JVC DLA- X7900 vs Sony VPL-VW360ES vs Epson EH-LS10000

[ward0112]

I would love to hear from the combined wisdom of members in this forum, to help me decide on a projector for my new Home Theatre set up.

 

Background

 

The room is 4.5m x 5.1m and is going to be a dedicated Home theatre.

It is underground and has perfect external light control / Dark coloured walls with matt paint etc

The front of the projector lens will be approx 4.6m from the back wall

Planning on using a 125-135 inch 2.35:1 cinemascope screen (final size to be determined once the projector is in place)

 

My total budget for projector / screen / receiver and 7.1.4 speakers is in the ball park of $20-25K

Planning on spending $7-9K on projector - $1.8K on screen, and the rest on the receiver / speakers.

 

As far a projector wants - I value contrast and colour representation over absolute pixel count. We are going to be seated 3.7m from the screen, and at that distance won't be able to resolve individual pixels. I need a projector with lens memory as while I will be predominately viewing 2.35:1 content, I want to be able to switch to 16:9.

 

I am looking at the above projectors. I live in Adelaide and have managed to see a Sony 260 in real life. To be honest the resolution of the projector was amazing - being limited by the weave of the screen rather than the resolution of the projector. From reviews the contrast and picture quality of the X7900 sounds amazing, but I am yet to see one in real life - Is anyone aware of anywhere that has one on display. 

 

Also what are people thoughts on the laser based Epson EH-10000 - again it is an upshifted 4K image - but how does the picture quality compare to the X7900? Is it worth the extra outlay at the beginning to save on not having to replace bulbs down the track?

Edited February 7, 2018 by ward0112

[DoggieHowser]

If you play games and want 4K@60 HDR - there is only one option. The JVC. Which sports 18Gbps. 

 

The rest are crippled by a 10.8/13Gbps engine. 

 

On paper the LS10500 doesn't seem to have that contrast of the JVC but man - that flicker free laser is something I really marvel at. 

 

You already said you are not into absolute pixels so that takes away any possible pro of the Sony. 

[Mobe1969]

From what I keep hearing, if you are wanting color reproduction and blacks over pixel count, the 7900 would be a much better bet. And cheaper than the 360 I'm in a similar situation and I can't make up my mind either.

 

It makes it hard that in Brisbane, there isn't even anywhere local to even see a JVC unit. The one JVC dealer in Bris I phoned up today and they don't stock anything, and they have mainly moved to Sony as the Aussie distributor of JVC (Kenwood It think they said) is pretty hard to deal with, so they still sell JVC on request, but don't recommend it and prefer to just sell Sony. I do get a bad feeling about JVC despite all the good feedback. I mean some people have had lens issues with this gen JVC, here and overseas, including someone here. And last I saw from them (on AVSforum) the unit was still sitting there waiting for JVC to action what they were going to do. And I believe that person is a JVC dealer as well. If I'm wrong here please let me know and I'll retract it.

 

I can't really see a Sony unit in a decent setting in Brisbane either that I've been able to locate.

 

I don't know anything about the Epson though.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Mobe1969

[DoggieHowser]

You just got to buy them like I did  

 

I have my X9500 sitting alongside my 760ES now. I am surprised the wife hasn't noticed. 

[Mobe1969]

Just now, DoggieHowser said:

You just got to buy them like I did  

 

I have my X9500 sitting alongside my 760ES now. I am surprised the wife hasn't noticed. 

Hah hah! Given you have a close-ish comparison on hand to what the OP and I'm looking between, what are your thoughts on the Sony and contrast/black levels? If you aren't like me and worried about 60fps 4k / 18GBPS.

 

Honestly, today I'd vacillated to deciding on JVC 9500 (If I could get it) or 9900 until I talked to the local dealer...

[ward0112]

38 minutes ago, DoggieHowser said:

You just got to buy them like I did  

 

I have my X9500 sitting alongside my 760ES now. I am surprised the wife hasn't noticed. 

lol - I imagine that will be an interesting conversation when she either notices the second box, or the credit card statement

 

36 minutes ago, Mobe1969 said:

Hah hah! Given you have a close-ish comparison on hand to what the OP and I'm looking between, what are your thoughts on the Sony and contrast/black levels? If you aren't like me and worried about 60fps 4k / 18GBPS.

 

Honestly, today I'd vacillated to deciding on JVC 9500 (If I could get it) or 9900 until I talked to the local dealer...

Do you think the 9900 is worth the extra $2K over the 7900. From my reading the specs are pretty comparable - slight improvement on contrast but I wonder if it is really noticeable. 

 

Looks like there is a big jump from the 5900 to the 7900, but then a much smaller step to the 9900.

 

I do have the tendency to over spec these sort of purchases and then wonder if I have needlessly wasted money, and have been pretty proud of keeping myself to the 7900 - you are testing my resolve!

 

 

[Mobe1969]

20 minutes ago, ward0112 said:

lol - I imagine that will be an interesting conversation when she either notices the second box, or the credit card statement

 

Do you think the 9900 is worth the extra $2K over the 7900. From my reading the specs are pretty comparable - slight improvement on contrast but I wonder if it is really noticeable. 

 

Looks like there is a big jump from the 5900 to the 7900, but then a much smaller step to the 9900.

 

I do have the tendency to over spec these sort of purchases and then wonder if I have needlessly wasted money, and have been pretty proud of keeping myself to the 7900 - you are testing my resolve!

 

 

Well, price comparison wise, the 9900 is identical to the 360 as far as I can see.

 

The best information I had on the 7900 vs 9900 was from John Schuermann on the AVSForum - in short they have the same underlying parts, but all the parts are graded and the 9900 is made from best ones. I guess the best proof is they use the same lamp, but the 9's have better contrast and lumens than the 7s

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-digital-hi-end-projectors-3-000-usd-msrp/2937682-great-jvc-vs-sony-projector-shootout-dec-9-10-no-price-talk-please-19.html#post55644788

 

Geez, it is a hard decision. So nervous about getting a 9900 with a bad lens like someone here did, and then have to fight to get it fixed or replaced. Plus hearing from the ex dealer in Brisbane about Kenwood. Its driving me nuts

Edited February 7, 2018 by Mobe1969

[betty boop]

3 hours ago, ward0112 said:

Do you think the 9900 is worth the extra $2K over the 7900. From my reading the specs are pretty comparable - slight improvement on contrast but I wonder if it is really noticeable. 

Save dollars I’d suggest, just about everyone backed out the hand picked Ltd series as well.

3 hours ago, ward0112 said:

 

Looks like there is a big jump from the 5900 to the 7900, but then a much smaller step to the 9900

 

 

Definitely seems that way am pretty happy myself with the piggy in the middle 7 series

[DoggieHowser]

7 hours ago, Mobe1969 said:

Hah hah! Given you have a close-ish comparison on hand to what the OP and I'm looking between, what are your thoughts on the Sony and contrast/black levels? If you aren't like me and worried about 60fps 4k / 18GBPS.

 

Honestly, today I'd vacillated to deciding on JVC 9500 (If I could get it) or 9900 until I talked to the local dealer...

 

FWIW I thought the JVC X9500 has elevated black floors compared to my old RS60 but it is a function of HDR I guess and higher lumens. I guess that's just the way the HDR stuff is designed. 

 

When I first got the 760ES I also got an Apple TV 4K and started watching Netflix UltraHD/HDR stuff and to be honest, a lot of the black levels look pretty meh. 

 

But after I went back to the JVC recently for comparison, I was surprised that a lot of the high black levels seemed to be source dependent. The JVC did suffer from a similar washed out look too. But for good black material, the JVC is noticeably better. The question then is how often I notice that black level improvement. 

 

For pretty much everything else, the Sony looks way sharper than the JVC and I know part of it is because of the Reality Creation but man does it look good. And bright too. Despite the same lumens rating, the 760ES is just much brighter. Really helps with HDR material. And motion is something that Sony has perfected. 

 

Is the Sony perfect? Hell no. There are lots of areas that can be improved.. maybe not in the way that some users are expecting (like access to manual iris) but the way the tone mapping is done and the way the laser dimming works.. I would love to see improvements in that. 

 

Sorry to the OP for not answering him directly. 

[Mobe1969]

Thanks @DoggieHowser, that is interesting.

 

I still feel no closer to a decision point...

 

And at least with a Sony I won't need to get more 3D glasses and an emitter...

[wooferocau]

1 hour ago, Mobe1969 said:

Thanks @DoggieHowser, that is interesting.

 

I still feel no closer to a decision point...

 

And at least with a Sony I won't need to get more 3D glasses and an emitter...

To satisfy your own opinion ...you NEED to see both before deciding...

 

A good friend went from the X9500 to the 760ES and he is stoked with it. Yes it hasn't got the absolute black levels of the X9500...BUT everything else image wise FAR outweighs this aspect. 

 

He would now NOT go back to the E-Shift unit...

 

The 360ES from reports will have better black level performance than the 760ES , so  worth viewing one and forming your own opinion..

 

On a scope screen approaching 130" and above IMO the native 4K REALLY does come into it.  I run a 143" scope and switching back and forth between my Z1/RS4500 and my X9900 the difference in image resolution is VERY noticeable......ALL who have come and viewed the comparo have 100% agreed on this.

[Mobe1969]

Thanks. I might phone JVC to see if I can find who the dealers are in Brisbane. I can't find any online. Rich from Ozts is near Gold Coast, and I believe he has a 7900, but no 9900 or 385.

[betty boop]

I dont know why we are talking 760es in this thread, the 760es is an over $22k projector way way past what OP is looking for. 

 

18 hours ago, ward0112 said:

Planning on using a 125-135 inch 2.35:1 cinemascope screen (final size to be determined once the projector is in place)

 

My total budget for projector / screen / receiver and 7.1.4 speakers is in the ball park of $20-25K

Planning on spending $7-9K on projector - $1.8K on screen, and the rest on the receiver / speakers.

its a good budget, and having seen 130" scope I have no bother with brightness or output with the jvc you are considering.

 

re the sonys you mention no way in hell would i even think of the $7999 260ES when it has no iris ? and no lens memory goodness. thats just madness for a projector at price going for. especially in a scope setup that would instantly rule it out.  

 

for the 360 thank goodness it builds those features in.  but having a hdmi  thats band width limited to 13 gb rather than the full 18 ? ok there is limited material now but gee having seen full band width 4k 50/60 I tell you it is drool worthy and we have so many means of media these days I for one would be kicking myself with a over $10k outlay for a projector and not being able to experience the best source capability ? and with the best colour gamut which the sonys also lack before bringing contrast into it.

 

the other thing with the sonys, reality creation. this was a big deal breaker for a lot of people on previous sonys that could not completely bypass. I would check if you can. its all good looking at detail it creates but if its creating "stuff" which is what annoyed you want to be able to dis engage this. people sold $25k sony projectors as this was the last straw.

 

 

18 hours ago, ward0112 said:

Also what are people thoughts on the laser based Epson EH-10000 - again it is an upshifted 4K image - but how does the picture quality compare to the X7900? Is it worth the extra outlay at the beginning to save on not having to replace bulbs down the track?

ward, i dont understand where this projector really fits in, I appreciate the benefit of laser source and at a lower price point. but the reason this projector is at this lower price point now is it simply doesnt support the UHD format. its old hack legacy thing. and retailer will be just trying to get rid of it at a lower price.. the thing is an absolute beast size wise as well, i can see most people struggling to fit something like it into homely setting without some sort of special mount or ceiling/wall arrangement.

 

re the lamp vs laser thing ? is it such a biggie the saving of replacing lamps ? ive never had to replace a lamp. . as they tend to have long lifes these days we are seeing quotes of 4000 hours and such and we are also not seeing a lot of drop off in output wiht these latest gen lamps as quoted by people getting up there with the current xXX00 series JVCs. 

 

I myself have owned multiple projectors  over few years now and tend to own them 3-5 years before turning over, never had to change bulbs. tend to just have to crank open the iris as ages. ok might have to change it over when run out of light have up the sleeve but never got to that point, never even have got to the point of needing to crank up the lamp power so needing higher output so lamps not really an issue.

 

there are others I know who specifically are running 1st gen DILA JVCs and have been for over a decade and they just change lamps when lamps due... even if at full price $500 and replaced every other year with very high use over a decade you are looking at $2.5k which is not a huge outlay in scheme of things and wouldn't be why move to a laser. keeping in mind the laser has finite life to. when burns out you put the projector on the nature strip... if looking for a calmer picture or more light output or something is where id suggest laser might come in  but laser driven are quite a bit off in pricing still and out of reach for most. 

[Mobe1969]

I agree I don't see the need for laser,  and even if you replaced your bulb every year it'd be a couple of decades before you made up the difference in price between a 360 and 760. I'd rather have the iris. Honestly the only benefit of the 760 over the 360 is the 18MBps. And personally I have no interest in any 60fps material so I'm not that worried.

[DoggieHowser]

The 760ES uses the same lens and the same panel as the 260

[ward0112]

3 hours ago, al said:

for the 360 thank goodness it builds those features in.  but having a hdmi  thats band width limited to 13 gb rather than the full 18 ? ok there is limited material now but gee having seen full band width 4k 50/60 I tell you it is drool worthy and we have so many means of media these days I for one would be kicking myself with a over $10k outlay for a projector and not being able to experience the best source capability ? and with the best colour gamut which the sonys also lack before bringing contrast into it.

For me, this is probably going to be one of the deciding features between the JVC and the Sony. 

 

Bit it nerve wracking undertaking a significant purchase like this as ‘sight unseen’ but I can’t find any of these JVC projectors in Adelaide. 

 

3 hours ago, Mobe1969 said:

I agree I don't see the need for laser,

I also agree and had mostly ruled out that projector, but I had spent some tome looking at them and just wanted some closure. 

 

 

Looks like I will be ordering the JVC shortly

Edited February 8, 2018 by ward0112

[Mobe1969]

It is more than a bit daunting having to do it sight unseen. Imagine if you were going for a real high end one like the VPL-VW5000ES or even the Z1. No way in heck I'd do it without some sort of satisfaction gaurantee... 

[IMDave]

@:) al and I ordered our X7000's " sight unseen". In fact we had them before anyone else in the world. Before the reviews came out.

Best decision I ever made. 15 months of viewing bliss.

It's a bit like bungy jumping. ...sometimes you've just got to " grow a .." and JUMP.???

Paralysis by analysis. 

No way I would spend  $10k on a projector with all the irreversible limitations of the Sony.

Sure if there was the possibility of a firmware update to fix the issue,  no worries. But you can't upgrade to 18Gb/s by firmware. 

That is so far from "future proof" it's not funny. 

[Mobe1969]

11 minutes ago, IMDave said:

@:) al and I ordered our X7000's " sight unseen". In fact we had them before anyone else in the world. Before the reviews came out.

Best decision I ever made. 15 months of viewing bliss.

It's a bit like bungy jumping. ...sometimes you've just got to " grow a .." and JUMP.???

Paralysis by analysis. 

No way I would spend  $10k on a projector with all the irreversible limitations of the Sony.

Sure if there was the possibility of a firmware update to fix the issue,  no worries. But you can't upgrade to 18Gb/s by firmware. 

That is so far from "future proof" it's not funny. 

I keep putting down pros and cons in my mind, and it isn't clear cut to me, although the overwhelming recommendation from people here and other forums is JVC.

 

JVC Pros I care about:
- Better black handling than Sony
- Beteter colour reproduction

JVC Cons I care about:
- Possible dodgy lens unless I can get a 9500...
- Also need to buy new 3d glasses and an emitter

- Worse resolution

 

Sony Pros I care about:
- Native 4k resolution
- Possibly better 3D from what I've reard

- Have not heard a single issue with lenses this generation

 

Sony Cons I care about:
- Not as good black handling
- Not as good colour reproduction
 

 

[Quark]

In addition to the above list, have Sony completely fixed the contrast degradation issue with these latest models? Humidity was meant to be an accelerating factor for this.

[Mobe1969]

Not certain, but I believe so. It was raised as an issue several years back, but not seen since and no one has reported it on later models. And people have asked others on AVS 

[IMDave]

Sorry if I came across a little condescending in my previous post. Not my intention.

I agree with what Javs said before. You need to see them both.

The trouble is, in all honesty. Unless they are running side by side in the same room, playing the same movie, at the same time, it will be really hard to remember "how black the JVC blacks are" and and how fine" the Sony 4k is".

I'm currently trying to toggle back and forward between the new Oppo 203 beta firmware vs my custom made Arve curves on my JVC X7000. The handshaking delay means there is approx 45secs from being able to see one image, and the other. 

The brain simply can't remember and compare things that far apart. And I'm talking less than a minute.It's doing my head in. LOL.

Personally, I bought my X7000 from Rich ( "sight unseen" ) and if he has a X7900 in store, I would go and look at it. I agree with @:) al and going with the piggy in the middle is the best bang for buck.

I believe it was Javs that had the "bad" X9900. But he is a JVC dealer. He also quite clearly said that probably only he would be able to tell the difference between his sample and a "golden one". He is very,very fastidious.  .

The general consensus does appear to be that paying the extra for the "hand picked" parts of the 9 series is wasted money in this series. ( possibly not so much with the 7000/9000 series, but they are long gone).

If your room is ready to go, and you need a PJ, then get in a car and drive. Research time is over..

[Mobe1969]

5 minutes ago, IMDave said:

Sorry if I came across a little condescending in my previous post. Not my intention.

I agree with what Javs said before. You need to see them both.

The trouble is, in all honesty. Unless they are running side by side in the same room, playing the same movie, at the same time, it will be really hard to remember "how black the JVC blacks are" and and how fine" the Sony 4k is".

I'm currently trying to toggle back and forward between the new Oppo 203 beta firmware vs my custom made Arve curves on my JVC X7000. The handshaking delay means there is approx 45secs from being able to see one image, and the other. 

The brain simply can't remember and compare things that far apart. And I'm talking less than a minute.It's doing my head in. LOL.

Personally, I bought my X7000 from Rich ( "sight unseen" ) and if he has a X7900 in store, I would go and look at it. I agree with @:) al and going with the piggy in the middle is the best bang for buck.

I believe it was Javs that had the "bad" X9900. But he is a JVC dealer. He also quite clearly said that probably only he would be able to tell the difference between his sample and a "golden one". He is very,very fastidious.  .

The general consensus does appear to be that paying the extra for the "hand picked" parts of the 9 series is wasted money in this series. ( possibly not so much with the 7000/9000 series, but they are long gone).

If your room is ready to go, and you need a PJ, then get in a car and drive. Research time is over..

Thanks, but I didn't take it as anything other than more useful information.

Hmm so even the handpicked parts for the 9900 series isn't a worthwhile upgrade over the 7900? I guess it isn't as clear cut a benefit there as with the Sony - you'd have to be nuts or on a tight budget to touch a 285, losing the dynamic memory. And if I was choosing between 285 and 7900 I'd most definitely do 7900.

I can check out a Sony at Videopro, which I'll do Saturday, but their viewing room is pretty unflattering.

[Javs]

3D is not better on the Sony, Fact. There is considerably more crosstalk, and less depth in the image.

 

Up to 4x native contrast advantage wide open iris is BIG even in 3D. Plus nearly 500 lumens advantage in 3d...

 

3d up-scaling to 4k is BS too... Have you seen what the 1080pFP resolution looks like on a projector? Trust me, its NOWHERE near 4K, its not even what good 1080p looks like. Its easy to test, plug in a PC to the machine, and change the resolution to 1080p (3D) and you will see a MASSIVE loss of general sharpness across the image. JVC's do this too. CONTRAST is what you notice in 3D. Sharpness is more than enough on both projectors. Again, I have seen nobody post good data on this, other than subjective thoughts or assumptions. Frame packed 3d resolution is horrible on all displays. When you have the two frames alternating then thats when the sharpness of 3d begins to appear, but if you walk up to the screen and look through one lens, both these projectors are going to appear far, far softer than good 1080p.

 

The 7900 is the best projector under $10,000. Very, very safe bet right now if youy must purchase now, else, wait until next year...

 

You have been on the fence too long, JUMP OFF. Life is too short.

 

Quote

- Have not heard a single issue with lenses this generation

Because those guys don't know any better. The lens 'issues' you have heard on the JVCs are being EXTREMELY picky, and mostly limited to the 9 series simply not being up to snuff, I am one of them.

 

All of them, would still beat the Sony lenses in all likelihood. At least the two 9900's I have had here. I just KNEW JVC could do better, hence it was unacceptable to me.

[Mobe1969]

1 minute ago, Javs said:

3D is not better on the Sony, Fact. There is considerably more crosstalk, and less depth in the image.

 

Up to 4x native contrast advantage wide open iris is BIG even in 3D. Plus nearly 500 lumens advantage in 3d...

 

3d up-scaling to 4k is BS too... Have you seen what the 1080pFP resolution looks like on a projector? Trust me, its NOWHERE near 4K, its not even what good 1080p looks like. Its easy to test, plug in a PC to the machine, and change the resolution to 1080p (3D) and you will see a MASSIVE loss of general sharpness across the image. JVC's do this too. CONTRAST is what you notice in 3D. Sharpness is more than enough on both projectors. Again, I have seen nobody post good data on this, other than subjective thoughts or assumptions. Frame packed 3d resolution is horrible on all displays. When you have the two frames alternating then thats when the sharpness of 3d begins to appear, but if you walk up to the screen and look through one lens, both these projectors are going to appear far, far softer than good 1080p.

 

The 7900 is the best projector under $10,000. Very, very safe bet right now if youy must purchase now, else, wait until next year...

 

You have been on the fence too long, JUMP OFF. Life is too short.

 

Because those guys don't know any better. The lens 'issues' you have heard on the JVCs are being EXTREMELY picky, and mostly limited to the 9 series simply not being up to snuff, I am one of them.

 

All of them, would still beat the Sony lenses in all likelihood. At least the two 9900's I have had here. I just KNEW JVC could do better, hence it was unacceptable to me.

Thanks Javs. Especially regarding the 3D being better. I'll update my checklist... That tips it more...

 

So would you say the 9900 would be a reasonable improvement over the 7900, or just not worth the extra 2-3k as others have said?  I'd love to spend less, if it was not something I'd regret later (3m seat distance, 110" screen).

 

Anyone have a link to a JVC projector throw calculator? I've run my dimensions thru Sony's now will have to check JVC. The room is 4.8m long so about 4.2m from lens (mount on back wall) to screen