What's new

Sony's 2022-23 Native 4K HDR Laser Projector line-up (4 Viewers)

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
Re: that comparison video
  • They said it was calibrated "by hand". But they noted the colors and brightnesses were different between the projectors. If calibrated properly, the brightness and colors would have matched closely, at least on standard SDR content.
  • Even to me, it looked like the JVC was simply not focused correctly. And experienced JVC owners and reviewers note that degree of image softness is very atypical.
  • The black floor they love can also be interpreted as Sony crushing blacks while JVC has better contrast to reveal shadow detail (c.f. the high-heel shoe scene). Who knows? Clearly not those two.
  • Someone has looked at the video closely and sees green fringeing in the NZ7 video indicating it has panel misalignment, also suggesting the reviewers have a badly setup unit or a defective unit (or cynically, they biased the comparo on purpose because they're Sony shills).
  • The test material appears to be a Sony demo disc so presumably is authored to highlight the best possible performance the projector can achieve.
There's a bunch of discussion over at AVS on the video.

I find it helpful as a pre-review first look at the Sony, supporting the views that the Sony has good contrast, good black floor, and the HDR management is pretty decent. And the look at fan noise also seems in line with other early comments that the Sony is comparatively quiet (important to me).

LIke I said earlier, lots of pre-review “ooh shiny!” hot takes for now. But it’s all really encouraging and exciting hot takes.

But it's not useful, even misleading, as a comparison to the JVC NZ series.
 

John Dirk

Premium
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 7, 2000
Messages
5,659
Location
ATL
Real Name
JOHN
Beware with this video since it has problems. Their “calibration” is uncalibrated. The JVC is clearly setup wrong and possibly defective. They’re not especially competent projector “reviewers”.

I take some encouraging early optimism about the Sony. But as a comparison to JVC, this video should probably be ignored.
I also felt the JVC seemed poorly calibrated compared to the Sony but didn't attribute it to any nefarious intent as they repeatedly lauded both projectors as top in class. The weight of the JVC is my main concern. Support would also be a concern for both of these. Honestly, I really wish Epson had produced a truly competitive model in this segment. I would have been happy to pay a bit more for it.
 
Last edited:

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
The weight of the JVC has also been a concern for me. The Sony is much lighter, I think. I’m pretty sure my current mount would hold it without concern.

Every review I’ve read says the new Epson is a truly competitive model, and there’s nothing else at $5000 or less that’s better. And depending on preferences, its compromises could be better than the Sony or JVC with their increased cost.

But for me, I’m leaning strongly to the Sony, so based on pre-review info. I’m considering ordering now to try and get it sooner than later. But I’m not sure I’m truly willing to spend $6000 based on the scant pre-release info.
 

John Dirk

Premium
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 7, 2000
Messages
5,659
Location
ATL
Real Name
JOHN
The weight of the JVC has also been a concern for me. The Sony is much lighter, I think. I’m pretty sure my current mount would hold it without concern.

Every review I’ve read says the new Epson is a truly competitive model, and there’s nothing else at $5000 or less that’s better. And depending on preferences, its compromises could be better than the Sony or JVC with their increased cost.

But for me, I’m leaning strongly to the Sony, so based on pre-review info. I’m considering ordering now to try and get it sooner than later. But I’m not sure I’m truly willing to spend $6000 based on the scant pre-release info.
It definitely is. The 5000 ES weighs in at 28 lbs. The 6000 and 7000 are 31 lbs.

At this point in my life all major purchases I make will need to be the last of their kind as I am essentially retired. This is an important lesson I learned on my speaker journey. Had I just purchased the Legacy Focus SE's I now have instead of arriving at them only after several compromise, stopgap solutions, my overall trouble and expense would have been considerably less.

My current projector is the 3rd one I've owned. It could actually suffice in perpetuity as there is nothing wrong with it I am not willing to live with. If, however, I am going to purchase another projector, it will have to be as close as I can afford to a no-compromise solution. That may end up being the LS12000. I thought it definitely would until the Sony's were announced. At that point I was prepared to spend a little extra for the 5000 ES but, unfortunately, the lack of a motorized lens and 3D support make it an instant no-go. Stepping up the the 6000 ES seems like a perfect fit but the increased price would have to be carefully weighed against it's real-world feature/performance value over the LS12000.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
3D is a tough requirement. No TVs have it. And projectors are moving it to the luxe models for the niche willing to pay big to keep it.
 

John Dirk

Premium
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 7, 2000
Messages
5,659
Location
ATL
Real Name
JOHN
3D is a tough requirement. No TVs have it. And projectors are moving it to the luxe models for the niche willing to pay big to keep it.
It appears so although I simply cannot understand why.
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
23,212
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
It appears so although I simply cannot understand why.

I think removing that part of the optics allows them to buy a little more light output when it comes to HDR specs, which seems to be the consumer priority.

I’m happy with the Epson 5030 as long as it works (knock on wood) but I’d settle for a 5050 when it came time for a replacement if that wound up being the only option.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
If you need 3D
It definitely is. The 5000 ES weighs in at 28 lbs. The 6000 and 7000 are 31 lbs.

At this point in my life all major purchases I make will need to be the last of their kind as I am essentially retired. This is an important lesson I learned on my speaker journey. Had I just purchased the Legacy Focus SE's I now have instead of arriving at them only after several compromise, stopgap solutions, my overall trouble and expense would have been considerably less.

My current projector is the 3rd one I've owned. It could actually suffice in perpetuity as there is nothing wrong with it I am not willing to live with. If, however, I am going to purchase another projector, it will have to be as close as I can afford to a no-compromise solution. That may end up being the LS12000. I thought it definitely would until the Sony's were announced. At that point I was prepared to spend a little extra for the 5000 ES but, unfortunately, the lack of a motorized lens and 3D support make it an instant no-go. Stepping up the the 6000 ES seems like a perfect fit but the increased price would have to be carefully weighed against it's real-world feature/performance value over the LS12000.
I think the JVC NP5 is your best choice, based on available info and speculation.

Pros:
  • Great black floor and contrast (presumably class leading)
  • Great HDR management (presumably class leading)
  • 3D
  • Motorized Lens (but no memory?)
  • Good brightness
Cons
  • Lamp (but not a performance negative, just a cost matter: you can buy a new lamp to get original brightness, if you want)
  • Price (highest of the three competitors
 

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
Let’s not make this Yet Another 3D Argument Thread. :)
why don't we we move on let it go GIF by Obama
 

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
Another option, if you’re up for being a projector crazy person…

Keep your current projector for 3D — buy a new lamp to get it back to “new”

Then buy the cheaper projector you can compromise on. If you’re not doing Zoom-based CIH (which I doubt you are), I’d argue for the Sony to get best image and HDR for a bit cheaper. You only wish for motorized lens once during setup and they can presumably ignore it for long durations.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
But if your retirement projector purchase budget allows, of course going to the Sony XW6000 or JVC NZ7 or NZ8 solve all problems. :)
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
23,212
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
Another option, if you’re up for being a projector crazy person…

Keep your current projector for 3D — buy a new lamp to get it back to “new”

Long term, I’ve considered this as well if I need better 2D performance in the future and current machine still works fine. I’ve heard of other people doing the same. The amount of extra wall/ceiling space needed is probably negligible, and there are plenty of AVRs that can support dual displays so that the HDMI cable doesn’t need to be manually switched when going back and forth between devices.

It’s not necessarily elegant but it’s not the craziest idea either.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
Long term, I’ve considered this as well if I need better 2D performance in the future and current machine still works fine. I’ve heard of other people doing the same. The amount of extra wall/ceiling space needed is probably negligible, and there are plenty of AVRs that can support dual displays so that the HDMI cable doesn’t need to be manually switched when going back and forth between devices.

It’s not necessarily elegant but it’s not the craziest idea either.
There definitely enthusiasts that do this for 3D, or one is for gaming and the other movies, and so on. The hardest part, I think, is coming up with a good system to hod to projectors one on top of the other (or maybe side by side). After that, it’s just more cables and remote control programming. Easy, for certain definitions of “easy“. :)
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
23,212
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
There definitely enthusiasts that do this for 3D, or one is for gaming and the other movies, and so on. The hardest part, I think, is coming up with a good system to hod to projectors one on top of the other (or maybe side by side). After that, it’s just more cables and remote control programming. Easy, for certain definitions of “easy“. :)

The nice thing about the 5000/6000 series of Epson is that they have ridiculously wide ranges of lens shifts built in, so it’s incredibly easy to have a great result with less than perfect positioning - it’s probably ideal as a second unit in a setup for that reason alone!
 

John Dirk

Premium
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 7, 2000
Messages
5,659
Location
ATL
Real Name
JOHN
I think removing that part of the optics allows them to buy a little more light output when it comes to HDR specs, which seems to be the consumer priority.
Right. We're pretty much in agreement there. My question had more to do with why they've decided to retain it in higher cost models.
You only wish for motorized lens once during setup and they can presumably ignore it for long durations.
Not true (in my case anyway). I use mine almost daily to eliminate the top black bar when viewing 2.35:1 content on my 1.78:1 screen. It's not as good as a complete masking solution [something I've decided to take on as my next project] but I prefer it to having both of the bars.
Keep your current projector for 3D — buy a new lamp to get it back to “new”
Definitely not that serious of a concern. ;) As previously stated, I rarely actually view 3D content, I just like having the option. If the Epson had a real world dynamic tone mapping solution I would likely have already purchased it, despite the absence of 3D.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
Not true (in my case anyway). I use mine almost daily to eliminate the top black bar when viewing 2.35:1 content on my 1.78:1 screen. It's not as good as a complete masking solution [something I've decided to take on as my next project] but I prefer it to having both of the bars.
Ok, that’s weird. :)

If you’re going to masking and don’t do zoom CIH, then you don’t need motorized lens? :confused:

I get it, the heart wants what the heart wants. But you seem like you’d A-OK to compromise on skipping on the motor.
 

John Dirk

Premium
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 7, 2000
Messages
5,659
Location
ATL
Real Name
JOHN
If you’re going to masking and don’t do zoom CIH, then you don’t need motorized lens?
I'm at the onset of my "masking" project so who knows what I'll actually end up with. For now, however, I'm thinking I can simplify it by using lens presets to move the 2.35 image up to the top border, thus eliminating one of the black bars without the need for upper masking. That would just leave me in need of only a lower masking solution. As I said though, these are just preliminary thoughts.

I get it, the heart wants what the heart wants.

When it's all said and done, you're actually right although it's not so much the heart making this decision. My main concern is not feeling the need to replace whatever I buy based on a feature I compromised on to save some money up front. Been there, done that and you can't add a motorized lens to a projector originally made without one.

Also likely factoring into this decision is my recent AT screen installation. That project would have been a nightmare without the convenience of the motorized lens.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
26,860
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
So what you're saying is, JVC NZ9?


Guess it's down to how much "laser" means to you versus max budget. JVC NP5 vs Sony XW6000 or JVC NZ7 to get everything without compromising.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
351,019
Messages
4,939,262
Members
142,963
Latest member
RGG
Recent bookmarks
0
Top