[BousquetP]

My wife and I agreed that the usage of our home theater system will be 60-70% DVD watching and the rest HDTV (mostly sports). Should I rule out Matterhorn based PJs since their native resolution is 1024 x 576 and focus more on the Mustang based PJs with 1280 x 720 resolution?


Our room will be totally lighted controlled, with a 16:9 screen size of 106†diag. I anticipate the first row to be around 12 ft back from the screen. I would ideally like the PJ mounted as far back as possible. The room dimensions are: 21’ L x 13’ W x 8’ H.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Yes, rule it out.


You can get some HD2 machines for pretty cheap these days (BenQ) and you will see a *real* improvement with an HD projector when viewing HD material. Why deny yourself one of the coolest things about a large-scale FP system?


If you couldn't get HD and it would stay that way for a few years...not such a bid deal. But even 10% of the time spent with HD signals is reason to warrant an HD projector!!!!!!


Also, your seating distance might see a few too many pixels with a matterhorn chip. You'll just *barely* see them with HD2 at that distance. Keeping Screen Door/pixels to a minimum is another reason to push for an HD-res machine.


-dave

 

[Mit07]

I'd say more pixels are always better for HD within a certain technology. Obviously you have to be willing to pay the extra cost for the Mustang chip.


However, I have seen the IF5700 with HD and it was stunning - even though it was "only" 1024x576. The IF5700 is significantly better IMO than the 1280x720 LCD PJs I saw like the Sanyo Z2 and Sony HS20.

 

[Brian Corr]

Do your best to demo projectors with the matterhorn chip before ruling them out.

I've seen the Runco 510 and Infocus 5700 and the images were stunning. If price keeps you from an HD2, then the matterhorn is a worthy option IMO.

 

[BousquetP]

I am trying to get a demo, but it is not the easiest thing to do. The Infocus 5700 and the Runco 510 are the two that I have been given quotes on. I almost had my mind made up on the Sony HS20, but I am having second thoughts on LCD.


There is a local bar that has the Runco 510 and 710 in different rooms. I plan to take a look at those setups just to see what they look like.

 

[Hoyt Griffith]

Even though the Matterhorn chip can not resolve hi-def material quite as well as the Mustang chip, would hi-def programing using a Matterhorn projector look significantly better than DVD sources feeding the same machine? I'm extremely pleased with my IF5700 for DVDs, but have been wondering whether I should invest now in a hi-def STB, or wait until I someday upgrade to a higher resolution projector. Thanks for any thoughts on this you might have.


Hoyt

 

[ckolchak]

Quote:

Keeping Screen Door/pixels to a minimum is another reason to push for an HD-res machine.

i'm not ragging on you David, but i always see this choice presented with "and another good point about HD2s over XGA/matterhorns is..."


to me, less screendoor and consequently a less digital look- irregardless of what you are watching, is THE major selling point and the primary reason anyone should consider the highest res panel they can afford.


i use an HT1k which is XGA.

its certainly a nice picture, but damn, would i love to be able to go about 20% larger and not have to be distracted by screendoor and a digital look reminding this isn't really film.

and all i watch is dvds.

100% of the time.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Don't mean to rag on me? By *agreeing* with me?


I only offered the "screen door" issue as "another" reason because obviously in this case the first reason would be because the viewer showed an interest in watching HD programming material...


But you and I really do agree. I think that REGARDLESS OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE SOURCE that more pixels are better because the more clearly rendered the image becomes reducing quanitzation error and screen door. When the thing that stops you from sitting any closer to your screen is the pixel structure you can see from your projector...that's a problem!

Quote:

Even though the Matterhorn chip can not resolve hi-def material quite as well as the Mustang chip, would hi-def programing using a Matterhorn projector look significantly better than DVD sources feeding the same machine?

Yes. HD material downconverted to SD or PAL resolutions will still look clearly better than DVD material. Part of the reason is the added resolution in the color-space (DVD has full 720 x 480 res for the luminance, but not chrominance video channels).


-dave

 

[JMA]

Hoyt, I have a Samsung SIR t-351 connected via DVI to an IF5700 projecting on a 119" Da-Lite matte white screen. Seating is between 21' to 23' from the screen. Everyone who has seen a live High-Def broadcast (e.g. Monday night football, playoffs ...) on this system has commented that the picture is unbelievable! [As stated in a previous post, the image quality is noticeably better than some 1280x720 LCDs e.g. Sanyo Z2.) My advice, invest in STB; the only downside is that you will quickly become disappointed in the image quality of DVDs.

 

[patrickwebb]

Quote:

Originally posted by BousquetP My wife and I agreed that the usage of our home theater system will be 60-70% DVD watching and the rest HDTV (mostly sports). Should I rule out Matterhorn based PJs since their native resolution is 1024 x 576 and focus more on the Mustang based PJs with 1280 x 720 resolution? Our room will be totally lighted controlled, with a 16:9 screen size of 106†diag. I anticipate the first row to be around 12 ft back from the screen. I would ideally like the PJ mounted as far back as possible. The room dimensions are: 21’ L x 13’ W x 8’ H.

Bousquet,


We have almost identical thoughts on this. My room is 19.5x14x8 and I also am looking at the 5700. I too want the projector in the back of the room up in the rear soffit. So, a longer throw pj is in need, sorry no Benq. I have seen a number of pjs, both the 5700 and 7200 from IF, 510 & 710 Runco, Yahama HD2 (forget model), Marantz S2, Sony HS20, and Sharp 10k.


Here are my thoughts... The toss up is between the 5700 and the Sharp 10k. Both fall perfect for my throw distance to a 100 diag screen. The street difference brings the 5700 in around $2000 less than the Sharp 10k. Would I rather have more pixels, yeah, probably. Would I be disappointed with the 5700, definitely not. I was really impressed by this pj in DVD and from HD source.


So, all things said, I am leaning towards the 5700...

 

[outlier2]

I have a 5700 and the PQ is stunning for both DVD and HD sources. Save a few thousand and go see some live sports events with the savings or upgrade your system elsewhere. Maybe buy some new furniture. In other words, will the marginal increase in performance on HD material (I find I watch little HD material as I have become accustomed to watching what I want, when I want) be as dramatic as spending a few thousand on comfort, other activities etc. I think once you purchase a Matterhorn you will feel good about saving the extra $$$.

 

[patrickwebb]

Outlier2, what are you dimensions of your room, distance to screen and screen type? What source to your PJ? DVI?

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Ok...so if I knew that some viewers would be at 1.5 screen widths...is the pixel structure of the 5700 *really* ok from that distance? Or would an HD2 PJ create a noticably smoother image?


-dave

 

[Innova]

David, you seem to be very sensitive to pixels, so you'll have to see for yourself. I personally sit 1.1-1.2 widths back from my 5700. I can see pixels in bright scenes, but they really don't bother me. I could sit in the second row, but I prefer the big picture with a few pixels, to the smaller picture with no pixels.

 

[Mit07]

I saw an IF5700 and could not see any visible pixels or SDE from 10 feet.

 

[outlier2]

patrickwebb,


My room dimensions are 18' long by 11.5 feet wide by 93" high. I have a riser in the back with seating position at 13', front row at ~10', screen is 100" diagonal. This is a dedicated HT and I have full light control. From the front row I will occasionally see SDE on very bright scenes where the screen is largely a single colour (e.g., white) but I don't notice pixelation from my preferred seating in the rear row. My screen is simply Behr Ultra Pure white matte paint on my wall with a frame built around it so this is likely not the best screen to reduce SDE but I still don't notice it from my rear seating position. IF you like to sit up very close you might try a smaller screen size but the 5700 is so bright it thows a stunning image at 100" in my setup. My comparisons to the HD2 7200 were not in my viewing environment but were in two rooms set up where I bought my projetor. At that time I could see no differnce in PQ between the 5700 and 7200 on DVD sources (which is mostly what I watch).


I hope this helps.

 

[BousquetP]

I'm still 2-3 even 4 months away from actually purchasing a PJ. I'm hoping the HD2 PJs will come down in price and make my decision a little easier. The Matterhorn PJs sound like a less expensive alternative right now. I will be seeing a Runco 510 and 710 soon, but in a less than ideal environment.


Those with the 5700, do you notice any problems when viewing fast paced sports action? Or does it not make a difference? I recall that 720p is preferred for sports rather than 1080i. How does the 5700 handle a 720p signal?

 

[krasmuzik]

A rough seating rule


@4/3 screen width for Mustang

@5/3 screen width for Matterhorn


In other words you have to sit 1/3 screen width further back for the screen door to be the same. Usually moving your seat is free, buying more pixels is not.


Neither can fully resolve 1920x1080p HDTV.