or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › Official Samsung 2011 PNxxD8000 Thread [No Price Talk]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Samsung 2011 PNxxD8000 Thread [No Price Talk] - Page 4

post #91 of 5097
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erickson00 View Post

Can everyone please step away from the ledge? Who cares if the black level is not quite as low as you were hoping? The picture quality is fantastic, the TV looks great, costs less than Panasonic, probably has no buzz this year, and you guys still want to complain and talk about 'Oh, I guess I have to go buy a Panasonic now?"

The guy who posted his opinion on the black level with and without CS engaged, saying they looked identical, is probably RIGHT...they probably do look identical...to most of us. If he didn't notice it, most people won't, either.

Is it really worth not buying an otherwise fabulous TV just because the black level is slightly higher than a competing model? A competing model with a host of other issues?

Well said.......That is the bottom line....
post #92 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlymantis View Post

Thanks for the review, Chad. Do you guys have plans to have a look at the 59 or 64 as well?

Hopefully, I can get my picture settings to come close to that color accuracy.

I would like to. Chances are it will happen, but I'm not sure how soon.
post #93 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erickson00 View Post
Can everyone please step away from the ledge? Who cares if the black level is not quite as low as you were hoping? The picture quality is fantastic, the TV looks great, costs less than Panasonic, probably has no buzz this year, and you guys still want to complain and talk about 'Oh, I guess I have to go buy a Panasonic now?"

The guy who posted his opinion on the black level with and without CS engaged, saying they looked identical, is probably RIGHT...they probably do look identical...to most of us. If he didn't notice it, most people won't, either.

Is it really worth not buying an otherwise fabulous TV just because the black level is slightly higher than a competing model? A competing model with a host of other issues?
This is very true.

Also, about seeing the black level difference with CS- like I said in the review, it puts up this large, bright, blue menu when you switch. All I could do was focus on the edge, and with such a bright thing in the middle, it's hard to detect small differences instantaneously. Not to mention the momentary dropout when engaging. I thought I did barely detect a slight difference, though.
I do remember being more impressed with the blacks in the initial "before calibration" comparison before I switched to 1080p/24 with CS but it was far from dramatic. I started out with 1080i.
post #94 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erickson00 View Post
Who cares if the black level is not quite as low as you were hoping?
People like me who want improved black levels, as opposed to significantly worse, from their next plasma purchase?
post #95 of 5097
Thank you!
post #96 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Mad Mule View Post
I'm almost 100% sure that Samsung must have changed the color of the bezel between CES and now (retail). In the early photos and CES videos, the bezel was definitely a light silver. Now with the pics on the front page, the color is definitely anything but that.
My initial thoughts, also, because it sure looks that way.
post #97 of 5097
What's more important to your purchase- the numbers or what you see?
post #98 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by QZ1 View Post
My initial thoughts, also, because it sure looks that way.
Quick, get chad's expensive meters on that bezel!
post #99 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobl3 View Post
What I don't understand is, the 50" C8000 measured at .009-.01 among many calibrators, yet the 51" D8000 measures .016? SO worse?
Last year, he measured the 50C7000 and got .026; but, that was before the firmware update for MLL improvement. After that, were .009-.01 readings.

I don't remember what the 58" & 63" versions got before the FW update, but afterwords, they were .0065-.008.
post #100 of 5097
Well it looks like Samsung haven't made any improvements at all. *sigh*

So disappointed...
post #101 of 5097
Chad,

I know you also just re-read the ST30 and got around the same that D-Nice did. Could the same have happened in this situation or did you already take those precautions? I am no way trying to second guess you.
post #102 of 5097
Instead of just concentrating on the black levels look at the whole picture. I don't think I have seen any comments on the very linear gamma which is spot on 2.2. How about the color points. Luminance levels at almost zero as are the deltaE color errors. Seems like a pretty nice tv to me.
Chad is absolutely correct when he says that mll is irrelevant during a calibration as is contrast ratio which is something else that a lot of people look at. CR and mll are whatever they are when the set is calibrated. If you really look at Chad's charts from this and other years he doesn't even show 0 IRE on them. Keep up the good work Chad.
post #103 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by donnymac51
Instead of just concentrating on the black levels look at the whole picture. I don't think I have seen any comments on the very linear gamma which is spot on 2.2. How about the color points. Luminance levels at almost zero as are the deltaE color errors. Seems like a pretty nice tv to me.
Chad is absolutely correct when he says that mll is irrelevant during a calibration as is contrast ratio which is something else that a lot of people look at. CR and mll are whatever they are when the set is calibrated. If you really look at Chad's charts from this and other years he doesn't even show 0 IRE on them. Keep up the good work Chad.
I agree. I was not trying to insult Chad at all. I am sure it has excellent PQ and am currently watching on a 6yr old 32" LCD and I know anything will be better than what I have now and don't really care to much about mll. I am just trying to decide between the D550 and the ST30.
post #104 of 5097
Was it really a firmware update that brought last year's 50" in line with the 58/63"? Or was it just phosphor aging?

It doesn't make sense because D-Nice says he has measured ten 50C7000's at 0.009ftL-0.01ftL , so how could it be worse for 2011? It is assumed that the ones D-Nice measured were from customers who had broken them in, so maybe that is the difference.

I wonder if it's possible for Chad to re-measure a 50C7000 with high hours to check this.

Also interesting that Chad has re-measured the ST30 at 0.007ftL now that it has had a chance to cool down. That's a difference of 0.005ftL from his initial reading! If we subtract the same amount from the D8000's 0.016ftL we get 0.011ftL , which is more in line with D-Nice's readings.

Something is going on, I don't know what it is but it's something.
post #105 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferran586 View Post
I agree. I was not trying to insult Chad at all. I am sure it has excellent PQ and am currently watching on a 6yr old 32" LCD and I know anything will be better than what I have now and don't really care to much about mll. I am just trying to decide between the D550 and the ST30.
I wasn't directing towards you specifically.
post #106 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by donnymac51 View Post
Instead of just concentrating on the black levels look at the whole picture. I don't think I have seen any comments on the very linear gamma which is spot on 2.2. How about the color points. Luminance levels at almost zero as are the deltaE color errors. Seems like a pretty nice tv to me.
Last years model had the exact same colour performance too, so that is nothing to get excited about. All that needed fixing was the buzzing and black levels and they would have outright the best TV. But they didn't...

P.S 2.2 gamma is wrong, please stop using it
post #107 of 5097
A problem with last year's Sammy panels was a quite noticable shift towards pink as the panel aged. This could be seen quite easily at a showroom when placed beside plasmas from other manufacturers. I hope they've done something to promote more even ageing of its panels phosphors or have software to counter it.
post #108 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldensunbluesky View Post
A problem with last year's Sammy panels was a quite noticable shift towards pink as the panel aged.
I have not witnessed this on any display models which I frequently browse, but if it did occur it should be easily correctable with the white balance controls.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldensunbluesky View Post
This could be seen quite easily at a showroom when placed beside plasmas from other manufacturers.
All the manufacturers are running different white balance settings with most of them tinted blue, so you can't really compare them this way. If one is running D75 and the one next to it is D65 then the D65 will probably look yellow-brown in comparison, when it is actually more correct.

I'm not trying to defend Samsung...I just haven't seen any with a pink tint..and I've seen a lot. I have however observed a couple of 42C450's at different stores with unusually dim picture even at max brightness settings which I would deem as faulty. Not seen it on any 50C450's though....
post #109 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneumatic View Post
Last years model had the exact same colour performance too, so that is nothing to get excited about. All that needed fixing was the buzzing and black levels and they would have outright the best TV. But they didn't...

P.S 2.2 gamma is wrong, please stop using it
I totally understand that 2.2 is not a standard but there is nothing wrong with 2.2. I used it because that is what he calibrated to. From what I have read of user comments the buzzing is not there so far. However I hardly think that the relatively few samples so far are enough to make a determination one way or another. Let's wait and see.
post #110 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneumatic View Post
I have not witnessed this on any display models which I frequently browse, but if it did occur it should be easily correctable with the white balance controls.



All the manufacturers are running different white balance settings with most of them tinted blue, so you can't really compare them this way. If one is running D75 and the one next to it is D65 then the D65 will probably look yellow-brown in comparison, when it is actually more correct.

I'm not trying to defend Samsung...I just haven't seen any with a pink tint..and I've seen a lot. I have however observed a couple of 42C450's at different stores with unusually dim picture even at max brightness settings which I would deem as faulty. Not seen it on any 50C450's though....
I can confirm that the pinkness is due to ageing of the pixels. The Samsung C8000 panels do not start out being pink. One forum member used his Samsung (can't remember which model) in 4:3 mode (without vertical grey bars) for a couple of years to watch free-to-air SD broadcasts. After those few years of abuse, his TV (when displaying a white or grey screen) now shows a strong pink bias covering the 4:3 areas of the screen and a reasonably well-balanced white/grey for the side bars.

But yes I'm sure a white-balance calibration would fix the problem but that compensation would probably mean losing out on getting the brightest whites possible since we'll be dimming the red phosphors to offset the pink push.
post #111 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by donnymac51 View Post
there is nothing wrong with 2.2.
Yes there is! It doesn't produce correct brightness tracking from dark to light when viewing under dim lighting conditions (and let's face it, most of us view this way).

Unless you are calibrating for high ambient light, you have no excuse for using 2.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldensunbluesky View Post
But yes I'm sure a white-balance calibration would fix the problem but that compensation would probably mean losing out on getting the brightest whites possible since we'll be dimming the red phosphors to offset the pink push.
Could raise green+blue instead to avoid losing light output.
post #112 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneumatic View Post
Yes there is! It doesn't produce correct brightness tracking from dark to light when viewing under dim lighting conditions (and let's face it, most of us view this way).

Unless you are calibrating for high ambient light, you have no excuse for using 2.2



Could raise green+blue instead to avoid losing light output.
First off people view in all different lighting conditions. The exact reason why most people have a calibrated day and night mode. To say 2.2 is wrong is wrong on your part. It is not correct at times but then 2.3 or 2.15 is not correct at times based on lighting conditions. It is a setting that can be used in certain situations just like 2.3. Unfortunatley not all sets have adjustable gamma so you are stuck with whatever you get to use in all lighting conditions. Such as the 1.9 gamma of the Panny S2.
post #113 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneumatic View Post

Well it looks like Samsung haven't made any improvements at all. *sigh*

So disappointed...

If Chad's measurement agrees with what other calibrators measure, then they have actually gone backwards.
post #114 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by donnymac51 View Post

First off people view in all different lighting conditions. The exact reason why most people have a calibrated day and night mode. To say 2.2 is wrong is wrong on your part. It is not correct at times but then 2.3 or 2.15 is not correct at times based on lighting conditions. It is a setting that can be used in certain situations just like 2.3. Unfortunatley not all sets have adjustable gamma so you are stuck with whatever you get to use in all lighting conditions. Such as the 1.9 gamma of the Panny S2.

Fair points

I probably should have been more clear about 2.2 only being wrong for dim lighting conditions. I just assumed that most of us calibrate for dim lighting conditions since that is the environment plasma is recommended for, and that which most of us would put more preference towards.

Strange thing is, I don't personally feel the need to reduce gamma for daytime viewing either. I just don't feel it affects the perceptual uniformity of the image that much (if at all). I know the science says otherwise but subjectively I'm just not feeling it.
post #115 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by H_Prestige View Post

If Chad's measurement agrees with what other calibrators measure, then they have actually gone backwards.

Well, yes, but look what Chad got on the 50C7000...0.024ftL. I want to see what Chad gets on an aged 50C7000 (or one with newer firmware, if that has any effect).
post #116 of 5097
great review chad this tv sounds like a winner now is it worth the upgrade over theD7000 thats the million dollar question lol. I think i will be geting the samy over the panny
post #117 of 5097
Chad, Is there an improvement with the motion judder cancelor? I read somewhere that they were using a different chipset.
post #118 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erickson00 View Post

Can everyone please step away from the ledge? Who cares if the black level is not quite as low as you were hoping? The picture quality is fantastic, the TV looks great, costs less than Panasonic, probably has no buzz this year, and you guys still want to complain and talk about 'Oh, I guess I have to go buy a Panasonic now?"

The guy who posted his opinion on the black level with and without CS engaged, saying they looked identical, is probably RIGHT...they probably do look identical...to most of us. If he didn't notice it, most people won't, either.

Is it really worth not buying an otherwise fabulous TV just because the black level is slightly higher than a competing model? A competing model with a host of other issues?

That very much depends on the person. If Samsung promised significant picture improvment in the 2011 models (and folks were gullible enough to believe that), they have a right to be upset. Let them suffer if they want.
post #119 of 5097
59" and 64" are going to be nasty if they get the MLL down to 0.008fL or lower and mirror that performance. The post calibration charts are crazy good in everything else, but honestly, 0.0165fL is laughable for a $2300 50" panel in 2011. Did you mess with a D550 while you were there Chad?
post #120 of 5097
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneumatic View Post

Was it really a firmware update that brought last year's 50" in line with the 58/63"? Or was it just phosphor aging?

The MLL change was immediately quite noticeable after a firmware update, and some people re-measured their TV's MLL to confirm the difference. As much as I remember, I don't recall how much the MLL improved, and furthermore, the changes on 50" and 58"/63", respectively. Also, did panel aging decrease it more? Maybe, but if so, it should've been very little at that point; even now it should be relatively little.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Plasma Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › Official Samsung 2011 PNxxD8000 Thread [No Price Talk]