CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

perisoft · Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 2920 Location: Ithaca, NY

It may be a bottom-of-the-barrel projector, but even the poor Sony VPH-722 being auctioned here deserves better than this!

Daa-aamn! Hold me back! And at only $98.99, it's a steal. A steal from whom is another issue....

Update: As I wrote this, my last question answered itself.'This item has ended with Buy it Now.' - and t***e, may God have mercy on your soul!

**Curt Palme** · Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 11:01 pm Post subject:

I don't see a 722 in that pix. It's some digital POS, and I'll bet that that's an accurate screenshot! Very Happy

Clarence · Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 11:16 pm Post subject:

betel · Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 11:17 pm Post subject:

Curt,

The 772 is in the link to an eBAy auction (sold for $98.99!). Not sure what that screen shot is of except a "digital POS" as you so elegantly described.

perisoft · Joined: 29 Aug 2007 Posts: 2920 Location: Ithaca, NY

That thing on top is the DVD player - notice the plastic fascia rim on the right and the cables on the left. It's sitting on the projector's case - you can see "Hi-Resolution 900" there. The projector is between it and the camera; you can see the image (such as it is) projected partially onto the DVD player. That shot is in the thumbnail list in the auction, guys! Very Happy

cmjohnson · Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Posts: 5180 Location: Buried under G90s

Talk about not doing it justice!

My first PJ was a 722Q1 in mint condition with absolutely pristine tubes.

Though it could only do standard definition, I ran it on the same 8 foot wide screen (2:1 aspect ratio) that I'm running my 9500LC on
right now. It had sharp, stable analog convergence and focus was quite sufficient to resolve every scan line. It had enough vertical size
adjustment capability that I ran DVDs in 16:9 mode with perfect geometry. It had good color and saturation and in a fully darkened
room, it WAS adequately bright. It actually delivered a very respectable picture. I ENJOYED watching movies on it for a couple of
years, until I got my first Marquee. I might even argue that it was as good as you'd ever need it to be, within the limits of straight NTSC
video. If I ran my Marquee at straight NTSC as well, I'm not really sure that its picture would be substantially better.

In fact, it might not even be as good at 480i as the Sony was, simply because the Sony was optimized for 480i and the Marquee is
optimized for far higher resolutions and scan rates.

Properly set up, that little 722Q1 delivers a very nice picture within its capabilities.

CJ

**Curt Palme** · Posted: Thu May 21, 2009 2:24 am Post subject:

cmjohnson · Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Posts: 5180 Location: Buried under G90s

Those things originally cost 7500 bucks back in the mid 80s, which was a very hefty chunk of change back then, and today, too! You could buy some new cars for less than that, at the time. And, apparently, Sony sold rather a lot of them as they're pretty common to this day.

I think this is because it's pure truth that they're a very good projector, so long as you accept the fact that they're strictly limited to plain
old NTSC video.

Frankly I'm more amazed that people tend to think of them as old junk. I've never yet had a Sony projector that wasn't capable of
delivering a fine picture. I've also had a 1031 and a 1270. Both did a fine job. The 1270 in particular had a remarkable character to
its picture, extremely smooth (yet detailed) and as filmlike as I've ever seen. It was a very easy picture to watch. As I was already in
modded 9500 land when I got it, I sold it to a fellow CRT enthusiast and I assure you, I've never heard any complaints from him!

We tend to lose sight of the simple fact that even the worst CRT projectors that any of us are likely to admit to having owned is still a
very high end display unit in terms of what the average consumer is used to. Our projectors START at a higher level than Joe Consumer
has, and they go way up from there.

CJ