[Chivs]

Here's a collection of pics from the LT150 with a Panamorph. Unfortunately the 20k limit on image size doesn't really do them justice.


Images were taken off center, so distortion is from camera and not the screen.

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/image_uploads/Fifth1.JPG

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/image_uploads/Glad1.JPG

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/image_uploads/Nat1.JPG

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/image_uploads/Nat2.JPG


Chivs

 

[Alan Gouger]

Hi Chivs


The pictures speak for themselves.


I could never go back to using a 4x3 projector without a anamorphic lens.


There is still some hesitation by some despite all the positive reviews posted over and over again by actual users of such lens.

I hope everyone is listening, take the plunge because the improvements are well worth it and clearly visible.

Adding such a lens will be the biggest improvement to your projector you will ever see as well as being the cheapest.


Thanks for posting the pictures!


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

Alan Gouger

Thanks for supporting AV Science.
www.avscience.com


[This message has been edited by Alan Gouger (edited 09-25-2001).]

 

[Phat Phreddy]

They look like great images and seem better than I am getting with Davis machine....


As you have a LT150 (with more of an off axis setup than a Davis) could you post some 16x9 squares and circles convergance pics from as near to the center of the image as possible... It should also be noted that using 2.35 source is a little biased as the issue is only prevalent in the bottom 10% of the image so this is not seen on 2.35 material, the 16x9 ones do look good though but I also have a hard time seeing the distortion on video source as you do not have the frame of reference...


This would allay fears that this is an axis issue and more just the anomaly of Davis machines combination of beam spot size + off axis + short throw etc...



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


[This message has been edited by Phat Phreddy (edited 09-25-2001).]

 

[Huey]

$600 maybe reasonable. $1995 is not cheap for us po-folks. For 2K more one can get a brighter, better, 16:9 projector. These photos are awesome though; just wish the Panamorph is more affordable and shipping more reliably.


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

Huey ;-]

 

[arrow]

Alan's excitement aside, I would advise anyone considering a panamorph to strongly consider the current inability of cygnus to deliver product to those who purchased a year ago.


While I still anxiously await my panamorph, there is no way I would send more dollars Cygnus's way given their current inability to meet customer demand.


--Les

 

[cvye]

Quote:

Originally posted by Huey: $600 maybe reasonable. $1995 is not cheap for us po-folks. For 2K more one can get a brighter, better, 16:9 projector.

What 16:9 projector for +$2K were you thinking about?



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

Christian Vye


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

e-mail is forever

 

[Huey]

Look like I hit a sore spot. Sorry all. I didn't mean to inflame anyone. I was merely expressing my personal opinion. I personally would love the Panamorph, but just not for 2K. For 1K or less, maybe, but not for 2K. The 16:9 projector I was thinking of was $4799 PLV-60: www.projectorcentral.com/projector_details.cfm?part_id=1109 or for even less the Sony VWH10T: www.projectorcentral.com/projector_details.cfm?part_id=623 . A lot of people paid $2700 for LT150 before the Dell's mistake. This plus 2K panamorph will bring the total to $4700. The Toshiba MT7 is $4999 which sounds decent too: www.projectorcentral.com/projector_details.cfm?part_id=1147 . All these have zoom, lens shift, longer life bulb, built in component, and 1000 lumens. Most people would say this class of projectors are "better" than LT150. Again these are just my opinion so don't flame me.


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

Huey ;-]

 

[David Wallis]


Quote:

The 16:9 projector I was thinking of was $4799 PLV-60:

Huey

No flames intended and if you like Lcds then sure 5k street will get you in the ball park unless you need a scaler.

Why not add the Panamorph to the PLV-60 and get 1365x768 at 1300 Ansi's for your "2:35 discs" all for a total of $6799.

You will have no distortion issues with the lens shift on the Sanyo, and the Sanyo's onboard scaler allows custom aspect ratios for doing the 2:35 stretch.

The other added bonus is that the Panamorph will minimise the screen door effect as well.


This would have to be one of the cheapest ways to get into 2:35 which no projector will probably ever do native.

Just a thought.


DavidW

 

[Huey]

Look like I hit a sore spot. Sorry all. I didn't mean to inflame anyone. I was merely expressing my personal opinion. I personally would love the Panamorph, but just not for 2K. For 1K or less, maybe, but not for 2K. The 16:9 projector I was thinking of was $4799 PLV-60: www.projectorcentral.com/projector_details.cfm?part_id=1109 or for even less the Sony VWH10T: www.projectorcentral.com/projector_details.cfm?part_id=623 . A lot of people paid $2700 for LT150 before the Dell's mistake. This plus 2K panamorph will bring the total to $4700. The Toshiba MT7 is $4999 which sounds decent too: www.projectorcentral.com/projector_details.cfm?part_id=1147 . All these have zoom, lens shift, longer life bulb, built in component, and 1000 lumens. Most people would say this class of projectors are "better" than LT150. Again these are just my opinion so don't flame me.


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

Huey ;-]

 

[Chivs]

Here are the AVIA test patterns people asked for. I also took a shot of a roofline head-on. Some of the test patterns are not perfectly squared in the camera lens, but you do get to see the keystoning at the top of the image. I haven't finished experimenting yet, and this may be able to be reduced further.


If you look at the circle test pattern, you'll see they're a bit egg-shaped. However, this is both top and bottom meaning I need to adjust the 4:3 display width.

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/image_uploads/43.JPG

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/image_uploads/185.jpg

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/image_uploads/235.JPG

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/image_uploads/roof.jpg


Chivs


[This message has been edited by Chivs (edited 09-25-2001).]

 

[David Wallis]

Chivs

The pictures look good. What are the screen details?

I take it you are happy with the LT-150/Panamorph combo?


Since I have had mine I can not believe how much better my image is. I must get a digital camera and do some before and after shoots, as the Panamorph has been an impressive addition.



DavidW

 

[Chivs]

David,

Screen is a homebrew $60 special (including frame) designed to experiment with constant height, variable width projection. It's 52 inches tall and actually 144 inches wide, although 2.35:1 is using about 122 inches.


The downside right now is that this is hanging in an unfinished room, so image reflections tend to light fill the room. I'm sure when I hang some drapes and mask off the screen, the contrast will improve.


Chivs

 

[TC]

Is the lense easy to remove if you wanted to watch 4:3 material? Does the projector need to be repositioned if you do this? The reason I ask this is because I'll be watching TV and will want to switch to a particular DVD scene and then switch back to TV. If you only have to get up to nove the lense that want seem to bad but if I have to reposition the projector then I think the benefit may not out weigh the hassle.


I guess I'm with Huey where price is concerned. $2,000 seems like a lot of money to me for a lense. If you pay $2,700 for a projector plus $2,000 for the lense and another $1,200 for a computer with a good graphics card you're up to $5,900.00, not to mention a bulb that lasts half as long as most other projectors. As good as the LT 150 may be, for this set-up I think you could look at new and some used projectors in that price.

 

[Kirk]

Those are great pix Chivs. You've really done a good job minimizing the non-linear distortion.

 

[Mad Chemist]

Sign me up!!! That looks more than good enough for me. Now if I could actually buy one.


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

Greg

 

[Alan Gouger]

Arrow


I did not say Panamorph or Isco just anamorphic and its improvement in general.


Grant


Yes I have used the Isco 2 with the Panamorph combined to achieve a 235:1 ratio and I posted some pictures to forum about a month ago.


No matter what lens you choose I cannot say enough about the improvement.



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

Alan Gouger

Thanks for supporting AV Science.
www.avscience.com

 

[skihiker160]

Those are some neat pictures. We hope to be LT150 or LT150Z owners real soon now depending on how things work out, and we already have a non-progressive scan DVD player.


Besides a screen, what should we purchase next? A progressive scan DVD player, a HTPC, or an anamorphic lens. Up to this point we thought a progressive scan DVD player or HTPC would be the obvious choice, but Alan's comments and Chivs's pictures have got me wondering.

 

[Chivs]

Mark,

I didn't try the Panamorph with a DILA, just the LT150. As my current setup is somewhat makeshift, configuration was pretty quick, around 30 minutes.


As I posted in another thread, the LT150+Panamorph really narrows the gap to a G11, rainbows aside. Now a G11/15 with a Panamorph would be a different animal altogether.


Chivs

 

[CCLAY]

Those AVIA pics look pretty darn good. The image geometry looks to be very good too. Well done Chivs. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif


I can relate to that first pic of Leloo in 5th Element. I've used it for many a reference.


On my G11 and the Panamorph, I can actually tell that the marks on her face are makeup brush marks. No Foolin'! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/eek.gif


Bottom line is as Alan says: If you have a 4:3 Pj, an anamorphic lens takes you to the apex of performance.


Chris

 

[TSHA222]




Chivs said:

Quote:

As I posted in another thread, the LT-150+Panamorph really narrows the gap to a G11, rainbows aside. Now a G11/15 with a Panamorph would be a diferent animal altogether.

Well I have a G10 (actually a Proxima from the closeout last year) and I just got a Panamorph. (Thanks again Don) I can honestly say that there was a big jump in brightness and the pictured "smoothed out". I was VERY impressed with the improvement. Now if I can just get around to figuring out how to properly mount it I'd be in business http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif


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

Chris White

MEDIA CONCEPTS