[PeterS]

I am looking at building a new HT in the near future. I am currently running a Sony CRT, and am considering the Sony G90.


However, before I jump on the G90 bandwagon, I am wondering if anything compares to it picture-wise from the non-CRT camp. Can anyone direct me towards where I should conduct my research?


Thanks

 

[joswig]

Did anyone say



---- _J_E_H_O_V_A_ !!!!! -------

 

[amillians]

As long as your screen is not huge (i.e., less than 108" width, preferably 96"), the G90 is about as good as it gets, save perhaps for a tweaked out VisionOneX (but the G90 costs 50-60% less). On the digital front, nothing really comes close, and those that do (e.g., 3 chip DLPs) are very, very expensive.


I'm sure you'll get a lot of differing opinions on this one, though. Let your eyes be the judge. As for references/reviews, I don't know of any legit reviewer who would argue that CRT is not still king of the hill.

 

[ogomez]

unless of course they are talking about ease os use, light uniformity, brightness, convergence, or footprint.


-oliver

3rAd|k8er

 

[JHouse]

Boxlight 38t or 40t

 

[amillians]

Ogomez:


Pseudo-valid points (ease of use?!? please explain), but since the question comes from a current CRT owner who is likely (hopefully!) quite familiar with CRT's shortcomings in the setup and maintenance arena, I inferred he was concerned *solely* with overall picture quality. As such, I defy you to show me a legit review where CRT loses out to any other display technology on overall picture quality...especially if the CRT in question is in the same class as the G90 he is looking at. 1080p on a G90 (or a VisionOne/9500LC) is as good as it gets. The only variable (IMHO) that would push PeterS away from a G90 or similar CRT is screen size.


PeterS:


Just as an aside, the stability of the G90 (once properly set up by the likes of Willam Phelps or Roger Galvin) is well known. The thing is a rock--people have gone 12+ months without touching up. A 250 lbs. rock, yes, but a rock nonetheless!

 

[Richard Tywoniak]

Try this:


JVC Dila G15

Rock+ or Vigatech Scaler with SDI in/output

ISCO II Lens

DVD player with SDI output.

HDTV Receiver


This may get close. Not sure if anyone has done a face off but it would be interesting.


The price difference is significant


G90 - 25k- 30k


JVC - 10k

Scaler - 5k

Lens - 1K

DVD player 750 - 2.5K



BTW - the G90 still needs a scaler.


I looked at both and the G90 was to costly. I went with JVC.

 

[sitkom]

If you have the room and the light control. G90 all the way. The digital displays are coming along, but you simply can't touch the quality or flexibility of a CRT display.


The DILAs still have pixel structure and the pesky Panamorph picture squeezer to get anamorphic 16:9.


I'd do a Sharp XV-Z9000 over a D-ILA for a couple of reasons: far quieter, no anamorphic lens requirement. As an aside there's no rainbow on the 9000 unlike previous DLP efforts.


You'll still need a video processor/scaler though no matter which one you choose.


-Ted

 

[jsaliga]

If I had to choose I would take the G90 + HTPC over the D-ILA and any other gadgets you might care to throw at it. I can't imagine a D-ILA delivering a more pleasing image than the G90 at 960P.


--Jerome

 

[smitty]

I won't comment on the other issues since they have been debated ad nauseum and nobody ever changes anybody's mind, but I don't believe it is accurate to state that the DILA has "pixel structure." Certainly, the G-15, which is mentioned by others, has no dicsernable pixel structure unless you walk right up to the screen. The picture with the Rock+, for example, in terms of smoothness, is as good as the very expensive CRT's I have seen from any reasonable viewing distance.

 

[Richard Tywoniak]

This forum was very helpful for me in deciding between the JVC D-ILA and the G90. At the time the Sharp did not exist. I think that you can not go wrong with either product. It all depends on your requirements. The G90 is an awesome projector and will provide you the best picture in the 25k - 35k price range. However there were some major factors which made me turn away from it. The major factor was the size of the screen you are limited to. The advice from forum members, sales people, trade magazines, consultants etc. say do not have a screen wider than 84 inches (using a 16x9 ratio). Based on my room size and my desire to have a large screen the D-ILA was the best choice. I have an 11 foot screen ( 8 - 11 ft is the sweet spot for the D-ILA) and with my Rock+, Greyhawk screen I have created what I was looking for which is the "wow factor". You should know that the DILA G15/G20 actually improve in quality as you start projecting on a larger screen (8-11 ft wide). For me, size and picture quality were the paramount requirements. With the additions of an anamorphic lens and SDI input; I am looking to get close to the quality of what the G90 can project on a 7 ft. screen. Understand I said close. I agree with people who say that that a 9 inch CRT is the ultimate--just do not forget the smaller screen size. In fact my 42 inch plasma may be better in picture quality than all of these. BTW, the money I saved on the G15 allowed me to afford a plasma.


Regarding the sharp, I have not seen it and I am not sure how many people have really done a real good face off. Here are some of the specs:


Sharp:

Resolution: 1280/720

Lumens: 800


JVC:

Resolution: 1365x1024 (with anamorphic Lens)

Lumens: 1500



Someone who has done a face off would be better off commenting on wether this makes a difference. If you were to do a face off - I would look at the JVC on a greyhawk screen from Stewart. I am not sure I would recommend this screen with the Sharp because of the low lumens. The best test is to go check them out and decide what you like best.


Regarding noise and anamorphic lens on the JVC. I set up the projector with hush box and scaler with no problem. I do not anticipate problems with installing an anamorphic lens which I have on order. Do not let the D-ILA set up scare you away. If you think that is complicated you do not want to get into a CRT.


I would never attempt to install a G90 myself. I don't even think I could lift it to attach to the ceiling. You need two people. You also need a professional to calibrate it once it is installed.


Although the D-ILA is a more challenging install than the Sharp; it is no way close to the challenge of installing a CRT.


Finally, I would just recommend that before you make your decision you owe it to yourself to check out the D-ILA, anamorphic lens, good scaler, and a 9 - 11 ft. greyhawk screen. Then compare the Sharp and the G90 and make your decision. Do not let all the well intentioned advice you get on this forum make your decision for you. Let it narrow your decision. In the end, you need to make the decision based on your room, screen size, picture quality, and ease of use/install requirements.

 

[PeterS]

I think it is clear from the responses in this forum that the G90 is still the only way to go. It seems as if the other non-CRT solutions are not quite up to the task (and may never be due to technical limitations).


However, to those discussing the limitations of the G90, let me say that I am currently running a D50 in a totally blacked out room on a 12' diagonal screen and the picture is stunning (not a G90 - but stunning none the less).


I am dissapointed in this state of affairs though as I was hoping to really see a quantum difference in the performance/value curve. My hope is that one day there will be a tecnhology to challenge CRT, but we do not have it now.


Also for all those who discuss all of the issues in working with a CRT, I can only say that I have had mine for almost 4 years now, and have had to touch up the convergance once, maybe twice since it was set up. Biggest issue is that it really does take 15 minutes or so for the unit to actually warm up to full potential and spec.


I guess, that unless things change, there is a G90 in my future.


Peter

 

[Dean McManis]

I think that there were some really good points expressed in this thread. The G15 with a HTPC/scaler and anamorphic lens is superior in my mind for larger screens.


Peter,


Supporting a 12' diagonal screen with a D50 (160 Ansi Lumens) is a pretty big stretch, and likely to lead to blooming/burn-in problems of pushing the 7" CRTs even in a pitch black room.


I had a 120" diagonal 1.3 gain screen with a FPTV with comparable light output to the D50Q and it was pushing it's limits on a 1.3 gain screen of that size.


I later went to a Sony 1292Q with 9" CRTs and 225 Lumens (the G90 has 350) and the image looked great even going up to a 138" screen, but I had to go to a 2.3 gain screen to support it well. And again there were some trade-offs.


I really wonder if you ever considered getting a non-CRT FPTV, as you didn't acknowledge any of the known advantages of digital FPTVs in your response.


If you haven't seen a properly setup D-ILA on a big screen you really should. Being a CRT enthusiast it is doubtful that it would change your opinion of owning a G90, but you might be surprised at how good some digital FPTVs can look.


I doubt that you would be happy with anything other than a CRT based FPTV from your comments, and you will most likely be quite pleased with the G90 as it is a stunning performer, as long as you team it with a quality scaler.


Enjoy it,

-Dean.

 

[spar]

Peter,


You might give the Barco CineMax a look. They call it the ultimate CRT projector, on some points even better than the Sony G90: sharper image ( 81 convergence zones) and more stable image ( full digital control).

Don't you think that DLP will be the technology to put CRT aside eventually?


greetz

S

 

[jsaliga]

Quote:

Originally posted by Richard Tywoniak The advice from forum members, sales people, trade magazines, consultants etc. say do not have a screen wider than 84 inches (using a 16x9 ratio).

Richard,


Some good points in your post, but an 84" screen width for a G90? I don't think that is correct and wonder which forum members, trade people, and consultants made such an assertion. I have a 8" NEC XG CRT projector and my screen width is 92" with a 16:9 aspect ratio with unity gain. I have complete light control and the picture is plenty bright. A G90 can easily go larger than 84" wide.


--Jerome

 

[amillians]

84" width screen will definitely give you great light output, but you can go bigger without sacrificing too much. Here are some sample measurements taken by William Phelps using a G90 (350 ftL output) at 960p, non-microperf 1.78 screen:


96" wide 1.3 gain = 12.6 ft lamberts

102" wide 1.3 gain = 11.2 ft lamberts

108" wide 1.5 gain = 11.5 ft lamberts

114" wide 1.5 gain = 10.3 ft lamberts


I think most people and installers would feel perfectly good with a 96-100" 1.3 1.78 screen. I think I'm pushing my luck with a 100" 1.5 1.78 microperf and a G90 (1.5 to offset the 10% loss on microperf).


Before we all go off the deep end on screen size, most (I said MOST!) would agree that a good seating distance from the screen is anywhere from 3-5 picture heights, depending upon source. Yes, some will argue that NTSC pushes you back further than 5 picture heights, but let's just say for argument's sake that you're watching a mix of DVD/HDTV and 3 heights works. On a 96" screen, that puts you 13.5' back. Unless you have a huge room, that's a pretty good distance (if you're sitting at the 3/5 point, that's a room 22' long).


Peter, with a 144" diagonal, you're obviously in a monster room or you really like to get close to the screen. I offer all this up only to help gather feedback from those of you running big screens (say over 100" width)--how far are you sitting back? I'm guessing that you're not playing by the 3-5 picture heights "rule"--I guess I'm just having a hard time understanding why the desire to go to a larger screen vs. just getting closer to a smaller screen. If you've got 4 rows of seating, I understand the desire/need for a big screen. Is it the heightened light output of your DLP/DILA/etc. that is "forcing" you to a larger screen? Or does everyone just like a big screen because it's cool? Inquiring minds want to know...

 

[ogomez]

I use 106" 16:9 and sit 12 ft back. Looks great. . . . FEELS great


-Oliver

the 3rAd|k8r

 

[amillians]

Oliver...that's cool...looks like you're about 2.4 pic heights back. Have you measured your projector's light output (it seems that most manufacturers are guilty of overstating lumens)?


I'm just trying to figure out how bright things are in the non-CRT world--unless JVC is full of it on their putput rating, 1500 lumens out of a G15 on a Greyhawk would give you 14 ftL on a 160" wdith screen. Yikes!

 

[Wireless]

Yikes good or yikes bad?

 

[sitkom]

Quote:

Originally posted by smitty I won't comment on the other issues since they have been debated ad nauseum and nobody ever changes anybody's mind, but I don't believe it is accurate to state that the DILA has "pixel structure." Certainly, the G-15, which is mentioned by others, has no dicsernable pixel structure unless you walk right up to the screen. The picture with the Rock+, for example, in terms of smoothness, is as good as the very expensive CRT's I have seen from any reasonable viewing distance.

There is pixel structure... because there are pixels. The pixels can be seen in a Sharp, JVC, Sanyo, etc... to varying degrees. To say that that is inaccurate is to deny the nature of the beast.


Also, considering 350 ANSI lm really translates to about 1500 peak lm really means that the G90 is going to give the DILA and Sanyo units a run for their money in all but the highest APL signals.


Hook the Rock+ up to that G90 and you're going to need a jaw-bra.


-Ted