Panasonic PT-AT5000 3D LCD Projector Review & Comments

Tech News

Joined
Sep 15, 2004
Messages
29,589
Reaction score
470
Points
29,702
Location
Cyberspace
<img src="http://reviews.images.static-avforums.com/reviews/225/thumb.jpg" align="right">Reviewed by Phil Hinton, 16th September 2011.
For a company at the cutting edge of 3D consumer technology and a very vocal supporter of the format, it has taken what seems like an age for them to release their 3D projector. However, in our opinion after a few days of intense testing and viewing, the PT-AT5000 has definitely been worth the wait.
Read the full review...
 
Does this support 3D content at 1080/60P, as most display max out at either 720/60P or 1080/30P..

Support for:

Checkerboard 1080p/60Hz
Frame Packing 1080p/60Hz
 
Last edited:
Can you give the physical dimensions of the projector as size is an important considerations for many who have to home it in their lounge and possibly on a rear shelf.
Thanks for a great review!
 
Can you give the physical dimensions of the projector as size is an important considerations for many who have to home it in their lounge and possibly on a rear shelf.
Thanks for a great review!

Dimensions [mm]
Width 470.0
Height 137.0
Depth 345.0
weight: 8.7Kg
 
Does this support 3D content at 1080/60P, as most display max out at either 720/60P or 1080/30P..

Support for:

Checkerboard 1080p/60Hz
Frame Packing 1080p/60Hz

Not as far as I am aware. It fully supports all the standards being used for Blu-ray and broadcast for 3D. It wasn't tested for any other.
 
Thanks for the review, I've been eagerly awaiting more information on this projector and you've done a great job of providing it.

However, I'm a bit confused about the lack of lens memory for 3D. I have two screens, 16:9 and scope and obviously therefore want the function to switch between the two. I presume I can set up the projector for my 16:9 screen, then set it up the scope one as long as I don't do so using 3D material.

What I don't understand is what happens if I choose to watch a 2.35:1 2D film on my scope screen, then decide to watch a 2.35:1 3D film. Will this cause problems? Do I have to nominate a screen (through one of the lens memory selections) as being the one I want to watch 3D on?
 
Thanks for the review, I've been eagerly awaiting more information on this projector and you've done a great job of providing it.

However, I'm a bit confused about the lack of lens memory for 3D. I have two screens, 16:9 and scope and obviously therefore want the function to switch between the two. I presume I can set up the projector for my 16:9 screen, then set it up the scope one as long as I don't do so using 3D material.

What I don't understand is what happens if I choose to watch a 2.35:1 2D film on my scope screen, then decide to watch a 2.35:1 3D film. Will this cause problems? Do I have to nominate a screen (through one of the lens memory selections) as being the one I want to watch 3D on?

As soon as the projector senses a 3D signal the lens memory is greyed out completely. You can still manually adjust the zoom/focus it is just that the memory zoom and focus will not operate.
 
Thanks Phil - so does that mean that if I'm already watching 2D on either a 16:9 screen or a scope screen and switch to 3D that the image will stay as it was on the screen format I selected prior to switching to 3D?

For example - I can watch 3D on my scope screen if I've already selected it in the lens memory before the projector gets a 3D signal, but I can't use the scope screen lens memory option if I'd selected the 16:9 screen before feeding the projector a 2.35:1 3D signal?
 
You mentioned you had the chance to compare it with the X9 but it didn't see any comparisons related to the JVC in the subsequent text. I have been trying to choose between the 2 systems seemingly forever. To date, I have preferred the JVCs picture but the Panasonic had stronger features and was cheaper.

It looks like for the latest generation the feature set and price are going to be about the same. So I would love to know how the PTAT5000 shapes up on picture quality with the current JVCs.
 
You mentioned you had the chance to compare it with the X9 but it didn't see any comparisons related to the JVC in the subsequent text. I have been trying to choose between the 2 systems seemingly forever. To date, I have preferred the JVCs picture but the Panasonic had stronger features and was cheaper.

It looks like for the latest generation the feature set and price are going to be about the same. So I would love to know how the PTAT5000 shapes up on picture quality with the current JVCs.

For 2D the JVC X3 offers slightly better dynamic range and blacks. But, it cannot be calibrated for Rec.709 without an external processor (this doesn't apply to the X7 or X9 which can). Comparing the X9 in 2D to the Panasonic is really unfair as the JVC is three times the price and walks all over it in picture quality terms in 2D.
With 3D I compared brightness of the image through the glasses and crosstalk performance between the X9 and HW30ES; and the Panny is brighter for 3D viewing, has no crosstalk to be seen and loses less light when wearing the glasses. However, all three perform extremely well.

Steve Withers saw the Panasonic in a brief demo, he owns an X3, and was really impressed.

I don't envy anyone demoing the PT-AT5000 and Sony HW30ES as they both are top projectors. And if you are not interested in 3D or 2.35:1 it gets even closer to call in 2D performance with the Panasonic just that little bit more accurate when calibrated (you can't calibrate the colour gamut on the Sony.) We have also to see the new Epson and JVC X30... interesting times and its going to be good to have such a choice for the market and end user.
 
Thanks Phil - so does that mean that if I'm already watching 2D on either a 16:9 screen or a scope screen and switch to 3D that the image will stay as it was on the screen format I selected prior to switching to 3D?

For example - I can watch 3D on my scope screen if I've already selected it in the lens memory before the projector gets a 3D signal, but I can't use the scope screen lens memory option if I'd selected the 16:9 screen before feeding the projector a 2.35:1 3D signal?

It might do it as a workaround but I didn't try it with the review sample (which has now gone back).
 
No hope of an answer to the lumens question, then? Perhaps you didn't make note of it while you had the machine for review. I really hope that you will consider adding this to your standard reporting on projectors. It does matter quite a bit for some of us with larger or lower-gain screens.
 
No hope of an answer to the lumens question, then? Perhaps you didn't make note of it while you had the machine for review. I really hope that you will consider adding this to your standard reporting on projectors. It does matter quite a bit for some of us with larger or lower-gain screens.

Mike, I got 710 2D calibrated in my bat cave, no DI. It will differ for other environments, settings etc, which is why I don't quote them. Sony was 730 if I remember correctly, again calibrated and no DI.
 
Phil will the 5000 fill a 140" screen in best mode 2D?

Depends on a lot of other factors. Room environment, throw distance, settings, screen gain, aspect ratio of screen and so on. I can't give you an answer to that, sorry.
 
Depends on a lot of other factors. Room environment, throw distance, settings, screen gain, aspect ratio of screen and so on. I can't give you an answer to that, sorry.

140" 2.37 screen gain 1.2, bat cave.
 
Mike, I got 710 2D calibrated in my bat cave, no DI. It will differ for other environments, settings etc, which is why I don't quote them. Sony was 730 if I remember correctly, again calibrated and no DI.

Thanks, Phil! Even comparative numbers are very helpful, since the manufacturers' figures are utterly unreliable.
 
Any update on my question Phil?

My advice would be to go and demo one, or better still find a dealer close to you who will loan you one, or bring one around to test in your room. I think if zooming at that size you might be towards the maximum and if calibrated I think you would be down to around 200 - 300 lumens if lucky (a guess). Thats a big screen to fill and most consumer models at this price range would be at their limits. As its a bat cave then you might get a little more leeway and be happy with the image brightness. I can't say anything for sure so really it is up to you to demo and see.
It was tested for the review on a 110" 2.37:1 screen excellence screen with 0.9 gain 4K material. I would say this is probably the sweet spot for brightness zoomed.
 
I note in the review of the PT-AT5000 that the IR transmitter is not powerful enough to bounce the signal off the testing screen. Does this mean that one cannot watch 3D images without obtaining an off board transmitter?
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom