Originally Posted by Ken Ross
Hold on now. I saw no evidence that the OIS of the Sony was better than the 900. The low light yes, the OIS no. Good light PQ of the 900 was, IMO, definitely better from a sharpness, detail and color standpoint. That, to my eyes, was the biggest difference.
Just speculating Ken. CCi states no difference in OIS from last years model. I don't know why because Panasonic states otherwise. If that is true, the Sony has better OIS. We all know the OIS on the Sony was the best last year. And from djandrea's posted videos it looks like it has not changed.
Originally Posted by Steve Cebu
I have the older Fat model with 160GB
Thanks, that's interesting. I have a slim and fat, but the fat is broken due to YLOD. I was wondering why some report their PS3's play the high bitrate files with no issues and some do. My slim has issues with them if the bitrate goes above 33 to 34 Mbps. Maybe it is just the slim models that can't handle the higher bitrate files?
They did put redesigned cell processors in the slim units. I'm thinking that they might not be up to par as the original cell processor. I'm curious because it seems Ken has issues and so do I, and we both have slim models. I'm sure you will report your findings with your fat, so that would take us a step further as to what might be causing the issue. It certainly could be the newer processors.
I might get my fat fixed just so I can test files myself at some point.