# I just can't decide.....



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

So I've been going back and forth looking at these projectors online. The ones I'm considering are the Epson Pro Cinema 1080 UB, Panasonic PT-AE2000U, and the JVC DLA-HD1. My friend said there were some sort of cadence issues where in motion scenes the resolution would drop sometimes as low as 480p? Is this still a problem with the HD1 I have no idea. I can afford all these projectors but I wonder if the HD1 is worth the extra 1000 bucks. Although I know its said to have the best black levels of any projector in this price range. I'm really iffy about the Epson, simply because the CR rating is so over rated and I just can't find a good review comparing it to the Panny or HD1. I was just curious what your guys thoughts were? :help:


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

I only have experience with the Panny 2000 and it was about as perfect as it gets for me. I highly doubt I would ever notice a difference in anything better, but I realize there are some folks that are picky about the smallest imperfections. :huh:


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Yeah...I was leaning towards the Panny. But even if thats my choice then I have to decide if I'd rather get the AE2000U or get a new Marantz AV8003 pre/pro  I want both but can only afford one for the time being... I have a 50" RPTV right now so its not like I'm looking at something small.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

That large screen is nice, but like you say, a 50" ain't all that bad either. I like the experience of a 8-10's screen... it draws me into the movie more. There is no doubt you will notice a much more significant positive change going with the Panny than you will notice replacing your Yamaha receiver... assuming the 2400 has DD 5.1.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Ah I don't have the yammy anymore  I have a Sony STR-DA3300ES, Emotiva XPA-3 amp and an Emotiva XPA-2 amp, Sony PS3 80gb. I can accept the new audio formats as PCM so yeah I have that...but its still not on par with the Marantz. I was waiting for the new Emotiva stuff but they still aren't sure when the stuff will be released.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

Get the Panny and wait on the Emotiva. I seriously doubt you will notice that much difference, if any, with the Marantz.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Maybe not when used in an HT matter but I'd imagine there would be some difference with 2 channel. I don't know I may just wait on both lol.


----------



## Sonnie (Apr 11, 2006)

The way I always look at that is that the ultimate goal is "neutral"... the preamp/amp does nothing to the signal but pass it on, which is what it is supposed to do. If it sounds different, then one or the other is coloring the sound in some way or another. Generally, once you get to that neutral level, about the only differences are bells, whistles and price. :nerd: Now if your speakers are Martin Logan's, it would obviously be wise to get enough power to make them do what they do.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Yeah I'm not sure any pre/pro or receiver is really capable of giving a neutral sound. Generally I like to have no preamp at all and go from source to amp with a volume control. Now in a mixed system setup you either have to just live with going through the pre/pro or swapping the setup. I'm not sure what I plan on doing as this is the first time in a long time I've had a receiver in my setup. Also the first time in a long time that I'll have a full 7.1 setup with subs  For the last year or so I've had 2 channel only system.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Well I can get the AE2000U for 2100-2400, Epson is like 3000 and the HD1 is obviously much more at around 4k. I could probably get the Pre/Pro I want and the AE2000U for the price of the HD1  And I really have doubts that the Epson is on par with the AE2000U. I'm going to try and get to a place to look at them though so we'll see.


----------



## Blaser (Aug 28, 2006)

> My friend said there were some sort of cadence issues where in motion scenes the resolution would drop sometimes as low as 480p? Is this still a problem with the HD1 I have no idea.


This is a problem of any display. The bigger the screen, the easier you notice it (but you have to look hard for it). No such thing as lowering the resolution...


> I can afford all these projectors but I wonder if the HD1 is worth the extra 1000 bucks.


It depends on the type of perfection you look for. The JVC is absolutely the best but relatively (quality/rice) speaking, it depends...


> Although I know its said to have the best black levels of any projector in this price range. I'm really iffy about the Epson, simply because the CR rating is so over rated and I just can't find a good review comparing it to the Panny or HD1.


JVC is best in black level but not by far at all compared to the UB. CR rating is explained somewhere in the stickies. Epson over rated? Yes and no.
Yes: assuming the best (dimmest) mode around 4000:1 CR
No: assuming the brightest (relatively inaccurate) mode where it exeeds its rating.
Anyway, there is nothing to complain about as far as CR is concerned (trust me).


> I was just curious what your guys thoughts were? :help:


All these projector are very good. If you can afford the JVC go for it. If you can have a UB unnit QCed you will be stunned as well by PQ through the fliexibiliy of its CMS. The Panny is also excellent but a tiny bit behind the other 2 units.


----------



## Blaser (Aug 28, 2006)

Dougie085 said:


> Well I can get the AE2000U for 2100-2400, Epson is like 3000 and the HD1 is obviously much more at around 4k. I could probably get the Pre/Pro I want and the AE2000U for the price of the HD1  And I really have doubts that the Epson is on par with the AE2000U. I'm going to try and get to a place to look at them though so we'll see.


The Epson is believed to be a slightly better performer than the Panny. The Panny's an excellent machine though.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Yeah I finally found some reviews comparing the 1080 UB to the AE2000U and the 1080UB to the RS1. I'm not sure what I'll get. We'll see when the time comes sometime next weekend.


----------



## Blaser (Aug 28, 2006)

Dougie,

If you want a 2.35 setup, a UB is not the best choice as it does no VS for 720p or 1080p input. I think the Pannie does it but I'm not sure for the JVC.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Yeah...I'm not sure I will ever do an anamorphic lens though.


----------



## Keith from Canada (Jan 30, 2008)

Dougie085 said:


> So I've been going back and forth looking at these projectors online. The ones I'm considering are the Epson Pro Cinema 1080 UB, Panasonic PT-AE2000U, and the JVC DLA-HD1. My friend said there were some sort of cadence issues where in motion scenes the resolution would drop sometimes as low as 480p? Is this still a problem with the HD1 I have no idea. I can afford all these projectors but I wonder if the HD1 is worth the extra 1000 bucks. Although I know its said to have the best black levels of any projector in this price range. I'm really iffy about the Epson, simply because the CR rating is so over rated and I just can't find a good review comparing it to the Panny or HD1. I was just curious what your guys thoughts were? :help:


Of the three, the JVC is technically the best...it is also by far the most expensive. I'm not sure what it means to you but $1K is significant to most people.

Between the Epson and Panny, the answer is an easy one for me (yes, I've seen them both in action)...the Epson is the better projector as far as I'm concerned. Noticeably better blacks which, in projectors, is the biggest hurdle in getting a spectacular image. 

With this all being said, why no DLP? IMO, the BenQ W5000 outperforms both the Epson and Panny and is definitely worth a look if you're spending that amount.

Good luck and enjoy the hunt!


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

You really think the W5000 is better then both of them? I'll have to look for some reviews. I've looked at the W5000 before and I don't know, I've always liked the look of LCD's I suppose? My RPTV right now is an 3 chip LCD unit.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

I just read through a review comparing the 1080ub and the W5000 as well as the VW40 and they said the W5000 had the best shadow detail but the 1080ub was real close but had better black levels.


----------



## Keith from Canada (Jan 30, 2008)

Dougie085 said:


> I just read through a review comparing the 1080ub and the W5000 as well as the VW40 and they said the W5000 had the best shadow detail but the 1080ub was real close but had better black levels.


Better black levels with a dynamic iris - native contrast will be better with DLP. As to your preference for LCD, you should be aware that 3-chip LCD has a number of issues, including an inability to produce as deep a black without engaging in the use of an iris. You can also run into the problem with panel uniformity. With that said, DLP isn't perfect either...poor lens shifting options and the possibility of rainbow effect being the two kickers that go along with DLP.

For the sake of saying you did your homework, here is a good article you should read before dismissing DLP:

http://www.projectorreviews.com/advice/dlpvslcd/hometheater.php

LAST POINT - The Epson is a VERY nice projector and one that I would strongly consider myself. The tipping point for me would be to take the advice of the ISF calibrator who works on my displays...he bought the BenQ right after he calibrated an Epson and a Panny.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Oh I'm not dismissing DLP I'm completely open to all options.


----------



## Blaser (Aug 28, 2006)

Keith from Canada said:


> Better black levels with a dynamic iris - native contrast will be better with DLP.


How do you know that? The general rules are not applicable when comparing 2 specific models. How much is the NCR of the Benq?



Keith from Canada said:


> you should be aware that 3-chip LCD has a number of issues, including an inability to produce as deep a black without engaging in the use of an iris.


That's not true anymore. Most UB users deactivate the IRIS as they do not feel that much enhancement. FYI, when set on, the IRIS isn't that active in fact. It is intended only for the very dark scenes. I wish I had time to show you the common operating graph of an IRIS.


----------



## Harold Dale (Jun 26, 2006)

Well if the UB was a few hundred less it would be a much easier decision  Not that I can't afford the UB but its more a matter of if its worth the extra cost to me over the AE2000U. One of the reasons I really like the HD1/RS1 is because it doesn't use an iris. But I really need to fnd somewhere that I can view all of these....There just aren't many places around here that have the projectors I want to look at.


----------



## ACGREEN (Feb 23, 2007)

I reviewed the Panasonic, the Epson, the JVC, the Sharp, the Mitsubishi, and the Sony (it was the lower end LCOS model). I liked them in this order; JVC, Sony, Sharp, Panasonic, Mitsubishi, and the Epson. These were the 1080p models when the 2000EU first came out. The Epson had a bad refresh rate and was not clear on moving scenes. It was really bad and I would stay far away from it. The Mitsubishi is okay, but when compared next to the Panasonic, I noticed a serious lack of black. I that the Sharp and Panasonic where comparable and the JVC and Sony had the best pictures.

I purchased the Panasonic due to the Value of the projector. I don't think it can be beat at its price point.


----------



## Keith from Canada (Jan 30, 2008)

ACGREEN said:


> I reviewed the Panasonic, the Epson, the JVC, the Sharp, the Mitsubishi, and the Sony (it was the lower end LCOS model). I liked them in this order; JVC, Sony, Sharp, Panasonic, Mitsubishi, and the Epson. These were the 1080p models when the 2000EU first came out. The Epson had a bad refresh rate and was not clear on moving scenes. It was really bad and I would stay far away from it. The Mitsubishi is okay, but when compared next to the Panasonic, I noticed a serious lack of black. I that the Sharp and Panasonic where comparable and the JVC and Sony had the best pictures.
> 
> I purchased the Panasonic due to the Value of the projector. I don't think it can be beat at its price point.


Was it the UB version that you looked at? The UB is 'fairly' recent and is considered a significant upgrade.


----------

