But if your room darkens, and you are looking at a night scene or any really dark scene without a lot of bright areas, then the difference is going to be rather dramatic.

I would expect a greater improvement in blacks going from the 8100 to the 8500UB than the improvement going from the Panny to the 8100. -art

It would have been better to use shutter glasses and feed the Epson or BenQ 120 frames a second, but that’s not possible I think.
They can interpolate 24 f a sec. to 120 but not eat actually real 120 frames a sec or am I wrong about that.

Thanks. Not much to add at this point. You seem to be following and concurring with my take as to why black levels are far more critical in dark scenes. That’s a good thing, since Evan’s article tends to play down the huge difference that can be found in those dark screens, compared to the relatively minor differences a similar advantage in blacks has in a brighter scene. That is my point. Well, the Panasonic is arriving Friday, complete with engineer and product manager. Should be fun. (and I get a free meal out of it to boot!). Yes I will do one blog about it before the weekend ends, if at all possible. Monday at the very latest. -art

That makes perfect sense…that where people would notice the most difference in blacks, is in darker scenes, not mid/lighter scenes.
As a matter of fact, now that I think about it, the fact that most scenes in movies are usually not dark, would make for an even more dramatic change in darkness for ‘blacker projectors’, than if a movie was to have half or more scenes that are dark. I know it may be subjective, but I think the less dark scenes there are in a movie, the more shock effect there is in those scenes, when using projectors that have more noticably blacker blacks.

So if what I’ve read in other reviews is true, than this year Epson will still maintain an advantage on both brightness and blacks/contrast, which is two points up for the 8500. Now I really can’t wait for your review, because if you find the same difference in blacks & brightness that others have, the Epson will win in those particular areas … though I don’t want to presume anything, as your measurements & your conclusions may differ from other reviewers, whereby you may find less difference in ‘blacks’ between the 2 projectors than other reviewers do (in dark scenes), or you may find the Panny is brighter than others say it is..?

Though, if all holds the same with Epson maintaining better blacks and brightness, as other reviews have shown, the only thing that might make a difference is that the Pan4000 seems to be $500 less than the 8500. How that will play out in the market place, and whether it makes the Pan4000 better or equal in terms of “value for your dollar” & what you recommend as the best ‘bang for your buck’, I am eager to find out, and thus I will be waiting with baited breath for your review.

I really appreciate you taking time to respond during what I presume is one of your busiest times of the year, and I really appreciate & value all your ‘extremely in-depth’ reviews.

Regardless of which projector comes out on top this or any other year, the Epson/Panasonic competition makes it very exciting.

Darryl

OK, first, I don’t do ANSI, nor do I plan to. (I get asked at least once or twice a month. Actually I’m not that big on specs either, and favor the subjective approach. Over the years, the reviews have grown to have lots of measurements, and calibration settings. Ultimately that grew out of my desire, and requests from readers, as to how we ended up setting up the projectors after calibration. And, I’m pleased to say, that one of the things we get the most thanks for, are our calibration settings recommendations. They aren’t perfect, of course, but in almost every case, provide a slight, to significant improvement in picture quality, compared to just pulling one out of the box and hooking it up.

Back to ANSI. If you read a lot of reviews, you’ll quickly discover that subjective analysis tends not to follow ANSI when it comes to black level performance. right off the bat, the use of irises basically changes almost everything. Sure, you could turn off the iris on the Epson, and the Panasonic, but you won’t. So why worry about ANSI, the iris actions and design will have a huge difference.

Now, about the blacks being slightly blacker on the Panny, than the 8500UB, in bright and mid-brightness scenes. 1. Can’t comment, because I won’t have the PT-AE4000 here until Friday. 2. Assuming it’s true, it is a relatively minor aspect in the grand comparison of these two projectors. If the difference in blacks was dramatic on say a bright scene with skyscrapers, and a black helicopter in the foreground, then maybe, but, the reviewer you are quoting – Evan – indicates only a slight difference. Which means, ok, maybe there will be a touch more pop to the image.

But the real difference is not when dealing with those types of scenes, and is far, far more significant:

I’m talking about dark scenes, and really dark scenes. Here even a slight difference in black level performance can be rather dramatic. I could break out any number of side by side images from last year’s reviews to demonstrate. And will do so with the Panny vs Epson, next week.

When you have a really dark scene, ie. the train scene I use from Bond, or many of the space scenes from Space Cowboys or The Fifth Element, or dark scenes in The Dark Knight or Hunt for Red October, just modestly blacker blacks can mean the difference between a dull scene and a vibrant one. That was certainly obvious last year, when we compared the 6500UB against the PT-AE3000 and Sanyo PLV-Z3000 (and BenQ W5000, etc.) If the Panasonic’s blacks in dark scenes have improved a lot more than the Epson’s have, it may be a real horserace, but, if the Epson (or any projector) still maintains an easily visible difference on dark scenes, that’s where (all else considered) you want to be putting your money.

We shall have to see how good the Panasonic PT-AE4000 at all levels, compared to the Epson, as certainly, again this year, the latest versions of these two projectors will dominate the under $2500 marketplace.

Much fun. I’d dig out a couple of old side-by-side images, but I’m just too slammed. You can probably find them in the old Epson 6500UB review.

I read the review on the 8500…great review! There is only one thing that I can’t seem to find anywhere regarding that projector…what are the ANSI Black levels rated at, and how do black levels compare with other projectors when looking at blacks in the majority of scenes that have average light levels..?

I’ve read one review that compares the Pan4000, and it says that while the 8500 is best for darker scenes, the majority of scenes have better blacks & color saturation on the Pan4000…?

Thanks,
Darryl

Well, since we only calibrate one mode, its always the high lamp setting. In most cases, there is a small color shift at low lamp, and sometimes there is a modest difference in the overall grayscale curve (from 100 IRE to 20 IRE).

In the case of this Epson, we measured THX “out of the box” at high power, with a white color temp of 6505K. By comparison, switching to low lamp, the color temp increased to 6730, a slight shift toward a cooler image. I have no measurements for the lower IREs. -art

That said, I’ll have to go with the JVC, well, actually the newer JVC RS25, since it adds creative frame interpolation, which I do like for sports, and it’s got the best color overall. If you are talking only the RS20, not the RS25, I’d take the Epson. it’s brighter modes have pretty good color and can be further tweaked. The BenQ, on the other hand, is tempting, for it’s image sharpness, which bests the other two. Tough one. I can tell you that right now, I’m watching the Penn State – Northwestern game, on the RS25, with CFI on low (it has low, high, and off choices). Looks good, but I must admit I was tempted to swap in the Epson 9500UB for the extra 400+ lumens. (I probably would have, but hey, I’m officially reviewing the RS25 right now.