I said it was the photos you posted. Unfortunately for you, others who have a lot of experience with projectors have seen this projector and don't agree. 1000:1 native contrast has an obvious weakness. You should have embraced it from the start instead of embellishing the truth.
Dave, everyone that compared the two side by side all had the same thing to say about the contrast on the LK. We are talking Woofer, Markmon1, Kris, Javs, Dylan and Dylan's friend. That is six people all saying the same thing and none of them trashed the LK. All of them had good things to say about it, other than it's weakness of contrast.I should send you the emails from Jav's, early on regarding his hopes for the LK. Based on all the hype you gave the LK, he was all ready to buy one. Was talking about how he could give up some contrast if the LK still did okay. Jav's was seriously looking for a projector to light up a large low gain screen. So Jav's did not go into this wanting the LK to fail. Jav's was excited about the LK. So rather than say everyone portrayed the LK incorrectly, maybe you should compare the two side by side, but you need to do so in a black pit of a room, because all the people I listed that did the comparison, used black pit rooms.
Mike, thank you for stepping into foray and trying to keep the peace. I am asking that everybody please take a breath and agree to disagree, this discussion site will not tolerate disrespect for anybody's opinions. Don't make me send you to your rooms.
See my reply above to Dylan. Please stop these falsehoods and misdirections that somehow I was saying its native contrast was on par with the LCoS and SXRDs of the world.
Show me the falsehood in my statement and misdirection? What has happened to you?
Dave, everyone that compared the two side by side all had the same thing to say about the contrast on the LK.
OK, like this:It wasn’t just directed toward you either. The misdirection is that you guys always make it about the contrast (because you know that’s one place it is weaker than your JVCs and the only way to win your argument), even though I never said that was its strength......not once! Why is that pretty much the only thing that’s brought up by you guys then?Nothing has happened to me, believe me. Take a real good step back and just look at the what’s happened over there in the last few years. That’s all the proof you need. It’s a dying horse being continually beaten due to the closed minded and biased attitudes and culture that’s been created. Nobody seems to have an original thought anymore and they just toe the company line and agree with anything the so-called “experts” say, regardless of any proof otherwise, sight unseen. If anyone says otherwise, the posse all comes out if the woodwork and trounces the poor unsuspecting victim until he’s either assimilated or subsequently beaten down and eventually removed.
Dave, one of the issues I have with your subjective thoughts on the LK990 and LK970 is that you've never had one of these units up against a JVC or Sony 4K model in the same room at the same time. You may have seen a JVC eshift model at your place long ago, but that is not the same thing as having them both in the same room at the same time to A/B compare. So how exactly do you know what the difference is or, better yet, if the difference isn't as big as we say it is?I'm not saying this to put the projector down, but when I did an A/B comparison between the RS2000 and LK990, we literally laughed out loud when we saw the saw the difference in contrast performance. That's just how jarring the difference was. All we could do was laugh. So, I challenge your claim that the difference isn't as great as we say it is. Sorry Dave, it really is a "laugh out loud funny" kind of difference. And this wasn't with torture-type content like star fields and black out sequences. This was with regular everyday content. On top of this, this was with the RS2000, not the older e-shift models that have even more contrast available. You can claim we may not have set things up properly to compare HDR with your magic settings, but contrast performance cannot be fixed or helped with your settings. The level of black is what it is on this projector.
I guess I will respectfully and fully agree to disagree then.I did have a Sony 885 and many others including an Epson LS10500 while I was making many evaluations and conclusions. I personally chose the LK because it was better overall, especially for the money savings. I KNOW what good deep blacks and contrast are. Please everyone stop talking to me as if I’m some novice with no experience. It’s so condescending to me. I’ve been working with projectors for over 25 years and in TV/Radio and AV for more than 30 years. Believe it or not I know what I’m doing. I have no doubt you all could get to the same place i did with as much time and effort as I have invested in these, so no, based on what’s been reported and posted and said, then the LK wasn’t optimized as I have it. So yes, it’s a a setup issue.These LKs have Automatic Power control and dynamic laser dimming (on the 990). If you massage the settings in the right way you can maximize the cut off point of the laser dimming so it doesn’t drop immediately down off a cliff and you get a smooth transition to off pretty much. This is no different than how people are talking about the RS4500 and it’s a laser dimming but you just have to kind of force it yourself if you figure it out, which I have. As I have said, you have to send it the HDRBT2020 signal, not SDR. It is just how this model seems to work best.
I read this whole thread and all I have to say is WOW.
275 Replies
90356 Views