F8500.. OR .. ZT60 ????? - Page 43 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1261 of 3105 Old 05-19-2013, 09:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,848
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 223
Ken Ross: many have commented that the f8500 is SHARPER. Do you think it somehow has better processing? How much difference would a great processor make to the sets that were at the shootout--f8500 included?
Artwood is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1262 of 3105 Old 05-19-2013, 09:41 AM
Member
 
abalone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

That's pretty bad and not totally uncommon with any brand of LED. FWIW, when I saw my first 8500, I really felt it had the best screen uniformity I had ever seen in a flat panel, plasma or otherwise. Looking at a full-screen white, it was really incredible seeing how even it was from edge to edge.

Good to hear. Yeah, it is bad on some scenes. I've got a white slide that also shows it on my E7K. I'll put together a hockey video and slides to take to Magnolia and see if they'll let me check the new models.
abalone is online now  
post #1263 of 3105 Old 05-19-2013, 07:56 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,641
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1421 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

Ken Ross: many have commented that the f8500 is SHARPER. Do you think it somehow has better processing? How much difference would a great processor make to the sets that were at the shootout--f8500 included?

I have no clue Art, but it would be pretty easy to conduct a scientific experiment if we had similarly calibrated sets hooked up to an external processor. But regardless, the sharper results of the 8500 are achieved without any external processor together with no ill-effects. A pretty nice plus in my book.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #1264 of 3105 Old 05-19-2013, 07:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,641
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1421 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Quote:
Originally Posted by abalone View Post

Good to hear. Yeah, it is bad on some scenes. I've got a white slide that also shows it on my E7K. I'll put together a hockey video and slides to take to Magnolia and see if they'll let me check the new models.

I returned a Sony 929 due to really poor screen uniformity. In fact, my first Sharp Elite had some bad uniformity issues, but my 2nd one was excellent. It's a crap-shoot sometimes.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #1265 of 3105 Old 05-20-2013, 07:52 AM
Member
 
abalone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I returned a Sony 929 due to really poor screen uniformity. In fact, my first Sharp Elite had some bad uniformity issues, but my 2nd one was excellent. It's a crap-shoot sometimes.

Ok. In this case as I mentioned I had the panel replaced twice, so 3 panels in all, and the main board once. The panel includes all the boards except the main board. The only other parts are the frame and connectors. Also had the board voltages checked twice. So it was like having nearly 3 different sets, and it was no better. Either I'm very unlucky, or there really is a QA or design problem. It's so obvious in certain scenes that I'm puzzled it's not reported more, and sets at the end of the model life still show it. But maybe it was just my bad luck. Anyway, I need to confirm the next model I get doesn't have this issue, which is why I posted in this thread.
abalone is online now  
post #1266 of 3105 Old 05-20-2013, 03:59 PM
Member
 
drm870's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
From the second paragraph of CNet's ZT60 review, which was posted a half hour or so ago:
Quote:
The VT60 also beat our in-house Kuro, so the most important question for videophiles with money to burn becomes: Why did you like the picture quality of the ZT60 better than the VT60's? The sole reason is that the ZT60 looks better in a bright room. If you watch TV swathed in dimness, as any dedicated videophile does whenever possible, the VT60 and ZT60 have basically identical pictures -- starting with their virtually indistinguishable, and hella inky, black levels. Meanwhile the Samsung PNF8500 plasma, and of course some of the better, brighter LED TVs, look even better than the ZT60 in a bright room -- although they can't touch it in the dark.

Interesting...
drm870 is offline  
post #1267 of 3105 Old 05-20-2013, 05:45 PM
 
vinnie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nunya
Posts: 11,657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 1011
^I also like the paragraph preceding:
Quote:
Let me get this out of the way first: Panasonic's TC-PZT60 is now the best-performing TV we've ever tested. Perhaps a few of the old, super-tweaked Pioneer Kuros out there might deliver slightly superior black levels, but I've never had any of those in the lab. This one beats my in-house Kuro, and every other TV in my lab.
Of course the VT60 can do this also, and the more pertinent paragraph is indeed the one quoted by drm870.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #1268 of 3105 Old 05-20-2013, 06:45 PM
Member
 
thisrandomguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 25
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
crap, I think that cnet review may have just convinced me to buy the ZT60 biggrin.gif
thisrandomguy is offline  
post #1269 of 3105 Old 05-20-2013, 09:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
slimoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 4,685
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Two things a little strange on the CNET review:/settings:

-The statement "THX Cinema on this set is just that good, and markedly better than our measurements of that setting on the VT60." is kind of surprise, given so many claims the 2 TVs perform basically the same in a dark room.

-This is probably a typo ...Brightness zero as recommended setting.

Standard Definition Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy
slimoli is offline  
post #1270 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 08:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jkozlow3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,029
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by slimoli View Post

Two things a little strange on the CNET review:/settings:

-The statement "THX Cinema on this set is just that good, and markedly better than our measurements of that setting on the VT60." is kind of surprise, given so many claims the 2 TVs perform basically the same in a dark room.

-This is probably a typo ...Brightness zero as recommended setting.

Keep in mind that CNET will not go into the service menu to calibrate a display. THX modes can only be balanced via the service menu (for grayscale anyway). All that this tells me is that the unit-to-unit variance between their particular VT60 and ZT60 favored the ZT60. Either that or the factory is spending a bit more time adjusting the cuts and drives in the service menu of the ZT60 than they are for the VT60. Either way, I'm pretty sure that the VT60 and ZT60 could be made to look almost identical in THX mode if you did a grayscale calibration in the service menu.
jkozlow3 is offline  
post #1271 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 11:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 78
A couple of miscellaneous remarks on sharpness and showing white expanses:

You shouldn't conclude that displaying extra sharpness, which is not actually present in the source image, is achieved through some special processing computation. It may be due rather to a failure to reproduce intermediate gradations of luminosity. It doesn't necessarily take special image processing to produce an image defect.

I think any hockey enthusiasts who are unhappy with dim or blotchy looking ice on their Panasonics ought to try out some color temperatures other than the usual Warm2 setting. My ST60 puts out much more white (maybe I should say "putative white") as I change to Warm1 > Normal > Cool1 > Cool2.

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #1272 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 03:03 PM
Member
 
abalone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

I think any hockey enthusiasts who are unhappy with dim or blotchy looking ice on their Panasonics ought to try out some color temperatures other than the usual Warm2 setting. My ST60 puts out much more white (maybe I should say "putative white") as I change to Warm1 > Normal > Cool1 > Cool2.

The red blotch issue I see is actually on a Samsung E7000. I have tried the different color temps, as well as all the other color adjustments and can't find any setting that makes much difference. Are you saying you see a uniformity issue on your ST60, or are you just suggesting something to try in case it is seen?
abalone is online now  
post #1273 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 04:23 PM
Member
 
markus46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

You shouldn't conclude that displaying extra sharpness, which is not actually present in the source image, is achieved through some special processing computation. It may be due rather to a failure to reproduce intermediate gradations of luminosity. It doesn't necessarily take special image processing to produce an image defect.

That it correct. It is also equally correct to say a softer picture may not be representative of the source image and may indicate a defect.

How do you know for sure what is encoded on that BluRay disk with respect to sharpness/clarity? One source, two displays - both with identical calibration figures but with two perceived degrees of sharpness. Which one is more representative of the digital image encoded on the disk?

I had a similar enquiry with a HiFi reviewer who stated that the sound reproduction of certain equipment was closer to what was on the master tape. His view (altered to substitute audio technology with video) was along the lines of:
If you were there during the filming
and know the technical characteristics of the cameras used
and the colour temperature & intensity of the lighting
and know the effects of all the post-processing applied to the digital image
then you would be in a position to make a determination as to which display is more accurate with respect to sharpness.

Regards
markus46 is offline  
post #1274 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 05:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus46 View Post

How do you know for sure what is encoded on that BluRay disk with respect to sharpness/clarity? One source, two displays - both with identical calibration figures but with two perceived degrees of sharpness. Which one is more representative of the digital image encoded on the disk?
It's not completely straightforward, but it's easier than it might seem. Camera men know what the director wants you to focus on, so that's where they focus their cameras. So to see whether your set is correctly discriminating the distance of intended focussed elements of a scene, just look. Are the important things sharp and others blurry? If so, your TV is doing the right thing.

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #1275 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 05:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by abalone View Post

Are you saying you see a uniformity issue on your ST60, or are you just suggesting something to try in case it is seen?
The latter.

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #1276 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 07:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,408
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 331 Post(s)
Liked: 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post


I think any hockey enthusiasts who are unhappy with dim or blotchy looking ice on their Panasonics ought to try out some color temperatures other than the usual Warm2 setting. My ST60 puts out much more white (maybe I should say "putative white") as I change to Warm1 > Normal > Cool1 > Cool2.

Interesting point. I tried this on a VT50 and found the "Normal" to be the best looking ice, but "Cool 1" seemed to be whitest... whiter for me than "Cool 2" by a good margin. "Cool 2" seemed bluer and dimmer. Still, the Warm settings, which are so good for movies did seem like suddenly very poor choices for hockey. My calibrated "ISF Day" setting still looked pretty good.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #1277 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 07:42 PM
Member
 
markus46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

Camera men know what the director wants you to focus on, so that's where they focus their cameras. So to see whether your set is correctly discriminating the distance of intended focussed elements of a scene, just look.

I don't know about you, but I don't have that close a relationship to the directors of the movies I watch to ask them about their intentions re focussed elements of a scene! So your method of determining which display is correct with respect to sharpness is of no use to me. Now if Steven Spielberg was tossing up between a F8500 vs ZT60... smile.gif
Ken Ross likes this.
markus46 is offline  
post #1278 of 3105 Old 05-21-2013, 08:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus46 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

Camera men know what the director wants you to focus on, so that's where they focus their cameras. So to see whether your set is correctly discriminating the distance of intended focussed elements of a scene, just look.

I don't know about you, but I don't have that close a relationship to the directors of the movies I watch to ask them about their intentions re focussed elements of a scene! So your method of determining which display is correct with respect to sharpness is of no use to me. Now if Steven Spielberg was tossing up between a F8500 vs ZT60... smile.gif
I have noticed this in movies, but I first realized I had figured out what was going on while watching Bobby Flay's Brunch show on the Cooking channel. When the camera had just food in view, the food was sharp, in comparison to the kitchen or whatever that I could see behind the food. It wasn't a subtle effect at all. Anyone could see it.

I'm not saying here that there is any difference between the F8500 and the ZT60 in making the focus plane discernible. I haven't observed either of those TVs. I'm just suggesting that here is a reasonable test for whether reported sharpness is a good kind of sharpness, showing sharpness that is supposed to be there, or a bad kind of sharpness, which is a defect.

Greg Lee
GregLee is offline  
post #1279 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 05:35 AM
Member
 
abalone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

I have noticed this in movies, but I first realized I had figured out what was going on while watching Bobby Flay's Brunch show on the Cooking channel. When the camera had just food in view, the food was sharp, in comparison to the kitchen or whatever that I could see behind the food. It wasn't a subtle effect at all. Anyone could see it.

I'm not saying here that there is any difference between the F8500 and the ZT60 in making the focus plane discernible. I haven't observed either of those TVs. I'm just suggesting that here is a reasonable test for whether reported sharpness is a good kind of sharpness, showing sharpness that is supposed to be there, or a bad kind of sharpness, which is a defect.

Technically that may be true, but without some objective standard to compare to it really comes down to your own subjective preference when comparing TV's. I did a side-by-side between a E7000 and a GT50 playing the same source DVD, and the GT50 actually looked out of focus it was so soft. I could hardly believe the difference. Also, the GT50 was a 60" versus the 64" E7000, and it's sharpness setting was a bit higher. Maybe Cameron wanted a blurred look to Avatar, but I found it really unpleasant in comparison. I'll try to do the same between the F8500 and VT60. I know very well sharpness is just one PQ factor, but for me it's very significant.

I notice the intentional unsharpening on my local news show. When the anchors are on their faces are clearly not sharply focused, even though they are the key object in the scene. I'm sure it's because HD in closeup is so revealing, and potentially unflattering. When they cut to a taped interview you can really see how sharp the technology can be. The difference is striking and has to be intentional.
abalone is online now  
post #1280 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 01:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,598
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 887 Post(s)
Liked: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by slimoli View Post

Two things a little strange on the CNET review:/settings:

-The statement "THX Cinema on this set is just that good, and markedly better than our measurements of that setting on the VT60." is kind of surprise, given so many claims the 2 TVs perform basically the same in a dark room.

-This is probably a typo ...Brightness zero as recommended setting.

remember the brightness setting goes from -50 to 50, so a setting of 0 is not 'off', it's 50%.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #1281 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 01:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
slimoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 4,685
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

remember the brightness setting goes from -50 to 50, so a setting of 0 is not 'off', it's 50%.

I don't think so. Contrast was set to 70. I have 3 Panasonic plasmas and all go from 0 to 100.

Standard Definition Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy
slimoli is offline  
post #1282 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 01:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chunon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Wilmington Ohio
Posts: 5,278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 274 Post(s)
Liked: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by slimoli View Post

I don't think so. Contrast was set to 70. I have 3 Panasonic plasmas and all go from 0 to 100.

I believe he is referring to the brightness setting not contrast, this year it does go from -50 to +50

65VT60(Calibrated by Chad B)
55ST60(Calibrated by Chunon)
Darbee DVP5000
Sony BDV-F7 3dbluray/soundbar
Calman Enthusiast/I1Pro/I1D3
Dish Network with Hopper/Super Joey
chunon is online now  
post #1283 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 01:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
slimoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: South Florida
Posts: 4,685
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by slimoli View Post

I don't think so. Contrast was set to 70. I have 3 Panasonic plasmas and all go from 0 to 100.

OK then. Thanks. My mistake.

Standard Definition Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy
slimoli is offline  
post #1284 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 01:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chunon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Wilmington Ohio
Posts: 5,278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 274 Post(s)
Liked: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by slimoli View Post

OK then. Thanks. My mistake.

No worries we all get used to the standard panny controls then they throw a curve ball in smile.gif, one positive is I think it is consistent with the euro models now

65VT60(Calibrated by Chad B)
55ST60(Calibrated by Chunon)
Darbee DVP5000
Sony BDV-F7 3dbluray/soundbar
Calman Enthusiast/I1Pro/I1D3
Dish Network with Hopper/Super Joey
chunon is online now  
post #1285 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 06:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,641
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1421 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

A couple of miscellaneous remarks on sharpness and showing white expanses:

You shouldn't conclude that displaying extra sharpness, which is not actually present in the source image, is achieved through some special processing computation. It may be due rather to a failure to reproduce intermediate gradations of luminosity. It doesn't necessarily take special image processing to produce an image defect.

I think any hockey enthusiasts who are unhappy with dim or blotchy looking ice on their Panasonics ought to try out some color temperatures other than the usual Warm2 setting. My ST60 puts out much more white (maybe I should say "putative white") as I change to Warm1 > Normal > Cool1 > Cool2.

I'm loving my 'image defect' on my 8500. If this is what qualifies as an image defect, I really hope manufacturers continue to shower us with 'image defects'.

God forbid the picture could actually be displaying detail that's there, but it's easier to conclude it's an 'image defect'?

As they say in French, 'whatever'. smile.gif

As to image brightness, making the image cooler and blowing out your white balance in the process, is not the best way to produce more light IMO. That becomes an image defect. wink.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #1286 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 06:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,641
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1421 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

It's not completely straightforward, but it's easier than it might seem. Camera men know what the director wants you to focus on, so that's where they focus their cameras. So to see whether your set is correctly discriminating the distance of intended focussed elements of a scene, just look. Are the important things sharp and others blurry? If so, your TV is doing the right thing.

Say what? How do you know, in order of importance, what the intended 'focused elements' truly are? You can guess, but you can't be sure. Even if you could, how do you know what the degree of sharpness of each of these elements is supposed to be?

Sorry, with all due respect, this sounds like so much gobledegook.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #1287 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 06:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,641
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1421 Post(s)
Liked: 1537
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post


I'm not saying here that there is any difference between the F8500 and the ZT60 in making the focus plane discernible. I haven't observed either of those TVs.

OK, so now all of your prior posts are in 'sharp focus' for me. wink.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #1288 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 09:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,598
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 887 Post(s)
Liked: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by slimoli View Post

I don't think so. Contrast was set to 70. I have 3 Panasonic plasmas and all go from 0 to 100.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chunon View Post

I believe he is referring to the brightness setting not contrast, this year it does go from -50 to +50

Quote:
Originally Posted by slimoli View Post

OK then. Thanks. My mistake.

just what I noticed when playing in the store. never owned a panny before so I assume it's new this year. funny how you got contrast:p

anyway, looks like we're all caught up now

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #1289 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 09:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,598
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 887 Post(s)
Liked: 966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I'm loving my 'image defect' on my 8500. If this is what qualifies as an image defect, I really hope manufacturers continue to shower us with 'image defects'.

God forbid the picture could actually be displaying detail that's there, but it's easier to conclude it's an 'image defect'?

As they say in French, 'whatever'. smile.gif

As to image brightness, making the image cooler and blowing out your white balance in the process, is not the best way to produce more light IMO. That becomes an image defect. wink.gif

I hope I don't open a can of worms here, but it seems like all these kinds of observations need a 'reference' to compare to. I get the feeling that most ppl are comparing the Samsung to the panny's and whatever the Samsung does differently is being seen as a 'mistake'. like the Panasonic is the reference. kind of like in the shoot out it felt like the kuro was the reference, and the reason nothing could 'beat' the kuro is because anything done difference was seen as a mistake.

the f8500 is brighter, it's too bright. the f8500 isn't sharper, it's artificially adding detail. etc.

it just seems that at this level of quality(vt60, zt60, f8500, etc) it's hard to really be sure which one is 'best' at these unmeasureables because you need to compare it directly to a reference display. and as soon as you dub one the 'reference' it can never be beaten since any improvement would just be seen as a difference, and therefore a mistake.

all that being said, I didn't really think the Samsung had a sharper image, or showed more detail. but it did look 'smoother' to me. like it's not any more pixels, but there's less space between pixels? from my normal viewing difference it was irrelevant, but standing fairly close in the stores the f8500's pixel structure was SLIGHTLY harder to perceive.

my ultimate deciding factor was the lack of difference in pq, and the 500 dollar cheaper price for the f8500

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #1290 of 3105 Old 05-22-2013, 10:42 PM
Member
 
superbooga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

I hope I don't open a can of worms here, but it seems like all these kinds of observations need a 'reference' to compare to. I get the feeling that most ppl are comparing the Samsung to the panny's and whatever the Samsung does differently is being seen as a 'mistake'. like the Panasonic is the reference. kind of like in the shoot out it felt like the kuro was the reference, and the reason nothing could 'beat' the kuro is because anything done difference was seen as a mistake.

the f8500 is brighter, it's too bright. the f8500 isn't sharper, it's artificially adding detail. etc.

it just seems that at this level of quality(vt60, zt60, f8500, etc) it's hard to really be sure which one is 'best' at these unmeasureables because you need to compare it directly to a reference display. and as soon as you dub one the 'reference' it can never be beaten since any improvement would just be seen as a difference, and therefore a mistake.

all that being said, I didn't really think the Samsung had a sharper image, or showed more detail. but it did look 'smoother' to me. like it's not any more pixels, but there's less space between pixels? from my normal viewing difference it was irrelevant, but standing fairly close in the stores the f8500's pixel structure was SLIGHTLY harder to perceive.

my ultimate deciding factor was the lack of difference in pq, and the 500 dollar cheaper price for the f8500

With regards to "sharpness" and artificially adding detail, the reference is a computer monitor, which does no image enhancement.

Actual sharpness in static scenes should be virtually identical among all flat panels with overscan and image processing turned off. However, sharpness in motion scenes can greatly vary among flat panels.
superbooga is offline  
Reply Plasma Flat Panel Displays

Tags
Samsung Pn51f8500 51 Inch 3d Smart Plasma Hdtv , Panasonic Viera Tc P65vt50 65 Inch Plasma Tv , Panasonic Viera Tc P60zt60 60 Inch Plasma Tv
Gear in this thread

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off