| Author |
Message |
armstrr
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 160
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:27 am Post subject: difference between marquee GT-17 and the G-90 HD-10f |
|
|
Would there be an advantage to trading my GT-17 for G-90 HD-10f lenses? Would the throw distance change? Thx in advance
_________________
Electeohome marquee 9500lc, lumagen hdp, 9' da lite high power screen denon 2809ci paradigm speakers home made dual stacked subs
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
They are basically the same lens. They both were manufactured by US Precision lens.
This is how they were sold...
The original lens reference number is HDXX or it started with HD as the prefix for the actual number. So Sony and Barco had the HD only in their numbers, with the latest CRT lenses made for 9" CRT's were the Barco 909 lens sets, that had two number references. One was HD10E, with the exact same lens also having the HFQ-900 number reference.
The HFQ-900 or HD-10E lens set was a very unique/special design, because it was able to fit screens from small to very large in that one lens set. This was not possible before the HD-10E design, and that explains why Electrohome offered different lenses depending on the screen size.
Electrohome had GT-17 for that same exact HD-10F lens. Sony only purchased one of the four different lens series, while Electohome purchased the entire set (HD-10, HD-10/GT17, HD-10/GT-26 and HD-10/GT30).
I have both GT-17 and HD-10F lenses and have carefully checked and compared them both, and I was not able to detect any difference in what was projected on the screen, to include being able to tell a difference in the design. the only thing I was able to see a difference in was the label attached on he lens itself.
I was told the only lens that may be different would be the ones used on a few of the 9" Barco's. I think they had HD-120 on them. Not sure, but because Barco had a different HD-XXX number, it was suspected of actually being different.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
armstrr
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 160
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks so much for that thorough explanation, mike! I thought I had heard that the g 90 set might be capable of better corner focus, but that myth now is busted.
_________________
Electeohome marquee 9500lc, lumagen hdp, 9' da lite high power screen denon 2809ci paradigm speakers home made dual stacked subs
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dvh99
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 2158
Location: nederland
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i thought there were some revisions between the gt17s as well as other lens sets so there might be a small quality difference if i`m not mistaking.
check the lens section for more info.
_________________
1 answer always poses multiple questions.
marquee 9500ultra HD10L moome hdmi1.3 v3+ some mods.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Kildare
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | They are basically the same lens. They both were manufactured by US Precision lens.
This is how they were sold...
The original lens reference number is HDXX or it started with HD as the prefix for the actual number. So Sony and Barco had the HD only in their numbers, with the latest CRT lenses made for 9" CRT's were the Barco 909 lens sets, that had two number references. One was HD10E, with the exact same lens also having the HFQ-900 number reference.
The HFQ-900 or HD-10E lens set was a very unique/special design, because it was able to fit screens from small to very large in that one lens set. This was not possible before the HD-10E design, and that explains why Electrohome offered different lenses depending on the screen size.
Electrohome had GT-17 for that same exact HD-10F lens. Sony only purchased one of the four different lens series, while Electohome purchased the entire set (HD-10, HD-10/GT17, HD-10/GT-26 and HD-10/GT30).
I have both GT-17 and HD-10F lenses and have carefully checked and compared them both, and I was not able to detect any difference in what was projected on the screen, to include being able to tell a difference in the design. the only thing I was able to see a difference in was the label attached on he lens itself.
I was told the only lens that may be different would be the ones used on a few of the 9" Barco's. I think they had HD-120 on them. Not sure, but because Barco had a different HD-XXX number, it was suspected of actually being different. |
Mike, while I value your opinion a LOT, it seems it is not that clear cut. If you look at zGman on page 1 and Curt and DGP post on page 2 then throw in the rest is it that straight forward? For what it's worth I was under the same impression as Curt.
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=21398.html
Let the fun begin 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| J Kildare wrote: |
Mike, while I value your opinion a LOT, it seems it is not that clear cut. If you look at zGman on page 1 and Curt and DGP post on page 2 then throw in the rest is it that straight forward? For what it's worth I was under the same impression as Curt.
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=21398.html
Let the fun begin |
I read the thread, but would only agree that the HD-10F are NOT a better lens than the Gt-17's.
I think we can agree that there may have been differences in the versions of the lens, but from my undertstanding, they were the same lens.
for instance, when I compare the two, I'm not seeing a difference. And in respect to DGP, I would say that he may not have the exact same version numbers that I have here.
So there could be a reason why some are saying that one lens is better than the other, when it could only be that they are comparing different versions of the lens.
We do however, know that there were several different versions of these lenses. And to better see that in action, look at the 10L lens. Some of them have version numbers right on the barrel.
But are the 10F better than the Gt-17....no!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Kildare
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | J Kildare wrote: |
Mike, while I value your opinion a LOT, it seems it is not that clear cut. If you look at zGman on page 1 and Curt and DGP post on page 2 then throw in the rest is it that straight forward? For what it's worth I was under the same impression as Curt.
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=21398.html
Let the fun begin |
I read the thread, but would only agree that the HD-10F are NOT a better lens than the Gt-17's.
I think we can agree that there may have been differences in the versions of the lens, but from my undertstanding, they were the same lens.
for instance, when I compare the two, I'm not seeing a difference. And in respect to DGP, I would say that he may not have the exact same version numbers that I have here.
So there could be a reason why some are saying that one lens is better than the other, when it could only be that they are comparing different versions of the lens.
We do however, know that there were several different versions of these lenses. And to better see that in action, look at the 10L lens. Some of them have version numbers right on the barrel.
But are the 10F better than the Gt-17....no! |
Where was this post when I needed it 5 years ago? I was going to get a set of HFQ but the deal fell thru so I found a set of HD-10f from the G-90 and was under the impression they were as good except for a larger variety of screen sizes. It appears this is not the case.
Thanks for the clarification.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| J Kildare wrote: | | I was going to get a set of HFQ |
Now, that's the set of lenses to get. And you should expect a significant improvement over anything else out there.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Curt Palme
CRT Tech
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 24396
Location: Langley, BC
TV/Projector: All of them!
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I ***may** have a set available for $1000. I need to take inventory of those 809 split packs I had here, and if I can let a set go.
PM me if you're interested, I'll know by Weds. Just need to make sure I have enough lenses for the 4 909s I have here...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
draganm
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 8990
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rob, look at Appendix B in the latest 9500 manual from VDC . They show throw distances for various lenses and the HD10E and GT17 are quite a bit different.
http://www.curtpalme.com/docs/ElectrohomeMarqueeUltra8500_8500LC_9500LC_User.pdf
on the 9500 they show
GT17 minimum 91" wide, maximum - 114" wide
HD10E 78" to 247"
that's quite a discrepancy,so it suggests the lenses are very different. I can't comment on their focusing ability, as I've only had the GT17 here. Someone posted pics once comparing the 2, and the 10E looked a lot sharper. Does anyone remember or link to that thread ? Was it ZGman or that Australian dentist?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | J Kildare wrote: |
Mike, while I value your opinion a LOT, it seems it is not that clear cut. If you look at zGman on page 1 and Curt and DGP post on page 2 then throw in the rest is it that straight forward? For what it's worth I was under the same impression as Curt.
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=21398.html
Let the fun begin |
I read the thread, but would only agree that the HD-10F are NOT a better lens than the Gt-17's.
I think we can agree that there may have been differences in the versions of the lens, but from my undertstanding, they were the same lens.
for instance, when I compare the two, I'm not seeing a difference. And in respect to DGP, I would say that he may not have the exact same version numbers that I have here.
So there could be a reason why some are saying that one lens is better than the other, when it could only be that they are comparing different versions of the lens.
We do however, know that there were several different versions of these lenses. And to better see that in action, look at the 10L lens. Some of them have version numbers right on the barrel.
But are the 10F better than the Gt-17....no! |
The concept of "different versions" muddies the water on this discussion. The same issue supposedly exists with the HFQ-900 and HD10E. It was Galen or someone who compared a set of HD10E and HFQ-900 and found the HFQ-900 set to provide better focus. Supposedly, Barco demanded that the lens be matched/tighter tolerances.
Assuming the HD10F and GT-17 lens are the same, the next question is how different they are from the HFQ-900. Craig said he could see a very slight difference between an HD10F and HFQ-900 on his G90 but it's possible the results could be different on a Marquee 9500LC. AFAIK, Craig still uses the stock HD10F's and I would expect that if he thought there was a significant improvement he would have kept the HFQ-900.
Considering that the HFQ-900 sells for twice the HD10F/GT-17 market rate and potentially different versions of these lenses may exist, it makes the evaluation process irritating. Without a definintive method to identify all the variants, someone could spend a lot of money just shipping lens sets around only to find that there is minimal difference from one to the next.
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe cleaning the lenses would have bigger effect..??
Those who tested different lens sets, did they take the lenses apart and clean them inside to.?
I'm sure we all know that it don't take much dirt to make a difference with these lenses.
Last edited by stridsvognen on Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:00 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
draganm
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 8990
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Does anyone find it odd that VDC lists the GT17's as only having a screen width range of 23 inches? It would nice to hear the engineer who wrote that comment on lenses and types.
I also remember reading that people compared the same lenses from like mid 90's to early 2K and newer and found the newer lenses focused better. An optics Engineeer from 3M would be a good insight to into that.
Without more first hand knowledge, only thing we can have here is speculation. Not that that has ever stopped raging a argument before .
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| draganm wrote: | Does anyone find it odd that VDC lists the GT17's as only having a screen width range of 23 inches? It would nice to hear the engineer who wrote that comment on lenses and types.
I also remember reading that people compared the same lenses from like mid 90's to early 2K and newer and found the newer lenses focused better. An optics Engineeer from 3M would be a good insight to into that.
Without more first hand knowledge, only thing we can have here is speculation. Not that that has ever stopped raging a argument before . |
Yeah, the Sony 1292 also has an earlier version of the HD10F lens which is supposed to be different than those found on the G90. Lens comparison is a total SNAFU..LOL
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| draganm wrote: | Does anyone find it odd that VDC lists the GT17's as only having a screen width range of 23 inches? It would nice to hear the engineer who wrote that comment on lenses and types.
I also remember reading that people compared the same lenses from like mid 90's to early 2K and newer and found the newer lenses focused better. An optics Engineeer from 3M would be a good insight to into that.
Without more first hand knowledge, only thing we can have here is speculation. Not that that has ever stopped raging a argument before . |
Did VDC not change specs on the lenses sometimes.. Like they could not decide how much tube surface to use.. lol
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zGman
Joined: 22 May 2006
Posts: 599
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello - the GT17 first element has a very deep curvature - while the HD10F and HD10E(hfq900)
have a very shallow curvature of the first element. That would constitute a major design
difference in my view.
The hd10E and hd10F are much more similar in performance than either compared with the GT17.
The GT17 corresponds much more closely to the HD120 as used by Barco.
GT17/HD120 seems to be happiest around 96" wide screen, where the HD10F/E
have a much larger screen size range.
In general the later the production date the better the lens performance will be.
The G90 HD10F lenses can be quite good and will have a wider screen range than the GT17.
The early 1292 hd10f are better than a regular hd10 of the same year, but not
nearly as good as a late model GT17 or HD10F
The hfq900 (hd10E) have a better ability to focus corners, but some variation
in focus across the screen in my testing. They are ideal for blends and stacks.
My observations are emperical of course, but I have had all the lenses and tested
them with high end PJ's and careful setups...
G
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HaydnG90
Joined: 22 May 2006
Posts: 1356
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zGman wrote: | Hello - the GT17 first element has a very deep curvature - while the HD10F and HD10E(hfq900)
have a very shallow curvature of the first element. That would constitute a major design
difference in my view.
The hd10E and hd10F are much more similar in performance than either compared with the GT17.
The GT17 corresponds much more closely to the HD120 as used by Barco.
GT17/HD120 seems to be happiest around 96" wide screen, where the HD10F/E
have a much larger screen size range.
In general the later the production date the better the lens performance will be.
The G90 HD10F lenses can be quite good and will have a wider screen range than the GT17.
The early 1292 hd10f are better than a regular hd10 of the same year, but not
nearly as good as a late model GT17 or HD10F
The hfq900 (hd10E) have a better ability to focus corners, but some variation
in focus across the screen in my testing. They are ideal for blends and stacks.
My observations are emperical of course, but I have had all the lenses and tested
them with high end PJ's and careful setups...
G |
I think that sums things up nicely Galen.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zGman wrote: | Hello - the GT17 first element has a very deep curvature - while the HD10F and HD10E(hfq900)
have a very shallow curvature of the first element. That would constitute a major design
difference in my view.
The hd10E and hd10F are much more similar in performance than either compared with the GT17.
The GT17 corresponds much more closely to the HD120 as used by Barco.
GT17/HD120 seems to be happiest around 96" wide screen, where the HD10F/E
have a much larger screen size range.
In general the later the production date the better the lens performance will be.
The G90 HD10F lenses can be quite good and will have a wider screen range than the GT17.
The early 1292 hd10f are better than a regular hd10 of the same year, but not
nearly as good as a late model GT17 or HD10F
The hfq900 (hd10E) have a better ability to focus corners, but some variation
in focus across the screen in my testing. They are ideal for blends and stacks.
My observations are emperical of course, but I have had all the lenses and tested
them with high end PJ's and careful setups...
G |
yep
I also hear that for the HFQ 900's barco had 3M test them and pick out the best of the HD 10E's for the 909's so they were matched sets of 3.
Nashou
_________________
Don't blame your underwear for your crooked ass~ unknown Greek philosopher
"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." --- President Reagan
One Smart Dog!!!
Marquee High Performance Bellows now shipping!!
Marquee Modifications and Performance Enhancement
Marquee C-element and Bellow removal
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| zGman wrote: |
The hd10E and hd10F are much more similar in performance than either compared with the GT17.
G |
There is no comparison between the two. The 10E's based on Barco is an entirely new lens set, which is clearly supported by them being able to do screen width up to 72' - a first for any 9" lens. Also, the internal elements of the 10E are entirely different from the earlier lens design.
The 10F design goes back to the Sony 1292, while the 10E based on Barco is a:New Super high definition
Look at the second post by DGP on the page in the link. It best describe what I had also experienced and what to expect from a set of 10E's in comparison....and why I'm using GT-17's until I can get another set of 10E's.
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=21398.html
.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Curt Palme
CRT Tech
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 24396
Location: Langley, BC
TV/Projector: All of them!
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
So if anyone wants to get a premium price for HD10F lenses, for $200, I'll nuke this thread.
(just kidding!)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
