LCD VsDLP projectors

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Alfredino

I'm not the one who dismissed an extremely well regarded, popular technology out of hand, the technology used most often in high-end applications.

Right, but 95% of the people who buy a projector don't fall in that category. So it makes your point moot. I've already said if you want a BIG picture you buy DLP. LCD & LCOS can't compare with DLP for big pictures. My DLP has 9000 ANSI Lumen output. Most people checking this thread aren't going to need that kind of power. Anyone dealing with high-end applications will be getting a DLP anyway and won't bother to look here.

Indeed. Funny how you forgot to mention motion blur in your earlier dissertations of the
various technologies flaws. Rainbows affect a very small percentage of the population.
Convergence, blurring, softness, CA, white field, black field uniformity issues can be there
all the time, every time with LCD based panels.

It's not a problem with every LCD based unit. Therefor I'm not going to mention it. "Rainbow Effect," is an issue with EVERY single chip DLP no matter how fast the color wheel. Also close to 50% of people can "notice," rainbow effect. If it's pointed out to them, there are certain people who will always notice it and that might drive them nuts. Close to 15% of people however get serious viewer fatigue from the rainbow effect, causing massive headaches.

I have looked, even the RS-2 hasn't gotten there yet, as you just noted. Sharp enough
may be okay for you, but don't assume it's good enough for others--not those who've seen
good DLP projectors. I know a lot of people who had DLP, bought an RS-1 and sold it, only
to go back to a DLP projector. I'm sure there are many who are quite happy with the RS-1
or VW-50, VW-100. Depends on image quality priorities. Contrast performance of the JVC's
and newest SXRD's is extremely good.

Here is where you lose me. I don't think SXRDs have good contrast performance at all in comparison to a nice DLP or JVC unit. They all use auto iris tricks, and these iris are not fast enough to do a truly good job. I also find it hard to believe you know "a lot," of people who traded DLPs for an RS-1 and then back. I find that statement so hard to believe in fact, it makes the rest of what you say extremely questionable.

Maybe not from viewing distance, but it doesn't mean it's not there. I had CRT projectors
for years, happy to get away from convergence issues with single chip DLP. YMMV.

All that matters is viewing distance. Seriously. Who cares if you see a screen door effect or some stupid problem if you're inches away from the screen? You don't watch movies that way. It's pointless.

I didn't specifiy JVC in this case, certainly Sony and other LCD brands use auto iris.

Sure, but auto iris really can't provide truly great contrast performance. So units like the JVC which don't are that much better because of it. Because the HD-ILA is also so sharp (the RS-2 in particular) it can provide the 3D look so many people like. It however isn't overly sharp which looks bad with film.

No, most of the people complaining on sites like AVS Forum are very knowledgeable, long
time enthusiasts whose expertise is at least as good as any of the reviewers.

These must be the same people to have claimed to have switched that you know a lot of. AVS Forum is a place to go to have people fool you. My god that place has users promoting Caradas screens! It's a horrible place to get information unless you know which few posters aren't full of it. AVS is full of knowledgable liars. There are so many people that post there and WORK for TI, etc. it's tainted. Many of the posters are industry people in one way or another and have extremely biased points of view.

Already proven wrong--a BenQ W5000 can be bought for under $2500 any day of the week.
It is not considered to be a piece of junk.

The BenQ W5000 has an MSRP of $4995. It falls off the back of a truck a lot, and on the internet can be had for $2444 (cheapest I found googling). This isn't a "street," price it's an internet price. Local dealers will not be selling the unit that cheap ($3,500 is common). It's also an HDMI 1.2 unit.

PQ wise though the W5000 is NICE, but for a decent sized screen it lacks the simplicity of placement that the Epson currently offers.

You can't have it both ways. You say more than $2500 is the point of diminishing returns,
yet you'll spend three times that on an RS-2.

I actually spent 100 times that for my HT. What I find important is not what others will find important. I can readily admit that $2500 is the point of diminishing returns. It just so happens I like having the best in audio and video.

I think we're all very fortunate to be able to have so many amazing projectors at such low
price points compared to just a couple of years ago, no matter the technology.

This is true. However imho you don't really start benefiting from DLP until you spend $5000 or more. The truly nice units cost over $10,000. In all honesty for MOST people there isn't justification for spending more than $2,500.

[wes]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Right, but 95% of the people who buy a projector don't fall in that category. So it makes your point moot. I've already said if you want a BIG picture you buy DLP.

May be if you can afford three chip DLP then I would agree otherwise the JVC DLA RS2 is the best!

[Alfredino]

Lotus,

You make some good points. There is no doubt that TI is up against it and should consider
lowering their chip pricing in the ultra competitive projector market, but the fact remains that
1080p DLP projectors can be had for under $3000. Whether you think they are good enough
wasn't the original point.

I find the JVC LCOS projectors to be very compelling as far as full field blacks. Unfortunately, the other image artifacts that I saw in the RS-1, but happily not so much in the RS-2, made me go to DLP. I feel that my DLP throws the sharpest, brightest, most three dimensional image available.

I own an Optoma HD81-LV which is incredibly bright, over 1000 lumens after D65 calibration.
An RS-2 is more like 600 lumens. My 2:35:1 Stewart Studiotek 1.3 gain screen is only 100"
wide, yet I wouldn't want to give up 40% or more light output by going to an RS-2. For the
same price as an RS-2, I feel I've got a brighter, sharper image, accurate color, no convergence or white/black shading errors.

Having said that, I'm sure that I could be very happy with an RS-2, the blacks are the most
CRT like I've ever seen in a front projector, and am happy that there is such amazing progress being made in projector quality and lower pricing at such a rapid pace. Every home theater enthusiast benefits from the technology race and if you think one technology has an edge today, don't worry, that will change tomorrow.

[HDENZ]

Originally Posted by Alfredino

Lotus,

You make some good points. There is no doubt that TI is up against it and should consider
lowering their chip pricing in the ultra competitive projector market, but the fact remains that
1080p DLP projectors can be had for under $3000. Whether you think they are good enough
wasn't the original point.

I find the JVC LCOS projectors to be very compelling as far as full field blacks. Unfortunately, the other image artifacts that I saw in the RS-1, but happily not so much in the RS-2, made me go to DLP. I feel that my DLP throws the sharpest, brightest, most three dimensional image available.

I own an Optoma HD81-LV which is incredibly bright, over 1000 lumens after D65 calibration.
An RS-2 is more like 600 lumens. My 2:35:1 Stewart Studiotek 1.3 gain screen is only 100"
wide, yet I wouldn't want to give up 40% or more light output by going to an RS-2. For the
same price as an RS-2, I feel I've got a brighter, sharper image, accurate color, no convergence or white/black shading errors.

Having said that, I'm sure that I could be very happy with an RS-2, the blacks are the most
CRT like I've ever seen in a front projector, and am happy that there is such amazing progress being made in projector quality and lower pricing at such a rapid pace. Every home theater enthusiast benefits from the technology race and if you think one technology has an edge today, don't worry, that will change tomorrow.

[bobsor]

As you've probably already noticed, as soon as you ask questions like those you've posed, you'll immediately receive many replies, often very opinionated, often very contradictory. In my personal opinion, the best solution for you will be what fits into your specific environment (light control, dimensions, acoustics), works well with your budget, and most of all, looks good to you. I went through the same questioning that you did, asked many questions, looked at as many video specialist theaters as possible, checked my funds one more time, and went for the combination that appealed to me. The results were far better than I had expected, the systems was self-installed, and I found the installation and adjustment process simpler than I expected. It's always difficult to compare home theaters side-by-side, but I like my installation better than any I saw, costing many times more. It really doesn't matter what I chose, since you'll immediately hear that everything I bought is total junk, but after comparing every major brand of screen, and projector, and receiver in my price range, I chose Carada for the screen (outstanding assembly quality ease of installation, and to my eyes (with the 1.4 gain 102" white screen), viewing quality), a Panasonic AE2000 projector, Panasonic BluRay, Toshiba HD DVD, Yamaha speakers and V-1800 receiver. I love the results, and the only down-side is that I spend far more time in my projector room than I ever planned to, and rarely venture into my dedicated TV room with its tiny 53" screen. The only advice I can offer is to read as much as possible, see as many installations as possible, and believe your own eyes, and not everything that sales people and forum experts tell you. Good luck in your search!

[HDENZ]

Interesting discussions here, bottom line is simple any Unit at around $3000 is built for a budget and expecting 100% options on colour ,contrast etc is plainly stupid as no one would have to buy the higher priced systems. There will always be a better unit....
Incidently comparitive controlled tests have shown the SONY SXRD (which is also used for the 4:4:4 HD -SR Cinema projection format) is the highest performing chipset...but ..beauty and performance is in the eye of the viewer. This is an age old debate which started with CRT's through Plasma, LCD and soon OLED displays.
I love the progress.
Cheers.