Aller au contenu

JackB

Membre PJHC
  • Compteur de contenus

    8
  • Inscription

  • Dernière visite

  • Avis Vérifiés

    pas encore noté, soyez le premier

Réputation sur la communauté

1 Neutre

À propos de JackB

  • Rang
    Membre

Visiteurs récents du profil

Le bloc de visiteurs récents est désactivé et il n’est pas visible pour les autres utilisateurs.

  1. Gregory, Perhaps the PF 1500 you tested was a bad sample. I suggest asking LG to send you another sample and then see if it is better. I will try to see if I can take a picture of my PF 1500 and my JVC. I also have a SharpVision 20000 sitting in the closet that I can also test. The Sharp was originally priced at $10,000 so you know it has fine glass optics. It is in the closet because the LG picture is just as good. Below are two images. First is LG, second is RS40.
  2. Gregory, Perhaps the PF 1500 you tested was a bad sample. I suggest asking LG to send you another sample and then see if it is better. I will try to see if I can take a picture of my PF 1500 and my JVC. I also have a SharpVision 20000 sitting in the closet that I can also test. The Sharp was originally priced at $10,000 so you know it has fine glass optics. It is in the closet because the LG picture is just as good.
  3. Gregory, I hope this translates to French OK. Perhaps, since your English is excellent, maybe you be could explain to your fellow videophiles exactly what I am try trying to say. I say this because French does not translate well to English using Google. As a long-term owner of the LG PF1500 I would like to say That I think you are putting too much value on the glass lens sharpness and not enough on the weakness of having no tools to adjust the color and the gamma, as the LG has. I also own a JVC RS40. Although it is not a great example of JVC picture quality it is still a fine projector and has a very fine glass lens. When I compare the picture of the RS40 and the PF1500 from my viewing distance of 3.35 meters (11 feet) for a 2.69 meter (106 inches) screen, I see a slight difference in sharpness, but not very much. Certainly, with video memory as it is, the only time it is noticeable is right after-switching between the two. Much more obvious is the difference in color balance attained through a good detailed calibration. And guess what, in this regard the LG is better than the JVC. Almost After 1700 hours of use the picture is still bright and the colors-have not wavered. I suggest to your readers That If They really want LED projection Then They Would Be Foolish to buy the Q8 INSTEAD of the PF1500. The LG is Almost as small, very quiet, and just runs and runs without a hitch. Less expensive too. If'any of your posters-have Any Questions please ask.
  4. Patrick, There are no rednecks in Minnesota. Just lots of Lutherans.
  5. In the US the PF 1500 can be bought for $900 - $1,000. The Q7+ is listed on the Vivitek web site for $999. Also, the Netflix app on the PF 1500 has a better picture than it does when played from my Sony blue ray player. So to my eyes, an imbedded app works better than en external app.
  6. I just read the manual. There is no zoom, no cms, no apps like Netflix. The glass lens may be a slight improvement over the 1500 but if I can't adjust the picture past saturation, hue, brightness, contrast, and basic gamma, then I would say it isn't competitive. Who cares if the picture has better optics if I can't get the skin tones right.
  7. It's Sunday evening almost. Waiting to see results here in US. Q8 is not listed for sale on Vivitek site yet. I have LG PF1500 so I will be interested in this. BTW, I've had 1500 for close to 1.5 years and it just keeps on humming. Great projector!
×