What do you think of this projector screen?

[Jethro]

http://cgi.ebay.com/Home-Theater-Mov...1%7C240%3A1318

I'm thinking of going with this or ...

http://www.htdepot.com/Focupix_Wides...69lt-100gy.htm

Projector will be the cheapest 1080P I can find in about 1 month, probably an optoma.

[buzz3]

$230.00 would sure be tempting. I would probably chance it. My room will easily hold a 120" so that's probably my next move as well. I am looking at the A3000 as the reviews are pretty good.

[Jethro]

$230.00 would sure be tempting. I would probably chance it. My room will easily hold a 120" so that's probably my next move as well. I am looking at the A3000 as the reviews are pretty good.

What is the A3000?

This? http://www.askproxima.com/products/p...tasheet_en.pdf

[bunnyma357]

I would think either of those screens would be fine. If your main viewing will be BluRays, I'd seriously look into a 2.35 screen rather than a 16:9. With 16:9 you'll get a grey letterbox top and bottom on most BluRays. A 2.35 screen can easily be masked down to 16:9 or even 4:3 using regular black curtains on a traverse rod.

Most of the newer PJ's have zoom and lens position range that lets you fill the screen keeping a Constant Image Height. Buzz was most likely referring to the Panasonic AE3000U:

http://www.projectorpeople.com/proje...c+PT%2DAE3000U

I have a Mitsubishi HC4900, but if I were buying today I would get the Panasonic AE3000U, since it has "lens memory" so you can easily switch between 16:9 and 2.35 at the push of a button. With mine I have to go into 2 setup menus and adjust it manually, a little tedious, but way better than the letterbox bars for me. You may not be bothered by the letterbox bars, but it is something to consider.

There are also vertical masking systems for Constant Image Width, but they are more complex and expensive.

Jim C

[Jethro]

I would think either of those screens would be fine. If your main viewing will be BluRays, I'd seriously look into a 2.35 screen rather than a 16:9. With 16:9 you'll get a grey letterbox top and bottom on most BluRays. A 2.35 screen can easily be masked down to 16:9 or even 4:3 using regular black curtains on a traverse rod.

Most of the newer PJ's have zoom and lens position range that lets you fill the screen keeping a Constant Image Height. Buzz was most likely referring to the Panasonic AE3000U:

http://www.projectorpeople.com/proje...c+PT%2DAE3000U

I have a Mitsubishi HC4900, but if I were buying today I would get the Panasonic AE3000U, since it has "lens memory" so you can easily switch between 16:9 and 2.35 at the push of a button. With mine I have to go into 2 setup menus and adjust it manually, a little tedious, but way better than the letterbox bars for me. You may not be bothered by the letterbox bars, but it is something to consider.

There are also vertical masking systems for Constant Image Width, but they are more complex and expensive.

Jim C

Thanks for the info Jim... I'll have to look into 16:9 vs 2.35. I'm guessing I'll be watching Blu's, standard DVD's, and cable TV. I only have a few blu's right now but that could very easily change.

That panny is too rich for my blood... I'm trying to do this on the cheap.
This is the projector I have my sights on as we speak... lemme know what you think.

http://shop.benq.us/benq-us/product....&culture=en-US

If this projector is indeed something of a good bang for my buck... would it be better served for a 16:9 or 2.35 screen or is this something that is personal preference and all projectors will do either format? Or is it more of a source material thing?

Sorry for so many questions... getting excited :jiggy:

This is going to be my first Projector setup :huge:

[bunnyma357]

The BenQ is supposed to be nice, I believe Jinx might have one if you look up his posts on AV123. I'm one of those people who is very sensitive to the "Rainbow" effect of single chip DLP's with a color wheel. You may not be sensitive, but I'd suggest taking your family members with you to look at a DLP, to determine if they are bothered by it.

For me a 3 Chip LCD was a better option, at the time my Mitsubishi was $1400 new (Current equivalent is the HC5500), so if you shop around you can find deals on what type works for you. I'd think with the current economy if you can wait there will likely be a lot of great sales and rebates.

The 2.35 thing is purely subjective, for me there are 3 things I like about a 2.35 screen:

- "BIG" movies are displayed bigger than TV & Sports, which seems appropriate.

- Viewing a letterboxed 2.35 on a 16:9 screen the top and bottom is the white screen with nothing projected on it, which shows up grey, but it is actually your absolute black level, so by not having those bars masked, you see that the dark parts of the image are really grey. When they are masked all you see is the image so the perceived black levels are much better.

- You can use any type of simple standard curtain setup to mask the side edges, so it is much easier to mask the sides down to 16:9 or 4:3. Masking the top & bottom of a 16:9 is far more complicated - you'd have to mask top & bottom for 2.35 & sides for 4:3.

Projector People's web site had a handy screen calculator, where you could figure the projector distance that would give you the zoom range to allow both a 16:9 and a 2.35 screen to work.

I'm still in the experimenting stage testing stuff out in my unfinished basement for when we build the real theater, which in this economy may now be years off. I started with a DIY "Do-able" vinyl screen from Home Depot, and discovered the letterboxing really bothered me. Then I made a screen from a roll of photographic background paper which is 53" high and the width of the room, sides are masked with hanging black fabric draped over a curtain rod. From this I've figured when I do this for real I'll do a 48" high screen the width of the room and black velvet curtains on a motorized traverse rod to mask the sides down - and it will still be fairly cheap.

Jim C

[buzz3]

Thanks Bunny and sorry Jethro... The panny is the one I was thinking about.

It's a pretty sweet unit for the money, but the money is what counts.

[kingdeezieav123refugee]

Jethro, I have a screen from that company.

Mine is something around 140 inches though.

I am using the original Epson Pro Cinema 1080 (not the UB), and at 140 inches even on the high contrast screen (Gain is .9) I still get a pretty decent picture.

Everyone that comes over comments on how amazing it is. There are some issues with my black levels not being the greatest but that's the projector more then likely.

The quality of the screen is excellent for the money. No problems at all with it.

The 2.35 idea is a great idea; too much of a hassle for me as I don't watch movies that often.

In fact, most of my time on it anymore is videogames, and even that is limited to two hours a week at most.

YMMV.

[Jethro]

Thanks King, I'm going to go with the 120. These seem to be pretty good for the money from the few people I've heard from. I just have to finalize a projector choice now........................ :toilet: