Is this a joke?
4400 contrast on a unit that should be measuring much much higher?
4400 contrast on a unit that should be measuring much much higher?
Enjoyable read. I like the numerical score...also the fact many machines have already been reviewed which I don't think is the case here. I might want to read more about the Acer laser based on their review.Kraine has posted his review of the DLA-X5900 (DLA-RS440) here.
Some quotes:
"Lcos technology generally gives a very uniform image. The X5900 is no exception to the rule, no appearance of bright corners as it could produce in the past or hot spot."
"Ultra HD support was already at a very good level on the latest generation JVC, this year some progress has been made with a slightly larger color space obtained thanks to an internal filter and a dynamic iris now operational in HDR ."
First I've seen of any mention of a slightly larger color space obtained by an internal filter!
"JVC also announces that HDMI sync has been improved and lag input has been further reduced. The manufacturer also highlights that the integrated 18Gb / s HDMI chipset supports color resolutions up to 4: 4: 4: 4: 4 or 36bit even at 50Hz and 60Hz. This is a distinct advantage in 4K compared to Sony, which is limited to 13.5 Gb / s."
"A day in the life of Billy Lynn, ultra HD HFR 60fps is read without problem by the JVC with its 18Gbps HDMI chipset ."
99% Final Rating!
Looks like a really good review of a golden sample! I wonder if I could buy it from him!
Correct, the RS440 has one iris and you do have the dynamic ability.Has anyone else picked up this projector? Seems like the 540/640 thread is bustling, and this one is a bit dead. I am in the process of building a dedicated theater room, and when it's done in a couple of months the 440 will almost certainly be the projector I'll be putting in.
I saw mention in the 540/640 thread of the differences between those models and the 440, and one of them was that this model doesn't have a dual iris. My understanding was that all three models had a dynamic iris, and another iris that can be adjusted to cap maximum light output. Does the 440 not have that second iris.
The other difference is the P3 filter, which isn't present in the 440 apparently. What are the implications of this?
Thanks.
AVForums stated 100% P3 on the X5900 (same model as RS440)Correct, the RS440 has one iris and you do have the dynamic ability.
A recent RS420 review indicated around 90% of P3. It does not have a P3 filter, so you would lose a bit of saturation especially at brighter levels but doubt it will make a big difference in movies.
There is no internal filter on the RS440 for HDR.Kraine has posted his review of the DLA-X5900 (DLA-RS440) here.
Some quotes:
"Lcos technology generally gives a very uniform image. The X5900 is no exception to the rule, no appearance of bright corners as it could produce in the past or hot spot."
"Ultra HD support was already at a very good level on the latest generation JVC, this year some progress has been made with a slightly larger color space obtained thanks to an internal filter and a dynamic iris now operational in HDR ."
First I've seen of any mention of a slightly larger color space obtained by an internal filter!
"JVC also announces that HDMI sync has been improved and lag input has been further reduced. The manufacturer also highlights that the integrated 18Gb / s HDMI chipset supports color resolutions up to 4: 4: 4: 4: 4 or 36bit even at 50Hz and 60Hz. This is a distinct advantage in 4K compared to Sony, which is limited to 13.5 Gb / s."
"A day in the life of Billy Lynn, ultra HD HFR 60fps is read without problem by the JVC with its 18Gbps HDMI chipset ."
99% Final Rating!
Looks like a really good review of a golden sample! I wonder if I could buy it from him!
Except you can ignore the contrast measurements, they are not even remotely close to being correct and you can ignore the part about the 440 having an internal filter giving it a wider color space.Enjoyable read. I like the numerical score...also the fact many machines have already been reviewed which I don't think is the case here. I might want to read more about the Acer laser based on their review.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
And they would be completely wrong.AVForums stated 100% P3 on the X5900 (same model as RS440)
"In terms of its coverage of the Rec. 2020 colour gamut, the X5900 delivered an excellent 74%, which is a bit higher than the X5000 we reviewed previously. It isn't quite the widest we've measured, the Epson EH-TW7300 managed a massive 78%, but it was enough to cover 100% of DCI-P3 when measured using both xy and uv coordinates."
Not accurate.AVForums stated 100% P3 on the X5900 (same model as RS440)Correct, the RS440 has one iris and you do have the dynamic ability.
A recent RS420 review indicated around 90% of P3. It does not have a P3 filter, so you would lose a bit of saturation especially at brighter levels but doubt it will make a big difference in movies.
"In terms of its coverage of the Rec. 2020 colour gamut, the X5900 delivered an excellent 74%, which is a bit higher than the X5000 we reviewed previously. It isn't quite the widest we've measured, the Epson EH-TW7300 managed a massive 78%, but it was enough to cover 100% of DCI-P3 when measured using both xy and uv coordinates."
Yeah, just depends on the set-up. More brightness definitely helps with HDR.Maybe the real question is, will you ever use the color filter on the 540/640 when you're looking to maximize brightness for HDR anyway?? Obviously depends on your screen size and screen material, but most have a large enough screen that this is a problem.
You have a choice with the 540 and 640. You do not have that choice with 440. But, yes, if you do not have enough brightness for HDR with filter, it will go unused, but there is still a big difference in contrast. In my family room set up, I went from a 60,000:1 to 120,000:1 contrast projector. Shooting onto a 1.3 gain FireHawk screen in a room with off white walls, the difference in black level and contrast was huge. The walls are not close to the screen and the white ceiling is 17', so I am getting less reflected light back than some people.Maybe the real question is, will you ever use the color filter on the 540/640 when you're looking to maximize brightness for HDR anyway?? Obviously depends on your screen size and screen material, but most have a large enough screen that this is a problem.
I guess it's a shame that we can't trust some of these professional reviews thenSome of these reviews are really getting sloppy with their data.
Seems like the 540/640 thread is bustling, and this one is a bit dead.
Yes, good point. How much brightness do you lose through the filter?Maybe the real question is, will you ever use the color filter on the 540/640 when you're looking to maximize brightness for HDR anyway?? Obviously depends on your screen size and screen material, but most have a large enough screen that this is a problem.
I've seen varying numbers on the filter loss from 8 to 13%.Yes, good point. How much brightness do you lose through the filter?
I will be on an acoustically transparent 2.35:1 AR screen at 105" wide. Probably using the Seymour UF material, so the gain will be 0.8. I will still have plenty of brightness for SDR material, but probably not as much as would be ideal for HDR.
I am a little bummed about the static iris being omitted from the 440. Then again, given the brightness issue, maybe I wouldn't need to stop it down much anyway. Just use low lamp for SDR stuff and high lamp for HDR I guess.