2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

[stridsvognen]

Yes i have the zone convergence turned on both places. On the bright side this projector seems to resolve 1080P very well, the SONY 1080P projector never did that...  And im actually enjoying the projector after getting it calibrated and setup to my liking.


Running HD BD upscaled to UHD from a XBOX ONE S wich is the best player for that job i have, gives a very nice and natural looking image, no artifacts or ringing, the hole HDR thing really dont sit well with me, gave it a shot with the Panasonic player today, tweaking the tonemapping, but i simply far prefer the HD SDR masterings at a 12-14fl on my screen.


The focus seems to drift quite a bit, think i adjusted it 5-6 times now with 20 hours on the projector.

[Dylan Seeger]

Here is what I'm seeing with the 695ES disabling the zone convergence correction software. I'm still unsure why your unit isn't responding the same way. I took these a couple days ago:

2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

[DavidHir]

I know this sounds obvious, but you've disabled the zone convergence correction in the regular menu as well, correct? Even with both off, there will still be some color banding and posterization issues. I don't think this can be completely eliminated unless Sony does a complete overhaul to the hardware. I hope to see this next year. Their model number naming scheme indicates this might happen next year. Where do they go from the 295 and 695?

Agreed, I think in 2020 Sony is going to have to offer something more similar in price and performance to JVC 4K.  Sony has not given many reasons why one should pay more for the 695 over an RS1000...let alone RS2000.

[stridsvognen]

Here is what I'm seeing with the 695ES disabling the zone convergence correction software. I'm still unsure why your unit isn't responding the same way. I took these a couple days ago:

2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread
Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread
Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread
Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread
Re: 2019 Sony 4K Projector Owners Thread

Where is that pattern from, can you sende me the file, then ill try take the same pictures with the same pattern..

[Dylan Seeger]

Check your PM inbox.

[DLCPhoto]

Dylan, when do you anticipate being able to provide some information on comparing the Sony 695ES with the JVC RS2000?  This is assuming you have both in your possession, and of course I may be mistaken.


Thanks.


Don

[Dylan Seeger]

Dylan, when do you anticipate being able to provide some information on comparing the Sony 695ES with the JVC RS2000?  This is assuming you have both in your possession, and of course I may be mistaken.


Thanks.


Don

Yes, both units are here. I'm currently working on reviews for each projector so a long comparative write up is going to have to wait. In the mean time, is there something specific you want to know?

[stridsvognen]

The pattern was a different one, but it was possible to see a difference, but its not a huge difference.

[Dylan Seeger]

The pattern was a different one, but it was possible to see a difference, but its not a huge difference.

When you get the opportunity, post pictures of the test pattern I sent you. It should remove a lot of the banding and chroma issues. But as I mentioned before, I think there are hardware limitations with Sony's current 4K SXRD platform. Hopefully they are working on a revised 4K SXRD panel and related supplemental hardware to process and feed them data.

[DLCPhoto]

Yes, both units are here. I'm currently working on reviews for each projector so a long comparative write up is going to have to wait. In the mean time, is there something specific you want to know?

Yeah - which one is better??


But seriously, I am wanting to upgrade my RS400, to get more light, detail, better color, contrast, etc., on my large 160" diagonal 2.35:1 screen.  My plan was to get the RS2000 with the Paladin DCR lens (providing a better 'bang for the buck,' and theoretically 20% more light output), rather than getting the RS3000.


It has now been determined that while the DCR lens works perfectly with the RS1000/2000/3000 series projectors for scope content, it doesn't have the proper Anamorphic modes for 16:9, nor for 3d in either aspect ratio.  There are work-arounds, each with their own advantages and disadvantages, but there are compromises to be made.


And further, the latest information is that JVC does not have plans to address these limitations in this generation of projectors.


In exploring all my options, I wondered about other projector brands.  It is my understanding at this point that the Sony 695ES *does* have the proper Anamorphic modes to use with the DCR lens, for all available content, so would solve those problems.


So basically, if I knew that the overall picture quality of the Sony matched or exceeded that of the JVC, then that would be very tempting.


But on the other hand, if the JVC provided a clearly better overall picture, then I would either deal with the limitations and work-arounds or just wait for the next generation of JVC projectors that would 'hopefully' address these limitations.


So I guess I'm just looking for the 'real-world' 'big-picture' comparison to help me decide here, rather than the nitty-gritty of a formal review, with all of the technical details, which while important, are not always directly related to what kind of overall visual experience is provided.

[stridsvognen]

Got it as good as it gets i think.
The convergence shift is also messing up the 1:1 resolution, so it needs to be turned of as well, now everything looks sharper and less distorted, have a bit of convergence error, but only visible when moving closer to the screen.

[Dylan Seeger]

Yeah - which one is better??


So basically, if I knew that the overall picture quality of the Sony matched or exceeded that of the JVC, then that would be very tempting.


But on the other hand, if the JVC provided a clearly better overall picture, then I would either deal with the limitations and work-arounds or just wait for the next generation of JVC projectors that would 'hopefully' address these limitations.


So I guess I'm just looking for the 'real-world' 'big-picture' comparison to help me decide here, rather than the nitty-gritty of a formal review, with all of the technical details, which while important, are not always directly related to what kind of overall visual experience is provided.

The answer depends on the type of content you normally watch. If you're mostly watching movies, I'd pick the JVC. The Sony, in my opinion, is better suited for those who game or for those who watch a lot of sports. I say this because the Sony has lower input lag for gamers by about 15ms and people who watch a lot of sports can benefit from the Sony's slightly better motion handling with higher frame rate content (60p for instance). I also think that Sony has better motion interpolation software which a lot of people who watch sports enable. Sports and video game content is generally higher in APL (brighter overall) which is where the Sony's higher ANSI contrast performance will help as well.

However, I think the JVC's far better native contrast, combined with a slightly better lens, better color performance (with the P3 filter), more extensive HDR controls and overall lack of image artifacts (slight banding and posterization still on the Sony) yield a better experience overall for UHD blu-ray and 1080p blu-ray content.

This is going to be the gist of my comparison review but I plan on going into quite a bit more detail with measurements and other objective information. But, overall, both of these projectors offer excellent image quality and I don't think anyone would be unhappy living with either. It's just one of those things where you need to know the type of content you plan on watching the most and choose based on that information.

[DLCPhoto]

The answer depends on the type of content you normally watch. If you're mostly watching movies, I'd pick the JVC. The Sony, in my opinion, is better suited for those who game or for those who watch a lot of sports. I say this because the Sony has lower input lag for gamers by about 15ms and people who watch a lot of sports can benefit from the Sony's slightly better motion handling with higher frame rate content (60p for instance). I also think that Sony has better motion interpolation software which a lot of people who watch sports enable. Sports and video game content is generally higher in APL (brighter overall) which is where the Sony's higher ANSI contrast performance will help as well.

However, I think the JVC's far better native contrast, combined with a slightly better lens, better color performance (with the P3 filter), more extensive HDR controls and overall lack of image artifacts (slight banding and posterization still on the Sony) yield a better experience overall for UHD blu-ray and 1080p blu-ray content.

This is going to be the gist of my comparison review but I plan on going into quite a bit more detail with measurements and other objective information. But, overall, both of these projectors offer excellent image quality and I don't think anyone would be unhappy living with either. It's just one of those things where you need to know the type of content you plan on watching the most and choose based on that information.

That is an extremely helpful reply, Dylan.  I would say 98%+ of what I watch is movies, with 0 gaming, and sports only rarely (we'll watch Premiere League Soccer on my Sony 900E TV in the other room).


I have also been paying close attention to Manni's reports concerning use of the filter, which seems to have been confirmed by 1 or 2 others, that there is only 10% or so light loss with use of the filter when in High Lamp mode.  With my larger screen, I'd most likely be in High Lamp mode anyway, so that might be a worthwhile tradeoff.


I'll look forward to your more detailed observations when they're available, but this is exactly the kind of information I need at this time.


Thanks again!!


Don

[Kris Deering]

Yeah - which one is better??


But seriously, I am wanting to upgrade my RS400, to get more light, detail, better color, contrast, etc., on my large 160" diagonal 2.35:1 screen.  My plan was to get the RS2000 with the Paladin DCR lens (providing a better 'bang for the buck,' and theoretically 20% more light output), rather than getting the RS3000.


It has now been determined that while the DCR lens works perfectly with the RS1000/2000/3000 series projectors for scope content, it doesn't have the proper Anamorphic modes for 16:9, nor for 3d in either aspect ratio.  There are work-arounds, each with their own advantages and disadvantages, but there are compromises to be made.


And further, the latest information is that JVC does not have plans to address these limitations in this generation of projectors.


In exploring all my options, I wondered about other projector brands.  It is my understanding at this point that the Sony 695ES *does* have the proper Anamorphic modes to use with the DCR lens, for all available content, so would solve those problems.


So basically, if I knew that the overall picture quality of the Sony matched or exceeded that of the JVC, then that would be very tempting.


But on the other hand, if the JVC provided a clearly better overall picture, then I would either deal with the limitations and work-arounds or just wait for the next generation of JVC projectors that would 'hopefully' address these limitations.


So I guess I'm just looking for the 'real-world' 'big-picture' comparison to help me decide here, rather than the nitty-gritty of a formal review, with all of the technical details, which while important, are not always directly related to what kind of overall visual experience is provided.

Just get a standard Paladin instead of the DCR. You get all the features you want plus the bump in light. You're only losing the 6% or so of light by not going full 4096, but most never use 4096 even without the lens. Less scaling, all the features you want. This should be a no brainer.

[DLCPhoto]

Just get a standard Paladin instead of the DCR. You get all the features you want plus the bump in light. You're only losing the 6% or so of light by not going full 4096, but most never use 4096 even without the lens. Less scaling, all the features you want. This should be a no brainer.

Hey Kris,

Thanks for the reply.  The standard Paladin is certainly a viable alternative, as you point out.  Because of the minimum throw distance of 1.6x screen width (vs 1.4x with the DCR), I would have to move my mount back about 2 feet or so, and replace my HDMI cable with a longer one.  A bit of a hassle, but do-able.

I also confirmed with Shawn Kelly that if you do use the 'Zoom' Aspect Ratio option, you can still get the full 38% bump in light, and the cost being a 2.5% crop of the image top and bottom.  This would scale, and thus lose 1:1 pixel mapping, but I haven't yet seen any evidence that this is problematic with real-world content.  It might be, but I just haven't read it thus far.

Appreciate your again pointing out this option.

Don