Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Mozitron

benefits of resolution and lens quality

Recommended Posts

I've been digging through all of the discussion regarding projector releases and seeing the endless debate over the fauxK vs native 4K mix blend into a mess with arguments of lens quality.

 

Given that we can calculate the benefit of resolution vs screen size vs seating distance in a simple graph like below (thanks Carlton Bale), is it possible to quantitatively measure the sharpness of a projectors lens and the resolution created form the 2x, 4x fauxK projectors and the 4k or 2x faux8K projectors? This could be represented by a plotted line for each different projector, so you could determine that at a set distance/screen size their would be no benefit in choosing a JVC Nx7 (4K) over a Benq LK990 (4x fauxK) or an Epson 5050 (2x FauxK).

 

 

image.png.8006ce69a37faf3baf18cf0e5cf964f6.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to add another level of detail, the lines for each projector could end at a screen size where the calibrated lumens are too low for HDR or SDR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Mozitron said:

so you could determine that at a set distance/screen size their would be no benefit in choosing a JVC Nx7 (4K) over a Benq LK990 (4x fauxK) or an Epson 5050 (2x FauxK).

its muddies .. since its highly unlikely you can receive a full 100% mtf 4k uhd source via UHD just not possible.... its been argued at best tis 3-3.5k ? how many films and source are even mastered at over 2k DI ? 

 

even a base benefit is regardless of tech we will likely see 2k and beyond for the first time ? 

 

then there is point that some eg even native 4k sony cant display a 4k pattern unless you go and mess with their internal menus...

 

a much ado about nothing i would suggest overall... rather than get too caught up in 4k and upshifted or what ever 2k base discussion is far more worthwhile in pure PQ terms...? 

 

38 minutes ago, Mozitron said:

If you want to add another level of detail, the lines for each projector could end at a screen size where the calibrated lumens are too low for HDR or SDR

dont really need a chart for this I dont think its simply matter of measuring light output given particular installation and checking whether getting in there abouts of 100 nits 30FL for gains with HDR. there is also the projector central calculator as well. but I do agree too many people likely go for far too large a screen or mount projector too far away and then wondering why its too dim ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a simple way of measuring sharpness/resolution that is actually portrayed on a screen during a review?

 

So far its comes down to a direct comparison with arbitrary comments about perceived sharpness with qbf patterns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mozitron said:

Is there a simple way of measuring sharpness/resolution that is actually portrayed on a screen during a review?

 

So far its comes down to a direct comparison with arbitrary comments about perceived sharpness with qbf patterns.

just perceived I think...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Optics are more important than the amount of pixels on the screen. A 16K projector running out of ordinary optics will look terrible, whereas a 2K projector with sublime optics will look better. 

 

For LCD e-shift you would need to sit a little further back, say 20% or reduce screen size when compared to say sxrd and lcos pixels. At present I'm 1 x image width and have the Epson 9400, I can see a hint of the pixel grid in bright scenes, but that is very close to the screen. most won't be that close so it's not an issue.

Share this post


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

Optics are more important than the amount of pixels on the screen. A 16K projector running out of ordinary optics will look terrible, whereas a 2K projector with sublime optics will look better. 

 

For LCD e-shift you would need to sit a little further back, say 20% or reduce screen size when compared to say sxrd and lcos pixels. At present I'm 1 x image width and have the Epson 9400, I can see a hint of the pixel grid in bright scenes, but that is very close to the screen. most won't be that close so it's not an issue.

yep no pixel grid with jvc pixel shift

 

this is superseded JVC from main viewing position captured with full frame camera and a lens to best capture as seen,

 

24812482936_02791aae26_k.jpg

 

this right up at the screen as close as camera can focus.... no pixels no screen door....

24471140189_cd55c39f40_k.jpg

 

while lcd has large inter pixel gap as a prior lcd owner... can say with confidence things like screen door are a non event watching from viewing position... ie you are NOT pixel peeping ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I agree, had both JVC x5000 and Epson 9200 before that and pixel gap is larger on Epson but at normal viewing distance it was not noticeable at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read that the lens on the 9400 is a very good one, maybe you can confirm, Rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, chris2003 said:

I have read that the lens on the 9400 is a very good one, maybe you can confirm, Rich.

It's  very good. super clean, up there with the LK970 and 990 I kid you not. No other 4K projectors I've seen (JVC N7, Sony 570, Sony 760 and everything native 4K before that including the e-shift JVC,s) can best the BenQ lenses only this epson and it's not even native 4K.. which is clearly doesn't need to be.

 

Seems we're getting the 6050 model in the USA which Art claims 'has the better lens' than the 5050 model.. so win win finally for Australia! Though I'll try and confirm this with Epson.

 

Taken with a 6 yr old phone camera, no tripod. 3.8 metres away 165 inch scope screen zoomed so about 180 inch 16:9 image. cinema mode, high lamp, mildly tweaked until I get it calibrated.

 

I finally see what all the fuss with HDR is about too. .it's quite astonishing switching between SDR and HDR on the fly.

 

 

20190514_215929.jpg

20190514_212326.jpg

20190514_122157.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...