I have been loosely researching a replacement for my projector for about a year now. In the last several days I got serious about it and have spent hour upon hour going over the feature sets of various models until I narrowed it down to either the JVC NZ7 or the Sony XW6000ES. We all know the JVC's are renowned for their superior black levels but they are also much heavier than competing models. In my case, this meant I'd need a new ceiling mount at a cost of several hundred additional dollars. Since I'd already be spending north of $10,000.00 on this thing, that didn't sit particularly well, so I zeroed in on the Sony. Based on conclusions from the 2022 Value Electronics Projector Shootout and several other online sources, excepting black levels, the Sony actually outperformed the NZ7 in several key areas such as brightness and skin tone accuracy. Weighing in at about 31 pounds, it would also work with my existing ceiling mount. I thought I was ready to pull the trigger and then I dug into the 3D aspects of each model. I'm glad I did.
Both the JVC and Sony claim full 3D support. Digging a bit deeper, however, I learned several current owners were having issues actually getting 3D to work with these projectors. Why? Each requires an external 3D emitter which is , you guessed it, sold separately. In the case of the JVC that emitter is the size of a USB stick yet costs $100.00. If you want assured compatibility you'll probably also need to purchase JVC's own 3D glasses. They're listed at $139.00 a pair. The Sony requires a similar additional investment if you actually want to use the "built-in" 3D feature.
So here we have two projectors costing well over $10K that claim to support 3D yet require hundreds in accessories to actually do so. Well, this is when I realized I was pissing into the wind. My Epson 6050 already produces excellent 3D playback and requires nothing more than a pair of $25.00 active shutter glasses to do so. At this point I asked myself, "why was I trying to replace it" and I couldn't come up with a good answer.
This may seem obvious to some but It appears to me manufacturers are no longer committed to 3D in projectors, as even Epson dropped it with their new consumer level flagship LS12000. My 3D journey may indeed be nearing its end but I don't need to spend over 10K to extend it awhile longer so, "no thanks Sony and JVC." I think I'll keep my 10K and just buy myself a new Pre/Pro for half that amount.
Both the JVC and Sony claim full 3D support. Digging a bit deeper, however, I learned several current owners were having issues actually getting 3D to work with these projectors. Why? Each requires an external 3D emitter which is , you guessed it, sold separately. In the case of the JVC that emitter is the size of a USB stick yet costs $100.00. If you want assured compatibility you'll probably also need to purchase JVC's own 3D glasses. They're listed at $139.00 a pair. The Sony requires a similar additional investment if you actually want to use the "built-in" 3D feature.
So here we have two projectors costing well over $10K that claim to support 3D yet require hundreds in accessories to actually do so. Well, this is when I realized I was pissing into the wind. My Epson 6050 already produces excellent 3D playback and requires nothing more than a pair of $25.00 active shutter glasses to do so. At this point I asked myself, "why was I trying to replace it" and I couldn't come up with a good answer.
This may seem obvious to some but It appears to me manufacturers are no longer committed to 3D in projectors, as even Epson dropped it with their new consumer level flagship LS12000. My 3D journey may indeed be nearing its end but I don't need to spend over 10K to extend it awhile longer so, "no thanks Sony and JVC." I think I'll keep my 10K and just buy myself a new Pre/Pro for half that amount.
