Panasonic PT-AE4000 LCD Projector Review Comments

A quick bump/question on this one, if that's okay Phil.

What's the maximum size 1.0 gain screen you would go to on this projector?

Steve W

I personally wouldn't go over 110" as you are asking too much in terms of brightness over that size, it will do it but you will start to come up against issues. However, it may be possible with the correct mix of screen type, gain and room conditions and aiming at 14ftl. Obviously upping the gain will then introduce other considerations. I have just had a screen installed (110 inch 2.37:1 and 0.8 gain) and will test the AE4000 on it in a few weeks. (going to look at zoom over lens approaches for a future article).
Obviously there are so many varibles when looking at different rooms, screen gains and so on, that this answer is not definitive and is based on my experience of the product in almost ideal circumstances. There's no easy or straight answer.

Phil do you have any projector recommendations for screens in the 150" - 165" (1.78) range??

(currently using a 1.8gain Elite retro reflective screen with a ceiling mounted IF 7210).

New Theater will have screen image surface starting about 4" below ceiling with the center of the projector lens about 4" below the top of the image area.

Two levels of seating...

Tier 1 - Eye height will be ~60" below center of lens.

Tier 2 - Eye height will be ~46" below center of lens.

(I mention this as I do not think the High Power screen will work under these conditions)

Projector lens to screen ~19' 2"

Steve,

Hot potato subject and lots of information on the interweb to read up on. It will depend on the type of image you want in terms of brightness, the type of room you have, light control, the screen and so on. I notice you are using a very high gain screen which will act differently with differing projectors. I would imagine (although I haven't tested such a screen) that hot spotting would be a concern as well as viewing angles. I also get the feeling that you are based in the US?
My advice would be to find a high quality dealer (who has an extensive protfolio for good work and certifications) - there are still a few around - discuss your options in terms of loan projectors you are thinking about and actually testing these in your room, against your criteria for image quality and brightness.(I would certainly pay a little more for that type of flexibility and of course their suggestions and after sales as opposed to winging it). There are so many varibles that any advice from me would be pages long and even then miss important factors you haven't mentioned or considered.
My opinion above is based on my batcave and preference for calibrated image brightness at around 14 - 16ftl and a screen gain of 0.8, plus these conditions are kept the same for every review I conduct so it's difficult for me to comment fully and definitively when discussing differing screen gains, room conditions etc. Obviously when you start adding in different gains, room conditions and so on it can start to be a mine field and this is where experienced installers and dealers can assist you fully. Hope that helps and sorry I cannot be more definitive on this occasion.

Thank you for the quick reply Phil.....

And yes, I am located in "the colonies."

I am currently using a 135" version of the 1.8 gain screen I mentioned with the 7210... although mounted a bit higher than it will be in the new "edifice," which has total light control. I have never noticed any "hot-spotting" or other artifacts with this screen (I also have a 120" version of this screen being lit by a Mitsubishi HD1000U).

I do realize that all projectors/screens are "application" driven, but there seems to be a real dearth of higher lumen output projectors that put out an excellent image at a "reasonable" price.

The throw/offset on the IN83 remove it from the list (it might be barely be made to work by tilting the projector and screen) as well as the throw on the older BenQ W20000. I had hopes for the new BenQ W6000 but it appears to have iris "issues" which cause me to hesitate. The new Epson 8500 can put out enough light if you use the less optimized Living Room mode which compromises image quality, but I have been less than enthused about LCD offerings as the images always appeared rather flat and as I seem to have an extreme aversion to SDE.

Don't wish to be long-winded, just filling in a bit of information and wish to thank you again for taking the time to respond.

Excuse the crudeness of the diagram, it's not to scale obviously. Concerning the anamorphic function of the AE4000. Does the create an image like in Type A or Type B?

Non zoomed in is on the left and zoomed in 2:35 mode is on the right.

Type A is what the PT-AE4000 does. We have fed back that Type B would be a welcome feature on their next model.

I'm a new member to this forum and hope someone can shed some light on this:
I just received my Panasonic AE4000u (here in the US). I saw the IFA 2009 U-Tube video that demonstrates the 2.35:1 mode that automatically zooms the image to fill a 2.35:1 screen. On my AE4000 under the LENS MEMORY menu shows the AUTO SWITCHING option. There are two items in the AUTO SWITCHING: 2:35:1 Image Detection, and 16:9 Image Detection. On my AE4000 both selections show these two options as OFF as follows:
2:35:1 Image Detection OFF
16:9 Image Detection OFF

On my AE4000 there are no left and right arrows (for the 16:9 and 2.35:1) items) that would allow changing either option to ON (although in the user manual it shows left/right arrows to change the selection).

So my question is: Am I not able to change the selections to ON because of the input source? My source is the latest Samsung BD3600 BluRay player with HDMI out, and I'm connected to the HDMI #1 (out of 3) on the AE4000U.

Or is there something else I need to do first in some other option on some other menu that will then enable the ability to set the AUTO SWITCH to ON for either 16:9 or 2:35.1.

Any assistance would be appreciated.

I had a PT-AE3000U and just installed a PT-AE4000U yesterday. Type A is what PT-AE3000 could do. The new PT-AE4000 can do your Type B scenario. There are lens options for left, right, top, and bottom "masks". I believe these are electronic deactivation of the pixels. There is only a small amount of light leakage that appears.

When using the automatic 2.35 feature of the new PT-AE4000U, it automatically does the masking. You only need to use the manual setting for the masks if you wish to set for other than 2.35 automatic.

I used the manual left and right masks for 4:3 material on my 2.35 CIH screen. Basically I took my saved settings for "16:9" and adjusted the left and right masks, and saved the settings as a new saved setting named "4:3".

So to sum up, I currently have three lens settings saved: "2.35:1", "16:9", and "4:3".

CinemaPete:

First setup your saved lens settings: "2.35:1", "16:9", and "4:3"

Second step: The AUTOMATIC screen adjustment for 2.35 material is configured to use the saved "2.35:1" setting, and the 16:9 AUTOMATIC adjustment is configured to use "16:9" setting.

You need to set these up yourself.

Regards,
Dennis

Could you post a detailed step by step to do it?
Thank´s!!

My setup input to projector is HDMI 1 1080p/60.

Prerequisites:
You have a 2.35:1 ratio screen.
You have mounted the PT-AE4000. Best if centered as much as possible. Better if within the width and height of the screen.

STEP 1:
Center image horizontally with manual HORIZONTIAL LENS SHIFT DIAL.
ZOOM lens to maximum screen width image.
Adjust FOCUS, HORIZONTIAL LENS SHIFT DIAL, and ZOOM until you get screen filled from left to right edges of screen.
Don't worry about top and bottom right now, that is for STEP 2.
Adjust MENU;OPTIONS;INSTALLATION as necessary to make menus readable.
SAVE your lens settings: MENU;LENS CONTROL; LENS MEMORY SAVE; ENTER. Using menu on screen NAME the stored setting "2.35:1" and press ENTER.

STEP 2:
Adjust FOCUS, VERTICAL LENS SHIFT DIAL, and ZOOM until you get screen filled from top to bottom edges of screen.
SAVE your lens settings: MENU; LENS CONTROL; LENS MEMORY SAVE; scroll down to "Position 2"; and ENTER. Using menu on screen NAME the stored setting "16:9" and press ENTER.

STEP 3:
Program AUTO SWITCHING: MENU; LENS CONTROL; AUTO SWITCHING; and press ENTER.
Press ▲ ▼ to select the "2.35:1 IMAGE DETECTION" in the AUTO SWITCH menu.
Press ◄ ► to select your required LENS MEMORY for AUTO SWITCHING.
At this point, there should be three options: OFF, and the two lens memories you created in STEPS 1 and 2.
Pick the "2.35:1" memory.
Scroll down to the "16:9 IMAGE DETECTION" in the AUTO SWITCH menu.
Pick the "16:9" memory setting you created in STEP 2.
Exit menus.


Your projector should now detect after several seconds a changed 2.35:1 or 16:9/4:3 image size automatically.

At any time you adjust your zoom or focus and want to keep setting permanently you must save your LENS POSITION MEMORY as we did in STEPS 1 and 2.

You may want to create a third lens memory for 4:3 that activates image masking for the left and right side of screen. This third saved lens setting will not be automatically triggered, but you can select it by pressing the LENS button on the remote twice. You can manually select your saved memory settings using this method. I believe you must have a live image projected in order to make masking adjustments.

The masking settings are not needed for the AUTODETECT 2.35:1 and 16:9 settings. The projector does this automatically.

At least I can say this all worked for me. I did this from my memory. Let me know your experiences. I will update this posting if it isn't correct.

Dennis

Panasonic Support Site: Manuals, specs, test images, etc.
https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/pro...000/index.html

Thank´s!
I´ll try ASAP.

RM

Thanks Denis for the detailed setup on the 2.35:1 mode.

Will try it out and report back.

Hi Phil,

thx for the review, would you mind sharing the settings you made to Cinema 1? that would be great to use as a standpoint, for a home calibration.

Projectorreviews has written their settings to Color 1, and sure the colors are accurate, they look great to me. But i really think that the picture is to dimm. not bright enough for my taste.

The controls to fix this is locked in Color1

Thanks

I currently have an AE2000. This may sound a little strange, but my bulb is close to the end of it's life. Rather than getting a new bulb, I was considering upgrading to a better projector. My screen is 120" with about a 14" throw, ceiling mounted. The AE4000 is listed as 1600 lumens while the AE2000 is 2000. I like things bright. Opinions, is this a much better projector or is there a better choice. Last option, buy a bulb and wait 1-2 years for AE7000.

If you are happy with your PT-AE2000, i'd say buy the bulb.
The next big thing is 3D, and that will property be supported on the next model.

If you are going to sell your PT-AE2000 you dont have to Burn out the bulb before upgrading.

There is a lot of hype regarding these new projectors and their supposedly deeper blacks. 100,000:1 contrast is a snow job. In fact these projectors, when calibrated and used in some cinema mode, barely do more than 400:1 ansi contrast and on/off actual measured is a bit over 4000:1 (how's that compared to 100,000:1?). Many old DLP projectors can do the same, years ago already.

In truth, unless you have a totally dark room, a properly calibrated projector and light absorbing walls and ceiling, you will not see much, if any, of the supposed ae4000 superiority.

A new bulb is the right purchase, safe in the knowledge that your current projector is at least 90% of a new one. In most situation, watching DVDs, HDTV and poor quality blurays, your machine is every bit as good.

I have the AE4000 and I have owned few projectors before the Ae4000, Infocus 4805>Sharp Z3000>JVC RS2 and now AE4000. I prefer the AE4000 over all of the PJs I have owned. The contrast in Normal mode is excellent. Yes, it is true if you use any of the cinema modes it would be dim at a little over 400 lumnes. But use the normal mode and you will lose little if any on color accuracy, at least to this eye. The contrast and black level you dazzle you not to mention the lens memory feature being the icing on the cake. I am getting a new 2.35 screen. My home cinema will never be the same again. What a truly cinematic experience! Thanks, Panasonic!

I had a demo of the AE4000 today and was disppointed if I let the truth be known. Even on Colour1 the colours were a tad muted even compared to the Mitsubishi HC3800 (DLP) I had had for a few days (returned today). I think the phrase often used is "Pop" and "Wow", neither of which came to my mind on the AE4000. But the biggest let down for me (and again making comparison to the diminutive HC3800 at nearly half the price), the picture was too soft; there was no crispness to the image which made HD look no better than a very well done upscale of SD material, which I had also pumped through the Mitsubishi.

I'm afraid the Panny is off my list of potential suitors to fill the gap left by my returned HC3800 (returned because one family member was struggling with RBE).

The AE4000 has very good colors OTB in color1 and cinema1 mode. Maybe those were changed on the unit you reviewed ? Detail clarity at +2 or 3 would take care of any softness. The panasonic image is soft for the first 1/2 hour after fired up. I think the PJ has to warm up for the lens focus to be spot on.

Interesting comments. DLP will look sharper especially if used in the brighter modes. It also depends on the environment. The Panasonic is not soft, it uses a technique to hide the gaps between the pixel make up. This pixel look is what can make cheaper DLPs look sharper and what some would describe as a 'digital' look. I'm not sure I subscribe to that description, but the Panasonic is certainly not soft when set up correctly, it just doesn't have that sharp edged look of DLP. This can make you believe you are seeing more detail.
Colours are pretty good out of the box on both projectors in the right modes, so surprised you thought the Panasonic was muted as if anything its slightly more saturated out of the box than the Mitsubishi (which has a a gamut that is off kilter slightly).
If you want bright and vivid then the Mitsubishi in its most used modes like natural (or native can't remember the name) will look sharp, vivid and bright. However, if in user cinema mode and medium colour temp, the mits should have a closer look to the Panasonic (and loads of added features like the zoom modes). Of course its all about what you want, the Panny gets very accurate to how it should be and looks cinematic. The Mits is limited in features and placement options but will give you an image that 'pops' if thats what you want over accuracy.

Hope that helps some. I would also look at the Sony HW15 or the TW4400 from Epson as well, so you get a good idea of the £2k price point.

Whether in low or standard mode, the difference between the HC3800 and AE4000 sharpness was not insignificant. Perhaps a tweak on detail clarity as DVDIT suggested may have improved it. Me, Incrediboy and Flash all had the same impression as we watched the Panny. We were equally in agreement that the JVC950 just knocked the socks off everything else! But you'd expect that at the price and JVC's reputation with blacks.

The AE4000 was viewed with OOTB settings and so not sure how much "tweaking" may have been necessary to at least show the AE4000 approaching its optimum performance. As it was, it was a little flat in its presentation on the day.

We had been fortunate with the Mits in that we had enough room to allow placement without having to resort to keystoning to get a square image. Sure, any of the PJ's with lens shift will give me even more flexibility in the future, so that is likely to be a bonus and not necessarily a "must-have".

Perhaps the lack of a "sharp edge" as you say, may actually be the culprit of the whole image appearing soft, whereas in fact the Panny is in focus, and sharp, but that I'm not accustomed to "film like" quality compared to the enhanced edges of the Mitsy. Who knows?!

Bob, sorry that you didn't like the AE4000 & hope you enjoy the JVC 750, I'm very jealous

I've found having the Digital Clarity set to +1 works best for me, when looking at various test patterns it gives a more defined edge without adding much in the way of artificial sharpness and associated artefacts. Certainly sharper than with the DC set to 0.

Iris - Wasn't to sure about the Auto Iris, but I have to admit that it certainly improves the depth of image on darker scenes. With out it darker scenes appear a little flat and murky, switch it on and you get the depth seen in the brighter scenes of the movie. Not entirely sure that it's what the director intended, but it works well enough

I have a red blob on screen. I have tried compressed air in case of dust and no joy. On close inspection lots of tiny red dots. Instructions say white screen test. white to black and black to white? I think may have been left on pause for up to one hour and image projected on screen. Did this for 1hr 10mins- no joy. Can anyone help?

Mr. Incredible....

You might also want to take a look at the LG CF181-D. It is reported to do quite excellent colors OTB.

I understand your feelings about the LCD machines... having owned 3 DLP units it is hard to move to another technology. However, that being said I have seen the Epsons properly set up and they are very good.