JVC DLA-X700R pictures

1 of 12 pictures

JVC DLA-X700R
JVC DLA-X700R

12 Pictures - JVC DLA-X700R

  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R
  • JVC DLA-X700R

Jmac

October 22, 2013, 6:07 am

I'm currently totally underwhelmed by the prospect of 4k - at least in Europe / North America (the Far East may be a different story) there is neither (to my knowledge) a broadcast source nor suitably widespread high bandwidth home internet to make streaming viable, nor are there any affordable home players (4k Blu-Ray or equivalent), so spending money on a 4k TV or projector at the moment seems pointless.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure in 5 years' time it will be great, as PCs will deliver sufficient graphics power to play games in 4k; the next-next gen of consoles will likely be on the horizon delivering 4k gaming; and streaming/disc-based playback systems may be becoming viable, but for now it must be akin to having a 1080p TV ten years ago - nothing to feed it.

Pg

October 22, 2013, 1:03 pm

No, but it's never like that. It's like the chicken and the egg - without 4k content, who will buy a 4k tv? With a 4k tv, who will produce 4k content?

Yeah, it costs money right now to buy 4k tv along with some 4k material, but then early adopters always faced this issue. Companies need to recoup some of the R&D costs. As the price lowers and more people pick up a 4k tv, more 4k content will be produced, more 4k tvs are produced at a cheaper price... It's nothing new. But people like having the latest and greatest, being the first to get one, etc.

And this gen of consoles generally don't do games in 1080p, the next gen should (I hope). Whether the next gen of consoles after that can give us 4k gaming is another matter.

manni01

October 24, 2013, 4:05 pm

Thanks for a very interesting article.

A question to John Archer: when you say that eshift3 can currently only work with 1920x1080 inputs, do you mean:

1) that when fed a 4K native picture the 4K signal has to be first downscaled to 1080p before the whole eshift process can be applied (which means one MORE conversion to 1080p before the usual upconvert to 4K, creation of the two 1080p subframes and using the physical eshift device to re-create a near-4K picture),

or

2) that the 4K native picture is directly converted to two 1080p subframes which are then displayed using the eshift device to recreate a near-4K picture (which means one LESS conversion as the picture is already in 4K, so no need to upscale it first).

I was expecting 2) as in less work needed when inputting native 4K vs 1080p (the upscaling to 4K isn't necessary as the input is already providing a 4K picture), but your article can be read the other way and imply more work (downsampling to 1080p first due to a limitation of the eshift process).

Thank you for clarifying. If 1), please could you link to or quote some technical documentation of eshift3 when processing a native 4K picture, that explains the need to downconvert the signal to 1080p first before applying the eshift process?

manni01

October 25, 2013, 11:46 am

I have obtained a confirmation from JVC that there is no need to downscale the 4K input to 1080p before the eshift processing (so what happens is 2), not 1) as listed above), so it would be good if you could clarify/correct your article, as that part is at best ambiguous and confusing, at worst incorrect. Thank you.

manni01

October 28, 2013, 12:15 pm

Does anyone from trusted reviews ever read user comments?

How do you plan to deserve the "trusted" part of the title if you don't mind leaving misleading or inaccurate information in an (otherwise very good) article?

By the way there is another inaccuracy which is that there are no two sets of 1080p imaging chips diagonally offset by half a pixel.
Here is how e-shif works: "Using e-Shift, the original 1920 x 1080 signal is processed with a correlation detection algorithm to uncover detail that can be enhanced on a 4K display. This enhancement improves edge transitions, eliminates aliasing and stair-stepping, and increases contrast in detailed areas. New sub pixels are generated based on this detection and a 3840 x 2160 frame is created. This frame is then temporally separated into subframes 1920 x 1080 pixels each and projected using the D-ILA optical system and through the e-Shift device. This device utilizes a property of liquid crystals called birefringence and can switch between straight light and refracted light by 0.5 pixel both vertically and horizontally. It has no moving parts. The result is an image with 4 times the pixel density of the original content."

Full description here: http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attrib...

It would be nice to show your readers that you do mind about accuracy and find a way to correct the content of this article.
Thanks!

andyvan

October 29, 2013, 9:22 am

manni01 We do care, believe me. I've forwarded your comments onto John, but he's away at the moment. We'll get you can update soon.

manni01

October 29, 2013, 10:10 am

Thanks Andy, that's good to know! :)
I'm looking forward to hearing back from John.

manni01

November 5, 2013, 9:08 pm

Any news from John?

manni01

November 8, 2013, 6:21 pm

Andy? John? Anybody home?

Jmac

November 11, 2013, 7:13 am

True, without the early adopters we'd never get tech like 4k to mass market. All I was saying is that, subjectively, the equation doesn't add up for me yet - the price is too high to justify the purchase of a 4k TV, given the lack of content available at this stage. This was not the case when I purchased my first HDTV or my current 3D TV - the relevant "cutting edge" technology (1080p in the first case; 3D in the second) was effectively delivered "free", in the sense that I chose a TV based on price, features and image quality, and it just happened to have the latest and greatest built in. That is not yet the case for 4k - you need to make a conscious decision, and fork over a considerable premium, to get a TV which is 4k capable. Personally I will be waiting for a while longer, by which time HDMI 2.0 should be standard, prices will have come down, and 4k content should be more readily available. A nice 60" 4k OLED with a Moth Eye filter would do me just fine - wake me up when they are available for under 3 grand :-)

You are right that in many cases current gen consoles can't deliver games at 1080p (though the PS3 does for some games, such as WipeOut HD; I don't know about the Xbox 360 as I don't have one). The PS4/Sbox One certainly should deliver everything in 1080p, one would hope.

Fernando

November 23, 2013, 1:55 am

Let's hope due to Sony 500 it forces the JVC prices to be even far below than MSRP.

comments powered by Disqus