|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | zGman wrote: |
The hd10E and hd10F are much more similar in performance than either compared with the GT17.
G |
There is no comparison between the two. The 10E's based on Barco is an entirely new lens set, which is clearly supported by them being able to do screen width up to 72' - a first for any 9" lens. Also, the internal elements of the 10E are entirely different from the earlier lens design.
The 10F design goes back to the Sony 1292, while the 10E based on Barco is a:New Super high definition
Look at the second post by DGP on the page in the link. It best describe what I had also experienced and what to expect from a set of 10E's in comparison....and why I'm using GT-17's until I can get another set of 10E's.
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=21398.html
. |
Mike,
How wide is your screen? The VDC reference table has the GT17 minimum screen width at 91". The HD10F minimum width (per the G90 manual) is 1829mm (72").
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: |
Mike,
How wide is your screen? The VDC reference table has the GT17 minimum screen width at 91". The HD10F minimum width (per the G90 manual) is 1829mm (72"). |
My screen is 8' wide. I used to have a 6' wide screen, but for the past two years, I'd had an 8' wide screen.
I tested the HFQ/10E's on my 6' wide screen, but had also installed them on a few other Marquees, to include Williams Blend setup. The difference was very noticeable. But I have to tell you that it also depends on the resolution your running at, because that's when you can really tell how well they help with sharpness in the finer details.
So the best way to test or evaluate these lenses for best performance, you would want to be using them at 1920x1080P 60 or higher. You'll not notice much of a real difference at the lower resolutions. And if running lower resolution, you may want to save your money and go with any of the other lenses. The HFQ/10E's were designed for Higher resolution and screen sizes.
With the exception of the HFQ/10E lenses, you would have to evaluate each particular set, because all of the US Precision lenses were riddled with version changes, that could have almost any amount of changes within the same model.
For instance.. I have two sets of HD-10L's lenses. One has terrible outer edge blurring, while the other works fine on my 8" wide screen. I even switch back and forth between the GT-17's and the 10L's.
This was a problem back in the 90's when you would install a marquee in one installation that worked fine, and when you installed one in another installation some time later, you would have focus issues. The edges were not the only focus issues they had. Some of the 10L's produced a blur zone on the right side of the screen, that was about a foot or less away from the right edge. We once had the rep (Frank Weathers) from Electrohome out to look at the problem. They solved it by replacing both projectors, to later find out the problem was the lenses. I guess the lens manufacturer must have solved the problem, but with a version change.
The only thing I can say for sure is that the HFQ/10E's are consistent. And if you own a Marquee that can resolve the higher resolutions, you're want to get your hands on a set of the HFQ/10E lenses. On my system, that's the only upgrade I'm waiting to make. I without a doubt have the higher bandwidth resolve power, I'm only limited by the lenses I now have on my Marquee.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: |
Mike,
How wide is your screen? The VDC reference table has the GT17 minimum screen width at 91". The HD10F minimum width (per the G90 manual) is 1829mm (72"). |
Oh, I forgot to mention this part. To further support my experience with the variances in the versions, I'll point to the Electrohome manual, that says to "simulate" the setup before installing the projector. Meaning to use the numbers for "reference only"
So they were recommending that for each projector install, you place the projector to the screen to determine the PROPER throw distance. Which also imply that they did not trust their own throw distance chart - that or there must have been some variances with the lenses themselves.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I had HD10L's that were blurry at the edges, once I switched to HD10F's from a late model G90 the focus improved everywhere. After installing the 10F's I had to drastically redo the geometry because of the difference in the curvature of the lens (as noted by Galen when he compared the GT17 to the G90 HD10F).
Nashou's findings were also consistent with Galen's. On the last page of the lens thread he posted photos of the inner elements (Nashou get your photos hosted again!!) from a GT17 and HFQ900 and the ladder was far flatter in shape/design. Before installing my 10F's from a late model G90 I compared them to the HFQ900 and they had a similar profile. Last spring I looked at a 2000/01 Vision One and removed the GT17's to check tube condition. The inner element on the GT17 protruded outward, very different looking than my 10F's. There is no way that the G90 10F's are the same as the GT17's.
Having said that, one other possibility is that the 1292 HD10F's are the same as the GT17's. The early Vision One was produced concurently with the 1292, therefore it's quite possible they used the same optics.
Also see this thread: http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=81045#81045
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: | I had HD10L's that were blurry at the edges, once I switched to HD10F's from a late model G90 the focus improved everywhere. After installing the 10F's I had to drastically redo the geometry because of the difference in the curvature of the lens (as noted by Galen when he compared the GT17 to the G90 HD10F).
Nashou's findings were also consistent with Galen's. On the last page of the lens thread he posted photos of the inner elements (Nashou get your photos hosted again!!) from a GT17 and HFQ900 and the ladder was far flatter in shape/design. Before installing my 10F's from a late model G90 I compared them to the HFQ900 and they had a similar profile. Last spring I looked at a 2000/01 Vision One and removed the GT17's to check tube condition. The inner element on the GT17 protruded outward, very different looking than my 10F's. There is no way that the G90 10F's are the same as the GT17's.
Having said that, one other possibility is that the 1292 HD10F's are the same as the GT17's. The early Vision One was produced concurently with the 1292, therefore it's quite possible they used the same optics.
Also see this thread: http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=81045#81045 |
So what is your point??
The GT-17 is NOT a version of the 10F. Or are you saying that the 10F and the GT-17 are not the same lens all together...
My point was the "Design" being the same. A lens element being slightly different does not effect the design.
what are the differences with these lenses, I have no idea, but the only thing I'm sure of based on one manufacturer is that the HFQ/10E is an entirely different lens DESIGN....are there things similar to the 10F - yes. was it manufactured during the same time period that the 10F was manufactured - no. The 10F has been around in some version or the other for almost 20 years. The HFQ/10E is the NEWEST of the lens series.
And I can accept what Gino posted, when he said the HFQ is a "version" of the 10E. That makes sense to me because it has a separate model number all together, and not another HD-10 number.
Is the 10F a high resolution lens, maybe, but that's not what I'm seeing on my setup. And I can properly resolve 1920x1080P @ 72 hz - ask Craig!
I put one HFQ-900 on my projector and it let me know I could be doing so much better with that lens set. However, that was not the case with the 10F.
Also, there has never been a debate about 10L's not having edge focus problems, and that almost any other 9" lens would do better....but that's not saying that all or every set of 10L's had that problem.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forgot that I could get this all figured out through Barco (I'm a Partner), so I put in a request on the 909 lens. And also got some info in general on these lenses.
Here's the deal:
The lenses used on the Barco 909 came in a Standard Option to include a Curve Screen option.
The Standard Option is the HD-10E and HFQ-900 lens set.... they are two different lenses..
Or as I was told, "they are definitely different" - Gino was right about the HFQ being a version of the 10E, but it's a very different version.
The HD-10E lens has a screen width of 90" to 300"
The HFQ-900 lens has a screen width of 7 feet to 72 feet
The design difference is what allows the HFQ-900 to be able to work with screens up to 72 feet wide. and because of the internal differences, it also provides it being considered a "Super High Definition" lens.
In other words, it would have either more or less internal lens elements than any of the previous designs.
-----
Now the HD-10E is very similar to the HD-10F, but of course that could depend on the version year. Both are specified to go up to 300" wide screen, but also depending on the version, the smaller size could be different. Not sure why there are two different lens models with almost the same specs.
Also, the lens were labeled as HD-10XXX - and that explains why there was one set of lenses that were sold to different manufacturers, but could be "labeled over" (HD-10/GT17, etc.) But there would be an original HD-10 number for them all.
So an HD-10E lens could perform very close or close to a particular year version of the HD-10E. The HD-10E lens were most likely a beta or research version, and that could explain why it surfaced later after the HD-10F had its near 20 year run.
The GT-17 is most likely a HD-120, but could still perform very close to the HD-10F because they all work best up to a 10 feet wide screen.
It is also believed that both Barco and Electrohome used the same 9" lens sets, with the exception of the Barco 909.
There's more info on this, but it's somewhat encrypted..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Curt Palme
CRT Tech
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 24396
Location: Langley, BC
TV/Projector: All of them!
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Cutting and pasting most of this to the 'all about lenses' thread. Good info, thanks Mike!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The original post asked if there was a difference between the GT17 and the G90 HD10F. In your first post you stated that Electrohome had GT-17 for that same exact HD-10F lens and that you carefully checked and compared them both, and was not able to detect any difference in the design. Correct me if I'm wrong but your 10F lens came from your G90 test mule.
My main point is that the HD10F from the G90 and the GT17 are not the same exact lens. They may have performance similarities at a certain screen width but are not the same lens. The physical design looks different and they have different specs/screen width ranges. Inspections by myself, Galen and Nashou all confirm the opposite of your experience and that makes for a curious mystery. Galen went as far as to both inspect and thoruoughly test all the lenses in question; e.g. the G90 HD10F, the GT17 and the HFQ900.
Since you have both the GT17 and HD10F G90 lens would you be so kind as to take photos of each and post in this thread? The more visual evidence of these differences/variations we have the easier it will be for those looking to buy/sell the items in question. The reality is that HD10F's from G90's carry a higher market price than do the GT17 and perhaps in certain circumstances they should not.
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zGman
Joined: 22 May 2006
Posts: 599
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
HD10E = HFQ900
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
18.65 KB |
| Viewed: |
6970 Time(s) |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zGman wrote: | | HD10E = HFQ900 |
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, but finding out that there are two different specs associated with that one set of lenses, I prefer to now agree with the guy from Barco and go with "definitely different"
Also, I would like to think that the label on that particular lens shows that its a special version of the 10E.
------------------
| jbmeyer13 wrote: | | ...............Since you have both the GT17 and HD10F G90 lens would you be so kind as to take photos of each and post in this thread? The more visual evidence of these differences/variations we have the easier it will be for those looking to buy/sell the items in question. The reality is that HD10F's from G90's carry a higher market price than do the GT17 and perhaps in certain circumstances they should not. |
I no longer feel that they are the same lens. I'm now thinking the GT-17's could be HD-120's that were used in the Barco's. And I'll prefer to say at this point, you may not be able to discern a real difference between the GT-17 and the 10F lens sets. So it may not make much sense to go that extra "higher price" for something that's not going to show a real difference......unless, you're into designer names and brands as some are to make for a better feel or to boaster a discussion on what changes you have made to your setup.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
noos@xp37+
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 464
Location: Berlin/Munich
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hello,
and thank for the data in this topic.
I know the Sony HDIH is not based on the HD10 familiy, but it is 9" LC and the motorized Nikkon lenses should be mentioned.
I have to say that the colours of a HDIH (filtered red/green) are outstanding, but lenses are much more special. I have found out in the last months, that on 1920x1080i on a flat screen, the HDIH smokes my very well setuped 2002 Ultra on GT17s from 2000 in total sharpness by far! My low hour Ultra has highrez green, and I compare green output. But I can not go higher than 660p in scope, because of the low bandwidth of the HDIH. Certainly, on both machines 1080i is not watchable....
Sorry I have no access or have ever seen a HFQ in action.
In the future, I might build the Nikkon lenses on a recent 9" machine. I think that in a cold winter, I might be able to change/build a chamber on the tubes of a more recent 9" projector, and mount the HDIH C-Elements. But, as the Nikkon lenses are motorized, there will be a need for a genius in electronics like Barclay66.
Here is my first post of the HDIH, that soon will be updated: https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=31287.html
Best regards
Marc
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dvh99
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 2158
Location: nederland
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
all it will take is probably 12/24 volts and a frequency regulator.
shouldn`t be too hard but maybe barclay has a better solution.
now i regret it not getting the projector myself  .
_________________
1 answer always poses multiple questions.
marquee 9500ultra HD10L moome hdmi1.3 v3+ some mods.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dvh99
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 2158
Location: nederland
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
maybe barclay can make something around this chip.
http://www.ti.com/product/tl494
_________________
1 answer always poses multiple questions.
marquee 9500ultra HD10L moome hdmi1.3 v3+ some mods.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
noos@xp37+
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 464
Location: Berlin/Munich
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dvh99 wrote: | | now i regret it not getting the projector myself . |
Yes, thanks again!!!
But the seller last yeat wanted 1200 Euros, and rejected to test it with a source. I got him down to 300€ plus 150 for shipping. But as I has guessed, like all HDIHs the input boards were corroded - but no problem with 12xx IFBs, as I guess because I use a Sony switcher...
One seller that last year wanted 6000 Euros for one (!) of his ten(!!!) HDIHs, is now down to 1000€ one Ebay, but he will soon learn even more about reality. I know a little about this machines from telephone (last year), and they should work (with a Sony switcher or IFB cards)! He only sells to companies, because of warrenty issues when dealing with private persons, so he calls them defective. But the auction text can not be right, because as my machine, they were not used for years....
http://www.ebay.de/itm/SONY-HDIH-2000M-HIGH-DEFINITION-3-TUBE-REFERENCE-VIDEO-PROJECTOR-WAS-60K-EURO-/150959913236?pt=DE_Computing_TV_Video_Audio_Videoprojektoren&hash=item2325e97914
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barclay66
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
Posts: 1304
Location: Germany
TV/Projector: Marquee 9500 Ultra
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| noos@xp37+ wrote: | | In the future, I might build the Nikkon lenses on a recent 9" machine. I think that in a cold winter, I might be able to change/build a chamber on the tubes of a more recent 9" projector, and mount the HDIH C-Elements. But, as the Nikkon lenses are motorized, there will be a need for a genius in electronics like Barclay66. |
Hi,
Congratulations on Your new "baby".
Controlling the motorized lenses shouldn't be much of a problem. On a Marquee I could even make this controllable via the remote...
Regards,
barclay66
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dvh99
Joined: 25 Dec 2009
Posts: 2158
Location: nederland
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2012 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
his description is indeed a bit weird as he says that it has run for months and hasn`t been on aftwerwards and later tells us the projector is untested.
the best marketing is the next sentence  .
gleich ein oder mehrere Geräte (falls vorhanden), um aus 2 oder 3 Geräten wieder ein funktionierendes Gerät zu machen.
_________________
1 answer always poses multiple questions.
marquee 9500ultra HD10L moome hdmi1.3 v3+ some mods.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
noos@xp37+
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 464
Location: Berlin/Munich
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| barclay66 wrote: | | noos@xp37+ wrote: | | In the future, I might build the Nikkon lenses on a recent 9" machine. I think that in a cold winter, I might be able to change/build a chamber on the tubes of a more recent 9" projector, and mount the HDIH C-Elements. But, as the Nikkon lenses are motorized, there will be a need for a genius in electronics like Barclay66. |
Hi,
Congratulations on Your new "baby".
Controlling the motorized lenses shouldn't be much of a problem. On a Marquee I could even make this controllable via the remote...
Regards,
barclay66 |
Haha!
If I ever get my 8500 Ultra from NL, I will donate my 9500 Ultra for this project. But I would feel better if I get one of these mysterious "gleich ein oder mehrere Geräte (falls vorhanden), um aus 2 oder 3 Geräten wieder ein funktionierendes Gerät zu machen" defective devices as lens and Element donator. But probably my HDIH gives up anyay. that would make the decision easier.
I also should add the from the telephone call with the seller in 2011, that the HDIHs were used in stack for brightness. So probably the tubes were driven very hard in daylight/ambient light.
"Congratulations on Your new "baby"??? Well, the "new" should be in Quotation marks for a machine that did hit the marked in the 80"s...
Ps @ Barclay.: Sorry, I hob jetzat erst Dei Pm (vom Juli) gseng.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barclay66
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
Posts: 1304
Location: Germany
TV/Projector: Marquee 9500 Ultra
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| noos@xp37+ wrote: | | Ps @ Barclay.: Sorry, I hob jetzat erst Dei Pm (vom Juli) gseng. |
NP = Null Problemo...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
