News: JVC unveils new NZ9, NZ8 and NZ7 laser projectors

RobberButton

Novice Member
So which 8k certified cable are people using with their NZ’s? Need 10 meters.

Had a scare this evening when the NZ8 went dark, but I confirmed its the @#&£ Ruipro fiber optics cable that I’ve had for 18 months.
Did you have any success getting an 8k cable for your NZ? Just ordered my 6th attempt at a long cable (7.5m+)
 

Rock Danger

Distinguished Member
Ruipro 15m works on my NZ8 and Trinnov and also does 4K 120hz direct to projector (the processor only has an hdmi 2.0b board and therefore cannot do 4K 120)
 

Rock Danger

Distinguished Member
Thanks, I’ll check this out. Have you managed to get a full [email protected] with these?(This is my goal). With the cables I’ve tried so far some have managed [email protected], but most error with ‘out of range’.

Why would want 8K? There's nothing in 8k. No cable can give you an 8K guarantee as you have to factor, colour bit depth and chroma into it also.

What have you got that's passing an 8K AV file to a projector?
 
Last edited:

kenshingintoki

Distinguished Member
Why would want 8K? There's nothing in 8k. No cable can give you and 8K guarantee as you have to factor, colour bit depth and chroma into it also.

What have you got that's passing an 8K AV file to a projector?
Totally.

Only high end PC gamers with dual rtx3090 need to care for 8k
 

Rock Danger

Distinguished Member
Your JVC is a 4K projector, yes some will accept an 8K signal but it won't actually do anything with it other than e-shift which is not really known for doing much of anything at any time, except occasionally make an annoying noise.

Theater Optimiser is one of your biggest friends on the JVC and then stepping up from that would be a Lumagen.
 

RobberButton

Novice Member
I’m outputting from a PC with RTX3090 graphics, so I’m generating my own content. I’ve tested this with a 2m Belkin cable and got a stable 7680x4320 10bit RGB HDR @60hz, but just need a longer cable to do the same.

Would much appreciated any advice from anyone that’s had success with long AOC HDMI 2.1 cables

Thanks
 
I’m outputting from a PC with RTX3090 graphics, so I’m generating my own content. I’ve tested this with a 2m Belkin cable and got a stable 7680x4320 10bit RGB HDR @60hz, but just need a longer cable to do the same.

Would much appreciated any advice from anyone that’s had success with long AOC HDMI 2.1 cables

Thanks
One thing is to output 8K, and the projector accepts the signal, the projector still doesn't resolve 4K, so there is no good reason to push the bandwidth to do 8K, all you get is problems.

The 8K eshift X is just a marketing gimmick to seduce ignorant consumers with a fetish for high nr.
 
Wasn’t after an opinion on 8k, just some help on cables : )
Thanks
Could you for the rest of us share what kind of 8K content you are using, and whats your expected gain, what benefits did you get with your short cable tests?
 

kenshingintoki

Distinguished Member
One thing is to output 8K, and the projector accepts the signal, the projector still doesn't resolve 4K, so there is no good reason to push the bandwidth to do 8K, all you get is problems.

The 8K eshift X is just a marketing gimmick to seduce ignorant consumers with a fetish for high nr.

Thats was what I thought.

I thought the maximum the PJ can do is resolve a signal to 4K and 8K e-shift it to pseudo 8K?

I just don't see a point to it doing this at all. You don't want the PJ messing with the content.

Native 8K panels will also not make sense as we have no native 8K content and theoretically would mess up 1080p/4K content as we will be reliant on upscaling. and the advantage of the pixel gap is pretty much vanished now with 4K so 8K advantage of this will be lost too.
 
Thats was what I thought.

I thought the maximum the PJ can do is resolve a signal to 4K and 8K e-shift it to pseudo 8K?

I just don't see a point to it doing this at all. You don't want the PJ messing with the content.

Native 8K panels will also not make sense as we have no native 8K content and theoretically would mess up 1080p/4K content as we will be reliant on upscaling. and the advantage of the pixel gap is pretty much vanished now with 4K so 8K advantage of this will be lost too.
It should accept an 8K input, no problem there if you can get a stable HDMI connection to handle that kind of bandwidth.

Where it gets odd is that you can address the 8K resolution, but you cant display it, as the optical resolution is way to low, even struggling to resolve 4K on the NX/ NZ9 with the 100mm lens, and the panels are not able to do a 1:1 on-off pixel in 4K. It should not be worse to have 8K native resolution if you can resolve it properly, but also unlikely any visible improvement.

With my nose pressed against a 210" 2.40:1 screen looking at focus and eshift on the NZ9, my choice was eshift off, as it was not able to resolve 4K and 8K eshift just made it even fuzzier.
 

groesbeek

Active Member
Did you have any success getting an 8k cable for your NZ? Just ordered my 6th attempt at a long cable (7.5m+)
Hi yes I went with the phoosno version 2. 10 m.
Amazon product

And despite the nay-sayer, gaming 8k/60 looks fantastic - a distinct step up over the non 8 k EshiftX version. Not so much the absolute resolution, but the perception of depth and less resolution loss on fast motion. Many users, and a separate thread, on avsforums.
 
Last edited:

groesbeek

Active Member
With my nose pressed against a 210" 2.40:1 screen looking at focus and eshift on the NZ9, my choice was eshift off, as it was not able to resolve 4K and 8K eshift just made it even fuzzier.
:)
“Given the current dearth of 8K content, I had no real way to test the new e-ShiftX system, so I reached out to test equipment manufacturer Murideo to borrow an 8K signal generator. The company loaned me its SIX-G 8K generator so I could put e-ShiftX to the test with full 8K-quality test patterns. The NZ9 breezed through the test patterns with crisp, clear representation and no discernable scaling or processing artifacts—a positive sign for the day when we might see consumer 8K content (likely a long time from now). But the real question remains: Does 8K offer any current benefit for home theater systems?

The answer is yes—and no. From a strict resolution standpoint, I find 4K to be more than enough for even the largest home theater screens (and to be honest, movie theater screens as well). Individual pixels in full 4K-resolution static test patterns are non-discernable at most seating distances. And when you add in the fact that the 4K movies and TV shows we watch on disc or via streaming fall short of the full resolution of a static 4K pattern due to losses from motion and video compression, it becomes clear that 8K doesn't seem necessary.

Where I do see the benefit is when any type of image processing such as scaling and enhancement is being applied. With 8K, these extra processes extend over far more pixels and as a result lack the immediate artifacts you may see at lower resolutions, 4K included. Viewing in 8K also helped with motion resolution. The image took on a quality that reminded me of frame interpolation, but without any of the annoying "soap opera effect" on camera motion and pans. I also noted a subtle increase in apparent depth, dimension, and detail on lots of material I regularly use for testing. So, while I was quite the skeptic about viewing standard HD and 4K content on an 8K display going into this review, the more I watched the more I liked it.

To cite two examples, EShiftX yielded an appreciable increase in image clarity on the Ultra HD Blu-ray of Blade Runner 2049 and the 4K/HDR image montage on the Spears & Munsil UHD HDR Benchmark disc. Other scenes I've used repeatedly for demos and testing showed marked improvement. The difference wasn't night and day, but it was visible.”
 
Last edited:
:)
“Given the current dearth of 8K content, I had no real way to test the new e-ShiftX system, so I reached out to test equipment manufacturer Murideo to borrow an 8K signal generator. The company loaned me its SIX-G 8K generator so I could put e-ShiftX to the test with full 8K-quality test patterns. The NZ9 breezed through the test patterns with crisp, clear representation and no discernable scaling or processing artifacts—a positive sign for the day when we might see consumer 8K content (likely a long time from now). But the real question remains: Does 8K offer any current benefit for home theater systems?

The answer is yes—and no. From a strict resolution standpoint, I find 4K to be more than enough for even the largest home theater screens (and to be honest, movie theater screens as well). Individual pixels in full 4K-resolution static test patterns are non-discernable at most seating distances. And when you add in the fact that the 4K movies and TV shows we watch on disc or via streaming fall short of the full resolution of a static 4K pattern due to losses from motion and video compression, it becomes clear that 8K doesn't seem necessary.

Where I do see the benefit is when any type of image processing such as scaling and enhancement is being applied. With 8K, these extra processes extend over far more pixels and as a result lack the immediate artifacts you may see at lower resolutions, 4K included. Viewing in 8K also helped with motion resolution. The image took on a quality that reminded me of frame interpolation, but without any of the annoying "soap opera effect" on camera motion and pans. I also noted a subtle increase in apparent depth, dimension, and detail on lots of material I regularly use for testing. So, while I was quite the skeptic about viewing standard HD and 4K content on an 8K display going into this review, the more I watched the more I liked it.

To cite two examples, EShiftX yielded an appreciable increase in image clarity on the Ultra HD Blu-ray of Blade Runner 2049 and the 4K/HDR image montage on the Spears & Munsil UHD HDR Benchmark disc. Other scenes I've used repeatedly for demos and testing showed marked improvement. The difference wasn't night and day, but it was visible.”
I also saw that, would be interesting if you could post some of the objective documentation from the 8K test, showing the resolution capabilities.
How well does your JVC resolve 4K?
 

groesbeek

Active Member
I also saw that, would be interesting if you could post some of the objective documentation from the 8K test, showing the resolution capabilities.
Why? I can see the difference with my own two eyes. Starting 12:30 to tomorrow I’ll be able to see the anguish on Rangnick’s face with EshiftX even in the full field shots on BT Sport’s HDR coverage.

Drank a fantastic Rioja with dinner tonight. I have no plans to do mass spectrometry or liquid chromatography to confirm that it tasted great.
;)

Anways, just stopped by this thread to answer a specific question to me and see that some are still doing the hand-wringing. NZ‘s are certainly a step up from NX’s - you’ll have decide for yourself if the difference is worth it to you. Out.
 
Last edited:
Why? I can see the difference with my own two eyes. Starting 12:30 to tomorrow I’ll be able to see the anguish on Rangnick’s face with EshiftX even in the full field shots on BT Sport’s HDR coverage.

Drank a fantastic Rioja with dinner tonight. I have no plans to do mass spectrometry or liquid chromatography to confirm that it tasted great.
;)

Anways, just stopped by this thread to answer a specific question to me and see we are still doing the hand-wringing. NZ‘s are certainly a step up from NX’s - you’ll have decide for yourself if the difference is worth it to you. Out.
The NZ8 NZ9 i have seen have both been a good step up from the N7 and NX9, except for the lenses, in both cases the NZ lenses were noticeably worse, looking forward to see a few closeup pictures of 1:1 checkboard patterns from yours, see if its a magic sample, or like the ones i have seen.
 

geogan

Well-known Member
Only high end PC gamers with dual rtx3090 need to care for 8k

I don't think dual cards are supported anymore by NVidia - SLI is dead, so most modern games can utilize is a single 3090. Reason is modern rendering techniques do not work well with multiple cards - end up copying data back and forth between the two frame buffers to do many of the frame rendering steps, and gets pointless, and defeats the purpose.

Of course that's the official reason... could be unofficial reason is its more profitable for NVidia to sell high cards and stop people using two older cards to give same performance of latest top end card.

The NZ8 NZ9 i have seen have both been a good step up from the N7 and NX9, except for the lenses, in both cases the NZ lenses were noticeably worse,

New lenses worse? Don't like sound of that.
 

kenshingintoki

Distinguished Member
T
I don't think dual cards are supported anymore by NVidia - SLI is dead, so most modern games can utilize is a single 3090. Reason is modern rendering techniques do not work well with multiple cards - end up copying data back and forth between the two frame buffers to do many of the frame rendering steps, and gets pointless, and defeats the purpose.

Of course that's the official reason... could be unofficial reason is its more profitable for NVidia to sell high cards and stop people using two older cards to give same performance of latest top end card.



New lenses worse? Don't like sound of that.

True. Nvidia are nvidia loll 🤣🤣
 

The latest video from AVForums

Maverick UK Premiere IMAX Review + Top Gun, Tom Cruise, Tony Scott and 4K + Movie/TV News
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

dCS announces Bartók 2.0 firmware upgrade
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Audiovector unveils QR 7 loudspeaker
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
What's new on UK streaming services for June 2022
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
LG UltraGear Gaming Monitors get VESA certification
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Sony confirms UK pricing for A90K and A75K Bravia XR 4K OLED TVs
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom