[purduesd]

That is not correct at all. Calibrated to a de of 3 or less, there is not a huge difference in brightness between these two. The Epson is brighter in all cases except if you engage the DCI P3 filter on the Epson for HDR. With Filter the Epson loses 40% to 50% of its brightness. In a blacked out room, the JVC is clearly the better projector as long as it is bright enough to light up the screen, but that applies to any projector. Also keep in mind, with the Epson you need more brightness for HDR than what you need with the JVC, due to the JVC having dynamic tone mapping.

I'm not sure its best for me to consider calibrated brightness. I've never had a tv calibrated and honestly i'm kind of doubtful i would have my PJ. Not that i wouldn't consider it though, i guess. Honestly i am not a critical viewer for color accuracy. I prefer poppier color that jumps out at you even if its not accurate. For higher end TVs i prefer samsung colors over sony.

The dynamic tone mapping for HDR, way better blacks and contrast are huge deals to me. Bigger than brightness for ambient light viewing? Maybe not....TBD. Wish i could have both.

 

[noob00224]

Thank you for the calculations. By your estimate it looks like the epson fL on low is roughly equivalent to the NX5 fL on high.

I understand i want to set up the projector as close as possible on the throw window to maximize brightness. I have flexibility to do this, although I think I would prefer not to have the projector directly overhead of the seated position from a noise stand point. I also have a ceiling height change and it would be nice to tuck a black projector right up at the tradition. It would disappear more. Although i don't have to stick with the 15' throw, i would prefer to if possible. (needs more thought)

In my case, at full zoom the NX5 min throw range is 12'. However, an ALR like the Elite 3d has a min throw ratio of 1.5 which means at least 13.2' in my case.

Unfortunately the drawbacks of room do negate some of the ALR benefits. The Windows/ door spill light into the room from the same direction as the projector. (see pic). No possibility of direct sun shining on the screen surface. If i watch at times without window treatments (and we will), this is where the extra brightness from the epson would really pay off. I have considered a dual projector setup and i'm not ruling it out... I could buy a cheap laser, but would prefer not to over complicate things from a usability standpoint.

In the two attached pics you can see the view looking at my screen location and the view looking back the other way. My finger represents the projector placement. The ceiling transition is ~17' from the front wall. So, if you stick a 20" deep PJ up there, that's where i cam up with ~15' throw.

Regarding the DCI P3 coverage:
The 5050UB can do at most 1000 lumens with the filter enabled, and that's with High lamp. It's enabled in presets Digital Cinema and Cinema: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2675882&stc=1&d=1579992765

Without the filter the 5050UB covers around 87% of the DCI P3. The NX5 covers ~90%. Many people prefer the brightness over the extra 13% WCG coverage.



Both the JVC and Epson are very quiet, close to imperceptible in Low/Eco lamp.

Recommended distance for that ALR and others is 1.8x to 2.0. With an 120" screen that would be 15.6' to 17.5'.

With 15.6' for both projectors the loss of light is around 13%, and 16% with 17.5".

Positive gain screens that do not artifact, or are less likely to do so at shorter throws such as 1.6x would be EVP Darkstar9, possibly Elunevision ALR. But they are much more expensive than a budget type ALR, especially if the screen is DIY.

It's likely that you'll want a laser unit after seeing how projection looks like on a big screen. A laser also turns on immediately like a TV where lamp based take 30s just to turn on, and another minute or so to get to an acceptable brightness.

The least expensive unit with the throw ratio that would not cause issues with an ALR is the Optoma ZH406 that has up to 2.24x throw. It's offset is 100% which means the center of the lens is at the same height as visible part of the top of the screen. It's lens shift is only 16% vertical, which means the image can go down 16% (from the height of the screen / 9.4").

Placement of two projectors with an ALR screen is going to be tricky since they have to be on the central axis of the screen. So the projectors would have to be at different height levels, one under another with an ALR screen, no other way around it.

If the screen is not ALR the JVC has some lens shift: from the center of the screen, the image can be moved 44" left/right and 36" up/down. If both of them are used I believe it's less.
Page 18: http://www33.jvckenwood.com/pdfs/B5A-2809-01.pdf

Even if it would be doable to place one next the other with lens shift, the Optoma's vents are on each side, the JVC's front and back.
The JVC would be required to be moved to the side ~25", that's 24% horizontal lens shift. Only 35% vertical lens shift is possible in this case, which is 20" upwards from the center of the screen. The screen height is 58.8". Let's say the screen starts 20". 20" plus half screen height 30" plus the 20" would be 70" / 5.8'. The center of the lens would be at 5.8'. I don't think it would be acceptable.

So either if the screen is an ALR or regular, a two projector setup would need to be with one projector under another, or with with the center of the lens under another. The Optoma is 4.8" in height (total) and JVC 20".

While not ideal, if the light coming from outside is not too much an ALR might work:

 

[purduesd]

Recommended distance for that ALR and others is 1.8x to 2.0. With an 120" screen that would be 15.6' to 17.5'.

This is from the elite website... Its says 1.5 for 3d and 5d. Where are you getting the 1.8?

 

[purduesd]

Regarding the DCI P3 coverage:
The 5050UB can do at most 1000 lumens with the filter enabled, and that's with High lamp. It's enabled in presets Digital Cinema and Cinema: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2675882&stc=1&d=1579992765

Without the filter the 5050UB covers around 87% of the DCI P3. The NX5 covers ~90%. Many people prefer the brightness over the extra 13% WCG coverage.



Both the JVC and Epson are very quiet, close to imperceptible in Low/Eco lamp.

Recommended distance for that ALR and others is 1.8x to 2.0. With an 120" screen that would be 15.6' to 17.5'.

With 15.6' for both projectors the loss of light is around 13%, and 16% with 17.5".

Positive gain screens that do not artifact, or are less likely to do so at shorter throws such as 1.6x would be EVP Darkstar9, possibly Elunevision ALR. But they are much more expensive than a budget type ALR, especially if the screen is DIY.

It's likely that you'll want a laser unit after seeing how projection looks like on a big screen. A laser also turns on immediately like a TV where lamp based take 30s just to turn on, and another minute or so to get to an acceptable brightness.

The least expensive unit with the throw ratio that would not cause issues with an ALR is the Optoma ZH406 that has up to 2.24x throw. It's offset is 100% which means the center of the lens is at the same height as visible part of the top of the screen. It's lens shift is only 16% vertical, which means the image can go down 16% (from the height of the screen / 9.4").

Placement of two projectors with an ALR screen is going to be tricky since they have to be on the central axis of the screen. So the projectors would have to be at different height levels, one under another with an ALR screen, no other way around it.

If the screen is not ALR the JVC has some lens shift: from the center of the screen, the image can be moved 44" left/right and 36" up/down. If both of them are used I believe it's less.
Page 18: http://www33.jvckenwood.com/pdfs/B5A-2809-01.pdf

Even if it would be doable to place one next the other with lens shift, the Optoma's vents are on each side, the JVC's front and back.
The JVC would be required to be moved to the side ~25", that's 24% horizontal lens shift. Only 35% vertical lens shift is possible in this case, which is 20" upwards from the center of the screen. The screen height is 58.8". Let's say the screen starts 20". 20" plus half screen height 30" plus the 20" would be 70" / 5.8'. The center of the lens would be at 5.8'. I don't think it would be acceptable.

So either if the screen is an ALR or regular, a two projector setup would need to be with one projector under another, or with with the center of the lens under another. The Optoma is 4.8" in height (total) and JVC 20".

While not ideal, if the light coming from outside is not too much an ALR might work:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MPjN4kPeCA

Thank you for your continued input! Yes if i go with a multiple projector setup, I would place the JVC up in the taller 9' side and place the Laser below and further back on the 7'9" ceiling side. It would hang down there pretty bad and be quite noticeable. I'm 6'2 and i'd be ducking under it, even though i wouldn't necessarily need to...

 

[noob00224]

@purduesd
If the center of the lens is ~20" above the height of the center of the screen (29.4" is half height), the JVC being 20" high (plus 2" for a flush mount), and the ceiling 9'/108" 8'/ 96":

108- 2 - 10 (center of lens) would result in 96" - center of the lens.
Problem is if the height of half the screen is 30" and the lens shift only allows for 20" above the center height of the screen, the center of the lens is 10" under the visible top of the screen. This would result in only 2" remaining to the ceiling, and 2" is the usual height of a screen black border. So the screen would be flush against the ceiling.

Not only that, but the screen would have to start at 47.2‬" / 4'. That's too high.


If the difference between the two ceiling is 1'/12".
The screen would end at 80" /6.7'.
JVC height is 20" and Optoma 5".
JVC's vertical lens shift is 47" from the center of the screen, ~50".

If the JVC would be flush against the ceiling, 50 + 47 = 97" - center of the lens.

The center of the lens of the Optoma would need to be at ~80" with the possibilty of raising it by 9.4".

If using an ALR screen placing them on the vertical axis but one closer might result in unwanted visual artifacts.
17'/ 204 - 20" (JVC depth) - 4" (for cables) = 180"
180 / 104.6 = 1.72x throw ratio

Using both of them under the 9' ceiling is not possible. Even just with the JVC the throw ratio is still 1.72x. There was a recent purchase of a Cinegrey 3D (with a realistic gain of 0.8-1.0) and while there was no hotspot the user reported sparkles at 1.7x throw. The projector was a HC3800 which is bright, but I don't know if the NX5 will be artifact free at this throw ratio.

Placing the Optoma under the 8' /96" ceiling:
80" end of screen + 2.5" center of lens to top of projector= 82.5"
96 - 82.5 = 13.5" required.
Vertical lens shift can add another 9.4". 13.5 - 9.4 = 4.1"
A mount of at least 4.1" would be required, putting the Optoma at ~87" height - from floor to bottom of the projector. 87' is 7.25".

This is from the elite website... Its says 1.5 for 3d and 5d. Where are you getting the 1.8?

I have the 3D and it definitely hotspots at 1.5x.



Maybe just get the 5050UB/6050/NX5 and a white screen, you'll be very happy with it. Not entirely sure how it would look like with 1500 lumens during the day without curtains. It's probably fine. 1000 lumens on the JVC on the other hand, not sure.
If you want to get the ALR the projector would need to be placed underneath the 8' ceiling.

 

[Luminated67]

Its boiling down to,
Way better blacks and contrast ratio. Great HDR (no fussing with in movie slider adjustments)

vs.

Epson brightness, it's there in every side x side comparison picture i've seen. Blaze mode for parties... Price

*its a tough one.. the snobby movie guy in me says jvc, but well rounded guy in me says Epson.

A mate on the UK forums has his JVC NX5 and took a photo from a demo 4K that I also did, you’d be amazed just how close these two projectors look when both are calibrated. Even the detail is very similar though no doubt the JVC is smoother due to it being native 4K versus e-shift and both images are zoomed in.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/j31vayrqwckqyit/Photo 16-01-2020, 06 34 14.jpg?dl=0
JVC NX5
https://www.dropbox.com/s/br4t5agu16emz5h/Photo 16-01-2020, 06 34 22.jpg?dl=0
My Epson 6050 (TW9400)

Both machined are calibrated professional, you’ll notice that my Epson has slightly better colour variation due to its filter. Don’t know what he runs his lamp mode with HDR but mine is on ECO mode.

I’m not going to claim the Epson is the absolute best because that’s the JVC, but it gets remarkably close and has the option to produce a brighter image if the need requires. Bar the DTM that’s presently unique to JVC the Epson offers all its other features, motorised lens, multi presets for lens and image setups, blanking and multiple image sharpness enhancement settings.

I’ve the money sitting if I wanting to make the switch to the JVC but at present I genuinely don’t feel the need as I am more than happy with my image.

 

[noob00224]

Sorry for the multiple posts.
Using both projectors under the 9' ceiling is possible if a non ALR screen is used.

Minimum throw for the ZH406 is 1.4x. That's 146.44" / 12.2' - lens to screen.
146.44 + 10.5 (projector depth) + 4" (cables) = 161"

The NX5 would be at 180" lens to screen, so 19" spare.

The ZH406 would still start at ~99"/8.25" height. The center of the lens of the JVC would be at ~97" shooting downwards.

So it's possible. The ZH406 would take care of the brightness issue during the day.
Problem solved .

The only issue is if you want to have the Optoma ~12.5' from the screen. It's rated at 32dB.

 

[purduesd]

@purduesd
If the center of the lens is ~20" above the height of the center of the screen (29.4" is half height), the JVC being 20" high (plus 2" for a flush mount), and the ceiling 9'/108" 8'/ 96":

108- 2 - 10 (center of lens) would result in 96" - center of the lens.
Problem is if the height of half the screen is 30" and the lens shift only allows for 20" above the center height of the screen, the center of the lens is 10" under the visible top of the screen. This would result in only 2" remaining to the ceiling, and 2" is the usual height of a screen black border. So the screen would be flush against the ceiling.

Not only that, but the screen would have to start at 47.2‬" / 4'. That's too high.


If the difference between the two ceiling is 1'/12".
The screen would end at 80" /6.7'.
JVC height is 20" and Optoma 5".
JVC's vertical lens shift is 47" from the center of the screen, ~50".

If the JVC would be flush against the ceiling, 50 + 47 = 97" - center of the lens.

The center of the lens of the Optoma would need to be at ~80" with the possibilty of raising it by 9.4".

If using an ALR screen placing them on the vertical axis but one closer might result in unwanted visual artifacts.
17'/ 204 - 20" (JVC depth) - 4" (for cables) = 180"
180 / 104.6 = 1.72x throw ratio

Using both of them under the 9' ceiling is not possible. Even just with the JVC the throw ratio is still 1.72x. There was a recent purchase of a Cinegrey 3D (with a realistic gain of 0.8-1.0) and while there was no hotspot the user reported sparkles at 1.7x throw. The projector was a HC3800 which is bright, but I don't know if the NX5 will be artifact free at this throw ratio.

Placing the Optoma under the 8' /96" ceiling:
80" end of screen + 2.5" center of lens to top of projector= 82.5"
96 - 82.5 = 13.5" required.
Vertical lens shift can add another 9.4". 13.5 - 9.4 = 4.1"
A mount of at least 4.1" would be required, putting the Optoma at ~87" height - from floor to bottom of the projector. 87' is 7.25".



I have the 3D and it definitely hotspots at 1.5x.



Maybe just get the 5050UB/6050/NX5 and a white screen, you'll be very happy with it. Not entirely sure how it would look like with 1500 lumens during the day without curtains. It's probably fine. 1000 lumens on the JVC on the other hand, not sure.
If you want to get the ALR the projector would need to be placed underneath the 8' ceiling.

Wow, thanks for crunching those numbers. I had not yet ran the numbers on half angle. Half angle is only a consideration for an ALR screen, correct? If i choose to go white... height doesn't matter, just adjust the projector mount. Right?

I don't see myself choosing to hang the JVC (or even the epson) under the lower ceiling:eek. I just measured and its going to finish out at 91" (7'7"), Tall side is 104" (8'8")

So assuming i can ignore half angle for white... I have basically 3 options.

1. White screen/ jvc & optoma (if needed) 15.2/ 17.2 throw respectively

2. Epson with white screen 15'2" throw

3. Epson with ALR at 1.72 ratio (15'2" throw)

 

[purduesd]

The only issue is if you want to have the Optoma ~12.5' from the screen. It's rated at 32dB.

Ya not sure i want the big white blob out in the middle of the room/ in front of my head. But that's an idea i hadn't thought of. Wonder if anybody makes a black one...

 

[noob00224]

Wow, thanks for crunching those numbers. I had not yet ran the numbers on half angle. Half angle is only a consideration for an ALR screen, correct? If i choose to go white... height doesn't matter, just adjust the projector mount. Right?

I don't see myself choosing to hang the JVC (or even the epson) under the lower ceiling:eek. I just measured and its going to finish out at 91" (7'7"), Tall side is 104" (8'8")

So assuming i can ignore half angle for white... I have basically 3 options.

1. White screen/ jvc & optoma (if needed) 15.2/ 17.2 throw respectively

2. Epson with white screen 15'2" throw

3. Epson with ALR at 1.72 throw (15'2" throw)

Half angle is something else, it's for ALR's, how dim does the screen get as the viewing angle (left/right) is increased.
The ratio relevant is the throw ratio.

1. The throw ratio (under the 9' area) with the JVC is 1.72x at the most. Distance from lens to screen would be 180" / 15'.
5050UB's depth is 17.7" versus 20" with the NX5, so the throw ratio is 1.74x. As I mentioned earlier a somewhat slightly brighter Epson had issues with a Cinegrey 3D from 1.71x.
ALR screens that will not artifact at this throw ratio are very expensive (5050UB price or higher) and have negative gain.

If you were to pair the Epson or the JVC with a budget ALR screen, for instance the XY Black Crystal 0.8 gain, I honestly don't know if there will be any issues.

The second projector could also not be used. This might be fine with the Epson which is brighter and can handle the 0.8 gain (and has cheaper lamps), but might be an issue with the JVC (which lamps are more expensive).

2. As per point 1, the throw with the 5050UB is 1.74. If it can be placed closer the brightness will increase by ~ 12%.


Since calculations might not be accurate to the mm, and there is some variance in specifications, if a two projector setup is used withe the ZH406 closer to the screen and the NX5 behind it, the NX5's beam could hit the Optoma.

For example, the vertical lens shift on the NX5 is 80% (of the height of the screen 58.8"). PC calculator says it's 44", but 80% of 58.8" is 47.04".

If the NX5's beam hits the Optoma, since the NX5 can't be lowered (?) and the Optoma can't be placed higher, the screen itself would have to be lowered. But that can't be done because the lens shift of the NX5 is at it's limit and can't move the image downwards.
I've placed the screen at 20" height (and done the calculations), which is an average height, but it might not fit your setup.

In this case a projector that sits closer to the screen so the beam would not hit it would be required.
No lasers here, but there are bright lamp based projectors:

Optoma GT1080HDR. It has a fixed throw ratio of 0.5x, so 52.3" from the screen.
Optoma HD39HDR. Minimum throw of 1.12x, so 117" from the screen.

They are both DLP and 1080p. They have enough offset (sit above the screen) not to be hit by the NX5's beam. Can accept a 4K signal. Cost half the ZH406.

For a 4K version the Optoma UHD52ALV with a throw of 1.21x. About the same cost as the ZH406. The ZH406 is 1080p and can accept a 4K signal.

Ya not sure i want the big white blob out in the middle of the room/ in front of my head. But that's an idea i hadn't thought of. Wonder if anybody makes a black one...

The UHD52ALV is available in black.

Can't think of any black projectors with a short throw, laser or lamp.

LE:
The 52ALV is not black, the 51ALV is.

 

[Mike Garrett]

This is very true because the Epson has a filter to give it almost 100% colour coverage the JVC NX5 doesn't, so get like for like you need to go to the NX7. So really what is the point in these filters if one JVC model has it and the other doesn't?

If you get your projector calibrated as I did with the Epson your calibrator should give you two HDR setups, one with the filter and another 'BRIGHT HDR' without as I have. One is super accurate with colours and the other less so but still very acceptable and is seriously bright but comparison, bright enough to enough watch with my spot lights on in the dim position on my white screen, with an ALR screen it would be amazing.

No denying the JVC is the better projector, it has deeper blacks but unless you view these side by side you won't feel short changed for buying the Epson. The real question is are you OK with spending the difference for not a massive improvement simply because you want the best?

If the answer is YES then the JVC is your only option but if the money difference means anything to you then you owe it to yourself to see these two projectors in similar conditions, at least that way you know you will be making the right decision for YOU and not for anyone else.

The filter for HDR is not for correcting colors. It is for giving you a wider color space. HDR has colors that you do not get with regular BD, if your projector can do it. 4K HDR uses BT2020 color space with a current range equal to DCI color space. Without the filter, the Epson is 85% to 87% of DCI color space. With the filter the Epson is around 97% of DCI color space. The JVC RS1000/NX5 is 87% to 90% of DCI color space. Due to how many lumens the Epson loses due to the filter, almost no one here in the US uses it, because when they do, the image is too dim.

 

[Mike Garrett]

Its boiling down to,
Way better blacks and contrast ratio. Great HDR (no fussing with in movie slider adjustments)

vs.

Epson brightness, it's there in every side x side comparison picture i've seen. Blaze mode for parties... Price

*its a tough one.. the snobby movie guy in me says jvc, but well rounded guy in me says Epson.

Are those pictures from the TVS Pro review? You really should hunt down Kris Deerings comments from the review. He said the video and pictures did not actually show the difference that you saw in real life.

 

[purduesd]

Are those pictures from the TVS Pro review? You really should hunt down Kris Deerings comments from the review. He said the video and pictures did not actually show the difference that you saw in real life.

Yes ! And I agree it's silly to look at pictures of a picture and hope to make a decision. I hope to remedy this in person this weekend in Nashville.

The brightness after calibration in HDR is similar for both the nx7 and the 6050. The nx7 is actually slightly higher.

However, uncalibrated HDR (which may be how i would use the epson) its almost double. In its max bright modes in the .. It's not close. The Epson is way way brighter. And this is only HDR. Sports and DirectTV are going to be the primary viewing for ambient lighted room in my case.

 

[coderguy]

Possibly someone already mentioned this, but did you consider a dual projector setup, or maybe that's not viable in your situation. That is the only real way to get the best of all worlds, otherwise the Epson is the best minor compromise. Even though a perfect HDR calibration might be near the same with some calibrations, the Epson still calibrates brighter in other respects, and even going barely off in delta error will make the Epson much brighter than the JVC. And... This is coming from a JVC fan, myself...

 

[purduesd]

Possibly someone already mentioned this, but did you consider a dual projector setup, or maybe that's not viable in your situation. That is the only real way to get the best of all worlds, otherwise the Epson is the best minor compromise. Even though a perfect HDR calibration might be near the same with some calibrations, the Epson still calibrates brighter in other respects, and even going barely off in delta error will make the Epson much brighter than the JVC. And... This is coming from a JVC fan, myself...

Thanks for posting up your opinion. I am surprised at your recommendation honestly since ive been following the other thread pretty close. Glad you took a minute to weigh in. I guess im wishing the JVC would be bright enough, but keep coming back to it being borderline.

Yes lots of talk about dual projector in this thread, but i would probably work into that decision down the road. Start with either the NX5 or the 5050/6050 and try to use it multipurpose.

 

[noob00224]

Other black case projectors that could be placed closer to the screen so they would be out of the NX5's beam:

ViewSonic PJD7835HD: 116% offset, 1.1x minimum throw, 1080p, DLP.
ViewSonic Pro7827HD: 115% offset, 1.1x minimum throw, 1080p, DLP.

The first is the brighter of the two, but could not find it available. These two used could be an option. Inexpensive and bright.

Otherwise the UHD51ALV: 115% offset, 1.21x minimum throw, 4K, DLP.

The 5050/6050UB has more vertical lens shift than the NX5, can do 56.62" up (from the center of the screen) vs 47.04" on the NX5.
Which means the screen can be placed lower, so in a dual setup the light beam from the projector further away would not hit the second. Although I don't think that is very likely with the models discussed above.

LE:
If you really want a black case laser projector there is the Optoma ZH506: 118% offset, 1.4x minimum throw, 1080p (can accept a 4K signal), DLP, brighter than the ZH406. Costs as much as the 5050UB.

 

[noob00224]

1000 lumens on 150" white screen with some ambient light:

My living room is 13 feet x 24 feet. My projector is a Runco LS-5 (1080p | 1,000 calibrated lumens) and is ceiling mounted in the back of the room. It's 21 feet from the front of the projector lens to the screen and 15 feet from the main seating position to the screen. I'm projecting on a Silver Ticket (16:9, 150", White Material) fixed frame screen, a shadow box extending out 2 feet into the room from the screen wall. (Using manual masking for aspect ratios north of 1.78:1.)

In the back of the room I do leave a small lamp on quite often when watching DIRECTV or different apps on my Apple TV 4K. It raises the ambient lighting level just enough I don't feel like I'm sitting in the dark while at the same time having very little impact on the picture.

And here's another video with the lights turned on over my dining room table as well. These videos look like garbage on YouTube compared to how they look on my iPhone. (And my iPhone sort of blows the image out a bit to start with which doesn't help.) They still demonstrate quite well I think how decent the image quality is maintained despite the indirect lighting at the back of the room.

 

[purduesd]

So, I got to view an Epson 6050 side by side a Sony 295es with my wife this weekend in Nashville. The setup was in a theater room of a retail store. But there was glass french door behind the projector and 2 rows of Track lighting on the ceiling. We played with the room lighting and could simulate how both the Sony and the Epson look in both controlled and not controlled lighting on a 110" white screen.

I thought the epson was slightly brighter over all. To me, this was not as noticeable as i anticipated. After the fact, my wife said she didn't notice a big difference in brightness. The 295es got a slight edge for contrast when watching a Transformers 1080 blue ray. In dim lighting the Sony looked amazing for the movie. In hind sight, i wished i would have spent more time comparing dark room performance of the Epson. Both performed fine for sports (soccer). So i don't see motion as a problem with either one.

I didn't really get to dig in on the settings because the cheesy salesman was selling sony hard. It wasn't a direct comparison, we took the 6050 off a shelf and fired it up for its first hours on a cart. The sony was hanging on the ceiling. Supposedly it was on low lamp, and i assume the 6050 boots up initially in low lamp but... who really knows.

We both did notice you lose a little bit of the clarity and vibrance coming from a TV. But the size jump experience seems to more than make up for it.


The great news is our concerns about whether projection is right for us is totally answered. We are going PJ.

My understanding is the Sony 295es is comparable to the JVC NX5.

So i guess it comes down to the trade off... little bit of brightness or little bit of picture contrast. The Epson 6050 is probably the cheapest option but i haven't really dug into pricing. I'll also need to consider screen options- ALR vs white.

 

[Luminated67]

If the Sony was already mounted in their demo room chances are it’s also calibrated which I doubt the Epson was if they lifted it off the shelf. Ask anyone with the Epson that had theirs calibrated they will tell you there’s a world of difference.

On a plus note it’s great you are won over to the whole PJ experience, no matter which one you end up with you will never look back, not only movies but sporting events will never be the same again.

Here’s my Epson with the exact same image for a YouTube 4K demo.

Pre Calibrated
https://www.dropbox.com/s/r3kgrlzt0jjeqn9/Photo 03-05-2019, 20 14 57.jpg?dl=0

After Calibration
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8g8i3hr95ue7crn/Photo 02-02-2020, 00 22 52.jpg?dl=0

Not only are the blacks better but the colours are now accurate.

 

[Craig Peer]

So, I got to view an Epson 6050 side by side a Sony 295es with my wife this weekend in Nashville. The setup was in a theater room of a retail store. But there was glass french door behind the projector and 2 rows of Track lighting on the ceiling. We played with the room lighting and could simulate how both the Sony and the Epson look in both controlled and not controlled lighting on a 110" white screen.

I thought the epson was slightly brighter over all. To me, this was not as noticeable as i anticipated. After the fact, my wife said she didn't notice a big difference in brightness. The 295es got a slight edge for contrast when watching a Transformers 1080 blue ray. In dim lighting the Sony looked amazing for the movie. In hind sight, i wished i would have spent more time comparing dark room performance of the Epson. Both performed fine for sports (soccer). So i don't see motion as a problem with either one.

I didn't really get to dig in on the settings because the cheesy salesman was selling sony hard. It wasn't a direct comparison, we took the 6050 off a shelf and fired it up for its first hours on a cart. The sony was hanging on the ceiling. Supposedly it was on low lamp, and i assume the 6050 boots up initially in low lamp but... who really knows.

We both did notice you loose a little bit of the clarity and vibrance coming from a TV. But the size jump experience seems to more than make up for it.


The great news is our concerns about whether projection is right for us is totally answered. We are going PJ.

My understanding is the Sony 295es is comparable to the JVC NX5.

So i guess it comes down to the trade off... little bit of brightness or little bit of picture contrast. The Epson 6050 is probably the cheapest option but i haven't really dug into pricing. I'll also need to consider screen options- ALR vs white.

Maybe the most important consideration for watching with some lighting on, is to try and have lighting that won't shine directly on the screen. Recessed can lights and dimmers that shine straight down onto tables really help. And having different zones on separate dimmers, so only the lights that need to be on are on. That is my recommendation.