Optoma HD81 1080p DLP official discussion
-
LIVE: AVSForum Tech Talk Podcast with Scott Wilkinson, Episode 5 Click here for details.
-
Enter to be our Home Theater of the Month Click here for details.
21 - 40 of 4839 Posts
TzungLin,
Could you clarify the point that the offset puts the projector outside of the image height, or inside as Bob suggested as a possibility?
Example 1: 100" screen height, vertical offset 27" above (or below) the image
Example 2: 100" screen height, vertical offset 27" below top or above bottom of image
Which is accurate?
Could you clarify the point that the offset puts the projector outside of the image height, or inside as Bob suggested as a possibility?
Example 1: 100" screen height, vertical offset 27" above (or below) the image
Example 2: 100" screen height, vertical offset 27" below top or above bottom of image
Which is accurate?
D_B,
I understand how to calculate offset, thanks, but as Bob pointed out, it could be positive or negative. Hence my examples. Hopefully TzungLin will shed some light on this for us. Actually, 27% of 52" is 14.04", but you are SO close!!
![]()
The 100" height is just to make the math obvious to anyone who sees the post.
I understand how to calculate offset, thanks, but as Bob pointed out, it could be positive or negative. Hence my examples. Hopefully TzungLin will shed some light on this for us. Actually, 27% of 52" is 14.04", but you are SO close!!
The 100" height is just to make the math obvious to anyone who sees the post.
I think if you re-read the comments on lens shift you see it is a time to market equasion as well. Not just cost. I am sure that lens shift would only add a small additional cost but because this PJ is using an existing light engine without lens shift. adding that feature to this engine would push the release date to an unacceptably late timeframe. So you can either have the PJ sooner without lens shift in 2006 or get it in 2007 with lens shift.
I think that Optima wanted to release their 1080 projector sooner rather than later to get on the front of the early adopor wave. and to establish a presence in the 1080 market space. That way they don't lose out on early 1080 sales completly.
I think if you re-read the comments on lens shift you see it is a time to market equasion as well. Not just cost. I am sure that lens shift would only add a small additional cost but because this PJ is using an existing light engine without lens shift. adding that feature to this engine would push the release date to an unacceptably late timeframe. So you can either have the PJ sooner without lens shift in 2006 or get it in 2007 with lens shift.
I think that Optima wanted to release their 1080 projector sooner rather than later to get on the front of the early adopor wave. and to establish a presence in the 1080 market space. That way they don't lose out on early 1080 sales completly.
The presence of lens shift was important in my decision to upgrade from my old fixed offset BenQ to the H79. Installed just above and behind the viewing position I've been able to use a High Power and utilize near maximum gain; this wouldn't be possible with the HD81 and my low ceiling would in fact probably prevent me from using it at all.
Dan
Dan
Understood about the time to market but given the dearth of 1080p content is it really worthwhile to spend anytime engineering a solution without lens shift on a product with a 10k MSRP? IMO, the time they spent engineering this unit (even if thye have re-used a data-based design) was somewhat of a waste since theyll probably do a LS-capable design at some point anyway. IIRC they are one of TIs largest DLP manufacturers, how much presence do they need? Optoma should still be able to leverage their relationship with TI and their general 'size' to beat competitors to market.
Understood about the time to market but given the dearth of 1080p content is it really worthwhile to spend anytime engineering a solution without lens shift on a product with a 10k MSRP? IMO, the time they spent engineering this unit (even if thye have re-used a data-based design) was somewhat of a waste since theyll probably do a LS-capable design at some point anyway. IIRC they are one of TIs largest DLP manufacturers, how much presence do they need? Optoma should still be able to leverage their relationship with TI and their general 'size' to beat competitors to market.
Yes, this is the most probable background of the HD81. I guess that they came to a decision, to do something against the danger of Ruby dominating the early 1080 market, only some time after the Ruby introduction.
Then they had no chance to design a specific HT projector. They took a business PJ already in a progressed design phase, i.e. the EP910, which had a comparably large DMD, and threw in the 1080 stuff.
From this business PJ we got the strange offset. As you said, it was not cost but time-to-market. The same is true for the external processor. It's quite inefficient with regard to cost, but the fastest option for getting something out.
IMHO this all means that the HD81 in its presently announced form will be very shortlived. Apart from its PQ it is not a good HT PJ, and its manufacturing cost are not optimized. Completely unaccaptable for a company like Optoma.
So they will replace it quite soon, I guess before the end of the year.
But an early adaptor like me still may have enough reason to buy one, simply due to the lack af alternatives. So I will do so in early summer, if then there is still no bright and cheap alternative. Cheap it must be, because everything out of this crop of 1st gen 1080 PJs will be shortlived, because they all are a done on a hasty defensive against the Ruby.
Yes, this is the most probable background of the HD81. I guess that they came to a decision, to do something against the danger of Ruby dominating the early 1080 market, only some time after the Ruby introduction.
Then they had no chance to design a specific HT projector. They took a business PJ already in a progressed design phase, i.e. the EP910, which had a comparably large DMD, and threw in the 1080 stuff.
From this business PJ we got the strange offset. As you said, it was not cost but time-to-market. The same is true for the external processor. It's quite inefficient with regard to cost, but the fastest option for getting something out.
IMHO this all means that the HD81 in its presently announced form will be very shortlived. Apart from its PQ it is not a good HT PJ, and its manufacturing cost are not optimized. Completely unaccaptable for a company like Optoma.
So they will replace it quite soon, I guess before the end of the year.
But an early adaptor like me still may have enough reason to buy one, simply due to the lack af alternatives. So I will do so in early summer, if then there is still no bright and cheap alternative. Cheap it must be, because everything out of this crop of 1st gen 1080 PJs will be shortlived, because they all are a done on a hasty defensive against the Ruby.
I have 2 follow-up questions related to the 2 items above:
#6 I assume the throw ratio is times the screen width, is this correct? For example for a 120 inch wide screen the front of the projector would need to be back somewhere in the range of 216 inches (1.8 x 120) to 264 inches (2.2 x 120).
#8 If the box to the projector needs both an HDMI and a RS232 cable, what type of connectors are required on each end of the RS232 cable (DB9, DB25, ?). I will be building a new home theater in a few months and would like to pre-wire for the cables (up the wall and across the ceiling) before the drywall goes up.
Ron Jones
I have 2 follow-up questions related to the 2 items above:
#6 I assume the throw ratio is times the screen width, is this correct? For example for a 120 inch wide screen the front of the projector would need to be back somewhere in the range of 216 inches (1.8 x 120) to 264 inches (2.2 x 120).
#8 If the box to the projector needs both an HDMI and a RS232 cable, what type of connectors are required on each end of the RS232 cable (DB9, DB25, ?). I will be building a new home theater in a few months and would like to pre-wire for the cables (up the wall and across the ceiling) before the drywall goes up.
Ron Jones
kuebler,
I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with their approach. I agree that it isn't the ultimate in flexibility, but if it works for a given application, then it works. I also agree that they will (probably already working on) have a home-centric product out later. I actually think the two box solution is SUPERIOR to all in one, so there we differ. It certainly looks like they didn't compromise the video processor performance using the Gennum VXP plus the additional chipset. Bottom line, if this projector does what you want, and it fits in your room, then why would you want to swap it in the short term? Based on the few reviews I have heard from people who saw it at the show, it doesn't sound like anything is going to come along and just blow it away for the price any time soon.
I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with their approach. I agree that it isn't the ultimate in flexibility, but if it works for a given application, then it works. I also agree that they will (probably already working on) have a home-centric product out later. I actually think the two box solution is SUPERIOR to all in one, so there we differ. It certainly looks like they didn't compromise the video processor performance using the Gennum VXP plus the additional chipset. Bottom line, if this projector does what you want, and it fits in your room, then why would you want to swap it in the short term? Based on the few reviews I have heard from people who saw it at the show, it doesn't sound like anything is going to come along and just blow it away for the price any time soon.
Joined
·
8,487 Posts
Falk got this pegged perfectly. Optoma threw a 1080p DMD in with a business projector light engine and then connected it to an external scaler in a huge rush to get a 1080p to market. The best of intentions...
Sony caught TI with their pants down and now manufacturers like Optoma are forced to rush something to market. I blame this on TI, not Optoma.
Sony caught TI with their pants down and now manufacturers like Optoma are forced to rush something to market. I blame this on TI, not Optoma.
Joined
·
8,487 Posts
So do I, as long as the box is OPTIONAL. I have been eagerly awaiting any manufacturer to sell a "head only" unit that would allow me to connect my scaler of choice. This way I could afford to buy a better head end and not spend more money repeating the functionality of a scaler that I already own.
So do I, as long as the box is OPTIONAL. I have been eagerly awaiting any manufacturer to sell a "head only" unit that would allow me to connect my scaler of choice. This way I could afford to buy a better head end and not spend more money repeating the functionality of a scaler that I already own.
As I read (and it could be wishful reading) it the RS232 connection is on the scaler, allowing it to be controlled by RS232 control devices. The only connection to the projector is the video cable, which some are saying is an HDMI connection. I seem to remember reading that the scaler to projector connection is Fiber Optic, but I can't find it now and I may be confusing it with another projector scaler combination.
Allen
As I read (and it could be wishful reading) it the RS232 connection is on the scaler, allowing it to be controlled by RS232 control devices. The only connection to the projector is the video cable, which some are saying is an HDMI connection. I seem to remember reading that the scaler to projector connection is Fiber Optic, but I can't find it now and I may be confusing it with another projector scaler combination.
Allen
Joined
·
4,412 Posts
Oh no!
![]()
This will make for a bit of a problem, currently my HT room is 91" tall and my 106" diag screen is mounted 12.5" below the ceiling, assuming a 52" tall screen I'm already in trouble as this requires a 14" offset!
![]()
I just checked and concrete to floor joist is only 93"... I was hoping to increase the screen size but even with the screen I have, I would need to drop it lower on the wall to accommodate this PJ.
This will make for a bit of a problem, currently my HT room is 91" tall and my 106" diag screen is mounted 12.5" below the ceiling, assuming a 52" tall screen I'm already in trouble as this requires a 14" offset!
I just checked and concrete to floor joist is only 93"... I was hoping to increase the screen size but even with the screen I have, I would need to drop it lower on the wall to accommodate this PJ.
I will add to this question. The calibrated lumen output mentioned by TzungILin was very nice but if that is with an open iris we would like to know the contrast at that brightness.
It is good to hear that a variable iris will be added so brightness can be traded for contrast.
I will add to this question. The calibrated lumen output mentioned by TzungILin was very nice but if that is with an open iris we would like to know the contrast at that brightness.
It is good to hear that a variable iris will be added so brightness can be traded for contrast.
Bob,
In your case, I agree, but not everyone who will buy a video projector like the HD81 already has a scaler, and even if they do, it may not be as good as this one looks to be, with the Gennum and the flexible input switching. I, for one, would be happy with it as it is, since I have an HDLeeza I want to get rid of anyway. I think the processor included with this bundle is better than what I have right now. I would definitely like to see them offer just the head unit separately, but if I were to buy one, I would get the combo anyway.
I sure would like TzungLin to come back and clear up this positive/negative offset question. I hope he has time this evening to post a response. 27% outside the image height is fairly substantial, but for me it would be better than the alternative you suggested where it is inside the image height.
In your case, I agree, but not everyone who will buy a video projector like the HD81 already has a scaler, and even if they do, it may not be as good as this one looks to be, with the Gennum and the flexible input switching. I, for one, would be happy with it as it is, since I have an HDLeeza I want to get rid of anyway. I think the processor included with this bundle is better than what I have right now. I would definitely like to see them offer just the head unit separately, but if I were to buy one, I would get the combo anyway.
I sure would like TzungLin to come back and clear up this positive/negative offset question. I hope he has time this evening to post a response. 27% outside the image height is fairly substantial, but for me it would be better than the alternative you suggested where it is inside the image height.
Joined
·
911 Posts
The RS-232 is a DB9 connector on the Scaler. The interface from the Scaler to the projector is HDMI. I've got their color brochure with a photo of the Scaler connections. The IR extension and the 12V triggers are on the Scaler as well as an AV receiver loop on HDMI. Hope this helps.
The RS-232 is a DB9 connector on the Scaler. The interface from the Scaler to the projector is HDMI. I've got their color brochure with a photo of the Scaler connections. The IR extension and the 12V triggers are on the Scaler as well as an AV receiver loop on HDMI. Hope this helps.
21 - 40 of 4839 Posts
