AVS Forum banner

21 - 40 of 1864 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,587 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 · (Edited)
My Paladin DCR impressions.

In summary, I’m happy to say this is a home run for me.

First – the details most have been asking for (FWIW I have a Sony VPL-VW5000ES and about a 1.8:1 throw ratio from around 26 feet):

1. Light output – 23% gain in 1.24x Anamorphic V Stretch over the 2:35:1 Zoom projector mode prior to A Lens - my process is simple – I chose a 100% IRE 1080p slide and used a Rec 709 calibration preset and used the same slide to compare. This was a bit of a disappointment as I was expecting a 38% bump in brightness which is not the case.

2. Distortion – what distortion? There’s so little bowing at the edges that I can call it negligible. Will post Sony internal pattern.

3. Chromatic aberration – I am tempted to say none – I see some red fringing when I am closer than 2 feet from the Sony Panel Alignment Zone pattern – but I am sure a little bit was there even before I installed the A Lens. I am pretty sure I cannot catch it on my camera if I stand more than two feet from the screen. Will post Sony internal pattern.

4. Sharpness – As soon as the A Lens covered the Sony internal green pattern - the lines became clean and sharp – way better than without A lens – the menu system is not fuzzy anymore in 2:40 and looks very sharp. I don’t know if it is perception or what but there is no reduction in sharpness when watching a movie after the lens is installed – I think contrary to what people say, sharpness has improved quite a bit. At some point I will have my calibrator review the A Lens setup and will report back.

5. Contrast – I didn’t measure. Honestly I couldn’t see any visual change in black level at all so I didn’t go through the testing. If there is a change then the increase in overall “pop” overpowers it. As I have stated earlier all movies are mastered differently and it depends on the transfer how a picture looks so if ANSI has suffered by say 2% you cant tell for which movie unless you plan to watch the same movie over and over again and compare.

6. Installation - The install was a breeze even for a guy like me who needs a handyman to hang a picture on the wall. Followed the measure twice and cut once principle – the lens was level, no roll or yaw – about 1.3 degree of pitch that was corrected by the lens tilt adjustment. I was done in 30 minutes.


Second – experiences:

Last night we watched the movie UP in 1080P (using Kaleidescape) to celebrate a English Cream Golden Retriever joining our family - in 16:9 using V Squeeze to get the correct AR – calibration used was REC 709 – 100 Laser (although you lose light output when viewing 16:9 with the A Lens – since the 16:9 was way too bright prior so all I did was to increase the light output). The picture looked Glorious – I cannot explain what magic this lens was doing that the picture rivaled many 4Kransfers – very sharp and colors popped.

Watched bits of Guardian of the Galaxy – fireworks funeral scene – opening song/fight/Groot dance scene – 23% is a bump in brightness is enough that on my 14 foot wide Snomatte 2:40 AT screen it made all the difference when watching in full REC 2020 HDR with Contrast Slider at 70. The Rec 2020 image is now very watchable unlike before when I was only watching Colorspace 2 calibration. Going forward I can choose Rec 2020 calibration or Colorspace 2 calibration on UHD 4K HDR Content depending the on the movie transfer whereas before I could only watch Colorspace 2.

Needless to say that Colorspace 2 HDR Lite calibration picture is very very bright and looks awesome even in a movie like Revenant.

I watched a bit of ‘Stranger Things’ on Netflix HDR10 in V Stretch so it filled the screen (AR for this is 2:0) – filling up the entire 2:40 screen was a treat.

I have not watched the Nolan movies yet with the A Lens but it will be nice NOT to have a AR headache now that the A Lens is in place ...

3D mutant Ninja: 2:40 just pops now - 3D is looking very very good (off course in Rec 709).

Shawn’s service has been impeccable – he worked with me in advance to support my install which is upside down and shipped everything earlier than expected - answered my questions until late night on the day of install.

And – It does look ‘Bad Ass’ – see pictures.

As a final thought, my goal was to significantly increase the brightness of my movies, which I just did and I love the convenience of the A Lens. But I’ve also heard over the years that an A lens comes with a trade-off of softening the image – either from the lens itself or from the anamorphic upconversion process. I can honestly say that this can’t be farther from the truth. Maybe it’s just the result of that higher brightness – I’m not sure. But in my situation it was very obvious that adding a couple million more pixels processed by my Sony and sent through the Paladin DCR definitely increased the visual clarity and detail of everything I watched. Maybe anamorphic lenses and processing have finally come into their own.

Now - since I love the DCR - I may be biased so I will let my calibrator comments once he is here late February as I know he will give me his candid opinion .... and he told me not to get any A Lens... so he will be critical I am sure.

And lets see what other users say as the lenses start getting delivered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,638 Posts
My Paladin DCR impressions.

In summary, I’m happy to say this is a home run for me.

First – the details most have been asking for (FWIW I have a Sony VPL-VW5000ES and about a 1.8:1 throw ratio from around 26 feet):

1. Light output – 23% gain in 1.24x Anamorphic V Stretch over the 2:35:1 Zoom projector mode prior to A Lens - my process is simple – I chose a 100% IRE 1080p slide and used a Rec 709 calibration preset and used the same slide to compare. This was a bit of a disappointment as I was expecting a 38% bump in brightness which is not the case.

2. Distortion – what distortion? There’s so little bowing at the edges that I can call it negligible. Will post Sony internal pattern.

3. Chromatic aberration – I am tempted to say none – I see some red fringing when I am closer than 2 feet from the Sony Panel Alignment Zone pattern – but I am sure a little bit was there even before I installed the A Lens. I am pretty sure I cannot catch it on my camera if I stand more than two feet from the screen. Will post Sony internal pattern.

4. Sharpness – As soon as the A Lens covered the Sony internal green pattern - the lines became clean and sharp – way better than without A lens – the menu system is not fuzzy anymore in 2:40 and looks very sharp. I don’t know if it is perception or what but there is no reduction in sharpness when watching a movie after the lens is installed – I think contrary to what people say, sharpness has improved quite a bit. At some point I will have my calibrator review the A Lens setup and will report back.

5. Contrast – I didn’t measure. Honestly I couldn’t see any visual change in black level at all so I didn’t go through the testing. If there is a change then the increase in overall “pop” overpowers it. As I have stated earlier all movies are mastered differently and it depends on the transfer how a picture looks so if ANSI has suffered by say 2% you cant tell for which movie unless you plan to watch the same movie over and over again and compare.

6. Installation - The install was a breeze even for a guy like me who needs a handyman to hang a picture on the wall. Followed the measure twice and cut once principle – the lens was level, no roll or yaw – about 1.3 degree of pitch that was corrected by the lens tilt adjustment. I was done in 30 minutes.


Second – experiences:

Last night we watched the movie UP in 1080P (using Kaleidescape) to celebrate a English Cream Golden Retriever joining our family - in 16:9 using V Squeeze to get the correct AR – calibration used was REC 709 – 100 Laser (although you lose light output when viewing 16:9 with the A Lens – since the 16:9 was way too bright prior so all I did was to increase the light output). The picture looked Glorious – I cannot explain what magic this lens was doing that the picture rivaled many 4Kransfers – very sharp and colors popped.

Watched bits of Guardian of the Galaxy – fireworks funeral scene – opening song/fight/Groot dance scene – 23% is a bump in brightness is enough that on my 14 foot wide Snomatte 2:40 AT screen it made all the difference when watching in full REC 2020 HDR with Contrast Slider at 70. The Rec 2020 image is now very watchable unlike before when I was only watching Colorspace 2 calibration. Going forward I can choose Rec 2020 calibration or Colorspace 2 calibration on UHD 4K HDR Content depending the on the movie transfer whereas before I could only watch Colorspace 2.

Needless to say that Colorspace 2 HDR Lite calibration picture is very very bright and looks awesome even in a movie like Revenant.

I watched a bit of ‘Stranger Things’ on Netflix HDR10 in V Stretch so it filled the screen (AR for this is 2:0) – filling up the entire 2:40 screen was a treat.

I have not watched the Nolan movies yet with the A Lens but it will be nice NOT to have a AR headache now that the A Lens is in place ...

3D mutant Ninja: 2:40 just pops now - 3D is looking very very good (off course in Rec 709).

Shawn’s service has been impeccable – he worked with me in advance to support my install which is upside down and shipped everything earlier than expected - answered my questions until late night on the day of install.

And – It does look ‘Bad Ass’ – see pictures.

As a final thought, my goal was to significantly increase the brightness of my movies, which I just did and I love the convenience of the A Lens. But I’ve also heard over the years that an A lens comes with a trade-off of softening the image – either from the lens itself or from the anamorphic upconversion process. I can honestly say that this can’t be farther from the truth. Maybe it’s just the result of that higher brightness – I’m not sure. But in my situation it was very obvious that adding a couple million more pixels processed by my Sony and sent through the Paladin DCR definitely increased the visual clarity and detail of everything I watched. Maybe anamorphic lenses and processing have finally come into their own.

Now - since I love the DCR - I may be biased so I will let my calibrator comments once he is here late February as I know he will give me his candid opinion .... and he told me not to get any A Lens... so he will be critical I am sure.

And lets see what other users say as the lenses start getting delivered.
Home run? More like a Grand Slam! [email protected]@@

As your increase in light output is 23+%, it seems the added sharpness is not only due to some increased fl but also due to the increased pixel count/density. Interesting.

I know you love your Sony UDP-X1000 4k blu ray player. Now that Oppo has just posted beta firmware on their site for your Oppo UDP-203 (if you still have it), you have to try this and see if this, vs the Sony player, can make your HDR picture as good or better! (As well as perhaps the Lumagen Radiance Pro down the line, as Art states that even with his stacked VW5000s he still uses the Radiance Pro's tone mapping and finds it necessary for best HDR picture quality).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,587 Posts
Discussion Starter · #25 ·
I know you love your Sony UDP-X1000 4k blu ray player. Now that Oppo has just posted beta firmware on their site for your Oppo UDP-203 (if you still have it), you have to try this and see if this, vs the Sony player, can make your HDR picture as good or better! (As well as perhaps the Lumagen Radiance Pro down the line, as Art states that even with his stacked VW5000s he still uses the Radiance Pro's tone mapping and finds it necessary for best HDR picture quality).
Its a journey my friend... not a destination - I will look into Lumagen once my Trinnov gets the HDMI upgrade soon :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,962 Posts
@Ash Sharma, maybe I missed it but can you clarify a few things. I was trying to do the math on the light output/loss/gain but I might have a few assumptions incorrect.

1. Is the Palladin a horizontal expansion or vertical compression lens? I thought Panamorph only did HE lenses.

2. The initial FtL measurements:
A. Did I calculate that right where you have about 1,817 Lumens coming from the Sony 5KES?
B. Were with no lens, 16:9 normally filling the screen and then you zoomed out to get a 2.40:1 image, correct?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,587 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 ·
@ash sharma, maybe i missed it but can you clarify a few things. I was trying to do the math on the light output/loss/gain but i might have a few assumptions incorrect.

1. Is the palladin a horizontal expansion or vertical compression lens? I thought panamorph only did he lenses.

2. The initial ftl measurements:
A. Did i calculate that right where you have about 1,817 lumens coming from the sony 5kes?

b. Were with no lens, 16:9 normally filling the screen and then you zoomed out to get a 2.40:1 image, correct?
Vertical compression.

Not sure how THE LUMENS was calculated I am using a Sekonic light meter to measure FTL.

You are correct zoomed and shifted to display 2:40 picture measured the ftl without the dcr and then placed the dcr used v stretch and made a measurement and gained 22% - 23% in ftl.

In 16:9 the ftl were lower after using the dcr lens - using the v squeeze (same as 2:40) so in effect lost brightness in 16:9
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,133 Posts
@ash sharma, maybe i missed it but can you clarify a few things. I was trying to do the math on the light output/loss/gain but i might have a few assumptions incorrect.

1. Is the palladin a horizontal expansion or vertical compression lens? I thought panamorph only did he lenses.

2. The initial ftl measurements:
A. Did i calculate that right where you have about 1,817 lumens coming from the sony 5kes?

b. Were with no lens, 16:9 normally filling the screen and then you zoomed out to get a 2.40:1 image, correct?
Vertical compression.

Not sure how THE LUMENS was calculated I am using a Sekonic light meter to measure FTL.

You are correct zoomed and shifted to display 2:40 picture measured the ftl without the dcr and then placed the dcr used v stretch and made a measurement and gained 22% - 23% in ftl.

In 16:9 the ftl were lower after using the dcr lens - using the v squeeze (same as 2:40) so in effect lost brightness in 16:9
If you are using V-Strecth on Sony , then something has to horizontally expand the image to fill the scope screen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,638 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,587 Posts
Discussion Starter · #38 · (Edited)
Before I installed the DCR - for 2:40 (which is what I mostly watch) - the wasted pixels were on top and bottom of the screen - my screen stage is a black hole but my room is all kinds of colors and the soffit above and below is painted in gold and blue (See picture below) - this light would spill on the soffit and cause all kinds of havoc on my picture (I am guessing ANSI??) ...
With the DCR Palladin the picture is perfectly projected on my screen area only with very slight spill which is on my screen velvet and thus vanishing - this is giving a big boost of picture quality to my eyes...


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,436 Posts
I think Sony's A lens menu options work the same whether it's VC or HE - with HE the 16:9 image in the middle of the screen has black bars above and below the scope image and the HE lens expands the width, The Sony will vertically stretch the image to remove the black bars and restore the geometry.

With a VC lens, you zoom the image to fit the width on the screen and the scope image fills the 2.40 screen, with black bars above and below the screen. When you add the VC lens, you compress the image and bring the black bars onto the screen and the image is now too thin, just like it was on with the HE lens. Using the Sony to vertically stretch the image to remove the black bars gives the same result as with the HE lens.

I'm not sure how the 16:9 sideways 'squish' would work if you keep the lens in place and use that to scale 16:9 movies to fit CIH without removing the lens, but I've a feeling it will work just the same. I prefer that method over removing an A lens for 16:9 as it keeps the pixel density and fL levels the same for both formats, and don't miss the loss of res that it entails. If most of your viewing is BD, you'll only be losing res for UHD 16:9 movies, so it's only going to be a very small amount of movies overall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BattleAxeVR

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,900 Posts
I think Sony's A lens menu options work the same whether it's VC or HE - with HE the 16:9 image in the middle of the screen has black bars above and below the scope image and the HE lens expands the width, The Sony will vertically stretch the image to remove the black bars and restore the geometry.

With a VC lens, you zoom the image to fit the width on the screen and the scope image fills the 2.40 screen, with black bars above and below the screen. When you add the VC lens, you compress the image and bring the black bars onto the screen and the image is now too thin, just like it was on with the HE lens. Using the Sony to vertically stretch the image to remove the black bars gives the same result as with the HE lens.

I'm not sure how the 16:9 sideways 'squish' would work if you keep the lens in place and use that to scale 16:9 movies to fit CIH without removing the lens, but I've a feeling it will work just the same. I prefer that method over removing an A lens for 16:9 as it keeps the pixel density and fL levels the same for both formats, and don't miss the loss of res that it entails. If most of your viewing is BD, you'll only be losing res for UHD 16:9 movies, so it's only going to be a very small amount of movies overall.
Correct. It is also why a VC lens requires a longer throw and can have less pincushion. With HE lens, you are required to fill the height, with VC you are required to fill the width.
 
21 - 40 of 1864 Posts
Top