[MCaugusto]

on the latest issue of SOUND & VISION MAGAZINE they reviewed the SIM SELECO HT300, the SHARP XV-Z9000U and the brand new RUNCO VX-1000C, all of which employ the HD-1 DLP chip with 1280 x 720 resolution.

i must point out that overall i was disappointed with the article as the reviewer did not post any figures for contrast, and hardly mentioned the "rainbow issue" at all...i guess he must be one of the lucky ones who aren't bothered at all by it !

as for onscreen lumens (or, as they called it "brightness") as projected onto a 80-inch wide Stewart GrayHawk, the figures for the three projectors are so similar to each other, as well as testing lower than i have ever seen on other reviews, that one begins to wonder if the reviewer got his figures somehow mixed up :

SELECO > 6.0 fL ---- SHARP > 6.4 fL ---- RUNCO > 5.6 fL

all figures achieved after units had been calibrated, with the uncalibrated figures about 1 fL higher !!!

i wonder how come these results are so low, especially when SGHT found that both the SHARP and the SELECO tested on average about 10 fL higher than reported here....

 

[jamoka]

Dang. That's a dim screen. Can you double stack those things?


I'm thinking this. For people who want the high brightness of a CRT, but need the convenience of a digital PJ, they might be able to double stack an XV-Z9000U or something. Picture quality obviously would be poor. But if you need the brightness and can't use a CRT, it might be a solution.


Or is double stacking something that can't be done with the digital projectors? Anyone tried it?


Joe

 

[Jonmx]

Quote:

Originally posted by jamoka For people who want the high brightness of a CRT, but need the convenience of a digital PJ, they might be able to double stack an XV-Z9000U or something.

Brighness of a CRT? That is something I never heard of. CRTs are known for great blacks and silkie smooth images, but brightness...

 

[jamoka]

"CRTs are known for great blacks and silkie smooth images, but brightness..."


Exactly! That's my point.


Joe

 

[Scott Stock]

Huh?

 

[Abit-id]

heh

 

[jamoka]

"Huh?"


Thatwas my other point.


Joe

 

[QQQ]

MCaugusto:


You're right, if that is what they reported, there is no way those figures are correct. So what's the point of telling us about the review if you are not going to tell us what they concluded? Who "won"?

 

[mbw23air]

By reading the article it sounds like either the Sharp or Runco won. They seemed to think the Runco was worth the extra $6k over the Sharp. I bet the Seleco they had didn't have the new firmware upgrade which is suppose to improve brightness by quite a bit so then the Seleco might have won. The main point here is that I don't think any of these projectors would be a loser.


Mike

 

[thehun]

Which writer did the article?

 

[mbw23air]

Quote:

Which writer did the article?

Al Griffin

 

[Reed W]

I would be interested to know if any of these three manufacturers regularly take out full page ad's in Sound & Vision? Reed.

 

[Martin Butler]

Sound & Vision should change their name to Audio & Video Lite.

 

[Free]

"Or is double stacking something that can't be done with the digital projectors? Anyone tried it?"


I tried double stacking two HT200's once and boy did I sure get a headache. The picture looked kind of like looking through the old 3D glasses.


It was definately brighter but I think the color wheels would have to be synched up to make it work. Made me long for a brighter projector though

 

[PF]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jonmx Brightness of a CRT? That is something I never heard of. CRTs are known for great blacks and silkie smooth images, but brightness...

Well, not exactly. There's brightness and then there's peak brightness. Peak brightness is really the issue when watching film/video -- and CRTs excel at that, usually equaling or surpassing DLP measurements.


As for the S&V article, I can't explain their numbers, but subjectively the Runco seems the brightest (by far) to me. But I'm biased -- I like the picture it throws the best. It seems the most natural and it has an un-digital, smooth, CRT-like look to me and has by far the best blacks. (I haven't seen the SIM2 in a few months, though.) It's also got the best flesh tones, imo, and is surpassed perhaps only by the Marantz VP-12S1 in this critical area (to me).


I agree wholeheartedly with Mike about one thing: none of these projectors is a loser by any stretch of the imagination. And the Sharp is the deal of the century!

 

[GScott]

Sorry but those lumens numbers are the same as reported in previous reviews of the Sharp 9000. Every review I have seen of the Sharp puts in the 6-7 ft-L range. I seriously doubt if every reviewer is wrong.

 

[QQQ]

Quote:

Originally posted by GScott Sorry but those lumens numbers are the same as reported in previous reviews of the Sharp 9000. Every review I have seen of the Sharp puts in the 6-7 ft-L range. I seriously doubt if every reviewer is wrong.

Hi GScott:


Here is Don Stewart himself testing a Sharp 9000 on a 87" by 49" screen and reporting 13 footlamberts on a flat gain model and 18 footlamberts on a 1.3 gain model. At 6500K. Sorry.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...p&pagenumber=2

 

[GScott]

Quote:

Originally posted by QQQ Hi GScott: Here is Don Stewart himself testing a Sharp 9000 on a 87" by 49" screen and reporting 13 footlamberts on a flat gain model and 18 footlamberts on a 1.3 gain model. At 6500K. Sorry. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...p&pagenumber=2

And here is another review quoting 6.22 ft-L on an 87" wide Grayhawk.

http://www.hometheatermag.com/showarchives.cgi?103


So what...Even if you take the high ft-L figure that Don gave of 13 ft-L on an 87" wide Grayhawk instead of the 6-7 ft-L rating and do the math it only equates to 365 ANSI lumens of brightness. A far cry from the 700 ANSI lumens spec'd by Sharp.


Also take the HT Mag review in Feb 98 of the Runco DTV-852 CRT projector. It uses 7" CRT's and is rated at around 170 ANSI lumens. It's measured light output was 17 ft-L on a 80" wide Studiotek screen. This equates to 326 ANSI lumens which is far above its spec'd rating and this projector is considered dim by CRT standards.


I guess Barco was correct in that ANSI ratings are not a good indication of video performance.

 

[Jim Ferguson]

I have both a CRT projector (a Barco BG808s) and I have had a couple of digital projectors (previously an LT150 and now an SE13HD). Both digitals are undoubtedly "brighter" by any lumens measure. However there is something different about the "quality of brightness" between the digital and CRT projectors that is hard to explain.


Both digitals clearly can get away with more ambient light. You pretty much need a completely darkened room with the CRT. On a Firehawk screen with the SE13HD I can have a decent picture with a surprising amount of light in the room. Watching a football game on the SE13HD with enough light to find the bag of chips is no problem at all


However, on a more subjective level, the CRT really doesn't suffer from lack of brightness when watching a movie. When the scene switches from darkness to an outdoor scene it can hurt your eyes just as much as on the digital, or in a movie theater. I have never really wanted my CRT image to look any brighter than it does. Maybe it's just the fact that it can do actual blacks, unlike the digitals, which makes the difference

 

[QQQ]

Jim:


Thank you for an excellent post.


It is my belief that if you put a large group of people together in a room most would probably come pretty close to agreeing on most aspects of picture quality (it is unlikely that one half would want to crank the detail adjustment all the way down while the other half would want to crank it all the way up). But my experiences lead me to believe that brightness is a different issue, assuming that you created a means to instantly change from one brightness setting to another. You might find some people in the room that would prefer to view at 10 footlamberts, some 20 and even a few at 30 (which others might think burns their eyeballs out).


Those who prefer higher numbers are probably going to prefer a digital projector. But I am with you that a CRT can provide plenty of brightness, albeit you need to control light a little bit better and can't use as big a screen as a digital at the same budget (talking new products of course, not used).


Anyhow, thanks again for the excellent post.