups and and thought both looked good, and that each had certain strengths over the other. However, my main point was that there is simply no way that the LT150 "blows away" the DL450.


P.S. My new bulb costs less than an LT150 bulb and is rated at 6000 hours


[This message has been edited by Jim Tittle (edited 08-15-2001).]

 

[Jonmx]

Quote:

Originally posted by Grant Smyth: My suggestion is that if we think our particular projector is better than another that we don't name the other projector - can't help but offend someone, and rightly so. Often the comparisons aren't fair anyway! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif Cheers, Grant

Good point. Almost all projectors discussed on this forum can be made to look very good or even excellent with the proper tweaks. But some are easier than others to optimize. The majority of demos don't do the projector justice. I may never spend the time get my LT150 up to Grant Smyth's level, but I will certainly try some of the tweaks. Currently I am happy with the out of the box setting of both my LT150 and Sanyo XP21N just with a progressive scan DVD.

 

[nataraj]

I'm sure there are several members here who have owned / still own both lt150 and davis 450 (or clones).


I don't see much difference between them except that lt150 has better resolution (XGA), handles HD but does not have the zoom lens. The pictures are very comparable. Davis probably has better blacks but lt150 has better colors.


I've seen dreamvision setup at a dealer only once. It was awful. They also sold dvdo (and other scalers) but were not using one with the dreamvision.




------------------
www.musicalnirvana.com

Presenting the genius of Indian Classical Music

 

[ckolchak]

apologies if i gave offense to any Dreamvision owners.

i'm sure they've taken pains to set theirs up well and that theirs would 'blow away' what i saw in the store.

however-

even though the demo at the store may not have been ideal conditions, it was fairly close to the conditions i have in my basement right now, also far from ideal at the moment.

i've read somewhere that the dreamvision can't take a progressive signal(?) so it must have just been s-video?.

After i watched the Fifth Element in the store.

i actually went out and bought it so i could demo it on mine at home ( actually never seen this movie before).

i played the exact same chapter on the LT150, and while "blows it away " may have been a bit of hyperbole, i can honestly say, on a simple DIY screen (compared to a cosmopolitan 1.8 gain), with a simple s-video connection, in a fairly uncalibrated room, that i much prefered the image on the LT150.

on natural 1 the blacks were plenty dark. i don't really comprehend all the discussion from people unhappy with the black levels with this projector. i'm sure they have their reasons,but to me this is not a factor at all.

i will concede that rainbows were more apparent with the NEC. i expected to see them with the dreamvision, but it was like they were always shimmering just below the surface of the water...on the LT150 the would actually break the surface. they were fairly common on the FE disc, which makes me think something about the software has a lot to do with it, not talking about just scene-specific conditions, either.

but even with the 'bows, the resolution was so much greater, that i could defocus the screendoor completely and still have a tighter, more detailed, and significantly more dimensional image.

tweaked, both these pj's would be different stories , i'm sure. but right out of the box with the cheapest of connections, i really didn't think it was much of a contest.

what really prompted me to post this was their selling price which is almost 4 x's what i paid for my pj, and even now more than twice the price.

even at the same price and the 1/4 lifespan on the bulbs, i'd still take the LT150.

at the very least, nothing i saw in that demo would make me lust after front projection, or seek out more info on the internet about it. i would have simply thought at that price/quality it will still be a few years before i'll need to bother looking into it.

sorry.



I'm curious, some people have mentioned that the dreamvision was the big deal last year...whats the story there?

 

[Jim Tittle]

I think the reason your initial post was frustating to some people, including me, is that everyone who knows anything about the DL450 (Dreamvision) understands that it does not have a good scalar. So for people who have been around here a while, saying a DL450 looks bad with S-video input is like saying it looks bad if you leave the lens cap on


One way in which projectors have really improved over the last year is in terms of their onboard scalar. The DL450 was hot stuff last summer because, with an HTPC or external scalar, the image is outstanding, and in some ways better than the LT150. For example, I still think the DL450 is the rainbow-free king of DLPs (not counting the new six element color wheel models coming out now) Given that more experienced members of the forum understand that, you can see why your pronouncement that the LT150 "blows away" a Dreamvision fed with s-video is a little galling.


unlike Grant, I don't mind if people make meaningful comparisons between projectors. It provides a way to let people have some limited idea how a projector they have not seen stacks up to one they have seen. However, for experienced DL450 owners to hear people say that their projector looks like crap when fed with s-video provides absolutely no information and is more than a little annoying.


I along with many other people bought the DL450 last summer for $1450, and so THAT along with its performance is why it was a big deal last summer


[This message has been edited by Jim Tittle (edited 08-15-2001).]

 

[ckolchak]

once again, my apologies for any offenses incurred.

to re-iterate; the comparison was of the two projectors with the barest of resources.

unfortunately, at the moment, all i can afford are the barest of resources.


someday i would love to see a tweaked dreamvision driven by a radeon HTPC.


oh, for pete sakes. i thought you guys had spent like $8000 on your dreamvisions.

for $1450, you can stand to get your noses tweaked a little http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif

besides, it will happen to the class of '01 next year, i'm sure.

this deal is already in the history books.


[This message has been edited by ckolchak (edited 08-15-2001).]

 

[Jim Tittle]

Quote:

Originally posted by ckolchak: i probably should just read more, and keep my mouth shut ..

Now don't get all defensive on me here


I am the last one to suggest that someone should post less. I was only trying to explain to you why some people got a little worked up by your post.


Last year I was DL450 newbie, and so I understand what LT150 newbies are going through. I was just trying to explain that the interest in certain projectors often has a long history attached to it, and you would do well to try and understand that.

 

[Phat Phreddy]

Quote:

d)The gamma table updated

OK well the rest is done (OK I admit it, I still use a GeForce but...) but I was not aware that this was a common tweak...


I have seen this recent thread but didn't know that this was being adjusted...


How do I go about this and is it a DIY job ???


------------------

[email protected]
HTPC without using windows... GUI Front Ends for Home Theater

 

[RobertWood]

Jim,


When you say you don't see screen door with your Davis I'm wondering with what screen size and at what distance?


p.s. The hype about the internal scalers being much better with the newer projectors (at least the afforadable ones) is pretty much just that (hype).

IMO opinion there's still not enough difference to matter

since the older and newer ones both need to be fed native resolution to get a truly watchable picture.


Bob



------------------

~ The Sultan of Cheap ~





[This message has been edited by RobertWood (edited 08-15-2001).]

 

[noah katz]

Grant,


"My suggestion is that if we think our particular projector is better than another that we don't name the other projector - can't help but offend someone, and rightly so."


If someone is offended, they're taking things too personally. Everyone wants comparative information, and if you leave something unnamed, they won't get it. Hopefully the poster will give enough info to form reasonable judgements about whether stated conclusions are valid, or ideally, let the reader form their own conclusion. In any case anyone who's been around awhile knows that all stated opinions about image quality are in the end subjective.


------------------

Noah

 

[JHouse]

The Dreamvision was the first projector I ever saw that made me think "I've gotta do this". It flipped my switch. I had seen some projectors before, and they were all a joke (I thought it really WAS a screen door). No color, no detail, just not worth looking at. Then the Dreamvision. Wow. I needed one. That started the research. Then I found this forum. The rest is histrionic (get it?). I will always remember that first experience. Real color, real contrast, real clarity and I didn't see anything I would call a screen door. Of course, I didn't buy one. Too much money, not quite bright enough and it needed processing help. So I went with the LP350/CD555m because I wanted it to be clean, bright and easy. It turns out that just whetted my appetite.


------------------

Joe

My current idea of the best value:

Boxlight 38t

Quadscan Elite

Panasonic RP91

RCA DTC-100

Da-Lite 100" 4:3 1.3gain

Studio Experience SE616's

and some other stuff.

 

[Robert Clark]

Quote:

Originally posted by ckolchak: the place i first saw a Sony VW10HT set up , now has a DreamVision DLP replacing it. they said it was being fed off a progressive player and it was being thrown on a 120" 1.8(?) gain screen. they want $6500 for it

There was the problem right there. The Davis projectors have a particularly putrid internal scaler and simply MUST be fed with an HTPC. Seen this way they are still very, very good projectors...


Robert



------------------

Robert Clark

See our home theater (with very poor quality pics!)
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/Album...874&a=12744078

 

[Robert Clark]

I actually am MOST interested when people compare one projector to another, that's how I can get some idea how a particular projector stacks up against something I might have seen myself.

I don't think people in here take it personally, they just wish to correct any misinformation (like comparing an LT150 with an HTPC to a Davis 450 clone driven by a standalone DVD player, probably the 450 at it's worst...)


Fire away!

Robert
Quote:

Originally posted by Grant Smyth: My suggestion is that if we think our particular projector is better than another that we don't name the other projector - can't help but offend someone, and rightly so. Often the comparisons aren't fair anyway! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif Cheers, Grant

------------------

Robert Clark

See our home theater (with very poor quality pics!)
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/Album...874&a=12744078