AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've been looking at possible projectors for my setup and a friend recommended the JVC X95R? I'm an admitted newb to projectors and thought I'd get some feedback from the forum. I'm not a JVC junkie; this is what a friend threw out there as a good unit for such a large screen.


Any alternatives or suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,827 Posts
The JVC isn't a 4K projector. It has some optical trickery that overlays two images to get a faux 4K image. They call it e-shift. The only consumer grade 4K projector out there at the moment is the Sony VPL-VW1000ES and that has an MSRP of $24999. The JVC you listed is a good choice if you want a solid 1080p 2D projector. At that price range there are a couple DLP models you could look into. I usually recommend looking at the Runco LS-5 as an alternative to a JVC. It's worth seeing a high end DLP and JVC (or higher end Sony) before you make a decision. Many rave about JVC projectors, and they right to do so, but some people, myself included, like how DLP looks in comparison. You should see if there is a place local to you that has some projectors on display to see which technology you like best.


Another thing to point out is that, unless you go with a high gain screen, there is no way you can use most home theater projectors (under $10000) and project an image bright enough for a screen that size. You could look into a Da-Lite High Power screen at that size as it would be your best bet to get the right brightness at that size with almost all current home theater projectors under $10000. There are several drawbacks to high gain screens like the Da-Lite High Power screen. Most of the current projectors out there this year from the leading manufacturers should be able to push a screen around 135" diagonal and still be decently bright on lower gain (1.0 to 1.3) screens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks for the most informative response; this is why I always turn to avs forum! Without using a using a Da-Lite screen and "expanding" the budget on the projector, what would be a good fit for a screen of my size?


I will definitely look into the Runco LS-5. I'm assuming this one would be bright enough for a 160'? I've always been fond of DLP but I may simply not know the difference.


I don't mind spending a few bucks on the projector instead of getting disappointed and having to upgrade later on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
463 Posts
Be very cognizant of your seating distance. Anything less than 1.25x of the screen width will result in seeing the pixel structure if you have a straight 1080p machine (not 4k or JVC eshift).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
252 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Withrow  /t/1459842/recommendations-for-160-screen-and-4k-projector#post_23003753


Be very cognizant of your seating distance. Anything less than 1.25x of the screen width will result in seeing the pixel structure if you have a straight 1080p machine (not 4k or JVC eshift).
Don't forget sony projectors. No e-shift and no pixel structure unless you watch from few inches away.
 

·
Registered
Quadruple Stack w/ JVC RS2000/N7| Runco Q750 | DPI M-Vision Cine LED | Benq HT9050
Joined
·
5,412 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by anidabi  /t/1459842/recommendations-for-160-screen-and-4k-projector/0_40#post_23004138


Don't forget sony projectors. No e-shift and no pixel structure unless you watch from few inches away.
Some state that they can see pixel structure from there seating distances on large screens. Not every one see pixel structure on screens the same way
 

·
Registered
Quadruple Stack w/ JVC RS2000/N7| Runco Q750 | DPI M-Vision Cine LED | Benq HT9050
Joined
·
5,412 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by edd1e22  /t/1459842/recommendations-for-160-screen-and-4k-projector/0_40#post_23002777


Thanks for the most informative response; this is why I always turn to avs forum! Without using a using a Da-Lite screen and "expanding" the budget on the projector, what would be a good fit for a screen of my size?


I will definitely look into the Runco LS-5. I'm assuming this one would be bright enough for a 160'? I've always been fond of DLP but I may simply not know the difference.


I don't mind spending a few bucks on the projector instead of getting disappointed and having to upgrade later on.
No one knows what is bright enough for someone's else eyes. I have read some avs members watch their projectors that is very dim to many. Your eyes or your friends eyes will adjust after awhile. For instance, the theaters aim for 12ftL and you can get the same brightness with the jvc projector with the iris open. Most likely you can get that brightness from all projectors uncalibrated. Since I am aware of how many ftL I'm used to watching movies at, I prefer around 14-15ftL and 20ftL for sports in a darken room.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
463 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by anidabi  /t/1459842/recommendations-for-160-screen-and-4k-projector#post_23004138


Don't forget sony projectors. No e-shift and no pixel structure unless you watch from few inches away.

This simply isn't true. Experiment a bit for yourself. On my screen with my old RS1, which is basically the same as the newer projectors sans eshift, pixels and the lines between the pixels are crystal clear more than a foot out and affect picture from way out. The point is to make sure you don't try to go to big and/or sit too close with 1080p or without eshift. The situation is worse with DLP due to the larger spacing between pixels. This stuff isn't an issue with smaller (110" or less) screens where people tend to sit a good ways back. Most folks that want giant screens also want to sit relatively close. This is where the issue pops into view.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
463 Posts
Dude, read the posts before you comment. I didn't say that. We are talking basic pixels. There is little or no difference in pixel spacing byween old and new LCOS projectors. Further, the size of the projected pixels for a 1080P projector won't change for a given image size. As such, the pixel structure won't change, nor will it's visibility.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,464 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Withrow  /t/1459842/recommendations-for-160-screen-and-4k-projector#post_23005671


Dude, read the posts before you comment. I didn't say that. We are talking basic pixels. There is little or no difference in pixel spacing byween old and new LCOS projectors. Further, the size of the projected pixels for a 1080P projector won't change for a given image size. As such, the pixel structure won't change, nor will it's visibility.


Hi Ben. I am confused by your statement. Obviously with 1920 x 1080 pixels or for that matter any number of pixels, the area each pixel occupies on the screen (projected pixels?) will increase as well as the space between the pixels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,495 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich  /t/1459842/recommendations-for-160-screen-and-4k-projector#post_23006318


Hi Ben. I am confused by your statement. Obviously with 1920 x 1080 pixels or for that matter any number of pixels, the area each pixel occupies on the screen (projected pixels?) will increase as well as the space between the pixels.

the way I read it was "for a given image size". So image size constant all 1080p would have the same pixel size by definition. At least that's the way I read it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,106 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by lbrown105  /t/1459842/recommendations-for-160-screen-and-4k-projector#post_23006389


So image size constant all 1080p would have the same pixel size by definition. At least that's the way I read it.

LCD, DLP, and LCOS have different sized pixels slightly even at the same resolution if you count the pixel as the space inside the fill and not including the fill itself (which is how a pixel should be counted). How can this be since you cannot geometrically divide something unevenly? As you probably know but may not have thought about, the reason is because the spacing between the pixels vary between the different techs, and therefore so does the pixel size because the extra space causes LCD to have smaller pixels. Now that is if you count the pixel as the actual projected pixel and not with the border.


To the other poster, I disagree that you need e-shift for an LCOS projector from 1.x seating distance. I would say "prefer" e-shift, not need. I sit about 1.05x seating width from the screen and I cannot see pixel structure with a JVC, even a DLP that is about where you ALMOST start to see it. I have good vision and don't wear glasses, though someone younger in their 20's might be slightly more adept to see it. The pixel fill of LCD is very visible at that seating distance, but not LCOS. E-shift is about more than just pixel fill, it's about smoothing and changing the way our eyes see the geometric edges.


Would I benefit from e-shift, yes, but I don't need it. I would also benefit from a more expensive projector, but need is a strong word.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,106 Posts
I've seen the e-shift now, it's some difference, but I don't need it


If it cost $500 more, I'd take it, but not for double the cost of the RS-45 or RS-46.


Since the OP seems to have the extra cash, I say go try to find a used RS-55 but get a smaller screen and move the seats up. I'm not telling him not to get e-shift, I was just saying I don't want it at that price for my budget.


160" is too big a screen for the JVC anyhow really, because an HP at this size would cost too much (if they will even custom cut one that big), and even then it's pushing it even if he can get 2.0 gain. It's ok if the person is on the dimmer side of likeability of what is acceptable, but for me 160" (even HP) is way too big for a JVC. At near closest throw with the HP it's ok before the lamp ages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,482 Posts
It's nice and bright with the smaller 142" 2.8HP. I run @ -11 and there's still plenty of squinting.


e-shift benefit diminishes with the smaller screens, so imo this is the ideal setup to take advantage of it. This screen takes up an entire wall, nearly floor to ceiling. I'd probably go to 150" if I had the room.
 

·
Registered
Quadruple Stack w/ JVC RS2000/N7| Runco Q750 | DPI M-Vision Cine LED | Benq HT9050
Joined
·
5,412 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k  /t/1459842/recommendations-for-160-screen-and-4k-projector/0_40#post_23006692


It's nice and bright with the smaller 142" 2.8HP. I run @ -11 and there's still plenty of squinting.


e-shift benefit diminishes with the smaller screens, so imo this is the ideal setup to take advantage of it. This screen takes up an entire wall, nearly floor to ceiling. I'd probably go to 150" if I had the room.
Definitely don't go small with eshift.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,106 Posts
It depends on seating distance, not screen size, right?

How can it depend on screen size...


I know bigger screens are cooler because of the "auditorium" effect, not saying go THAT small, but 160" is a bit pushing the lamp. 142" like Zombie sounds more reasonable, maybe to 150" but you're hitting the limits even with an HP. Of course it depends on how many hours you put on the projector. At 850 hours, my JVC is almost too dim for my 106" 2.4 gain HP, of course that is with a series 2 lamp.


Keep in mind going bigger with the JVC = losing contrast since you won't be able to close the IRIS as much.
 

·
Registered
Quadruple Stack w/ JVC RS2000/N7| Runco Q750 | DPI M-Vision Cine LED | Benq HT9050
Joined
·
5,412 Posts
You right, 150-160 is pushing it, but some like it that dim
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top