| Author |
Message |
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: |
If you compare the different kinds of pjs, you'll see that sets with the same tubes performing pretty much the same (regarding focus), it is usually not the electronics that are limiting the focus, more likely the the tubes themselfs.
But this is only my opinion. |
Guess you need to read the "frankenyokes" thread.
As far as beam angle, the angle is proportional to the face width and the distance between face and deflection yoke, not just the width.
And distance beam travels from focus to face, think of a 36" or larger direct view tube and try to put beam distance into the equation.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | The Panasonic did not have the edge over the 912, maybe the 812, but not the 912. The tubes used were all Panasonic.
P16s are 8" tubes, NEC and Sony used them in their later sets, as did Barco.
The 10PG is rated 17,000:1 CR in the specs on this site, where as the G90 is listed as 30,000:1 ( didnt look at the rest. )
Start a thread in off topic for the solar if you like, itll be easier for me to keep it all in separate threads!!  |
Cool I thought the replacement tube I got for my tv looked bigger then a 7 inch tube(first projection tv I've owned with 8inch tubes) it is capable of displaying up to 1080i so I guess it has to have the larger tube to resolve those resolutions
Nec documention listed the 10pg with 40,000 to 1 contrast(which is under the nec section) and considering my set has two flybacks with a large cap before it goes to the tubes I am not surprised at its brightness
I am not going into the off you pic section again(been there and it looks like people like to argue in the section)
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2802
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | And distance beam travels from focus to face, think of a 36" or larger direct view tube and try to put beam distance into the equation. |
I don't know what do you want to suggest with this, my parents have a 30" thomson flat tubed CRT TV, looking at the tubes closely it is clearly visible that the pixels at the edges are much larger (and more distant) than on the middle area.
_________________
projectors in the past : NEC 6-9PG xtra, Electrohome Marquee 6-7500, NEC XG 1351 LC ( with super modified Electrohome VNB neckboard !!!)
current: VDC Marquee 9500LC
The MOD: VNB-DB, VIM-DB
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | And distance beam travels from focus to face, think of a 36" or larger direct view tube and try to put beam distance into the equation. |
I don't know what do you want to suggest with this, my parents have a 30" thomson flat tubed CRT TV, looking at the tubes closely it is clearly visible that the pixels at the edges are much larger (and more distant) than on the middle area. |
But is that focus or astig? Your suggesting that is a focus anomaly. Not true. You were suggesting the distance of the beam affects focus. Based on your theory, a ES focus, 30 whatever inch tv, where the beam is traveling a much greater distance then a projection tube, would suggest on screen focus to be impossible. Which is why I used the direct view tv for comparison.
If your focus theory was correct, then a larger, direct view tv with ES focus would not even be able to achieve center focus, since the center beam distance is multiple times farther then in a projection tube. Even a 12" projection tube distance from focus coil to outer most edge of screen is no where near as far as a larger, direct view tube from coil to tube face center.
Your larger, outer edge pixels is an effect of astigmatism. Which is why electronic astig control was created.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I think you guys are way overthinking this. IIRC most who have seen it said it wasn't any better than a 9".
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wow I didn't think it would get to astig and beam spot size when I started the thread
macgyver655 the projector I linked to is a em focus machine not a es machine
My Ecp has a nice sharp picture but it is still in the middle where it is the sharpest(haven't tinkered around with the electronic astig adjustment yet but that is what the tv you described needs adjusted
Anyway I think the projector I linked to is a lc optics set with em electronics and considering there aren't many on the used market I doubt I will ever see one(unless curt gets one in)
But it is true most sets(good sets) used mostly 8 or 9 inch tubes(projector or projection tv)my samsung rptv has 8inch lc tubes made by Panasonic (p16)
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SisterOfMercy
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Posts: 155
Location: Zwart Nazareth, The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The story I heard was about a problem with the lenses.
I don't think I would trade my 1209s/E for a 912, just because of spare parts, but maybe if it was new... hmm...
Then again, I would need to know someone who can set it up really properly.
_________________
The kissing and the colour come crashing down
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SisterOfMercy wrote: | The story I heard was about a problem with the lenses.
I don't think I would trade my 1209s/E for a 912, just because of spare parts, but maybe if it was new... hmm...
Then again, I would need to know someone who can set it up really properly. |
True
Also I set up my Ecp myself and got it nailed it so close to prefect then the high voltage power supply started giving me trouble(I think its messing with the focus of the tubes due to voltage drop as it was tack sharp before)
But I have a nec 10pg with 9 inch tubes and it huge so a set with 13inch tubes would be too big for me(even if it was a bit brighter)
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the big E wrote: |
macgyver655 the projector I linked to is a em focus machine not a es machine
|
I am well aware of what you posted. Probably more then you can imagine. I guess you missed the reason for my comment. Go back and read again and maybe you'll get it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | the big E wrote: |
macgyver655 the projector I linked to is a em focus machine not a es machine
|
I am well aware of what you posted. Probably more then you can imagine. I guess you missed the reason for my comment. Go back and read again and maybe you'll get it. |
I get it now(was speed reading last time) but I can't compare my projectors to a direct view tv as I don't have any that are big enough to compare it to(I mainly had projection tvs currently have one that I am repairing)
But it is a em set not a es set(I had a projection tv from the late 80's that had em focus)
I have been tinkering around with crt tech since I was 8years old(25 now) and I have learned a lot over the years(still can't beat curt for knowledge) but I mostly work on and bulid computers now as most consumer projection tvs are cheap and getting up in age(like our projectors)and not many people wants to keep them long anyway(except me)
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the big E wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | the big E wrote: |
macgyver655 the projector I linked to is a em focus machine not a es machine
|
I am well aware of what you posted. Probably more then you can imagine. I guess you missed the reason for my comment. Go back and read again and maybe you'll get it. |
I get it now(was speed reading last time) but I can't compare my projectors to a direct view tv as I don't have any that are big enough to compare it to(I mainly had projection tvs currently have one that I am repairing)
But it is a em set not a es set(I had a projection tv from the late 80's that had em focus)
I have been tinkering around with crt tech since I was 8years old(25 now) and I have learned a lot over the years(still can't beat curt for knowledge) but I mostly work on and bulid computers now as most consumer projection tvs are cheap and getting up in age(like our projectors)and not many people wants to keep them long anyway(except me) |
You missed the point again. The comment was not meant for you. I did not quote you when I posted. And i did not ask you to compare anything.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | the big E wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | the big E wrote: |
macgyver655 the projector I linked to is a em focus machine not a es machine
|
I am well aware of what you posted. Probably more then you can imagine. I guess you missed the reason for my comment. Go back and read again and maybe you'll get it. |
I get it now(was speed reading last time) but I can't compare my projectors to a direct view tv as I don't have any that are big enough to compare it to(I mainly had projection tvs currently have one that I am repairing)
But it is a em set not a es set(I had a projection tv from the late 80's that had em focus)
I have been tinkering around with crt tech since I was 8years old(25 now) and I have learned a lot over the years(still can't beat curt for knowledge) but I mostly work on and bulid computers now as most consumer projection tvs are cheap and getting up in age(like our projectors)and not many people wants to keep them long anyway(except me) |
You missed the point again. The comment was not meant for you. I did not quote you when I posted. And i did not ask you to compare anything. |
You could have said so 
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I thought it was well known that when you quote someone you are then posting to what they said, not to what ever else is going on. See, you just learned something today and now you know.
Now start from the beginning and read this thread over again now that you know how to read quote posts.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | I thought it was well known that when you quote someone you are then posting to what they said, not to what ever else is going on. See, you just learned something today and now you know.
Now start from the beginning and read this thread over again now that you know how to read quote posts. |
It was my mistake as when I speed read I don't always pay attention(the forum I joined for my vehicle has the quated post is in blue lettering so its harder for me to make that mistake)
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No problem. All worked out well. Continue. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the big E
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 1928
Location: speedwell Tn.
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | No problem. All worked out well. Continue. |
I did get the point of your post about the beam spot size being affected because of larger tube face
_________________
crt king of black
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
km987654
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 2874
Location: Australia
TV/Projector: Barco BG809s
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As mentioned before with almost any system there is a trade off whenever change is made. In this case the focus system to my knowledge is identical and is now being applied to 12" tubes. The end result is that most likely focus will suffer. Of course if the focus system is somehow different then this may not apply but i believe a 912 is a 909 with larger tubes.
I would add that in terms of movie watching the change in focus ability is probably not significant and may not even be detectable.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Macgyver has basically better summed up the point i was trying to make when i also refered to a direct view ES set being able to clearly focus even in the corners. Knowing what he knows about these technologies, make no mistake, he is probably the most experienced and qualified man here to make such comment.
Big E, the reference to large ES focusing sets was made to prove the point that an increase in beam distance from the focal point does not mean focus will go out the window, it was a point made to say that if a large ES focus tube can produce a decent level of focus with no electro-magnetic assistance, there is no good reason a much smaller EM focus tube with full digital astig control could not achieve some good beam spot size. Macgyver may be able to expand on that further again, but that is the general direction i feel we were both headed with our comparison.
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | I think you guys are way overthinking this. IIRC most who have seen it said it wasn't any better than a 9". |
That has certainly been said before Spanky yes, but in all my readings last night i found a number of posts on other forums to suggest otherwise, and it seemed a common point between alot of them stated they had seen a 912 and it really was a step up from a 909. It was very widely agreed that the 812 was not as capable as a 9" set.
| km987654 wrote: | As mentioned before with almost any system there is a trade off whenever change is made. In this case the focus system to my knowledge is identical and is now being applied to 12" tubes. The end result is that most likely focus will suffer. Of course if the focus system is somehow different then this may not apply but i believe a 912 is a 909 with larger tubes.
I would add that in terms of movie watching the change in focus ability is probably not significant and may not even be detectable. |
No. That is not where the focus is or was ever being let down. They would not create a machine such as this and then decide "we've done enough, lets just leave it at that" when it wouldve been quite easy for them to just make changes to the electronic controls if required, however i dont think major changes would be required. Furthermore, it was not electronically that the 812 was being let down, it was apparently lens corner focus. Beam focus was never said to be the issue.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SisterOfMercy
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Posts: 155
Location: Zwart Nazareth, The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you look at old topics (not necessarily on this forum), you will see it's a beast (just like your my mom). A quadrupler and splitter for every tube!
I think you should all go and find a NEW 912 and give it to me! That's the way it is supposed to be.
_________________
The kissing and the colour come crashing down
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanky Ham
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 23, 2013 3:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: |
| Spanky Ham wrote: | | I think you guys are way overthinking this. IIRC most who have seen it said it wasn't any better than a 9". |
That has certainly been said before Spanky yes, but in all my readings last night i found a number of posts on other forums to suggest otherwise, and it seemed a common point between alot of them stated they had seen a 912 and it really was a step up from a 909. It was very widely agreed that the 812 was not as capable as a 9" set.
|
What forums? I wish MP would weigh in.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
