Home Theater Projectors- any resident experts?

Hi- looking to learn various aspects of today's home theater projector market. Hope we have a few members with experience.

Partial summary of areas of discussion:

Common brands Epson, Sony, JVC, and BenQ plus SIM2 and Runco at the hi-end

Imaging tech Digital Light Processing (DLP) or Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCoS)
Not interested in LCD. I understand that LCoS is branded as SXRD, DiLA, and LCOQ

Digital Micro Mirror (DMD) the "DLP chip"; most have one chip and the hi-end have 3 (for R, G, B)

Light Output Ultra High Performance (UHP) lamp, LED, and Laser

ANSI Contrast, Dynamic/Sequential Contrast

Dynamic Iris

Lenses ED glass, etc.

Projector screens



Trying to simply put today's projector market into perspective at the $1,500 - $12,000 range including screen. This will exclude the hi-end and low-end. What should I know? What can I expect in terms of picture quality and overall experience compared to a pro-calibrated reference plasma (aside from diagonal of course)?

Much appreciated!

 

I have a BenQ W1080ST with an Elite 135" screen and I love it! The room has been painted in a non-gloss gray with no windows. The picture is great for under 1K and the screen was only $365 on sale. Sure there is better equipment out there with better black level and color but for the money I wanted a giant bright screen for Blu-rays to include 3D movies as well. The room is 19X17 and since the projector (the main reason I bought it) is 7 feet away and has a short throw lens on it I can blow it up that big with such a short room. I have tiered seating and the back top row is at about the back wall from the screen. and the front row is about 9 feet sitting back in the seat and the picture is still good with barely visible lines.

I use a Oppo BDP-103D player as the source. I had the projector calibrated since it has the ISF option for the tech and the picture looks as good as it can be. Better projectors will give you a more 3D image with blacker blacks and since the BenQ isn't the best the gray bars on 2:35:1 movies sort of distract it sometimes. I want to get a masking system someday.

 

I would look at the AVS Forum as a source of info. The technology changes so rapidly, it's easy to get blindsided by something new or buy a brand that has a known problem with design flaws. I can say -- in general -- more money is better.

 

Great advice. New projector announcements are happening this week at IFA Berlin, check out the threads there for details. Sony and JVC seem to be the preferred brands both with strengths and weaknesses. If you want to go 4k Sony is the only game in town.

Good luck, let us know what you decide on.

 

Only research at this point. Looking out at least a year. If any of you come across items of interest then please post here.

 

I have a very good relationship with Donna at the web retailer Projector People and have bought more than 10 units from her over the years. She has given me excellent advice and good deals.

 

Appreciated!

Share your experiences with projectors and screens.

I'm curious about the lenses commonly used at the various price points.

I'll be looking for a fixed white screen to be used in a "cave", so I won't be spending for light rejection.

 

There's a new Panasonic OLED monitor that looks great...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2015/09/02/panasonic-goes-oled-new-65-inch-4k-tv-unveiled/

I'm not a fan of the curved screen, but I like the fact that they're promising it reproduces color "the way filmmakers intended" back at the studio.

 

I'm done with panels for home theater. I have a pro-calibrated 60" Panny VT60 ("reference" plasma) and there's simply no way that 85"+ at under $5,000 will happen anytime soon with picture quality beyond my 60". They certainly won't touch 92"+ projection picture quality especially for the money. There's a learning curve with projection which I've been avoiding, but I'm ready to face reality. I enjoy the discovery and demystification process as it is, so here we go!

 

Okay, I'll bite on this one. As I sell projection technology for a living there a number of things to consider when looking at a projection system. As Vidiot has said above, projection (and display technology) in general is moving so rapidly that anything that you purchase now is likely to be superseded in the very near future. What we advise our dealers to point out (and end users when I speak to them) is not to skimp on the screen and the anamorphic lens if you decide to go down that path (and speakers when you look at the system as a whole) as these "passive" items will typically be purchased once and will last longer in your theatre system, if not for the entire life of your system, than any component that delivers the audio visual content to them. As delivery systems such as projectors, AV processors, blu-ray, streaming, etc are constantly changing as manufacturers tempt you with upgraditus, it makes sense to invest a little more into those products that will provide the longest return on your investment.

When it comes to projection screens, a screen should be window to the world. It should not be seen itself. A good screen will get out of the way and enable the content to be viewed in the way it was intended without drawing attention to itself. A company like Stewart Filmscreen has been in the screen manufacturing business business for nearly 70 years and are widely regarded as the industry reference due to their uncompromising dedication to image quality and fidelity. Their unique manufacturing capabilities make them the defacto standard in Hollywood and beyond for their surface technology. They are generally more expensive than their competitors but when their products will long outlive any projector that you employ on them, they become a prudent investment in your system. A quality screen surface will be based on optics and physics and not the latest AV trend and is going to last you a long time.

Similarly, anamorphic lenses can be either built to a price point or to a quality level. In general terms, a cylindrical lens will provide better optical performance than prism based lens though you will pay more for it. A good anamorphic lens could actually cost you more than the projecotr than you put it in front of. As anamorphic lenses are a niche market, production volumes are very low and like professional camera lenses, a quality glass lens will not e cheap. An anamorphic lens however is something that can be added at a later date should the initial budget be stretched.

Can't argue with the more money is generally better when it comes to projectors comment above but as Vidiot commented, the technology changes so rapidly. We typically see end users getting mesmorised by the latest and greatest when it comes to projectors whether it be 1080P, now 4k, 3D (well that worked out well didn't it - not) and the forthcoming HDR (high dynamic range) and HFR (high frame rate) technologies but then rapidly see their expensive purchase get superseded. As projectors and AV processors are typically seen as hero items they tend to hog the limelight whilst the stable workhorses and mainstays of the system such as screens, speakers and lens systems are viewed as second class citizens. More money is typically going to get you better optics, better processing, better controls to calibrate the image and hopefully better build quality and reliability though it is no guarantee.

Projection technology is also rapidly changing in the method of light generation. Whereas in the past all projectors have deployed a lamp based system, there is now a move to LED light engines, laser sources or a hybrid combination of the two. It is my understanding that the EU have or are about to mandate the end of lamps based on halogen and incandescent technology by early next decade in an effort to reduce CO2 emissions and this is compelling projector manufacturers to move to these new light sources. And what makes it an even better win-win for the consumer is that there will no longer need to be lamps changed in your projector at a significant cost every couple of thousand hours as a result of this change.

We used to see end users typically budget 10-15% of their projection budget to the screen but given the dramatic price drop in projectors over the past eight or so years, we see this as an opportunity for you the consumer to be able to invest more in a quality screen rather than just seeing it as a piece of a material that is the final link in the projection chain. Believe me, there is actually a lot more science and technology behind a quality screen surface than just simply cutting a piece of material off a roll and calling it a projection screen.

One important thing to remember is that the projector and screen form part of a synergistic system. When working with our dealers, we advise them on the most suitable screen solution for the project based on the room size (or more importantly seating positions) and aesthetics, the projector model and screen size and the functionality that is required of the screen. For example, a screen employing a masking system that gives a nice black border around the projected image will provide much better perceived contrast than an image that does not mask the image off. Also, what is the best aspect ratio for the screen based on the main use of the system (movies, sports, gaming, etc)?

And as I stated numerous times in the past, to get the most out of your projection system, ensure that you at least perform a decent calibration using a recommended calibration disc if you can't afford a professional ISF calibration. Believe me, you will not realise how good an image can look until you have seen one professionally calibrated to meet industry standards.

Good luck with your decision making.

 

This is exciting news but from initial reports the TV is going to be very expensive though I guess it is designed as a hero product for their first dip into the water with OLED technology. But the initial review here certainly gives it glowing praise. Unfortunately, the market for premium video displays makes the premium high end audio market look like mass market commodities. There is no way for someone to make niche high end displays at an affordable price point as video technology cannot be manufactured in that fashion. Video display panels have to be mass market to make them viable in any way, shape or form. Though it is great to see Panasonic taking LG's OLED panels and adding their own secret sauce to them to improve the image performance. Marketing videos for the set:



And another:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1WtTKCJGTQ


Curved screens on televisions is the most ridiculous introduction into the market in the past few years. I think LG released their first OLED model with a curve to make it stand out from all of the other flat LCD and plasma panels out there and since then every manufacturer has caught this stupid disease. It's hard to believe that we spent DECADES trying to remove the curve from CRT sets and then when we finally get technology that enables flat screens, they go and put a curve back into it. Gobsmackingly idiotic. Curved screens do have their place and it is in projection where large images can be more immersive. Curving projection screen is also done to remove the pin-cushion distortion inherent with anamorphic projection. You can't get immersiveness from a curved TV unless you sit a couple of feet away from it. And apart from simulators or large scale visualisation systems, the only other place I can see a benefit for a curved display is a nice large 21:9 format computer monitor on your desk replacing two or three smaller flat panel monitors for a totally homogenous, immersive experience.

 

I'd like to figure out how to invest in the nuts and bolts of the projector/screen rather than trendy features or display tech just as I will be emphasizing speaker quality (over size, etc) and pre/pro DAC implementation, power supply design, etc. I've got plenty of time to learn, but it's not so easy to identify reliable sources of info.

 

The entire panel TV market is ridiculous. I'd be surprised if a $5,000 investment in a projector and 92" screen wouldn't bury my reference panel to such a large degree that one might relegate the panel to a kitchen or bathroom.

 

I am leaning toward the direction of a 2.35:1 screen as I'll mostly be watching movies. The 92" 16:9 would be fine for most rooms I'll be considering, so I suppose I'll try to end up with a room which will accommodate a 2.35:1 with a diagonal which allows for 85" or so for 16:9.

Ideally, I'll have a black room. I'm not sure about the floor, but I'll intend to paint the walls and ceiling with whatever black will deliver a true cave-like dark. I'll use passive acoustic treatment and I can use dark fabric for DIY cylinder bass traps. So I won't need a screen with light rejection, but rather the best fabric affordable.

I don't understand the "throw" and how that relates to the anamorphic lens, etc. I want to stay as native as possible and avoid things such as zooming and dynamic irises, etc.

 

Anamorphic Lens

^The basics for those interested. Hopefully SpudOz and other subject matter experts can chime in here and there with info and advice.

 

AVS is definitely the place to go for info on projectors/home theaters. they have forums on projectors, screens and even home theater design and construction (you can learn tons of stuff there). a bit of advice: go BIG. otherwise is it really worth it? i sit 11-12 feet from my 110" screen (16 x 9) and it's about right but sometimes wish it were a little bigger. what i hear a lot of people advise is to put a white sheet up for a few days and see what size works best for you. good luck. i've had a projector for 6 years and it's been great. lots of fun.

 

I have an Epson 8700UB (no longer sold - was about $2K) and a cheap $150 pull down 16:9 106" screen. Despite this not being a "top end" setup, it still looks absolutely fantastic. I believe that if I would buy a $10-15K projector and $2K screen I might get a 10-15% better picture (in my opinion of course). For me it is not worth it as I love the pic I have now and I'd rather spend my money on other things.

The reason I picked an Epson LCD is because I am susceptible to the rainbow effect of DLP projectors. Even the newest ones bother me a bit. Anyone who is shopping for a projector should at least investigate to make sure this does not bother them before they pick a technology. Also if you are a gamer you need to investigate input lag. AVS Forum is the place to go to learn about all this.

One more note: I also have a 55" LCD flat panel behind my pull-down screen which we use for day-to-day TV viewing because my wife doesn't enjoy sitting in dim lighting all the time. This should be a consideration for anyone with a family because not everyone likes sitting in the dark. For movies we always use the projector and it never fails to amaze me. If you had told me when I was a kid that one day I could sit in my living room and watch a movie on a 106" screen on my wall I wouldn't have believed you.

 

One thing about screens - those folks throw the BEST parties. Open bar, lots of free food. It's great when you're at CES or CEDIA, but what it means to me is that the margins on those things are insanely high. My projection screen is stretched fabric - if you have a dedicated room, don't get a screen that can roll up. Concentrate on masking a constant width screen.

 

Any advice on selecting a projector which is ideal to mate with a Lumagen Radiance video processor? Would be nice to maximize the display tech quality of the projector and sort of bypass processing and even the lens (detachable).

 

@SpudOz

Bump!

 

CEDIA wrapped up recently with JVC and Sony leading the way in the sub twenty grand space. JVC held on to its advantage in contrast while increasing brightness where it had lagged Sony. HDMI/HDCP 2.2 Compatible Inputs along with HDR compatibility also impress. Sony does offer the only projectors with a native 4K display, but their SRP is firm (no "street pricing"). JVC comes out on top for those with a budget. They are going to sell a good many RS500 and RS600 at aggressive street prices.

The $28,000 or $60,000 Sony would be interesting to check out, but that's the sort of coin I'd like to have for hi-end two channel someday! There are also statement projectors from the likes of Barco, etc.

It might be interesting for casual consumers of flat panels to note that JVC is having success with their "almost 4k" e-shift. Does it really make sense to spend big on a native 4K 65" panel when projection is delivering a great 2K picture at 120" plus?!

 

jh901,
You're on the right track looking at the JVC line.
I've had a JVC for a few years and it's really nice.
I have several friends that are true experts and a couple that are "in the industry".
They all have JVC projectors and they literally could have anything they want with the exception of the uber projectors like Barco.
I just spoke with them after CEDIA and they are all saying the JVC RS600 is the sweet spot.
I don't know what your budget is but when you mention the 4k Sonys well...
BTW, AVS is a great place to buy from as well. I recommend Mike Garrett.
One thing you really should do after buying your PJ is invest in professional calibration.
I've had all of my displays done and it really does make a worthwhile difference.
Good luck!

 

Last year in my dedicated room in our new house I got the Epson 6030 and a Stewart filmscreen cima 123" 16x9 screen. I love it.

 

Sony has wacky pricing, so hopefully the RS600 does prove to be killer. Reviews are expected before long.

Indeed.

Indeed. ChadB unless another name is too hard to pass up. He did some fine work on my VT60 plasma.

 

Sounds like you're on your way to getting a great system.
Stewart makes the best non-AT screens.
I'm ok with giving up the last nit in video quality to go with an AT screen so I can get better sound.
Opinions vary on that as well but I really like having 3 identical speakers for the L\C\R.
My room correction software takes care of the minor attenuation.