I have a 4040 and I love it. (I got it for the lens memory and I am keeping it for the Great picture.) I was able to get one new for $1400.00. Remember these epsons are not really 4K projectors. Optoma is a True 4K projector (Not Native 4K) The optoma puts 4k pixels on screen and has in reviews stood up to the Sony Native projectors. The epson if I had to guess puts double of 1080p So I would call it a true 3K projector just for reference. That said at normal viewing distance you will not tell much difference IMHO. The reality is that HDR is the thing that makes these new projectors shine and for movies the Epson 4040 has great HDR. The epson has so many great features that makes it a great Movie projector. For games it is complicated as Games run in 60fps on consoles and in fact the xbox one and most streaming boxes run everything in 60fps and the Epson only goes to 10gbs bandwidth so at 60fps you will lose HDR unless you use an HDfury linker but then you just get 8bit HDR which still looks great but be aware. For streaming on all the projectors you need to be using a 5th gen apple tV or Shield TV anyway since they will stream movies at 24FPS. Xbox one S and X only allow the BluRay app to run at 24p and it is glorius on the Epson. I run 2 separate motorized screens 16:9 and 2.35:1 so I needed a projector with Lens and shift memory. And in case you care The 3D is great on this as well. If you do not need the lens memory then consider the Optoma. or any of the projectors that use the TI DMD .4 or .7 chips. The TI chips are the real deal, especially the .7 chip People confuse the DMD projectors with Eshift and that is a shame. Remember your projector screen does not have pixels so it does not matter how the 4K got on the screen as long as you have it. Native chips will looks bit sharper but those big chips need more light and so add HDR to that and you better have a super dark room.
There's an error in this video: the Epson 4040 and Epson 5040/6040 are not at all similar in performance. The 4040 has a fraction of the contrast potential of the 5040/6040 as they employ different LCD panels. Other than that great video! :)
That is correct, as far as contrast is concerned as well as black levels. Each of the Epsons projectors gets better contrast and features as you move up the line. They are all similar, however when it comes to image detail and resolution which is the main thing we wanted to test in comparison to the Optoma. Several on line reviews had indicated that at viewing distance the Epson 4K e or enhancement looked as good or very close to a 4K projector. We found that is simply not the case on native 4K sources with good detail. Both the Sony and the Optoma UHD65 easily are observed at viewing distance as more detailed and sharper to the eye than the 1080p projectors with 4k shift or enhancement when viewed side-by side. Also see tvspecialists.com/blog for more detailed information and high resolution stills.
I don't really understand the tech, but how can epsons shift tech work if you only comparing still images? I would think you would need video to be playing to compare.
Actually you do not need motion we we did do both. Epson's "e Shift" or "4K enhancement" is a refresh or flash of a secondary set of on screen pixels which are 1/2 over and 1/2 up so they take 2 million pixels and deliver 4 million to the screen. It helps make HD look smother and in some case higher resolution. It is not however the same as what the new TI chip is doing as it is delivering 8.3 millionindividual pixels to the screen, and that is the difference we are seeing. We were skeptical, but seeing is believing. (and testing!)
From what I can see, I actually think the Optoma has much better color accuracy. In the very first test pattern, the white was white, not a yellowish-white. The skin tone test was much closer to a real skin tone, and the trailers had more detail because it wasn't lost in the color saturation. I would LOVE to see a test between the UHD65 and the new Vivitek HK2488!!!
You are correct, out of the box and just putting the color temperature at menu setting of 6500K, and color mode at reference or cinema I did like the skin tones on the Optoma better. They had less green and yellow color.
Exactly and it's full of BS! Nobody in the world is claiming all this nonsense. I mean really, the back levels and contrast levels of the Epson are far superior and that is measurable and visible in every real unbiased test. This channel has zero credibility...Optoma just come out clean and admit this is your channel lol
@@painterdood2484 Dood, he said he gave the Epson the edge in terms of color when the color looked better, to me, on the Optima when viewing on my calibrated LG C8 OLED... Seems pretty honest.
Maybe it's my cheap monitor, but the Epson looks slightly green when compared to the Optoma. On the contrast test comparison it was very noticeable. On the skin tone test too.
You are correct, as this comparison was "out of the box" with both projectors put in their most accurate color mode. If you look at the RU-vid image of the title you will notice we have done both calibrated and uncalibrated comparisons on some of the comparisons. With an ISF calibration, which most people will not do on this price level of projector, the color comparison would be much closer. We wanted to see how they would compare without have a full calibration done. However, color calibration does not usually dramatically effect detail, resolution, and contrast. So either with or without will not change most of what we were trying to see which is if the new DLP chip really could compete and it certainly does.
To me the UHD65 looks to have significant difficulty with fast-moving scenes. Look at the judder for the movie trailer, especially when panning over the trees. Was the motion processing turned on? The Epson is so smooth at the same point. As a sports fan the constant judder is a deal-breaker and will now probably go Epson. Such a shame as it looks to have great image quality. Watching other RU-vid videos they all seem to have Epson in 'bright cinema' mode, which apparently provides a far brighter and better picture than 'cinema'. Good video though, well done!
For our Image testing the "pure motion" was turned off as that is default out of the box and we were just testing the color, contrast and detail for these comparisons. Also for sports, they are usually at 60i or 30 fps so "judder" you see at 24 fps in movies should not be an issue. Comparing to the Epson with "Pure Motion" at setting 1 it looked very comparable.
Ted - your direct comparison method is great and I wish everybody did it like you. However, it would have been nice to directly compare the 5040UB since this is the real competitor by dollars. Any opportunity to shoot a new comparison or does the 5040UB upset the balance and change conclusions especially in the UHD domain?
Hi Dave - Ted is out of the country for a few weeks but I reached out to one of our other home theater projector specialists and here's his reply: Thank you, we appreciate you kind words. We agree a comparison with either the 5040UB or the 6040UB would have been preferred, and we would have done that, however we had just sold our demo and stock units, and had a 4040 on hand. After seeing how good the Optoma is, we are having a hard time wanting to bring one in just for the demo, but we’ll see. We do, however, have the Epson Laser 10500, that we hope to do a formal video comparison with soon, and it does have higher contrast and better scaling that the 5040UB and 6040UB have, and we have compared the 6040 to the 10500 (however not in a formal video). So we should be able to draw some conclusions and insight from that. The Epson 5040UB/6040UB are great projectors and until the Optoma UHD65 came out the 6040UB was our projector de jour for the under $7k market. However, after seeing the Optoma’s True 4k in comparison to the Epson’s 4KE, there is no question which looks sharper, and we feel that the contrast and black levels are fairly comparable. -Mike Bollinger
Thanks Mike and Ted - fair point and appreciate your patience with this repeated question. The UHD65 compares favorably considering the 3x price gap though Epson colors and contrast typically appear more vivid. Thanks for taking these extra efforts to minimize review subjectivity for consumers.
it's amazing how far we've come with affordable "true 4k" projectors have come. Making buying a flatscreen pointless...assuming the buyer has a spot to place the projector. If there's a dedicated room the only choice that makes sense today would be a projector like the Optoma UHD or UHZ...I wonder who else makes a true 4k projector like Optoma's 2 65 models. Maybe you could do a shootout video if you haven't already comparing affordable true 4k projectors. Actually with projectors like the Optoma's I don't think it makes any sense to buy the Sony's native 4k able projectors at 2x the cost plus....the picture quality isn't clearly 2x better. Also, projector today have come a long way (the affordable...e-shift an the affordable "true 4k"). I'm sure any one would be happy with a e-shift Epson or JVC. Especially if they've never seen an a/b comparison. Or if they see the two projector types separately at different times in different shops. Rarely will one shop have two setup for a shootout since they would want to sell both brand/models. I think it comes down to budget and preconceived knowledge of what each projector can do.
Actually we are just finishing up our first triple comparison (actually a quad since the Epson represents two models) of the best 4K under $2,500 home theater projectors. It will be out as both a blog with measurements on our website and a video on You Tube by next week. We compare the Epson 5040/6040, the UHD65 and the new JVC LX-UH1 which is the first .47" 4K DLP with an iris. The results were very interesting and full of surprises.
I think this test might be slightly flawed. The UDH65 uses a chip with exactly half the resolution of 4K and then uses 2 phase shifting to achieve 4K. Since each frame is made up of two images each with half the pixels of a 4K image, it adds up to the same number of pixels. Therefore there is no reason why the UHD65 should be that much less clear. It looks to me like it may not be full focused or perhaps the sharpness setting needs to be adjusted.
Actually the UHD65 is not "less clear" than the Epson. The Optoma delivers over 8 million pixels and the Epson about 4 million. Sharpness however is very good on both and it depends on your viewing distance in your particular setup whether you will really see the difference. If you want to see high res closeups visit www.tvspecialists.com/jvc-dla-nx7-vs-epson-pro-cinema-6050ub-vs-tvs-pro-theo-z65-part-i/ as the 6050 uses the same shift technique and resolution and the TheoZ65 uses the same .66 chip as the UHD65.
is there a switch on the back of the UHD65 that changes the voltage or is US model strictly 110v? The UK predecessor version (UHD60) has a price of $3600 on our favorite site AtoZ site
133" is pushing a reference or calibrated mode light output, however, if you go into the advance color settings and move the brillant color setting to 10 you in the color menus, you can almost double your light output and only suffer a slight compromise in color accuracy.
We did not specifically test the fan noise as I believe their are labs with on line results you can get exact readings. From what I remember neither projector was objectionably loud in the low mode and both could be heard but not to the point of the audio being a problem when in the High or brightest mode.
We are not planning on a UHD60 comparison. Why? it is because the UHD60 doe not have the RGBRGB color wheel, the higher contrast and motion processing needed to compete at this level. For the few hundred more dollars investment we feel the UHD65 is the better value in the long run. Most 4K source material is just too good to give up contrast and color accuracy and richness.
Yes, it is, we have just received word we will be getting a UHD 60 to compare to the UHD65. We have had so many requests and we are now curious to see if the theory of the color wheel hold true and is significant or only for the last 10% accuracy. We hope to have in the next two weeks and publish in three weeks.
Too bad the optoma isn’t true 4k. It’s 2716 x 1528 with e-shifting. While double the pixels of the 2 million on the 4040 (not 4 million as stated) still not true 4k
Actually is is quite different that the electronic e shift that JVC and the 4K enhancement that Epson uses. Both of those techniques are based on the very large pixels of 1080p panels. The TI DLP projectors like the Optoma use a much higher resolution chip and an "optical actuator" so they have been clasified as "true 4K UHD" resolution both by the CTA and by multiple reviewers. We have done side by side comparisons where you can see high res images of here: www.tvspecialists.com/optoma-uhd65-home-theater-projector-comparison-epson-pro-cinema-4040/ In many cases it even looks more detailed than some "true 4K" projectors. In our opinion, what is delivered to the screen is what the viewing experience is all about. You may want to see for yourself a 4K test generator on the screen as many reviewers have done - it is 8.3 million pixels delivered to the screen and what the eye see is more important that how they achieve it. Please, compare side by side for yourself and then decide.
Possibly, depends on what you mean by "correction." The Optoma does not have lens shift or lens memory that the Epson has. You need to make sure that it will work in your particular application, so yes, you are correct in some ways.
Actually we just finished the 5040, UHD65, and the new JVC LX-UH1 comparison and you are in for a few surpises. The 5040 uses an iris and although has the best blacks when it is on, it also compromises the highlights as they are dimmed down as well. If you turn the iris off to get its best dynamic range the blacks will surprise you. The Epson 5040 is a great projector and if you need 3D, lens memory then without question it is a good choice. If you want the best HDR and 4K detail it may not be the best projector unless you need the higher brightness and then it wins hands down. The new videos and detailed blog will be out next week as we are just in final edit stages, I think you will find it very interesting if you, like us, appreciate Epson projectors.
what and why is better: 1) take a projector with 3m screen and look at the screen on distance 3m 2) take a TV with 1.5m(65) and look at the tv on distance 1.5m ?
To bad the comparison has been made to the Epson 4040 (TW7300 in Europe), as the 5040 (TW9300 in Europe) is much much better in contrast, blacklevels and the same time holding his highlights where the 4040 fails in this test. Besides that the color accuracy of the 5040 is better then the 4040. I really would like to see the comparison of the 5040 vs the UHD65
We understand, that is exactly why we did compare the UHD65 to the top of the line Epson the LS10500 which has Epson's very best performance, contrast and blacks. See www.tvspecialists.com/optoma-uhd65-projector-comparison-epson-pro-cinema-ls10500/ or the video for that comparison.
Please note the that the Epson 5040, 4040, and 6040 all use the same 4K "enhancement" or pixel shifting technology. As far as detail and sharpness they are all equal to 4 million pixels on screen vs the 8 million on the Sony and Optoma. The difference is noticeable on any good 4K UHD sources. The 5040 contrast falls between the 4040 and LS10500, see high res comparisons at tvspecialists.com/blog
Please note the that the Epson 5040, 4040, and 6040 all use the same 4K "enhancement" or pixel shifting technology. As far as detail and sharpness they are all equal to 4 million pixels on screen vs the 8 million on the Sony and Optoma. The difference is noticeable on any good 4K UHD sources. The 5040 contrast falls between the 4040 and LS10500, see high res comparisons at tvspecialists.com/blog
So, is not possible to compare 5040 vs UHD65? I would like to see a real comparison between those, I really like the way you make this job. For me the best job I´ve seen so far. I´ll go for one of these, but none have the complete package. For me is important the sharp, but also the black, color and contrast. Optoma better sharp, and Epson (for the people say) better in the others areas. The only way to compare both to make a decision is to see a comparison like this since I don´t have the opportunity to do it personally. Again, great job! Thank you!!
Stay tuned, we should have at least one more comparison out next week. The 5040 is good but not in the same class as the LS10500 Epson's top projecctor but even it had a hard time keeping up with the UHD65. See also the blog with higher res images: www.tvspecialists.com/optoma-uhd65-projector-comparison-epson-pro-cinema-ls10500/ just click on the images to see the higher res versions.
Please note the that the Epson 5040, 4040, and 6040 all use the same 4K "enhancement" or pixel shifting technology. As far as detail and sharpness they are all equal to 4 million pixels on screen vs the 8 million on the Sony and Optoma. The difference is noticeable on any good 4K UHD sources. The 5040 contrast falls between the 4040 and LS10500, see high res comparisons at tvspecialists.com/blog
Check the panel alignment on the epson it looks like blue bleed . even new out the box Epsons should should have it done by a pro they are always a little off from factory It can be an all day deal to do each color on over 100 intersections on the grid .Realign panels then compare the epson will get alot sharper Sorta of throw back to the CRT days
Actually, in this case a quick panel alignment was performed with some fine touch up, however, as you indicate with enough time it certainly could be improved. We have also learned that even with perfect alignment as in a single chip DLP there is also some level of color edging or fringe color due to the "Chroma Aberation" characteristics of the lens. There is also the same challenge with the lens used on the camera even though we use "cinema grade" or super 35mm lenses but that should be the same on both images of the projector.
Can you please compare Optoma GT 1080HDR vs Epson Home cinema 3800 / EH-TW7100 ? Also if you can please suggest which one is suitable for 120" screen on living room setup it'll be great help. Thank You :)
We get so many requests that unfortunately we aren't able to do all of them. However, if you're looking for advise, and you are in the United States, please call us at 801-486-5757 (M-F 9am-6pm MST) and you can speak to someone about what may be best for your environment. (Screen size is important, but the control of light, and what you'll be using it for, etc. is also something to take into consideration).
Thanks a billion for great review! But how come Epson is sharper for instance @ 3:18 and 4:12? It's quite surprising. Epson is still sharper when both projectors sharpness settings at max?
There is no Question, the Epson is a fantastic projector, I’m not sure what you are seeing, I don’t see that on my monitor when watching it in youtube (or the original video)? Perhaps it has to do with Compression artifacts or streaming, as in person the UHD65 is sharper, but the Epson does an excellent job. Let me also clarify when Ted stated that the 4040 and 5040 are essentially the same, what he meant was that when fed native 4k, the image enhancement /4K enhancement is the same in the 4040 as in the 5040. Technically speaking the 5040 and 6040 use the same chipset, which has higher contrast, and higher brightness (2,500 lumens vs 2,300 lumens) than the 4040. -Mike Bollinger
I own a epson 8350 model (Which is a 1080 p) And if i get to close to the screen ,i can see the screen door effect...in this test.you are doing , i could see the screen door effect on the epson and not the Optoma . why am i still seeing that effect on a 4k epson and not the 4k optoma.
Great question, it has to do with the fill factor (the space between pixels and the size of the pixels. In this case the Epson has a fill factor (screen door effect) of about 65 or possibly 70 (most LCD's) and the Optoma has a fill factor of about 89 (most DLPs). The Optoma has smaller pixels, 8 million, and the Epson 4 million. Both factors make the Optoma a much smoother and less of a screen door effect.
Thanks Ted i get it now ...But i don't sit close to notice it of course ....not a fan of colour wheels ,because my first projector was a optoma and the colour wheel let go ,just after warranty ran out. So i moved on to the lcd epsons . which i'am very happy with. But after seeing this comparison .i think i will give the 4k 65 model optoma a go...And because it's true native 4k ...and of course the price is right......thanks
Yes true 4k is better but from a distance it isn't that obvious . I have an Epsom 5350 1080p projector 💯" screen compared to my LG 55 Oled 4k screen the Epsom destroys it . I still prefer 1080p . It's still good enough. And most 4k films on a blue ray disc are not true 4k. The Optoma dosent have lens memory shift feature which I think the latest Epsoms do . I prefer Epsom better value . Thanks for the video.
I love and own Epsons. But if a 1080P projector beats your LG Oled 4K TV in ANY metric other than screen size, there must be something wrong with your TV.
Yes, we agree, we did sell off our 4040 so we will be getting a 5040 or 6040 (same except come with mount, spare lamp and longer warranty, and its black.) So there will be some future comparisons in a few months. There is a fairly good written comparison at Projectorcentral.com that essentially says for 4K HDR the UHD65 is the better image and HDR. The also say that for just HD they are close but give the nod to the 5040. Depending on what they did in terms of setting up the combination of dynamics and lamp power and set up we have found the UHD65 is capable of some very good black levels just how close to the 5040 we are hoping to confirm.
Actually, the UHZ65, the laser projector is the top of the line Optoma 4K for the home. These are the best under $3,000 4K projectors that we have tested and seen side by side regardless of where they fall in each manufactures line.
Great question, and there are many opinions and a lot would depend on you specific application like screen size, room lighting and screen type. Since OLED has near perfect blacks (but sometimes tends to also crush or hide low light details) the best blacks are undoubtledly the JVC like the DLA-X790 at $5,999. The best detail I have seen is the Optoma UHZ65 at $3,999 which is also laser based and probably the best balance of good blacks, color, cost and performance that will continue to be bright and perform year after year without buying expensive lamps. In terms of color the Epson LS10500 ( $7,999) is the widest color gamut I have seen but not as bright as the others so not great in screens over 110" for HDR. The Sony VPL-VW385ES is also a good all around choice but like the JVC has rather expensive lamps but a great combination of blacks, color, brightness and native 4K imaging chips. It would be hard to go wrong with any of those options.
why are you using wong term of saying "native 4K" when: The Optoma UHD65 uses the new 4K DLP chip which puts 3840x2160 discrete pixels on the screen. However the chip itself has 2716x1528 micro-mirrors and pixel-shifting technology is used to achieve the result on screen. The HUGE question is whether this method of achieving a 4K picture can match the image detail of fully native 4K chips.
In the same way DLP works in the first place (10x frame rate which would be 10x60=600hz for 60fps) pixel-shifting to achieve a higher resolution is a non-issue at the rate the mirrors move. The output is what matters, on screen when static or in movement the resolution is 4k.
That is exactly why we also did this comparison with the Sony VPL-VW365ES which is true 4K 17:9. The Optoma has been considered true UHD 4K and we can tell you conclusively yes, as far as detail and sharpness it can hold its own with true 4K projectors. It also far exceeds the detail and sharpness of 4K enhancement of so called 4K shift technologies that we have tested so far.
Ted Bollinger I appreciate your effort with these reviews, they are really helpful. I did have a chance to demo side by side UHD65 and JVC X570 along with sony es45. Im starting to believe that optoma was faulty, as contrast, color, blacks, everything was far more superior on jvc, regardless small difference in price. On topic, wjat do you use for those samples, and is there some specofoc software you use when calibrating (user calibration, not pro)
The term "native 4K UHD" refers to the ability to address 8.3 million pixels vs the projectors that use shift on a 1080p chip or chips typically deliver 4 million pixels so can they could not be called native 4K UHD. What we wanted to know is if it could equal visually what are eyes see on a 3 chip native true 4K. The answer is yes, it can hold its own with the best as far as detail and resolution is concerned.
What about rainbow effect on the Optoma? I am sensitive to it, but hope it´s gotten better nowadays.. Also, please do a side by side with the Epson TW9300 (5040UB I think in the US..), because price wise, they are the only option for me (in Norway..)
You will want to see it first live to decide if possible. It is better than most DLP's as the RGB/RGB color wheel really helps but on bright scenes with fast action it is still visible to some. We have one employee here that is very sensitive to it but he finds the UHD65 OK but the UHD60 not acceptable, so all depends on your sensitivity to it.
It all depends on what you are looking for and in this case what setting you have the "pure motion" in. You can definitely smooth out the motion but some feel motion processing looks like a soap opera rather than a movie. We did have it off as we were mainly testing detail. When we compare the UHD65 vs the UHD60 next week we will show the difference.
There are 3 levels of motion smoothness which Optoma has labeled "Pure Motion" Since each person's idea of smooth vs. "cinematic" you can select which ever you prefer. If you select the highest even movies look like soap operas or news or sport..too smooth for cinema buffs.
Also noticed the UHD65's choppiness in the Smiths trailer but assumed this is just a camera sync artifact - not normally perceptible to the viewer. Is this true or can you actually see choppiness in person with some combination of PureMotion settings?
Good question, I don’t recall seeing that in person, but I do see what you are talking about in the video. I think you are correct in that it is some type of artifact from shooting the video. But I went and pulled that scene up and looked at it, and with PureMotion turned off, there is some choppiness that is typical of any 24fps content that we are used to seeing when no motion enhancement is used on any display, with PureMotion turned on, that smooths out nicely. That said, my personal preference when watching movies or other 24fps material is with no motion enhancement on (regardless of brand / display technology) -Mike Bollinger
I am sorry to say that no 3D no sale and the Optoma UHD65 4K and Optoma UHD60 4K have no 3D. I am really wondering thinking of the fact that 3D requires big inches to be really immersive, what were the optoma people thinking when they decided that. All the people I know are waiting for a DLP 3D 4K at up to 3000USD and have already skipped this projector from their list. Granted there is no 4K 3D standard but how about FullHD 3D? Complete nonsense and a great pity.
