...and in addition, even at normal viewing distance it sticks out like a sore thumb that it is not true 4K resolution, (Stick it by the side of a JVC and the resolution just becomes embarrassing)"
They do its just an attempt to get a rise out of people save a grand and buy the EpsonDon't the Epson 9300 and JVC 5900 in the article use equivalent 1920x1080 pixel shifting ? I'd expect them to yield similar results if set up correctly (from a resolution perspective).
What’s your thoughts on both having seen them?As far as I'm aware both the JVC and Epson work in much the same way when rendering UHD using their respective eshift - and having done a direct comparison in a split screen with both that does seem to be the case. When comparing up close to the screen, the biggest visible difference was panel alignment. Differences in contrast and image brightness may also play a part, so a brighter JVC with more contrast may look sharper.
I tend to agree with you, jvc has obviously the edge for contrast and deep blacks but the image noise and the tendence to lose some of shadow details didn't (still) convince me to buy it...with the right source btw is really incredible (lucy uhd, for instance)Pros and cons, I think I preferred the JVC, though the image noise tends to bug me. That's why I ended up with an Epson Laser.
I tend to agree with you, jvc has obviously the edge for contrast and deep blacks but the image noise and the tendence to lose some of shadow details didn't (still) convince me to buy it...with the right source btw is really incredible (lucy uhd, for instance)
Do you have 10500 laser epson?
Wow no Sony
"Just got say here Phil ..