AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
572 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm looking for a little help selecting a projector for my theater. I spent a lot of time narrowing the field down based on specs and some reviews. But I'm hoping the regulars here can help me pick a winner. My screen will be 2.4 aspect ratio, acoustically transparent and 135" wide. First row is 8' from the screen but the main seating position is in the second row (there are only two rows). 3D capability is a must.

I watch a lot of sports but I don't know if this should be a factor because I don't know if I'm going to want to watch sports in a darkened theater. I've got a big TV in the living room and suspect that's where I'll continue to watch sports, but who knows, maybe I'll really enjoy watching sports on a giant screen in the dark.

The contenders are:
Benq HT5550 $2,700
Epson 5050UB $3,000
Epson 6050UB $4,000
Sony VPL-VW295ES $5,000
JVC DLA-NX5 $6,000

Is there anything else I should consider? There were a couple of other candidates that I excluded due to lack of 3D.

It's in the budget but unless it is head and shoulders above the rest, I'd rather not get the JVC due to its price and cost of replacement lamps. My guess is that once a pj is installed and I'm finally watching movies, I'll probably be happy with one of the others and won't regret not spending more money. But I have zero experience with projectors and can be convinced to buy it, perhaps the JVC is that much noticeably better.

I don't see much difference between the two Epsons except for slightly higher contrast with the 6050 and 6050 comes with an extra lamp. What else does the extra $1,000 get you?

Also, the 6050 product page says "Anamorphic Wide and Horizontal Squeeze require an Anamorphic Lens Kit, sold separately." Does this mean I need a Panamorph lens for 2.4? It can't project that without the lens? What about the 5050? Its specs are silent on anamophic projecting, so what does that mean?

That is the other requirement, I need to be able to project to the 2.4 screen without an anamorphic lens. I thought any projector could do this but now I'm unsure.

A question I have is when I'm watching 16:9 content, do I have to physically adjust the projector lens to make it fit on a 2.4 screen? Is that the benefit of a motorized lens? If not, then what is the benefit of having a motorized lens?

Sorry for the long post. I know the longer the post the less likely I am to get responses but I really appreciate any guidance or insights you guys can provide.

Thanks in advance!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,694 Posts
JVC DLA-NX5 $6,000
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
What are your content sources?
JVC can do dynamic tone mapping which can eliminate the need for an HTPC or Video Processor.
e.g. Epson 5050 + VP device or HTPC adds up.

Lamps suck all around.

Consider something on the cheaper side until LED's & Lasers get more mainstream?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
572 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Content sources will be discs and streaming. And whatever else might come along in the future.

Don't want to buy something now with a plan to replace it later.

Why would I need HTPC or video processor with the 5050? I suddenly feel much less knowledgeable than I thought I was.

Is the JVC the only one that does dynamic tone mapping? I'm not exactly sure what that is so time for me to do some more independent research too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
The JVC is your best bet due to DTM ( Dynamic Tone Mapping ) and contrast performance. That being said the newest Epson firmware that came out a few month ago did drastically improve the static tone mapping choices you have for HDR material. If you don't know what the anamorphic lens support is just go with the Epson 5050 over the 6050 unless you must have a black case.

The only reason I would go Epson over JVC besides money is if you don't have a dedicated theater room. The Epson does have some serious lumen headroom in its "Torch Modes". Meaning for a slightly off color mode it can be much brighter than the JVC is if need be.

If you have a proper dark room and a smaller screen you may still consider the Sony. I still think they have a slight motion and processing advantage if that's your thing. But that Sony is not the brightest if you have a large screen. I now consider it to have the weakest HDR tone mapping of the 3, and the contrast between the Epson and Sony are very close being that the Epson has a dynamic iris that closes the gap with out my downsides.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
572 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
"If you don't know what the anamorphic lens support is just go with the Epson 5050 or the 6050 unless you must have a black case."

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking here; I know what an anamorphic lens is and I know I do not want to get one. Are you saying I should get an Epson because I will need one with the JVC if I have a 2.4 screen? I don't know what a black case is.

I have a dedicated theater and the screen is 135" wide (not sure what the diagonal is). No idea if that is considered a small screen for the Sony but it sounds like the best options are the Epson and JVC.

If I go with Epson why will I need an HTPC or video processor?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,641 Posts
or..you can go with the VAVA UST..2799..was on sale this week for 2199 and probably will be again on BF. Very nice 3D too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
"If you don't know what the anamorphic lens support is just go with the Epson 5050 or the 6050 unless you must have a black case."

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking here; I know what an anamorphic lens is and I know I do not want to get one. Are you saying I should get an Epson because I will need one with the JVC if I have a 2.4 screen? I don't know what a black case is.

I have a dedicated theater and the screen is 135" wide (not sure what the diagonal is). No idea if that is considered a small screen for the Sony but it sounds like the best options are the Epson and JVC.

If I go with Epson why will I need an HTPC or video processor?
With a screen that big I wouldn't consider the Sony personally.

No anamorphic lens is required for either Epson's or JVC as they all have programable lens shift options built in. The anamorphic support is a built in software that does the anamorphic squeeze for the lens. If you don't want one its a useless feature. The black case means just that. The Epson 5050 comes in a bright white case. The Epson 6050 comes in a much more desirable black case.

I have a Epson 5050 and its been good to me. The JVC is a noticeable step up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Content sources will be discs and streaming. And whatever else might come along in the future.

Don't want to buy something now with a plan to replace it later.

Why would I need HTPC or video processor with the 5050? I suddenly feel much less knowledgeable than I thought I was.

Is the JVC the only one that does dynamic tone mapping? I'm not exactly sure what that is so time for me to do some more independent research too.
Sounds like NX-5 is your unit, then.

Static tonemapping is normalization and/or clipping based on a pre-defined threshold.
These PJ's can use an HDR "slider" technique to shift the threshold based upon user setting (e.g. values of 1 to 10).
Dynamic tonemapping alters the curve based upon scene-by-scene or frame-by-frame measurements - which is much better/smarter (see e. below)
3047585

HTPC with clever SW installed or a VP can do Advanced Tonemapping to compensate for PJ limitations.
In any case, you want to make sure that DCI-P3 color gamut is covered or within close reach.

3 parts to 4K UHD:
1. Resolution (JVC and Sony are native 4K)
2. Chroma (wide color space)
3. Luma (brightness range, PJ's can't into Luma range compared to TV's)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Sorry I didn't see that last question about the HTPC or video processor.

No you do not have to have one. Its just that the JVCs have a built in processor to analyze HDR material in a frame by frame case adjusting gamma points to try and give you the best picture possible.

The Epson has a 16 point slider that uses Static tone mapping. Meaning you pick a tone map setting and it doesn't change. Like I said Epson has improved it bigtime with a recent firmware update but it is not up to what the JVC can do. Also I have found the HDR to SDR tone mapping of the Panasonic 420/820 (UHD disk player) to do a slightly better tone map than the Epson itself. Mainly at the black floor. Epson really didn't want to crush blacks with their tone mapping IMO so they raised the Gamma to much on the low end in HDR compared to the Pannys.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,383 Posts
Of course the JVC is the winner here but not necessarily for you. The Epson is defiantly the best projector "for the price" and is most likely what I would get unless money is really of no concern. Is the room going to be treated for reflection IE no white ceiling? Light control is everything in front projection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,325 Posts
I'm looking for a little help selecting a projector for my theater. I spent a lot of time narrowing the field down based on specs and some reviews. But I'm hoping the regulars here can help me pick a winner. My screen will be 2.4 aspect ratio, acoustically transparent and 135" wide. First row is 8' from the screen but the main seating position is in the second row (there are only two rows). 3D capability is a must.

I watch a lot of sports but I don't know if this should be a factor because I don't know if I'm going to want to watch sports in a darkened theater. I've got a big TV in the living room and suspect that's where I'll continue to watch sports, but who knows, maybe I'll really enjoy watching sports on a giant screen in the dark.

The contenders are:
Benq HT5550 $2,700
Epson 5050UB $3,000
Epson 6050UB $4,000
Sony VPL-VW295ES $5,000
JVC DLA-NX5 $6,000

Is there anything else I should consider? There were a couple of other candidates that I excluded due to lack of 3D.

It's in the budget but unless it is head and shoulders above the rest, I'd rather not get the JVC due to its price and cost of replacement lamps. My guess is that once a pj is installed and I'm finally watching movies, I'll probably be happy with one of the others and won't regret not spending more money. But I have zero experience with projectors and can be convinced to buy it, perhaps the JVC is that much noticeably better.

I don't see much difference between the two Epsons except for slightly higher contrast with the 6050 and 6050 comes with an extra lamp. What else does the extra $1,000 get you?

Also, the 6050 product page says "Anamorphic Wide and Horizontal Squeeze require an Anamorphic Lens Kit, sold separately." Does this mean I need a Panamorph lens for 2.4? It can't project that without the lens? What about the 5050? Its specs are silent on anamophic projecting, so what does that mean?

That is the other requirement, I need to be able to project to the 2.4 screen without an anamorphic lens. I thought any projector could do this but now I'm unsure.

A question I have is when I'm watching 16:9 content, do I have to physically adjust the projector lens to make it fit on a 2.4 screen? Is that the benefit of a motorized lens? If not, then what is the benefit of having a motorized lens?

Sorry for the long post. I know the longer the post the less likely I am to get responses but I really appreciate any guidance or insights you guys can provide.

Thanks in advance!
jvc

Sent from my SM-A716U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
502 Posts
For plug and play in a dark theater room JVC all day. You will be really happy with HDR tone mapping , trust me you don’t want to go down the rabbit hole of needing a HTPC and Madvr lol I have a JVC RS620 with Madvr and the picture is amazing. But it would be nice to have the plug and play of the newer JVC. On the other hand with the Epson it’s a light cannon. I had the 5030ub and the 5040ub. I always had the super bowel parties. I have a 138inch 2.35:1 screen and could have all the lights on and people could eat and enjoy the game with no issue. If your going to mostly use it for movies and lights off watching again JVC. Like you said you don’t want to be looking for another projector again soon. JVC with its tone mapping and firmware updates will keep you happy. Also with the 2.40 screen you will want to stay away from DLP as you will need the lens memory of the JVC, Sony or Epson.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
I do believe some people here are being un fair when they keep saying you MUST get an external scaler to get a watchable image. This is not the case. The Epson out of the box can give you a good image with its built in tone mapping. No its not as good as the JVC with dynamic but its more than watchable.

Before JVC released the firmware update with DTM they were using static tone mapping. People still raved about the picture then btw.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
812 Posts
JVC NX5 with DTM is my vote, it's the closest to plug and play. I owned the Epson 6040UB 4K e-shift, before selling it, and I was always fiddling around with the settings, with different media. Don't get me wrong it was a great projector, thanks to Dave Harper and Oledurt settings, but I had it as a place holder, until I could get a 4K projector. I plan on using the NX7 projector until I move and or retire. Hope this helps.

Peace and blessings,

Azeke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,922 Posts
I'm looking for a little help selecting a projector for my theater. I spent a lot of time narrowing the field down based on specs and some reviews. But I'm hoping the regulars here can help me pick a winner. My screen will be 2.4 aspect ratio, acoustically transparent and 135" wide. First row is 8' from the screen but the main seating position is in the second row (there are only two rows). 3D capability is a must.

I watch a lot of sports but I don't know if this should be a factor because I don't know if I'm going to want to watch sports in a darkened theater. I've got a big TV in the living room and suspect that's where I'll continue to watch sports, but who knows, maybe I'll really enjoy watching sports on a giant screen in the dark.

The contenders are:
Benq HT5550 $2,700
Epson 5050UB $3,000
Epson 6050UB $4,000
Sony VPL-VW295ES $5,000
JVC DLA-NX5 $6,000

Is there anything else I should consider? There were a couple of other candidates that I excluded due to lack of 3D.

It's in the budget but unless it is head and shoulders above the rest, I'd rather not get the JVC due to its price and cost of replacement lamps. My guess is that once a pj is installed and I'm finally watching movies, I'll probably be happy with one of the others and won't regret not spending more money. But I have zero experience with projectors and can be convinced to buy it, perhaps the JVC is that much noticeably better.

I don't see much difference between the two Epsons except for slightly higher contrast with the 6050 and 6050 comes with an extra lamp. What else does the extra $1,000 get you?

Also, the 6050 product page says "Anamorphic Wide and Horizontal Squeeze require an Anamorphic Lens Kit, sold separately." Does this mean I need a Panamorph lens for 2.4? It can't project that without the lens? What about the 5050? Its specs are silent on anamophic projecting, so what does that mean?

That is the other requirement, I need to be able to project to the 2.4 screen without an anamorphic lens. I thought any projector could do this but now I'm unsure.

A question I have is when I'm watching 16:9 content, do I have to physically adjust the projector lens to make it fit on a 2.4 screen? Is that the benefit of a motorized lens? If not, then what is the benefit of having a motorized lens?

Sorry for the long post. I know the longer the post the less likely I am to get responses but I really appreciate any guidance or insights you guys can provide.

Thanks in advance!
135" wide AT screen viewed from 8'? What screen do you plan to use? Seymour AV, XD fabric is too coarse for that viewing distance. Any woven AT screen that size is going to be hard to light up, especially for HDR. You are going to need DTM for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Not to hijack the thread, but very similar to the question I was going to ask (maybe it will help the op). I was pretty set on the Epson 5050 thinking that I'm probably going to want to upgrade at some point, and it would be a great starter projector. I also have a dedicated room planning on a 140 inch diag screen (heard great things about Seymour, they are sending me samples of the XD and UF as I'm 10.5 feet from screen so we'll see if the weave is noticeable).

Anyway, I had a vendor contact me and offer a JVC 790r for almost the same price as the Epson 5050 and now I'm unsure. I get that JVC is the gold standard, but there are some tradeoffs there too. What would you guys suggest between the 790r and 5050? or is the NX5 worth spending the extra money and just not planning on upgrading for 10 years?

Love this forum!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,922 Posts
Not to hijack the thread, but very similar to the question I was going to ask (maybe it will help the op). I was pretty set on the Epson 5050 thinking that I'm probably going to want to upgrade at some point, and it would be a great starter projector. I also have a dedicated room planning on a 140 inch diag screen (heard great things about Seymour, they are sending me samples of the XD and UF as I'm 10.5 feet from screen so we'll see if the weave is noticeable).

Anyway, I had a vendor contact me and offer a JVC 790r for almost the same price as the Epson 5050 and now I'm unsure. I get that JVC is the gold standard, but there are some tradeoffs there too. What would you guys suggest between the 790r and 5050? or is the NX5 worth spending the extra money and just not planning on upgrading for 10 years?

Love this forum!
790 is a great 1080P projector, but it will not do very well with HDR on that size weave screen. If you are planning on keeping the projector 10 years, no way I would consider buying an E-shifter.

Also if you have normal eyesight, the weave will be noticable. You will not clearly see the weave, it will be more like a haze.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
My thought with the Epson was 3-4 years and see if there was some radical improvement in the tech (amazing lasers or something), but if I'm dropping close to 6k on the NX5 I would be trying to make that last closer to 10 I imagine.

And yeah, I'm concerned about the XD material, but it seems to have a ton of advantages over the UF, so I figured I would do my best with samples to make a decision.
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top