| Author |
Message |
lydmann
Joined: 12 Aug 2006
Posts: 56
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2009 1:20 pm Post subject: HD-144 lenses installed, poor focus,help! |
|
|
I installed the hd-144 lenses, but now the focus is really bad. Exspesially in the corners. My SW is 2 meters 16:9 (92”) and the distance from barco to screen i 2.62 meter. Any solutions?
I used Bjoern adapters from NORWAY
Henning
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmm... Not sure if Joust's adapters yield the same results (because I believe the rear-element-to-tube-face distance is critical, and could be different)... But, looking at Joust's FAQ here...
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=3820.html
| Quote: | Horizontal Throw Distance (HTD) formula
HD8 lens face distance from screen in inches = 1.2 X (measured screen width + 9.4 Inches)
HD144 lens face distance from screen in inches = 1.144 X (measured screen width + 9.3 Inches) |
According to that formula, you should be around 2.5m throw, and you're at 2.62... That should make corner focus better, not worse. I don't know what could be going on.
Like I said, though... Your adapters could be substantially different than Joust's. I'm not familiar with the Bjoern adapters... Could they be in backwards or something?
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lydmann
Joined: 12 Aug 2006
Posts: 56
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bjørn Hegelstad made this adapters, one of the first who made adapters.
Even there the image is in focus, I think that image is less defined than before with HD-8. It look like blooming, but even when I turn down the contrast and brightness the lines seems "fat". And even when I change resolutions, I can't see any changfe in sharpness.
Of cource I like the colurs now, but I lost so much sharpness that I consider to go back to hd-8.
My barco tech says that HD8 is sharper than HD-144, because HD-8 was made for text and data..
I hope someone can help me here with my lovely bd808s with p16lug green tube, and greg eisemann mod.
Henning
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
32.16 KB |
| Viewed: |
7157 Time(s) |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaulB
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 359
Location: Bonnie (but rainy) Scotland
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Might be worth removing the lenses and having a look directly at the tube face. Using a test pattern, if the display is sharp on the tube face then its definately the lenses, if its blurry on the tubeface then start looking at electronic focus and perhaps you magnets.
If nothing else it will confirm whether its definately the lenses or something else thats at fault.
_________________
Paul
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark_A_W
Joined: 15 Mar 2006
Posts: 3068
Location: Sunny Melbourne Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Something is wrong.
In my experience, HD-144's are sharper than HD-8's.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom.W
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 6635
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark_A_W wrote: | Something is wrong.
In my experience, HD-144's are sharper than HD-8's. |
Same here. Better corner focus also.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
secstate
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 720
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I am pretty sure that Bjorn's adapters didn't have schiempflug so if the projector is not spot on and/or the screen size is outside of the sweet spot or if the tubes are not mounted just right in the hardware (I have seen VDC do some not so good mounting jobs) that could throw off the focus as compared to have some sort of control over schiempflug.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom.W
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 6635
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
The Bjorn adapters do not have Schimpflug but I assume you moved the screen or projector about 10-12 inches closer together to adjust for the focal length change.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Kildare
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 164
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Try taking a piece of white printer paper or white cardboard, start at the screen center and move it slowly towards the projector and see if it comes into focus. You are probably going to have to move the projector ahead about 10" as noted above.
Jim
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HaydnG90
Joined: 22 May 2006
Posts: 1356
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I was using Galen's adapters with the 144's on a BG808S and had noticeably better sharpness than the OEM HD8's. Of course colors were far more natural and I retained corner focus adjustment. All I had to do was bring the pj about 5-6 inches closer to the screen which I wasn't complaining about as I could then sit in the sweet spot behind the floor mounted pj.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Elaine Benes
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 1416
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Its funny, I've tried HD144/145's a couple of times, with different adapters, and always gone back to HD-8 RevB's....because they're sharper. I don't post about this because I know I'd get shouted down by the sellers of the adapters, but *to me* the HD-8 RevB's have always looked better. Add a color gel filter and you can get the more saturated red too...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Elaine Benes wrote: | | Its funny, I've tried HD144/145's a couple of times, with different adapters, and always gone back to HD-8 RevB's....because they're sharper. |
I've heard you mention that before... But, that's totally bizarre to me, because both sets of plastic HD-8's I've had on Sony 12xx sucked ass... Big time. It wasn't the projector, either... If I strained, I could make out the 1080i scan lines on the tube face (lens off) with the naked eye (or easily with a loop or camera macro lens), yet the damn HD-8's wouldn't even BEGIN to reveal the scan lines. I mean, they were completely unresolved! That put the real resolvable resolution down in the sub-540p ballpark (16:9). I didn't find the Sony PT-whatever lenses any better, either. I always wanted to try a set of HD-144's to compare.
Perisoft had exactly the same experience with his 808... sh*tty, soft HD-8's.
It doesn't make logical sense to me that the HD-8's would be sharper, either. The HD-144 is a newer lens, used by NEC on the XG and Electrohome on the 8500, sold as graphics projectors. OTOH, the HD-8's go clear back to the Barco 800's and Sony 12xx's sold as video/data machines.
I just don't get the wide variation on what people are seeing. It makes me wonder if there are a lot of sub-par or damaged lenses or something.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | Elaine Benes wrote: | | Its funny, I've tried HD144/145's a couple of times, with different adapters, and always gone back to HD-8 RevB's....because they're sharper. |
I've heard you mention that before... But, that's totally bizarre to me, because both sets of plastic HD-8's I've had on Sony 12xx sucked ass... Big time. It wasn't the projector, either... If I strained, I could make out the 1080i scan lines on the tube face (lens off) with the naked eye (or easily with a loop or camera macro lens), yet the damn HD-8's wouldn't even BEGIN to reveal the scan lines. I mean, they were completely unresolved! That put the real resolvable resolution down in the sub-540p ballpark (16:9). I didn't find the Sony PT-whatever lenses any better, either. I always wanted to try a set of HD-144's to compare.
It doesn't make logical sense to me that the HD-8's would be sharper, either. The HD-144 is a newer lens, used by NEC on the XG and Electrohome on the 8500, sold as graphics projectors. OTOH, the HD-8's go clear back to the Barco 800's and Sony 12xx's back in the video/data days.
I just don't get the wide variation on what people are seeing. It makes me wonder if there are a lot of sub-par or damaged lenses or something.
SC |
I agree with SC, you might not have installed them correctly, At first I had a hard time , I was using the old style adaptors on my marquee. I had to do as Draganm suggested and add a .2" thick washer to get the lens closer to the tube face. And then Schliemfug was all messed up from not measuring each corner of each tube to outer plate distance before i did the mod. It took a long time to get it right but it was worth it. Much sharper than the Hd8's.
Athanasios
_________________
Don't blame your underwear for your crooked ass~ unknown Greek philosopher
"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." --- President Reagan
One Smart Dog!!!
Marquee High Performance Bellows now shipping!!
Marquee Modifications and Performance Enhancement
Marquee C-element and Bellow removal
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Elaine Benes
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 1416
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Um, they made several iterations of HD8's, ALL "plain" HD8's ARE terrible, including the "all aluminum" one's that I bought specially because someone claimed they were better. HD8RevB lenses have the same resolution capability of HD144's(in terms of lppm specification), but a larger aperture. The documentation is on this very website...
I would assume, but I don't KNOW this, but I would assume HD144/145's are offered for some reason other than simple resolution capabilities, like perhaps color fidelity or perhaps the simple difference of throw distance they offer ?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK, I'm confused. What you just wrote conflicts with everything I thought I'd read from everybody else on HD-8's. I thought the rare "all aluminum" HD-8's were the original HD-8's, and that if you had a plastic HD-8, it could be an HD-8 Rev B.
How the hell can you tell the difference between an HD-8 and a HD-8 Rev B then?
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Elaine Benes
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 1416
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
All aluminum HD8's ARE the "original" or in my experience, simply older versions, and they are TERRIBLE, or at least the ones I've owned were terrible.
HD8RevB's are labeled as such, or at least, all the ones *I* have are(maybe a half dozen sets from Marquee's, Barco 808's, Ampro 3600's...).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom.W
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 6635
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| HaydnG90 wrote: | | I was using Galen's adapters with the 144's on a BG808S and had noticeably better sharpness than the OEM HD8's. Of course colors were far more natural and I retained corner focus adjustment. All I had to do was bring the pj about 5-6 inches closer to the screen which I wasn't complaining about as I could then sit in the sweet spot behind the floor mounted pj. |
I also use Galen's adapters. VERY nice machine work ! 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
