Informal Comparison: Panasonic TC-P65ZT60 & TC-P65VT60, Samsung PN60F8500, Pioneer PRO-141FD - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 11:19 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,100
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 550 Post(s)
Liked: 1613
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Hitman- View Post

Exactly the context I was referring to by my post, one will effect the combination.
I agree to a point but the reality of it is that the majority of consumers will purchase a display for normal, general home use and each display is advertised as such (no signs to state, this choice for a dark room, this is for a light room, any room) and therefore should be tested to show the maximum potential, this will then show, which are the best for each individual circumstance!

Running a comparison in only 1 type of scenario will only show which display bests that mode and not an accurate representation of all the displays full potential, proper environment use and IMHO give an inaccurate assumption and will not only give limited information but should only appeal to a minority who will use the display in such an environment, but it won't and so would also make point that if a general consumer made a purchase on such information and then used such a display at home, which did not meet the criteria of the test conditions, then he would be disappointed, mislead, would he not?

But, that consumer is not likely to spend that much money on a plasma. At that price point, the salesperson is not going to promote a plasma for general use, not with so many other options out there. The price itself is the qualifier—when you spend that much, it's not a casual purchase anymore.

If the buyer is not as savvy as I think they are, that buyer is not going to get an ISF calibration anyhow. If that buyer uses THX mode instead, the ZT60 will pass 35fL, so the argument becomes moot. Either the consumer knows enough to care what each TV is best at, or the ISF calibration figures do not really matter to that buyer.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 11:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
rahzel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 145
The people that view their sets in ideal conditions may be considered the minority in general, but HTMagazine's target audience is not the general public. Almost all published online reviews target a specific brightness, even if that means limiting the dynamic range / contrast ratio of the display. But they usually make a note of the maximum capabilities of the display (ie brightness).

In this particular case, this was not a review, but a comparison done in a specific room condition. I'm sure HTMagazine's full written review will make note of what the Samsung is capable of.

edit: Just realized that the review is posted, and sure enough, they do mention that the Samsung is capable of a brighter picture and that it may be a better choice if bright room performance is a priority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTMagazine 
Also keep in mind that the Samsung can be driven to higher brightness levels (though not LCD levels) than the Pioneer and retails for less than half of what my non-3D Kuro did back in 2009. The Samsung’s extra brightness on 2D is of little use to me—as noted earlier, I find that the roughly 30 ft-L I can reach on the Pioneer is more than satisfying in the subdued room lighting I prefer. Many users will have different priorities.
Dougofthenorth likes this.
rahzel is offline  
post #93 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 11:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
-Hitman-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 620
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 50
All valid points but I do think personally the majority of people who have already purchased these products have done so for a normal viewing environment, a small percentage will have such conditions (theatre room etc..) as the comparison/test.

I'm an enthusiast like many members and my viewing environment is, a normal household living room and would want to see a full and complete representation done with the available displays to aid an upgrade descision, if i was looking to upgrade at this time.
Dougofthenorth likes this.
-Hitman- is online now  
post #94 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 11:54 AM
Advanced Member
 
Robert2413's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Belmont CA U.S.A.
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Evidently, not all 141FDs have the same black level capability. Pre-calibration, my panel's black level was 0.0016 FL, which is substantially higher than what was expected, and I admit that I was somewhat disappointed in the picture compared to what I had expected, given that I had replaced an 8th-gen Kuro with the 141FD.

I had Dnice calibrate the panel in February 2012, and he used some of his "service menu magic" to get the black level down to 0.0006 FL, which was unexpected in a panel that has been widely reported to be capable of only 0.001 FL. This, along with the rest of the calibration, made a *huge* difference in PQ. As of now, I still consider this panel one that I can live with indefinitely. It seems that black levels somewhere around 0.0005 FL are really the "point of diminishing returns" for PQ, even in darkened rooms.

When I originally posted these results, some skeptics said that the service menu readjustments were likely to destabilize the panel, resulting in uneven firing of pixels during dark scenes. However, almost a year and a half later, there is nothing amiss at all. So not all calibrations are created equal, and it would interesting to know how the Panasonic panels in this shootout would fare against a 141FD whose calibration came out as well as the one did on my panel. (I don't know if all 141FDs can do this well, or if it's the "luck of the draw" as to how low they can go as a result of a calibration that includes service menu readjustments.)
Robert2413 is offline  
post #95 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 01:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mixdoctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 1,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Yes these sets are generally for a dark room environment, but as Hitman said they are not marketing them that way....doing so will doom sales, since there are not enough enthusiasts to keep the plasma market going. Many consumers will google "Top Rated TV 2013" and will get CNET. Most will probably skip the body of the review and see that the ZT is top rated. Don't laugh......I met a fellow just like this in BB recently. Many will get this set home and find it is too dark for a normal environment, probably thinking if it's the best set is got to be bright too.

This is your general consumer. Samsung knew this and this is why they added the brightness to the panel. I believe Panasonic made the mistake of not doing so also. They could have achieved a little more brightness, while maintaining black level too. It is possible, the Kuro does it. I think if you see any change for Panasonic next year that is what it will be.

Panasonic TC-P65ZT60
Sharp Elite 70X5FD
Oppo BDP-103D
Pioneer Elite SC-07, SC-05 Receivers
Martin Logan Ascents
Rotel RMB 985MKII
NHT VT-2.4 Surround System
Velodyne DD-18 Pair
Mixdoctor is offline  
post #96 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 01:27 PM
Senior Member
 
improwise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 309
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
We all know that plasmas are affected by ambient light, not only making the picture look "dim" but also making blacks turn into dark grey (even though the ZT60 handles this quite well). Would it be possible to define how dark a room would have to be in order to actually see the difference in black levels between a F8500 and a VT60/ZT60? I'm not mainly talking about direct light here but indirect ambient light in the room.

This would be interesting to anyone like me that doesn't have a dedicated home cinema room, but rather a normal living room that won't be as dark as a batcave even with blinds etc. As a projector owner, used in the same room, I've long ago had to accept that it is no longer the actual black levels of the projector that is the limiting factor, it's the room.
improwise is offline  
post #97 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 01:36 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,100
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 550 Post(s)
Liked: 1613
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mixdoctor View Post

Yes these sets are generally for a dark room environment, but as Hitman said they are not marketing them that way....doing so will doom sales, since there are not enough enthusiasts to keep the plasma market going. Many consumers will google "Top Rated TV 2013" and will get CNET. Most will probably skip the body of the review and see that the ZT is top rated. Don't laugh......I met a fellow just like this in BB recently. Many will get this set home and find it is too dark for a normal environment, probably thinking if it's the best set is got to be bright too.

This is your general consumer. Samsung knew this and this is why they added the brightness to the panel. I believe Panasonic made the mistake of not doing so also. They could have achieved a little more brightness, while maintaining black level too. It is possible, the Kuro does it. I think if you see any change for Panasonic next year that is what it will be.

That's not going to happen unless they deliberately choose ISF mode and get a pro calibration. The Z60 gets a fair bit brighter. I just don't see the scenario you describe happening. If the consumer does not care about calibration and proper viewing conditions, then the ZT60 can be set to THX-Bright and it'll surely satisfy such a consumer.

Panasonic should be so lucky that "many consumers" just rush out and snap up ZT60s, thanks to CNET. Alas, I don't think that's the reality out there.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #98 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 02:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mixdoctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 1,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

That's not going to happen unless they deliberately choose ISF mode and get a pro calibration. The Z60 gets a fair bit brighter. I just don't see the scenario you describe happening. If the consumer does not care about calibration and proper viewing conditions, then the ZT60 can be set to THX-Bright and it'll surely satisfy such a consumer.

Panasonic should be so lucky that "many consumers" just rush out and snap up ZT60s, thanks to CNET. Alas, I don't think that's the reality out there.

No there will be no rush on these panels by Joe Consumer, but anything you can do will help sell these things helps.

Panasonic TC-P65ZT60
Sharp Elite 70X5FD
Oppo BDP-103D
Pioneer Elite SC-07, SC-05 Receivers
Martin Logan Ascents
Rotel RMB 985MKII
NHT VT-2.4 Surround System
Velodyne DD-18 Pair
Mixdoctor is offline  
post #99 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 02:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rahzel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mixdoctor View Post

Yes these sets are generally for a dark room environment, but as Hitman said they are not marketing them that way....doing so will doom sales, since there are not enough enthusiasts to keep the plasma market going. Many consumers will google "Top Rated TV 2013" and will get CNET. Most will probably skip the body of the review and see that the ZT is top rated. Don't laugh......I met a fellow just like this in BB recently. Many will get this set home and find it is too dark for a normal environment, probably thinking if it's the best set is got to be bright too.
Then it's the consumer's fault for not reading the body of the review.
Quote:
This is your general consumer.
Personally I don't think that it is. I think the general consumer doesn't even look at reviews... they go shopping and buy whatever looks good to them, or whatever the salesman pushes on them. The average enthusiast will look at reviews, and will actually read them. And/or they will come here for advice.
Quote:
Samsung knew this and this is why they added the brightness to the panel.
This I agree with... the average consumer does care about brightness. That's one of the reasons why LCD is beating Plasma in sales. But that has next to no relevance to this thread. The intent of this comparison was to compare them in a theater-like room and were calibrated appropriately for such conditions. This is AVSForum after all, not a general discussion forum. The actual HTMagazine review isn't mis-leading in anyway either because it makes mention of the fact that the Samsung is brighter. Again, it's the consumer/reader's fault for not reading the body of the review.
Quote:
They could have achieved a little more brightness, while maintaining black level too. It is possible, the Kuro does it. I think if you see any change for Panasonic next year that is what it will be.
If it were so easy, why do you think it took so long for Panasonic to even come close to Kuro black levels? It's not like they're intentionally limiting the brightness of their panels. Samsung has a good balance for day/night performance, but for many enthusiasts who do most of their critical viewing in a light controlled room, they will take the superior black levels/contrast over brightness that they will never use. It ultimately comes down to how the consumer will use their set.
Dougofthenorth likes this.
rahzel is offline  
post #100 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 02:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mixdoctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 1,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahzel View Post

Then it's the consumer's fault for not reading the body of the review.
Personally I don't think that it is. I think the general consumer doesn't even look at reviews... they go shopping and buy whatever looks good to them, or whatever the salesman pushes on them. The average enthusiast will look at reviews, and will actually read them. And/or they will come here for advice.
This I agree with... the average consumer does care about brightness. That's one of the reasons why LCD is beating Plasma in sales. But that has next to no relevance to this thread. The intent of this comparison was to compare them in a theater-like room and were calibrated appropriately for such conditions. This is AVSForum after all, not a general discussion forum. The actual HTMagazine review isn't mis-leading in anyway either because it makes mention of the fact that the Samsung is brighter. Again, it's the consumer/reader's fault for not reading the body of the review.
If it were so easy, why do you think it took so long for Panasonic to even come close to Kuro black levels? It's not like they're intentionally limiting the brightness of their panels. Samsung has a good balance for day/night performance, but for many enthusiasts who do most of their critical viewing in a light controlled room, they will take the superior black levels/contrast over brightness that they will never use. It ultimately comes down to how the consumer will use their set.

Whether it's their fault or not they, not us the enthusiasts, are going to determine what will make it or not. The main point in this day and age, a day mode as well as a night mode should be reviewed. Hell, next year Panasonic may come along and not only beat Samsung in the day mode, with not just brightness, but bright and excellent pq, and also.......have a better black level too. That should be measured let's say at 40ftl and also have a 35ftl comparison for enthusiasts too.
Dougofthenorth likes this.

Panasonic TC-P65ZT60
Sharp Elite 70X5FD
Oppo BDP-103D
Pioneer Elite SC-07, SC-05 Receivers
Martin Logan Ascents
Rotel RMB 985MKII
NHT VT-2.4 Surround System
Velodyne DD-18 Pair
Mixdoctor is offline  
post #101 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 02:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
BBS G35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

But, that consumer is not likely to spend that much money on a plasma. At that price point, the salesperson is not going to promote a plasma for general use, not with so many other options out there. The price itself is the qualifier—when you spend that much, it's not a casual purchase anymore.

If the buyer is not as savvy as I think they are, that buyer is not going to get an ISF calibration anyhow. If that buyer uses THX mode instead, the ZT60 will pass 35fL, so the argument becomes moot. Either the consumer knows enough to care what each TV is best at, or the ISF calibration figures do not really matter to that buyer.

You think the majority of consumers who buy a HDTV over $2000 dollars are putting them in theater rooms with extremely controlled lighting?
BBS G35 is offline  
post #102 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 02:53 PM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,100
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 550 Post(s)
Liked: 1613
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBS G35 View Post

You think the majority of consumers who buy a HDTV over $2000 dollars are putting them in theater rooms with extremely controlled lighting?

Not at all. I think the majority of consumers who buy a plasma HDTV that retails for over $2000 are putting them in rooms that feature some sort of controlled lighting. The majority of HDTV shoppers in the $2000+ category are opting for LED-based LCD HDTVs.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #103 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 02:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rahzel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mixdoctor View Post

Whether it's their fault or not they, not us the enthusiasts, are going to determine what will make it or not. The main point in this day and age, a day mode as well as a night mode should be reviewed. Hell, next year Panasonic may come along and not only beat Samsung in the day mode, with not just brightness, but bright and excellent pq, and also.......have a better black level too. That should be measured let's say at 40ftl and also have a 35ftl comparison for enthusiasts too.
But this was not a published online review... it was a comparison that was done in a theater-like room and posted at AVSForum, a forum specifically for HT enthusiasts. How many average joes are going to come here, read this thread and make a purchasing decision based on it?

If it were Cnet, HTMagazine, HDTVTest.co.uk etc., and they completely ignored day time performance, then I would agree. But since no reviewer has done this, why are we having this discussion?
Dougofthenorth likes this.
rahzel is offline  
post #104 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 03:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
BBS G35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Not at all. I think the majority of consumers who buy a plasma HDTV that retails for over $2000 are putting them in rooms that feature controlled lighting.

To what level of controlled lighting?
BBS G35 is offline  
post #105 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 03:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rahzel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBS G35 View Post

To what level of controlled lighting?
Window treatments, dimmable lights.

Personally I wouldn't consider either plasma for my bright living room. I don't do enough viewing in a dark room to justify the premium of the F8500, and the ZT60 and VT60 aren't bright enough. For my theater room that I do almost all viewing in a dark room, I will buy the one that performs the best in terms of blacks/contrast and color accuracy.. as long as it can comfortably reach 35fL. Things will be different for someone else.
rahzel is offline  
post #106 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 03:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mixdoctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 1,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahzel View Post

But this was not a published online review... it was a comparison that was done in a theater-like room and posted at AVSForum, a forum specifically for HT enthusiasts. How many average joes are going to come here, read this thread and make a purchasing decision based on it?

If it were Cnet, HTMagazine, HDTVTest.co.uk etc., and they completely ignored day time performance, then I would agree. But since no reviewer has done this, why are we having this discussion?

I know my part of the discussion focused on the 141 vs ZT comparison and that I do not believe the ZT's pq is better at the black level or definitely not at the bright level (which was not tested and led to the current discussion).

Panasonic TC-P65ZT60
Sharp Elite 70X5FD
Oppo BDP-103D
Pioneer Elite SC-07, SC-05 Receivers
Martin Logan Ascents
Rotel RMB 985MKII
NHT VT-2.4 Surround System
Velodyne DD-18 Pair
Mixdoctor is offline  
post #107 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 04:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Glashub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA, CA - 818
Posts: 1,815
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Hitman- View Post

Exactly the context I was referring to by my post, one will effect the combination.
I agree to a point but the reality of it is that the majority of consumers will purchase a display for normal, general home use and each display is advertised as such (no signs to state, this choice for a dark room, this is for a light room, any room) and therefore should be tested to show the maximum potential, this will then show, which are the best for each individual circumstance!

Running a comparison in only 1 type of scenario will only show which display bests that mode and not an accurate representation of all the displays full potential, proper environment use and IMHO give an inaccurate assumption and will not only give limited information but should only appeal to a minority who will use the display in such an environment, but it won't and so would also make point that if a general consumer made a purchase on such information and then used such a display at home, which did not meet the criteria of the test conditions, then he would be disappointed, mislead, would he not?

I'm confused. I come from 2 Kuro's in a row followed by a VT50 and now a ZT60. I live in LA. The display is in a bright room and I have no issues with it's bright room performance. I would say that it achieves what is an integral part of Japanese culture -- Wa -- or harmony. I find it to be a perfectly balanced picture. I lived in the UK -- I know you folks don't get that many bright Samsung is the only way to go for a display days. smile.gif
chunon and agkss like this.
Glashub is online now  
post #108 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 05:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Glashub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA, CA - 818
Posts: 1,815
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mixdoctor View Post

I know my part of the discussion focused on the 141 vs ZT comparison and that I do not believe the ZT's pq is better at the black level or definitely not at the bright level (which was not tested and led to the current discussion).

Awesome -- 2 DD-18's. I had 2 DD-15"s. Now have 2 DD-15 +'s. As I indicated in another post I had 2 Kuro's in a row. The last one being a 111FD. I then had a VT50 and now a Zt60. The Kuro was brighter but I find the ZT60 to be more harmonious and balances. All aspects just deem to fit together better imo including motion handling. The ZT60 is a wonderful bit of engineering particularly when you consider that Panasonic tries to hit energy and aesthetic mandates that the Kuro did not. Truth be told I wouldn't go back to a Kuro.
Glashub is online now  
post #109 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 05:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mixdoctor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 1,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glashub View Post

Awesome -- 2 DD-18's. I had 2 DD-15"s. Now have 2 DD-15 +'s. As I indicated in another post I had 2 Kuro's in a row. The last one being a 111FD. I then had a VT50 and now a Zt60. The Kuro was brighter but I find the ZT60 to be more harmonious and balances. All aspects just deem to fit together better imo including motion handling. The ZT60 is a wonderful bit of engineering particularly when you consider that Panasonic tries to hit energy and aesthetic mandates that the Kuro did not. Truth be told I wouldn't go back to a Kuro.


Yeah I love the DD-18's. Cool thing is i can tune each for a different part of the room.

I would say you made a good upgrade with the ZT60( 65" right?) You have a larger picture and about equal pq. I am going from a 60" Kuro to a ZT. I do like having the extra 5", but I miss the slight increase in contrast during the day the Kuro gives me. I saw that contrast the other day when I had both on. I closed the blinds to the bedroom somewhat but the Kuro could get a little brighter for that daytime viewing. The ZT is also hotter and don't mention the fans....... I don't think The VT's and ZT's are energy star compliant either.

Panasonic TC-P65ZT60
Sharp Elite 70X5FD
Oppo BDP-103D
Pioneer Elite SC-07, SC-05 Receivers
Martin Logan Ascents
Rotel RMB 985MKII
NHT VT-2.4 Surround System
Velodyne DD-18 Pair
Mixdoctor is offline  
post #110 of 205 Old 07-23-2013, 10:47 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: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert2413 View Post

Evidently, not all 141FDs have the same black level capability. Pre-calibration, my panel's black level was 0.0016 FL, which is substantially higher than what was expected, and I admit that I was somewhat disappointed in the picture compared to what I had expected, given that I had replaced an 8th-gen Kuro with the 141FD.

I had Dnice calibrate the panel in February 2012, and he used some of his "service menu magic" to get the black level down to 0.0006 FL, which was unexpected in a panel that has been widely reported to be capable of only 0.001 FL. This, along with the rest of the calibration, made a *huge* difference in PQ. As of now, I still consider this panel one that I can live with indefinitely. It seems that black levels somewhere around 0.0005 FL are really the "point of diminishing returns" for PQ, even in darkened rooms.

When I originally posted these results, some skeptics said that the service menu readjustments were likely to destabilize the panel, resulting in uneven firing of pixels during dark scenes. However, almost a year and a half later, there is nothing amiss at all. So not all calibrations are created equal, and it would interesting to know how the Panasonic panels in this shootout would fare against a 141FD whose calibration came out as well as the one did on my panel. (I don't know if all 141FDs can do this well, or if it's the "luck of the draw" as to how low they can go as a result of a calibration that includes service menu readjustments.)
The Panasonic would naturally pale in comparison to your 141FD with that amazing level, but it is the exception rather than the norm. I believe D-Nice has found a way to make ALL Kuro models benefit from these special service menu tweaks. I also have a feeling OLED will be the only other way to achieve such deep blacks when it comes to display technology since Plasma has nearly sung its swan song.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #111 of 205 Old 07-24-2013, 09:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
saprano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bronx NY
Posts: 3,319
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert2413 View Post

Evidently, not all 141FDs have the same black level capability. Pre-calibration, my panel's black level was 0.0016 FL, which is substantially higher than what was expected, and I admit that I was somewhat disappointed in the picture compared to what I had expected, given that I had replaced an 8th-gen Kuro with the 141FD.

I had Dnice calibrate the panel in February 2012, and he used some of his "service menu magic" to get the black level down to 0.0006 FL, which was unexpected in a panel that has been widely reported to be capable of only 0.001 FL. This, along with the rest of the calibration, made a *huge* difference in PQ. As of now, I still consider this panel one that I can live with indefinitely. It seems that black levels somewhere around 0.0005 FL are really the "point of diminishing returns" for PQ, even in darkened rooms.

When I originally posted these results, some skeptics said that the service menu readjustments were likely to destabilize the panel, resulting in uneven firing of pixels during dark scenes. However, almost a year and a half later, there is nothing amiss at all. So not all calibrations are created equal, and it would interesting to know how the Panasonic panels in this shootout would fare against a 141FD whose calibration came out as well as the one did on my panel. (I don't know if all 141FDs can do this well, or if it's the "luck of the draw" as to how low they can go as a result of a calibration that includes service menu readjustments.)

I remember a 600M owner from another forum blacks were as high as 0.0024. Up from 0.0011 when he first calibrated it. He was told by the calibrator that it was normal from wear and tear. That's crazy. I thought the kuros blacks were able to hold. But many other kuro owner report the same thing. They notice a rise in blacks from when they first bought it.

I don't notice any change on my 151 yet. Is this a issue for the monitors you think? As i mentioned before even TJN mll is different from what he always reported (0.001 vs 0.0013).

home theater addict
saprano is online now  
post #112 of 205 Old 07-24-2013, 09:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
facesnorth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Pocono Mountains
Posts: 1,880
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It was proven at the Shootout, that the Kuro 9g still has lower black levels than any of this years sets.
facesnorth is offline  
post #113 of 205 Old 07-24-2013, 11:45 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: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by facesnorth View Post

It was proven at the Shootout, that the Kuro 9g still has lower black levels than any of this years sets.
The 500M and 101FD do, yes. The rest are approximately equal unless you get the special tweak.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #114 of 205 Old 07-25-2013, 07:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
saprano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bronx NY
Posts: 3,319
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 205
I wouldn't call 0.001 (some sets it seems now?) to 0.0013 equal. Though that filter works wonders i guess.

home theater addict
saprano is online now  
post #115 of 205 Old 07-25-2013, 07:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
saprano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bronx NY
Posts: 3,319
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by facesnorth View Post

It was proven at the Shootout, that the Kuro 9g still has lower black levels than any of this years sets.

Nobody likes to use the 9.5G's for comparison. lol. It's crazy actually, when panasonic announced the ZT60 i was sure is was going to reach the 50" monitors MLL's. To my surprise they didn't. I don't get it. The Sharp LCD, of all things, was the one to reach 0.0005 2 years ago. Makes me think panasonic is purposely not striving for the lowest black level.

home theater addict
saprano is online now  
post #116 of 205 Old 07-25-2013, 09:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Stu03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kingdom of Fife, Scotland.
Posts: 1,359
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 161
So much more to an all round good display though than MLL. ANSI on a Pioneer tramples anything else, colour better, better panel, better components, highest light output (except for F8500 and LCD's). There is much more even than all that, but it becomes impolite wink.gif
curly21029 and mo949 like this.
Stu03 is online now  
post #117 of 205 Old 07-25-2013, 10:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
smurraybhm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 1,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 358
As a former 9th gen Kuro owner (calibrated by DNice) - sold Saturday - and an owner of a Panasonic VT60 I would respectfully disagree with your post Stu03. Little evidence on your end to support all those claims and we've been down the rabbit hole already about just how much light output someone needs for reference picture. You will find plenty of former Kuro owners like myself who are very pleased with the performance of their ZT/VT - plus the larger screen size is a nice bonus - especially if you moved up from 50" inches as I did. All I can say is my VT does some thing better than my Kuro and I haven't missed it for a minute the past few months. Obviously there are a number of forum members who misunderstand the meaning of informal and who will never except something could equal or exceed their display's performance regardless of the brand. You said it best, so much more to an all around good display. Cheers.
smurraybhm is offline  
post #118 of 205 Old 07-25-2013, 10:32 AM
Member
 
eyeful99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
repost with original quote attached.
eyeful99 is offline  
post #119 of 205 Old 07-25-2013, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
smurraybhm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 1,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 358
You convenience my wife to let me put up a 120" fixed screen in the room where I am "allowed" to have my a/v equipment and I'm in. Still enjoying my smaller display smile.gif
smurraybhm is offline  
post #120 of 205 Old 07-25-2013, 10:36 AM
Member
 
eyeful99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by farsider3000 View Post

Really enjoy these quick comparisons Scott. Thank you! I love my 65 inch Panasonic VT30.

**** What I really want to know is when or if manufacturers will produce a 75 or 80 inch plasma panel.****

My 65 inch is too small for my movie room and I am trying to hold out for a reasonably priced 4k projector for the motorized screen.

65" is indeed really small nowadays, even as the superb PQ these plasmas provided, you had to squint and stand 2 feet from it to take in all the glorious details. I went with an Epson 5020UB projection system, along with a 120" fixed Screen Innovation, now I can just sit back at 12 feet on my EZ lounge and enjoy all that details being PUT TO GOOD USE, which means a truly cinematic experience!
eyeful99 is offline  
Reply Plasma Flat Panel Displays

Tags
Panasonic Viera Tc P65zt60 65 Inch Plasma Hdtv , Pioneer Pro 141fd 59 6 Elite Kuro Plasma Panel Widescreen 1080p Fullhd , Samsung Pn60f8500 60 Inch 1080p 600hz 3d Smart Plasma Hdtv , Panasonic Tc P65vt60 65 Inch 3d Smart Plasma Hdtv
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