NZ7 8K Upshift User Experience

[JonProphet]

I'm debating on a projector that needs to last me between 5 and 10 years. I know that true 8K consumer devices are years away but I'd like to be able to hold onto my next projector (most I've spent on any single AV device in my live) for a good long while. My 2nd projector had 900 hours on it over 5+ years before I replaced it with a Sony 350ES that I've had less than a month. I bought it second hand to see what a true 4K projector experience was like. I'm hooked and now I want to get into a new 4K projector that gets closer to HDR with a few more lumens. I'm on the fence between a used NZ7 (B stock, open box, low hours used) or a new NZ500.

At this time, I do not have any 8K display devices but I could see moving in a Strato K in a year or two. My AVR obviously doesn't support 8K either but I'm not above doing a dual HDMI output device to send video signals directly to the projector.

So, anyone out there have any real world experience with a Strato K and a NZ7?

Thanks!

 

[Reezepees]

I would by a NZ500 a much much better picture overal!
No 8K eshift, but better contrast, better DTM, more light output, newer panels.

 

[JonProphet]

I would by a NZ500 a much much better picture overal!
No 8K eshift, but better contrast, better DTM, more light output, newer panels.

Thank you for the response. Do you own the NZ500 and were you able to compare it to a NZ7?

 

[Reezepees]

I hang out with two friends who have them pretty often, so I see them a few times every month. The picture quality is seriously awesome! I did see an nz7 once, but that was ages ago.

 

[JonProphet]

I hang out with two friends who have them pretty often, so I see them a few times every month. The picture quality is seriously awesome! I did see an nz7 once, but that was ages ago.

So you don't own either?

 

[Reezepees]

Nope. I have a nz700.

 

[DieZwei]

Not sure if it´s anything you´d need, but the NZ500 doesn´t have:
- motion interpolation
- 3D
- 4K@120Hz

 

[JonProphet]

Not sure if it´s anything you´d need, but the NZ500 doesn´t have:
- motion interpolation
- 3D
- 4K@120Hz

Nope none. I haven't done 3D in years. Still have the media, but no. 120hz, not gaming on my projector, so nope there too. Thanks for the response.

 

[DieZwei]

Nope none. I haven't done 3D in years. Still have the media, but no. 120hz, not gaming on my projector, so nope there too. Thanks for the response.

In that case, I agree with @Reezepees - go for the NZ500.

 

[JonProphet]

In that case, I agree with @Reezepees - go for the NZ500.

Find it interesting that you are recommending this over the Nz7. The 8K is kind of a big deal to me but not if it will sacrifice 4K fidelity.

 

[DLCPhoto]

Find it interesting that you are recommending this over the Nz7. The 8K is kind of a big deal to me but not if it will sacrifice 4K fidelity.

Personally, I would not let 8k impact my decision making whatsoever, as it is mostly irrelevant for real world home theater now, and likely to remain that way for quite some time. You need a very large screen, and/or very close viewing distances, to even be able to detect a difference between 4k and 8k, even if there was any content to watch (other than the single KScape demo clip).

Further, the NZ7 has the first generation of 8k eShift, and many feel that it does more harm than good when used. I do use 8k eShift on my prior NZ9 and current NZ900, and find there is a tiny amount of improvement from my seating distance, but it is negligible. I wouldn't care if it wasn't there, and wouldn't pay more in order to have it.

So I would also take the NZ500 over the NZ7, as many others have recommended.

 

[JonProphet]

Personally, I would not let 8k impact my decision making whatsoever, as it is mostly irrelevant for real world home theater now, and likely to remain that way for quite some time. You need a very large screen, and/or very close viewing distances, to even be able to detect a difference between 4k and 8k, even if there was any content to watch (other than the single KScape demo clip).

Further, the NZ7 has the first generation of 8k eShift, and many feel that it does more harm than good when used. I do use 8k eShift on my prior NZ9 and current NZ900, and find there is a tiny amount of improvement from my seating distance, but it is negligible. I wouldn't care if it wasn't there, and wouldn't pay more in order to have it.

So I would also take the NZ500 over the NZ7, as many others have recommended.

Perfect. Exactly what I was looking for in a response.

I will say, that on smallish screen viewing (at over 10 feet viewing distance) TG:Maverick on a NZ800, I could immediately tell there difference in PQ on a couple of scenes. I'm assuming the 800 and 900 have upped their game compared to 1st gen 8K e-Shift.

 

[DLCPhoto]

Perfect. Exactly what I was looking for in a response.

I will say, that on smallish screen viewing (at over 10 feet viewing distance) TG:Maverick on a NZ800, I could immediately tell there difference in PQ on a couple of scenes. I'm assuming the 800 and 900 have upped their game compared to 1st gen 8K e-Shift.

Well, the eShift is a tad better, but I think other aspects of the projector account for the biggest picture quality differences.

I think many companies use the whole "8k" thing as a marketing gimmick, to distinguish themselves from other products. I mean, being future proofed is generally a good thing overall, but as I indicated above, I don't see 8k being particularly relevant or needed any time soon.

I'm just a hard-core skeptic, getting more and more 'curmudgeonly' every day!

 

[JonProphet]

Well here is my line of thought. If the image quality is marginally worse over all on the NZ7 vs NZ800 and the 8K up convert is only marginally worse on the NZ7 and one can get a NZ7 for a fraction of the price of a NZ800. Does the cost benefit outweigh the purchase of a new NZ500. Yeah that may be a lot if mental gymnastics but also have to toss in that one may not get the warranty on the NZ7.

The 8K content is coming. Between the K 8K support and K’s upcoming content and other devices supporting 8K, is it worth jumping in now?

Well, the eShift is a tad better, but I think other aspects of the projector account for the biggest picture quality differences.

I think many companies use the whole "8k" thing as a marketing gimmick, to distinguish themselves from other products. I mean, being future proofed is generally a good thing overall, but as I indicated above, I don't see 8k being particularly relevant or needed any time soon.

I'm just a hard-core skeptic, getting more and more 'curmudgeonly' every day!

 

[Stitch1]

I agree with the above. The NZ7 was good, the NZ500/700 are better. Just all the way around better. No more bright corners, better intrascene contrast. I like the throw ratios better on the newer units but that could be less desirable to some.

 

[DLCPhoto]

Well here is my line of thought. If the image quality is marginally worse over all on the NZ7 vs NZ800 and the 8K up convert is only marginally worse on the NZ7 and one can get a NZ7 for a fraction of the price of a NZ800. Does the cost benefit outweigh the purchase of a new NZ500. Yeah that may be a lot if mental gymnastics but also have to toss in that one may not get the warranty on the NZ7.

The 8K content is coming. Between the K 8K support and K’s upcoming content and other devices supporting 8K, is it worth jumping in now?

Choosing between NZ500, NZ700 and NZ800 is a tougher call. A lot will depend on your need for lumens: screen size and gain, throw distance, room conditions, etc. Many will feel NZ500 provides the best 'bang for the buck' and it's hard to argue with that. If it has enough lumens, that's a pretty safe bet. I would take any of these over a used NZ7 unless the budget doesn't allow for it.

As for if or when significant 8k content is coming, my guess it's going to be a while. I remember when HD first came out, and the only way I could get content was with a rooftop antenna picking up the signal from local broadcast stations. It was years before it became mainstream.

Same with 4k/HDR content - it came on the scene a long time ago, but it again took many years before it entered mainstream content. Most broadcast TV is still not using this technology.

I could, of course, be completely wrong about 8k, and that significant amounts of content will become available sooner than I expect. But I could still make the argument that it would make more sense to wait for that to happen, and then get an 8k native projector, since it's likely several years away.

The benefit going from DVD to HD was pretty huge. The improvement going from HD to 4k/HDR is definitely there, but in my opinion, not as big a jump. And going from 4k to 8k is an even smaller jump, likely to be of negligible real-world significant for the reasons I discussed above.

My $.02 worth!

 

[dinom]

I just purchased an NZ800 to replace an 8-year-old RS440. I do not have a Strato K yet; I'm waiting for the bugs to be worked out first (with Cinematic encoding).

 

[JonProphet]

I agree with almost everything you stated except for 8K content. There is already 8K content and hardware with the promise of more from K-scape. The interview from AVSForum and K-Scape said they will be going back and working on older films to convert them to 8K. Will they benefit? Who knows.

The studios obviously have to start shooting in higher res formats for new material.

I’ve received a lot of feedback and it has all been in support of a NZ500.

 

[DieZwei]

Consumer projectors are limited by the quality of their lenses. They are already at the limit with 4K content. So to be able to properly project 8K content, the lenses must become of much higher quality (=cost). A high quality Christie or Barco lens costs the same (or more) than a consumer projector.
So I really wouldn´t worry too much about the ability to project 8K content. 8K is a thing for large scale LED-walls or highest end projectors, but nothing to worry about in a "normal" homecinema setup.

 

[JonProphet]

Consumer projectors are limited by the quality of their lenses. They are already at the limit with 4K content. So to be able to properly project 8K content, the lenses must become of much higher quality (=cost). A high quality Christie or Barco lens costs the same (or more) than a consumer projector.
So I really wouldn´t worry too much about the ability to project 8K content. 8K is a thing for large scale LED-walls or highest end projectors, but nothing to worry about in a "normal" homecinema setup.

Again I’ll respectfully disagree. But thanks for the insight.