Banned at AVSForum

[Dylan Seeger]

While I had the UHD65 (non laser version) the projector just felt very cheap. The chassis is glossy black and it scratches SO easily. The lens has a very bad offset which basically forces you to ceiling mount. Very limited lens shift and the menu system is a mess with many unintuitively named things in the menu system you weren't entirely sure what they did. You also had to play with the Brilliant Color setting see which setting was optimal. You could not disable it. There was very little in the way to calibrate the projector easily. Nothing like what you find on a JVC or Sony (clearly laid out and intuitive).

Though I will say there was nothing offensive about the image. Contrast was just "okay" at about ~4500:1 dynamic contrast. I've seen worse from other DLP units. The image was very sharp. I'd say it has an edge over the JVCs in this regard but the deficits in brightness, contrast and color do not make up for the slightly sharper looking image.  I just couldn't get over how cheap the UHD65 felt in both build quality and how the menu system was laid out. Considering these are the only two ways you actually interact with the projector (menu system and setting the projector up) I just felt Optoma could have done a LOT better. It really feels like they took a business projector and changed the case color from white to black.

[stanger89]

Margin is not better. I do not understand why a dealer would push these. As you say, image is not as good and they are not as bright as what you can get with other brands. It certainly is not because it is higher profit.

I'm sure you guys wouldn't make any more off an Optoma (less I'd guess), but I get the impression that these things are selling for at, or close to MSRP.  Just reading some of those DLP threads you get the feeling these things are giant slayers.  People keep comparing the UHZ65 to the VW885 as if they're even remotely similar in performance and features when the only thing they have in common is the word "Laser" on the spec sheet. 

JVC and Sony are pretty well known for what they are and what you can get them for, but these new DLPs are a new thing, and with all the hyperbole, I have to wonder if some "less integrous" sellers are taking advantage of the hype/hyperbole.  I mean if you're just in it to make a quick buck, it's a pretty easy sales pitch:

"Look at this, it's got laser and "true 4K" same as the Sony VW885, but it's only $4500 instead of $25,000, it's a great deal!"

That's what certain folks on the other forum are actually saying, and it's what lots of others are seemingly implying.  I went to one well known seller online, and they only offered about an 8% discount off MSRP once added to the cart.

Though I will say there was nothing offensive about the image. Contrast was just "okay" at about ~4500:1 dynamic contrast. I've seen worse from other DLP units. The image was very sharp. I'd say it has an edge over the JVCs in this regard but the deficits in brightness, contrast and color do not make up for the slightly sharper looking image.  I just couldn't get over how cheap the UHD65 felt in both build quality and how the menu system was laid out. Considering these are the only two ways you actually interact with the projector (menu system and setting the projector up) I just felt Optoma could have done a LOT better. It really feels like they took a business projector and changed the case color from white to black.

Isn't that what Optoma makes?  Same with BenQ (though their menus typically were pretty good), they both primarily make business units, and on the side they throw in a few tweaks, like an RGB colorwheel, FI, DI, maybe change the case color and call it "Home Theater".

As for the UHZ, I think we finally have the answer as to why it's got an RGBY colorwheel, without it, it would probably be dimmer than the UHD60, and then what's the sales pitch for the 2x price?

[Stereodude]

As for the UHZ, I think we finally have the answer as to why it's got an RGBY colorwheel, without it, it would probably be dimmer than the UHD60, and then what's the sales pitch for the 2x price?

Does it come with it's own pot of gold at the end of the rainbows from the 2x color wheel? 

[DLCPhoto]

A few years ago, when I bought an RS600, I fully planned to not use the DI. That was one of the reasons I went with the 600 over the 500, since I wanted as much native contrast as I could get. I was pleasantly surprised how well the DI performed and ended up using it.

On this:

I have the RS400, and found the DI bothersome, with 'iris pumping' quite distracting.  I tried it numerous times, but each time decided it created more problems than it solved.  Two questions related to this:

1.  Does the 'double iris' on the RS500/RS600 line perform significantly better in this regard than the single iris of the RS400?

2.  My aperture now, for the last 6 months or so, doesn't work.  I put it in manual mode, and when I try to adjust it, the numbers on the screen display show it shutting down, but the aperture itself doesn't change.  Is it possible that it was never working properly, even when new, and that is why it was more intrusive?

Thanks.

P.S. Because I have a large screen screen (160" diagonal scope), for HDR I have the aperture open anyway, and even with regular Blu-ray, having it wide open still works fine.  And given the hassle of taking it down, getting it repaired, being without the projector for a few weeks, I've been reluctant to get it fixed.

Looks like this reply might have gone unnoticed, Mike.  If you have opportunity, would appreciate your thoughts.

[AVSCraig]

While I had the UHD65 (non laser version) the projector just felt very cheap. The chassis is glossy black and it scratches SO easily. The lens has a very bad offset which basically forces you to ceiling mount. Very limited lens shift and the menu system is a mess with many unintuitively named things in the menu system you weren't entirely sure what they did. You also had to play with the Brilliant Color setting see which setting was optimal. You could not disable it. There was very little in the way to calibrate the projector easily. Nothing like what you find on a JVC or Sony (clearly laid out and intuitive).

Though I will say there was nothing offensive about the image. Contrast was just "okay" at about ~4500:1 dynamic contrast. I've seen worse from other DLP units. The image was very sharp. I'd say it has an edge over the JVCs in this regard but the deficits in brightness, contrast and color do not make up for the slightly sharper looking image.  I just couldn't get over how cheap the UHD65 felt in both build quality and how the menu system was laid out. Considering these are the only two ways you actually interact with the projector (menu system and setting the projector up) I just felt Optoma could have done a LOT better. It really feels like they took a business projector and changed the case color from white to black.

That's my impression from the UHD60. That and light spill out the vent. 

[AVSCraig]

Looks like this reply might have gone unnoticed, Mike.  If you have opportunity, would appreciate your thoughts.

I saw your post but hadn't had a chance to respond. Maybe the RS500 / 600, having much higher native contrast, just don't need the DI to work as much. I think the multiplier is a factor. I rarely saw the DI on my RS600 work, except on credits.

[AVSMike]

Looks like this reply might have gone unnoticed, Mike.  If you have opportunity, would appreciate your thoughts.

Very few complain about the DI on the 400, so you must be pretty sensitive to a DI. The DI may be a little less noticeable on the 5 and 6 series, due to the much higher native contrast. Anyway, the big advantage of the 5 and 6 series, is the native contrast is high enough without the DI to still provide a very nice image.

[DLCPhoto]

Very few complain about the DI on the 400, so you must be pretty sensitive to a DI. The DI may be a little less noticeable on the 5 and 6 series, due to the much higher native contrast. Anyway, the big advantage of the 5 and 6 series, is the native contrast is high enough without the DI to still provide a very nice image.

Thanks for the reply, Mike.  I do realize that the 5x0/6x0 series have the greater contrast.  But I had wondered if the double aperture that they have would be a factor in 'smoother' DI performance.  Thoughts?

I know this is guessing, but do you think the fact that my Aperture isn't functioning at all now might indicate DI wasn't performing to spec even when the Aperture did seem to work, and that would account for my finding it too intrusive?

I'm trying to decide if it's worth the hassle of taking it down, sending it in, possibly having it come back with different problems than now due to the inevitable potential for trauma with shipping.

[stanger89]

Thanks for the reply, Mike.  I do realize that the 5x0/6x0 series have the greater contrast.  But I had wondered if the double aperture that they have would be a factor in 'smoother' DI performance.  Thoughts?

I doubt it, AFAIK it's only the final aperture right at the lens exit that operates dynamically. 

I know this is guessing, but do you think the fact that my Aperture isn't functioning at all now might indicate DI wasn't performing to spec even when the Aperture did seem to work, and that would account for my finding it too intrusive?

Seems reasonable, if it was sticking, it could have had jerky operation when it should have been smooth.  If it's broken now, I wouldn't make any judgements on how it's supposed to work.

I'm trying to decide if it's worth the hassle of taking it down, sending it in, possibly having it come back with different problems than now due to the inevitable potential for trauma with shipping.

Only you can decide that.  But I'll say this, if you ever go to sell it, a broken aperture would dramatically affect resale value, for that reason alone I'd seriously consider getting it fixed.

[DLCPhoto]

I doubt it, AFAIK it's only the final aperture right at the lens exit that operates dynamically. 

Seems reasonable, if it was sticking, it could have had jerky operation when it should have been smooth.  If it's broken now, I wouldn't make any judgements on how it's supposed to work.

Only you can decide that.  But I'll say this, if you ever go to sell it, a broken aperture would dramatically affect resale value, for that reason alone I'd seriously consider getting it fixed.

Yeah, that's what I've been thinking.  Dang, hate to go through the hassle, but you're probably right...

[DavidHir]

Yeah, that's what I've been thinking.  Dang, hate to go through the hassle, but you're probably right...

I've never been big on DI's myself, but it's pretty impressive on my RS440.  Some of the fades to black can be really nice.

[AVSCraig]

I've never been big on DI's myself, but it's pretty impressive on my RS440.  Some of the fades to black can be really nice.

They've gotten much better over the last few years, at least on the better home theater projectors !

[DLCPhoto]

I've never been big on DI's myself, but it's pretty impressive on my RS440.  Some of the fades to black can be really nice.

Yeah, I'm planning on sending it in.  I'll be heading out of town for about 10 days in February, so will ship it out a little before that.  Hopefully be back about when I return.  Now I've got to find some big guys to held me get it down and put it back up!

[DavidHir]

I do see some occasional instances of a scene with consistent APL that will subtlety dim and brighten for a second.  Replaying those scenes with the auto iris off keeps it stable.

[DLCPhoto]

I do see some occasional instances of a scene with consistent APL that will subtlety dim and brighten for a second.  Replaying those scenes with the auto iris off keeps it stable.

That's exactly what I was seeing (when my aperture was working, that is! ), and what led to my eventually just turning it off.  It made me much more conscious of the equipment, and not the movie.

But after it's fixed, I'll probably give it another try, and see if the benefits outweigh the negatives, especially if the DI works a bit more smoothly than it did before.