If it were me, I would start at the JVC NX7, then if I can't find a good deal on that one, I would be looking at either a JVC NX5 or perhaps a used Sony 695ES. If all of those options are off the table due to budget or you can't find a deal you like, then a JVC x790, Sony 285/385, Epson 5050UB, or BenQ HT5550 would be considerations. Definitely invest in your projector as it will likely be the centerpiece of your HT space.
-
Get an exclusive sneak peek into our new project. >>> Click Here
Sony VPL-VW295ES or Epsom 5050UB
New build, which projector?
Opinions.... I'm going to be building a new house and am pre-planning my home theater build. see thread here: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-dedicated-theater-design-construction/3085908-new-ht-construction-build-suggestions-ideas.html#post58456946
I want to start out spending 6k or less in total on the movie room (upon moving into the house) and then slowly upgrade w/ a budget of about 1k/month
I was thinking the 5050UB since the contrast and colors are better (i think). And it would be probably a 100-120" screen from 10' away, from that distance can you really tell a difference between 4k and "fauxK"??
I'm also considering JVD DLA-NX5 or RS540U.....
1st time projector buyer so I'm not completely sure what i'm looking for
room is 14'x16' and there are no windows, so lighting is not an issue
Other option would be to spend more on the projector upfront and then upgrade the speakers and room acoustics later...
Any opinions or other suggestions for a different projector?
Thanks!
Opinions.... I'm going to be building a new house and am pre-planning my home theater build. see thread here: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/19-dedicated-theater-design-construction/3085908-new-ht-construction-build-suggestions-ideas.html#post58456946
I want to start out spending 6k or less in total on the movie room (upon moving into the house) and then slowly upgrade w/ a budget of about 1k/month
I was thinking the 5050UB since the contrast and colors are better (i think). And it would be probably a 100-120" screen from 10' away, from that distance can you really tell a difference between 4k and "fauxK"??
I'm also considering JVD DLA-NX5 or RS540U.....
1st time projector buyer so I'm not completely sure what i'm looking for
room is 14'x16' and there are no windows, so lighting is not an issue
Other option would be to spend more on the projector upfront and then upgrade the speakers and room acoustics later...
Any opinions or other suggestions for a different projector?
Thanks!
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Check out a similar thread on the same subject further down the page.
Based on a test I conducted in my room which has a 100” screen viewed from 9-9.5ft away we compared a mates Sony 360es against my Epson TW9400 (6050 in the US) and neither of us could see any resolution difference from my standard viewing distance, we actually had to move to 7ft before any doubt was placed in our mind as to which projector was playing and it really took moving to 6ft to know for sure it was the Sony and not the Epson.
I feel there’s enough doubt of the benefits of true Native 4K over e-shift to suggest you to go demo each machine in person.
Based on a test I conducted in my room which has a 100” screen viewed from 9-9.5ft away we compared a mates Sony 360es against my Epson TW9400 (6050 in the US) and neither of us could see any resolution difference from my standard viewing distance, we actually had to move to 7ft before any doubt was placed in our mind as to which projector was playing and it really took moving to 6ft to know for sure it was the Sony and not the Epson.
I feel there’s enough doubt of the benefits of true Native 4K over e-shift to suggest you to go demo each machine in person.
Although I agree with your findings having seen several examples of the Epson 5040 and various native 4K Sony's you need to take a couple of things into account.Check out a similar thread on the same subject further down the page.
Based on a test I conducted in my room which has a 100” screen viewed from 9-9.5ft away we compared a mates Sony 360es against my Epson TW9400 (6050 in the US) and neither of us could see any resolution difference from my standard viewing distance, we actually had to move to 7ft before any doubt was placed in our mind as to which projector was playing and it really took moving to 6ft to know for sure it was the Sony and not the Epson.
I feel there’s enough doubt of the benefits of true Native 4K over e-shift to suggest you to go demo each machine in person.
- Sony's image processing even with a service mode defeat does not show single pixel 4K test patterns
- All of the Sony 4K projector lenses I've seen in person showed varying degrees of uniformity problems. Which directly impacts sharpness and image depth. The newest models are supposed to have addressed this, but that 360ES you compared against almost certainly suffered here.
Both of those 2 points impacted the Sony's overall image when I compared them to the Epson 5040 and e-shift JVCs when I was in the market. I ended up with the JVC RS520 at the time.
The JVC NX/RSxxxx lineup on the other hand does not have these issues. The processing can resolve single pixel 4K test patterns and the lenses are excellent. Which means the 4K image it throws is certainly sharper with greater depth than the Sony units I've experienced.
Now having said that, the resolution difference moving from a JVC RS520 to NX7 was not night and day. But you will see more detail on well mastered 4K material from a normal seating distance vs. the e-shift unit.
^In the UK there has been side by side demos against the NX5 and TW9400, those that were there felt it was too close to call and said if it were there money they would have bought the Epson. Of course things like projector throw distance can affect how they perform and alter the results but in the real world you don’t always get to position your projector where’s optimum.
I think it’s always recommended to sample all considered projectors because that way you ended up with the right one for you and not what others think is right for you.
I think it’s always recommended to sample all considered projectors because that way you ended up with the right one for you and not what others think is right for you.
Cool. yeah, From what I've read, the image from 9' away from eshift and true 4k is not different. I'm surprised the TW9400 performed as well as the NX5 mostly becasue I'd think the Auto Tone Mapping would produce better colors. all good information..
How does one go about doing a side by side comparison. can i just walk into a best buy and ask them to set up specific projectors for me to compare?
How does one go about doing a side by side comparison. can i just walk into a best buy and ask them to set up specific projectors for me to compare?
Of course if it all possible you should always demo the actual units. The post was more meant to illustrate that not all 4K projectors are created equal. As far as the demo you mention it still seems odd that the NX5, which repeatedly measures 4-5 times the native contrast of the Epson in independent testing, didn't show an improvement over the Epson. I'm certainly a fan of the Epson, but it's hard to wrap my brain around a test where this wasn't observed as it easily should be. But as you say viewing conditions greatly impact what we ultimately perceive from a projector.^In the UK there has been side by side demos against the NX5 and TW9400, those that were there felt it was too close to call and said if it were there money they would have bought the Epson. Of course things like projector throw distance can affect how they perform and alter the results but in the real world you don’t always get to position your projector where’s optimum.
I think it’s always recommended to sample all considered projectors because that way you ended up with the right one for you and not what others think is right for you.
Between the Sony and the Epson, I'd lean towards the Epson. The Sony is lacking too many features to justify its $5K price point. The native contrast difference between the two is only about 2:1 in favor of the Sony. The Epson's dynamic iris system vs. the Sony's total lack of one is probably going to be more of a factor than the native contrast advantage with regards to black level. The Epson is also much brighter and has better tone mapping. A huge plus for 4K HDR. The Epson also has lens memory for supporting theatrical aspect ratio screens vs. being stuck with only a 16:9 option with the Sony. Another plus for the Epson.
Depends on what's being compared and the screen size. I sit around 9' from a 130" 2.35:1 screen and I can say with 100% certainty that I can put up material you would see a difference with pixel shifted vs. native. Night and day? No. But definitely there. That's comparing my previous JVC RS520 (pixel shifting) vs. my current JVC NX7 (native 4K) on the same screen from the same chair.Cool. yeah, From what I've read, the image from 9' away from eshift and true 4k is not different.
I've seen that one test mentioned before. However I would caution that independently measured data (from several reputable sources) shows distinct differences in performance in favor of the NX5. Now granted the Epson is a fantastic projector, but after seeing a 5050UB at my local AV store I feel confident in saying the NX5 would have appreciable differences. Whether that is enough to justify its higher price point is up to you.I'm surprised the TW9400 performed as well as the NX5 mostly becasue I'd think the Auto Tone Mapping would produce better colors. all good information..
It's tough to do. Your average BB probably does not have a room optimized for this and probably doesn't have a clue how to extract the best performance from either unit. Your best bet is to see if there is a dealer near you with a proper room and calibration training to view these. Or look for AVS members in your area who'd be willing to let you see their equipment. Not as good as a room with both side by side, but certainly better than what the average BB will be able to do.How does one go about doing a side by side comparison. can i just walk into a best buy and ask them to set up specific projectors for me to compare?
You should probably revisit this until after CEDIA in a few weeks. Who knows... Epson might reveal an affordable native 4k projector. As of now, I'd probably go with the JVC NX5, unless you have the coins for the NX7.
Most people here in the US have much larger screens than 100" diagonal. For example, my screen is 9' wide and I view from 9'. That is about the same viewing angle as 7' from your screen. My RS3000 throws a sharper image than the VW360.Check out a similar thread on the same subject further down the page.
Based on a test I conducted in my room which has a 100” screen viewed from 9-9.5ft away we compared a mates Sony 360es against my Epson TW9400 (6050 in the US) and neither of us could see any resolution difference from my standard viewing distance, we actually had to move to 7ft before any doubt was placed in our mind as to which projector was playing and it really took moving to 6ft to know for sure it was the Sony and not the Epson.
I feel there’s enough doubt of the benefits of true Native 4K over e-shift to suggest you to go demo each machine in person.
Read the OP’s post, 100-120” from 10ft, this is right in my screen/viewing ratio which is why I give my opinion based on my own experience and also why I added the distance from the screen when the difference in resolution became apparent.Most people here in the US have much larger screens than 100" diagonal. For example, my screen is 9' wide and I view from 9'. That is about the same viewing angle as 7' from your screen. My RS3000 throws a sharper image than the VW360.
Also your NX9 is a seriously expensive PJ, a lot more than the OP’s suggestions so far.
100" from 10' is within the benefit area for 4K, but not by much. 120" from 10' is well within the benefit area for 4K and getting close to full benefit.Read the OP’s post, 100-120” from 10ft, this is right in my screen/viewing ratio which is why I give my opinion based on my own experience and also why I added the distance from the screen when the difference in resolution became apparent.
Also your NX9 is a seriously expensive PJ, a lot more than the OP’s suggestions so far.
https://www.rgb.com/display-size-resolution-and-ideal-viewing-distance
I'm sure it's in the viewing area to benefit on some charts but to be totally honest, you're not going to see much difference 10 feet from a 100 inch screen over a pixel shifted 4K machine. You just won't.100" from 10' is within the benefit area for 4K, but not by much. 120" from 10' is well within the benefit area for 4K and getting close to full benefit.
https://www.rgb.com/display-size-resolution-and-ideal-viewing-distance
But there are those guys arguing they see the difference in 4K vs 1080p on their 65" screens 12 feet across the room even though they don't so who knows.
100%I'm sure it's in the viewing area to benefit on some charts but to be totally honest, you're not going to see much difference 10 feet from a 100 inch screen over a pixel shifted 4K machine. You just won't.
But there are those guys arguing they see the difference in 4K vs 1080p on their 65" screens 12 feet across the room even though they don't so who knows.
I believe some people convince themselves they are seeing something that isn’t there. We ran the experiment and 5 people ranging from 19 to 52 years of age couldn’t see the difference until we got to 7 ft and even then it wasn’t cut and dry that only happened at 6ft.
I agree at the 100", but he is considering a screen as large as 120". That is a different story.100%
I believe some people convince themselves they are seeing something that isn’t there. We ran the experiment and 5 people ranging from 19 to 52 years of age couldn’t see the difference until we got to 7 ft and even then it wasn’t cut and dry that only happened at 6ft.
Thanks for all the information! Loving this forum and how helpful everyone is!!
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
I have recently bought Epson 5050 (called 9400 here) and it's my first projector too.
I watch on 133" screen from 10' and wouldn't be much concerned with 4K vs e-shift. Resolution seems fine to me.
The major problem for me is motion, it's pretty bad on Epson. After connecting the projector, I fired DTS Demo disc with the "Snow White and the Huntsman" clip, and instantly noticed the motion was juddery. Or maybe "stutter" is the correct word. Anyway, lots of action was followed by some kind of judder, especially on contrast scenes with white background (to be fair, not ALL action was followed by judder). I couldn't believe the motion can be this bad. I watched "Avengers: Infinity war", "Aquaman" UHDs and could see lots of judder (again, not in every scene). It's not just me, other users from the French forum reported the same, even put the video on youtube. Not sure why no one mentions it in the Epson 5050/6050 thread. The only way I can use it is with FI (Frame Interpolation) to Normal, but then it's soap opera all the way. Other than terrible soap opera, motion on FI:Normal is fine with rare artifacts and no judder at all.
I have owned it for a week but is currently looking to sell it and buy (probably) Sony 285/295 instead for the motion processing everyone praises (although it's twice as expensive) or to Sony HW65 (as it costs roughly the same). To note, I'm very sensitive to motion. It's a pity because Epson 5050/6050/9400 is an excellent machine otherwise!
So, if you have the opportunity, go compare yourself. Lot's of people say you can't go wrong with this Epson model, but my experience proves otherwise.
P.S. I was playing UHD/BD on OPPO 205 connected directly to Epson, with auto frame rate or forced 24Hz on OPPO (also checked Epson "info" - reported frame rate was always matching video, i.e. 23.976 fps), with UHD downscaled to 1080p with OPPO and 4K enhancement enabled on Epson (so that I can enable FI on UHD content). Tried other modes on Epson, with the same results regarding motion.
I watch on 133" screen from 10' and wouldn't be much concerned with 4K vs e-shift. Resolution seems fine to me.
The major problem for me is motion, it's pretty bad on Epson. After connecting the projector, I fired DTS Demo disc with the "Snow White and the Huntsman" clip, and instantly noticed the motion was juddery. Or maybe "stutter" is the correct word. Anyway, lots of action was followed by some kind of judder, especially on contrast scenes with white background (to be fair, not ALL action was followed by judder). I couldn't believe the motion can be this bad. I watched "Avengers: Infinity war", "Aquaman" UHDs and could see lots of judder (again, not in every scene). It's not just me, other users from the French forum reported the same, even put the video on youtube. Not sure why no one mentions it in the Epson 5050/6050 thread. The only way I can use it is with FI (Frame Interpolation) to Normal, but then it's soap opera all the way. Other than terrible soap opera, motion on FI:Normal is fine with rare artifacts and no judder at all.
I have owned it for a week but is currently looking to sell it and buy (probably) Sony 285/295 instead for the motion processing everyone praises (although it's twice as expensive) or to Sony HW65 (as it costs roughly the same). To note, I'm very sensitive to motion. It's a pity because Epson 5050/6050/9400 is an excellent machine otherwise!
So, if you have the opportunity, go compare yourself. Lot's of people say you can't go wrong with this Epson model, but my experience proves otherwise.
P.S. I was playing UHD/BD on OPPO 205 connected directly to Epson, with auto frame rate or forced 24Hz on OPPO (also checked Epson "info" - reported frame rate was always matching video, i.e. 23.976 fps), with UHD downscaled to 1080p with OPPO and 4K enhancement enabled on Epson (so that I can enable FI on UHD content). Tried other modes on Epson, with the same results regarding motion.
Good to know!I have recently bought Epson 5050 (called 9400 here) and it's my first projector too.
I watch on 133" screen from 10' and wouldn't be much concerned with 4K vs e-shift. Resolution seems fine to me.
The major problem for me is motion, it's pretty bad on Epson. After connecting the projector, I fired DTS Demo disc with the "Snow White and the Huntsman" clip, and instantly noticed the motion was juddery. Or maybe "stutter" is the correct word. Anyway, lots of action was followed by some kind of judder, especially on contrast scenes with white background (to be fair, not ALL action was followed by judder). I couldn't believe the motion can be this bad. I watched "Avengers: Infinity war", "Aquaman" UHDs and could see lots of judder (again, not in every scene). It's not just me, other users from the French forum reported the same, even put the video on youtube. Not sure why no one mentions it in the Epson 5050/6050 thread. The only way I can use it is with FI (Frame Interpolation) to Normal, but then it's soap opera all the way. Other than terrible soap opera, motion on FI:Normal is fine with rare artifacts and no judder at all.
I have owned it for a week but is currently looking to sell it and buy (probably) Sony 285/295 instead for the motion processing everyone praises (although it's twice as expensive) or to Sony HW65 (as it costs roughly the same). To note, I'm very sensitive to motion. It's a pity because Epson 5050/6050/9400 is an excellent machine otherwise!
So, if you have the opportunity, go compare yourself. Lot's of people say you can't go wrong with this Epson model, but my experience proves otherwise.
P.S. I was playing UHD/BD on OPPO 205 connected directly to Epson, with auto frame rate or forced 24Hz on OPPO (also checked Epson "info" - reported frame rate was always matching video, i.e. 23.976 fps), with UHD downscaled to 1080p with OPPO and 4K enhancement enabled on Epson (so that I can enable FI on UHD content). Tried other modes on Epson, with the same results regarding motion.
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
We have about the same size screens. I can see a difference for sure. Native 4K is a little cleaner and sharper.Depends on what's being compared and the screen size. I sit around 9' from a 130" 2.35:1 screen and I can say with 100% certainty that I can put up material you would see a difference with pixel shifted vs. native. Night and day? No. But definitely there. That's comparing my previous JVC RS520 (pixel shifting) vs. my current JVC NX7 (native 4K) on the same screen from the same chair.
Also for those of you looking at this options, you may want to look at Arrow_AVs findings on the Sony 295ES here:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-d...y-vs-jvc-projectors-comparison-thread-66.html
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-d...y-vs-jvc-projectors-comparison-thread-66.html
1 - 20 of 35 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.
AVS Forum
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
WilliamR
961 Replies
BASSAHOLIC
529 Replies
bass addict
401 Replies
Recommended Communities
