JVC RS1000 / 2000 Anticipation Thread

[AVSMike]

Mike/Craig, I also see JVC is now offering a "3 Year Advanced Replacement Warranty" on all three of these new models. Is there any way we could get some details on this. It sound similar to Epson's warranty policy where they will ship you a new or refurbished unit right away before they've had the chance to receive your broken/damaged unit. Will this JVC warranty work similarly?

Yes, much like Epson.

[AVSCraig]

This is going to be a very nice projector !

[Dylan Seeger]

This is going to be a very nice projector !

The RS2000 seems to be the projector getting the least coverage (and probably rightfully so), but I think is the sweet spot in performance. Unless you just have to have that big lens!

What I think it's all going to boil down to is how much native contrast do the three of these projectors have with the iris fully open (or close to it). With HDR we want as much brightness as possible. Even with tonemapping we still want to have as much brightness as we can. The less brightness to work with, the more image artifacts there's going to be when doing the tone mapping because the software will need to truncate the dynamic range of the image down even further. I'm hoping for something like this:

JVC DLA-RS1000 = 17,000:1 native contrast at max zoom/iris open

JVC DLA-RS2000 = 25,000:1 native contrast at max zoom/iris open

JVC DLA-RS3000 = 32,000:1 native contrast at max zoom/iris open

[Dylan Seeger]

I just got an email from Leo Bodnar. His new 4K input lag tester is finally out:

http://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=89&products_id=317

It's a little pricey though. I'm curious as to how most other reviewers and end users were measuring input lag on these native 4K units before. I have a hard time believing most of them are using the CRT method. So were they using the 1080p tester and reporting lag with internal scaling enabled?

This is a bit off topic but I didn't know where else to post it. I might buy one to use on these native 4K models.

[AVSCraig]

The RS2000 seems to be the projector getting the least coverage (and probably rightfully so), but I think is the sweet spot in performance. Unless you just have to have that big lens!

What I think it's all going to boil down to is how much native contrast do the three of these projectors have with the iris fully open (or close to it). With HDR we want as much brightness as possible. Even with tonemapping we still want to have as much brightness as we can. The less brightness to work with, the more image artifacts there's going to be when doing the tone mapping because the software will need to truncate the dynamic range of the image down even further. I'm hoping for something like this:

JVC DLA-RS1000 = 17,000:1 native contrast at max zoom/iris open

JVC DLA-RS2000 = 25,000:1 native contrast at max zoom/iris open

JVC DLA-RS3000 = 32,000:1 native contrast at max zoom/iris open

It's going to be interesting seeing where these do actually measure contrast wise !

[Dylan Seeger]

It's going to be interesting seeing where these do actually measure contrast wise !

It's funny that people seem to be put off quite a bit by the iris fully closed, minimum zoom contrast numbers when in reality it's the iris fully open/max brightness number that matters more as that's the typical scenario most of us are going to be running our projectors at anyways, maybe with the iris stopped down a little. I have a funny feeling the max brightness contrast numbers aren't going to be that far off from where the eshift models were. Hopefully within 20%. And with the boost in ANSI contrast I don't think we'll be missing out too much contrast wise. On the bottom end the DI should help with extremely dark content.

[AVSMike]

It's funny that people seem to be put off quite a bit by the iris fully closed, minimum zoom contrast numbers when in reality it's the iris fully open/max brightness number that matters more as that's the typical scenario most of us are going to be running our projectors at anyways, maybe with the iris stopped down a little. I have a funny feeling the max brightness contrast numbers aren't going to be that far off from where the eshift models were. Hopefully within 20%. And with the boost in ANSI contrast I don't think we'll be missing out too much contrast wise. On the bottom end the DI should help with extremely dark content.

I agree and have made the same comment. Everybody looks at 130,000 vs 80,000, but that is fully closed and the gap is usually much smaller, when fully open.

[AVSCraig]

It's funny that people seem to be put off quite a bit by the iris fully closed, minimum zoom contrast numbers when in reality it's the iris fully open/max brightness number that matters more as that's the typical scenario most of us are going to be running our projectors at anyways, maybe with the iris stopped down a little. I have a funny feeling the max brightness contrast numbers aren't going to be that far off from where the eshift models were. Hopefully within 20%. And with the boost in ANSI contrast I don't think we'll be missing out too much contrast wise. On the bottom end the DI should help with extremely dark content.

Now you are being realistic and practical - we can't have that !

[jive turkey]

I agree and have made the same comment. Everybody looks at 130,000 vs 80,000, but that is fully closed and the gap is usually much smaller, when fully open.

I got to thinking about this....did you possibly typo and mean 1,300,000 to 800,000:1 fully closed? Yes, the gap is smaller between 130,000 and 80,000:1 fully open.

Is it visibly significant between 130,000 and 80,000:1 (fully open, properly calibrated)?

[Dylan Seeger]

@ARROW-AV I saw on the other forum you discussing the dynamic iris implementation on these upcoming JVCs. I have to disagree with you about part of your theory. While it may be true that with higher native contrast you can program an iris to start clamping down at a lower APL level versus a projector with more limited native contrast, I don't think that's what going to happen with these JVC models. I just don't think JVC is going to pay to have three separate lines of code made up, aka unique code for each model. Unless you can confirm this, I would have to argue that the dynamic iris implementation, in software, will be the exact same between all three of these new projectors. I say this judging this from previous JVC eshift models. All of them appeared to have the same DI implementation across the line up each year. I have specific test video that I use when comparing or reviewing dynamic irises and all of the eshift models tripped up and functioned pretty much exactly the same through these video clips.

[lygren]

A colleague of mine was just at a London launch event for the new JVC lineup and JVC officials basically confirmed that contrast will indeed be improved rather than the opposite on the new units. Why? Well, the new gen. chips are smaller, and as such, the amount of scattered light throughout the engine is reduced. The reason for the new, somewhat lower figures is simply based on JVC wanting to relate their specs more true to life... We´ll see, we´ll see...

[Javs]

A colleague of mine was just at a London launch event for the new JVC lineup and JVC officials basically confirmed that contrast will indeed be improved rather than the opposite on the new units. Why? Well, the new gen. chips are smaller, and as such, the amount of scattered light throughout the engine is reduced. The reason for the new, somewhat lower figures is simply based on JVC wanting to relate their specs more true to life... We´ll see, we´ll see...

Improved in relation to what? The eshift units or the Z1?

I am very interested in what the wide open iris to max contrast ratio is going to be.

Are you suggesting JVC is being very conservative in the contrast specs?

[lygren]

Improved in relation to what? The eshift units or the Z1?

I am very interested in what the wide open iris to max contrast ratio is going to be.

Are you suggesting JVC is being very conservative in the contrast specs?

Yes, they were comparing it to the current e-shifts for sure... As for how conservative - I guess it´s hard to tell until the units are here and can be properly assessed, but they certainly have included the use of the iris as per their normal routine, but I would be surprised if the native with the iris open is not an improvement compared to the Z1 due to the use of phosphor among other challenges using the current implementation of the laser engine as such...

[Dylan Seeger]

Maybe they meant ANSI contrast?

[Andreas21]

I find it strange that JVC reps say the contrast is more true to life ( I also spoke to Lygrens collegue), as all JVC models in the later generations I have measured have been close to spec with the iris set to -15. They dont have much light available at -15, but none the less they are close to spec. What I find to be far from spec is the dynamic contrast.

I am quite sure these new models will not be a big upgrade compared to the 1080p e-shift models and if I dont buy this gen I will do a side by side with my Cineversum and a N7 to see if I am right. Less contrast, same lens, same lamp+++ does not convince me even if it is native 4K and maybe has a little more ANSI most rooms (even batcaves) can not take advantage of. But there is a possibility I will buy a N5 or N7 if I can sell my Cineversum BW2 for the right amount of money.