Enter to Win: HDMI Fiber Optic Cable from DVIGear!

[CyrusTalon]

The length vs loss of signal has got to be the greatest advantage. I have been in numerous situations at conferences, shows, etc where we have had to go to a great deal of trouble to rig something to work, when a cable like this would have been a life saver. At one seminar, our A/V booth with dvd players, sound mixers, etc was a good 100' from the projectors!! Needless to say, we had to hook up the video inputs much closer, and send a guy down every time we needed to play, pause, or rewind!!! Aaaarrrrggghhh!! With a high quality cable like this, long cable runs would present virtually ZERO problems, except, of course, the usual seminar trip hazards of cables running everywhere!

 

[TenaCJed]

DVIGear contest

Supports long HDMI cable runs up to 100 meters (328 ft.) with no loss of image quality.

For me this is a big one as I already have a need for HDMI around 65 feet unless I move my equipment. I would rather not move my equipment though, so I am unsure of what I will do.

 

[blownrx7]

Supports long HDMI cable runs up to 100 meters (328 ft.) with no loss of image quality.

The primary reason to use!!!

Supports higher bit rates required for 1080p “deep color” (12-bit color) essentially making the fiber optic solution more “future proof” than copper cables.

One of those things that, in theory, should be true but, in practice, isn't always. The connector technology will change long before the higher bit rates make the copper cable obsolete. Now what do I do with that zoot fiber optic cable that cost me much dinero that has the WRONG connector???

Optical cable is not susceptible ground loops, or RFI/ EMI interference.

Never saw a quality shielded cable that was subject to interference and ground loops are easily worked around (most of the time...) but it is nice to not have the issue at all!!!

Narrow cable diameter; Possibility to pull cable through narrow conduit.

Now, for those of us that have had to pull 300ft of coax through a half-inch hole at a 90 degree angle, this is a BIG factor.

Elegant High-Tech solution.

Blah, blah, blah. Marketing BS!

 

[dapig]

Optical cable is not susceptible ground loops, or RFI/ EMI interference.
Narrow cable diameter; Possibility to pull cable through narrow conduit.

Both of these reasons are perfect for my situation. I live in an older house and its not always easy to tell where my AV cables could come into contact with the electric cables. Pulling cables in my house is impossible, I have aluminum floor joists that have pre-formed cutouts for pulling cables through. They do not line up so my cables snake around quite a bit.

 

[oldnkranky]

Long cable runs without signal degradation is certainly worth the cost. The real question is, is it worth paying extra for shorter lengths? If you have a constrained budget, like myself, the answer is no.

 

[Blue Dude]

1. # Supports long HDMI cable runs up to 100 meters (328 ft.) with no loss of image quality.
2. # Supports higher bit rates required for 1080p “deep color” (12-bit color) essentially making the fiber optic solution more “future proof” than copper cables.

Both of these are equally important. The others not so much. If I need a long hi def run, I really ought to make sure I won't need to do so twice...

 

[lee kostiuk]

I'm still not completely up to speed on the new HDMI cables. I haven't really seen them in action to compare quality vs. value. I'll have to rely on hear-say and assume the higher picture quality is worth the extra price.

 

[Jaycan]

Ability to have long cable runs without loss of image quality is the most impressive feature. I have to do a long pull-through to my ceiling projector. When you have significant $$ invested in a HT, the last thing you should have to worry about is signal degradation from your cable runs.

 

[Fierce Mice]

For me, any of the first three options would be justification to "upgrade" to fiber optic, but the most important of the three is 2: Supports higher bit rates required for 1080p “deep color” (12-bit color) essentially making the fiber optic solution more “future proof” than copper cables.

 

[Highness]

For video runs over 50ft., fiber optic HDMI cables have distinct advantages over copper cables. Please explain which of these advantages would justify the increased cost of the cable and why:

1.Supports long HDMI cable runs up to 100 meters (328 ft.) with no loss of image quality.

The increased cost is justified in #1 because fiber optic HDMI eliminates the need for a finding buying and installing a separate fiber optic audio cable which would perform equally at 100 meters.

2.Supports higher bit rates required for 1080p “deep color” (12-bit color) essentially making the fiber optic solution more “future proof” than copper cables.

The increased cost is justified in #2 because fiber optic HDMI would probably handle color depths of future developments such as 16-bit 1080p and laser HD.

3.Optical cable is not susceptible ground loops, or RFI/ EMI interference.

The increased cost is justified in #3 because fiber optic HDMI could be installed anywhere without the risk of becoming susceptible to interference from existing or future equipment installations.

4. Narrow cable diameter; Possibility to pull cable through narrow conduit.

The increased cost is justified in #4 because Installing through existing conduit eliminates the cost and ugliness of "remodeling." Where no conduit exists, smaller conduit would probably be easier to incorporate.

5. Elegant High-Tech solution.

Isn't this what every techno-geek strives for?
Elegant High-Tech solutions ... Priceless.

 

[GACrabill]

Please explain which of these advantages would justify the increased cost of the cable and why:

- Supports long HDMI cable runs up to 100 meters (328 ft.) with no loss of image quality.
- This extremely long length compared to wire definitely justifies an increased cost. For some installations, this would be the only option.

- Supports higher bit rates required for 1080p “deep color” (12-bit color) essentially making the fiber optic solution more “future proof” than copper cables.
- Future Proof is very good and adds some value.

- Optical cable is not susceptible ground loops, or RFI/ EMI interference.
- Absolutely justifies a cost increase .... very important to me.

- Narrow cable diameter; Possibility to pull cable through narrow conduit.
- Not too important for most folks and adds little value.

- Elegant High-Tech solution.
- 'Elegant' is not cost worthy.

 

[Jim Robbins]

Contest Questions:
For video runs over 50ft., fiber optic HDMI cables have distinct advantages over copper cables. Please explain which of these advantages would justify the increased cost of the cable and why:

1. Supports long HDMI cable runs up to 100 meters (328 ft.) with no loss of image quality.
2. Supports higher bit rates required for 1080p “deep color” (12-bit color) essentially making the fiber optic solution more “future proof” than copper cables.
3. Optical cable is not susceptible ground loops, or RFI/ EMI interference.
4. Narrow cable diameter; Possibility to pull cable through narrow conduit.
5. Elegant High-Tech solution.

I think that I would vote for item number 2... Relatively future proof... I have actually been halfway looking at using a 45 to 50 foot HDMI cable for a friend's projector setup, and my primary concern is to get one that I know I can use on a 1080p projector. I can probably use a shorter cable for now, but to make the install I want to look best, a longer run would be great! Oh, and as a secondary... I'll pick number 4. We halfway considered running the cable inside of conduit outside of the building, but we weren't 100% sure.

Thanks for the contest!

 

[supervij]

When I vote that I have or will someday have a video cable run of 50 feet or more, what I mean by that is that HOPEFULLY someday I'll have it. And that someday would be when I have a house and a dedicated home theatre room. Y'know, so that the components aren't near that huge freakin' screen I'll be throwing up there.

It's numbers one and two that are the most relevant to me. If there's no loss of image quality with that huge length of cable, that's extra-shiny. And supporting high bit rates to boot and being more future-proof is brilliant too.

cheers,
supervij

 

[Dank]

A cable length that exceeds the other technology is the most important value added. This is especially important with the growth of the projector market. Setting up a projector generally requires a ceiling mount and the resulting cable length needs to be much longer then other televisions. This would justify the added cost.

 

[shadlock]

To justify the cost, no loss of image quality and not being susceptible to interference go together. These are the primary reasons we pay primo prices.

 

[Reorx]

Contest Questions:
For video runs over 50ft., fiber optic HDMI cables have distinct advantages over copper cables. Please explain which of these advantages would justify the increased cost of the cable and why:

1. Supports long HDMI cable runs up to 100 meters (328 ft.) with no loss of image quality.
2. Supports higher bit rates required for 1080p “deep color” (12-bit color) essentially making the fiber optic solution more “future proof” than copper cables.
3. Optical cable is not susceptible ground loops, or RFI/ EMI interference.
4. Narrow cable diameter; Possibility to pull cable through narrow conduit.
5. Elegant High-Tech solution.

#1 and #2 would do it for me.
#1 because, If I wire my house, and all my rooms from 1 IDF closet, the length will definately be pushed, only having to pull a single cable for audio and video, and keeping the quality would be nice.
#2 because I'd like room to grow. To future proof so to say.