pheggie Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 sony vpl-vw350es http://www.cnet.com/products/sony-vpl-vw350es/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterpack Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 doesn't sound like 10K worth to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oztheatre Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Looks like it's the 300 version for the American market. One reader commented: This is the same as the 300ES available in Europe for the last few months. Awesome projector The 300 is getting rave reviews from what I've read. Plenty of happy users out there. You can't have high brightness with JVC blacks, it's not possible. JVC's are around 40% dimmer than the Sony post calibration. Sony - brighter, allows for much larger screesn. JVC - dimmer, best blacks, smaller screens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
709er Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Looks like it's the 300 version for the American market. One reader commented: This is the same as the 300ES available in Europe for the last few months. Awesome projector The 300 is getting rave reviews from what I've read. Plenty of happy users out there. You can't have high brightness with JVC blacks, it's not possible. JVC's are around 40% dimmer than the Sony post calibration. Sony - brighter, allows for much larger screesn. JVC - dimmer, best blacks, smaller screens. Shame it doesn't have lens memory Otherwise, an exciting and tempting model! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oztheatre Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Shame it doesn't have lens memory Otherwise, an exciting and tempting model! Wait until end of the year, we should see more native 4K machines from Sony. Not sure about JVC, they're doing something, but not telling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydrology Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 The 300 is a stunning projector - the 500 adds lens memory to the mix. For anybody considering these models, there is a (minimum of 10%) price rise happening May 1 here in Australia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Sony need to improve the native contrast ratio by at least 300% to be competitive because contrast is way more important than pixels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oztheatre Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Sony need to improve the native contrast ratio by at least 300% to be competitive because contrast is way more important than pixels. You could also say JVC need to improve their brightness by x amount because the Sony's are way brighter post calibration. You can't have both. It's either bright with lacking blacks or dimmer with great blacks. There's always compromise and both those brands show that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javs Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 Sony need to improve the native contrast ratio by at least 300% to be competitive because contrast is way more important than pixels. For what its worth, I have a 300ES and have been using a large format ND2 filter for viewing 2d material when I watch in total darkness. This cuts light output by half, Its a great way to tame those lumens and bring them down closer to the THX spec of 16fl or so, if I had to guess I would say I am getting somewhere around 30fl right now, I am at minmum throw and find it pretty darn bright in my room, almost to the point of eye strain. A great side effect of this is the ND filter actually also lowers the black floor of the projector, still not JVC levels but a fantastic tweak for $50 or so and you then still get all the other incredible Sony pro's to go with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javs Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 The 300 is a stunning projector - the 500 adds lens memory to the mix. For anybody considering these models, there is a (minimum of 10%) price rise happening May 1 here in Australia. Aside from that the one thing I really wish the 300ES had is manual iris control... But I am happy to save the $3000 extra for the 500ES and go without. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 You could also say JVC need to improve their brightness by x amount because the Sony's are way brighter post calibration. You can't have both. It's either bright with lacking blacks or dimmer with great blacks. There's always compromise and both those brands show that. Not everyone needs or wants more light output than the JVC's provide, in fact many if not most owners run the lamp on low and close the iris down to reduce output even further. For those people the Sony is too bloody bright, Sony should have put a manual iris in to control output and improve contrast ratio, it would have added bugger all cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 For what its worth, I have a 300ES and have been using a large format ND2 filter for viewing 2d material when I watch in total darkness. This cuts light output by half, Its a great way to tame those lumens and bring them down closer to the THX spec of 16fl or so, if I had to guess I would say I am getting somewhere around 30fl right now, I am at minmum throw and find it pretty darn bright in my room, almost to the point of eye strain. A great side effect of this is the ND filter actually also lowers the black floor of the projector, still not JVC levels but a fantastic tweak for $50 or so and you then still get all the other incredible Sony pro's to go with it. I'm very familiar with ND filters, I used one on a Sony rear projection setup for years because it was WAY too bright. An ND filter reduces white and black level by the same amount so contrast ratio is not improved at all. So, for any given white level a JVC will have a black level 3 or more times darker than the Sony. Even then its not anywhere near dark enough IMHO and JVC need to do something about that as far as I am concerned, but I suspect they just cant without a totally new projection system. All the existing projection technologies seem to have struck a wall as far as contrast goes with no significant improvements occurring in the last few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javs Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 I'm very familiar with ND filters, I used one on a Sony rear projection setup for years because it was WAY too bright. An ND filter reduces white and black level by the same amount so contrast ratio is not improved at all. So, for any given white level a JVC will have a black level 3 or more times darker than the Sony. Even then its not anywhere near dark enough IMHO and JVC need to do something about that as far as I am concerned, but I suspect they just cant without a totally new projection system. All the existing projection technologies seem to have struck a wall as far as contrast goes with no significant improvements occurring in the last few years. IMO the white level in my room is too bright as it is anyway. I know ND's don't increase the contrast, but it does tame the lumens and thus the black floor by half, which is much like an iris I suppose. Or is it? At this point any high brightness content washes out my screen due to reflections off opposing walls, So for my situation its a welcome addition. Apart from that I think I am one of those people who like it a little more on the dim side overall as its less strain on my eyes, looks more natural and with the lower black floor the image seems to have more depth to it. Certainly wasnt willing to spend the extgra $4000 or so just to get the added iris. Perhaps RGB laser projectors in the future will have substantial black level improvements. But I fear the very essence of Projection means we will never have much luck projecting black in its true form or lack therof as to project something means we need to shine a light through it to enlarge it. Unless of course they figure a way to block light from passing through on the pixel level then they could truly turn off pixels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterpack Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 IT's been a while since i have seen a movie at the cinemas I might have to go just to check out the black levels and overall picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwd Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 IT's been a while since i have seen a movie at the cinemas I might have to go just to check out the black levels and overall picture. Generally total crap IMHO. Cinemas are not very dark for safety reasons so the onscreen contrast is very poor. We won't go into the hoards of morons with mobile phones found in every cinema yap yap rabbit rabbit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterpack Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Yeah i know, may too may kids trying to be cool But it will be a purely technical explorative visit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 IMO the white level in my room is too bright as it is anyway. I know ND's don't increase the contrast, but it does tame the lumens and thus the black floor by half, which is much like an iris I suppose. Or is it? Closing down the iris (aperture) in a lens actually increases contrast ratio significantly due to a reduction in light scatter in optical path, and a medium aperture (not full open or stopped right down) also increases lens performance (sharpness) with most lenses. So, an adjustable iris provides a much better result than a filter on the lens. Sony not including an iris when if would add very little to the price is very disappointing. They want you to pay thousands more to get a feature that every projector should have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweet Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Just out of curiosity, If brightness is a problem .....would a grey screen go to help to reduce the screen brightness and improve contrast levels with the Sony ? C.M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oztheatre Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Just out of curiosity, If brightness is a problem .....would a grey screen go to help to reduce the screen brightness and improve contrast levels with the Sony ? C.M Brightness isn't a problem, only if you're using a screen the size of a large TV. But for those who don't want plasma brightness, yes a grey screen would help quite a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oztheatre Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Closing down the iris (aperture) in a lens actually increases contrast ratio significantly due to a reduction in light scatter in optical path, and a medium aperture (not full open or stopped right down) also increases lens performance (sharpness) with most lenses. So, an adjustable iris provides a much better result than a filter on the lens. Sony not including an iris when if would add very little to the price is very disappointing. They want you to pay thousands more to get a feature that every projector should have. I don't think anything apart from the iris feature on the 500ES is noticeable to anyone when comparing to the 300ES. The reason it's not included is simple, it's to differentiate between the 2 models price points. You're right, it probably wouldn't cost much to whack one in but the cheaper models have to be crippled somewhat to justify the price points of the more expensive models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) Just out of curiosity, If brightness is a problem .....would a grey screen go to help to reduce the screen brightness and improve contrast levels with the Sony ? C.M A grey screen just makes everything darker (lower gain), it doesn't improve contrast (the ratio of black to white) at all. The up side of a low gain screen is it less degradation due to room reflections. Edited April 7, 2015 by Owen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Brightness isn't a problem, only if you're using a screen the size of a large TV. But for those who don't want plasma brightness, yes a grey screen would help quite a bit. I would most definitely find the excessive brightness of the Sony a major problem on a 100" screen with a gain of 1, or a 130" screen with a gain of 1.3. No TV's that size. I have a 65" VT60, which is not a bright Plasma, and it needs to be dimmed WAY down for viewing in a dark room. Cant stand it at 30ftl in the dark, gives my eye strain and obscures shadow detail. I know many people like a bright picture but I'm not one of them. I value black level - contrast very highly and even the JVC projectors with the best contrast are marginal IMHO. A Sony that is 3 or more times worse is not an option and never will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oztheatre Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 I would most definitely find the excessive brightness of the Sony a major problem on a 100" screen with a gain of 1, or a 130" screen with a gain of 1.3. No TV's that size. I have a 65" VT60, which is not a bright Plasma, and it needs to be dimmed WAY down for viewing in a dark room. Cant stand it at 30ftl in the dark, gives my eye strain and obscures shadow detail. I know many people like a bright picture but I'm not one of them. I value black level - contrast very highly and even the JVC projectors with the best contrast are marginal IMHO. A Sony that is 3 or more times worse is not an option and never will be. Yeah fair enough too. It's funny how the eye gets used to what it's looking at. Been using the Sony 4K machine for many months now and gave it a rest the other week and went back to my JVC. The first thing my Mrs said was 'why is the picture so dark?' Told her it's the JVC. So used to the punchy image from the Sony, she now thinks the JVC is average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Different strokes for different folks. I cant get used to a bright picture, I just dont like it in a dark room. I therefore run the JVC at only half it's available output (low lamp with iris stopped down) on a grey screen. It simply wouldn't be possible to get the Sony down to an acceptable level without an ND filter. Contrast and black level, which are my only complaints with the JVC, would also take a major hit with the Sony which is just totally unacceptable to me. I crave contrast and blacks FAR more than extra pixels. For $10K I would take the JVC X900 over the 4K Sony without a moments hesitation, and if it was easily doable I would remove the E-shift element from the JVC's light path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoggieHowser Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Surprise. Surprise. Owen doesn't like the Sony 4K Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts