# Anamorphic?? or Panasonic PT-AE4000u?



## unnervingfalcon (Feb 14, 2011)

I'm a little confused on this. I was planning on buying the Panasonic because I thought it showed a 2:35 video in proper resolution. Now I'm not sure. Is it just a cheap picture with less lines of resolution?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

All the Panasonic does is zooms out the picture so the black bars are off the screen. If you have the projector set up properly you wont see the bars so in essence it is a true 2,35:1 image but the resolution is reduced if you understand that the black bars are still being drawn.


----------



## unnervingfalcon (Feb 14, 2011)

hmm well that won't do. I want the best resolution. I'm reading how to make my own anamorphic lens at the moment and seems very easy. I have a supreme complete shop here and could make one easily.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Making an anamorphic lens is a good choice because buying a true anamorphic projector is far more costly. The Panasonic would work very well with a anamorphic lens.


----------



## KelvinS1965 (Feb 6, 2011)

tonyvdb said:


> Making an anamorphic lens is a good choice because buying a true anamorphic projector is far more costly. The Panasonic would work very well with a anamorphic lens.


So would other projectors in the same price class. In fact any projector that has the required vertical lens shift (and ideally horizontal squeeze for 16:9 with the lens still in place) will do. Either that or add in ascending price order: DVDO Edge, DVDO Duo or Lumagen Radiance Mini3D (or a 'full' Radiance if you're feeling flush).

I think that some read the PR spin of the Panasonic lens memory and think that it does something 'magic' with 2.35:1 films, when all it really does is 'remember' where you zoomed to.

Making an anamorphic lens is an interesting approach, but I'd still recommend simply scouring the classifieds of here and elsewhere to look for a decent used lens. I got a pre owned (by about 5 people it turned out ) Isco II lens and it gives a fantastic result, much better than I got zooming with my old Ae3000.


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

It all goes back to the zoom vs the A-Lens approach.

The Panny's zoom feature projects the black bars off the top and bottom. Whilst BD is 1920 x 1080, a Scope film on this format is about 1920 x 810, meaning that the remaining 270 lines are projected off the screen. Because you zoom to fill the Scope screen, the pixel size must increase by 1.33x in both directions.

Using an A-Lens allows you to use the full 1920 x 1080 panel rez because you Scale for CIH first. This removes the black bars and creates an image that now looks vertically stretched. The point being that the projected image is now made up of 1920 x 1080. Those pixels by the way are still the same size as the previous letterbox image before Scaling for CIH.

Add the A-Lens and you restore the geometry and now have Scope at the same height as a 16:9 program. 

The limit here is of course what the A-Lens uses for its optics. In the end of the day, there is no such thing as a free lunch and you will only get out what you put in. 

There are three basic levels here - 

1. DIY prism lens AKA trophy lens. These have no correction and therefor exhibit Chromatic Aberrations, Astigmatism and Grid Distortion. There is also no published spec on surface finish and whilst you can have these optically coated, they generally don't have that either. 

2. Corrected prisms lenses (with Chromatic Aberration and Astigmatism correction and broad band optic coatings) will still produce Grid Distortion.

3. Fully Corrected Cylindrical Lenses. Optic Coatings, No Chromatic Aberrations, Astigmatism and can have 0% Grid Distortion. 

In the end of the day, the level of performance is based on what what you are prepared to pay.


----------



## unnervingfalcon (Feb 14, 2011)

Mark Techer said:


> It all goes back to the zoom vs the A-Lens approach.
> 
> The Panny's zoom feature projects the black bars off the top and bottom. Whilst BD is 1920 x 1080, a Scope film on this format is about 1920 x 810, meaning that the remaining 270 lines are projected off the screen. Because you zoom to fill the Scope screen, the pixel size must increase by 1.33x in both directions.
> 
> ...



Always comes down to money eh..... I'm not one to settle for less but I can only afford what I can too. Any good places to look for these used ones? What type do you recommend?


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

unnervingfalcon said:


> Always comes down to money eh..... I'm not one to settle for less but I can only afford what I can too. Any good places to look for these used ones? What type do you recommend?


The best you can afford.

Check EBAY. Here is a 1.5x I found in about a minute. 


This lens is a 1.5x expansion lens and would require an external scaler to further squeeze the image or it will be projected too wide. AVS member Vern Dias uses lens similar to one like this for CIH out to 2.66:1. He also has 10 step side masking and can run all ARs from 1.2:1~2.66 at true CIH.


----------



## RBTO (Jan 27, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> All the Panasonic does is zooms out the picture so the black bars are off the screen. If you have the projector set up properly you wont see the bars so in essence it is a true 2,35:1 image but the resolution is reduced if you understand that the black bars are still being drawn.


Now I'm a bit confused. Doesn't the Panny line have an electronic (not lens) Zoom mode which will make a 2.35 picture fit all 1080 lines vertically? Then an anamorphic lens can be used to recompress it to the proper aspect ratio, thus preserving the 1080 line vertical resolution. I thought this was one if the selling points of the Panny.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

yes, but you need an anamorphic lens without it you have to use the zoom memory


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

RBTO said:


> Now I'm a bit confused. Doesn't the Panny line have an electronic (not lens) Zoom mode which will make a 2.35 picture fit all 1080 lines vertically? Then an anamorphic lens can be used to recompress it to the proper aspect ratio, thus preserving the 1080 line vertical resolution. I thought this was one if the selling points of the Panny.


The Panny range have 2 ways to do CIH:
1. The zoom method where you shoot the black bars off the top and bottom of the screen leaving about 810 lines on screen
2. Scaling for CIH that allows all 1080 lines to be used, however the geometry is now incorrect and an anamorphic lens is required to restore the geometry.


----------



## RBTO (Jan 27, 2010)

Mark Techer said:


> The Panny range have 2 ways to do CIH:
> 1. The zoom method where you shoot the black bars off the top and bottom of the screen leaving about 810 lines on screen
> 2. Scaling for CIH that allows all 1080 lines to be used, however the geometry is now incorrect and an anamorphic lens is required to restore the geometry.


The latter (#2) is what I was referring to. I think I missed the point. The original post discussion led into a discussion of using an anamorphic lens and I thought that was the original question, when in fact the original poster was seeking a projector that allows full resolution widescreen (i.e., 2.35:1) _without_ an anamorphic lens. Now I'm on the right track.

No the Panny can't do full resolution widescreen without using an anamorphic lens. Yes, the Panny works well for widescreen when an anamorphic lens is available.


----------



## unnervingfalcon (Feb 14, 2011)

RBTO said:


> The latter (#2) is what I was referring to. Maybe I missed the point. Was the original post seeking a projector which allows full resolution widescreen (i.e., 2.35:1) _without_ an anamorphic lens? The Pannys can't do that.


I'm the original poster.... I'm ok now. Plan on buying a Epson 8700 or 9700. I like how the 9700 has both vertical stretch and horizontal squeeze. Most likely I'll get the 8700 and make a slide for the anamorphic lens. I just sent in a suggestion to Sony to make the PS3 have both of these features. Also suggested they make all audio quality levels have the ability to go through both optical and hdmi.


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

unnervingfalcon said:


> I'm the original poster.... I'm ok now. Plan on buying a Epson 8700 or 9700. I like how the 9700 has both vertical stretch and horizontal squeeze. Most likely I'll get the 8700 and make a slide for the anamorphic lens. I just sent in a suggestion to Sony to make the PS3 have both of these features. Also suggested they make all audio quality levels have the ability to go through both optical and hdmi.


It would be very cool if SONY allowed the PS3 to both scale and shift subtitles. As for audio, a SPDIF just does not have the band width for lossless audio like MC LPCM, DTS HDMA and DD TrHD and why the best it will do is either 2CH LPCM or DTS at 1536kps.


----------



## fitzwaddle (Aug 25, 2010)

unnervingfalcon said:


> hmm well that won't do. I want the best resolution.


I hestitate to bring this up, because it always ends up being a religious debate - but regardless of whether you zoom or use a lens, the HD source material has the same amount of content / resolution. Using a lens will stretch the image to allow the whole panel (1080 vertical lines) which gives you more brightness - but there's still just ~812 (?) lines of content.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

fitzwaddle said:


> I hestitate to bring this up, because it always ends up being a religious debate - but regardless of whether you zoom or use a lens, the HD source material has the same amount of content / resolution. Using a lens will stretch the image to allow the whole panel (1080 vertical lines) which gives you more brightness - but there's still just ~812 (?) lines of content.


Agreed ^^ 

Weather your zooming the image out so the black bars dont show or ignoring the black bars all together, there is still going to be the same outcome as the BluRay player is still sending a 16x9 image at 1080 lines including the black bars. this means that scaling of the image is going to happen no matter what if you "fit" the image on a 2,35:1 screen.


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

For the OP, the ONLY projector that can display a Scope image at 2560 x 1080 is the DP device that (at CEDIA 2010) cost $45K. One can buy a really good 16:9 + ISCO III for about half that.


----------



## sTechnical (Mar 15, 2011)

hey i would like to suggest u choose Panasonic PT-AE4000u..
thanks...


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

The AE4000 also has a great feature when fitting the movie to a 2,35:1 screen using the memory function you can eliminate the black bars completely meaning that the are not even shown by adjusting the horizontal upper and lower Masking in the projectors menu. It works amazingly well and so far all the 2,35:1 movies I have watched on my 120" screen look fantastic !


----------

