What's the rate of brightness degradation on PJ's?

BartR,


As CMRA points out, it's a bit of a crapshoot with every bulb. From my reading here, the higher wattage bulbs tend to be more likely to dim early. JHouse, a member here, is a lumen king. He just took down his AX100 because of dimming. He also replaces his high wattage lamps on his PLV-70 about every 1000 hours due to dimming or lamp failure.


The Epsons are quite bright, but use lower wattage lamps with an additional reflector to achieve the same brightness. Although the Epsons are less popular, there aren't a lot of posts about premature dimming.


Usually lamp life is rated to 50% output. So, if a lamp is rated at 2000 hours, it generally means the lamp will be at 50% of it's original brightness by that time. It's not linear, and it's not the same with all lamps. Some ( generally the higher output ones ) tend to lose brightness sooner, then gradually get less bright. I have an old 1300 lumen Mits HC3 that has 2500 hours on the lamp ( rated at 1700 ) and is still plenty bright when I comare it to my newish Mits HD1000 ( also about 1300 lumens ).


Generally, if you want a bright picture, the best way to achieve it is with a high gain screen. That way you can run on low lamp at the beginning, and bump up to high lamp towards the lamps end of life and still get about the same number of foot Lamberts off the screen. The Cadara Brilliant White is a well thought of medium-high gain angular reflective screen. The Dalite HiPower has about 3.0 gain, but is retro-reflective, so you need to have the projector mounted as close to eye-level as possible to take advantage of it. You also have a narrower viewing cone. The Vutec Silverstar is the king of gain, but, is only available in a fixed screen, no pull down, and is $$$ and fragile. There are many who built their own high gain Torus screens. MTyson, a regular poster here, has said he's happy to share his plans if you PM him. There's also a wealth of info in the DIY screen section.


On the CRT side, many argue that they throw a much higher quality pic than an inexpensive digital. If not pushed too hard, their tubes will last 10,000+ before they reach the 'half brightness' level. However, CRT's aren't that bright to begin with ( 150 to 250 ANSI lumens ), are less flexible in placement ( no zoom ), big ( I'm talking small fridge ), heavy ( I'm taking large fridge ), and generally noisy. On top of that, you need to devote time to learning how to set them up properly ( convergence / geometry ), and be willing to put time into touch-ups on a semi-regular basis. That being said, those who love them ( including me ) find the pic much more enjoyable to watch and more film like. Those who don't, well, I think I gave enough reasons for that.


Although I'm sure lots of work on high output LED illumination is being done, there are still lots of engineering challenges to get them bright enough for FP. Lots of good discussions on that in the >$3K forum. So, I wouldn't hold my breath.


Hope this helps.


Jonathan

Bart

A possible 50% reduction in brightness seems huge to most people take away half of anything and it's a lot. Light and our eyes are a bit different based on your starting point. Our eyes are wonderful at adapting to varied light levels and most people cant see a half F-stop reduction in light and a full F-stop is just barely noticeable. The reason being as the image gets dimmer our iris's open and compensate. The human eye functions over a range of 23 F-stops according to this article linked below. (a very good read I might add)

http://www.practical-home-theater-gu...ast-ratio.html


My theory has been to start off at a point that leaves you some wiggle room as the bulb starts to dim. Being high on the Foot Lambert number and running in eco mode with brightness on a lower projector setting to start matched to both a screen finish and a screen size that works for that and as things go down you have a escape plan when you notice it.


I have seen a lot of people start out brighter than needed and using a neutral density filter also that can be removed when required. I even saw one person start with 2 filters and a plan for taking one off at a time. But they require some horsepower from the projector. If you have ambient light issues those will require more lumens and better designed screens to deal with that.


I personally was willing to give up some resolution specs for the increased brightness of a business projector. Notice I said specs because I personally don't feel I gave up much in the way of PQ with some of the benefits lumens bring to how we perceive colors and blacks.


I have written my thought on this in the links below in my signature if you care to read them. Lots of comparison photos also.

Thanks a lot for your reply, Jonathan. That's some excellent information! Just the kind of stuff I was looking for.


Wow, JHouse took down his AX100 already because of dimming?? That's quite fast. Either he must have used the thing A LOT, or it really dims very fast. I used over 900 hours in about a year on my Panny 900, and it was at that point, more or less that the brightness was starting to disappoint me. Still much sooner than I had anticipated though. But, I was hoping it would improve with the AX100 since it's almost twice as bright to begin with. Well, it's good that I hear these things now (and cancelled my order a couple of days ago).


Ok, judging by your post, I either should settle with a lamp/projector with lower output, which could mean something like the Z5; or an Epson, which has low wattage. I actually have been looking (online) at an Epson, that seems to be pretty evenly matched with the AX-100, only, indeed, uses a lower wattage lamp (170 w) (vs 220 w for the AX100). It's the TW700. So why aren't the Epson projectors as popular as the ones from Sanyo or Panasonic, you think?


Anyway, it's in a way comforting to know that bulb life is rated to 50% output. Not that I'll be a very happy camper in the last stages of the bulb's life, but at least it's at least meant to show some sort of viewable image at the end of its lifecycle, meaning the time an actual enjoyable image can be viewed, will be longer too.


I'm not sure if I have a high gain screen. I know it's high contrast. And on the site of the screen it says something like 0,8 - 1,0 under the header: "Reflection". Is that the same as "gain"? In any case, it's a 104" (diagonal) lightgrey screen by a brand called Projecta.


CRT doesn't sound too bad. I can handle the size. The servicing does seem like a hassle but I'd be ready to spend time on that as well. The brightness might be a problem, though. Maybe you cannot isolate this factor like that, and the overall image might "work" differently than my Panny did, but so far, there's too many "ifs", I suppose. Do you have a CRT? If yes, is the brightness sufficient? Maybe only the bigger ones... (and they'd be too expensive)


Well, I'm not sure what to do yet, but at least I got some good food for thought now. Thanks.

Hi bud, thank you very much for your reply. You're all a great help. I'm not sure what an F-stop entails, nor have I heard of Foot Lambert, but it was a nice article, thanks. I know now at least what not to obsess over. Still not sure what I actually should be looking for (brightness over contrast?), but it does put things in perspective.


Sounds like a sound idea to start at a lower (brightness) mode initially, to then compensate later on, when things get worse. I guess it's just tempting to immediately go for the image with the most "punch" or "pop", or whatever... But I suppose your eyes get adjusted to the situation soon enough. I don't entirely get the story about the filters, though. It doesn't make much sense to me to let the PJ work at full power (which would "save" nothing) but to then use several filters to dim the image. I thought the point was to save wiggle room that's inherent in the projector (now you'll always be in full power mode). But maybe I'm misunderstanding.


I looked at some of your threads (in your sig). I especially liked the little fan solution. Does that really extend the bulb life? (and perhaps keep the bulb brighter for a longer amount of time?). If so, it's a great solution (and you have to wonder why projectors don't come equipped with a better fan). So, would you recommend your PJ to anyone shopping in the X100/Z5-category? Will it stand up to those, you think? (I can get it for around 800, 900 dollars around here).


Anyway, thanks again for your help. Much appreciated...

Hi BartR,


Remember, JHouse isn't happy unless he can watch an picture with sunglasses on. Re-reading his post here , It looks like he took the AX100 down just because it couldn't compare in brightness to his PLV-70, although I know he he is a high hour user, and it may have dimmed by the time he put it up in his main theatre.


The Epsons aren't as popular in North America because they have traditionally distributed through a custom installer network that depends on high margins, so, they've shy'd away from Inernet sales and discounting. They're swayng a bit on this now by offering the Pro Cinema line for custom installers, and the Home Cinema line which they sell themselves, and through select Internet dealers. They still don't allow discounting by their Internet distributors, so, the MSRP is basically the price. The new Home Cinema 1080, however, is currently the lowest price 1080p machine out there. In Europe and Asia, they compete much more aggresivly on the Internet side, so, that's why you see the TW700 at a much lower price than the Pro 810. Depending on what country you import from, you may be able to get an International warranty. Epson US and Canada have one of the best reputations for support, so that might be worth the extra $$ for you for a Home 400 / Pro 810 or Home 1080.


It sounds like you have a unity gain (1.0 ) or slightly negetive gain ( 0.9 ) screen. I haven't heard of your manafacturer before. It might be that simply switching to a high gain screen would make you very happy with your 900 once again. As far as high gain screens, both the manual pull-down Dalite HiPower and Optoma Greywof can be had very inexpensivly. Since you have a 900, if you can shelf mount it behind you at as close to eye level as possible, you can reap the benefits of the gain these screens have to offer. You didn't mention other details about your room. Those would be helpful for more recommendations.


Yes, our main 'bat cave' theatre in the basement is CRT. I have an 8" ( meaning 8" tubes ) EM ( meaning Electro Magnetic focus ) Barco 1208/2. This is a middle of the road CRT. You can get this type of set for less than $1000 from AVS members moving up to 9" ( or going high end digital ) or about $2,500 from trusted resellers that will support you. Actually, I have 2 of them. One I bought from Curt Palme, one of the trusted resellers, and a 'parts pig' I bought off EB for $500.


One positive about CRT's is that they are industrial / military spec machines that were built to last, and the Barco / Electrohome units are very easy to service by just swapping boards. Spare boards are easily available from resellers, and you can go the route I did and buy a 'parts pig' ( a complete working machine with end of life tubes ). There is also a large, helpful, online community. My primary set is 12 years old, and has close to 40,000 hours on the chassies and still going strong.


You REALLY need a totally light controlled enviornment for CRT. Most sane people would say that you should have a screen no larger than about 90" diagonal, although I have a 165" screen in a totally black theatre. CRT's have low ANSI lumens, they have high 'peak' lumens, which means that most mixed light / dark scenes look like a 1200 lumen projector.


I forgot to mention that they're also inflexible as far as inputs. While there are 3rd party HDMI and component video boards, ... it's basically RGB / VGA. So, a scaler or HTPC is a must. Well, you can also use a Momitsu DVD player, which provides RGB output and does a great job of upscaling ( and is cheap too ).


As far as setup / tweaking, You'll spend the first month ( after you've figured out how to hang a refridgerator on your ceiling ) doing and re-doing your mechanical focus / electrical focus / mechanical convergence / geometry / electrical convergence and greyscale. Not because you have to, .. you were pretty close the first day ... but because you know you can get it better. After that, if you've done your initial setup well ... especially the mechanical setup ... it takes about 2 hours 4x per year for me ( at the season changes ) to touch up the convergence.


If you're at all interested in the CRT option, spend some time and ask some questions in the CRT forum. See if there's a member in your area, and if you can look at his / her setup.


Jonathan

Hi Jonathan,


"Remember, JHouse isn't happy unless he can watch an picture with sunglasses on."

. Well, ok, so I may not have to pull the switch on the Panny just yet, I suppose. I'll keep it on my list. Yet, the Epson TW700 seems to be even brighter (in actual tests) according to a review I read (plus it seems to be sharper), and can be had for the same price. Add the lower wattage lamp, and it might be the way to go. The only problem might be the pixellation, since I like to sit fairly close (1 to 1,5 screenwidth [with a 104" diagonal screen], depending on the aspect ratio). As I understand, the Pro810 is the same as the TW700, the latter of which would be handier for me since I can get it from a Dutch (internet) distributor (I live in the Netherlands). Hopefully, the support over here will be at least adequate.


Of course, the Home1080 sounds/looks mouthwatering, but it's still quite a bit out of my price range. Even if it would drop to $2000, it wouldn't be feasible for me. So, I guess I'll have to wait it out a bit (after buying something else ) for the higher resolution machines. Besides, I won't be able to take the full benefit of it anyway, seeing as I don't have a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player yet, and only use my PJ to watch SD-DVD's.


Likewise, a new screen is not much of an option, since it will set me back several hundred dollars that I really cannot afford to miss. But thanks for your recommendations. Perhaps somewhere in the future, when my cash flow will be better . Oh, and I wasn't clear perhaps, but I already sold my Panny 900, so I'm gonna "have to" get a new PJ either way (well, I can wait it out another month or so, I suppose, but after that it'll be unbearable).


Hmm, the pricing for CRT's (used) doesn't sound bad at all. And those 40,000 hours you have on yours certainly are impressive. The problem is that I don't exactly have a bat cave just yet. I mean, my windows can be blinded, and I do most of my viewing at night anyway, but the walls and closets surrounding the screen are white, and during the day or early evening lights do peep in some. But I might move in the near future, so perhaps CRT's will be a viable option relatively soon. I KNOW home theater will be part of my life forever, so the most durable (as well as aesthetically pleasing) solution will have to be "arranged" someday.


Basically, I just want a good solution for the next, say, two or three years, after which I'll probably upgrade to 1080p or go with CRT anyway.


Thanks again for your input .


Bart.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart_R /forum/post/0


Hi bud, thank you very much for your reply. You're all a great help. I'm not sure what an F-stop entails, nor have I heard of Foot Lambert, but it was a nice article, thanks. I know now at least what not to obsess over. Still not sure what I actually should be looking for (brightness over contrast?), but it does put things in perspective.


Sounds like a sound idea to start at a lower (brightness) mode initially, to then compensate later on, when things get worse. I guess it's just tempting to immediately go for the image with the most "punch" or "pop", or whatever... But I suppose your eyes get adjusted to the situation soon enough. I don't entirely get the story about the filters, though. It doesn't make much sense to me to let the PJ work at full power (which would "save" nothing) but to then use several filters to dim the image. I thought the point was to save wiggle room that's inherent in the projector (now you'll always be in full power mode). But maybe I'm misunderstanding.


I looked at some of your threads (in your sig). I especially liked the little fan solution. Does that really extend the bulb life? (and perhaps keep the bulb brighter for a longer amount of time?). If so, it's a great solution (and you have to wonder why projectors don't come equipped with a better fan). So, would you recommend your PJ to anyone shopping in the X100/Z5-category? Will it stand up to those, you think? (I can get it for around 800, 900 dollars around here).


Anyway, thanks again for your help. Much appreciated...

Click to expand...

f-stop is the size of the opening in a camera , projector or our eyes that adjusts to the level of light. they numbered them in a way that each stop is half the light as the one before it. So when I said our eyes can go 23 stops that's half of a half of a half. 23 times. So you can see our eyes have a huge range they work within.

Below is a little explanation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number


Foot lamberts are the measure of light per screen area and lumens are the brightness measure of a projector. So foot lamberts takes into account the size of the screen.


One lumen on one square foot of screen = one foot lambert.


I have read that movie theaters show about 12 to 15 FL of brightness and many people shoot for that level at home. That's all based around a screen gain of 1.0 in my case with a gray screen I wanted higher FL's because my screen is about .7 maybe.


A 2.0 gain screen will double the FL that you will see. But there are pros and cons to higher gain screens. Read more below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot-lambert


As for the filters I don't really like that method ether but there is a thing as too bright. And those are the people using filters they start out with setup that don't require sun glasses more like welding hood and tame the light with filters. Some do it in anticipation of bulb dimming some because they have a screen and want to use it but it's a high gain and will make the image overly bright.


Matching everything up as best you can in the beginning is the best strategy and start with bulb dimming in mind and leave yourself some room for adjustment. I have never heard of a bulb getting better with age so plan for dimmer I say.


As to the aux fan. My idea is it can't hurt. I see a little lower temp during winter months and a bigger jump when the room gets warmer. My projector is fairly close to the ceiling and just moving the air past it makes the ceiling temp closer to the room temp if nothing else. I have no idea if it will help with bulb life my hopes are that it will. There is a noise issue with any fan but I don't use it if I'm playing the sound way down. (rarely) but with two 12 inch subs I don't hear the fan much.

My projector is designed cooling wise pretty good. Some are better some worse. Every design has to have a stopping point and trade offs.

bud:


Thanks for the links. The f-stop thing is still a bit fuzzy (all quite technical) but I think I understand a bit better now. As for the Foot Lamberts, I haven't really calculated the exact footage of my screen, yet (and the possible resulting FL's with potential PJ's) but I know now that I just like a bright picture. And one that stays bright for the longest time possible. And with my screen (that's probably a 0.9 in gain [which I gather means the level of reflection]), it's probably best to get a PJ with higher-than-average lumens (irrespective of my personal preference for bright images).


I just read some articles that state that DLP's have far less image degradation than LCD's (though one involved a test initiated by Texas Instruments [here: http://www.carltonaudiovisual.com.au/?q=node/view/857] , so we cannot exactly call that unbiased. Plus they only used two DLP's in their test vs 5 LCD's), and I wonder if this entails brightness too. If DLP's stay brighter for a longer time, I might just switch to that technology. Otherwise, if it doesn't really get worse than 50% of initial brightness then simply going with a PJ that has a (very) high lumen output might be good after all. I mean, cutting half of the AX100's original 2000 lumens still isn't that bad. After all, my Panny 900 only had 1100 lumens as its original output level. But it probably doesn't work that way.


Considering my distance from the screen, I don't think there's much of a way around the AX100 either, now that I think of it. I sit almost as close as 1 x screen width (meaning, at 2,3 m) with films in the cinemascope ratio. Stuff like the Sanyo Z5 or Epson TW700 will most likely give me SDE in that case. Or perhaps I should opt for DLP, which I hear doesn't have the pixellation issue. But then again, I'm not sure yet if I'm susceptible to rainbows... (lots of "ifs" all over the place).


I suppose the filters do make sense IF these guys are already using the economy-mode on their PJ's. This at least prolongs the life of the bulb. But yeah, if that isn't sufficient, I can see benefits in going the filter-route. It's all about keeping an evenly bright image on your screen, of course.


As for the fan, I was wondering if you could handle this with the PJ's own fan. For example, I read that the AX100 (yes, that one again . It does have a lot of problems, but if I get an extended warranty, I might still go with it at one point...) has a special setting for higher altitudes, making the fan work harder. So, what if you would use that setting even at normal altitudes? Would that work? Or would it get too cold inside?



Quote:
Originally Posted by klover /forum/post/0


Great topic and posts!

Click to expand...

Not to stray from the original OP questions pertaining to bulb life, but has anyone considered the monetary gain to the manufacturers of the lamps used in just about ALL video transfer since the essential demise of the CRT television.


I can only imagine the loss of revenue if led`s or laser technology were introduced into the market at the consumer level.


The sole purpose IMO from the manufacturers standpoint in going with lamp projection was monetary gain in the initial production cost & the revenue generated from consumers replacing $300.00 dollar lamps every few years.


I realize folks wanted bigger screens then the 36" & 40" displays & weight was a factor but ask yourselfs again why have the manufacturers discontinued making even these smaller size displays using the best CRT technology.


I purchased one of the last well made Sony XBR 800 40" CRT`s that displays 1080i via DVI/HDMI and Sony along with the rest of the manufacturers again IMO definitely doesn`t want folks to have displays that last 10 to 15 yrs. anymore !


I do NOT at 1080i displayed on the latest Sony SXRD LCOS XBR2 60" rear projection unit see any improvement over my older Sony 40" CRT. I do SEE a much better PQ in the old Sony 40" when displaying standard broadcast SD & digital channel content and thats for sure versus any of the lamp driven rear projection units regardless of technology. [LCOS, DLP, LCD]


I did recently purchase the Z5 and so far am satisfied with it just for viewing HD DVD & SD DVD content with the Toshiba XA2 on a 120" DW screen, but I will definitely not get rid of my old Sony CRT until it finally bites the dust. Then I have to get three strong buddys to help me get it out of the house since it weighs over 300 lbs. !


Regards & Good Luck in your Decision !

Hi Bart,


I wouldn't give too much credence to the TI study. You can read a lot of posts detailing exactly how it was flawed, and meant to show up an LCD weakness with heat that doesn't occur in normal operation. I feel I'm un-biased on this, as I own an LCD, DLP, and CRT.


Does SDE really bother you, or are you just afraid that it might bother you? As you had the Panny before, you weren't really exposed to it. If you are really SDE averse, then yes, if you have good eyesight you'll most likely see it in bright scenes at less than 1.5x. Note however than single chip DLP's do have their drawbacks too. I love my HD1000, but I do see rainbows. Just like SDE, they don't really bother me, but I see them. Strangely enough, I've watched them for short to medium periods for years ( even 2x wheels ) and never saw RBE, and it was only after a few months of watching the HD1000 that they suddenly jumped out at me. Again, not DLP bashing, as I love the pic, I would buy another single chip DLP. Just to let you know what my experience is.


Although I don't own one ( or any Epson for that matter ), I still think the TW700 would be a good choice. In Europe, the price is really hard to beat for the value it has. I'm not sure where you are in the Netherlands, but, I'm sure there must be somewhere in Amsterdam where you could see one.


Jonathan

Hey Jonathan,


Well, yeah, that TI-study felt a little dodgy. Even when dismissing abnormal viewing conditions, the sample size seems way too low to draw any kind of legitimate conclusion (and wouldn't you need the same amount of PJ's for each type? I'd say so). Still, I keep on reading this apparent shorter lifecycle of LCD-projectors all over the internet. How the panels or polarizers or what not will break down, and that DLP seems to be a much more stable technology in this respect. But this could mostly be hearsay, of course, with people just aping what they heard elsewhere, without scientific data to back it up.


So you own LCD, DLP, and CRT projectors? That's nice . You know, I just spend some time browsing on this national "ebay-like" site, and quite a few CRT-pj's showed up. A Barco s801, some Sony's... And, call me crazy but I really like the look of those big, heavy beasts. I just like those three huge lamps that the machines sport. I mean, that's what I call a projector! And when I move out of this place (which might be pretty soon) and end up in a Projector-friendly place (that bat-cave deal), I see myself going ahead with getting one. Right now, though, the placement wouldn't be ideal, and the lack of brightness would be an issue.


But anyway.... Yes, it's true that I haven't been really exposed to SDE before, but isn't it a fair bet that I'll see it when I sit at less than 1.2x screenwidth (around 2,7 m from a 2,3m wide screen)? In any case, if I see it, I know I'll be bothered by it. I'm pretty nitpicky when it comes to these things. I also tended to get annoyed (well, at first, later I just chose to accept it) by an ever so slight vertical banding in my Panny 900. I even went through the trouble of ordering a second unit to compare and check which one had less VB (turned out there was no difference ). I went to my (practically) neighbour about 2 years ago, and I was amazed at his big screen ht experience. Only, his 6-year old Epson PJ showed very clear SDE/pixellation. He didn't seem to mind and chose to sit about 2 meters away from his 2,3m screen. Which was inconceivable to me. I asked him if he didn't want to sit further away with all those visible pixels. But he didn't. I decided then and there that I wanted a PJ myself, but only if the pixel structure would be as close to invisible as possible. So, when I came across the Panny 900, it was the answer to my prayers. Well, for about 14 months, that is , at which point the bulb started to dim too much.


Still... the amount of "ifs" in your question about my (possible) issue with SDE, make me wonder about the visibility of it on PJ's without smooth screen. Need I be really SDE-adverse and have very good eyesight in order to even to see it in bright scenes? I thought most people would see it from my seating distance. If not, it might indeed be an idea to check out a non-smoothscreen LCD-machine in action somewhere (Although there aren't really that many stores in Amsterdam that showcase them. Not to my knowledge at least.). And the Z5 might suddenly come into focus then, too (except the lumens seem a tad bit disappointing).


I'm not sure if I see rainbows, but somehow I got the feeling I will. I remember there being some test online with all kinds of images that would show someone if he's susceptible to RBE. I can't seem to find it now, though. I think it turned out that I'd see them slightly, but of course the best way to find out is to actually see a DLP working somewhere. And I only know of one store around here (Amsterdam) that would have them. Well, maybe it's about time to pay them a visit. Are DLP's plenty bright, though? Oh, and which LCD-PJ do you have, if I may ask?


Well, I think I've been talking for long enough now. It's not getting any easier as of yet (ignorance can be bliss, I suppose), but it's at least very interesting (if time-consuming). The EPSON TW-700 sounds like a good idea to me, too. Only if the pixellation/SDE will not be noticeable from where I sit, though. Perhaps I should just order it from this particular store that gives you the opportunity to try it and return it within 2 weeks. I can always leave the Panny Ax100 on the back burner so to speak...


Thanks for listening/reading...



Quote:
Originally Posted by klover /forum/post/0


Great topic and posts!

Click to expand...

Thanks, klover . I'm very happy with the posts I'm getting, myself.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfox1 /forum/post/0


Not to stray from the original OP questions pertaining to bulb life, but has anyone considered the monetary gain to the manufacturers of the lamps used in just about ALL video transfer since the essential demise of the CRT television.


I can only imagine the loss of revenue if led`s or laser technology were introduced into the market at the consumer level.


The sole purpose IMO from the manufacturers standpoint in going with lamp projection was monetary gain in the initial production cost & the revenue generated from consumers replacing $300.00 dollar lamps every few years.


I realize folks wanted bigger screens then the 36" & 40" displays & weight was a factor but ask yourselfs again why have the manufacturers discontinued making even these smaller size displays using the best CRT technology.


I purchased one of the last well made Sony XBR 800 40" CRT`s that displays 1080i via DVI/HDMI and Sony along with the rest of the manufacturers again IMO definitely doesn`t want folks to have displays that last 10 to 15 yrs. anymore !


I do NOT at 1080i displayed on the latest Sony SXRD LCOS XBR2 60" rear projection unit see any improvement over my older Sony 40" CRT. I do SEE a much better PQ in the old Sony 40" when displaying standard broadcast SD & digital channel content and thats for sure versus any of the lamp driven rear projection units regardless of technology. [LCOS, DLP, LCD]


I did recently purchase the Z5 and so far am satisfied with it just for viewing HD DVD & SD DVD content with the Toshiba XA2 on a 120" DW screen, but I will definitely not get rid of my old Sony CRT until it finally bites the dust. Then I have to get three strong buddys to help me get it out of the house since it weighs over 300 lbs. !


Regards & Good Luck in your Decision !

Click to expand...

Thanks, Silverfox! Yeah, it may very well be a commercial decision to make lamps that don't particularly last long (or go with technology that needs them in the first place). It's a big drawback to this whole HT-deal. At least as far as digital projectors go. I don't think it implausible that I'd be going ahead with buying a CRT-projector sometime in the future because of the limited life of digital pj's and their bulbs. And do they really need to be this expensive, I wonder? 300, 400 dollars for a lamp? Yes, a very powerful and bright lamp, but still... I'm sure it can be done/sold for cheaper.


So, can I ask you some things about your Z5? For starters (and you saw this one coming, probably ): is it bright enough? Even in eco-mode? What is your seating distance? And, how many hours do you have on your bulb, now? And what made you decide to go for this particular PJ (instead of the AX100, for example)?

Somebody mention my name?


I had one of those combo problems. I'm used to a good looking WXGA picture with 2200 lunens on a 2.8 gain screen (120" 16:9). I was watching the AX100 on a 106" screen (about 40% fewer square feet). When I moved the pj to the big screen after watching it 500 hours in the dark on the small screen, the family started giving me the business. So at the same time I increase the square footage of the screen, I put it in a brighter room (more ambient light) and the bulb was half shot. All those things together created a big let down. I adjusted the heck out of it, but it never got there.



From what I'm gathering these damn lamps drop brightness like a rock. I think it's possible it wasn't as bothersome on the PLV-70 because at even half brightness it remained in the 35 ft.L area. But you guys who are shooting for 12 to 16 ft.L to be like a "cinema" are going to hit 6 to 8 fast, and if you failed to take into account the zoom loss, you might hit 4 ft.L. And some of the geniuses around here are watching that and making themselves think it's "GREAT".


Keep your old bulbs. They are going to come in handy.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart_R /forum/post/0


Thanks, Silverfox! Yeah, it may very well be a commercial decision to make lamps that don't particularly last long (or go with technology that needs them in the first place). It's a big drawback to this whole HT-deal. At least as far as digital projectors go. I don't think it implausible that I'd be going ahead with buying a CRT-projector sometime in the future because of the limited life of digital pj's and their bulbs. And do they really need to be this expensive, I wonder? 300, 400 dollars for a lamp? Yes, a very powerful and bright lamp, but still... I'm sure it can be done/sold for cheaper.


So, can I ask you some things about your Z5? For starters (and you saw this one coming, probably

): is it bright enough? Even in eco-mode? What is your seating distance? And, how many hours do you have on your bulb, now? And what made you decide to go for this particular PJ (instead of the AX100, for example)?

Click to expand...

Bart, simply purchase the FP of your choice. I am pleased with the Z5 except I didn`take into account the below variables when determining real life variables that factor into the throw distance of the FP regardless of which brand you purchase.


Most folks merely use the various calculators on the web to determine there throw distance and use this to then lay out there final plans in regards to screen size, throw distance, etc.


IMO, you should have your screen ready & placed in its final destination point.

Set your PJ up TEMPORARILY on a table at the distance you merely used with one of the calculators. After you have totaled at least 25 hrs. on the lamp then you can determine & find your best FP placement for permanent installation in regards to brightness which usually will wind up being the ceiling.


The Z5 as most FP`s come with 4 to 6 factory preset Image modes. In my case the most convenient Z5 placement was the rear wet bar since I could easily center it both horizontally & vertically to the center of the 120" diag. DW-354-60 laminate screen I had pre-built. ALL the image modes from the lowest which is pure cinema to vivid looked great. After just 20 to 30 hrs. and the lamp had burned in with a throw distance of 19`ft., I now have pretty much limited my PQ brightness level to the Living, Dynamic, & Vivid modes. The popular creative cinema mode is pretty much a no go now at this 19` ft. throw distance with the already inital lamp degradation you will get with all new lamps.


The calculated throw distance variable for a 120" was anywhere from 12` to 24`Ft. to mount the Z5 or most any FP. So like most folks I figured I was good to go at my 19` ft.


After the lamp burn in just simply move the FP in 1` to 2 ` ft. increments closer to your screen making sure your ambient lighting & image mode selection remain the same. Leave the FP screen mode in Full and re-zoom & re-focus the FP at every new distance closer. When you find the optimum PQ brightness allowing you to utilize ALL the factory image modes even in the lamps eco mode then you will know where to finally mount your Z5 or any other low budget FP.


I do not have a Bat-Cave but do have dark paneling and have painted the ceiling over the hanging screen I use in front of my existing Sony XBR800 40" HD CRT.


My seating distances or 10` to 15`ft. and I see no SDE with the Z5. The PQ mated to a Toshiba XA2 & the 1080i HD broadcast from my cable HD DVR receiver is excellent.


In my case I can simply perform this optimum throw distance by moving my screen closer to the Z5 on the wetbar to determine the best PQ in relation to brightness.


From a few independent reviews I have read the Epson 1080 Home Cinema FP would be the best unit I could have purchased for my CONVENIENT 19` ft. wetbar throw distance, but of course your talking twice the price over the Z5.


In regards to why I didn`t choose the AX100: IMO when I purchase any electronic product I attempt to never purchase one that has been already acknowledged by the manufacturer to have a few known common factory QC issues in the initial builds. That being said I would rather haggle with Sanyo over a warranty issue a few years down the road since by that time I will probably be ready to upgrade anyway.


Regards & Good Luck with your Final decision since we ALL had to make one !

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...x111/1Shot.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...x111/2Shot.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...x111/4Shot.jpg

Hi Bart,


Yes, there are lots of reports of polarizer problems, althogh there are also huge numbers of LCD's out there too without issues. It's a gamble. On the DLP side, while there are lots of reports about colour wheel problems down the road, I don't think from my reading that they're quite as common as polorizer failures though.


Are you a member of the avforums.com site? There might be a memeber in the Amsterdam area with a TW700 who might be willing to do an open house. Avforums is also a good place for Euro CRT info.


I have an old Mits HC3 LCD, which is 960x540 ( that weird 'quarter HD' format ). I think it's was Mits's first foray into home theatre projectors. Originally I bought it as a 16x9 VGA monitor for my tiny home office, as widescreen LCD computer monitors were rare and expensive in Canada at the time. It qot hijacked to become our 'livingroom' theatre projector. One of the reasons I chose it back then was for the brightness. It was REALLY bright for an HT machine at the time. My DLP, the Mits HD1000, is brighter than the HC3 with an end of life lamp, but my guess is that they would be about on-par if the HC3 lamp was new.


As far as SDE on the HC3, I paired it with a Greywolf screen, which has a side benefit of reducing SDE. I could still see it though from 1.5x. With the HD1000 / Greywolf, I can only see it if I'm really looking for it in bright scenes at the same seating distance. In our basement theatre We sit 1.1x from the 165" 16x9 screen. One of the benefits of CRT!


If it really bothers you, you could de-focus slightly. Many do this, but I think the loss of sharpness ( especially if you've seen it when perfectly focused ) would be more bothersome.


Off topic - this is the first year in the last 7 that my company isn't exhibiting at IBC. Too bad, as it would have been nice to tip a beer or two and talk HT at one of our annual 'local' haunts. We always rent a houseboat at Stanhouderskaade and the Amstel. A lovely and friendly city you have .. thanks for all the hospitality, and putting up with the annual influx in Sept that takes over your fair city. I'm sure it drives you folks nuts ( especially the cyclists! )


Jonathan