AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello all!


I'm having an informal Open House Projector Shootout this Friday (September 19th) at my home here in Colorado Springs, then at a friend's house this Sunday (September 21st) up in Parker (just South and East of Denver). The projectors to be compared are:


SCREENPLAY 7200

SCREENPLAY 5700

NEC HT-1000

STUDIO EXPERIENCE MATINEE 1HD


Festivities begin at 7:30 both nights. Anyone who is interested in the Colorado Springs shootout, please contact me (John) at:


jsmusicsound

@

wcubed.net


or IM me here.


If you are interested in attending the Parker/Denver shootout, please contact Brad at:


brad

@

wcubed.net


I've only got the NEC HT-1000 for a few days, so I thought it would be fun to put these projectors through their paces! Now that KKTV is broadcasting in HD, I can actually show some HD clips.


See ya there...


JOHN
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
I just got home from the Parker shootout. John and Brad did a good job showing, (in order) the InFocus 7200, NEC HT1000, and the InFocus 5700.


They were using a homemade 16x9 117" screen, and they showed a pretty good combination of HD and DVD material, mainly though a HTPC using a DVI cable. I took my wife with me (for the WAF)!


I thought the 7200 looked pretty awesome, it is very bright and sharp. It probably would have looked even better on something like a Greyhawk IMHO. I am a little disappointed that the MSRP on the 7200 has not come down as much as I would have hoped after CEDIA.


I was very unimpressed with the NEC. Of course it is considerably less $ than the 7200, and after all of the raves I have heard about it here, I was hoping I could possibly make do with the NEC. Screendoor was much more noticeable with the NEC, as was the light spill when in 16x9 mode. Contrast was better than the 7200, but I would just use a high contrast screen with the 7200. The NEC was extremely quiet.


The real winner in my opinion was the 5700! It was extremely bright and punchy. It was brighter than the 7200! Even with all of the lights on in the room, it was still quite watchable. I could see somewhat less detail on some of the HD material than with the 7200, but it was much better than the NEC. I course I am a 16x9 type of person. As my wife put it, "I did not see $2000 difference between the first projector and the third projector".


Bottom line is that I could definitely live with the 5700, but not the NEC. Since the 5700, 7200 and 7205 all share the same housing, I may get the 5700 for now, and then get a 7205 a year from now when it will hopefully be below $5K. Since they all look the same, the wife might not notice...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,477 Posts
Glenn and Shootout participants,


I think every owner of an HT1000 could tell you it wouldn't look good on a 117" screen. It's just too big for this projector. Put it on something under 100", preferably around 90 and it looks great. Not starting a flame, it's just the way it is with this projector.


Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,588 Posts
Scottyb,


Of course you are are right. The funny thing is that there is another thread going on where Adrea Manutti did an extensive comparison of several several PJs, including the HT1000 and Sp7200 on a very small screen. In that comparison the HT1000 looks great and the SP7200 has very washed out blacks. In that thread, several of us made the same post as yours above, but in reverse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,292 Posts
Thank you John and especially Brad for hosting the shootout at your house. And congratulations on the new baby!


You've made my once certain decision to get the Sharp Z10k more difficult. I intend to pull the trigger sometime next month and if I swing to the 7200 camp, you'll be the first to know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Scotty B - We actually reduced the size of the HT-1000's image so that it projected onto the equivalent of a 90 - 100" diagonal screen, as well as seeing how well it did on the full 119". I would say that the group - just like at Friday's shootout in the Springs - was split right down the middle on whether or not they preferred the HT-1000. It's just plain dimmer than the 7200 and especially the 5700, a restrained look that some people really liked and some people thought looked murky. I gotta say that those who prefer deep blacks are going to prefer the HT-1000, those who like a bright punchy image are gonna like the 5700. To me, the 7200 straddled the middle. Who is right and who is wrong?


Ron - Thanks and glad you had fun! Yes, keep us in the loop regardless of what you end up with. If you want to see the 7200 on a better screen, let me know. After all, Colorado Springs isn't THAT far away. If you want to see it up against the HT-1000 again, let me know quick since I gotta send it back! My 92" HC CinemaVision is a perfect match for the HT-1000, IMO, yet still gives excellent blacks with the 7200.


Glenned - yes, I'm very aware of Andrea Manutti's tests! That's me he was battling with for a very short time regarding the 7200 - now we're friends. In that case the 7200 was being projected on the equivalent of a 55" diagonal screen!


Other thoughts on the shootout: the screen we used was essentially zero gain. At several points we put up Da-Lite screen samples against the image, and it was quite obvious as to what screens were most effective with a given projector (unfortunately,we had no Stewart screen samples).


For the 5700 - High Contrast Da-Mat, hands down, if you want to get deep blacks out of this projector and still keep most of its amazing brightness. This is .8 gain material, and would be roughly equivalent to the Greyhawk. The 5700, by the way, lit up the 119" screen with tremendous brilliance and was viewable even with all the lights on in the room. I can't imagine needing a Firehawk with this piece unless you get all the way up to 130" or more.


For the 7200 - HC DaMat or Greyhawk under 100", HC CinemaVision up to maybe 120", then possibly a Firehawk over 120".


HT-1000 - Firehawk or Standard CinemaVision (both roughly 1.3 gain), HC CinemaVision (1.1 gain).


As always, these are my subjective opinions, but I think most people in the room would agree with me.


JOHN


P.S. - I think so many people are looking for some kind of definitive answer from these shootouts, that projector A just blew away projectors B, C, and D. There is no definitive answer. Buy the one that looks the best to YOU.


P.P.S - Since this last shootout was so successful and FUN (Brad and I had a blast!), we may do another quite soon with a different projector or two thrown in the mix. Right now I'm looking at a 20HD or a JVC DILA. Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,292 Posts
JCV DILA / Sharp Z10k / SP7200 is what I'd like to see.


Can you fit three 100" screens in Brad's place? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
In the interest of keeping all the posts about this shootout in the same thread, I'd thought I'd repost my original impressions (from another thread) here:


After spending literally hours yesterday evening getting set up for my projector shootout tonight, I would have to say that both projectors (the HT-1000 and the 7200) do an excellent job, each having strengths and weaknesses. In case you are wondering, I am doing a shootout between the 7200, the 5700, and the HT-1000.


Preliminary findings:


7200 - Most detailed, excellent color, bright and punchy. Looks best with DVI - component input looks softer, less punchy with DVD.


HT-1000 - best blacks, smoothest image (which seems slightly soft compared to the two Infocus models), displays an excellent image with any input, greens and reds not as deep or as accurate as the two Infocus models


5700 - VERY bright, intense, accurate colors, lots of WOW factor, looks great with component or DVI. Blacks were not as deep as the other two projectors - I would recommend the 5700 with a larger or lower gain screen than my '92 Da-Lite Cinema Vision.


Overall impressions - the 7200, when using DVI, had the most impressive picture overall. Very bright and sharp with very good blacks. The 5700 had the picture that would probably appeal to the most people at first glance - like I said, very bright and punchy with vivid colors. The HT-1000 has a softer, smoother image that is appreciated more after taking the time to study it. The HT-1000 is definitely less bright than either Infocus, so I'd suggest a high gain or smaller screen.


Remember, these are MY preliminary impressions, and I will have a bunch of people in over the weekend to assess their own opinions. I will put up a complete report after that!


JOHN
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
A question on this comment regarding the 5700:

Quote:
Originally posted by GlennBerry
I could see somewhat less detail on some of the HD material than with the 7200, but it was much better than the NEC.
How could this be possible given they both have the same resolution on HD material ? I'm guessing this is in reference to the brightness factor and not actual resolution ?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,352 Posts
"Screendoor was much more noticeable with the NEC, as was the light spill when in 16x9 mode."


Given the 7200's much higher black level and the many HT1000's owners' comments about the near invisibility of the black bars, I have to wonder if the brightness setting was too high on the NEC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Quote:
Originally posted by noah katz
"Screendoor was much more noticeable with the NEC, as was the light spill when in 16x9 mode."


Given the 7200's much higher black level and the many HT1000's owners' comments about the near invisibility of the black bars, I have to wonder if the brightness setting was too high on the NEC.
No, black level was calibrated on all the projectors before the shootout began (in fact, I offered to let ANYONE at the shootout handle the remotes, projector settings, or test material to prevent any chance that the test was "rigged.") In defense of the HT-1000, it did have the least obtrusive overspill that I have ever seen from a 1024 x 768 projector on a 16 x 9 screen. It was only really visible on the darkest of black scenes. Glenn obviously found it more objectionable than other people did - others preferred the NEC over the 5700.


There are no absolutes here! If one or more people found the NEC not to be their cup of tea, it doesn't mean it wasn't set up right or that their perceptions were wrong. There were others who didn't like the 5700.


The 7200 does not have a much higher black level - it's higher, but I'd hardly say "much higher." The 5700 DID have a much higher black level than the HT-1000, but not the 7200 (at least IMO).


Technically, the 5700 and the HT-1000 should display the exact same amount of screendoor, since they have identical resolutions with 16 x 9 material. To me, they looked about the same in that regard. Perhaps Glenn thought the higher brightness made it less apparent. Again, who is right and who is wrong?


I would definitely agree with the fact that higher brightness at the very least gives the impression of greater detail or sharpness.


JOHN
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
I was afraid that my perhaps too negative comments about the NEC HT1000 would provoke some partisan ire among the faithful. It seems to me that evaluating picture quality is a pretty subjective task, unless you are using professional test equipment under strictly controlled conditions.


Even then it is important to consider such things as the screen size, screen material and source material to take into account each projector's strengths and weaknesses.


I think as long as you are happy with the picture quality of your projector, that should be all that matters in the end, regardless of what other people think or write.


Personally, I am more interested in high quality 16X9 material from both DVD and HD sources for my soon to completed dedicated home theater. If I want to watch a classic 4X3 movie, I'll probably use my trusty old Sony XBR Wega in the family room. This mindset automatically puts the NEC at a disadvantage compared to the native 16x9 projectors.


I also like the flexibility that the ScreenPlay's extra brightness seems to offer. If I want to have the lights on in the theater to have a game on without having the picture completely washed out by ambient light, I would be able to.


I realize that it is an old trick among retailers and manufacturers to tweak their displays in a such a way to make them stand out on the sales floor. Maybe I am just a sucker for brightness...


I do know that to my subjective eyes, I preferred the PQ of the 5700 over the HT1000. The 7200 was noticeably better than either. That does not mean that I will get a ScreenPlay, because I honestly have not decided. I have to pull the trigger in about 3-4 weeks, and the 7200 is still about $500-$1000 more than I would like.


The Optoma H76 and BenQ 8700 are very interesting to me, and they seem to be the least expensive tickets to the HD2 Mustang chip arena. Or I may just "settle" for a Matterhorn, and use the price difference to buy a Stewart Greyhawk. The next few weeks will be interesting as I ponder this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by angilasaurus

[Technically, the 5700 and the HT-1000 should display the exact same amount of screendoor, since they have identical resolutions with 16 x 9 material. To me, they looked about the same in that regard. Perhaps Glenn thought the higher brightness made it less apparent. Again, who is right and who is wrong?


I would definitely agree with the fact that higher brightness at the very least gives the impression of greater detail or sharpness.


JOHN
In addition, I'd like to add that the surface material I chose for my temporary screen is a broadcloth -much like a tablecloth. I chose it for the even weave, which you *don't* get with the blackout material.


However, it does diffuse the image somewhat and with the brighter image on the 5700, it's not unlikely that the diffusion helped to reduce the screendoor appearance. Some people have commented that it gives a more film-like appearance, but personally, I'd rather have a sharper, more detailed image. I can immediately see the difference in image quality when I skip down to Colorado Springs and watch John's HC Cinema Vision. Granted, his screen will make the image brighter because of it's size, but the Da-Lite material samples we held up to the images Sunday night showed a very definite improvement in overall image quality.


Brad
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top