Panasonic PZ80/PZ85 Owners Thread [No Price Talk] - Page 14

what he said^^^

Yeah, I noticed that when I use standard mode the faces look like putty, when I choose cinema the facial tones are much more natural.

I changed to running my break-in in cinema mode with everything set to +50.

Thanks for calling and getting that information. I somewhat assumed that about the modes based on some reviews and calibration reports on previous Panasonic sets, but it's nice to have confirmation. I think I've read on other threads that the Cinema mode is closest to the 6500k standard. When people start posting their settings, it will be helpful if we put what mode we're in, which most people do.

Ok, I've almost every post so far, I've got a couple of questions if I may.
On Saturday I brought home a 40" Samsung LN-T4071F, the picture is very crisp, very nice set. BUT, I can't watch it, the "shutters" way too much for me, gives me a killer headache. I'm taking it back eitherway. I was going to give up in general till something crazy with the tv's happens. Like the Lasers or something. But then I see this 85U and it looks and sounds really good. And it's in the same price range and what I bought. So with that being said, I'm coming out of a 34" Sony XBR CRT HDTV, the picture was great, but it was just too big of a footprint for my little room. So I'm now looking at this 42" 85U. They don't have any floor models at BB, just ones in the boxes at the warehouse. So my question, am I going to get the shutter, during the panning ? I've read that there is not much concern about gaming, as long as you are smart about it. So my biggest concern is just really the shuttering, that I'm getting with my LCD. Please advise.

Thanks,
Tray.

Not sure what you mean by shutter, possible stutter or flicker, both which affected the 71. The 85u won't have any of those ridiculous issues.

I spent a lot of money on that damn thing. And I'm really mad about it. I'm pretty sure that you've got what I talking about. It looks like it's shaking amost, as it pans. It looks teriable. IMO. So none of that, with this More like a CRT.

Just goes to show how bad every other LCD is . But yeah, the 85 series should be very CRT-like. Far more than LCDs.

I don't have a single issue with my XBR4. Let's not group all LCD's together.

In my set, the sound is just low-level fan noise (not like 60Hz buzz). I doubt a power-conditioner would help in my case. But I only chimed in to point out that the noise, or buzz, is -- so far -- not a problem with my display.

That's what I wanted to hear, I'd hate to have to steal that old 34" CRT back from my mother. lol. Plus it's too heavy to be moving back and forth. I think I'm going to go get that tomorrow night, and take back that sammy. I'm really disapointed about the whole deal. I just hope I don't have any trouble taking it back to BB.

Thanks guys,

Pretty much just posting so I'm subscribed to the thread. Haven't posted since I bought my 42" ED Panny 5 yrs ago. Just pulled the trigger on the 85U. I think it was $1k less than the 42" ED!

I struggled with which 50" 1080p but the PZ85 seemed the right fit (literally have .5 inches to spare on width). I went with the 'display' model (UK) last time since I didn't see the point in the speakers since I have the HT system. Now that display 'has' to have an HT system when it goes to second string (or buy the speakers). When I replace this one someday, it is a standalone HDTV.

Anyone have calibration settings to recommend or bookmarked? This is a long thread.

Thanks
Dave

And that's for a reason. Guys, one should take the pictures of these "isolated" (I'll explain below) TV screens with a pinch of salt when it comes to gauging blacks. The way camera exposure (both digital and film) works, you cannot consider these blacks to be accurate representations. As anyone familiar with exposure will know that if you underexpose the picture a stop or two the image will get significantly darker. So you could take 5 pics of the same image being displayed on a TV at 5 diff exposures (each 1/3 or 1/2 stop down) and have the blacks look like 5 different levels of blackness depending on the exposure. The lighter parts would also respectively get darker along with the blacks but some of the 5 pics would still look "OK" to the point that they may not look obviously under exposed. Now what we have is an untrue representation where the blacks look much deeper than actual while the middle and brighter parts of the image still look OK.

In the quest to gauge how black blacks are the only accurate way to get a representation in a photo is a "comparative" pic where 2 TVs are in the same photo while displaying the same image on screen (as opposed to the "isolated" pic where only 1 TV is in the pic). In that picture we would not be looking at the blacks in absolute values (of say a scale of 1-10, 1 being white and 10 being black) but rather looking at the blacks of one relative to the other. Since both TVs have been exposed at the same exposure it doesn't matter if the blacks are accurate, what matters now is how black is one compared to the other. So if the absolute value of TV-A is 8 and that of TV-B is 9.5 then the "difference" of 1.5 is accurate. The absolute values (8 and 9.5) cannot be considered accurate since they are subjective to exposure conditions as described above. This "comparative" method is the only objective and true way to gauge blacks in photos.

I'll try to find a pic that showed this...will be easier to understand

EDIT - found the pic, now if you rated the blacks as say - pio 9/10, sony 6/10, and sharp 7/10, these absolute numbers or "scores" are not accurate since they depend on the exposure of that pic. By taking the pic at different exposures I could make the blacks on the pio look 9/10, 8/10 or even possibly 10/10 all while still making the mids and brighter parts not look too underexposed. But the comparative difference between the pio, sony and sharp would still be visible hence that "difference" is accurate.

source - http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/spec-wars...ses-259495.php

you are missing my point. and are out of context.

the attached image was not provided to discuss the accuracy of engadget or pioneer's comparision/demonstration of the 3 TVs . It was provided simply as an example of what a "comparative" (2 or 3 TV) photo looks like as opposed to an "isolated" (one TV) photo in the context of being able to accurately gauge an idea of darkness/blackness from a visual perspective as opposed to spec numbers that you have pointed out from a review.

That would be correct IF I was saying something like "the photo is a better way to compare the black levels of the 3 TVs than the spec numbers".

BUT I AM NOT

of course the spec numbers have merit, when did I say thet did not? But 'the spec method of comparing blacks' is not the topic of discussion, the 'VISUAL method of accurately gauging the difference in blacks from a photo' is. sorry, but you are out of context and unnecessarily trying to prove a point (which while it has merit) has no relevance to this discussion.

I think you're in violent agreement with am777. The point is that the way a photograph looks is so dependent on exposure settings that gauging the "black level" of a TV from a photo is next to useless. Even as a (very) amateur photographer, I'm appalled by how much credence people here give to photographs for evaluating displays.

Unless you know the exact lighting conditions the picture was taken under and also the camera settings, you should basically ignore any black/white levels and color balance/temperature data as seen in the photo, as they're almost certainly nothing like what was seen in person.

Even if the calibrated XBR4/5 has only slightly worse blacks than the Pioneer, it's very possible to get a picture that looks like the example provided, you can easily exaggerate such small differences with a camera.

Bottom line: do not make buying decisions based on other people's photos. I like to look at the photos people post of new models too, as often someone here gets the TV before my local BB/CC/whatever has a display model up, but you really have to take these things with a grain of salt.

See the Sammy LNxxA650 thread over in the LCD section for a prime example of the panic/hilarity (depending on your point of view) that ensues over misjudging color in a photograph taken with a flash.

Well said. The monitor you use to browse this forum even makes a difference when looking at a picture.

I just wanna give an update on ordering through Panasonic EPP to some guys here I've been talking to.

I ordered the 42PZ85U on 9th Mar, my email communications in Panasonic said they will only ship it enf of April.

I threatened to cancel a few days ago, they didn't reply. Last night my credit card was charged the full amount. Hopefully this means my unit is shipping soon.

So JEALOUS of you guys here who got it already! Can't wait~

I'll say the guy is rude. I'm new on here and trying to learn all I can. I'm ready to pull the trigger on this set and would like advice on settings after you guys get your sets.
Please define "judder". Thanks.

can the pz80 display 24fps?

It can do 3:2 pull down.

Zoom expands the image on the horizontal and vertical. It's useful for widescreen stuff that is broadcast on 4:3 channels (letterboxed). Pretty much every show on MTV these days (it's the cool thing to do!). Full just expands the image horizontally to make 4:3 stuff fit widescreen. There's also "just" which stretches the middle less and the sides more, the theory being that most people are centered in the frame in film so you don't get the fathead as much (although if someone happens to be on the left or right side of the frame you get mega-fathead). Hope that clears it up...

Please keep in mind that the Sony's black "rating" is based on the backlight being set to it's lowest setting. That black level will increase as you increase the backlight.

The set produced a .014fL black before the blacks "settle". It has to be a completely all black screen for a few seconds to lower to .006fL. So I'm guessing that .014fL is the best case scenario for normal content, and even then you will only get it when the material is dark and the backlight is dimmed. ANSI contrast usually gives a better idea of a displays real world contrast. The 720p pios measure 2600-2700:1, the 1080p measure 3,500-3,600:1, and the sony xbr4's measure 1,700-1,800:1. That's according to HTmag and Ultimate av mag anyways.

this my first time posting.i just got the th50pz85u about a week now after sending back my samsung lnt5265f cant stand motion blur and black smearing in games and all lcds do it even the new ones with 120hz.but now i have a new problem with my tv.phosphor trails. im very new to plasma so im not sure if this is normal or not.does this git better with time or is this a permanant feature.i sure hope not beacuse this tv is great and i dont want to return it but i will.some one said that this will git better after 3 to 4 months if that is true then great but in need to know before my 30 day return is up.any help would be great.

Don't plan on it getting much better. Green Fringing is here to stay on panasonic plasmas. I still see it on sets over a year old. I did notice that it became less prominent after the break-in period on my pz85u, but it's still very much there. I'm like you, I HATE it. I can't really ignore it and I considered returning my set too at first. But it's the lesser evil of any other on the market. You won't find a perfect set, and phosphor trails are not as bad as dim whites, motion blur, buzz, and most of all false-contouring. Learn to love your set despite this because these TVs are amazing.

Can anyone confirm if the glass on the 85U is less glossy than the 700U? I'm still considering a plasma, but the 700U is TOO glossy for my loft, and the 77U finish makes the color too washed out.

I'm hoping the new generation's glass is a compromise between these two older sets.

I don't have my 85U next to a 700U, but I'd say they are about the same.

Does anyone know how to access the service menu on the PZ85? Perhaps it's the same as the 700U which I assume I can find somewhere in that thread.

Thanks!

It's not the same. I can't find it anywhere.