# My New Projector



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

I thought I might share the news that I am now the proud owner of a BENQ W5000, true 1920 x 1080 DLP with full scaling for CIH. I am finally able to enjoy stress free CIH HD video...

Mark


----------



## Mike P. (Apr 6, 2007)

*Re: My New Porojector*

Nice projector Mark! Anamorphic compatilble for a street price of $2500. How big are you projecting? Do you find the 1200 lumen rating bright enough?


----------



## Blaser (Aug 28, 2006)

*Re: My New Porojector*

Congratulations Mark.... Describe!!!


----------



## mdrake (Jan 31, 2008)

Congrats!! Will it do both Anamorphic and 16:9?


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

Mark Techer said:


> I thought I might share the news that I am now the proud owner of a BENQ W5000, true 1920 x 1080 DLP with full scaling for CIH. I am finally able to enjoy stress free CIH HD video...
> 
> Mark


Ah!!..So the Benq won out Mark..
A very nice unit and with VS on HD..What else could one want! 

I might have to hold off on the Optoma..It has a very short throw and very little zoom range which is going to make it difficult to mount in my situation..and probably won't have a good throw ratio..
I might have to save up some more bickies and look at the W5000...I am A Benq fan after all..:bigsmile:

Some new screenies would be nice to see here..


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

Naturally, I will run a page on my blog to the new set up soon, but I am just watching Transformers (SD) with the volume at -60 given it is 2:45 in the am 

I have created a new room in a room for the house I am in now based on the one I had in my townhouse. 

My screen is 2.37:1 at just 960mm high. The screen is an Oz Theatre Screen Majestic Scope with flocking and Acoustic Vision fabric instead of the normal EVO3D. But instead of the screen just being mounted, I have made a custom rig that allowed me to curve the screen for the compensation of pincusion caused by the anamorphic lens.

Unfortunately, I had to trash the beautiful flocked frame to curve it, but have since made a new frame (same size) from MDF that has been flocked with the same material. The reason I trashed the alloy frame is that I had to reverse the frame to hold tension when curving. I have since checked out Stewart and Screen Research, and yes, both have thier fabric attached at the front, then use a cover... You can read in depth about that on my site...

The new Benq W5000 is slick - very quiet and actually very bright. It has both dynamic iris (which I prefer not to use) and manual iris that I currently have set to 1 or the lowest postion, and trust me, if this image was any brighter, I would be uncomfortable watching. The good thing is, as the lamp dims, I can open the manual iris to let out more light...

If you read my site (blog), you will see that not only have I fully calibrated this projector, but also rana shootout with the W20000 as well.

Seating distances are close - front row is measure to be just 2x the image height and the raised back row is closer to 3x. I am sitting in the back row now and it great. I might just move to the front row for a while to see how it is. 

WOW immersive, but still totally watchabe. This projector is truly like film, so you can sit at the same distances recommended for film by the SMPTE. 

One thing I find when installing this tonight was that the unit will not allow 4x the image height was it is at about 3.5x at min zoom. Honestly, I feel that all projectors should allow at least 4x for mounting so that you can sit in a wide range of seating positions. 

Yes, so anyway, I am liking this projector heaps look forward to upgrading to BD very soon...

My site is http://cavx.blogspot.com

Mark


----------



## Mike P. (Apr 6, 2007)

> I have made a custom rig that allowed me to curve the screen for the compensation of pincusion..........


Curved as in a "torus" screen?


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

Mark Techer said:


> I have created a new room in a room for the house I am in now based on the one I had in my townhouse.


Mark..Why do you need a room within a room in your house.?
I understood the reasoning in your Town house, from the point of view of noise level..Do you have a similar problem now? 



> My screen is 2.37:1 at just 960mm high. Seating distances are close - front row is measure to be just 2x the image height and the raised back row is closer to 3x. I am sitting in the back row now and it great. I might just move to the front row for a while to see how it is.


Is that correct!!? 2x the image height!! That's only 6.5' from the screen..
My screen is 1M. high and I'm sitting at 9'6", and that's as close as I would like to be..
Admittedly your image would have better definition than mine, but all the same, I think that's very close in anyones language..


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

Mike P said:


> Curved as in a "torus" screen?


Hi Mike,

No I ditched the Torus back in 06. I have just a curved scope screen - horizontal curve...



Prof said:


> Mark..Why do you need a room within a room in your house.?
> I understood the reasoning in your Town house, from the point of view of noise level..Do you have a similar problem now?


Hi Prof, 

Yes and no. I don't really like to "advertise" the fact that my sound system can play as loud as 105dB per channel, so keep the level below about -10dB for most films. The main reason is the open floor plan of this house - there are no useable parallel wall for the surrounds, so I created my own tempory (and fully removeable) walls... 



Prof said:


> Is that correct!!? 2x the image height!! That's only 6.5' from the screen..
> My screen is 1M. high and I'm sitting at 9'6", and that's as close as I would like to be..
> Admittedly your image would have better definition than mine, but all the same, I think that's very close in anyones language..


It is very close, but because of the high rez (it looks like film) it works. I sat in the front row during my post last night (actually this morning) for the rest of the film, and it is totally watchable, no pixels and clear , but your right, 3x is much better and where I sit when I go to a commercial cinema...

Mark


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

Mark Techer said:


> Yes and no. I don't really like to "advertise" the fact that my sound system can play as loud as 105dB per channel, so keep the level below about -10dB for most films. The main reason is the open floor plan of this house - there are no useable parallel wall for the surrounds, so I created my own tempory (and fully removeable) walls..


Mark..Do you have any photos or drawings on how you did this?


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

Prof. said:


> Mark..Do you have any photos or drawings on how you did this?


I do for the old place, but have documented this one. Basically, I have 3 sheets of MDF (2400mm x 1200mm x 16mm sheets) cut down to 1700mm x 1200mm and have used 75mm x 35mm kilm dried pine as the frame. I used metal shelf brackets to join the corners, so the two side and one rear can now free stand. The projector is on the rear wall and I will be modding that soon.

I have used batton screws to screw everything together, so no rattles and it is strong. Basically, the design allows me to install more panels as I need to. I have planned all screws and holes so that the install looks at least somewhat pro.

The rig is not painted yet, and I am actually contemplating using carpet here for both sound absorption and light control. The carpet can be rolled when I need to disassemble the rig to move to the next place.

Check out MY SITE to see what I did last time. The difference here is that I have been able to make the entry points at the front of the seating, so I have framing both at the top and bottom, so why it works and is very stable...

Mark


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

Mark..I take it that you have some sort of acoustic treatment on those MDF panels.?
Otherwise I would imagine that it would produce a fair amount of resonance and standing waves within the three sides..


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

Prof. said:


> Mark..I take it that you have some sort of acoustic treatment on those MDF panels.?
> Otherwise I would imagine that it would produce a fair amount of resonance and standing waves within the three sides..


I did have in the town house, but have not fitted them here yet...

Mark


----------



## tbase1 (Nov 10, 2006)

what lens are you using?


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

Still the old 2 prism lens, but in the process of upgrading that to a fully corrected cylindrical lens...

Mark


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

Mark..I'd love to see some photo's of that cylindrical lens when it's finished..


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

You will  There will be photos and screen shots (including sub pixels shots) everywhere...

Mark


----------



## akan101 (Sep 14, 2009)

Thanks for the info man.


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

Prof. said:


> Mark..I'd love to see some photo's of that cylindrical lens when it's finished..





Mark Techer said:


> You will  There will be photos and screen shots (including sub pixels shots) everywhere...
> 
> Mark


You may or may not be able to see the detail I was hoping for as I had to re-size the image for posting here. If you look on the word FOCUS, you may be able to see inter-pixel gaps. On the full size image, they are as clear as day.


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

I don't know about the inter-pixel gaps, but I can see chunks of pixels missing particularly at the top of the C and the S..What's that all about?


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

Prof. said:


> I don't know about the inter-pixel gaps, but I can see chunks of pixels missing particularly at the top of the C and the S..What's that all about?


Absolute clarity. The wording is just 2 pixels wide (on a 1080P) at its thickest part, so it can only be made of so many pixels. The test pattern was created in Paint, so the text is what ever the font size is.


----------

