[Drillt]

Hey all, new to the forums. I currently have a jvc 35rs and am looking for an upgrade for my dedicated media room.

The prices of the jvc 700r and Sony 600es are dropping and I'd like to get some opinions on which one I should purchase. The price difference is about 4k, is getting the Sony worth it? I probably would use blu Rays to watch movies as apposed to the Sony 4k media server. If 4k blu ray players come out over the next couple years would it be safer to go with the Sony now? I also play video games on my 120 screen a lot if that makes a difference. Thanks in advance for the opinions!

 

[Javs]

For video games the Sony's better motion and lag response are winners there.

The Sony has HDCP 2.2 support on one of the HDMI ports, the X700 does not, meaning when 4k Bluray does come out you wont be able to connect it to your JVC in any case.

The JVC has significantly better black level contrast and supposedly a better lens but that's about it, the Sony has better ANSI contrast, colour, 3d, and everything else is a nod to the Sony.

Sony's reality creation on minimal settings up-scaling top tier current blurays within the 4k panel is a holy sight to behold.

I demo'd an X500 next to a 500ES (600ES in the US) and although the JVC destroys the Sony in black level I walked away very much more impressed with the Sony's image for the reasons above.

I have a 300ES now and I love it.

 

[Andreas21]

For video games the Sony's better motion and lag response are winners there.

The Sony has HDCP 2.2 support on one of the HDMI ports, the X700 does not, meaning when 4k Bluray does come out you wont be able to connect it to your JVC in any case.

The JVC has significantly better black level contrast and supposedly a better lens but that's about it, the Sony has better ANSI contrast, colour, 3d, and everything else is a nod to the Sony.

Sony's reality creation on minimal settings up-scaling top tier current blurays within the 4k panel is a holy sight to behold.

I demo'd an X500 next to a 500ES (600ES in the US) and although the JVC destroys the Sony in black level I walked away very much more impressed with the Sony's image for the reasons above.

I have a 300ES now and I love it.

The JVC does not have a better lens than the VW500/600 I find them to be quite similar in quality.

I have tested the X500 against the VW500/600 and the JVC totally destroys the Sony in very low APL scenes and the Sony keeps up with brighter scenes (mid APL) and is better with bright scenes(higher APL). The Sony is also sharper due to the upscaling with RC, but if you set it to high can look overcooked and it is best to leave RC to minimum. With gaming the VW500/600 is better because of lower inputlag (after the firmware upgrade) and it is also brighter and can light up a bigger screen. If you have a normal size screen brightness is not a problem with the JVC, I have 16-17fl in 16x9 (102") and 14-15fl in 2.35:1 mode with an A-lens (129"). in low mode, and of course even brighter in high mode this is with a 1.0 gain screen.

 

[Naylorman32]

Although neither have been fully installed in my setup, i went from a jvc 6710 to a vw600es, and from the brief testing I did, I was much more impressed with the Sony. The blacks are good enough on the sony that you wont regret it.

 

[egrady]

I went from the JVC RS35 to the Sony 600es. I was disappointed with the black level of the Sony at first. But, after quite a bit of tweaking I was able to get something pretty close to my old JVC. Other than that, the Sony was a big upgrade. Much sharper, better motion and better ANSI contrast. The ability of the Sony to deal with a mixed light and dark scene is vastly better.


I'm aware that the newer JVC projectors have a better black level than the RS35. And much better than the Sony. But if you are happy with the black level of the RS35 I'm pretty sure the Sony black level won't disappoint you.

 

[Seegs108]

I got a chance to see a VPL-VW1100ES last year at Mark Haflichs house over the course of a long weekend and a 600ES at my local dealer a few times now. Both were in treated theater rooms. The feeling I get is that dark movies are a little lack luster with these units. More-so on the 600ES. That's just my personal feeling. For others it's good enough. The Sony's handle brighter content much better than they do dark content and will have an advantage over the JVC with brighter material. During my time with a current generation JVC unit I'm never left with a feeling that I'm missing something from the image. Sure, in an A/B setting against a Sony brighter scenes have a bit more pop to the image compared to the Sony, but the difference with brighter material is no where near as stark as the difference with darker material between the two. What you get with the JVC is good handling of bright and mixed-APL content with reference handling of darker movie material. The Sony offers great handling of bright and mixed APL level content and a little bit lack-luster performance when things get dark. Personally I wouldn't choose the 600ES over the X700. The 1100ES is bit more tempting because it does do a better job than the 600ES with darker content and even better than the 600ES with mixed/bright content. But between just these two units I think the X700 is better with blu-ray material.

The Sony is brighter and has lower input lag. So this may be a big plus for gaming. Though unless you have a very powerful PC, you aren't going to be gaming at 4K and getting decent framerates. Keep that in mind. For movies and TV, I think the JVC is the better option. Both are more than bright enough for a 120" screen.

 

[egrady]

The Sony is brighter and has lower input lag. So this may be a big plus for gaming. Though unless you have a very powerful PC, you aren't going to be gaming at 4K and getting decent framerates. Keep that in mind. For movies and TV, I think the JVC is the better option. Both are more than bright enough for a 120" screen.

For movies it depends somewhat on the content. On Alien the JVC, but there are lots of movies that would take advantage of the strengths of the Sony. For TV it also depends. Live sports are breathtaking on the Sony.

 

[Seegs108]

For movies it depends somewhat on the content. On Alien the JVC, but there are lots of movies that would take advantage of the strengths of the Sony. For TV it also depends. Live sports are breathtaking on the Sony.

But my point here is that the difference between the Sony and JVC with brighter material like sports and TV isn't anywhere near as large as it is with darker content. To put it in numbers, the Sony will look say 10% better with this kind of content, but with mid to low APL content the JVC will look say 50-75% better depending on how dark the material gets. And it's not just "the darkest of movies" like Alien where the JVC will pull ahead. The JVC just looks much better than everything else when things get kinda to very dark. "Kinda" dark happens a lot. It happens in most movies several times. "Very" dark is a more sparse type of content.

I've had many DLP units with higher brightness, better lenses, better motion, and higher ANSI contrast than the Sony 600ES has and I'd use these same numbers again to classify the differences between the JVC and these DLP units with brighter content. I'd say it's only about a 10% difference in PQ.

With that said, if gaming is of high importance the Sony will do far better due to lower input lag over the JVCs.

 

[chrisreeves]

But my point here is that the difference between the Sony and JVC with brighter material like sports and TV isn't anywhere near as large as it is with darker content.

Do you feel this still holds true when dealing with larger screens that push the JVC's beyond their sweet spot for peak light output? In those scenarios will the extra lumens of the Sonys become more apparent to the eye - and will the black level advantage of the JVC's be made less important because the Sony's higher black level is being spread across more surface area, and thus is naturally dimmed?

 

[Seegs108]

This would be true for any projector when putting it beyond it's limits. But at 120" wide or diagonal, both would be fine and plenty bright. The OP does have an interest in gaming on his screen so the Sony may be the better choice when taking that into consideration. Though I do not feel overall PQ will be better on the Sony. I've demo'ed one several times now and I just don't see myself giving up my X500 for it. It's just not enough of an improvement in the areas where the JVC is worse at where I'd consider owning the Sony over the JVC. Maybe when we get UHD blu-ray I'll change my mind, but I would imagine JVC is releasing a native UHD machine this fall so that may never come to fruition.

The same thing holds true for black level no matter what projector you're talking about. The more surface area you're spreading the light across the lower the black level will be. Contrast will remain the same however. But I don't think, even when going to an absurdly large screen where you're only getting 8 or 10 foot lamberts the Sony will be able to look as good as a JVC at the same ftL reading in regards to low APL content. Though, like I said, it will still have that ~10% handling of brighter/mixed APL content.

 

[George Kouzev]

Though I do not feel overall PQ will be better on the Sony. I've demo'ed one several times now and I just don't see myself giving up my X500 for it. It's just not enough of an improvement in the areas where the JVC is worse at where I'd consider owning the Sony over the JVC.

Comparing the two several times did not change what you value more, which is expected. I know at least two people who gave up their x500 for Sony 300 after side by side at home. I guess people's sensitivities are different, otherwise everyone would be buying JVC.

 

[Seegs108]

Comparing the two several times did not change what you value more, which is expected. I know at least two people who gave up their x500 for Sony 300 after side by side at home. I guess people's sensitivities are different, otherwise everyone would be buying JVC.

Definitely true. Everyone values things differently.

 

[chrisreeves]

But at 120" wide or diagonal, both would be fine and plenty bright.

Okay what about this Seegs - which would you keep on your desert island - you only get one:

600ES @ 17 foot lamberts

or

X500 @ 12 foot lamberts

screen size equal, bat cave swaddled in black velvet.

 

[Seegs108]

I mean I'd probably take water and food over a projector and screen if I were stuck on a desert island, but gun against my head I'd still take the JVC. Your eyes can and will adjust to 12 ftL of peak white brightness over a short period of time. We all do this frequently when we go to the commercial cinema. Very rarely will the presentation be brighter than 12-14ftL. The contrast performance on the 600ES will always be weak by comparison. Though I do like brighter images, I just don't think I could live with the 600ES knowing what I know other models such as the X500 and LS10000 can give you.

 

[Seegs108]

I've had the opportunity to have projectors here that were as bright to brighter and had similar contrast performance that the 600ES had. The Sim2 Lumis Host, Digital Projection HIGHlite Cine 1080p-260 HC, and Runco LS-10i are in the same league (or better) with brightness, ANSI contrast, and on/off contrast performance with the DI's enabled. Brightness can be addicting, but for me the situation was the same as the 4K Sony's I've seen; the difference in bright scene handling was no where near as different between the X500 and these units as was the difference in mid to low APL scene handling. It's just not a trade off I'm willing to make. If the difference were larger than I think I might make an exception. For others it might be a trade off they're fine with. I just think that on/off contrast performance is the one area that is most important for a display to have. I mean think about it, why do people like Plasma's and OLED screens over LCDs? What is their biggest claim to fame and reason people drool over them? LCDs can be crazy bright by comparison, but obviously there must something about contrast performance that's more important to people because they continually say these Plasma's and OLED screens are the best they've ever seen, not the brighter LCDs. Not that other things aren't important, but I think this example says a lot about what people are looking for and like in an image.

 

[chrisreeves]

I mean I'd probably take water and food over a projector and screen if I were stuck on a desert island, but gun against my head I'd still take the JVC. Your eyes can and will adjust to 12 ftL of peak white brightness over a short period of time.

Food and water are overrated! Okay now what if you lived in a world where half the films you want to watch are available in UHD Blu Ray with 10 bit color and less compression, but the same colorspace - would you still take the 12 ft lambert JVC over 17 with the Sony?

I know these comparisons are stupid, but I have fun sorting out your preferences.

 

[chrisreeves]

I mean I'd probably take water and food over a projector and screen if I were stuck on a desert island, but gun against my head I'd still take the JVC. Your eyes can and will adjust to 12 ftL of peak white brightness over a short period of time.

Food and water are overrated! Okay now what if you lived in a world where half the films you want to watch are available in UHD Blu Ray with 10 bit color and less compression, but the same rec709 colorspace - would you still take the 12 ft lambert JVC over 17 with the Sony?

I know these comparisons are stupid, but I have fun sorting out your preferences.

 

[Javs]

Food and water are overrated! Okay now what if you lived in a world where half the films you want to watch are available in UHD Blu Ray with 10 bit color and less compression, but the same colorspace - would you still take the 12 ft lambert JVC over 17 with the Sony?

I know these comparisons are stupid, but I have fun sorting out your preferences.

This was a fun argument a year ago, but the future is set and is almost upon us.

I honestly don't know why anybody would be entertaining the idea of buying an obsolete 1080p projector at this point in time when in about 9 months or so there will be content and a bluray standard that will be totally unable to connect with the JVC at all. Talk about not being future proof.

The real question should be, are YOU willing to have a projector that in 12 months no matter how good the blacks are will be totally unable to play any new content that that is available in UHD. You will be buying into the current bluray spec if you go JVC right now, and you will be locked out of the one just around the corner. That's where it ends in my opinion.

You will get no 10/12 bit colour space,
No 4:2:2 / 4:4:4 chroma sampling,
No 4k (Even though the JVC is NOT true 4k, feeding a real 4k signal and using e-shift would look better than 1080p + e-Shift, but no you wont even be able to do this)

Wait a few months for JVC to release a projector with at the very least a HDMI 2 & HDCP 2.2 port.

Im sorry but I cant buy that the JVC's much better On/Off contrast can overcome these cons at this point in time for anybody buying a projector and planning to keep it more than a few years.

 

[Drillt]

Thank you so much for all the opinions, I've had a chance to see both at local stores and all I can say is that black levels are more important to me than I thought! I don't watch sports nor am I a competitive gamer - very casual actually so you can guess where I'm leaning....

 

[Seegs108]

This was a fun argument a year ago, but the future is set and is almost upon us.

I honestly don't know why anybody would be entertaining the idea of buying an obsolete 1080p projector at this point in time when in about 9 months or so there will be content and a bluray standard that will be totally unable to connect with the JVC at all. Talk about not being future proof.

The real question should be, are YOU willing to have a projector that in 12 months no matter how good the blacks are will be totally unable to play any new content that that is available in UHD. You will be buying into the current bluray spec if you go JVC right now, and you will be locked out of the one just around the corner. That's where it ends in my opinion.

You will get no 10/12 bit colour space,
No 4:2:2 / 4:4:4 chroma sampling,
No 4k (Even though the JVC is NOT true 4k, feeding a real 4k signal and using e-shift would look better than 1080p + e-Shift, but no you wont even be able to do this)

Wait a few months for JVC to release a projector with at the very least a HDMI 2 & HDCP 2.2 port.

Im sorry but I cant buy that the JVC's much better On/Off contrast can overcome these cons at this point in time for anybody buying a projector and planning to keep it more than a few years.

It won't be "obsolete" as 1080p bluray will be here for quite a long time. I have a feeling the jump from 1080p to 4K will be not as in your face as DVD to bluray was.

The Sony 600es and 350es can't do P3 color, more than 8bit color at 60hz, it can't do HDR and is limited to a UHP bulb.

Both units will be "obsolete" by your terms within 24 months, the JVC more so, but I think to make it sound as if the 600/350ES is somehow "future proof" is a little bit too much. It will have many deficiencies compared to the projector models were about to get in the next two years that are fully HDCP 2.2 compliant, have full P3 support, have 18Gbps HDMI 2.0 ports, laser illuminated light engines and I'm sure will have other features these models currently don't posses.