AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 383 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Both of these projectors seem to be getting everyone worked up. Well me anyway. I've been a panny fan for a while and Sony seems to be taking notice.


I'm putting myself in the market for a new projector and think these two are meeting my specs. The Sony is listed for lower lumen output, but haven't seen anything on the panny AE3000. My room is fully light controlled, but do like to leave doors open (light) at times.


Interested in some of the deep black support in the Sony to match up with my PS3. Other than that I'm sold on Panasonic.


Anyone else contemplating this or have any input that could help with my decision?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
Not sure if it helps you at all, but as you mentioned the Playstation 3, this is one of the things that definitely caught my eye about the Panasonic:

Quote:
http://panasonic.net/pavc/projector/...features2.html
Selectable Frame Response:

This function reduces the time from when the video signal is first input until it is projected (referred to as frame delay) to approximately 1/3 that of our previous projectors. The projector can be switched from Normal mode to High-Speed mode. High-Speed mode is recommended for video game use.

I use my Xbox 360 for the HD DVD player for the projector room, as well as for gaming. (I have an A2, but that's for the 40" TV) I'd like to easily switch back and forth between SFR for gaming and maximum IQ during movie viewing.


I don't yet know how easy is it to turn SFR on and off, but if it is a one or two button fix, that's definitely something that's caught my eye. (I'm a current Sanyo Z3 user, but the Panasonic specs are pulling me in the AE-3000 direction. Assuming it lives up to my expectations with a reasonable price tag, that's probably my next projector.)


Also, my reason for upgrading is that my Z3 is showing signs of it's age with blue fringing on the right side of the screen...I'm guessing the blue LCD panel is dying a slow death. Does anyone know what kind of life expectancy these new inorganic pixels used in the PT-AE3000 are expected to have?


Questions...questions...any answers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,004 Posts
I would expect the Panasonic to produce a somewhat brighter image (i.e., more lumens output with 6500K calibration) with lower black levels and better Contrast Ratio (CR) with the dynamic iris (DI) engaged. However the native CR, without DI engaged, may not be much different. Also the Panasonic's 120Hz vertical refresh mode should produce a better overall image for some material. On the Sony side I would expect it to offer better convergence between the R, G and B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones /forum/post/14578982


I would expect the Panasonic to produce a somewhat brighter image (i.e., more lumens output with 6500K calibration) with lower black levels and better Contrast Ratio (CR) with the dynamic iris (DI) engaged.

First measurements seem to indicate otherwise. Jason has measured the HW10 with 16000:1 contrast and 600 lumen at D65. cine4home has measured the Panasonic at 13000:1 contrast and 500 lumen at D65. Of course these are measurements from two different people, so we should wait for further tests.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones /forum/post/14578982


Also the Panasonic's 120Hz vertical refresh mode should produce a better overall image for some material.

Probably not for movies. But let's wait and see...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,004 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi /forum/post/14579044


First measurements seem to indicate otherwise. Jason has measured the HW10 with 16000:1 contrast and 600 lumen at D65. cine4home has measured the Panasonic at 13000:1 contrast and 500 lumen at D65. Of course these are measurements from two different people, so we should wait for further tests.



Probably not for movies. But let's wait and see...

I agree - I also saw the mini-review on the Panasonic AE3000 by Cine4Home in Germany (I read it just after making my posting above) and I guess the jury is currently out on which projector is brighter and has the better CR and black levels when calibrated to 6500K. We need test results from the same tester using the same procedures to do the measurements in order to do a direct comparison. Of course getting the results for the new Mits and Epson projectors would also be very interesting since they will all be selling in the $3K price range.


As for the 120Hz, I could be useful for movies but many may not want to have the additional interpolated frames added, just the use of 5:5 pulldown to eliminate the 3:2 judder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones /forum/post/14579125


Of course getting the results for the new Mits and Epson projectors would also be very interesting since they will all be selling in the $3K price range.

Yep. The good thing is that we have several projectors now which are probably rather similar to each other in their image quality (Panasonic AE3000, Epson TW5000, Mits HC7000, Sony HW10). So let the manufacturers fight for getting our money...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Schneider /forum/post/14579220


Are we comparing the entry level sony with the top level panny?

Top level panny?
There is only one Panny 1080p projector.


The Panny MSRP seems to be $3282, while the HW10 MSRP is $3499. So the comparison is as valid as can be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Schneider /forum/post/14579220


I would think the panny should be better. The 2000 got very good reviews.

So did the Sony SXRD projectors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,628 Posts
The picture quality of these units will be excellent based on their predecessors performance. Personally I think it is going to come down to the unique features that each unit offers. Based on what I have read it appears the Panasonic has many more features especially anamorphic support which I cant imagine any unit above $3,000 not having.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,996 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by FiveMillionWays /forum/post/14579638


Actually the Panny 2000 had the highest black level rating of all none DLP projectors as reviewed on projectorreviews.com.

I thought the Epson 1080UB held that title.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,653 Posts

Quote:
If it were me I would take the Sony.

I'm thinking the opposite. The Panny seems to be a much better value. Nothing dramatically better about the Sony compared to VW40, while the Panny adds 2.35:1 mode w/o the need for a lens & appears to have better specs across the board compared to the AE2000. I was expecting the Sony to come in at a lower price than the VW40, which would've made it a real contender for my money. But, for now at least, the Panny has the edge IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,818 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brajesh /forum/post/14579828


I'm thinking the opposite. The Panny seems to be a much better value. Nothing dramatically better about the Sony compared to VW40, while the Panny adds 2.35:1 mode w/o the need for a lens & appears to have better specs across the board compared to the AE2000. I was expecting the Sony to come in at a lower price than the VW40, which would've made it a real contender for my money. But, for now at least, the Panny has the edge IMHO.

Yea. I am thinking of 16:9 only. I don't trust Panasonic quality reading these forums.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brajesh /forum/post/14579828


I'm thinking the opposite. The Panny seems to be a much better value. Nothing dramatically better about the Sony compared to VW40, while the Panny adds 2.35:1 mode w/o the need for a lens & appears to have better specs across the board compared to the AE2000. I was expecting the Sony to come in at a lower price than the VW40, which would've made it a real contender for my money. But, for now at least, the Panny has the edge IMHO.

So you decide based on which model has improved more compared to its predecessor? Wouldn't it make more sense to actually compare the new projectors against each other instead?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,223 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brajesh /forum/post/14579828


...while the Panny adds 2.35:1 mode w/o the need for a lens

How does Panny do 2.35:1 without a lens? Isn't that just the zoom method? Does it actually contain an anamorphic lens that lets the full panel get used in a CIH setup? I'd be very surprised.


I could see the Panny having a 2.35 vertical stretch mode (eliminating the black bars by stretching the picture vertically), which would allow you to do 2.35:1 without an external processor, but you still need a lens.


As far as I can tell, anything you can do without a lens is just the 'zoom' method (grow the whole image until the black bars are above/below the screen).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,229 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmeyer /forum/post/14579884


How does Panny do 2.35:1 without a lens? Isn't that just the zoom method?

Yes, it is. BUT the Panny can store separate lens shift, focus and zoom settings for 2.35:1 and 16:9. Which means you can change aspect ratio with a single remote button press. Which I find a *very* nice implementation of the "poor man's" CIH.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,562 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmeyer /forum/post/14579884


How does Panny do 2.35:1 without a lens? Isn't that just the zoom method? Does it actually contain an anamorphic lens that lets the full panel get used in a CIH setup? I'd be very surprised.


I could see the Panny having a 2.35 vertical stretch mode (eliminating the black bars by stretching the picture vertically), which would allow you to do 2.35:1 without an external processor, but you still need a lens.


As far as I can tell, anything you can do without a lens is just the 'zoom' method (grow the whole image until the black bars are above/below the screen).

1. looks to me like a modified zoom 'cih' method.


2. afaik, it also does the proper vert. stretch for use with a lens based cih setup.

which is a main selling point for me.
 
1 - 20 of 383 Posts
Top