HDTVtest Flat-Panel Faceoff Crowns Panasonic Plasma as Best TV - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 163Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 211 Old 06-16-2014, 07:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,118
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyWalters View Post
Well of course it does - the 4K content looks WAY better than the 1080 content and it does look incredible to me even from 12 feet back, but its more because of the better source and content. But it's not a fair comparison and i think TVs should be compared only when displaying the same exact content.

That's like saying a Chevy Malibu on a paved road handles better than a BMW M3 on a dirt road. Of course it does - because it's on a much better road


Play regular 1080 content on that UHD LCD TV and it does look more natural than on a 1080p LCD, but from the few examples i've seen it didn't look better than it would on a good Plasma.
I like this! and my experience follows your last point. I've never actually seen 4k content, and having only seen content that is available to me(ie 1080p) I haven't been the least bit impressed with the UHD TV's I've seen so far. they are still edgelit leds that still have all the same problems that bother me. the lack of resolution is so far down on my complaint list, it's really an insignificant spec to me right now. I may consider a UHD led over a 1080p led, but I'd much rather have a plasma or oled of any reasonable resolution(say 720p and up) until they get some good FALD models to close the gap
fierce_gt is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 211 Old 06-16-2014, 07:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wattheF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
1) Plasma has been a dead technology for years, so who cares.

2) I don't believe the results anyways.

3) It's a terrible time to buy any TV, since 4K is going to get way better and cheaper, and HDMI 2.0 will be available, etc.

4) 4K Is the way things are going. 1080p is for cheap commodity Wal-Mart TVs now anyways.
The only thing mentioned here that makes any sense is the fact that it is a bad time to buy a tv,
Weboh likes this.
wattheF is offline  
post #33 of 211 Old 06-16-2014, 08:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TVOD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,881
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by delphiplasma View Post
My modified panny plasma is outstanding with regards black level and this is with a side by side test with a grade 1 broadcast crt monitor
Which CRT monitor?
TVOD is offline  
post #34 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 08:43 AM
Member
 
cranster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD View Post
That and the original article seems to suggest that the upconversion in these displays is adequate. At closer viewing distances I would guess that the increased resolution would lessen pixel visibility, especially on larger screens.
That's how I'm planning on getting a cinematic experience on a smaller set. I figure I can turn that 65 incher into an 80 incher by sitting closer because there won't be visible pixels with 4k at a much closer distance, and I won't have to pay an outrageous price for an 80" 4k tv. The upscaling alone will allow for closer viewing over 1080p. I'm parked as close as I can get on my 60" plasma without seeing pixels, and I would move closer if I could. I would consider the ax800 over the Sony's but I don't know what Panasonic was thinking making a 4k tv with hevc that won't stream netflix, and no physical 4k media. It looks like it's going to be relegated to a gamers monitor into the forseeable future unless people want to use it for upscaling until 4k bluray's happen if they ever do.
cranster is online now  
post #35 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 10:02 AM
Senior Member
 
delphiplasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVOD View Post
Which CRT monitor?
Sony bvm14 forget the rest of the model number?
It comes with the bk10 controller with sdi inputs
delphiplasma is offline  
post #36 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 12:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,118
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by cranster View Post
That's how I'm planning on getting a cinematic experience on a smaller set. I figure I can turn that 65 incher into an 80 incher by sitting closer because there won't be visible pixels with 4k at a much closer distance, and I won't have to pay an outrageous price for an 80" 4k tv. The upscaling alone will allow for closer viewing over 1080p. I'm parked as close as I can get on my 60" plasma without seeing pixels, and I would move closer if I could. I would consider the ax800 over the Sony's but I don't know what Panasonic was thinking making a 4k tv with hevc that won't stream netflix, and no physical 4k media. It looks like it's going to be relegated to a gamers monitor into the forseeable future unless people want to use it for upscaling until 4k bluray's happen if they ever do.
that's definitely the reason for higher resolution. being able to sit closer to a display, or have a larger display at the same viewing distance.


the reason many aren't super excited about it at this point is because they don't feel a need to change one of those things. I'm sitting about 12-14' back from a 120" screen. I don't see pixel structure. I'm not saying going UHD would have no improvement, I'm just saying I'm not 'dieing for an upgrade' or unhappy with my current display in any way related to pixel structure. for a 'tv', it's even sillier for me. I have a 40" in my bedroom that I watch from like 12' back as well. there's no way I'm moving it 9' closer, or going for a 100" plus screen in there, so no need for more than 1080p there. same could basically be said for the tv in my living room as well. the only place I could actually use UHD, is in the theatre room with my projector.


I suspect that most ppl would only really benefit from having UHD in one room in their homes as well. it's hard to base a new standard on the hope that you can get 1 into the homes of enthusiasts. I don't think that's a huge market. I mean, many of us have 2 or 3 plasmas in our homes and that wasn't enough to keep them alive...
fierce_gt is online now  
post #37 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 01:23 PM
Senior Member
 
delphiplasma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 23
[QUOTE=fierce_gt;25041882]that's definitely the reason for higher resolution. being able to sit closer to a display, or have a larger display at the same viewing

Yes, at the end of the day HD has managed to achieve the quality we were use to with SD CRT. Most consumers are happy with HD results

Broadcasters are still struggling to provide HD to the consumer, let alone UHD. There is too much infrastructure needed to be changed to make the transition to Uhd viable to broadcasters.
gus738 and EscapeVelocity like this.
delphiplasma is offline  
post #38 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 02:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post
Still pissing on your favored edgelit LCDs from rather great heights.

How inconvenient for you. I imagine the last 3 years have been mighty difficult since the last W generated by any LCD was the Sharp Elite (for a cool $8k)!
I'm confident that LED-LCD has been the best TV technology available for a number of years, is the best technology today, and will continue to be for at least the short-term until OLED or something else comes along.
BiggAW is offline  
post #39 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 02:28 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: 1010
Your misplaced confidence has zip to do with reality.
StinDaWg and tubetwister like this.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #40 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 02:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gus738's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Watsonville, CA
Posts: 2,794
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
I'm confident that LED-LCD has been the best TV technology available for a number of years, is the best technology today, and will continue to be for at least the short-term until OLED or something else comes along.
smh oled work similar to plasma . So they will be prone to logos being burned in. Oled has a disadvantage to plasma motion blurrg ,

Pioneer Elite PRO-111
Samsung 60PnF5300 af
panasonic px75u

XBL x117x831
PS4 gusx831
gus738 is offline  
post #41 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 02:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
eric3316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 468 Post(s)
Liked: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by cranster View Post
That's how I'm planning on getting a cinematic experience on a smaller set. I figure I can turn that 65 incher into an 80 incher by sitting closer because there won't be visible pixels with 4k at a much closer distance, and I won't have to pay an outrageous price for an 80" 4k tv. The upscaling alone will allow for closer viewing over 1080p. I'm parked as close as I can get on my 60" plasma without seeing pixels, and I would move closer if I could. I would consider the ax800 over the Sony's but I don't know what Panasonic was thinking making a 4k tv with hevc that won't stream netflix, and no physical 4k media. It looks like it's going to be relegated to a gamers monitor into the forseeable future unless people want to use it for upscaling until 4k bluray's happen if they ever do.
No matter how close you sit to your 60" TV it is not going to feel like an 80" TV. You might feel more immersed but it will not feel any bigger then a 60" screen that you are just sitting closer to.

If I hold my 5" phone inches from my face, it still feels like 5 inches, just closer to my eyes. I don't get that theater expereince no matter how hard I try. lol

When I watched Gravity in 3D on my 65VT60 in 3D I moved my couch about 4-5 feet from the screen. I definitley felt a little more immersed in the picture, with the 3D also helping of course but it does not compensate for the true feeling of watching on a large screen. If you want a large screen you need to buy a large screen.

Just my opinion. Feel free to disagree.
StinDaWg likes this.
eric3316 is online now  
post #42 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 03:14 PM
Member
 
pavloPL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I have been a lucky participant in that event and my votes went exactly to Panasonic AX802 for 4K set and Panasonic ZT as best TV.
It would be useful to compare a true backlit LCD with the rest but the idea was to compare best 2014 models available in UK for sale.
All LCDs had uniformity issues, banding, DSE, black fluctuation, more or less which I believe had influence on results.
We have compared 4K Tears of Steel and 4K Netflix and yes there were a little more details visible but other picture attributes as contrast, blacks, colours were absolutely better on OLED and plasma and thanks to that I prefer watch it on these sets.
All tests were made with lights off, so only TVs emitted light. OLED was the most amazing with true blacks and amazing contrast. However comparing picture with ZT plasma, image was lacking significant amount of details. That might be true that LG was showing 2.4 gamma, when ZT probably not, but in my opinion the lost was too big. OLED had issues with clear motion, 3D is passive, ABL was quite aggressive, for me full whites were warmer than on ZT. And in that category only LCD obviously won.
Overall ZT was the most solid one: amazing deep solid blacks, amazing shadow details, clear motion, perfect uniformity.
I am owner of Samsung F8500 plasma and I can compare results to my set. It might not be objective but I think F8500 reproduce even better picture than ZT. Blacks might not be as good as ZT, but only by hair but F8500 reproduce true 2.4 gamma and thanks to that and higher brightness image is more OLED like.

Samsung PS64F8500, Anthem MRX 500, Dali Zensor 7.1, Apple TV 3, Sony BDPS790 Blu Ray, PS4, iDisplay Pro3, Calman 5
pavloPL is offline  
post #43 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 03:52 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: 1010
What's wrong with passive 3D? I find it preferable to active (though not the more visible pixel structure). The ABL should be no more severe than your F8500. Both the OLED and your F8500 (assuming 64") are capable of 24 fTL on a full white field, and the 65" ZT60 can't even go that bright (below 20 fTL if I'm not mistaken), so this finding continues to baffle me. In everything but motion resolution, I tend to rate the OLED higher.

Last edited by vinnie97; 06-17-2014 at 03:57 PM.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #44 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 08:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,118
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 859
[quote=delphiplasma;25042842]
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post
that's definitely the reason for higher resolution. being able to sit closer to a display, or have a larger display at the same viewing

Yes, at the end of the day HD has managed to achieve the quality we were use to with SD CRT. Most consumers are happy with HD results

Broadcasters are still struggling to provide HD to the consumer, let alone UHD. There is too much infrastructure needed to be changed to make the transition to Uhd viable to broadcasters.


I'm not sure totally get what you're saying, but I think I agree with you.


my cable is still 720p if I'm lucky. I'd much rather see GOOD 1080p become the standard than low bitrate UHD. I mean, you can't even really get 'good' 1080p on anything less than bluray right now. Netflix, vudu etc is MOSTLY(there might be one or two premium services that are close, I'm not sure and don't want to argue that, haha) aren't full bitrate 1080p. and I'd rather they used any upgrades to bitrate to improve the quality of the 1080p signal instead of adding pixels that are equally compressed as what we have now.


UHD definitely has some good things going for it. but the increase in resolution is the least important one imo. and it may be too much for infrastructure to handle for a long time. unfortunately, we all know when they have to limit the bandwidth, they won't do it by reducing resolution to 1080p, they'll do it by reducing the bit depth, which really is the best part of UHD imo.
fierce_gt is online now  
post #45 of 211 Old 06-17-2014, 08:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,118
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
I'm confident that LED-LCD has been the best TV technology available for a number of years, is the best technology today, and will continue to be for at least the short-term until OLED or something else comes along.
I might agree with this if all the LED displays were like the sharp elite.


but the fact that manufacturers seem to be using the worst possible backlight methods really hurts my perspective of LED TV's.


the sad fact is, I don't think we've seen the best of plasma, or the best of LED LCD, so we have to base it on what's been on the market. and based on what's been on the market, the only year LED LCD was as good or better was the year the sharp elite was made.


it's really too bad, I'd definitely rather spend 4grand for a good plasma, or good FALD LED than spend 1000bux on any edgelit LED
StinDaWg and gus738 like this.
fierce_gt is online now  
post #46 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 02:47 AM
Member
 
pavloPL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post
What's wrong with passive 3D? I find it preferable to active (though not the more visible pixel structure). The ABL should be no more severe than your F8500. Both the OLED and your F8500 (assuming 64") are capable of 24 fTL on a full white field, and the 65" ZT60 can't even go that bright (below 20 fTL if I'm not mistaken), so this finding continues to baffle me. In everything but motion resolution, I tend to rate the OLED higher.
Passive 3D is not displaying full HD which I think all people agree that active technology produce better picture quality. There was 60" of ZT and was calibrated to 120cd/m2 and I believe it went higher than 20fTl but what I would like to say is whites on OLED looked warmer than on ZT looking on them both side by side.
But for me the winning factor was shadow details, watching TDKR on both sets, well on OLED contrast was amazing but what if I couldn't notice shadow details and everything in shadows was black or very very dark.
But don't get me wrong OLED was brilliant, but not perfect and taking it account that is twice more expensive than ZT and have smaller screen size well it can't be truly justified to be the best TV.

Samsung PS64F8500, Anthem MRX 500, Dali Zensor 7.1, Apple TV 3, Sony BDPS790 Blu Ray, PS4, iDisplay Pro3, Calman 5

Last edited by pavloPL; 06-18-2014 at 03:09 AM.
pavloPL is offline  
post #47 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 04:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
chunon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Wilmington Ohio
Posts: 5,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 215 Post(s)
Liked: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
I'm confident that LED-LCD has been the best TV technology available for a number of years, is the best technology today, and will continue to be for at least the short-term until OLED or something else comes along.
What fantasy world do you live in ? You prefer LED-LCD I have no problem with that but to refuse to acknowledge what plasma brings to the table is myopic at best.
StinDaWg likes this.

65VT60(Calibrated by Chad B)
55ST60(Calibrated by Chunon)
Sony BDV-F7 3dbluray/soundbar
Calman Enthusiast/I1Pro/I1D3
Dish Network with Hopper/Super Joey
chunon is online now  
post #48 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 04:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
eric3316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 468 Post(s)
Liked: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by pavloPL View Post
Passive 3D is not displaying full HD which I think all people agree that active technology produce better picture quality. There was 60" of ZT and was calibrated to 120cd/m2 and I believe it went higher than 20fTl but what I would like to say is whites on OLED looked warmer than on ZT looking on them both side by side.
But for me the winning factor was shadow details, watching TDKR on both sets, well on OLED contrast was amazing but what if I couldn't notice shadow details and everything in shadows was black or very very dark.
But don't get me wrong OLED was brilliant, but not perfect and taking it account that is twice more expensive than ZT and have smaller screen size well it can't be truly justified to be the best TV.
Why is 3D even considered in these shootouts? I think many people don't even care about it anymore.

Also, why is price and size taken into consideration? Is the shootout about the best TV for your dollar or the TV that produces the best PQ out of all the TV's?

I personally would not buy a 55" OLED because of the size and price but that does not mean the TV does not produce the best picture of the bunch. I think these things should be clarified in the shootout if they are taken into the final choosing of the king.
eric3316 is online now  
post #49 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 09:15 AM
 
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: 1010
Quote:
Originally Posted by pavloPL View Post
Passive 3D is not displaying full HD which I think all people agree that active technology produce better picture quality. There was 60" of ZT and was calibrated to 120cd/m2 and I believe it went higher than 20fTl but what I would like to say is whites on OLED looked warmer than on ZT looking on them both side by side.
But for me the winning factor was shadow details, watching TDKR on both sets, well on OLED contrast was amazing but what if I couldn't notice shadow details and everything in shadows was black or very very dark.
But don't get me wrong OLED was brilliant, but not perfect and taking it account that is twice more expensive than ZT and have smaller screen size well it can't be truly justified to be the best TV.
Yes, resolution per eye is reduced, but is made up for the fact that passive is more comfortable and less susceptible to flicker. The ZT60 actually has reduced resolution in certain gradients as well thanks to the driving method used. Your F8500 is probably the best in that dept. That being said, LG's OLED is the best 3D I've seen (though I haven't seen much). The reduced resolution concerns will be squashed when 4K OLED comes along. I didn't realize previously that Panasonic's gamma tends to highlight low-level details. If I had them side-by-side, I might be able to see this. I will say that watching some content on the OLED is goosebump-inducing...an experience the ZT60 hasn't quite been able to duplicate (as impressive as it is).
vinnie97 is offline  
post #50 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 09:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,118
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by pavloPL View Post
Passive 3D is not displaying full HD which I think all people agree that active technology produce better picture quality. There was 60" of ZT and was calibrated to 120cd/m2 and I believe it went higher than 20fTl but what I would like to say is whites on OLED looked warmer than on ZT looking on them both side by side.
But for me the winning factor was shadow details, watching TDKR on both sets, well on OLED contrast was amazing but what if I couldn't notice shadow details and everything in shadows was black or very very dark.
But don't get me wrong OLED was brilliant, but not perfect and taking it account that is twice more expensive than ZT and have smaller screen size well it can't be truly justified to be the best TV.
personally I find crosstalk and annoying glasses to be the biggest issues with 3D. dropping to 720p is less of a concern. I don't have a ton of experience with passive 3D though, so I'm not sure if it actually fixes those problems, but my active 3D displays(f8500 and x35) have too much crosstalk and uncomfortable glasses for me to consider it watchable. I've viewed some SBS stuff, so I know the resolution loss is not a big deal for me
fierce_gt is online now  
post #51 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 09:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,118
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric3316 View Post
Why is 3D even considered in these shootouts? I think many people don't even care about it anymore.

Also, why is price and size taken into consideration? Is the shootout about the best TV for your dollar or the TV that produces the best PQ out of all the TV's?

I personally would not buy a 55" OLED because of the size and price but that does not mean the TV does not produce the best picture of the bunch. I think these things should be clarified in the shootout if they are taken into the final choosing of the king.
great point! just tell me how much better the tv is, i'll do the math on whether or not it's worth the street price.


it was so misleading seeing the st60 ranked higher than the vt60 and zt60 last year just because of price. was the vt60 better? then it should have a higher ranking when reviewed! I'm referring to cnet of course, but it seems all reviews take price into account, as if consumers are do stupid to know that $2000 is more than $1500...
fierce_gt is online now  
post #52 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 09:42 AM
 
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: 1010
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post
personally I find crosstalk and annoying glasses to be the biggest issues with 3D. dropping to 720p is less of a concern. I don't have a ton of experience with passive 3D though, so I'm not sure if it actually fixes those problems, but my active 3D displays(f8500 and x35) have too much crosstalk and uncomfortable glasses for me to consider it watchable. I've viewed some SBS stuff, so I know the resolution loss is not a big deal for me
To get an idea of comfort, consider that passive glasses are not too dissimilar to sunshades you'd buy at a store. This is to be expected since you've removed the unnecessary circuitry, battery, and the frame that houses it all.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #53 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 09:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,118
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 683 Post(s)
Liked: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post
To get an idea of comfort, consider that passive glasses are not too dissimilar to sunshades you'd buy at a store. This is to be expected since you've removed the unnecessary circuitry, battery, and the frame that houses it all.
it's not the weight that bothers me, it's the flat frames. my face isn't flat, it's curved, and I need a curved frame wrap around my face to fit comfortably. it doesn't seem like this is possible with the active lenses, but I think it should be possible with polarized ones. I mean my sunglasses are polarized. I guess it's just harder to avoid distortion with a curved lens, as I don't think I've seen any passive glasses that had that 'wrap around' sunglass feel I want.
fierce_gt is online now  
post #54 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 03:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by chunon View Post
What fantasy world do you live in ? You prefer LED-LCD I have no problem with that but to refuse to acknowledge what plasma brings to the table is myopic at best.
Plasma's technical superiority ended when LED-LCD came to the market and equaled it's performance in the package of an LCD.
BiggAW is offline  
post #55 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 03:18 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: 147
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
Plasma's technical superiority ended when LED-LCD came to the market and equaled it's performance in the package of an LCD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chunon View Post
What fantasy world do you live in ? You prefer LED-LCD I have no problem with that but to refuse to acknowledge what plasma brings to the table is myopic at best.
...
StinDaWg and gus738 like this.
rahzel is offline  
post #56 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 03:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chunon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Wilmington Ohio
Posts: 5,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 215 Post(s)
Liked: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
Plasma's technical superiority ended when LED-LCD came to the market and equaled it's performance in the package of an LCD.

Prove that ! One of the most ridiculous posts I have ever read. Sure some FALD panels have come very close but on average a bottom tier plasma will out perform a LED in almost all picture qualities. Show me one currently produced LED that can even touch the top tier plasmas in black level. Then factor in motion handling, off angle viewing etc

65VT60(Calibrated by Chad B)
55ST60(Calibrated by Chunon)
Sony BDV-F7 3dbluray/soundbar
Calman Enthusiast/I1Pro/I1D3
Dish Network with Hopper/Super Joey
chunon is online now  
post #57 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 04:28 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: 1010
You'll have a long wait. This individual could never come to grips with the results of the recent poll showing the wide popularity of plasma here at AVS. Stubborn and bullheaded are a few adjectives for this perspective that come to mind.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #58 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 04:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Latinoheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: BC Canada
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Liked: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
Plasma's technical superiority ended when LED-LCD came to the market and equaled it's performance in the package of an LCD.
Plasma superiority ended when they decided to call it quits not when LCD came to the market. LCD has never equal plasma in terms of picture quality, blacks, motion etc. With the exception of the Sharp Elite that was very close and now this new Panasonic 4K, which still hasn't been viewed and reviewed by the masses/actual owners.
I'm thumbs up for better and improved technology wether it was Plasma, LCD or Oled but your comments seem very bias or uneducated in technology.
StinDaWg, gus738 and tubetwister like this.

TV - Panasonic 55GT50 THX, Main Speakers - Klipsch Gallery G28's, Center Channel- Klipsch RC-52, Sub-Klipsch Sub 12, Surround - Klipsch RS-52 II Bluray/Game - HTPC/PS3, Receiver - Onkyo RC-360, HTPC- Intel Core i3, HDMI,Windows 7,XBMC,Bluray,3 TB,wireless WMC keyboard, V. Processor -Darbee

http://www.avsforum.com/photopost/sh...hp?cat=2236715

Last edited by Latinoheat; 06-18-2014 at 04:31 PM.
Latinoheat is offline  
post #59 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 04:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
EscapeVelocity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 5,655
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Alternative Headline

Group of plasma aficionados choose plasma set as best PQ over a slew of LCDs.

LOL!

Film at Eleven!

Vizio VP322 Plasma / Vizio GV42LF LCD / Denon 2200 Silicon Image DVD / Panasonic S97 Faroudja Genesis DVD / Oppo 970HD Mediatek DVD / Oppo 983H Anchor Bay DVD / Panasonic LX-600 Laserdisc / Aiwa MX100 Multi-region VCR / JVC S7600 S-VHS / PS2 / Sega Genesis / Nintendo SNES / Roku 2 XS & HD-XR / Realistic STA-90 Reciever / Realistic Minimus 7 / Antennacraft G1483 Hoverman / Belden 7915A RG6 / Channel Master 7777 Titan 2 UHF/VHF / Panasonic AX-200u / Optoma Graywolf 92" / Draper Luma 92"
EscapeVelocity is offline  
post #60 of 211 Old 06-18-2014, 04:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 10,048
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 595 Post(s)
Liked: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscapeVelocity View Post
Alternative Headline

Group of plasma aficionados choose plasma set as best PQ over a slew of LCDs.

LOL!

Film at Eleven!
Right, because they only invited plasma aficionados...
StinDaWg and gus738 like this.
Stereodude is offline  
Reply Plasma Flat Panel Displays

Tags
frontpage

User Tag List

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