Können Sie mir bitte einen 1080p oder höher 3 Chip DLP mit ordentlichem Kontrast empfehlen??

  • Regarding the M.150, which level of frame interpolation are you referring to? I have been watching 2 full movies in the last days, and skipped through all the fi-levels on the SIM2 to watch out for possible skipping. Usually I have the fi on high, but put it to low and medium for quite some time to check on skipping. I must say I didn´t notice any skipped frames on the M.150, no matter which fi level I was using. I stay with my verdict that I find the fi on the SIM2 pretty good and usable. On low, it is still a bit too stuttering on my huge screen, whereas on high it´s perfectly smooth, but with some blurring around moving objects. But no lost frames as far as I am aware of.

    Well this is interesting because I think it is the same on medium and high as it is on low, except maybe on low, it only activates for slow pans and certain shots but not others? My understanding is...


    Low interpolates 24fps to 48fps, but only for slow pans and certain shots. Otherwise it stays at 24fps.

    Medium interpolates 24fps to 48fps all the time.

    High is 100% the same as medium.


    Am I mistaken? If you check the "info" screen in "puremovie" mode, with no frame interpolation on, it says it is outputting at 48hz. This is because they have are doubling the same frame in order to sync it with the LED timings, but it's the same as 24fps. In other words, the info screen will always show double what the framerate is on the M-150.


    Then in "puremotion" mode with the frame interpolation set to "low," it says 96hz, which means 48fps (but only sometimes, I think). Then set to "medium," it still says 96hz. Then set to "high," it still says 96hz.


    What is your image source? Can you check different sources/players? And which GeoBox do you use? Can it output 24 Hz? And have you activated the 24 Hz throughput? If not, the GeoBox will output 60 Hz, but with a 3:2 pulldown, so no good!

    Or do you use a HTPC and have low frame repeat times? The madVR info shows you how often a frame repeat / frame drop is expected. Could this be the root cause of your problem?

    So far, I have not tried any of this stuff. I am totally new to Home Theater, started about 10 months ago, and have had to learn everything from scratch to try to plan and put together this project with both passive 3D and quality 2D. I have literally ten thousand emails and phone calls etc in that time to learn so many details. I have come a long way but still ironing some things out. For example, I have madvr successfully working on my PC, and I just bought a pre-flashed 4K UHD drive to use with it, but have not learned how to make them work together. I have asked a few people for help but so far nothing. Meaning so far, the only source I have tested anything with is the Sony x800m 4K UHD player. Not the x800m2, but the original x800m I think it's called.

    Really, that Vivitek´s FI is absolutely gorgeous! I always run it on high. Smooth as butter, and almost no visible artifacts at all. I haven´t seen nor heard of any better frame interpolation. I luckily don´t have a problem with rainbows, but if you are sensitive to that, it might be a problem. If you see them in 2D, you also see them in 3D, that makes no difference. However, as these Viviteks have RGBRGB 6-speed colorwheels, it´s the best possible colorwheel solution (for rainbows as well as for Gamut).

    What type of colorwheel did the 2 DLPs have that bothered you?


    How many lumens do you get, calibrated, from each Vivitek? The two models I had rainbow problems with were this, https://www.amazon.com/Optoma-…r-Projector/dp/B00MK39P92, the Optoma Hd141x, and the Infocus IN83.


    Also, the only lcos I have seen is the JVC RS4500. Unfortunately it was just a demo of scenes I was not familiar with, except for one. Say there were 7 scenes demoed total. Six I was unfamiliar with, one I was familiar with. The first six, when I was watching I thought, "I completely made the right decision. The motion is much worse, and the picture is much noisier." But the one scene I was familiar with, I immediately became confused, not knowing what to think, because it seemed exactly the same motion and noise level as the M-150. I have heard some people say JVC made big improvements in motion going from the e-shift generations of mdoels to the NX line, which is where the doubt comes into play whether I would get just as good native motion with a modern JVC as with DLP, but perhaps a more powerful and reliable frame interpolation algorithm on a 2018 model than a 2012 Sim2, because of the improvements in processing power in that time.

  • ...

    Regarding misconvergence, I have a used 3-chip DLP projector that I want to ask your opinion if it is fit to be one half of a 3D stack for 3D, and if it is fit to be a long-term 2D projector. It's a tricky situation because the manufacturer told the original owner it was hand-picked as a favor because he had a friend at the company, he never checked the convergence but from his seating distance (closer than mine) he loved it for years (and yes I confirmed this was true, not just something he told me), and since I received it, everyone who has watched it with me thinks it is in great condition, whereas I know which side is worse up close and which side is good, and sometimes I think I am seeing it less sharp on one side, but I could just be projecting. I need a way to test that more specifically. But this is what it is like, if you can tell me if this will make any difference to sharpness from my viewing distance. On the right side, green and blue are perfectly aligned, and is misconverged like 0.2 pixels on the outside, including chromatic aberration. Then as you move right to left 20% of the screen's width, red comes closer to green and blue until all three are perfect for like 10% of the screen. Then as you keep moving towards the center of the screen, red starts to become misconverged to the other side, and by the time you reach the center of the screen, red is off about 0.35 or 0.4 pixels. And then unfortunately it starts to rise pretty quickly, not just at the other far side of the screen, but let's say just once you move another 20%, to where you are not 30% from the far left side of the screen, red is 1 pixel off from green and blue, and by the time you get to 25% from the left of the screen, there is a little extra chromatic aberration on top of this. And by the time you reach the far left of the screen, there is 1 misconverged red, plus another 1 pixel of chromatic aberration, so 2 pixels off total. And it is like this not just on the very far left of the screen, but the entire 20% of the right side of the screen or so.


    From 1.5 viewing distance, do you think this will have any effect? Even most the M-150's I've seen have the 1 pixel of chromatic aberration on the far sides of the image, but of course, not the misconvergence on top of it. What do you think? How bad is it? Can I go forward with this unit with my plans, or should I only go forward when I find a better unit?

  • How many lumens do you get, calibrated, from each Vivitek? The two models I had rainbow problems with were this, https://www.amazon.com/Optoma-…r-Projector/dp/B00MK39P92, the Optoma Hd141x, and the Infocus IN83.

    ...

    I think it was something around 1400 lm on each H1188. Without the Omega Filters of course. They cost like 75% of the luminance...

    In the end, it is just about enough for a decent 3D image, being around 11-12 fL on my gain 2 screen. At least way better than any single consumer PJ with active shutter could give me.


    I am pretty sure those projectors on which you had witnessed rainbows are not 6-speed RGBRGB color wheels. So it should be better on the Vivitek.

  • Regarding misconvergence, I have a used 3-chip DLP projector that I want to ask your opinion if it is fit to be one half of a 3D stack for 3D, and if it is fit to be a long-term 2D projector. It's a tricky situation because the manufacturer told the original owner it was hand-picked as a favor because he had a friend at the company, he never checked the convergence but from his seating distance (closer than mine) he loved it for years (and yes I confirmed this was true, not just something he told me), and since I received it, everyone who has watched it with me thinks it is in great condition, whereas I know which side is worse up close and which side is good, and sometimes I think I am seeing it less sharp on one side, but I could just be projecting. I need a way to test that more specifically. But this is what it is like, if you can tell me if this will make any difference to sharpness from my viewing distance. On the right side, green and blue are perfectly aligned, and is misconverged like 0.2 pixels on the outside, including chromatic aberration. Then as you move right to left 20% of the screen's width, red comes closer to green and blue until all three are perfect for like 10% of the screen. Then as you keep moving towards the center of the screen, red starts to become misconverged to the other side, and by the time you reach the center of the screen, red is off about 0.35 or 0.4 pixels. And then unfortunately it starts to rise pretty quickly, not just at the other far side of the screen, but let's say just once you move another 20%, to where you are not 30% from the far left side of the screen, red is 1 pixel off from green and blue, and by the time you get to 25% from the left of the screen, there is a little extra chromatic aberration on top of this. And by the time you reach the far left of the screen, there is 1 misconverged red, plus another 1 pixel of chromatic aberration, so 2 pixels off total. And it is like this not just on the very far left of the screen, but the entire 20% of the right side of the screen or so.


    From 1.5 viewing distance, do you think this will have any effect? Even most the M-150's I've seen have the 1 pixel of chromatic aberration on the far sides of the image, but of course, not the misconvergence on top of it. What do you think? How bad is it? Can I go forward with this unit with my plans, or should I only go forward when I find a better unit?

    Puh, hard to give any reasonable advice without having seen it in person...

    2 pixels off, that is something. And not something good :shock:

    But you have the machine, so you must judge if it is bearable for you or not.

    What projector are we talkin? LS-10? VX-22? Does it provide any means to adjust convergence? At least on a digital basis?

  • Puh, hard to give any reasonable advice without having seen it in person...

    2 pixels off, that is something. And not something good :shock:

    But you have the machine, so you must judge if it is bearable for you or not.

    What projector are we talkin? LS-10? VX-22? Does it provide any means to adjust convergence? At least on a digital basis?

    Es ist ein Superlumis. Das ist der andere Projektor, den ich besitze, abgesehen von dem, was ich bereits erwähnt habe. Es hat ewig gedauert, einen gebrauchten zu finden, war nicht billig und dann diese unglückliche Fragezeichen-Situation. :( Auf der hellen Seite ist es nur 1 Pixel Konvergenz am schlechtesten Punkt, das andere 1 Pixel ist chromatische Aberration. Ich weiß nicht, ob das besser ist, aber ich habe das Gefühl, dass chromatische Aberration das Bild weniger beeinflusst als Konvergenz. Chromatische Aberration scheint wie eine Situation, in der das rote, grüne oder blaue Pixel noch an der richtigen Stelle ist, aber dann auch etwas an der falschen Stelle überschwappt am falschen Ort und nur am falschen Ort.


    Ich denke, mit chromatischer Aberration haben Sie ein fast volles rotes, grünes oder blaues Pixel, wo es sein sollte, aber dann werden zum Beispiel nur einige Wellenlängen dieser Farbe ein Pixel zur Seite verstreut. Aber bei einer Fehlkonvergenz fehlen die roten, grünen oder blauen Pixelinformationen vollständig, wo sie sein sollten, und leuchten beispielsweise vollständig ein Pixel zur Seite.


    Aber ich könnte damit völlig falsch liegen. Nur eine Theorie. Ich habe Sim2 Bilder gezeigt, sie sagten mir, es sei nicht nur in der Spezifikation, sondern "genau innerhalb der Spezifikation", und solche Dinge sind aus der Nähe normal, aber aus normaler Betrachtungsentfernung verschwindet alles. Ich muss noch mehr testen. Ich dachte, nachdem ich lange gesucht hatte, habe ich den ersten 1 von 2 des perfekten Projektors für einen 3D-Stack (und auch großartige 2D) gefunden, aber es ist frustrierend, weil ich vielleicht damit auf dem richtigen Weg bin (und die Micos mit ihre LEDs funktionieren möglicherweise überhaupt nicht mit Infitec-Filtern und erfordern einen sehr hohen Verstärkungsbildschirm mit Hotspotting usw.). Ja, Sie können es im Servicemenü in vollen Pixelschritten anpassen, aber da es auf der linken und rechten Seite unterschiedlich ist, können Sie eine Seite nicht verbessern, ohne die andere Seite zu verschlechtern. Aber vielleicht wird es nach weiteren Tests so sein, wie es mir Sim2 gesagt hat, und wird immer noch für einen Stack funktionieren. Wenn nicht, wenn ich es nur in 2D verwende, dachten der Vorbesitzer sowie meine Gäste alle, dass es aus der Sichtweite perfekt ist, kann nichts bemerken, und Sim2 hat mir das gleiche gesagt, also werde ich es an jemanden verkaufen, für den es verwendet wird 2D und aktives 3D, aber keine Stapelung, wo eine feinere Ausrichtung erforderlich ist.

  • Puh, hard to give any reasonable advice without having seen it in person...

    2 pixels off, that is something. And not something good :shock:

    But you have the machine, so you must judge if it is bearable for you or not.

    What projector are we talkin? LS-10? VX-22? Does it provide any means to adjust convergence? At least on a digital basis?

    I lost my original english version and when I translated it back the translation is messing it up, saying "exactly within spec" instead of "well within spec" like it should say, etc. "Right track" instead of "wrong" or I dont even know what got translated there. Anyway what I wanted to add is that I measured everything using a 1.1 gain Elite cinewhite screen, which does have a bit of texture on it and is supposedly 1.1 gain not 1.0. I'm not super hopeful this will make any difference but I will try checking it on a white piece of paper next time. I think my best hope though is that maybe it will not need to be any better because, like Sim2 claims, it will make no difference from my seating distance. I am sitting 1.5x away so maybe that will mean it is no problem at all. But I was curious your opinion in any case.

  • Es ist ein Superlumis. ...

    Ja, Sie können es im Servicemenü in vollen Pixelschritten anpassen, aber da es auf der linken und rechten Seite unterschiedlich ist, können Sie eine Seite nicht verbessern, ohne die andere Seite zu verschlechtern. Aber vielleicht wird es nach weiteren Tests so sein, wie es mir Sim2 gesagt hat, und wird immer noch für einen Stack funktionieren. ...

    Ich würde es mal ausprobieren. Es könnte sein, dass Du mit einer vollflächigen Verschiebung um einen ganzen Pixel dennoch ein besseres Ergebnis erzielst. Damit gleicht sich die Konvergenzverschiebung mit der chromatischen Aberration wieder aus. Zumindest auf der einen Seite. Auf der anderen Seite hast Du dann Rot und Blau zusammen um einen Pixel verschoben, das ist also gleich wie wenn nur Grün um einen Pixel verschoben wäre. Besser als 2 Pixelbreiten in eine Richtung. Ich würde es auf jeden Fall testen.

    Falls es gar nicht klappt, gib den Superlumis einfach mir :big_smile:


    Noch eine Frage: Mit welchem Kabel kannst Du die Live Color Calibration Software beim M.150 ansteuern? Ich habe ein USB to RS-232 Kabel gekauft mit Prolific PL2303 Chipset. Damit kann ich aber nur senden, nicht empfangen. Jetzt habe ich ein weiteres Kabel bestellt mit FTDI Chipset, hoffentlich funktioniert es damit. Hattest Du diesbezüglich auch schon Probleme?

  • Ich würde es mal ausprobieren. Es könnte sein, dass Du mit einer vollflächigen Verschiebung um einen ganzen Pixel dennoch ein besseres Ergebnis erzielst. Damit gleicht sich die Konvergenzverschiebung mit der chromatischen Aberration wieder aus. Zumindest auf der einen Seite. Auf der anderen Seite hast Du dann Rot und Blau zusammen um einen Pixel verschoben, das ist also gleich wie wenn nur Grün um einen Pixel verschoben wäre. Besser als 2 Pixelbreiten in eine Richtung. Ich würde es auf jeden Fall testen.

    Falls es gar nicht klappt, gib den Superlumis einfach mir :big_smile:


    Noch eine Frage: Mit welchem Kabel kannst Du die Live Color Calibration Software beim M.150 ansteuern? Ich habe ein USB to RS-232 Kabel gekauft mit Prolific PL2303 Chipset. Damit kann ich aber nur senden, nicht empfangen. Jetzt habe ich ein weiteres Kabel bestellt mit FTDI Chipset, hoffentlich funktioniert es damit. Hattest Du diesbezüglich auch schon Probleme?


    Well I guess it at least a good sign that you would still want the projector like this! That makes me feel better. As for as adjusting the convergence, the problem is that the majority of the screen is under 1 pixel, including the center under 1/2, so I cant make the worst part better without making the center, which is the most important part, worse. And the part on the left that is only off a little is off the opposite direction as the worst part is off on the other side. So going left to right, yes I could make it, instead of 0.2 off on the left, 0.35 off in the center, and eventually 2 off on the far right, I could make it 1.2 off on the left, 0.65 off in the center, and eventually 1 off on the far right. It would be more even at least... lol... but it would be off more overall if you add up the total. I just need to test if the way it is right now is visible in content. If not, then 50% of the screen is less than 1/3 or 0.35 off, which would be nice to take advantage of. Of course, if 2 pixels off isnt visible then you can say why not just shift it so that it's off 1.2, 0.65, and 1 off across the screen, 1.2 and below could not be visible if 2 is also not. But maybe 2 will be, and maybe even 1.2, I dont know, it's hard and time-consuming to test. Maybe I should just shift it like that though. I was just told the center is the most important so I did not want to make the center worse.


    As for the M-150, I ordered a normal cable like a week ago, and have not tested it yet. I have never used x-rite before, or calibrated a projector before, or done basically any of this. I am jumping in with boat feet. I bought an x-rite, mic stand, etc. I have everything to do it now. I have to learn it and then not sure when I will get to it. But it may be that the cable does not work for me either. I will update you with the result. Let me know how it goes with your new cable, or if you figure out what the problem was.

  • Ich würde es mal ausprobieren. Es könnte sein, dass Du mit einer vollflächigen Verschiebung um einen ganzen Pixel dennoch ein besseres Ergebnis erzielst. Damit gleicht sich die Konvergenzverschiebung mit der chromatischen Aberration wieder aus. Zumindest auf der einen Seite. Auf der anderen Seite hast Du dann Rot und Blau zusammen um einen Pixel verschoben, das ist also gleich wie wenn nur Grün um einen Pixel verschoben wäre. Besser als 2 Pixelbreiten in eine Richtung. Ich würde es auf jeden Fall testen.

    Falls es gar nicht klappt, gib den Superlumis einfach mir :big_smile:


    Noch eine Frage: Mit welchem Kabel kannst Du die Live Color Calibration Software beim M.150 ansteuern? Ich habe ein USB to RS-232 Kabel gekauft mit Prolific PL2303 Chipset. Damit kann ich aber nur senden, nicht empfangen. Jetzt habe ich ein weiteres Kabel bestellt mit FTDI Chipset, hoffentlich funktioniert es damit. Hattest Du diesbezüglich auch schon Probleme?

    I am not sure this is relevant, but one thing I noticed by chance watching a youtube video about another Sim2 projector is that in addition to the RS-232, there is a "graphics RGB" input that the presenter says is for connecting the computer.

    . However like you, I have always heard of the M-150 and Lumis connecting via RS-232, not anything else.


    This reminds me of a question to ask you also. Do you know what is the difference between Easy LED software and Live Color Calibration software? A review I read of the M-150 mentioned both of them as being separate software for the M-150. I can confirm knowing people who used the Live Color Calibration software, but what is Easy LED software?


    Edit: In the video, he actually says neither the RS-232, or the RGB Graphics, inputs are for software updating the M-150, he says the one in between them is? He calls it USB? Maybe you can figure it out from that. It is probably the same as the M-150.


    Edit 2: At the end of the video it says that model is upgradeable by RS-232, Serial Interface, and USB:

  • Nein, die "graphics RGB" Buchse ist ein altertümlicher Video-Eingang. Nicht für Steuerung oder Update.

    Ich habe direkt bei Sim2 in Italien nachgefragt. Die Antwort war: wenn dein Projektor eine USB Buchse hat, dann kann es kein M.150 sein :beat_plaste. Ich habe Fotos geschickt auf denen man den M.150 Schriftzug und die USB Buchse erkennen kann, bin gespannt auf die Antwort... :rofl:

    Die easy-LED software kenne ich nicht. Nach kurzem Googeln glaube ich aber, dass das eine ältere Software war, bevor LCC heraus kam. Die war vermutlich für die älteren Micos gedacht (40, 50, 60), nicht für M.150, M.120 und M.Reference.

  • Nein, die "graphics RGB" Buchse ist ein altertümlicher Video-Eingang. Nicht für Steuerung oder Update.

    Ich habe direkt bei Sim2 in Italien nachgefragt. Die Antwort war: wenn dein Projektor eine USB Buchse hat, dann kann es kein M.150 sein :beat_plaste. Ich habe Fotos geschickt auf denen man den M.150 Schriftzug und die USB Buchse erkennen kann, bin gespannt auf die Antwort... :rofl:

    Die easy-LED software kenne ich nicht. Nach kurzem Googeln glaube ich aber, dass das eine ältere Software war, bevor LCC heraus kam. Die war vermutlich für die älteren Micos gedacht (40, 50, 60), nicht für M.150, M.120 und M.Reference.

    Lol! Sim2 has told me so many contradicting things that I started to wonder if they aren't intentionally trying to confuse me about my full options. Especially because they took down their website with a lot of the info right around the time I started asking questions. Could both just be coincidences and due to other reasons, though. What is your opinion on the M.Reference and M-150S vs M-150? As far as I understand, the M.Reference and M-150S are both M-150's with "hand-picked parts." I am curious how big a difference that makes. Also, have you heard of the LED replacements? Are you considering doing that?

  • Ich habe vom Sim2 Service die Antwort erhalten, dass man über die USB Buchse nicht die LCC Software nutzen kann. Habe nun mein 3. USB -> Serial Kabel bestellt, aber ich glaube nicht dass es damit funktioniert. Jetzt habe ich noch einen uralten Laptop gefunden und auf diesem LCC installiert. Heute probiere ich, ob es damit (mit einem ganz normalen seriellen Kabel) funktioniert...

    Wie ist Dein Stand mit der Live Color Calibration? Kannst Du in beide Richtungen kommunizieren, senden und empfangen?


    Zitat
      • Also, have you heard of the LED replacements? Are you considering doing that?


    Ja, ich habe die neuen LEDs vor 2 Tagen eingebaut! :respect:

    Zuerst alle 3 (mit RAX): ca. 95% mehr Licht als vorher! (mein Projektor hat schon sehr viele Stunden, ich habe ihn bei dieser Gelegenheit auch komplett zerlegt und alle optischen Teile gründlich gereinigt).

    Das Rot ist zwar noch fast exakt auf DCI-P3, aber es hat mir doch deutlich weniger gut gefallen. Gestern habe ich dann das alte Rot mit der längeren Wellenlänge wieder eingebaut. Jetzt habe ich "nur" noch ca. 55% mehr Licht als vorher, aber eine nahezu perfekte Rec.2020 Abdeckung :dancewithme Ich liebe dieses tiefe Rec.2020 Rot!!! <3

    Möchtest Du mir zufällig eine Deiner alten roten LEDs verkaufen? Ich bezahle gut! Meine haben schon etwas viele Stunden, aber Sim2 verlangt über 800€ für eine originale LED :angry:

    Übrigens habe ich den Weißpunkt alleine über die LED Ströme kalibriert. Projektor Weißpunkt auf "native" eingestellt und im Servicemenü so lange an den LED Einstellungen gedreht, bis das Weiß perfekt stimmte. So habe ich maximale Helligkeit und maximalen Kontrast. Besser als das Weiß über die DMD Modulation einzustellen.

  • I still dont have the LCC set up at all. My project is sort of in limbo until I can hear back from people about my options, and whether I will use the M-150's for either 2D or 3D or whether I will resell them.


    How many foot lamberts were you getting total, calibrated to bt2020 or P3, with the RAX installed? How many ftl are you getting now with the original red?


    When you say you didnt like the RAX, what that on test patterns only or even in real content?


    I might be able to sell you a red with low hours, but I still need some time. Luckily apparently red is easiest to swap out without taking apart as much of the projector. Apparently you can access it from the back. I'll get back to you about it when I can but things seem to be moving pretty slow. Often when I need one new piece of information to make the next decision in my project, there is a delay of about a month, if not more, between when I seek out the information and when I find it, lol.

  • ...


    How many foot lamberts were you getting total, calibrated to bt2020 or P3, with the RAX installed? How many ftl are you getting now with the original red?

    The information content of the luminous intensity (foot lamberts) alone, without knowing my screen size and screen gain, tends towards zero...

    So I will tell you the luminous flux (lumens), which is an absolute factor of my projector. I cannot measure it accurately, because i only have a colorimeter, which becomes more or less unprecise with the narrowband, wide gamut spectrum of the RGB LEDs. However, it was roughly in the magnitude of 400 lm before my surgical intervention (no LED overlap, D65). Should be a bit more if properly measured with a spectrometer. However, I was mainly interested in a direct comparison before/after, rather than in absolute numbers, so my relative comparison should be quite accurate. Same measurement setup, all cleaned up, and 3 new LEDs (with RAX), native white point calibrated via LED currents gave me slightly over 800 lm (~ 100% increase). And 2 new LEDs (old RED) now measures with about 630 lm (~ 60% increase).

    Luckily, just yesterday I found a seller in the US who still has some new old stock of the "old" LEDs. So I will order a new "old" RED and swap it in, which will most likely result in 700-750 lm (~ 75% increase), but without sacrificing the glorious BT.2020 red :dancewithme

    Concerning the brightness perception: On my 3,6 m Gain 2 cinemascope screen the 630 lm result in appr. 75 nits. Which doesn´t sound much. However, with my JVC I have appr. 135 nits on the same screen, but it doesn´t look any brighter. Previously, both projectors appeared to be about the same brightness to the human eye. After the modding, the Sim2 even looks brighter than the JVC - even with the old RED. With the new old RED this will be a blast!

    Helmholtz-Kohlrausch does it´s job :zwinker2:

    Zitat

    When you say you didnt like the RAX, what that on test patterns only or even in real content?

    The color coordinate of the new green LED is shifted a tad towards up and right, it matches the reference point of BT.2020 even better than before. Also, for DCI P3, the line between red and green is now a bit higher than before, so yellow and gold tones are more saturated than with the old green. Just look at the measured Gamut of old RED together with new GREEN and BLUE, it is absolutely amazing :respect::



    And amazing is how the picture looks like!!! I compared old vs. new RED with my favourite HDR movie scenes with MadVR, like the Guardians of the Galaxy II, Hobbit, Passengers, Aquaman, Valerian, etc.. To be honest, I wouldn´t have expected the difference between DCI P3 red (new, RAX) and BT.2020 red (old, R) to be so obvious. But the first scene I watched with the RAX, I missed that deep, deep gorgeously saturated red. It is still better than almost every other projector on the market, and if one attempts to calibrate their projector precisely to P3, there is no point in using the old RED, as P3 coordinates can be reached even with the new RAX LED. However, I prefer using what I have paid for, so I would never reduce my gamut on purpose just to reach some norm. I calibrate it so that my secondary colors are in line with P3, white point is D65, but I leave the edges of the Gamut untouched to be able to enjoy the full sumptuousness of those colors. And boy does it look splendid!!! <3

    I am absolutely thrilled by the image, never seen colors rendered so beautifully and life-like!

  • This is great! And if the seller has any old new red left over, I might in the future be interested to buy one if I end up going this direction.


    I am glad to hear about the HK effect. One of the doubts in my mind about using an M-150 for 2D is that I would prefer a 1.0 gain screen for 2D, and on a 1.0 gain screen, I would get between 15 foot lamberts and 20 foot lamberts, most likely. When I had bought the projector, and everyone was telling me 20 to 30 foot lamberts is ideal for HDR (with bulb projectors), this sounded perfect for the same reason you are talking about, HK effect. 15 to 20 on the M-150 should look like 30 on a JVC, right? But more recently I see many people talking about how even in a completely blacked out home theater, and even with an RGB laser DLP projector, 150 nits or 45 foot lamberts is ideal, maybe 200 nits, but definitely 100. Some people even talk about 500 nits and so on. And definitely for lcos, people talk about higher numbers.


    So I dont know what to think. In any case I am committed to buy the Ilep X3 for 2D from the seller in this area (well, nation, but I am trying to be vague), but I am waiting for him to tell me it's ready, and not hearing back from him very often, which just introduces more uncertainty.


    When an M-150 is brightness matched to a JVC, how much brighter do you think the M-150 will appear? Most people seemed to say maybe between 20% and 50%, although a few people said 100% or one even said like 400% lol. But could it actually truly be like 100%, not just 25% like people usually guess? I think maybe people dont fully believe it so they make conservative estimates.


    Also, when I say I can get 15 to 20 foot lamberts on a 1.0 gain screen, with the new LEDs installed, that is with an M-150. However, one of my M-150's in the projector info screen says "M.Reference." This is like an M-150 but "with hand-picked parts" and so projectorcentral.com specs it at 1,200 lumens instead of 1,000 lumens like the M-150. However, I sort of figured this was mostly a difference in hand-picked LEDs, so because I replaced and upgraded the LEDs with non-handpicked new blue, green, and RAX LEDs, I am wondering will I still have benefit from this? Or can I expect, with supposedly hand-picked power supply, cooling, DMD, lens, everything in the projector, not just the LEDs, that I will get more brightness? Is it possible if you get 800 lumens, calibrated, with the new LEDs (including RAX) on an M-150, that I could get 1,000 lumens with the new LEDs, calibrated, on an M.Reference?


    I am just also skeptical because I found a comment from someone who bought an M-150S, which is the hand-picked version the year before the M.Reference came out, who said when it was brand new, he got 525 lumens calibrated, lol. So that is same as a normal M-150, maybe worse. Never change, Sim2.


    Really, hearing that they tried to charge you 800 euros makes me regret buying Sim2 at all, to some degree. It seems like they are very anti-consumer. I also constantly hear about broken Sim2 projectors. Quality control, etc. But in any case, I have them, and they are nice projectors, so we'll see what happens. So far so good overall. But hopefully I can get the Ilep soon, and that will give me great 2D performance for many years to come. Then figuring out passive 3D will be the next challenge.

  • Was, Du willst einen Ilep kaufen??? Hast Du im Lotto gewonnen? :waaaht:

    Also in diesem Fall würde ich dann aber auch 3D über den Ilep schauen. Das wird auf jeden Fall um ein Vielfaches heller als passives 3D mit zwei M.150. Und Triple Flash Shutter 3D ist ja auch nicht gerade schlecht. Oder verkaufst Du die M.150 dann und kaufst einen zweiten Super Lumis für 3D?

    Zum Vergleich der Helligkeit würde ich sagen, die Angabe von 1,5 die auch Sim2 offiziell macht, halte ich für relativ passend. Es ist recht subjektiv, und 1,5 oder 2 kann man ohne direkten Vergleich kaum unterscheiden. Aber die Größenordnung passt ganz gut nach meiner Erfahrung. Es macht definitiv mehr als 25% aus, aber auch sicher nicht mehr als 100%.

    Eine wirkliche Licht-Kanone wird der M.150 nie sein, aber schön hell und dynamisch auf jeden Fall :respect:


    Zum Thema "wie viel Helligkeit ist genug": für HDR kannst Du fast nicht genug haben. 16 fL finde ich die absolute Untergrenze, damit es (mit MadVR!) noch einigermaßen Spaß macht. Richtig gut gefällt es mir ab 30-40 fL, gerne auch 50. Ich hatte hier auch schon über 100 fL auf meiner Leinwand, das war sehr beeindruckend! :dancewithme


    Dass der M.150.S und der M.Reference etwas heller sind (sein sollen...) als der M.150 liegt mit ziemlicher Sicherheit nur an den selektierten LEDs (höheres Binning). Eine andere Möglichkeit gibt es dafür eigentlich nicht. Wenn Du also die LEDs austauschst, wirst Du höchstwahrscheinlich nicht mehr Licht haben als bei einem "normalen" M.150 mit neuen LEDs. Alles andere würde mich sehr wundern!

  • When you say you like 30-40 ftl for HDR, is that even with the M-150's and HK effect, or do you mean with JVCs and bulb projectors? What is the ideal brightness for HDR when using RGB LEDs like the M-150? Or when using bulb projectors but bulb DLP which may also have higher perceived brightness than lcos because the mirrors reflect the light directly while lcos reflects the light through a layer of liquid crystal which makes the light more diffuse and perhaps less bright looking when brightness matched?

    What, you want to buy an ilep ??? Did you win the lottery? : waaaht:

    Haha. I can only speak about pricing for the other models that i bought used. It seems the used prices are drastically less in the US than in Germany, which is really unfair for you guys.


    I'm glad you brought up triple flash active 3D. Have you ever compared it to passive double-stack 3D? Most the comments I could find comparing them were comparing 120hz active 3D to passive, however some people left comments that even triple flash is still alternating eyes, so the eyes are not seeing things in the same position at the same time, and so passive will always be better. I will go to the trouble of double stack passive 3D to get better quality. If the quality is not better then I would avoid it. Since I dont have passive yet I cant compare the two myself, so I am asking other people.


    My plan is to use the Ilep for 2D, and then have a dedicated 3D stack for 3D. I had originally planned to alternate use of the projectors in the stack for 2D, to keep the bulb/LED hours similar on both so that they will still match for the 3D stack. I thought moving the filters in and out would be easy enough. But I think that is not correct. So really it's better to have a dedicated 3D stack, and a third projector for 2D, anyway. The Ilep came up at the perfect time... well, if it ever becomes available in the US (I am still waiting)... so it's a great fit. I wish I could be more specific but I think it's a good decision in my position.


    For 3D, that is where it's really complicated. Putting cost aside for a moment, what about two Ileps in a stack, and I could sell everything else? The problem is, the laser wavelengths are too narrowband to split using Infitec filters. You need totally separate laser wavelengths in each projector in the stack, and then you dont need 3D filters at all, since the wavelengths are already separate from each projector, all you need is glasses that filter the wavelengths from one projector to one eye, and one to the other eye.


    Well, it turns out that Ilep also offers a 6P model. This model is apparently noisy and hot, to where you would not want to use it for 2D unless you had a dedicated projector closet, but this is my idea. What if they can take the alternate, secondary RGB lasers in the 6P model, and use them in a regular 3P Ilep model instead of the normal 3P RGB lasers?


    So the idea is to buy one normal 3P Ilep, and one 3P Ilep that is normal in every way except that they take out the normal 3P lasers and put in alternate RGB lasers. I have contacted the dealers etc asking if this is possible, and have not gotten an answer either way the last month. Until I have that information, I don't know about my full options, maybe even my best option, so I can make no decisions. Which is very frustrating after already taking a year on this project only to be in limbo at the finish line, but I need to wait to hear.


    If that option is impossible will not work, then I have a difficult decision. For the 3D stack, I can either use the two M-150's I have, or sell at least one of them and try to find a second Superlumis. Superlumises will work with Infitec filters, M-150's really will not. Superlumises are way brighter, so will work on a 1.3 gain screen probably with Infitec filters, while the M-150's will only work with a 2.5 gain screen using linear polarization 3D.


    However, how important is convergence to 3D? The M-150's are single chip, so zero misconvergence. The 3D separation from left eye and right eye will have exactly defined lines for all six RGB, RGB subpixels. Whereas with Superlumises, you will still get exact line definition for most the subpixels, but for a few of them you will have them 1 pixel off, like red etc, between two projectors, if not a little more sometimes.


    So which is the correct decision? I do not know. I cannot find a second Superlumis so far anyway, plus they're significantly more expensive. Maybe the M.Reference which I sort of hit the lottery on, speaking of lotteries, because it still has less than 100 hours, is worth the same as a Superlumis or more since it's newer than most Superlumises out there, probably most used Superlumises on the market are made around 2013 while this M.Reference is I forget but I think 2016 or 2017, plus it's the only one in the wild I know of with the new RGB LEDs, plus they were professionally installed. As few Superlumis sales I could find archived, I found zero M.Reference ones. For some reason the seller thought it was an M-150S but it's a Reference. Guess I can't complain lol but it was a weird situation. But other than that, M-150's are cheaper in the US used.


    So I dont know what to do. The M-150's will require a second high gain screen solely for 3D. The Superlumises probably also. Well, I either need two with "high brightness lenses," which lowers the contrast an amount I do not know, and then they will work for 3D on a 1.0 screen. But with the "high contrast" lens I have on the one that I have, 1.3 gain is probably the minimum and even that might be low.


    The question is which is more important to double stacked passive 3D, not having any misconvergence, or, being able to use a low gain screen, and Infitec filters and glasses that do not ruin the 3D when you tilt your head instead of linear polarization, which I've heard rumors may also harm the contrast more than Infitec system does. (If you've ever compared both Dolby 3D and IMAX 3D while IMAX used linear polarization for 3D, then that is similar to what I'm comparing regarding Infitec vs linear polarization).


    So I really dont know. When passive doublestack 3D was taking off on the big AV forum in the US ten years ago, almost everyone was using linear polarization on 2.5 to 3 gain screens, and some people had a lot of success with it, and I probably have a longer throw distance and viewing distance than they did. So it's really difficult to determine what to do. I feel like dual Superlumises is the safest option to get the best experience without big downsides, except for the misconvergence issue, which I do not know how to weigh against the negatives of high gain screens and linear polarization with the M-150's. Your advice on that is valued very highly. So for now, since the project is stuck in limbo anyway as I wait for info about the Ilep stacking idea, and the Ilep's availability for 2D in the USA period, I am just focusing on other things, putting the project on hold a bit, and keeping my eyes out for another used Superlumis, although until I hear back about the Ilep idea, I'm not sure whether to buy it anyway. Just another difficulty because I cannot get information I need in a timely manner to make these decisions. And provided the Ilep stacking idea will work from the Ilep side of things, then I also need information from Infitec about whether they can custom make 3D glasses for it, or whether their Christie 6P glasses or Barco 6P glasses will match the wavelengths for the Ilep stack idea. And they haven't gotten back to me either lol. Makes things really really difficult. And yeah to answer your first question, budgeting all of this is definitely problematic, but hopefully if things are available at the right prices, etc. First step is I need to determine what is the best combination of these things, for 2D, and for 3D, regardless of cost. Then the second step is to see what is the most I can budget, and which options to do.

  • Aaaalter, du kannst wirklich nicht erwarten, dass jemand hier (in einem deutschsprachigen Forum!) noch solche unendlich langen Texte in einer fremden Sprache liest. :shock:

    Ich kann auch nicht mehr auf jeden einzelnen deiner Gedanken eingehen - viele hatten wir auch schon zuvor erörtert...

    Ich kann dir nur nochmal dringend raten, was dir auch im AVS schon so viele Leute geraten haben: versuche nicht alles in der Theorie zu lösen, sondern fange endlich an, eigene Erfahrungen zu sammeln!!!

    Mich interessieren diese Themen auch sehr: wie wirken unterschiedliche Helligkeiten, unterschiedliche Farbsättigungen, unterschiedliche Auflösungen, unterschiedliche Technologien (LCoS, DLP, LED, etc.), unterschiedliche Leinwände. Deswegen besitze ich mehr als 10 Projektoren und teste, vergleiche, modifiziere, messe sehr viel damit. So konnte ich mir über die Jahre eigenes Fachwissen und einen eigenen Erfahrungsschatz erarbeiten, von dem ich jetzt profitiere. Und so konnte ich mir ein recht komplexes Projektions-Setup aufbauen für 3D, 2D und HDR, mit dem ich sehr zufrieden bin. So etwas bekommt man nicht durch immer noch mehr und noch längere Fragen in allen Foren dieser Welt... :beated:

    Gutes Beispiel: Als ich von der Möglichkeit erfahren habe, die LEDs an meinem Sim2 zu tauschen, habe ich alle Datenblätter verglichen und überlegt, ob sich der Wechsel für mich lohnt. Ich kam zu dem Schluss, dass es mir höchstwahrscheinlich viel bringen wird, also habe ich die LEDs gekauft und eingebaut. Auch direkt die neue RAX, die alte RED und demnächst auch noch die neue/alte RED getestet. Ich habe gemessen und mit bekannten Filmszenen verglichen. Jetzt weiß ich ganz genau was mir welche LED-Kombination an Helligkeit und Gamut bringt, und wie das im realen Filmbild aussieht. Das halte ich für zielführender, als monatelang das AVS Forum mit Fragen zu überhäufen, ob man jetzt wohl eher 55% oder eher 60% oder vielleicht doch nur 40% Lichtsteigerung erwarten kann, und ob Rec.2020 am Ende eher zu 91% oder doch eher zu 93% abgedeckt wird...

    Bitte nimm mir meine etwas harten Worte nicht übel - ich versuche Dir zu helfen. Ich sehe ja, wie du dich seit fast 2 Jahren im Kreis drehst und noch kaum wirklich weitergekommen bist.


    Noch kurz zu ein paar Fragen von Dir: es gibt keine ideale Helligkeit für HDR. Es geht nicht darum, ob meine ganz grob genannten 30-40 fL für Lampen oder für LEDs gelten. Der Kern meiner Aussage war: für HDR kannst du (fast) nie zu viel Helligkeit haben (meiner Meinung nach gilt das leicht eingeschränkt sogar für SDR). Je heller desto besser. Da man aber nicht einfach beliebig viel Helligkeit bekommen kann, muss man eben nehmen was man kriegen kann. So waren meine Angaben zu verstehen. Mindestens 16 fL - je mehr desto besser!


    Ich finde passiv 3D auch am besten, besser als Shutter-3D - sonst hätte ich mir nicht meinen passiv-Stack gebaut. Ich finde nur Deinen Ansatz unsinnig, einen extrem lichtstarken Projektor (Ilep) für 2D einzusetzen, und wesentlich weniger starke Projektoren für den 3D Stack. Bei einem Infitec Stack gehen ca. 70-80% des Lichts durch die Filter verloren. Das heißt Du bräuchtest eigentlich ca. 5 mal hellere Projektoren für 3D, um dieselbe Helligkeit zu erzielen wie bei 2D. Nimmst Du einen Ilep für 2D und deine zwei M.150 für 3D dann hast du bei 2D ein (ganz grob überschlagen) etwa 20 mal helleres Bild als bei 3D - DAS macht in meinen Augen einfach keinen Sinn - auch nicht mit 2 verschiedenen Leinwänden!

    ICH würde immer noch einen M.150 für 2D nehmen und 2 SuperLumis für 3D. Mit einer Leinwand mit ca. Gain 2 hast Du dann eine sehr gute Helligkeit und die bestmögliche Qualität sowohl bei 2D als auch bei 3D. Und es sollte möglich sein, einen zweiten SuperLumis für deutlich weniger Geld aufzutreiben als einen Ilep.

    Apropos Ilep: ich verstehe nicht, wie Du da von second-hand Preisen sprichst??? Es gibt die ILEPs doch noch kaum neu :think:

  • Your english has seemed fluent so far so I had no indication you were having trouble with it. I have been able to use the forum well through google translate, even though everyone is using German besides me, and it works great. But I am unable to tell if it works as well the other direction?

    Gutes Beispiel: Als ich von der Möglichkeit erfahren habe, die LEDs an meinem Sim2 zu tauschen, habe ich alle Datenblätter verglichen und überlegt, ob sich der Wechsel für mich lohnt.

    You didn't ask people who already did it? That's what I did and it helped a lot.


    Noch kurz zu ein paar Fragen von Dir: es gibt keine ideale Helligkeit für HDR. Es geht nicht darum, ob meine ganz grob genannten 30-40 fL für Lampen oder für LEDs gelten. Der Kern meiner Aussage war: für HDR kannst du (fast) nie zu viel Helligkeit haben (meiner Meinung nach gilt das leicht eingeschränkt sogar für SDR). Je heller desto besser. Da man aber nicht einfach beliebig viel Helligkeit bekommen kann, muss man eben nehmen was man kriegen kann. So waren meine Angaben zu verstehen. Mindestens 16 fL - je mehr desto besser!

    Thanks for clarifying that, but as you know many others say that if you go too high in brightness, it can be fatiguing to the eyes, and you had already said that the M-150's HK effect makes the picture almost twice as bright compared to lcos lamp lumens, therefore I wanted to know when you said 30-40ftl was not too bright for you, whether you were referring to lcos or DLP, and bulb or LEDs. For example some people said the Christie Griffyn with RGB lasers and DLP is too bright at 40ftl. Therefore I thought it was relevant if you were talking about 40ftl with lcos and bulb, or 40ftl with DLP and LEDs or something else. There are so many details in this hobby, you know how it is. You can never predict every detail that is relevant to someone else, so unless you include them all right away, often the other person has to write back to clarify more details. It is a time consuming hobby to research and learn about, that is for sure.


    Ich finde passiv 3D auch am besten, besser als Shutter-3D - sonst hätte ich mir nicht meinen passiv-Stack gebaut.

    Have you tried 144hz triple flash active 3D? I am assuming I will prefer passive 3D even compared to 144hz triple flash active 3D also, which is why I am doing it, but again the details are key in the question. Many others have compared 120hz and below active 3D to passive 3D, and they prefer passive 3D. Through many hours of researching, I was able to discover this trend pretty clearly. What is hard to find are people who have compared 144hz triple flash active 3D to passive 3D, and that is why I asked about this detail. If I didn't think there was a good reason for the question, I wouldn't have taken so much time to write it and the others! :) But I also understand it is tiring to talk about. You already have your setup so there is less motivation pushing you to keep spending hours and hours asking about the details online like I am trying to. If I was in your position I would probably spend way way way less time on forums, haha. So, I get where you are coming from. I'm just saying, I have a reason for asking these details. Of course, once my setup is complete, I should be able to compare 144hz active 3D to passive 3D myself, and I will let you know what I think, but not yet. Probably my answer will be, "the best 3D with just one projector is 144hz active 3D, and the best 3D with two projectors is passive 3D with those same projector models."


    Apropos Ilep: ich verstehe nicht, wie Du da von second-hand Preisen sprichst??? Es gibt die ILEPs doch noch kaum neu :think:

    No problem, it could be a translation issue. What I meant is, I am buying the Ilep new, but I told the seller I would not talk with others about pricing at all. Whereas, with used projectors like the Superlumis and M-150 that I bought, I am able to talk about prices, at least vaguely. I mean, I have not been specific about those either, because I may sell them, so I am keeping cards close to the chest as they say. But I was just making the point that at least with the used M-150 and used Superlumis, the prices in the US are less than in Germany, so maybe you can assume that it is the same with new projectors also, but with regards to the Ilep specifically, I have no idea. I agreed to pay very good money for it, but is it the same as it would cost to buy in Germany, I cannot say. And yes of course a used Superlumis is less expensive than a new Ilep, in the scenario I was talking about, the Superlumis and two M-150's would all be sold as part of paying for it.

Jetzt mitmachen!

Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!