Send this Page Home > Shootout: Epson 8500 vs. Panny AE4000    

Epson 8500UB vs. Panasonic AE4000
1080p Shoot Out

Evan Powell, October 23, 2009

Two 1080p projectors are getting a lot of attention this fall. One is the Epson Home Cinema 8500 UB, rated at a whopping 200,000:1 contrast, and coming in under $2,500. The other is the feature rich Panasonic PT-AE4000, priced at a remarkably low $1,999. In head to head competition, how do these two models stack up? We've been giving them both a workout for the past week, and here is our take on it ......

Contrast and Black Levels The 8500UB is rated at 200,00:1, and the AE4000 is 100,000:1. If you read this site regularly, you know we don't like contrast specs. Here's Exhibit A of why that's the case: the uninformed consumer will read these specs and conclude that the 8500UB must be double the contrast of the AE4000. In reality it is not that simple.

Both Epson and Panasonic have achieved higher contrast ratings on these new models compared to their predecessors, but they each took different approaches. Epson did it by improving the auto iris components. Panasonic got most of its improvement through refinements in their "Pure Contrast Plate." Essentially (if we understand this correctly) this improved precision of the polarizers and reduced stray light in the light engine. No change was made to the auto iris between the AE3000 and AE4000.

The net result is that the 8500UB has a deeper black level than either the 6500UB or the AE4000. Thus, side by side, with rolling credits or when the Sony Pictures logo appears against a black background, those backgrounds looks blacker on the 8500UB. No other projector anywhere near this price range achieves the blacks that the 8500UB is capable of. So in this regard, the 200,000:1 contrast rating (the highest in the industry) indicates something real and tangible about black levels on this model.

However, when viewing scenes that do not have substantial black components (which is most of them), it's a different story. In scenes with more typical average light levels, the AE4000 renders them in higher contrast, with deeper color saturation and a bit more three- dimensionality. This comes from the improved light control within the engine itself.

Brightness. The Dynamic and Living Room modes on the 8500 UB put out about 1800 lumens and 1600 lumens respectively. Both can be set to very acceptable color balance while still retaining high brightness. The AE4000's Dynamic mode produced 1362 lumens in default settings, and after some color adjustment we still were getting over 1300 lumens. So the AE4000 is capable of delivering a bright, well balanced image for ambient light use, but it is not quite as bright as the 8500.

The Cinema/Theater modes are much less bright on both projectors, but the 8500 retains an advantage here as well. Its THX and Theater modes put out 638 lumens to the AE4000's 548.

The AE4000 has a Normal mode which measured about 950 lumens. This is an attractive mid-range option that the 8500 doesn't have. If the Cinema modes on the AE4000 are not quite bright enough for the screen size or ambient light conditions, Normal gives the user an incremental boost without going all the way to Dynamic. This mode can also be calibrated to ideal color standards, and all you give up is a small bit of contrast and black level.

Color Balance. The THX mode on the 8500 tracks very closely to 6500K across the scale. So do the Cinema 1 and Color 1 modes on the AE4000. Thus, both projectors are capable of delivering precise color to industry standards. (The 8500's THX and the AE4000's Color 1 are both programmed to the REC709 standard).

The other operating modes on both projectors tend to be biased warmer or colder by design. For example, the 8500's Theater Black 2 is set to 5500K, which is a pleasing color temperature for b/w films. Both projectors have user memories to store custom calibrations.

Picture Quality. This is a catch-all category that is subjective. We set aside the technical stuff and meter readings and ask, "Which picture actually looks better?" In our experience, the 8500 looks better when the picture has a lot of black in it, simply due to its advantage in deeper black level. It also has a bit more pop when used in ambient light in its brightest modes. On the other hand, the AE4000 has a clarity and smoothness that edges that of the 8500. When viewed in a dark room, the AE4000 also has an incremental contrast advantage in most scenes that makes us prefer its image most of the time. We do not wish to make it sound like there are huge differences in the pictures however. These are both outstanding projectors, and the differences between them are subtle.

Frame Interpolation. Epson's frame interpolation is much improved over last year's version. Panasonic's was already very good, and they've added a third mode which is more comprehensive than the two modes they introduced last year. Thus, at this point in time, both projectors have four options for frame interpolation settings; the 8500 has Off, Low, Medium, and High, and the AE4000 has Off, Mode 1, Mode 2, and Mode 3, which are essentially low, medium, and high.

We tested the 8500's Low against the AE4000's Mode 1, Medium against Mode 2, and High against Mode 3. In each case the 8500 produced a slightly smoother picture with a bit less blur and judder. However, in each mode the "digital video" effect is more evident on the 8500. This does not matter with HD sports or animated film material, but for typical HD movies on Blu-ray, this is a matter of consequence. We don't find the digital video effect on the 8500's Low setting objectionable to the point where we wouldn't use it. But it is there to a modest degree. Thus, we prefer the AE4000's picture in Mode 1, despite the fact that is isn't quite as smooth, because it has virtually no digital video effect.

Sharpening Enhancement. Both of these models have a basic Sharpness adjustment that works in a conventional manner. The AE4000's default is at zero with no edge enhancement, and the control does not go below zero. The 8500's default is at zero, but this setting has some built-in edge enhancement, and the control goes down to -10 to turn it off completely.

Both products have an additional sharpening algorithm that can be set at varying degrees of effect. The 8500's is called Super Resolution, and it can be set to Off, 1, 2, or 3. The AE4000's is called Detail Clarity Processor, and it can be set from 0 to 7. Internally, these sharpening algorithms operate quite differently, as engineers at Epson and Panasonic have taken completely different approaches to the problem. But in the end, from the user's perspective, they have similar effects on the picture. Neither system is supposed to add any edge enhancement, but both of them seem to do so when turning them on high and examining their effect on the sharpness test pattern.

Our impression is that these are both very useful tools for increasing image sharpness, but they should be used in moderation based on the type of material being viewed. On both projectors, if you are watching a film-based movie, turning the sharpening features on to maximum will add graininess and an objectionable sandpaper texture to skin. Our preference for films on Blu-ray was to run the 8500's Super Res at 1, and the AE4000's Detail Processor at +3. For standard definition material, Super Res can be set at 2, and the AE4000 can be at +4. We tested both projectors with an animated film, Cars, and on this movie they can both be taken to the maximum without any apparent negative side effects.

Standard Definition. On both the AE4000 and the 8500, the combined use of frame interpolation plus a moderate setting on the sharpening enhancement features produces a particularly beautiful display of standard def DVD movies. Between the two, the edge in overall picture quality goes to the AE4000. But both of them are exceptional, and a significant step beyond most projectors that do not have frame interpolation or enhanced sharpening algorithms on board.

Frame Delay. All digital video systems take a moment to buffer and process a frame of video before writing it to the display device. In general, the more processing that is needed, the greater the delay. Thus, with both of these projectors, activating a subsystem like frame interpolation will lengthen the delay.

With all enhanced processing features turned off, the AE4000 delivers video to the screen a bit faster than does the 8500 UB. With frame interpolation set to Low on the 8500 and Mode 1 on the AE4000, the latter is still the faster of the two units. Once they are bumped up to Medium and Mode 2 respectively, the frame delay is identical. Taking them up to High and Mode 3, the AE4000 slows down a bit and lags the 8500. In the latter two modes, most users will want to use an audio delay to bring picture and sound into synch.

The AE4000 has a "Frame Response" feature that does not exist on the 8500. When this is activated, frame delivery is noticeably improved over anything the 8500 can deliver. For gamers who want the least delay possible, the AE4000 has the advantage. On the other hand, if your games provide the ability to compensate for video delay, this advantage is of little importance. And even with Frame Response on "fast," there are projectors which are just a hair faster--for example, the Optoma HD20 will get a frame of video to the screen a tiny fraction of a second faster than the AE4000 in its fast Frame Response mode.

2.40 Format Widescreen Use. The differences here are substantial. The AE4000 can accommodate an external anamorphic lens with its onboard anamorphic stretch. This does not exist on the 8500UB. If you don't want to use an A-lens, but would rather use the zoom capabilities of the projector, the AE4000 has a powered zoom/focus with a Lens Memory feature that will automatically reset the lens and the vertical picture position for the display of either 2.40 movies or 16:9 material at the touch of a button. You can even set it to detect whether the material is 2.40 or 16:9 format, and have it automatically reconfigure the lens without even touching the button. On the 8500, there is plenty of zoom range in its 2.1 zoom to adjust for 2.40 and 16:9 material on a 2.40 screen, but every move back and forth must be made manually.

HQV Tests. The HQV test patterns show very little difference between these two models. The jaggies test and rotation bar look identical on both machines. Both show relatively low digital noise levels, but there is somewhat less on the AE4000 than the 8500.

Fan noise. Fan noise on both of these models is low, and they are comparable to one another. The 8500 is slightly louder but lower in pitch, so their tendency to be noticed in a quiet room is about equal. Neither one is the quietest projector in the 1080p category, but we cannot imagine anyone passing on either one of these units specifically to get less fan noise.

Warranty. Epson offers a two-year warranty with no restrictions. Panasonic offers a one-year warranty that is extendable to two years at no charge with the submission of a claim form that is similar to a mail-in rebate. Panasonic also has a 2000 hour usage limit on the warranty, so it is two years, or 2000 hours, whichever comes first. If you plan on using your projector more than 2.7 hours per day, this will curtail the length of the warranty. You can run your 8500UB 24/7 and still get the full two-year warranty.

Conclusion

The Epson 8500 UB and the Panasonic AE4000 are both magnificent projectors. Neither one is better than the other for all situations. Each of them has unique advantages. Some of those advantages may be critical to you and tip your decision one way or the other. But we rate both of these projectors extremely highly, and give them both our most enthusiastic recommendation.

Reader Comments(13 comments)

Posted Nov 12, 2009 9:52:04 PM

By Ference

Regarding brightness comparison, Evan described a serious lumen output drop (15% within the first 150 hours operation) in his last year review related to Epson 6500UB. I assume the lamp in the Epson 8500 is the same as their last year model, so the serious lumen output drop still should be there. Accordingly within a short time the brightness benefit between of Epson 8500 compare the Pana AE4000 will be gone. Unless the Panny’s new red-rich lamp may have similar lumen dropping. There would be definitely interesting to hear more about this issue related to both projector for a clearer view.

Posted Nov 5, 2009 10:57:21 PM

By P Lewis

I just got my new AE 4000 today and I've been playing with it for a few hours. My first impression is that it's a nice picture, but not with the preconfigured settings. All of the settings are much too dark except for normal and dynamic. But I found even those setting needed to be tweaked for brightness, contrast and color.

I'm upgrading from my 4-year old Sanyo PLV-Z4 and I have to say, my old Z4 compares fairly well to the new Panny. It's only 1080i and doesn't have frame interpolation, but after viewing my new AE 4000, I can see how good my old Z4 is. (it's probably going to end up on Ebay!)

But, so far, after tweaking the colors and brightness, I can see that I will really enjoy my new projector. Like my old Sanyo, it still requires a dark room to really enjoy a Blu-Ray movie. The blacks are good and the colors are very bright. I was watching different parts of the new Transformers movie as a test and sharpness and frame interpolation are great. I used the highest setting and there is absolutely no jitter that I could detect. I also haven't noticed any delay or sync problems with voice and picture. I'm looking forward to seeing how it performs with all the football game this weekend.

Oh, one more thing, having 3 HDMI ports is really nice. Now I can have HDMI for my DirecTv, Blu-Ray player, and my Sony 400 DVD changer (it up converts to 720p with an HDMI cable).

I'll be curious to hear other comments as more of us try out the new Panny.

Posted Nov 5, 2009 7:00:34 PM

By Brian

Since Panasonic now owns Sanyo I wonder if the no show this year from Sanyo is suppression or restructuring? I have noticed from at least one website that the PLV-Z3000 can be had for the same price as the Panasonic how would this compare with the AE4k or UB8500

Posted Nov 4, 2009 4:43:42 PM

By Wader

I too own a panny ax200u and have the flicker issue...giving panasonic more money goes against my grain when I read the poor units that people have in the AVS forums!

Posted Nov 4, 2009 4:02:58 AM

By robert

It sounds terrific that there has been some major improvements in the frame interpolation technology. This was described well in the epson review.

What delineates all projectors on price to the largest degree is contrast. To say that it is only marginally important in my view highlights a major flaw in the review. Why not post the numbers with the equipment used and the test environment detailed? The lumen numbers are provided. I think people need to be aware of how ridiculous the contrast number spec given by most manufacturers is. They obviously believe the number is important and is the key reason why they balloon it to ridiculous levels. If you report the real world levels it would show true unbias in my view. It isnt an attack on your reviews but an opinion.

Posted Nov 3, 2009 8:48:26 PM

By Reuben

Don't compare the paltry ax100 to these technologies.

The AX100 is probably worth under $400-500 on the marked used nowadays. That's like saying a 20 year old honda civic sucked, don't buy honda.

-ELmO

Posted Oct 29, 2009 10:39:58 PM

By Jason D

Dana is right about the AX100. I have the same issue on my Panny and I'm not ready to get another only to have the same issue. Mine is a few years old and has only 700hrs on it, light use. I have to power down the unit every time it turns on the first time for the day. This thing is a lemon, maybe I can get my money back from the Warehouse store. If I can, then I'm going with a Mits or Epson. Sorry Panny, you've lost me

Posted Oct 28, 2009 9:10:17 AM

By Dana Decker

One note for folks considering the Panny (and I can't believe I'm one of them). As a previous Panasonic AX100U owner I suggest that anyone considering this projector take a look at the various Panny owner forums over on AVS. I had terrible flickering problems with my AX100U and it looks like AE3000 owners (many generations later) are still encountering this issue. I still think that Panasonic has quality control issues to this day and it makes me very nervous about buying another one of their products (though the price is very tempting). After you've taken a projector down 4 times, shipped it to Heartland, Kansas, waited for repair, and then remounted you start to realize how important it is that your projector just works. This caused me to switch over to Sanyo projectors after the Panny AX100U. No new Sanyos this year so it's either this or the Epson. If I'm not mistaken the Epson warranty agreement has them shipping you a replacement projector before you send your projector in need of repair back to them. Something to think about.

Posted Oct 28, 2009 7:46:56 AM

By RobertC

My brother is in the AV business. His Epson rep told him that Epson make the light engine for Panasonic projectors and sells the engine to them at an exorbitant price meaning that Panasonic has to buy less expensive and hence lower quality electronics and support systems for the light engine.

Can anyone else confirm this?

I am currently torn between these two projectors, but after a shootout like this, I don't see what the true advantage to the Epson is given that it's only + over the Panasonic is the increased black levels, whereas the Panasonic has same or better image quality and features like power zoom/focus...

Posted Oct 27, 2009 6:15:30 AM

By pplover

Really excellent article but yet I want still more.

+1 i agree with that word

where ANSI contrast? you are hiding something?

oh man just measure and show

Posted Oct 26, 2009 1:56:08 PM

By James Baroni

Couple of items usual covered Evan's excellent reviews left off in comparison: Lens shift, light output loss, bulb life estimates, remote control features, connections and also descriptive comparison of aestetic features such as size, color, and style. Other items not usually featured but helpful in making a decision would be quality history by brand and customer service satisfaction by brand specific to projectors.

Posted Oct 24, 2009 7:50:02 PM

By JSelig

Thank you! Evan that's a terrific review. It really helped. Next I have to find out which other projector has a power zoom that might compare to Panasonic AE4000.

Posted Oct 24, 2009 10:37:02 AM

By PatB

Really excellent article but yet I want still more.

I would like to see the ANSI contrast figures. I imagine that since Epson makes the LCD panels for both that they might be identical. But if the Panasonic Contrast Plate works maybe its effect shows up in the ANSI contrast figure. Maybe that's whst accounts for your preference for the Panny picture's contrast except for the credits.

The standard high pressure bulb is well known to be rich in green and weak in red. That's why bright modes tend to have a greenish cast. People detect too much green especially in skin tones. Heretofor the only solution has been to cut the total light output of the bulb. Now Panasonic has some sort of red boost technology. You dodn't mention it in this comparison. What does that mean?

The JVC LCoS projectors acheived fame because of their black levels. They dodn't use an iris. How do these LCD projectors with irises stack up?

Post a comment

Commenting on this article is easy and does not require any registration. Your email address is necessary for you to activate your comment once it has been submitted. It will not be shown to other site viewers. ProjectorCentral reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Foul language is not permitted, nor are personal attacks. All comments should remain on topic.

Name:

Email Address:(used only to confirm your comment)

Your Comment:

(Enter the numbers as they appear to the left)

Send this Page Print this Page Report Errors


Click for more info!

ProjectorPeople
NEC at ProjectorPeople