AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have an NEC 9PG that has served me well. Looking at the specs for NEC projectors, it looks like anything less that an XG110 wouldn't be worth the trouble if I wanted to upgrade. I'd like to hear from people who own other models and/or have owned several different ones if possible.


Which is the best NEC CRT projector out there?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,916 Posts
Without out a question, the entire XG series. LC or not.


Terry
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,399 Posts
But if available, I think that the LC is the way to go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
I had an XG 75 on my ceiling for a year. Now I have an XG 110 up. I can't see any difference at all, I can't see that a 135 will be better than the 75 either, considering that you won't be using any of these sets at higher than 47 Khz (line tripling)


Don't get hung up on specs too much, it's like buying an amp with .002% THD vs one with .02%. The .002% one looks to be 10X better, but your ear can't really hear any distortion less than 2-3%, so it does not really matter.


Flame suit on.


Curt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,510 Posts
What about the 10PG? Are those available with LC?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Perhaps not going from an XG 75 to a 110, but what about going from a 9PG to the 110? Or even the 75?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,902 Posts
Jesse: 10PG's are 9" LC, with excellent image, but very antiquated electronics. They are basically a 9PG with huge beautiful bright tubes, in a GP5000 case. The ONLY thing the 10PG shares with the GP5000 is the case, but it shares virtually everything with the 9PG

Any XG is quite a big improvement over any PG(PG6/9000 model number), but the differences between the PG Extra(PG6/9200 model number) and the XG's is much smaller. The PG (PG6/9000 model numbers) are relatively simple machines, overly simple maybe as they lack electronic zone astig and electronic zone focus and zone Keystone and Pincushion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,628 Posts
Hi,


I beg to differ regarding the XG's.

Liquid coupled XG's really are a step above due to better contrast and hence picture depth.


regarding PQ I'd rate the PG's and Xg's as follows, providing all units have point convergence:


6PG/9PG

6PG/9PG plus, extra, non-liquid coupled XG's

liquid coupled XG's, 10PG


I had a unit of each of this series so I have hands on experience with those.


Some may say the middle group doesn't do the XG justice and I will concur that the XG is significantly brighter than the PG plus and a bit brighter than the extras and on top of that has more adjustment possibilities and a bit tighter beam spot. But when you have a screen width of about 80" and you know your projector setup the difference between the three will be less than the difference to the other two groups. With wider screens I think it's a good idea to go at least for the extra or ultimately the XG's.

The extras have the same green tube as the XG however so what is gained in light output is lost in longevity IMO.


The 10PG's is worse than the liquid coupled XG's in some regards and better in others so I'd rank it roughly the same.


Oliver
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,999 Posts
Yeah, it would be nice to have a 10PG is really good condition, but how much better can it resolve high-resolutions when compared to a XG1352LC?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
I'll disagree with Oliver a bit. I have seen no difference between the PG and PG +'s. But of course there is a difference when you go to the Xtra series, and yes, the XG's are a big step over the PG series. The LC's are better yet.


I'm curious though Wasco, why do you think it would not be worth going from a PG to an XG 110? There's more of a difference going from a PG to an XG than going from an XG to an XGLC (IMHO).


Curt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,628 Posts
Wanman,


the resolving capability of the 10 PG is slightly above the XG in the center which gives HD an additional kick. On the downside the 10 PG is not so good on edge and corner focus at higher contrast settings but this is not so visible when watching movies and is apparent mainly with high resolution desktops.


Curt,


the PG plus is much more similar to the PG extra in adjustment capabilities with zone astig and focus adjustments and I found it to focus better in the center, too.


I have had an NEC XG 110 without liquid coupling for about 1 1/2 years and have recently played around with the extra chassis and in focus and general picture characteristics it is very close the the XG 750/1100/1350 series. On the XG 751/852 I don't have that extensive knowledge but what I have seen from the 751 looked very similar to my 1100.


Could you elaborate a bit on the difference in picture quality you have seen between the extras and the non-liquid-coupled XG's ?


Regarding adjustment capabilities and ease of setup and as well light output I would place the XG's hgher on the latter, but when you project onto a moderately sized screen I'd say the difference in PQ is very small.


Oliver
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
Interesting, I have not seen that with the POg and PG +. They use the same tubes, and I've found that some PG and PG + chassis need a point board, som seem to fall into place perfectly without it.


The Xtra is a different beast with larger tubes, and an extra 200 lumens, so yes, I can see that difference. I've found that the Xtra comes much closer to the XG without some of the adjustment parameters of the XG. THE XG also has yet another 200 lumens over the Xtra.


The XG's are best of all, but like I said, little or no difference between the various nonLC models IMHO.


I've never actually had an XGLC for too long, but I agree with what I've read on the forum, the LC gives slightly better contrast and no halo effect of a white object against a black background like with a non LC.


But you've got to be a really picky viewer to pick out that halo effect, it's very har5d to pick up in casual viewing. BEfore anyone panics, that halo effect is visible on all non LC projectors.


Curt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,507 Posts
BTW, I've carefully tweaked two minty condition 9500LC's driven with a Leeza and HTPC recently, and no question that the resolution of the 9500LC is superior by a bit over the 8" XG's.


Call me crazy, I still like the NEC colors better though.


Curt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,628 Posts
Curt,


I'd say that when it comes to PQ of 8" projectors it doesn't get better than the XG LC's. Easier to set up: yes, better geometry:yes, less noise:yes, better picture:no :)


The 10 PG is about comparable to the 9500LC in center resolution but due to no adjustments for the edges and corners lags behind in those areas.


And you got more of an NEC picture ;)

I think I read somewhere that you will be getting an NEC 10PG in - better take a closer look at it !


Oliver
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Hey Curt -

I was asking if going from a 9PG to an XG75 would be worthwhile, since I have a 9PG and I might be able to get an XG75. Like you said, I'm not going to get hung up on Specs since the two are so similar but the main difference is the lumens, it seems.


Is there a dead giveaway on the XG to check if it is LC?

LC is the way to go, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,902 Posts
wasco: LC is not for everyone, just because the people who love it REALLY love it doesn't mean its for everyone. Personally, I feel that air coupled projectors appear somewhat sharper than LC ones and are in fact recommended by some pro's for this reason.

THere is a definite improvement from a plain, first generation PG to any XG, it comes from improved control circuitry and greater brightness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Thanks GN - that is what I needed to hear.


I'm curious about a previous posting that on the Xtras and the XGs the extra brightness comes at a price: less longevity - does that mean that an XG with 5000 hours might not have as much of a future as say a 9PG with the same hours? Maybe I'm picking nits?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,916 Posts
Having seen and setup many XGLC's and non LC's, the difference is very noticable when it comes to Halo. But the XG nonLC still turns out a very nice picture like the LC. Because of the lack of LC it may be a bit sharper.

At times I almost have a hard time distinguishing between the two. Especially on a small screen (say 92" wide) But when the credits roll at the end of a movie and they hace white letters with a black background, that is where you can see the blooming of a nonLC.

I agree w/ Curt, I like the colors of the XG better than the 9500's.


Terry
 
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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top