Epson, JVC or Sony at around £5-6K

Discussion in 'Projectors, Screens & Video Processors' started by Atomicus, Feb 5, 2018.

Tags:

    1. Atomicus

      Atomicus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      May 10, 2009
      Messages:
      583
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      46
      Location:
      Chichester
      Ratings:
      +144
      My leaning at this budget, circa £5-6K, would be the Epson LS10500, but is that the right way to go? I would primarily be using for movies (BluRay & Netflix) and PC (+ some console) gaming, so the input lag would be a factor for sure. I'd ruled out older JVC models because of this, but they seem to have resolved this with the newer models.

      The laser of the Epson is great in so far as it negates the need to worry about changing a bulb, but are there performance features in any of the JVC or Sony 4K projectors that trump this and justify choosing one over the Epson?

      I don't know if I will be losing out with the 4K up-scaling of the Espon vs native 4K that some of the JVC and Sony projectors offer, but from what I've read I'd be somewhat hard pressed to notice?

      I plan to be using on a 100" screen and will be in a bat cave environment that is approx 4.5m long. I am not locked in to an exact seating position yet, so that's flexible. Any advice would be appreciated. :)
       
      Last edited: Feb 5, 2018
    2. dhts

      dhts
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Aug 31, 2006
      Messages:
      689
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      63
      Ratings:
      +296
      At that price point the JVC's are like the Epson, pseudo 4k, using a 1080p panel pixel shifted.

      If you're not using a high quality 4k source there's really next to nothing to be gained by having a true 4k Sony projector. If you've a UHD 4k source then there's some limited value in having a true 4k projector but the Sony at that price point doesn't have some of the nicer features such as lens memory and iris - most would consider these more important than absolute resolution.

      Both the JVC 7900 and Epson 10500 are fantastic projectors if your room is up to them, ie you can control light and it's not a white box. Which is right for you is really a personal choice, and you need to see them both at a decent dealer.

      You should also see the lesser models, JVC's 5900 and Epson 9300 and see if you think they are worth the extra £2K - these cheaper models really provide a winning combination of price vs performance and hopefully it won't be too long before we see real 4k laser projectors at around the £5-6k price point.
       
    3. ShanePJ

      ShanePJ
      Well-known Member AVForums Sponsor

      Joined:
      Jun 20, 2006
      Messages:
      2,433
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      Unit 5 The Sidings, Bacup, Lancs, OL13 9RW
      Ratings:
      +616
      If you are local enough to us, we have one of the Epson 10500's in the demo room and you'll be able to decide if its good enough for you.

      As you are in a blacked-out room, the JVC will have this room won on overall darkness with the Epson coming in a close second and the Sony following last, The Sony will win with 4k footage as it is native, its scaling ability is very good indeed and cannot be questions to much either.

      As both the JVC and Epson use shifting solution to create a 4K experience, this will put them in good stead for some of the footage that you wish to view as its not just about the pixels, but how they interpret them and both of these projector do this very well.

      Lamp life, there is only one real winner here as you guessed and its the one without the Lamp.

      Size wise, all these models are quite large, so if you have space for one, you will have space for all of them.

      On another note, also take a look at the Optoma UZD65 as this fits your budget and brings the sharpness of the Sony with the lamp longevity of the Epson with an ANSI contrast similar to the JVC in the real world (even though its blacks are not as good as the JVC).

      None of these projectors are slouches. JVC’s have been the masters at black detail since JVC came to the projector market. Epson have proven themselves with Laser tech and are now on the second generation. Sony has been refining 4K SXRD and also cheapening it in other areas to hit price points. Optoma is the only one here which is a little unknown long term, but promises a vast amount with the none laser version winning many accolades, the difference is the lighting system which should make it very attractive.
       
      Last edited: Feb 5, 2018
    4. Atomicus

      Atomicus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      May 10, 2009
      Messages:
      583
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      46
      Location:
      Chichester
      Ratings:
      +144
      The JVC 5900 is an interesting one, and at £2K less I do wonder if that makes more sense vs the Epson at £6K? I hadn't considered the Optoma, and that's priced in-between the two at £5K.

      I don't think space will be an issue. I plan to ceiling mount.

      The lack of lamp issues with the Epson is certainly an attraction, but i don't know if I'm lending that too much importance, especially given how much more expensive it is than the JVC or Optoma.

      Never easy!! o_O
       
    5. dhts

      dhts
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Aug 31, 2006
      Messages:
      689
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      63
      Ratings:
      +296
      How much to you plan to use the projector ? I'm a use it for movies once or twice a week kind of guy and have never needed to change a pj bulb. The Optoma is DLP, and whilst it does have a laser it doesn't I believe achieve a much wider colour range than a normal lamp based projector (which is the other advantage of laser ones). Not many would chose a DLP for a bat cave these days.

      If £6k is your budget compare the 7900 with the 10500, decide which you prefer and then compare with their little brothers the 5900 and 9300. They won't be as good, only you can decide if the incremental benefit is worth the additional cost to you.
       
    6. Jenz

      Jenz
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Nov 9, 2005
      Messages:
      483
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      47
      Location:
      Milton Keynes
      Ratings:
      +220
      I'm going to eagerly watch this thread as I am moving on from my Epson 9000 and am considering almost exactly the same: LS10500, 9300, JVC 5900, or JVC 7900.
       
    7. Atomicus

      Atomicus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      May 10, 2009
      Messages:
      583
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      46
      Location:
      Chichester
      Ratings:
      +144
      I'd be using a fair bit I imagine, more than once or twice a week. I'm quite an avid film watcher, plus I have no kids or any other distractions lol! ;)

      £6K was around my max yes, but obviously it comes down to a question of price/performance. I've seen it said that at £4K the JVC 5900 can't be beat, and you have to spend A LOT more to get a significant amount of improvement over what that offers. But that's subjective I know.

      It obviously does come down to personal preference to a certain extent, but I don't think I'd be disappointed with any of the above options, and also it may be hard to see the difference short of a side by side comparison. Jumping between different demo set-ups at different locations may just confuse me even more.
       
    8. dhts

      dhts
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Aug 31, 2006
      Messages:
      689
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      63
      Ratings:
      +296
      Option #1, simply buy the 5900, it's a sound choice, nicely within budget and if you're the sort of person who just get's on with life without worrying about whether they made the absolute right decision then you'll be fine.

      Option #2, get yourself to one of the few specialist home cinema dealers who are active on the forum who should have most if not all of the 4 models on demo. Pick their brains and then please purchase through that one rather than shop around for the best price - these guys are all pretty competitive but I'd go knowing what a good price is. I don't think you're too far from Ricky in Surrey who's very knowledgeable.

      I agree, trying to compare different models at different locations isn't the way to go.
       
    9. Atomicus

      Atomicus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      May 10, 2009
      Messages:
      583
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      46
      Location:
      Chichester
      Ratings:
      +144
      Both solid options lol! Part of me is also cognisant of the fact the no projector is at the zenith... there will always be something better around the corner, so spending top whack now while considering price/performance maybe doesn't make the most sense. It allows room for an upgrade further down the line, one that could easily vault the performance of one of the more expensive options today. That's the unknowable though... for all we know projector technology could stall for a few years, and/or what comes along next ends up being considerably better but exorbitantly expensive.
       
    10. Abacus

      Abacus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jan 19, 2015
      Messages:
      566
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      67
      Location:
      Torbay
      Ratings:
      +349
      Each technology has its advantages and disadvantages and only you can decide after viewing, however only Sony, JVC and 4K DLP process the full 4K input image, the Epson just works on a 1080P image.

      Also have a look at the Acer VL7860 laser 4K DLP which should be available soon, with a price of around £3500.

      Don’t buy blind, as if you get the wrong one (No matter how well reviewed) you will end up disappointed.

      Bill
       
    11. xar

      xar
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Jan 31, 2013
      Messages:
      1,654
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      Edinburgh
      Ratings:
      +983
      I have the ls10500 and love it. Don't rule out the benefit of near enough instant on/off with the laser. Handy when you want a quick blast of something. Also be careful of projectors for 4k in general. I have had a native 4k Sony and now the Epson, and neither really blew me away with 4k content vs TVs. You would think the bigger screen would benefit from the supposedly higher resolution but it doesn't a lot of the time, and projectors in general aren't bright enough to pull off HDR. I run mine my though a Lumagen so get the best possible 4k image I can, but it's hit and miss to be honest. Not slating 4k as I am an early adopter, just saying that projector based 4k isn't leaps and bounds above full HD in my view, so bear that in mind when demoing.
       
      Last edited: Feb 5, 2018
    12. Abacus

      Abacus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jan 19, 2015
      Messages:
      566
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      67
      Location:
      Torbay
      Ratings:
      +349
      Another option

      There are new sub £2000 4K DLP projectors on the way, so why not get one of these, and in 2 – 3 years’ time, (Depending how much you use your projector) then get a Laser 4K projector, as by this time they will have matured with all the bells and whistles included, as well as probably being under £3000, that way you will still be spending £5000 (Just spread over 2 – 3 years) but have a fully mature 4K laser projector, whereas if you get a laser 4K one now, while you will not need to change a lamp, you will probably still want to change your projector for a more mature 4K projector.

      Just a thought

      Bill

      BTW: If you look around, new Optoma 550 4K projectors can be picked up new from some dealers for under £1500, and UHD60 models for under £2000. (A £500 saving)
       
    13. mb3195

      mb3195
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Dec 27, 2007
      Messages:
      1,447
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      2
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      Deeping Gate, Peterborough
      Ratings:
      +1,334
      I have gone from an Epson 9300 to a JVC 7900, I have a dedicated cinema room that is a bat cave environment.

      The epson is very good, but having just watched blade runner 2049 on UHD on a 100” screen, I personally think you will struggle to beat it on picture quality. It looked absolutely incredible.

      Happy to demo if you’re close enough....
       
    14. Atomicus

      Atomicus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      May 10, 2009
      Messages:
      583
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      46
      Location:
      Chichester
      Ratings:
      +144
      I'm on the south coast so a bit far, but thanks :). Did you notice a big difference from your 9300, worthy of the price? Did you demo any other projectors, and what made you go for the JVC?
       
    15. mb3195

      mb3195
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Dec 27, 2007
      Messages:
      1,447
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      2
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      Deeping Gate, Peterborough
      Ratings:
      +1,334
      Brighter image, more vibrant colours and better blacks.

      I didn’t demo any others as I’ve had a JVC before so knew what I’d be getting.

      For my needs it is the right projector without a doubt. If you want one for every day use then the LS10500 may be a better option as the JVC takes a while to switch on and around 20 seconds to sync when changing source.
       
    16. jfinnie

      jfinnie
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Oct 1, 2004
      Messages:
      4,387
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      133
      Location:
      Norwich
      Ratings:
      +1,798
      I think they're probably all good at the price; I agonised between LS10500 and X7900 and am going for the JVC X7900 due to 18g input, best contrast and not needing to use DI (the DI on the Epson which you really want to use caused at least one artefact that my eye locked on to in Oblivion cigar sequence).

      To be honest I don't really think lamp cost comes into it much when you're spending 6K on a PJ unless you really are going to use it 12hrs a day. 3-4 hrs a day should get you something like 18 - 24 months on the latest JVC lamp setup. I'm sure if you're buying it you could easily negotiate a spare lamp or 2 into the deal, or an equivalent discount.

      I've liked the resolution but been unimpressed with contrast on the 9300 units I've seem. And Sony at the price you'll have no iris at all, which is a pain if you want a reference brightness image (unless you strap an external filter on the lens).
       
    17. mambo1888

      mambo1888
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Dec 8, 2009
      Messages:
      3,962
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      136
      Location:
      Fife
      Ratings:
      +613
      Do you plan on doing any gaming as well as watching movies? I think only the JVC hdmi is 18gb, and able handle 4k60 HDR. This would mainly affect gaming as most movies are only 4k24 HDR.
       
    18. Atomicus

      Atomicus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      May 10, 2009
      Messages:
      583
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      46
      Location:
      Chichester
      Ratings:
      +144
      Yes I would be doing some gaming, via PC and console, so that is definitely a consideration.
       
    19. Atomicus

      Atomicus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      May 10, 2009
      Messages:
      583
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      46
      Location:
      Chichester
      Ratings:
      +144
      Valid point on the lamp... I doubt I'd be using it that often lol!

      Between the 7900 and 5900, is there a big difference there? Looking at the specs, the main difference between them seems to be the brightness and contrast. Is that it? There's a £2K price swing, so I'm just trying to figure out if that's really worth it, as subjective a question as I know that is.
       
    20. mb3195

      mb3195
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Dec 27, 2007
      Messages:
      1,447
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      2
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      Deeping Gate, Peterborough
      Ratings:
      +1,334
      You get small improvements the higher up the food chain you go.

      Justifying the price is for you to decide on whether it’s worth it. Personally it is.
       
    21. jakimp

      jakimp
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Feb 21, 2009
      Messages:
      1,232
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      bromsgrove
      Ratings:
      +982
      this is an interesting discussion

      if I was in your shoes now I would want to see the JVC 5900 for sure

      I have had a 9300W for 15 months now and it is undoubtedly the best PJ I have had and still impresses me every time I use it

      some of the very positive views of members on the 5900 had me thinking of changing from my Epson but I have decided to hold fire and see what the next 12 months brings as I still enjoy the 9300 so waiting is no hardship

      the 9300W is still competitive and I don't need a 15m HDMI cable and a new Epson bulb is £107 so I don't mind how much I use it - about 100 hours a month on average is my usage level

      the great thing is they are all fantastic machines and cant really make a horrible choice
       
    22. xar

      xar
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Jan 31, 2013
      Messages:
      1,654
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      Edinburgh
      Ratings:
      +983
      I chose the ls10500 mostly for the 'fit and forget' factor (lasts 10 years on daily use, no lamp replacement required), and the speed of the laser going on/off. It's the first projector have had that is almost TV esq in its ease of use. Plus it looks amazing.
       
      • Like Like x 1
      • Thanks Thanks x 1
      • List
    23. Sunshinewelly

      Sunshinewelly
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Dec 1, 2005
      Messages:
      5,026
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      106
      Ratings:
      +440
      If you using it for gaming as well then you can rule out the Epson due to its crippled HDMI chipset.

      I was in a similar position to you. I ended up buying a new JVC X7500. the differences between the x7500 and x7900 are negligible and the price of the X7500 was around the same price i would have paid for a x5900.

      i did a lot of research and from that it was clear that nothing can touch the JVC
       
    24. Peter Parker

      Peter Parker
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Apr 6, 2001
      Messages:
      13,557
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      UK.
      Ratings:
      +3,057
      You keep saying this (you used to say it about the JVCs too) - that's not how it looked to me doing split screen with a JVC but if you can provide a link to prove this that would be useful. After all, people may be making buying decisions based on comments like this.

      Also, there are no 4K DLPs - they use their own version of eshift so other than Sony, everything else is pixel shifting and overlapping images to give the impression of a higher resolution. Again, people may be making decisions with their money based on comments like this.
       
      • Like Like x 3
      • Agree Agree x 1
      • List
    25. xar

      xar
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Jan 31, 2013
      Messages:
      1,654
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      Edinburgh
      Ratings:
      +983
      I owned a native 4k Sony and now the Epson. In real life the difference between pixel shift and native 4k isn't as big as it should be. I dropped from native to pixel shift and don't feel I have lost anything in the process .
       
      • Like Like x 2
      • Agree Agree x 1
      • List
    26. jakimp

      jakimp
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Feb 21, 2009
      Messages:
      1,232
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      bromsgrove
      Ratings:
      +982
      Yes but you have to admit abacus is very consistent in making these comments

      I don’t know what “process the full 4K input” means

      As I understood it eshift and 4K enhancement do pretty much exactly the same thing. I can understand that you might think one or the other does the pixel shift thing better but they are doing the same trickery as each other
       
    27. Peter Parker

      Peter Parker
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Apr 6, 2001
      Messages:
      13,557
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      UK.
      Ratings:
      +3,057
      So if the information is inaccurate or incorrect, that makes it OK if you repeat it often enough and without clarification?

      JVCs early eshift just processed a 1080 image, but the later versions take two different 1080 sets from the 4K image and process them to give a resolution that is in reality closer to 2.7k. As I understand it, Epson does much the same - for example, if you let the LS Epsons upscale 1080 to fauK it looks a tad soft, but if you feed it 4K it looks more detailed and very close to a native 4K Sony when comparing in a split screen set up. If it was downscaling and then upscaling as has been suggested it would look much the same as 1080 upscaled to fauK. It's a simple test that you can do if you have the pj in front of you. The lamp based Epsons look a little sharper with 1080 due to the LCD pixel structure having larger gaps compared to the RLCD of the laser models.

      This is how JVC does it:

      JVC Pro FAQ - We just installed a DLA-RS6710, but I'm reading online that even though it accepts 4k input, and outputs in 4k, in between it actually downsamples to 1080p, then puts it through the e-shift process. Is that what happens?

      The projector uses complex and advanced processing to internally deconstruct each 4K video frame into two unique 1080p sub-frames that represent the original 4K frame. It is important to remember that these two sub-frames are unique to each other as a way to preserve the high resolution elements of the original 4K frame.

      TI's XPR is eshifting a higher res native chip that is half the res of 4K (JVC/Epson is quarter res) and combined with being a single chip device gives a resulting resolution that is closer to native 4K. They are not native 4K devices though. TIs own documentation even shows it's a pixel shifting technology.

      All I'm asking is for some evidence to prove the comments, I don't think that's much to ask.
       
    28. jakimp

      jakimp
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Feb 21, 2009
      Messages:
      1,232
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      116
      Location:
      bromsgrove
      Ratings:
      +982
      I wasn’t endorsing abacus’s view merely agreeing with you that he seems to say the same thing about Epson enhancement very regularly
       
    29. Abacus

      Abacus
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jan 19, 2015
      Messages:
      566
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      67
      Location:
      Torbay
      Ratings:
      +349
      There are 4 main ways used to display 4K images on a projector.

      Native: which display each 4K frame exactly as input. (8.3 million Pixels)

      XPR (As used in Ti DLP) which splits the image in 2 (Giving 2 discrete 4.15 million pixel images) and displays them one after the other (As the 2 images are displayed separately, then “technically” you get 8.3 million discrete pixels (Otherwise they would be able to claim a true 4K image) with the second offset by ½ pixel, however due to the speed at which the 2 images are displayed, the eye only sees one image. (And being an engineer I stand by this 100%)

      E-shift, used by JVC and is described in the link above.

      4K Enhanced (Epson) which they keep fairly close to their chest, but most seem to agree that for the Native 4K input source, (such as Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K streaming services), the signal is downscaled to 1080p and then displayed using their 4K enhancement process.

      Only the first 3 (Sony, DLP and JVC process the full 4K image before sending it to the display mechanism, so should theoretically be better than the Epson with 4K material, however whether the user can see the difference with normal viewing, only they can decide.

      The above is why I always say, forget about the technology behind it, and try before you buy, as everyone is different.

      Anyway this conversation has drifted off what the OP asked so probably best to get back on topic.

      Bill
       
    30. Peter Parker

      Peter Parker
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Apr 6, 2001
      Messages:
      13,557
      Products Owned:
      1
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      UK.
      Ratings:
      +3,057
      If you were an engineer you could describe how it does that without overlapping or how overlapping pixels can be discrete for 4K applications and not for RGB using a colour wheel (where they produce a mix of the overlapping colours, not discrete colours), but in the other thread where this was discussed at length with you ignoring a great many simple questions (I guess you couldn't answer them, despite being 'an engineer'), and being asked many times, you couldn't describe it or prove it. Besides, it's not possible to do what you say when overlapping pixels, so it's impossible to prove it.

      I don't know who 'most' are, but if you had done any testing yourself you wouldn't be one of them. Also, if Epson is keeping it close to their chest, then how can you say how it's being done with any certainty?

      Can you prove that one way or the other? So far it's just unsubstantiated opinion. I have already given an example of why I don't believe it to be true.

      Epson themselves say:

      Epson Pro Cinema 6040B with 4K “Enhancement” named best projector of CEDIA 2016 Expo -

      “By pairing our proprietary 4K Enhancement technology with HDR and an advanced 3LCD light engine, the Pro Cinema 6040UB delivers picture quality virtually indistinguishable from any native 4K projector – at a radically more accessible price point.”

      Doesn't sound like upscaling (more like an existing 4K methodology) but I've yet to see anything conclusive other than what I've seen with my own eyes which differs from their 1080 upscaling. It's visibly two different things.

      Well, you did start the drift, but if you can prove your comments one way or the other, I'd like to see it. I'm sure others would too. If you can't prove it, it's probably best you don't keep repeating it until you can.
       

    Share This Page

    Loading...
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice