Originally Posted by Tony1
despite the fact that the zt60 has noticeably deeper black levels..
I would take umbridge with that. "Noticeably better" black levels? Uhm, no. Well, maybe calibrators in an absolute 0 light environment, on certain material, MAYBE. I'd put my 8500's black levels up against a zt owners any day of the week and would not for a millisecond think anyone would honestly pick the zt over mine in black levels. I dare say nobody could see the difference, IF there actually was one (my particular 8500 has the best black levels I've ever seen on ANYthing, so maybe I just got a great one in this area, whereas my max brightness is only 40ftl, that may be my trade-off... better blacks). But two things you WOULD notice while comparing our black levels, the 8500's brightness (mine calibrated to 39.4 ftp, zt can only hit 33ftl I think) and also the clarity/sharpness/detail (whatever you want to call it) where the zt looks like it has a small layer of crisco rubbed over it by comparison.
But noticeably better black levels? Noticeably? Uh, no. In fact, bring it on... I'd pit my 8500 against ANY set's black levels. I'd dare to even say you might even end up picking my 8500 for black levels. I know I know, the shootout, the calibrators; but not every set is equal and I got a set that particularly excels at black levels. So ya, bring it.
Next year at the shootout they really need to hide the bezel and the rest and just show the display itself. Nothing but the screen. Like a blind taste test. I have a feeling this would change a few peoples votes. Especially non-calibrators.
p.s. Tony, I don't mean this to you... I'm just using your post to make a point to anyone else that may think the opposite of what I'm saying. So forgive me for using your post as a launch point.