Cedia Jvc + Cavx Mk4 Lens Feedback

[jacked]

OK folks, I can`t wait any longer.

Who`s going to start things going on how it all went at CEDIA ?

How did the JVC HD950 perform with the CAVX MK4 lens ?

Detailed and in-depth opinons and feedback please.

Thanks very much all.

Dave

[ArthurK]

OK folks, I can`t wait any longer.

Who`s going to start things going on how it all went at CEDIA ?

How did the JVC HD950 perform with the CAVX MK4 lens ?

Detailed and in-depth opinons and feedback please.

Thanks very much all.

Dave

I am not qualified enough to make a detailed in-depth comment other than F'ING AMAZING. I walked in and couldnt believe the quality of the image on screen. I actually couldnt believe the crispness of the picture quality. Also amazed at the size of the MK4 product. I think pictures of the product dont do it justice with respect to its actual size.

Now I haven't compared it to a Schneider or ISCO but in comparison to the MKIII chalk and cheese.

[jacked]

I am not qualified enough to make a detailed in-depth comment other than F'ING AMAZING. I walked in and couldnt believe the quality of the image on screen. I actually couldnt believe the crispness of the picture quality. Also amazed at the size of the MK4 product. I think pictures of the product dont do it justice with respect to its actual size.

Now I haven't compared it to a Schneider or ISCO but in comparison to the MKIII chalk and cheese.

Great stuff !

What sort of clips did you look at on this ?

Cheers ArthurK

Dave

[ArthurK]

Great stuff !

What sort of clips did you look at on this ?

Cheers ArthurK

Dave

5th Element was running at the time.

I have the same projector that was on display running in my room and I currently zoom. Now I can honestly say I noticed a difference between my zoomed image vs the MK4 image. And before anyone jumps in about the benefits (or lack of) etc of a lensI didnt know the lens was in play. I was at the doorway when I noticed the crisp clean image and was blown away.

[jacked]

5th Element was running at the time.

I have the same projector that was on display running in my room and I currently zoom. Now I can honestly say I noticed a difference between my zoomed image vs the MK4 image. And before anyone jumps in about the benefits (or lack of) etc of a lensI didnt know the lens was in play. I was at the doorway when I noticed the crisp clean image and was blown away.

That`s good to hear from a fellow JVC 950 owner.

I`ve had my 950 for about 7 months and have always zoomed for my 2.40:1 screen. I`ve never found fault with the picture but knew eventually I`d be looking into getting a lens.

This next order for the MK4 lens I thought was too good to miss so I`m getting one.

I`ve only ever seen a Schneider lens with a JVC 950 at a UK show and that looked amazing.

It was the right time to dive in and get a MK4 lens before they go, I can`t wait to see it in action.

Cheers,

Dave

[GETREAL]

That`s good to hear from a fellow JVC 950 owner.

I`ve had my 950 for about 7 months and have always zoomed for my 2.40:1 screen. I`ve never found fault with the picture but knew eventually I`d be looking into getting a lens.

This next order for the MK4 lens I thought was too good to miss so I`m getting one.

I`ve only ever seen a Schneider lens with a JVC 950 at a UK show and that looked amazing.

It was the right time to dive in and get a MK4 lens before they go, I can`t wait to see it in action.

Cheers,

Dave

I'll find it very hard to believe if you're not impressed with the JVC 950/MK4 combo. I have seen this combo a few times now and it would still have to be one of the best scope solutions for the money. Mark has done a superb job with the latest lens, definetly a step up from the MK3. I haven't seen an ISCO in action but how much better can it get???

Good luck with it and look forward to your impressions once you've set it all up.

[Highjinx]

5th Element was running at the time.

I have the same projector that was on display running in my room and I currently zoom. Now I can honestly say I noticed a difference between my zoomed image vs the MK4 image. And before anyone jumps in about the benefits (or lack of) etc of a lensI didnt know the lens was in play. I was at the doorway when I noticed the crisp clean image and was blown away.

Did you view from your 'normal' viewing ratio?...if you were further way then the image could have looked denser and more resolved.

Did they do a masked zoomed image Vs A - Lens demo at CEDIA, brightness eq'd?, that would be the best way to demonstrate the difference. If that was done ie A/B ing with two stacked projectors, again brightness equalised, one projector with and the other without an A-Lens, the buyer can make a clear, informed decision...providing both projectors are calibrated and focused optimally. If the demo was done that way kudos to JVC and Mark.

All HT shops should adopt that demo method as well.

[CAVX]

Did you view from your 'normal' viewing ratio?...if you were further way then the image could have looked denser and more resolved.

Did they do a masked zoomed image Vs A - Lens demo at CEDIA, brightness eq'd?, that would be the best way to demonstrate the difference. If that was done ie A/B ing with two stacked projectors, again brightness equalised, one projector with and the other without an A-Lens, the buyer can make a clear, informed decision...providing both projectors are calibrated and focused optimally. If the demo was done that way kudos to JVC and Mark.

All HT shops should adopt that demo method as well.

We only had the one JVC HD950 on show which I elected to use instead of the HD550 as the MK4 is a higher end product than the MK3 shown last year, therefore I wanted the better projector. The other projector on display was the 4K monster. The screen used was a 16:9 screen with a drop down top mask to allow us to do what is now called "CIH + IMAX". We could have zoomed the HD950 to fill the full 16:9 screen, however the sole purpose for using a 16:9 screen was for the 4K projector, not the HD950 zoomed out.

The highlight of the show for me was having Anthony Grimani (formally of THX) who took time out of his day to drop in and run various test patterns and do an on site evaluation of the HD950/MK4 combo. Overall he seemed impressed with the MK4 lens. Given that he has seen anamorphic lenses like the ISCO III, his positive feedback about the MK4 was welcomed.

Edited June 27, 2010 by MarkTecher

[saxnix]

Good to hear positive views about this setup.

Congratualtions Mark. You must be very happy to have receieved good feedback from him.

Looking into building a house over the next couple of months. If we end up going down that road, a dedicated cinema is a must.

[CAVX]

Good to hear positive views about this setup.

Congratualtions Mark. You must be very happy to have receieved good feedback from him.

Totally. He is very passionate about all things AV and we even had a good long chat about the controlled vertical directivity of my CAVX Speakers.

[BladeRnR]

I have seen the Aussiemorphic MKIV twice in operation, most recently at CEDIA 2010 (Melbourne) and before that @ the Selby GTG.

As a Schneider 1.33x Lens owner I can say unequivocally the MKIV Lens is as good as my Schneider Lens in every regard (I certainly cannot discern any differences @ what would be deemed normal viewing distances).

If you are considering purchasing the MKIV I highly recommend it particularly at it's price point vs other major brands.

Blade

[jutta]

Good to hear positive views about this setup.

Congratualtions Mark. You must be very happy to have receieved good feedback from him.

HJ hasn't given it the all clear just yet. I think Mark is sweating on that stamp before he is truly satisfied

[yamapro]

HJ hasn't given it the all clear just yet. I think Mark is sweating on that stamp before he is truly satisfied

In that case it is a damned shame HJ refuses to view it... was gutted he did the old no show at the selby gtg

[CAVX]

Thanks for the positive feedback guys

I won't lose any sleep or raise a sweat. HJ was given the opportunity to come and see this for himself at Selby's and declined, so his opinion doesn't really matter to me anymore. Besides, even if he did come and see it for him self, what qualifies him to give product evaluation anyway?

Edited June 27, 2010 by MarkTecher

[BladeRnR]

Did you view from your 'normal' viewing ratio?...if you were further way then the image could have looked denser and more resolved.

Did they do a masked zoomed image Vs A - Lens demo at CEDIA, brightness eq'd?, that would be the best way to demonstrate the difference. If that was done ie A/B ing with two stacked projectors, again brightness equalised, one projector with and the other without an A-Lens, the buyer can make a clear, informed decision...providing both projectors are calibrated and focused optimally. If the demo was done that way kudos to JVC and Mark.

All HT shops should adopt that demo method as well.

Your commentary regarding len's is and always will be completely irrelevant. You don't agree with the concept, nor the implementation of them in HT and prefer native resolution. You also (More importantly) do not own one. You've made your stance abundantly clear in the past and most recently had the opportunity to come and view not only the Aussiemorphic MKIV lens but also an ISCO III @ the Selby GTG. Your refusal to even acknowledge my offer at the time merely shows what a charlatan and recidivist troublemaker you are HJ.

If you were at all serious about this subject you would have made an appearance @ the Selby GTG to both allow the maker of the Lens (Mark Techer) the right of reply and for us long suffering forum members to debunk your often ridiculous theories & conclusions.

Blade

Edited June 28, 2010 by BladeRnR

[Ronsta]

Did you view from your 'normal' viewing ratio?...if you were further way then the image could have looked denser and more resolved.

Did they do a masked zoomed image Vs A - Lens demo at CEDIA, brightness eq'd?, that would be the best way to demonstrate the difference. If that was done ie A/B ing with two stacked projectors, again brightness equalised, one projector with and the other without an A-Lens, the buyer can make a clear, informed decision...providing both projectors are calibrated and focused optimally. If the demo was done that way kudos to JVC and Mark.

All HT shops should adopt that demo method as well.

Your commentary regarding len's is and always will be completely irrelevant. You don't agree with the concept, nor the implementation of them in HT and prefer native resolution. You also (More importantly) do not own one. You've made your stance abundantly clear in the past and most recently had the opportunity to come and view not only the Aussiemorphic MKIV lens but also an ISCO III @ the Selby GTG. Your refusal to even acknowledge my offer at the time merely shows what a charlatan and recidivist troublemaker you are HJ.

If you were at all serious about this subject you would have made an appearance @ the Selby GTG to both allow the maker of the Lens (Mark Techer) the right of reply and for us long suffering forum members to debunk your often ridiculous theories & conclusions.

Blade

Might be just me, but I see HJ's comments above as quite impartial - use all the Facts and make your own decision, that's how I read it.

[CAVX]

Might be just me, but I see HJ's comments above as quite impartial - use all the Facts and make your own decision, that's how I read it.

I actually had one of JVC's own guys (on day one of CEDIA) question the need for an anamorphic lens and as it turned out, he's simply never seen one or a CIH set up. Therefore he had no idea of the how the final image would look. So once I showed him a letter box image, vertically stretched it, then optically expanded it, he was quick to change his opinion and stated that he did think that the full panel presentation of a Scope image was far more impressive and admitted he could not find the scaling/optical faults he'd heard about.

[oztheatre]

I actually had one of JVC's own guys (on day one of CEDIA) question the need for an anamorphic lens and as it turned out, he's simply never seen one or a CIH set up. Therefore he had no idea of the how the final image would look. So once I showed him a letter box image, vertically stretched it, then optically expanded it, he was quick to change his opinion and stated that he did think that the full panel presentation of a Scope image was far more impressive and admitted he could not find the scaling/optical faults he'd heard about.

There are no scaling or optical faults at all, it's a myth and a silly claim by some that's still to be proven.

[BladeRnR]

Might be just me, but I see HJ's comments above as quite impartial - use all the Facts and make your own decision, that's how I read it.

In regards to HJ how can his commentary be impartial when he hasn't actually seen the Lens in question (The Aussiemorphic MKIV) or the demonstration under discussion thereby missing a vital piece of information, that being half of a the comparison being made? Isn't that what a direct comparison is - to view 2 separate items in their own right and judge one against the other? I don't see Top Gear driving car "A" around a track and on the road yet leave car "B" they're comparing it against in the garage and "guessing" how it might have turned out.

Your support of HJ is admirable Ronsta but facts are just that and are indisputable. HJ has failed to prove a single claim regarding Anamorphic Lens's and was invited to do so. He didn't front therefore he has invalidated anything he's said or anything he can say until such time as he makes an effort to experience a Lens in person (More specifically the Aussiemorphic MKIV).

Yes the comparison methodology HJ chose to highlight the possible differences between the two methods is valid but unless you experience that for yourself (By physically being present during the comparison) commentary (Without direct experience) is merely an opinion and like *ssholes, everyone has one of those.

Blade

Edited June 28, 2010 by BladeRnR

[BladeRnR]

There are no scaling or optical faults at all, it's a myth and a silly claim by some that's still to be proven.

Unless you're the 6 Million Dollar Man and enjoy watching static test images instead of actual "moving images".

Blade

[SDL]

Ahving seen the Mk4 at Selby's not suprised by the positive feedback - shame I didn't make it to Cedia in the end, but a few work issues stopped me getting there. I think some people find fault in anything if they go looking for it. I recall a cop telling me he could unroadworthy a car straight out of a showroom if he chose to. The Mk4 is an excellent piece of kit and while I have the Mk 3 to which I will soon add the corrector would definately say the Mk 4 would give an image anyone would be happy with and well worth the money given the price of comparable lenses.

[Eli]

Yup, let's not let this thread turn into what it has in the past, it's been done before.

Well done Mark - I look forward to getting a MK4 one day!

[michaeljayc]

I'm looking forward for mine to arrive!! Can't wait!!

Michael.

[jacked]

I'm looking forward for mine to arrive!! Can't wait!!

Michael.

You and me both

Even taking a "risk" blind-buying a MK4 lens, I think it was a certainty on how good it would be but it does now sound like pairing it with a JVC HD950 really does bring out the best of both of them and produces fantastic images.

I really can`t wait now, shouldn`t be much longer !

Dave

[BladeRnR]

You and me both

Even taking a "risk" blind-buying a MK4 lens, I think it was a certainty on how good it would be but it does now sound like pairing it with a JVC HD950 really does bring out the best of both of them and produces fantastic images.

I really can`t wait now, shouldn`t be much longer !

Dave

That combination is absolutely phenomenal I can assure you.

Get a bigger screen

Blade

Edited June 28, 2010 by BladeRnR