These are not mean't to compete with the Barcos, Sony's commercial projectors do that. This is the first 4k HT specific unit. The Sony SRX-R220/210 and the like compete with the Barcos' at 18000/13000 lumens respectively.
Agree this is a stella effort to bring 4k to the HT scene at a 'reasonable' price, but one must wonder what the benefit is if 4k source material is some years away. Next year JVC will more than likely add 4k inputs and I am willing to bet that E-shift 4k vs true 4k Pwith a true 4k source, hardly anyone will be able to pick the difference. No different to a deinterlacing an interlaced signal well.
Sony have a long way to go to catch JVC's native CR. The VPL1000 has a native CR of 18000:1, far from JVC 120,000:1 native. There is no denying the Sony brightness will be of benefit for 130" -140" plus screens, but for folks with smaller screens, 1080p source material, the JVC will produce a better more dynamic image, irrespective of $$$ spent, not factoring in 3D of course where brightness is valuable.....the Sony will be better in motion handling dept due to it's faster panels. I know one can dial the brightness down by limiting the max aperture ith iris opens.....but the native CR is the native CR.
Sony is a great projector for any HT enthuasist with a large screen(130"+) who sits around 1 screen width away who has access to 4k material.......sitting at 1.5 screen widths with a 110 or so inch screen for movie viewing the JVC would be my primary choice for 2D 1080p sources. Waiting for an objective non commercial review, where these two are EQ'd for brightness and tested image quality, dynamic range etc.
If the Sony had JVC's native CR along with all else it offers.........then it would truely be the current HT King.
Honestly, I get tired of this constantly pulled out native CR argument with the JVCs. It's really getting long in the tooth these days. It gets touted as a argument to justify JVCs lack of DI to date. The Dynamic Iris in the VW1000 is phenomenal, in auto-limited mode it does an incredible job. Detail levels at just inside 1.5 times screen width at 110" are worth it in as is. I'm movated myself now to move up 123" diag, even pre any real 4K material. It's already touted that 4K viewing material is not that far off as some people believe. Also I can add 3D is rendered at a level that no long feels inferior to cinema and is also worth the entry price of 1000. As for not competing at barco level 2k/4k and such projectors not being considered as high end home use in the HT market, I refute that. Take this particular avs'ers recent comment specifically:
thank you very much for sharing your experiences. I considered the Barco (2k/4k) as most likely uograde path for me but the Sony certainly is a very interesting option.
The VW1000 is the first projector I've been able to truly use as a feasible sports tv projector during the day and with a lit room. So there's more to it than being solely for those 'batcave' HT enthusiasts. The nature of my setup is always going to be compromised until the day I own a dedicated room. Although, that can be at catch 22 in itself if u are not inclined to want to always feel ur always locked away, sitting in a 'batcave' to watch your fav TV series every night and sports.
Dropping back in to comment here has again just proved me why I spend my time reading and contributing over on AVSforums over spending time here these days. It just ends up with a back and forth debate here about why not to spend the $$ on cutting edge premium HT, just because it's above what's considered doable here. HT tall poppy syndrome. A remark to enlighten the Oz members that there more than the new just JVC offerings and perhaps that some posters may not have seen all that's out there currently in the latest projs , only in the end enlicteds reactions that Sony is so much higher a budget level as to make it impossible to compare and then the old chestnut about native CR justifications.
+1, I need more pixels like hole in the head, I cant see any pixel structure as it is. The ONLY thing that I hanker for is MUCH greater native contrast than JVC currently offers, 300,000:1 plus native is where I want to be.
The Sony is not doubt very impressive but the limited CR is a killer as far as I am concerned.
I very much doubt current projector technologies will be able to deliver that sort of contrast so I'm not holding my breath.
Owen my old Sony rearpro comrade, not you too still on this native CR bandwagon! I understand your arguments going back to the days when our large screen paths diverged with my entry into replacing my SXRD 70" with a VW projector, twas a massive compromise in CR- with DI( you can't be too hypocritical, you know the SXRD TV worked bloody well with its early version DI). But times have changed mate and so has the material we view. I want to see Bluray upscaled and experience BD 3D, and even my fav Mkv's at 110" and soon a hopefully 123", pixels and all! All I can say is seriously for those who want to sit in the viewing environment I've set up now and poke holes, go for it. I'll just keep enjoying it and night after night. As I've heard said on so many forums so many times, you can fence it and watch the technology get better and better or catch the smaller waves along the way and very occasionally $$ provided, drop in on a new tech surge as it kicks off.
Edited by OzHTfan, 24 March 2012 - 10:44 PM.