[Warren460]

Room attributes are as follows:


full light controlled dedicated room with dark colors used throughout.


The screen is a 11 foot wide curved scope Studiotek microperfed Stewart screen. Black masking is created by movable curtains.


The 16:9 portion of the screen is 8.3 feet wide.


I use a prismasonic lens to horizontally stretch the image to 11 feet wide and a DVDO VP50 scaler.


My front seating positon is approximately 11 feet back. Using a 720p Sim2 projector, pixels are barely noticeable if you are looking for them. In the second row, 18 feet back, pixels are not noticeable at all.


As we have 5 seats in the second row, a little bit of visable pixels are not really a big concern. Besides, guests usually sit in the front row and they typically dont know much about visible pixels anyway.


What are peoples thoughts on the choice between the two projectors in my application?


Is it really worth the extra dollars to go with the Sim2 1080p or the recently announced lumis host.


I am leaning towards sticking with the Sim2 C3Xe 720p projector. The price difference is substantial.


Comments are appreciated.


Warren

 

[Warren460]

I would have thought someone would have chimed in by now

 

[Christy Warren]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren460 /forum/post/15470166


I would have thought someone would have chimed in by now

Not much to say here. Only you can trade off PQ for money.


Personally I would not bother with anything but 1080p and find a way to get it. 1080p is much more future proof. If money is an issue, get a JVC RS20 (or RS10 if you have to) and, if you need to, change out your screen fabric to 1.5 or 2.0 gain.


The reason I feel strongly about 1080p is that it is more than just bigger pixels. To resample 1080p to 720 involves softening the image somewhat both for Blu-ray's and DVDs. 1080p is close to double DVD vertical resolution so both sources will look better on 1080p.


In my case I just bit the bullet and got the c3x 1080p (after returning the JVC which was not bright enough in a less than perfect light controlled room) But in no case would I have considered 720p an option.

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

The C3X 1080 will give you the better picture. But do you wanna spend that much money? That's up to you.

 

[noah katz]

If money is an issue you could get way more bang/$ with one of the JVC's and a HP screen.

 

[coldmachine]



Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz /forum/post/15471536


If money is an issue you could get way more bang/$ with one of the JVC's and a HP screen.

Bang/$ is a subjective issue, not an absolute. Some people would see the JVC as good VFM PJ others would see it differently. I think it is a very good VFM machine and have been very complimentary, but I also think the HT5000 is a great VFM machine, considering its PQ. Some people like HP screens and deify them, others find them simply nasty. As for your assertion that you get "way more bang/$", i would disagree. My own personal requirements mean that the RS20 would represent very low bang/$.


For someone used to the image of 3 chip DLP, the RS20 may represent a retrograde step in many areas. I bought one 2 weeks ago, not for personal use, and found it to fall short in a number of crucial areas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren460 /forum/post/15450027


Comments are appreciated.

Only you can determine the balance of Price difference-v- performance difference, especially as you already own one of the PJs you are comparing.


Sitting at 1sw from a 235 image, there will be a significant benefit from the res increase alone. You have a 720e so you have all the latest processing improvements, so the gap narrows to mainly resolution, and 30% CR increase, if you are looking at the C3X1080.


You really need to wait a week or 2 till the dust settles after the Lumis hits the street, as that is potentially a very major u/g.


At the end of the day, you need to decide where you lie on the price/performance line.

 

[Digital2004]

Coldmachine

hi

i have a C3X 2K here for a week.

what lumens have you clocked on it and on the C3XE 720 ?

i don't like D65 i prefer something colder more realistic so it allows also a bit more lumens. say something like 7200-7300, closer to "real life".

 

[coldmachine]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital2004 /forum/post/15477747


Coldmachine

hi

i have a C3X 2K here for a week.

what lumens have you clocked on it and on the C3XE 720 ?

i don't like D65 i prefer something colder more realistic so it allows also a bit more lumens. say something like 7200-7300, closer to "real life".

If its new you should get around 1100-1200. The 720 is brighter, around 1400. If you were to look at the Pro version of the 720 you are way up at HT5000 brightness.


If you are thinking of buying one, wait to have a good look at the Lumis.


Good luck.

 

[Digital2004]

I'll fire it up tomorrow

screen is 171' mperforated (pvc) black room, scope with ISCO

the Lumis will be brigther ?

also your lumens are D65

at my temp it's brighter imho

(my D80E is pretty bright with contrast a bit pushed up)

 

[Warren460]

the lumis is reported to be 20% brighter than the 720e

 

[Warren460]

If I had the opportunity to see the 720e and 1080p machines in a similar environment, the decision would be much easier. In such circumstances, I would not even post the question.


Stats often sound impressive, but real life results is what counts. The attributes often reported by pj manufacturers are often overstated.


I was hoping that someone would chime in that has looked at both machines and share their thoughts.


Steve said the picture would be better. Is this the case from the second row or only the first row? In what respects would he describe it as better. Perhaps I am missing something.


I doubt the extra 30% increase in contrast would be very noticeable.


The real issue is not affordability, its am I getting any tangible benefit for the money spent. Given how far back my second row is, I wonder if I were to get the 1080p machine, would I see any difference at all?

 

[Digital2004]

forget 720p.

the C3XE at 5meters i could still see the mirrors screen is 171" wide scope and ISCO II

at 6.7 (row 3 here) ok no mirrors

also downscaling is a bit visible

so go for the 2K or Lumis 2K

maximum punch is obtained if your HT is true black like black carpet.

floor can be blue or red but ceiling and side walls and back walls: black

that's valid for any projector.

besides HD is much sharper less aliasing on a 2K machine...

 

[coldmachine]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital2004 /forum/post/15482201


HD is much sharper less aliasing on a 2K machine...

D,


To avoid ant confusion I think it important to point out that neither of the machines you mention is actually a 2k machine. They are normal domestic1920x1080 machines. The term 2k has a specific meaning that goes way beyond simply a native resolution of 2048x1080. Its a very different animal indeed.


There are a growing number of 2k users on this forum, so its important to point this out to the unwary.



Hope this helps

 

[Digital2004]



Quote:
Originally Posted by coldmachine /forum/post/15482478


D,


To avoid ant confusion I think it important to point out that neither of the machines you mention is actually a 2k machine. They are normal domestic1920x1080 machines. The term 2k has a specific meaning that goes way beyond simply a native resolution of 2048x1080. Its a very different animal indeed.


There are a growing number of 2k users on this forum, so its important to point this out to the unwary.



Hope this helps

hello

should have said full hd ready or 1920x1080 indeed


back to initial question of member here: IF the viewing distance is 1.6x the width, the C3XE 720 "can" fit with ISCO for scope and without for non scope formats. 1.6 being for the scope size.

say screen is 4meters wide

recommended distance to not spot the mirrors: 6.4meters or more (with ISCO)

in 1.77 1.85:1 format (3meters wide about): you can sit at 5meters or further away.