A lot of these are my thoughts, and I'm sure you're awaiting more info from the 2019 JVC vs Sony comparison thread as am I.

One big question is whether these units are using binned parts. I'm pretty sure the NX9 uses cherry picked NX7 parts, as was the case with the 790/990. And it has a better lens, which in itself probably contributes to the price significantly. But is the inverse true for the NX5? Is the NX5 using rejected NX7 parts? Sadly, we will probably not know unless an especially courageous reviewer tears an NX7 and NX5 apart and compares the guts.

The NX7 is a stretch for my budget. Hence the NX5 is appealing. A lot of people in the comparison thread are indicating that they may not use the 2020 filter because of the reduction in brightness. So the loss of that may be moot if going with an NX5. So the real question is how much better is the NX7 contrast than the NX5? How much blacker is the black floor of the NX7? How much brighter is the NX7 (presumably 100 lumens) How noticeable will the differences be side by side?

Unfortunately, it will be at least three more weeks before Arrow-AV is able to do his comparisons since he got a couple duds from JVC...

 

Theoretically they should use separate parts, at least for NX9 vs NX5/7. But cost-effectiveness would dictate the same part and binning 3 ways, with the NX5 most likely to get the lowest contrast or decent contrast but a few stuck pixels.

In retrospect I realize value is highly subjective and budget dependent, but I was hoping someone would sway me one way or the other. Obviously my heart wants the RS3000/NX9, but my head wants a good excuse to spend the extra money. Hahaha

 

I thought exactly the same, but it was surprising. It did add detail.

 

I am considering all 3 versions as well.

REASONS TO JUMP TO THE RS3000 FROM THE RS2000
-300 more spec lumens. After adjusting settings/calibration though, the difference could be much less than 300.
-Slightly better spec contrast 100k vs 80k:1. Very unlikely to be noticeable in real viewing.
-More vertical lens shift (100% vs 80%). If you have a tall ceiling, you can mount the 3000 higher which may improve aesthetics and decrease noise.
-Greater throw range which allows for greater mounting flexibility. Can mount the 3000 closer to screen by about 1 foot depending on your throw distance. If you have a small room or limited mount points, this can make a difference.
-Better lens supposedly. It's bigger anyway. Might translate to real-world differences, or might not. The bigger lens may even be worse due to more internal reflections.
-8k eshift. In @markmon1 shootout, it noticeably improved sharpness on yokohama. However, you do need to pixel peep so real-world impact is probably minimal. 4k is already extremely sharp.

 

Hard to answer that question without actually comparing the two side by side, same environment and settings. As far as the "binged" parts, maybe JVC improved their manufacturing process so that the parts being produced are more consistent with less variances.

 

Going from the rs520 to the rs2000, I would find it extremely difficult to pay more than double to go from the rs2000 to the rs3000 with such little difference between them. Maybe a $2000 difference but not $10,000. Unlike the rs4500, that projector not only has the quality lens but it is a laser projector with excellent dimming. The rs3000 has a better lens with the same features. We've been waiting for this shootout for close to 5 months now

 

Their are some diminishing returns in there for sure. I guess it all comes down to how deep your pockets are.....

 

It would have been a big stretch for me to get the RS3000 so I went with the RS2000 and now that I have it I can't imagine I would consider the RS3000 "worth it" based on the spec difference. I would only be willing to pay significantly more for a laser light source or dramatic increases in brightness, contrast, or both. The quality of the picture on the RS2000 is stunning to me.

 

All I can say is don’t assume the NX9 is brighter.

All 3 projectors use the same exact bulb.

If you know anything about how projector manufacturer companies measure lumens, you know that they always measure with lens zoomed as big as possible.

This is the only reason that the NX9 is brighter. Because it can throw the same size screen from a closer throw. It can zoom the image bigger at the same throw distance.

I tested a NX9 and NX5 in the same room with the same settings, mounted at around mid zoom range and measured each. The NX9 measured 16 foot candles and the NX5 measured 16.1 foot candles, so both the NX9 and NX5 measured basically the same brightness. Only when the NX9’s lens is zoomed past the limit of the NX5’s lens does it result in more lumens and why JVC lists the rated lumens higher.

 

That would be disappointing, if you only get the light improvement by being that much closer and it does't apply to all distances that's not great value for the money.

I realize it's sharper but the improved lens on the NX5 is resolving fully so it's already extremely sharp. If I had 18k to spend your probably better off with a paladan and NX7 over NX9.

 

I would say RS2000 is good enough for most people

 

Well, I would say it's the sweet spot for price and features when comparing all three projectors in the new JVC line.

1-2 weeks? I've been waiting 5 months and still don't have one, lol.

Well, I had the opportunity for a late fall pre-order as well. I passed. Fast forward to mid-February and my dealer said a few who had ordered in October/November got their deposits back and bought other projectors. I jumped then, but I'm still probably two weeks away (best case) from getting mine.

 

1-2 weeks? I've been waiting 5 months and still don't have one, lol. I sincerely hope you get one soon, but wouldn't it be ironic if people ordering these today are getting them before people who preordered at the end of October?...

 

I don't know about the NX7 and NX9, but on March 12th I finally decided to buy a NX5. I contacted my dealer that morning and he said his distributor had one in stock, so he placed the order and had it shipped from distributor to me and I received it the very next day as the distributor was not too far away from me and I was in 1 day shipping range.

 

I have a pre-order on the NX7 and have been watching the comparison results trickle in. The NX9 is well beyond the point of diminishing returns when it comes to price. The 8k eShift does make the picture look sharper, but only by a small amount. See the comparison photos here: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-d...049760-2019-model-sony-vs-jvc-projectors-comparison-thread-20.html#post57821190

As someone said earlier in this thread, it's probably better to get an NX5 or NX7 and put extra money towards an anamorphic lens for better brightness. Unless you need aditional brightness beyond that or unless you absolutely require the best of the best experience, you can pass on the NX9.

The NX5 vs NX7 question I cannot answer until we see them go head to head with some real measurements.

 

There's definitively value in the NX9 over NX7, don't get me wrong I would love to have an NX9 but if you are on a budget then a NX5 or NX7 plus A-lens is something to consider for less money.

 

Yup, I am not regretting my RS2000 and DCR lens at all. I am glad I saved the money from the RS3000 and bought a lens that will last a lot of projectors for me.

 

The RS2000 is the sweet spot of the lineup...it is a significant jump above the RS1000 in performance for a roughly 30% increase in price. The RS3000 at roughly double the price of the RS2000 is a smaller step up so the law of diminishing returns is in effect big time.

For me the step up to the RS2000 was a no brainer, but I could not justify the RS3000. For most people who are buying a projector to enjoy content the RS2000 is the one to get. If you are into critical viewing and are more concerned with image perfection than with the content then the RS3000 is for you.

 

The RS2000 is the sweet spot of the lineup...it is a significant jump above the RS1000 in performance for a roughly 30% increase in price. The RS3000 at roughly double the price of the RS2000 is a smaller step up so the law of diminishing returns is in effect big time.



For me the step up to the RS2000 was a no brainer, but I could not justify the RS3000. For most people who are buying a projector to enjoy content the RS2000 is the one to get. If you are into critical viewing and are more concerned with image perfection than with the content then the RS3000 is for you.

I’m curious what you saw as a big jump up between the 1000 and 2000? I saw both and I saw pretty much no real difference between them. The main thing that I could see was the better color gamut coverage with the 2000 and it’s BT2020 color filter, but many people don’t even use that as you lose lumens with it.

I couldn’t see any real noticeable contrast difference to my eyes.

 

I'm looking forward to some pro reviews comparing the 1000, 2000 and 3000. The 1000 has better contrast than most projectors outside of JVC. I would think it would be on par with a Sony 695ES which everyone loves.

 

Was a direct shootout ever done for NX7 vs NX9? Is the consensus still that real world lumens are very close between the two ?

 

There must be upgrades in the optical elements such that JVC rates the lumen specs 1800/1900/2200 for NX5/7/9!

It would seem very dishonest to make this claim based on “binned” bulb brightness, when they know most users will be replacing bulbs over time, different bulb dimming rates etc.

 

The NX9 can be mounted closer for the same screen size so that may account for some or all of the brightness difference.

 

Has anyone directly compared the NX7 with NX9? After reading this thread, I can’t find a compelling reason to spend the extra $6k (usd street) on NX9.

The only real world benefit seems to be POSSiBLY 300 more lumens (probably 100-200 calibrated) due to closer throw range and/or the larger glass lens of the NX9.

 

Yep the lens does seem like the only difference. But a lens can make a substantial difference. Not only can it be brighter but it also can be a sharper cleaner image. Edge to edge sharpness should be improved.

I know when I use my mirrorless cameras the ability to resolve resolution using a cheap lens vs a good prime is massive. I would expect the same between the two.

I have not seen the two side by side so I would hope someone that has can comment. I will say I have not seen a major increase in contrast between the two noted in any reviews.

So is a massive high quality lens worth 6k? That is up to you!

 

I've seen all 3.

The biggest difference is certainly the lens. The image was sharper on the NX9 compared to both the NX7 and NX5 that I saw. Also the focus uniformity was pretty much perfect on the NX9 all the way out to the corners.

Now the lens on the 5 and 7 are no slouch and are still really nice, but the NX9 just took it to the next level IMO.

However, I still think you have to be sitting pretty darn close to even appreciate this difference.

The other main physical difference is the 8K eShift. This as far as I saw was an overall positive, but it was an extremely small difference. Probably because the input signal is still limited to 4K.

Finally we come to contrast, which is always a complicated subject. As far I have seen trustworthy measurements, looking at all 3 projectors with the iris fully open and the auto DI disabled and the BT.2020 color filter off, the NX5 is about 20K:1, the NX7 is about 25K:1 and the NX9 is about 30K:1. This difference is of course small and hard to notice between 2 adjacent (5 vs 7 and 7 vs 9), but the 5 vs the 9 is noticeable.

But don't let those numbers discourage you, those are the worst case numbers. As you close down the iris, the 7 and 9 create a much larger gap due to the fact that they have 2 iris and the 5 has only 1. At full closed -15 iris, the NX5 does about 37K:1, NX7 does about 50K:1 and the NX9 about 60K:1. Finally, adding the BT.2020 color filter adds some more contrast as well and brings the 7 to about 60K:1 and the NX9 about 70K:1.

These are then multiplied for dynamic by the auto DI in similar proportions to their static measurements.

My opinion is the NX9 is not worth it and you are much better off getting a NX7 with a DCR lens for similar price. The extra light that the DCR lens provides you would allow you to surpass any possible lumen advantage of the NX9. And with that lumen advantage you could close the iris down on the NX7 even more which can close the gap in contrast between the NX7 and NX9 as well. Either way you will have a choice for more brightness for HDR or more contrast closing down the iris farther.

 

I've seen all 3.

The biggest difference is certainly the lens. The image was sharper on the NX9 compared to both the NX7 and NX5 that I saw. Also the focus uniformity was pretty much perfect on the NX9 all the way out to the corners.

Now the lens on the 5 and 7 are no slouch and are still really nice, but the NX9 just took it to the next level IMO.

However, I still think you have to be sitting pretty darn close to even appreciate this difference.

The other main physical difference is the 8K eShift. This as far as I saw was an overall positive, but it was an extremely small difference. Probably because the input signal is still limited to 4K.

Finally we come to contrast, which is always a complicated subject. As far I have seen trustworthy measurements, looking at all 3 projectors with the iris fully open and the auto DI disabled and the BT.2020 color filter off, the NX5 is about 20K:1, the NX7 is about 25K:1 and the NX9 is about 30K:1. This difference is of course small and hard to notice between 2 adjacent, but the 5 vs the 9 is noticeable.

But don't let those numbers discourage you, those are the worst case numbers. As you close down the iris, the 7 and 9 create a much larger gap due to the fact that they have 2 iris. At full closed -15 iris, the NX5 does about 37K:1, NX7 does about 50K:1 and the NX9 about 60K:1. Finally, adding the BT.2020 color filter adds some more contrast as well and brings the 7 to about 60K:1 and the NX9 about 70K:1.

These are then multiplied for dynamic by the auto DI in similar proportions to their static measurements.

My opinion is the NX9 is not worth it and you are much better off getting a NX7 with a DCR lens for similar price. The extra light that the DCR lens provides you would allow you to surpass any possible lumen advantage of the NX9. And with that lumen advantage you could close the iris down on the NX7 even more which could close the gap in contrast between the NX7 and NX9 as well. Either way you will have a choice for more brightness for HDR or more contrast closing down the iris farther.

This is about what I was thinking without being able to see them with my own eyes. Like I said lenses on cameras make a difference. But you normally only notice it at the corners and when you pixel peep. But if you must have the best lens based projector on the market the NX9 is your ticket. NX7 should be the better scenario for most buyers. $6,000 can be put to use upgrading other parts of your theater.

If you have extreme disposable income in life then go for the nx9 or 4500 why not!

 

In my experience with measuring an NX9 it was the same brightness as NX5/7 and about 1600 lumens calibrated without the BT2020 filter.

 

Ordered a JVC DLA-NX7 a week ago, still have 1-2 wk to wait. Now I'm wondering, should I have spent more for the RS3000/NX9 OR saved money and gotten the RS1000/NX5?

So what diod you end up doing @davidahn , did you stick with the NX7?

 

Canceled / Upgraded



Sorry if any of this is rehashing what's been discussed, but... I haven't been keeping up with the thread.

Hey Cleveland Plasma, I canceled my NX7 and moved up to the NX9. It's very possible I could have been perfectly happy with the NX7 but I LOVE my NX9. Even on my 158" 2.35:1 screen it's PLENTY bright and punchy. I don't know what kind of light cannons people are used to, but my setup is kind of blinding on certain mostly whited out scenes, though probably after my pupils getting used to dark scenes.

It also has great sharpness and no visible pixels even a few inches from my screen, though I do have a Seymour AV AT screen whose texture is somewhat distracting, I can't lie. But from 14-15 ft, it's a BEAUTIFUL experience.

Also, I'm noticing a LOT of 4K Blurays are very blurry a lot of the time for some scenes, and very sharp in other scenes. Kind of a bummer.

 

I also upgraded from a jvc 520 to my current RS3000. We had several guests over last night for our annual xmas eve bash. As usual i had the movie Elf on in the theater. Elf is not a particularity good looking movie , however the kids watching could tell it looked better than the same movie from last year on my 520. Later i gave the adults a demo of some youtube 4k hdr material and they were blown away by how much better it was than what they saw previously. For reference my front 4 seats are 11 feet from my 125 scope screen.

 

I had the NX7 and the NX9 I definitively Prefer the NX9 over NX7, don't get me wrong the NX7 is fantastic but when I compared both projectors on my 100” Stewart StudioTek 130 G3 the NX9 had a better image. My recommendation is if meets your budget go for it.
You should also try to compare the two projector yourself as you are the one who has to live with it.

 

The RS3000/NX9 should outperform the RS2000/N7 because of the higher quality lens and the increase in contrast. If the price was MSRP of $12k or less, I would have jumped on it, but at more than double the price, I preferred to get the RS2000/N7 with very similar performance. Getting that smaller performance increase just was not worth double to me.

 

Short story, imo the NX9 is overpriced in light of what the NX7 provides for far less money....

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

I agree but I got a great deal on the NX9 so it was a no brainer.

 

I must agree, that is a crazy amount of money for the next step up.
It is a "step up" most certainly, but it is still a crazy amount of money.

 

When I bought mine the difference between the RS2000 and the RS3000 was very small.

 

In the end, everyone has a different determination of something being worth it or not, so the question cannot really be answered.
All I can say though is, sometimes this forum magnifies the tiniest differences, and sometimes the differences are enough.

 

I upgraded every year for awhile because I got majority of my pre-order price back to purchase a new model. However, the PQ was basically unnoticed majority of the time. For years, JVC brought out new models with simple tweaks. Even though I believe the RS2000/N7 is an amazing projector, the RS1000/NX5 can get extremely close for a few thousands cheaper. It will miss out on the WCG filter and 10-20k CR depending on preference. With the RS3000 compared to the lower two models, it's a minimal upgrade on paper with an enormous price tag.

 

I would say lens alone is not worth it most of the time unless for HTPC use or gaming, or you sit incredibly close.
However, it depends how much sharper overall things focus, than just the lens.
So would have to see it, but every time I've taken a guess on these things then tested in person, I've been correct.

It's just not that easy to see differences in lens in movie watching.
DLP has a tighter focus due to no convergence and because the pixel spacing is larger.
DLP should generally benefit from a better lens more than LCOS or any 3-chip.

The JVC's are nowhere near the focus issues of some of the lower-end Sony's, the JVC's are fairly uniform regardless of the lens. They may not focus quite as perfectly with cheaper lens, but there is no significant difference on MOST of the JVC's I've seen across the screen as far as uniformity goes. You might be able to see a tiny tiny focus uniformity on a test pattern, but most JVC's look uniform on HTPC text. If you cannot see it on HTPC text, you're not going to see an increase in focus uniformity in a movie, that's not even close.