AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So I purchased the Panny last week and it is sitting in the box waiting for the theater to be finshed (Install is next Tuesday). Just saw Art's review at Projector Reviews of the Sharp Z3000. Here is my problem. I can get the z3000 locally and at a comparable price to the panny. While the Panny is via online. Should I return the panny and get the Z3000 since it seems to be just as bright with a sharper picture and minus all the issues that are arising with the panny? Or is the panny really that bright that it will blow away teh sharp.. I want my pitcure to pop!!!


I am projecting from 11' to a 103" screen. Projector will be ceiling mounted. Some ambient light will occur. Will be using a Vetec Pearl Bright screen. Rainbox's are not a problem since I already have a 50" rear DLP that is three years old and have never seen a hint of RBE.


Is the Sharp that good of projector that Art's reviews says???
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,899 Posts
If you read that review very closely Arts really likes the sharp.But it does cost more,But if you can get it at the same price as the ax100 then it might be a better deal.But it is new also and more than likely has a few quirks also like all FP.The big thing for me would be no lens shift which is a must for me and most.BUDDA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,876 Posts
At 768 resolution there is some room for vertical shift. Also Sharps typically have low offset and quality built are excellent. If indeed it is near the price of ax100 you should look into it. At least you get a very reliable DLP machine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,140 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by brboulder /forum/post/0


So I purchased the Panny last week and it is sitting in the box waiting for the theater to be finshed (Install is next Tuesday). Just saw Art's review at Projector Reviews of the Sharp Z3000. Here is my problem. I can get the z3000 locally and at a comparable price to the panny. While the Panny is via online. Should I return the panny and get the Z3000 since it seems to be just as bright with a sharper picture and minus all the issues that are arising with the panny? Or is the panny really that bright that it will blow away teh sharp.. I want my pitcure to pop!!!


I am projecting from 11' to a 103" screen. Projector will be ceiling mounted. Some ambient light will occur. Will be using a Vetec Pearl Bright screen. Rainbox's are not a problem since I already have a 50" rear DLP that is three years old and have never seen a hint of RBE.


Is the Sharp that good of projector that Art's reviews says???

Neither is a slouch. You could however save some scratch looking into the Sharp DT-500. It's basically a z3000 minus the 2nd iris. Got a Costco membership?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Thanks guys. I just like the idea of buying it local that way if anything does go wrong the store will take care of it from me.


I am a little wooried about the offset. I am ceiling mounting and my ceilings are 8.5 ft high. the top of the screen is going to be roughly two feet from the ceiling. I attached a picture of the screen wall. The screen will fill up most of the dark brown area (the upper half) with the top of the screen being about even with the bottom of the arch.


I want to avoid a long tube dropdown system but willing to take 6" inches or so. Not sure how offset and that works.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Since I am giving the local installer a lot of business with all of my other equipment he is giving me a nice break on the price of the Sharp (sub 2K). He does not carry the 500 so I think I will stick with him and get the 3000. Several months ago he told me about the 3000 but I could find little information on it on the web. Then Art did his review on the 3000 and then all the recent postings about issues with the Panny gave me cold feet about my purchase of the Panny.


As for Costco, no membership yet, have Sam's Club. But they broke ground a on new Costco close to home so will switch upon opening. Do they carry the projectors in-store????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by brboulder /forum/post/0


Should I return the panny and get the Z3000 since it seems to be just as bright with a sharper picture and minus all the issues that are arising with the panny?

Just as bright? Panny advertises 2000 lumens while this Sharp is only advertised at 1200 lumens. If you have ambient light, this is definitely something to consider.


FJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
399 Posts
brboulder - costco has a few projectors in the store, but most of their HT projector line is only online. However their indefinite satisfaction guarantee applies and you can return an online purchase for complete refund (including shipping) to the local store. I'm fairly certain the DT-500 and XV-Z3000 are identical except for the 2nd iris in the Z3000, so feel free to head down to the DT-500 for a little more info.


Also, if you could ask your installer for the service menu access code to the Z3000 that would help us out quite a bit.



FJ - if you look at these two reviews you'll see that the XV-Z3000 measures pretty close to the AX100U. Amazing but Sharp actually seems to quote D65 lumens and can actually go a bit brighter than rated - roughly 1400 lumens. In what Art seemed to think was a usuable mode on the AX100U, he estimated 1800 lumens (why he didn't measure I don't know). Most manufacturers pretty much blatantly lie on their specs, so it's always good to look for actual review measurements when possible. In an extreme example some plasma mfgs measure contrast by sending no signal to the unit or even taking the front glass off, and most pj mfgs are ethically no better.

http://www.projectorreviews.com/Shar...erformance.asp
http://www.projectorreviews.com/Manu...erformance.asp
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
FWIW, I have the Z3000, and have been pretty happy with it. Not that I have a lot of experiance with DLP's. I got mine from Magnolia A&V (Seattle area) on a thanksgiving door buster, it was about 30% under mail order, and I just couldn't pass it up. Sure made springing for the extended waranty easier, and it's local.


I spent a lot of time screwing around with mounts as I was trying to get max performance out of a 106" hp screen. I started out with celing mount, then toyed with wall mount just behind the seats. Found that to be too loud, and a bit too bright even with the highest contrast seting, finally went with hight rear wall mount with an apex articulating mount I got for really cheap on ebay.


I wanted to avoid keystone adjustment as it is software baised, and as I understand, it uses up some resources and can lead to more artifacts. Also, It straightens the sides by clipping the picture, so even fairly small keystone adjustments leave the picture smaller than you would expect. In a room with limited throw distance, and a really big screen, I found that I couldn't do any keystone adjustment without having white on either side of the image. Remember too, increasing throw to inlarge a cropped pic will result in a dimmer overall image as some of the pixles are not used.


If you are going to hang with a 6" tube, and about 2" more for the center of the lense, then ideal screen offset would be about 7 3/8" or about 15 3/8 total. There is a software based picture shift of about 1.75" up or down, which gets you to about 17" drop. Adding 7" aditional drop will result in very noticable keystoning.


I was amaised on mine how precise I had to be in hight to avoid needing keystone adjustment. My final adjustment was about 2" and resulted in zero keystoning. I think it's the short throw of the projector, combined with the eye's ability to notice almost any error in keystone, given that the masking on the sides is straight. I supose if you had a fixed screen, you could use black masking to match a small keystone error, and it would probably not be noticable.


Bottom line, mount the screen as high as you can, then try the projector from where you want it, before you run perminant wires and screws. I understand the sharp is not as adjustable as some other projectors, and I did a lot of tweaking on position before it came out just right. I am very happy with the results though.


Best of luck!

Ken
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
This is straight out of my ZV-Z3000 manual,

Asuming that they use the same optics as the 3000, the throw range for a 100" picture is 9'11" to 11'6", so no, 14' is too long. Asuming I did the math right, you will end up with a pic range of 122-141" at 14' throw. All of this is asuming you don't have any keystone adjustment. As I mentioned, keystone adjustment will shrink the picture very quickly, and I supose could be used in a pinch to shrink the screen, but I would just move the projector forward, it will result in a much nicer, brighter pic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,689 Posts
I sold an AE900 to move up to the z3000, and I couldn't be happier. I consider the move a significant upgrade in PQ. I too paid less than I would have paid for the 100.


Even if brightness was equal between the Ax-100 and the 3000, the 3000 would still have a great deal more pop and depth due to the superior contrast/black level. The 3000 has noticeably lower black level and higher contrast when in high brightness mode than the 900 has in its best theater mode, and the 3000 has to be pushing 800 theater optimized lumens at that. In medium contrast mode the 3000 renders black, and it is better than twice as bright as the 900. In high contrast mode it's still 150 lumens brighter than the 900, and the contrast/black level is second to none. Needless to say, sharpness is worlds better than the 900.


I keep reading about the z3000 having a second iris compared to one in the DT-500. I've had the 3000 for 2 months now, and I've yet to find a second iris.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
If you look through the lense (from the side, it will damage your eyes from straight on, esp at close range) And shift from high brightness to med contrast and high contrast, you will see something shift across, just behind the lense. I assume this is the iris they are talking about. I don't pretend to understand exactly how a smaller iris will increase contrast, but the results are there.


I went from an old 3 gun projector to the 3000, and wow, I had no idea how much these had improved. Everyone is talking about lumens, which is fine for an office presentation, but for movies, contrast is where it's at! At night, in my dark white walled room, I use nothing but high contrast mode. During the day, with the white mini blinds on the 10ft X 4ft picture windows on the side, it's a little blown out, even in high brightness, low bulb mode, but it is usable. I may look for some other blinds, which will def improve the situation.


One word of warning, the default settings are for bright bulb with dynamic picture, by far the worst setting, makes the colors crawl. Usable only in extreme conditions. This is what the sales people had it set to. Made it look like an over driven LCD. Is there a conspiracy amongst sales people to keep us from buying DLP's???


Ken
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by lupy /forum/post/0


Everyone is talking about lumens, which is fine for an office presentation, but for movies, contrast is where it's at! At night, in my dark white walled room, I use nothing but high contrast mode. Ken

Ken,


I've been looking at the DT-500, which apparently does not have the high contrast mode due to lack of that second iris. However, a couple of 3000 owners on other threads have suggested that they never use the highest contrast mode as it is too dark. You obviously have a different impression, so I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on the high contrast mode vs. the "mid" setting.


Many thanks!


Tim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,289 Posts
If you have a fully darkened room, and a reasonable screen size (under 110") the high contrast mode is very usable, especially while the bulb is fresh. If you're buying this because you need a light canon, the high contrast mode might indeed be a bit dim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sethk /forum/post/0


If you have a fully darkened room, and a reasonable screen size (under 110") the high contrast mode is very usable, especially while the bulb is fresh. If you're buying this because you need a light canon, the high contrast mode might indeed be a bit dim.

Thanks--Don't need a light canon, as I am in a fully dark room, though the lumens are nice for watching HD sports in ambient light, but that's not what the high contrast mode is for anyway. I've currently got a BenQ 7800, which is only rated at 800 lumens (220W bulb vs. 275W on the 3000/DT-500), so the 3000 sounds like it would be both brighter and better contrast. However, while it would be nice to have, given that the 3000 is about $1k more than one can get the DT-500 at Costco, I'm not sure the high contrast level is worth the significant step up in price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
I have a high power screen, I am a bit out of the optimal cone of brightness, having the projector high. I got it mainly for the lack of ripple in a roll up screen, off axis light rejection, and a modirate bump in the brightness. That being said, the high contrast mode is very usable for me in a dark room with white walls. I do notice the wall directly behind the projector is noticibly brighter from the retro reflective screen. If my wife would let me paint the back wall black, I am sure the pic would look even better.

Fat chance..



As far as I can tell, the iris is changed for each contrast setting, so the 500 may only have the max brightness/ low contrast setting, which at least on the 3000 is noticibly less contrastly than the others, and which I would only use in a partilly lit room. I like black blacks, which is what I get with high contrast, but mid contrast is noticibly better than the bright. A darker screen would probably help, but then your light output would suffer when you needed it. When I am fooling around with settings, and I go back to high contrast, I initially think that it's too dark, but then I sit down and watch it for a while, and I like it. If there is much light in the room, then mid contrast is better.


I would be interested in seeing what a 500 would test for contrast if a filter were added over the front. Might be a low cost contrast boost??? it seems odd that just adding an iris would result in a 1K$ bump, about twice the $$$. I suspect that there's more diferences than just the iris, but stranger marketing decisions have been made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Hey guys thanks for all the input.


I sent back the Panny 100 today so I don't have to worry about the light flicker or green/red tint that almost every member in the Panny 100 forum is experiencing.


My local installer has nothing but good things to say about the Sharp saying it is one of his favorite projectors and he has been installing from 20 years.


Install is set for a week from today. Just received my Kef IQ7 yesterday and they look amazing. I am pairing those with a Kef Iq6 center channel. My four surrounds are all Speakercrafts AIM8 three's.


the screen is a Vutec PearlBright 103" .


Will post impressions and pics next week.


Someone should start a Sharp Z3000 forum.
 
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top