Acer V9800 4K DLP Projector Review and Comments

I was having a look at some reviews too to see what their take on it was....

"The new Optoma UHD60 is based on the new 0.67-inch DLP DMD chip to provide a UHD 4K imagery definition using XPR pixel-shifting technology , a similar approach to those adopted today, Hui by the 3LCD Epson and JVC video projectors."

So the above comment was from a well renowned French PJ reviewer. He says its like e-shift on JVC/Epson as we've been discussing. But then you have this kind of comment:

"For example, the Texas Instruments chip uses a micromirror system of 4 million units, reflecting two distinct pixels to generate a total 8 million pixel display."

Now this second comment lines up with the TI promotional video, making you think that the 4 million mirrors give 2 pixels each.

So which is correct? And whats even more bizarre, both of the quotes above are actually by the same person in one review! So what is it - e-shift, mirrors? Even the reviewer doesn't seem to know what he's writing lol.

Full review (Optoma UHD60) Its in French though.

Test Optoma UHD60 : un vidéoprojecteur DLP 4K HDR prometteur

Its a pity Ekki from Cine4home didn't take the Acer apart when he had it as he's done this with lots of PJ's in the past. That would at least confirm if there was an e-shift lens in the light path.
 
The projector central review has the same issue.
Well I am breaking my own rules here, (Slap on the wrist required ouch!) but each micro mirror of the Ti 660 chipset can display 2 unique pixels, which as it has 4.15 million mirrors means it can display 8.3 million discrete pixels.

Watch the video here DLP660TE, DLPC4422, DLPA200 Chipset Overview and target display applications which explains it about 1.25” in.

Bill

Bill everyone agrees with you on that point. The bit you're not grasping is the second pixel is diagonally offset and overlaps. Therefore the arrangement of pixels isn't the same as UHD - similar number, different layout. That's all we're saying.
 
What's mind boggling, is that at the 1 minute 20 second mark, it clearly shows the optical actuator that eshifts the image in exactly the same way as JVC and Epson does:

upload_2017-8-9_19-40-28.png



And the text that is supplied under the video says this:

An optical actuator is also a necessary part of the system design to achieve full 4K UHD resolution on the screen.

As for the DMD producing two discrete pixels per mirror, it can't, just read TIs documents and you can see that is clearly impossible, which is what we have been saying all along, and yet some people still insist that it's 8.3 million discrete pixels, which it clearly isn't. It's an eshift system. It's the optical actuator that shifts the image diagonally, not the DMDs mirrors.
 
The projector central review has the same issue.


Bill everyone agrees with you on that point. The bit you're not grasping is the second pixel is diagonally offset and overlaps. Therefore the arrangement of pixels isn't the same as UHD - similar number, different layout. That's all we're saying.

Then we have been saying the same, as all I have said is that it provides True 4K UHD with 8.3 million discrete pixels, but does it by displaying 2 discrete 4. 15 million pixel images one after the other at a speed that the eye cannot see, rather than in 1 go which the Sony Native chip does. (BTW the 2 images can never be overlaid as they are not on at the same time, which means they don’t interfere with each other)

Bill
 
What's mind boggling, is that at the 1 minute 20 second mark, it clearly shows the optical actuator that eshifts the image in exactly the same way as JVC and Epson does:

View attachment 895990


And the text that is supplied under the video says this:

An optical actuator is also a necessary part of the system design to achieve full 4K UHD resolution on the screen.

As for the DMD producing two discrete pixels per mirror, it can't, just read TIs documents and you can see that is clearly impossible, which is what we have been saying all along, and yet some people still insist that it's 8.3 million discrete pixels, which it clearly isn't. It's an eshift system. It's the optical actuator that shifts the image diagonally, not the DMDs mirrors.

All the 4.15 million unique mirrors on the chip can display 2 unique pixels, and as 2 X 4.15 million = 8.3 million, you have 8.3 million discrete pixels.

Bill
 
(BTW the 2 images can never be overlaid as they are not on at the same time, which means they don’t interfere with each other)

Bill

It works exactly the same as the JVC and Epson eshift methods, and they put two 1080 images on screen sequentially, and they overlap on screen. They do it so fast that it looks like a single image, but no one is claiming the resolution is 2 x 1080, because it's closer to 2.7k

That's exactly what XPR is doing, with the same kind of overlap and therefore the same caveat as the JVC, so can not be putting full 4k on screen.

All the 4.15 million unique mirrors on the chip can display 2 unique pixels, and as 2 X 4.15 million = 8.3 million, you have 8.3 million discrete pixels.

Good grief.

But once they are on the screen, they are overlapping and are no longer discrete, just like eshift.

Can you really not see that?

Can you not see the optical actuator that is shown in the video and that it is said in the text that it is required to get full 4K on the screen?
 
Then we have been saying the same, as all I have said is that it provides True 4K UHD with 8.3 million discrete pixels, but does it by displaying 2 discrete 4. 15 million pixel images one after the other at a speed that the eye cannot see, rather than in 1 go which the Sony Native chip does. (BTW the 2 images can never be overlaid as they are not on at the same time, which means they don’t interfere with each other)

Bill

Sigh.....you're not just deliberately winding us up are you ?

It can't display a 1-1 bit accurate version of the source as the layout of the pixels is different and there's a different number of them.
 
I was wondering the same thing now. It's more like trolling than trying to understand what's really going on.
 
Try again

It is a 4.15 million mirror chip, but as each mirror can display 2 discrete pixels, it means it can display 8.3 million discrete pixels, the only thin it can’t do is display all 8.3 million pixels at the same time, instead it splits the 8,3 million pixel 4K input into 2 separate (And discrete) 4.15 million pixel images which it displays one after the other, the optical actuator just makes sure that the 2 images do not show in exactly the same place on the screen which would cause the eye to see a complete jumble.

Whichever way you look at it, as far as the eye is concerned it does produce a true 4K 8.3 million 3840 X 2160 image on screen. (I just don’t get why you can’t see this as everybody else I speak too does)

Bill
 
but I am trying to be as open minded about it to get to the bottom of it. I was even trying to see if the DMD alone could do the image shifting.

I'm the same too, always try to keep an open mind. And after all the recent posts, I'm starting to change my mind. IMO, there has been some clever use of words when describing the new chips and than one mirror can deliver two pixels due to speed of switching etc etc.Yes, it can, but not in a separate space - its actually in the exact space as the other pixel - i.e., pixel A and pixel B share the exact same space on the mirror, not separate spaces. The chip is simply a native chip like any other DLP chip and A and B pixels are shown alternatively very quickly on one space. Its actually the e-shift lens that splits them into the new space which is exactly how other e-shift projectors work.

The fact that they have been trying to 'imply' that they are 2 separate pixels, is a bit crafty.

Well I am breaking my own rules here, (Slap on the wrist required ouch!) but each micro mirror of the Ti 660 chipset can display 2 unique pixels, which as it has 4.15 million mirrors means it can display 8.3 million discrete pixels.

Watch the video here DLP660TE, DLPC4422, DLPA200 Chipset Overview and target display applications which explains it about 1.25” in.

Bill

The key reason I'm thinking its just the same as regular e-shift is that in this video, it pretty much says that the actuator, while sourced from a different supplier instead of TI, is basically a necessity in the process of delivering the UHD image. You can't get it without it.

In basic terms, if the chip truly can give 2 discrete pixels from the one mirror, then why would the optical actuator even be required in the first place? You have your 8m pixels already so what purpose does the actuator have? Thats the nail in the coffin for me.

I'm still keeping an open mind though, and reserve the right to change my mind back again in light of further info coming to light :)
 
Try again

It is a 4.15 million mirror chip, but as each mirror can display 2 discrete pixels, it means it can display 8.3 million discrete pixels, the only thin it can’t do is display all 8.3 million pixels at the same time, instead it splits the 8,3 million pixel 4K input into 2 separate (And discrete) 4.15 million pixel images which it displays one after the other, the optical actuator just makes sure that the 2 images do not show in exactly the same place on the screen which would cause the eye to see a complete jumble.

Whichever way you look at it, as far as the eye is concerned it does produce a true 4K 8.3 million 3840 X 2160 image on screen. (I just don’t get why you can’t see this as everybody else I speak too does)

Bill

Well I think it's only you on this thread who has a different idea, though I suspect most others bailed several days ago.

It doesn't work as you describe because it's can't magically determine where the second pixel goes, the only place it can go is half a pixel offset diagonally. It can't place pixels in a 3840x2160 space. All it can do is show two images of 2716 x 1528 in quick succession (as you say faster than the eye can see).

Just think about placing 1 pixel at the bottom of the screen for a moment:

Ti can place that one pixel at the left hand side, say position 1, in the middle, say position 2716, or at the right hand side in position 5432.

A native 4k Sony can only place it in 3840 different locations.

They are just different beasts.
 
Try again

It is a 4.15 million mirror chip, but as each mirror can display 2 discrete pixels, it means it can display 8.3 million discrete pixels, the only thin it can’t do is display all 8.3 million pixels at the same time, instead it splits the 8,3 million pixel 4K input into 2 separate (And discrete) 4.15 million pixel images which it displays one after the other, the optical actuator just makes sure that the 2 images do not show in exactly the same place on the screen which would cause the eye to see a complete jumble.

How do you think it places the two 4.15mp images on the screen to generate the image so that the pixels remain discrete. i.e do not overlap? Remember it's a 16:9 array and the shape and pixel size does not change.
 
I'm the same too, always try to keep an open mind. And after all the recent posts, I'm starting to change my mind. IMO, there has been some clever use of words when describing the new chips and than one mirror can deliver two pixels due to speed of switching etc etc.Yes, it can, but not in a separate space - its actually in the exact space as the other pixel - i.e., pixel A and pixel B share the exact same space on the mirror, not separate spaces. The chip is simply a native chip like any other DLP chip and A and B pixels are shown alternatively very quickly on one space. Its actually the e-shift lens that splits them into the new space which is exactly how other e-shift projectors work.

The fact that they have been trying to 'imply' that they are 2 separate pixels, is a bit crafty.

Yes it is crafty, but people like Abacus are falling for it. It's just a higher res eshift called XPR


The key reason I'm thinking its just the same as regular e-shift is that in this video, it pretty much says that the actuator, while sourced from a different supplier instead of TI, is basically a necessity in the process of delivering the UHD image. You can't get it without it.

Exactly. The DMD by itself can not off set the second image.

In basic terms, if the chip truly can give 2 discrete pixels from the one mirror, then why would the optical actuator even be required in the first place? You have your 8m pixels already so what purpose does the actuator have? Thats the nail in the coffin for me.

I'm still keeping an open mind though, and reserve the right to change my mind back again in light of further info coming to light :)

It's an eshift system by another name, but they are not being completely honest about how they are saying how it works, hence the confusion. I think the part that some people struggle with is the use of the word 'discrete' and where the second image is placed with respect the first. We know how eshift works and so can understand it, it's just a pity the TI video doesn't show it actually working like Benq and Optoma have using their chipset. I think that would stop them using discrete as a description of the pixels that end up on screen.
 
Sounds like as long as you don't buy both and run them side by side you'll be ok with the 2k one?!
 
Is this make up stuff day?
I think it's a bit tongue in cheek?

Re: @mbmapit post, I think it's unlikely you'll ever get to see those 2 machines side by side so maybe he'll come back with some more meat on the bones as to what he means.

At current price points, it's hard to justify the Acer IMO which is around double the price of the Optomas.
 
I think this is more akin to the uhd65 (£3k) rather than uhd60 (£2.5k) or uhd550x (£2k), due to its colour wheel and so may be more suited to a dedicated cinema room with controlled light. I'd still find it hard to see extra £1k value in this over the uhd65, although having looked at the specs this weighs 15kg and the uhd65 7.3kg, so there must be something in there. It is manual zoom etc, so wonder if the weight is better glass or just some fancy lead weights to make it feel like a quality product?!?
 
I think this is more akin to the uhd65 (£3k) rather than uhd60 (£2.5k) or uhd550x (£2k), due to its colour wheel and so may be more suited to a dedicated cinema room with controlled light. I'd still find it hard to see extra £1k value in this over the uhd65, although having looked at the specs this weighs 15kg and the uhd65 7.3kg, so there must be something in there. It is manual zoom etc, so wonder if the weight is better glass or just some fancy lead weights to make it feel like a quality product?!?

The acer is a big beast, thats for sure! I think its likely that the Acer has a better lens but after that, I'm not sure what the extra cash gets you to be honest.

If its going in a dedicated room, its hard to recommend any of these DLP's to be fair as there may be more to gain by going for something like Epson or JVC. I guess we need to understand what his priorities are.
 
I don't have enough knowledge to know if it's just the different colour wheel and lower lumens 2200 of the Acer and UHD65 vs 3000 of the UHD60 that make them both a dedicated room type projector. All I have deducted (right or wrong!?!) is that I thInk it's closer to the 65 in spec so presume it's targetted / marketed for the same environment as the uhd65. For me I'd be putting any new projector in a lounge, so am eagerly awaiting real world views of the uhd60 or more likely uhd550x to see if I should jump that way or go for something more like the Epson TW7300..
 
I don't have enough knowledge to know if it's just the different colour wheel and lower lumens 2200 of the Acer and UHD65 vs 3000 of the UHD60 that make them both a dedicated room type projector. All I have deducted (right or wrong!?!) is that I thInk it's closer to the 65 in spec so presume it's targetted / marketed for the same environment as the uhd65. For me I'd be putting any new projector in a lounge, so am eagerly awaiting real world views of the uhd60 or more likely uhd550x to see if I should jump that way or go for something more like the Epson TW7300..
Yes, its the colour wheel. The Acer and the Optoma UHD65 have an RGBRGB colour wheel whereas the 60/550x have 6 colour wheel with a white segment which gives it the increased brightness (and lower contrast)

My room is a living room environment as well and while I'm suitably impressed by the sharpness of these new machines, I would like to understand a bit more on how they handle 24p bluray as well as our standard 50p broadcast - and ideally how they handle UHD football matches from sky and BT. If they can do that well, I'll be tempted to get one :)
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom