Jump to content

Javs

JVC X7900 / X9900 Owners Thread

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

 

Dont see much JVC threads around here, not much projector activity at all?

 

Would like to hear from new 7 or 9 series JVC owners, let me know your thoughts, what have you upgraded from, more importantly how good is the sample you received??

 

Me, I just got my 9900 a couple days ago, it was meant to be replacing my 9500, and lets just say I am extremely happy I had not offloaded my 9500 as yet, I was able to stack them and do a shootout as long as I wished, they are still there now, I run both at the same time, cover the IR port on one machine, hit HIDE on the remote, then uncover the IR port, from then, every time I hit hide on the one remote (which controls both machines) they instantly switch within mere milliseconds.

 

Anyway, aside from Eshift 5 offering almost nothing, clear black Low/Off is certainly a higher quality difference than the difference between eshift 4 and 5, it seems I pretty much have a bad 9900 sample in regards to its lens and panel alignment.

 

I am going through the process right now to try and have my unit swapped as essentially unaccaptable and see how I go with sample #2. If I still dont like that, I am going to wash my hands of the 9900 this round and keep my apparantly stellar sample of my 9500.

 

Here are my lens comparisons. Keep in mind my DSLR lens is close to the screen here, so the focal plane is small, pay attention only to the center line portion of the images as they are in focus on my camera, so the vertical lines and the middle area should be ok to look at.

 

Left side of screen:

 

X9500

 

1UTBGLk.jpg

 

 

X9900

 

vZMvN6O.jpg

 

 

Right side of screen:

 

X9500

 

pUr6pzf.jpg

 

 

X9900

 

ezGCqkq.jpg

 


Left side of screen, both projectors at the same time.

 

 

9n93JRF.jpg

 

 

Convergence, X9900 right side only - left side is stellar:

 

 

fB3c8GV.jpg

 

kjX3IiT.jpg

 


What happens when I correct the convergence with zone alignment... This is a single 1080p pixel horizontal line pattern, gee this artefact looks SUPER familiar :)

 

X9900

 

LOHMK0S.jpg


X9500 with normal panel alignment:

 

Ntx0pJ1.jpg

 

 

Obviously the 9900 can show that screen as clear grey too, but if I want panel alignment to be correct, I get artefacts, yay!

 

Here is real content, top corner of screen showing the real world lens difference with content on the screen:

 

X9500

 

7QKhwLI.jpg

 

X9900

 

WiofHuR.jpg

 

Edited by Javs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator

Great to see your feed back and comparisons Javs. Invaluable really fir those considering to jump in ...

 

also so great to see the owners thread. I’m unlikely at this rate to jump off my jvc horse to hop on another till likely next series but look forward to others picking up one of these posting their thoughts and impressions :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this below post, from another forum is actually my first thoughts, before I did any of the calibration and comparisons above... Still interesting, the eshift stuff is closesly looked at here...

 

----

I am disappointed overall, and its mainly a gut feeling though, a few things stand out, but it seems to gain a couple steps in one area we give up one or two steps in another area.. I am torn on weather I will keep this projector.

There, got that out of the way.

Here is what my shelf looks like right now...
ga2EU39.jpg


Eshift buzz is definitely reduced since when I first turned it on, it sounded dead set like an electric razor at first, by the end of the night, 4 hours later it was about the same volume as my old unit, unless you put your ear right up to the 9900 and then the frequency was a bit different. No big deal here.

The 5 seconds improve sync time in Low Lag mode is very nice. 11.8s in low lag mode ON, 16.8s Low Lag mode off for a 4k Desktop to appear.

Turns out this lens is not as sharp as my 9500, once I studied all the corners of the lens it was clear it wasn't quite as sharp. My 9500 lens is pretty much pin sharp in all the corners, this 9900 lens appeared to be, but when I had both projectors stacked, they were both super sharp in the center, but the 9900 slightly less so, and was a couple clicks less sharp on the corners and this could not exactly be brought in line with the sharpness of the center. Both of these lenses though are still far out sharper than my X7000 lens ever was, so I would still say both these lenses are excellent and would quality for hand selection for the 9XXX series projectors, its just that my old one is better than the other.

However because the left side has perfect convergence, the pixel delineation appears to be stronger, however the focus grid is sharper on the X9500 in person, no doubt about it..

X9900

opZTLIc.jpg

X9500

FTf46OZ.jpg

The chromatic aberration on the right side of the lens I have come to decide is unacceptable. I think this will be the basis of at least exchanging this unit to try another sample. While the 2/3rds of the left hand side are perfect, I would actually prefer if the panel alignment was out, that it be out by a consistent amount across the whole screen, my last two JVC's were both exactly 1 pixel blur out vertically, which is easy fix, this would require zone alignment and I am not doing that with an MSRP $10k projector.

EShift 5 with text is better than EShift 4, but in real data in video, I am not sure it can be seen at all.

My X9900 is DIMMER than my X9500 is right now at 700 hours. I'll let that sink in for a moment.

I have to run the X9900 on iris -9 and contrast -2 to brightness match the X9500 currently at iris -10 contrast -1. This is a shame, because my X9500 was at least 10% brighter than this when it was new and has dimmed itself since new. So the 9900 starting out where it is, its not looking good here.

There is some ugly super warm colour temp cast over just the menu screen, the X9500 menu screen looks like a correct calibrated almost 18% grey menu, I don't know how else to say that. I did calibrate both grey-scales on the projectors, there still seems to be a slight colour difference on screen however despite very quick cal, the menu doesn't seem to be affected by calibration at all, so that ugly red bias grey menu seems there to stay...

HDMI SYNC TIMES:

When Low Latency mode is on, my projector was syncing in 11.8 seconds for a 4k desktop image to appear, and 16.8 seconds when Low Latency mode is off. Thats also a repeatable 5 seconds quicker than the 9500 was generally. All modes seem to be between 2-3 seconds quicker syncing vs the 9500 when low latency mode is off.


LOW LATENCY MODE: This seems like it needs to be left ON at all times, at least on my unit, its sharper with it, there is some effed up blur ghosting artefact with Low Latency off, yes you read that right, Low Latency needs to be on for sharpest image. Its totally odd but the pics don't lie.

 

Perhaps my unit is misbehaving? It did come at default switched to On OOTB. EDIT - This has actually be corroborated by other owners, this may be a bug, but for best quality Low Latency must be off, oddly, cycling CMD on then off again removed the ghosting... but how long does that stick for? Perhaps on next power up the ghosting will be back, best to leave it ON.


LOW LATENCY ON:

66MZ7Gj.png

LOW LATENCY OFF:


q1gPB27.png


Low Latency Roll over comparisons On / Off


http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121488

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121489

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121490

ESHIFT 5 DOES NOT HAVE LESS MOSQUITO NOISE THAN ESHIFT 4. It just doesn't. The fine buzzing noise with your face to the screen is identical on both models. Sorry to see this, it was one of the things I was hoping to see improved, for a calmer image, but no.


Windows Desktop at 4k/ Still not native on either machine but no doubt the 9900 is getting closer to where it should be.

X9500

Ri3jn9b.png

X9900

mbpoMfc.png

Rollover

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121495


Now for this, lets look at Eshift 5 vs 4. At first your eyes may be drawn to the vertical lines being far sharper with actual gaps between then on eshift 4 and you would be right, but look at the letters and words... eshift 5 kills it with high density 4k text. But it seems to give up something all the same while doing it... which is a lesser evil? I really don't know, I am truly torn here...


CHROMA TEST

 

X9500

 

f7dOkVe.jpg

 

X9900

 

XtfyswC.jpg

 

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121753


X9500

OUbBYCn.jpg

X9900

TugMZv3.jpg


Chroma Rollovers:


http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121496

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121497
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Javs

 

Wonder if they kept the good stuff for the LTD20 and the X9900 is saddled with the shittier components that didn't make the grade. 

 

I think I will keep my X9500 for a bit longer then. 

 

Any chance you will get the Sony 760?

Edited by DoggieHowser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DoggieHowser said:

Thanks Javs

 

Wonder if they kept the good stuff for the LTD20 and the X9900 is saddled with the shittier components that didn't make the grade. 

 

 

When my 20LTD  turns up i will let you know..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor

I'd say this is a dud unit in the first batch. Not acceptable but does happen.

 

Ironically my 7900 is stellar and I've still got my 7500 (which is just in getting the firmware updated) as I've sold it.

Edit, my 7500 I'd also like to say is superb! I wasn't implying my 7900 was some enormous stepup from my 7500, it's not possible.

 

I guess the problem is, you haven't gone back to JVC to see what's going on, instead just run with your review with what could well be, likely be, a faulty unit. Wouldn't you give them the benefit of the doubt first before posting this all over the forums?

Edited by oztheatre
add info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor
5 hours ago, DoggieHowser said:

Thanks Javs

 

Wonder if they kept the good stuff for the LTD20 and the X9900 is saddled with the shittier components that didn't make the grade. 

 

I think I will keep my X9500 for a bit longer then. 

 

Any chance you will get the Sony 760?

 

They made 20 LTD units, that's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, oztheatre said:

I'd say this is a dud unit in the first batch. Not acceptable but does happen.

 

Ironically my 7900 is stellar and I've still got my 7500 (which is just in getting the firmware updated) as I've sold it.

 

I guess the problem is, you haven't gone back to JVC to see what's going on, instead just run with your review with what could well be, likely be, a faulty unit. Wouldn't you give them the benefit of the doubt first before posting this all over the forums?

I'm telling it like it is Rich, like it or not mate. This is my experience, when I get a new one I will post an equally in depth look at that one and compare them.

 

If the next unit I get is the same I will report the same, I have faith that eventually it will be resolved, but many people were waiting on my thoughts, so I share them, good or bad...

 

Dud units should not be buried, they should be discussed as much as the good ones.

 

Besides, the lens in the centre is just as sharp as my 9500, I have said that, as such in depth Eshift analysis can still be done in the centre of the screen and carry plenty of relevance.

 

Does anybody disagree with that?


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For "hand-picked optics" the chromatic aberration on the right side of the X9900 is dreadful - I'd hate to see the lenses flicked over to X7900 models that day...

 

I do wonder if one or more of the lens elements has separated on one edge - perhaps in transport, so giving JVC the benefit of the doubt, maybe not something visible during production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor
On 26/10/2017 at 7:20 PM, Quark said:

For "hand-picked optics" the chromatic aberration on the right side of the X9900 is dreadful - I'd hate to see the lenses flicked over to X7900 models that day...

 

I do wonder if one or more of the lens elements has separated on one edge - perhaps in transport, so giving JVC the benefit of the doubt, maybe not something visible during production.

 

I think it's more lens assembly.. there's an awful lot of pieces behind that primary lens and if one moves even slightly it will cause CA issues.

 

Transport I think is their biggest problem, for any PJ or optics manufacturer.

 

Then to instill confidence even further, go back to making these in Japan? Does that really help though?

 

Edited by oztheatre
extra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For "hand-picked optics" the chromatic aberration on the right side of the X9900 is dreadful - I'd hate to see the lenses flicked over to X7900 models that day...
 
I do wonder if one or more of the lens elements has separated on one edge - perhaps in transport, so giving JVC the benefit of the doubt, maybe not something visible during production.


No matter how much shift I use to the left and up/down and zoom, the red fringing still remains in the same spot.

I think its more likely actually alignment specifically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor

It's strange you know, this image here for example http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121589

There is a purple fringe on the top of the letters on the 9500 and the 9900 some slight yellow under the letters.

So in that example and the actual movies images I see virtually no differences between them?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, oztheatre said:

It's strange you know, this image here for example http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121589

There is a purple fringe on the top of the letters on the 9500 and the 9900 some slight yellow under the letters.

So in that example and the actual movies images I see virtually no differences between them?

 

Thats the centre of the lens very zoomed in... The edges are where the issues are.

 

This is the full size shot, look on the right side, the machine logos etc begin to blur.

 

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121590

 

This one, guy on the right, blurry on 9900, even the guys on the left...

 

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121582

 

This one, very clear, even the assassins creed poster. Check out the red lettering on the word CREED, just, detail and texture literally gone.

 

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/121843

 

Look, its obviously not coming through amazingly well in photos for you, but I can tell you in real life its very obvious which projector I am looking at from the chair, which is why I took photos of text in the corners and my focus grids to highlight the issue for people reading, and for JVC to see. Also by doing the focus grid shots in 1080p you rule out eshift 4/5 variation, if the lens cant get a 1080p pixel grid delineated well enough like I know they are capable of then eshift is never going to reach its potential.

 

Overall we are talking about 3-4 good clicks worth of focus missing from this lens sample, if you have a stellar lens, then go to the focus screen and defocus 3-4 clicks, that's what I am looking at. The 9500 seems to SNAP into sharp focus all of a sudden and then is like whoa! There we go, this one never got there, then suddenly you overshoot and you realise that was as good as it gets and have to click backwards in the other direction.

 

I fear JVC is going to see this unit on its own and claim its fine. I will have to take my 9500 to the service center and physically show them I think. Luckily I live not a huge distance from the place, so I hope they are open to the idea, it will be plain as day to the tech in about 20 seconds.

 

I certainly have no doubt if I get another sample with these issues resolved this will be a fantastic unit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor

Yeah I can see a fair difference in the assassins creed image but not in the others, to me anyway it comes across extremely minor. I realise in real time it's going to be more noticeable.

 

I can see the word 'express' which looks bolder in your 9500 image though, not by that much though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We really really need to see results from  at least 1 or 2 other samples of the X9900 . The X9900 sample you have MUST be defective and subpar as i really cant see JVC releasing a product

that goes "backwards" in image quality!

 

Even though the improvements of the previous series have been small/incremental ...they have "Definately " been improvements . 

Same as the progression  up in the series.....X5xx - X7xx -X9xx.........  have  no illusions   the improvements as you go up ARE noticeable   and worthwhile!   the step up from my previous X7000 to the X9500 was pronounced.:ohmy:

 

I am sure Jav,s if you get another sample and repeat the above , the results will be a stark contrast to what was produced by the sample you currently have..:)

Edited by wooferocau

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The X9900 is obvious faulty, but even if the lens was perfect what where you hoping to gain from replacing the X9500???????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The X9900 is obvious faulty, but even if the lens was perfect what where you hoping to gain from replacing the X9500???????????


Im not going to bother going into that with you, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wooferocau said:

Same as the progression  up in the series.....X5xx - X7xx -X9xx.........  have  no illusions   the improvements as you go up ARE noticeable   and worthwhile!   the step up from my previous X7000 to the X9500 was pronounced.

Do you calibrate your projectors? If two JVC projectors look significantly different after calibration the calibration was no bloody good.

The JVC X series light engine has not changed in years, its native performance is the same as it was 4 generations ago. The lens was provided by a different manufacturer after the Xxxx series but that seems to have been a negative step, probably to reduce costs.

Video processing has changed over time, but if a quality picture is desired the sharpening system should be turned off and external upscaling and sharpening systems employed.

 

Basically all the newer projectors offer is different gamma mapping for "HDR" content, but again that can be done manually by the user via "calibration", either internally or externally.

 

I'm waiting for a NEW projector with superior native performance, especially in regard to native contrast, not another rehash of the X series that has been around for many years.

 

Edited by Owen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor
On 27/10/2017 at 10:34 PM, Owen said:

The X9900 is obvious faulty, but even if the lens was perfect what where you hoping to gain from replacing the X9500???????????

A couple of little tweaks to software for hdr related content and a new chipset for the cmd. Even JVC themselves admit they're a .5 model, just a small update. Not JVC Australia's fault, they have little control of what Japan does with their models. I think I might have got a better lens on my 7900 but I'd have to get my 7500 back here again to triple check. Then again we're not watching test patterns where these small differences are noticable with your face plastered up against the screen, when you watch movies it's much harder to distinguish between them unless you're looking hard to find faults.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oztheatre said:

A couple of little tweaks to software for hdr related content and a new chipset for the cmd. Even JVC themselves admit they're a .5 model, just a small update. Not JVC Australia's fault, they have little control of what Japan does with their models. I think I might have got a better lens on my 7900 but I'd have to get my 7500 back here again to triple check. Then again we're not watching test patterns where these small differences are noticable with your face plastered up against the screen, when you watch movies it's much harder to distinguish between them unless you're looking hard to find faults.

Yet the image is the sum of its parts Rich... All of it adds up.

 

A lens which still leaves sharpness on the table, focus uniformity,  chromatic aberration or bad convergence... when you start stacking those things you end up with what Sony is doing crippling the panels potential by bad optics in front of it.

 

Thats why the 1100ES with its ARC-F lens destroys the 550ES, HDR aside, the lens is huge part in the final product.

 

Repost from another forum, some good observations anyway:

 

Now here is something positive about the 9900... I took a shot of my holiday test photo which I have used now quite a bit, and there is no doubt, something about the 9900 shots here with the new eshift are rendering these shots possibly better, if you could pair this with a most excellent pin sharp lens sample, excellent convergence (or EQUAL at least), and proper bulb brightness OOTB, I think I/we have something interesting here. Make no mistake, this is an INCREDIBLY incremental improvement if you were going to call it that. Its really odd that this only ever seems to show up with text, and not with textures as damn hard as I have been looking for it, I am only finding examples of a shot with text on screen that show what the new eshift is doing.

Low Lag mode working full time with zero image loss and 5 full seconds faster sync times, no CMD bug, Autocal working really well, oddly, these are the things that have impressed me so far and which I want to be able to keep...

Better rendered text is a good thing though I guess, it all adds up. I still remain hopeful for the moment that in a couple of months, the only PJ sitting on my shelf will be a great sample 9900.

While screen from further back:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/122001

This shot is on the right side... Probably not much if any difference here oddly:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/122002

This shot was near center lens which is where they are kiiinda close in sharpness, so pretty relevant I guess. I still wonder what a couple clicks extra focus crispness would do to the 9900 here, possibly not possible to photograph the difference, you always lose some MTF during photography of the screen... Notice the new eshift grid looks very slightly different.

Odd thing is here, mostly the text on the 9900 shot in all cases looks better than the 9500, its slightly more defined and correct font kerning, but the word Suzuki, looks better on the 9500... perhaps the lens is coming into play here, but the window where you see the ocean through the grid, is definitely better on the 9900, clearly it just knows what that should look like, the ocean squares are bigger and the colour on them looks more like the surrounding ocean. The word APV on the car is better on the 9900, the licence plate letters BB look less like 88 on the 9500 and have sharper more straight left hand side lines on the lettering... But why does the word Suzuki look better on the 9500... the Z is clearly better on that unit.

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/122003

Which is which?

 

There is no question which one of these has proper font kerning and spacing. More complete lettering etc...

 

Ground truth, original photo:

 

08gZFUQ.jpg

 

Original photo enlarged to same scale in Photoshop:

 

xjSdNqw.jpg

 

Projectors:

 

BAXurwb.jpg

 

DUsJDGl.jpg

Edited by Javs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sponsor
On 27/10/2017 at 11:20 PM, Owen said:

Do you calibrate your projectors? If two JVC projectors look significantly different after calibration the calibration was no bloody good.

The JVC X series light engine has not changed in years, its native performance is the same as it was 4 generations ago. The lens was provided by a different manufacturer after the Xxxx series but that seems to have been a negative step, probably to reduce costs.

Video processing has changed over time, but if a quality picture is desired the sharpening system should be turned off and external upscaling and sharpening systems employed.

 

Basically all the newer projectors offer is different gamma mapping for "HDR" content, but again that can be done manually by the user via "calibration", either internally or externally.

 

I'm waiting for a NEW projector with superior native performance, especially in regard to native contrast, not another rehash of the X series that has been around for many years.

 

 

I wonder if these new X#900 series models have different lenses to the previous models? Not like we could just 'find out'.

That would certainly explain Javs problems with his 9900?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, oztheatre said:

 

I wonder if these new X#900 series models have different lenses to the previous models? Not like we could just 'find out'.

That would certainly explain Javs problems with his 9900?

They are meant to be identical to the lenses in the X9000/X9500.

 

JVC were asked at Cedia about such things by the senior salesmen folks at AVS, they were told pretty plainly that was the deal.

 

What we do know is there was a new production lens in the X9000 series which I believe were made at a different location and or supplier than the previous models, and they were a step up supposedly.

 

I think assuming JVC are going to put identical yield lenses in the 9 series is the mistake here, they are not, just like only 20% of the 4k Sony lenses would be excellent, and the rest would vary from completely unacceptable to Just OK to pretty good. (According to Cine4Home who have calibrated, measured, logged, and sold literally hundreds of them as part of the cine4home edition)

 

Like I have said though, I think unless a person had a known good lens to literally overlay and compare, only then would it be clear the current 9900 lens I have is not up to the standard it could be. Unfortunately I do, at first glance when I had the 9500 off the lens looked pretty good, until I turned on the 9500.. so, I am going to pursue a sample which fits the description of 'Hand Selected' component I know its capable of. Obviously aside from that the convergence issue doesn't help either.

 

 

Edited by Javs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Javs    IF the lens on the X9900 was equal to your X9500...WOULD you pick the X9900 over the X9500? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wooferocau said:

Javs    IF the lens on the X9900 was equal to your X9500...WOULD you pick the X9900 over the X9500? :)

Yeah, sure, why not :)

 

I listed some reasons I am otherwise happy with where the 9900 is going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×