CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

[Mr. Green]

Well, the showdown happened tonight... I'll be brief as it's late and we didn't have a lot of time to play.

Neither projector has been professionally calibrated.

Source: PS3 playing Blu-ray at 1080i (yes he did 1080p on his Epson and it wasn't noticeably different)

The Epson: http://www.projectorcentral.com/Epson-PowerLite_Home_Cinema_1080.htm

Setup...

Nec 9PG+: PS3>HDMI-DVI cable>Fury>box1040>vga-bnc>projector ($1,500 a year ago through Curt with warranty)
Epson: PS3>Hdmi cable> projector ($2,700 2 weeks ago with 2 yr warranty and free bulb).

Results (YES, I know they aren't calibrated! The results are interesting).

We played a varied number of Blu-ray, 1080p demo's, trailers and games.

The Epson: Off the start the Epson was amazing. It was setup, focussed and sized for the screen in under 5 minutes. Credits and such were crisp and clear. Screen door effect on a 7 foot wide image at 10 foot viewing distance was visible, but not really noticeable/ distracting. The f'n thing was SILENT!. It's loud for a 1080p projector and I couldn't hear it running. It was no louder than central air conditioning (air moving through the vents) or central heating. SO QUIET. The image was definitely digital and despite boasting 50,000-1 contrast, black was darker than charcoal grey, but not black. despite being on its darkest mode (cinema) it was still bright but slightly washed out. My wife thought it was really washed out because it was too bright and looked superficial and that was on the darkest setting. During Mila's escape from the lab, the 5th element should have looked like a dirty dingy city and on the Epson it looked pretty clean and shiny. It wasn't realistic. She did point out that the smog in the 5th element had the blotchy pixelated look and motion artifacts just like our crappy LCD T.V. That took away from the image.

The NEC: I thought I'd set mine up pretty well. DAMN... I need to work on the focus. Text was noticeably fuzzy. Black was black and despite needing to do major calibration the colours were much more realistic . The image was definitely more film-like (especially the close up shot of Mila's face in 5th element on the ledge before she jumps). It wa s definitely less fake/digital looking. I wanted to watch more of the Epson to compare, but the NEC ended up on for longer by the end of the night.

The result. We called it a draw. The Epson was the clear winner as far as ease of setup, brightness, sharpness where the PG+ was the winner in blacks, depth of image (film-like) and skin tones. Overall, would I pay almost $3,000 for a comparable image to my 9PG+, no. We both finished the night happy. Both had definite strengths and weaknesses, but at the end of the night, we both agreed we'd be happy either way. The Epson takes it for sharpness/ setup, but the NEC takes it for film-like image (which we agreed was of huge importance). The Epson didn't blow the NEC out of the water by any means.

He said if CRT wasn't a pain to setup, maintain and wasn't so big (not apartment friendly), he would seriously consider it. He found it very watchable. The Epson had a lot of positives, the main thing being ease of setup. I couldn't believe how easy and quickly he set it up. It was literally minutes. On the other hand I wouldn't want to see any brighter mode than the darkest cinema mode as it looked artificially bright.

I am REALLY looking forward to digitals improving over the next 3 years since the last batch I reviewed 2-3 years ago. If they improve that much again, they will be worth having. I'm still hoping for a 1080p LED projector the size of a classic Ipod so I can take it over to a bulb projector's domain and say "wow that's a big beast you've got isn't it?"

My 2 cents... Even knowing CRT is on the decline, I'll stick with it for as long as possible, because I can't afford more than $3k for a projector and digitals in that price reange aren't quite there yet. They've made leaps an bounds, but there is still a long way to go.

Cheers,
Chris

[Elaine Benes]

And if you watch that Epson with a bit of ambient light it will look ten times better....

I like crt, but their days are numbered, and not in the hundreds...

[Mr. Green]

Oh yeah, with any light on it was still quite watchable. Don't get me wrong. It was nice. I do prefer the film-like quality of CRT over the digital though.

All I was saying, is that if you have a PG series or better, you won't likely move up in picture quality for under $3,000. We have more time than I thought. Sure by next year, they'll be down to $2,500, then $2,000, but the current $3,000 digitals aren't there, so you;ll still need to buy the newest and best you can afford.

In about 3 years, I still say we all get IPod sized LED projectors (when they can do a decent 1080p) and go onto AVS and give the bulb projector guys a hard time for their big beasts for a change.

[Jesse S]

2 questions.

1) was the PG setup at 1080p res? Too high if so. Running it at 720p or 1080i would look much better.

2) why would anyone watch a movie with any ambient light? That's not a feature. That's just stupid. That's like listening to music with a little ambient noise added in.

[draganm]

Thanks for the review Mr. Green, I have always suspected the cheaper 1080P's like the Epson wasn't anywhere near the RS1 but it's nice to have that confirmed. I'm surprised you saw pixles at 1.2 x viewing distance, on a better digital like the RS1 I had to get 3 feet away from the screen. Your point is valid, the "cheap" $3K digitals still are cheap and nothing more

[Clarence]

[VideoGrabber]

Chris, thanks for sharing your experiences.

You mentioned it was on cinema mode (darkest setting), but not if you had EcoMode enabled. That would bring the brightness down some, which is part of the reason the Epson suffered. I.e., few would pair a bright digital PJ with a high-gain screen like you have. That's just not a good combination, and in a sense, you were seeing the Epson at its worst, with all flaws magnified. Also a neutral density filter may have helped, but your current screen isn't a good match for a high-output digital.

You indicated that on the NEC, "Text was noticeably fuzzy", but didn't say if that was from a desktop, OSD, or movie credits. Desktop text isn't going to look as sharp on your NEC as a digital, but I don't really see that as a disadvantage (for movie use).

> Epson: PS3>Hdmi cable> projector ($2,700 2 weeks ago with 2 yr warranty and free bulb). <

That seems a bit strange. A 19-month old unit, which has an MSRP of $2300, going for $2700? I guess it was the "free" bulb that jacked the price up?

> Screen door effect on a 7 foot wide image at 10 foot viewing distance was visible <

That would kill it for me, right there. That's a 1.43 d/w ratio, and would look even worse at draganm's 1.2x distance.

> The Epson was the clear winner as far as ease of setup, brightness, sharpness <

- setup - only needs to be done once
- brightness - which you indicated was a disadvantage, since TOO bright, and
- sharpness - which you never commented on, beyond text

I'm not sure how I see any kind of draw out of that comparison. Also, readers need to consider Person99's recent series where he selected a different digital PJ, coupled with an anamorphic lens and screen, and came up with a better image for less $$$. I don't think we can draw any conclusions on digital vs. CRT from the above, but am glad that Chris is still happy with his NEC.

[stuffandpuff]

[stuffandpuff]

[VideoGrabber]

> She did point out that the smog in the 5th element had the blotchy pixelated look and motion artifacts just like our crappy LCD T.V. That took away from the image. <

Ya think? Other than a blotchy pixelated look and motion artifacts, the image looked really great! LOL

The other thing I just realized is that you probably put the Epson on a table in front of your couch? Versus mounting it overhead on your NEC? That means you really did see the Epson at its worst, since in that location, you're getting most of the high gain off the Elunevision screen. If you had thrown an old sheet over your screen, the Epson would have looked much better. Many of the digital defects that become so obvious when the brightness is too high aren't nearly as objectionable when the brighness is at the proper level.

> I wanted to watch more of the Epson to compare, but the NEC ended up on for longer by the end of the night. <

So, while you wanted to evaluate the differences, everybody else just wanted to see a quality picture. So they chose the NEC. That should tell you something.

[VideoGrabber]

stuffandpuff,
> I think he is including the PS3 and cables in with that price. <

Thanks! I missed that. You're probably correct, but he also has the PS3 listed on his NEC setup line. So that confused me.

[Bucketfoot]

At $2700 it also may have been the 1080P UB. I think it is the non-UB that is $2300.

[VideoGrabber]

Doing a bit of quick reading on that Epson, you could also have dropped the brightness down significantly by mounting it farther away, and then used Zoom to shrink the picture back down. That can drop the lumen output from 370 down to 205, which would have helped a lot. Your wife may have been willing to watch it for more than 5 minutes then.

[Mr. Green]

[Mr. Green]

[Mr. Green]

[Mr. Green]

[Mr. Green]

[Mr. Green]