or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › F8500.. OR .. ZT60 ?????
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

F8500.. OR .. ZT60 ????? - Page 59

post #1741 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermans View Post

To sum it up. F8500 has better 3D and 2D daytime viewing when calibrated.
VT60 has better 2D viewing in a dark room when calibrated. Although I can honestly say the advantage is ever so slight and makes the clear winner for me the F8500.

I'd agree with this in terms of the absolute MLL achieved by both units when viewed in dark rooms. However, despite the slight MLL advantage of the VT/ZT, what tips the scales for me in favor of the 8500 in this viewing environment, is the 8500's ABL advantage. I can see that in a totally darkened room or bright room and for me at least, it more than makes up for the MLL advantage.

What would be really nice is the MLL of the VT coupled with the ABL of the 8500. Next year? wink.gif

I also agree with your flesh tone assessment. I viewed a Kevin Miller ISF'd VT50 right next to a Kevin Miller ISF'd 8500. I would have defied anyone to point out differences in flesh tones or the overall color palette in general. They were remarkably the same. Both looked great.
post #1742 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

The problem is they're virtually all edge lit LEDs that don't have the PQ of either plasmas or full-array LEDs that are, unfortunately, extinct.

Yes, that is true on both counts. However, we are talking about the first generation of UHD (2nd if you consider Japan and Europe releases). Pretty soon they become very cheap and every where. I remember the transition from 720p to 1080p vividly; back then, I've just got a Samsung LA-40R71BA, and a year later 720p sets were literally obsolete! They will eventually start making full array LEDs as well, although I think even between full arrays sets, not all of them are on the same league. BTW, in the video they said something about Toshiba being full-array, maybe I didn't listen carefully.
post #1743 of 3096
Has someone hooked up an Xbox or a PS3 to their F8500? A general overview of some gaming performance would be much appreciated. Thanks.
post #1744 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermans View Post

Now this is getting silly. We are talking about two amazing tv's here that have some differences. They are by no means becoming obsolete anytime soon just because a newer technology exists at double the price. I for one will enjoy my 64F8500 for at least another 6 years if not more. So far both of these sets are at the top of the food chain in terms of bang for your buck if you are looking for reference level quality. If you just want brightness, then get an LED and make sure to sit right in the front middle. I prefer to allow everybody in the room to enjoy the best image possible. All this fanboy nonsense is reminding me of the HD-DVD vs Blu ray battles that went on, but in a much smaller scale. I owned a Samsung 50 inch DLP which was a flagship model at its time and loved watching movies on it. Now my new Samsung is leaps and bounds better in most every way except in those areas DLP's shined. Fast moving images and no ir to worry about. However Plasma's are simply stunning when calibrated to their full potential.

I viewed the VT60 and F8500 side by side fully calibrated and the color levels and skin tones were identical. For anyone to say one is better than the other after calibration had a calibrator that didn't do a good job. Furthermore the F8500's day mode and 3D mode after calibration should look better to everyone in this forum in a blind comparison test between the F8500 and VT60. The night mode calibration should yield a very slight black level advantage to the VT60 in 2D mode only when viewed in a pitch black room. My advice to anyone reading this and is undecided between going for the F8500 or VT60, to take into consideration what I just said. It is as honest and non biased a recommendcation I can give.

To sum it up. F8500 has better 3D and 2D daytime viewing when calibrated.
VT60 has better 2D viewing in a dark room when calibrated. Although I can honestly say the advantage is ever so slight and makes the clear winner for me the F8500.

Panasonic 65VT60 ISF 3d.pdf 560k .pdf file

The color and grayscale (calibrated) is not nearly as accurate in 3D mode on the F8500 compared to the VT/ZT. Overall color accuracy is still very important in 3D mode.

The 3D performance is extremely impressive on the Panasonics. The color has impressed me the most, but, overall, really nice "3D" effect.
Edited by DavidHir - 7/3/13 at 9:11am
post #1745 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

The color and grayscale (calibrated) is not nearly as accurate in 3D mode on the F8500 compared to the VT/ZT. Overall color accuracy is still very important in 3D mode.

The 3D performance is extremely impressive on the Panasonics. The color has impressed me the most, but, overall, really nice "3D" effect.

The 3d has really improved the past couple of years(resolution aside), if you compare the 50 and 60 lines to 3d cal on the 2010 and 2011 models there is no comparison. The calibratedion can be dialed to "reference" which was not the case even a couple of years ago.
post #1746 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Panasonic 65VT60 ISF 3d.pdf 560k .pdf file

The color and grayscale (calibrated) is not nearly as accurate in 3D mode on the F8500 compared to the VT/ZT. Overall color accuracy is still very important in 3D mode.

The 3D performance is extremely impressive on the Panasonics. The color has impressed me the most, but, overall, really nice "3D" effect.

3D is dead. I don't understand all the arguments and pontificating over it when it comes to the F8500 vs the VT/ZT.

I just ordered a 60VT (which I might cancel), I probably would have purchased a F8500 if not for the high price.
post #1747 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

3D is dead. I don't understand all the arguments and pontificating over it when it comes to the F8500 vs the VT/ZT.

I just ordered a 60VT (which I might cancel), I probably would have purchased a F8500 if not for the high price.

That is your opinion seems to be doing nicely, lots of new releases. This conversation is pretty civil actually If you don't like 3d don't watch it pretty simple. Never have understood all the venom, its just like any other feature on the tv like the web browser for instance, I don't use it but I don't rant about it being worthless even tho to me it is.
post #1748 of 3096
Loving the "debates" ...
BTW, don't cite BestBuy for any comparison. Their sets are not well calibrated and according to a salesman (ie. be skeptical), they are not allowed to mess with the settings. Factory reps come and set their unit then BB are not suppose to touch it. Some scenes in the F8500 at my local BB is horrible with lots of noise (could be the source) and the VT and ZT are receiving a signal that is 7 or 8 places down on a daisy chain.

I wonder what the LCD guys talk about?
post #1749 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

3D is dead. I don't understand all the arguments and pontificating over it when it comes to the F8500 vs the VT/ZT.

I just ordered a 60VT (which I might cancel), I probably would have purchased a F8500 if not for the high price.

Yeah, I wouldn't say dead either. There are lots of people that enjoy it, I for one only own two 3D blurays but that doesn't mean I don't like them. As for the future, yeah I don't see it lasting but right now it's still going strong.
post #1750 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hungster View Post

Loving the "debates" ...
BTW, don't cite BestBuy for any comparison. Their sets are not well calibrated and according to a salesman (ie. be skeptical), they are not allowed to mess with the settings. Factory reps come and set their unit then BB are not suppose to touch it. Some scenes in the F8500 at my local BB is horrible with lots of noise (could be the source) and the VT and ZT are receiving a signal that is 7 or 8 places down on a daisy chain.

I wonder what the LCD guys talk about?

You have one heck of a commute I will never complain again biggrin.gif Yes hard to garner much from in store conditions
post #1751 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

3D is dead. I don't understand all the arguments and pontificating over it when it comes to the F8500 vs the VT/ZT.

I just ordered a 60VT (which I might cancel), I probably would have purchased a F8500 if not for the high price.

3D dead? Last time I looked it still works on my VT60 and Oppo 103, and there are a wide selection of movies to buy and even some to rent at my local Family Video store. smile.gif

This is kind of funny coming from someone who has trolled for years on various displays forums on this site and clamored over a (now dead) display technology for years that never even took off.
post #1752 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Latinoheat View Post

Yeah, I wouldn't say dead either. There are lots of people that enjoy it, I for one only own two 3D blurays but that doesn't mean I don't like them. As for the future, yeah I don't see it lasting but right now it's still going strong.

I see the technology changing but as long as they keep making movies in 3d and creating 3d blurays i think it will stick around. I'm not a huge frequent user but I believe for the right material it can enhance the movie experience. Recently saw Ironman3 3d at the theater and thought it was very well done.
post #1753 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Panasonic 65VT60 ISF 3d.pdf 560k .pdf file

The color and grayscale (calibrated) is not nearly as accurate in 3D mode on the F8500 compared to the VT/ZT. Overall color accuracy is still very important in 3D mode.

The 3D performance is extremely impressive on the Panasonics. The color has impressed me the most, but, overall, really nice "3D" effect.

Extremely impressive is a strong praise and one that can be used on either set we are talking about here. However the color accuracy as impressive as it can be when newly calibrated on the VT60 in 3D mode, the differences in color accuracy between a newly calibrated F8500 in 3D mode would be so close, only a machine would be able to tell them apart. In other words our human eyes wouldn't be able to see the differences. If we could, there would be little need for meters as we would be adjusting the color for accuracy ourselves.
post #1754 of 3096
For those with the VT/ZT, have you calibrated your '3D' setting with the 'panel luminance' set to Mid or High? I thought I read somewhere that using the 'High' setting for panel luminance worked better for 3D, as well as enabling the motion smoothing.
I have not seen the F8500 in 3D, so i'm curious if it is improved over previous Sammy models. I did an 3D A/B comparison between my D8000 and my VT60, and they definitely looked different, but I couldn't really say which looked 'better'. It seemed the D8000 has more of 'depth' of 3D, but I found watching the VT60 gave me less of a headache after watching an entire 3D movie (Avengers, Alice in Wonderland, IMAX Deep Sea, etc.). And as much fun as it is to watch Avengers in 3D, I enjoyed watching the 2D version much more. Great eye candy, especially the Ironman vs. Thor fight scene..
post #1755 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by defjamz View Post

For those with the VT/ZT, have you calibrated your '3D' setting with the 'panel luminance' set to Mid or High? I thought I read somewhere that using the 'High' setting for panel luminance worked better for 3D, as well as enabling the motion smoothing.
I have not seen the F8500 in 3D, so i'm curious if it is improved over previous Sammy models. I did an 3D A/B comparison between my D8000 and my VT60, and they definitely looked different, but I couldn't really say which looked 'better'. It seemed the D8000 has more of 'depth' of 3D, but I found watching the VT60 gave me less of a headache after watching an entire 3D movie (Avengers, Alice in Wonderland, IMAX Deep Sea, etc.). And as much fun as it is to watch Avengers in 3D, I enjoyed watching the 2D version much more. Great eye candy, especially the Ironman vs. Thor fight scene..

Panel brightness = High was used on my VT50 3d calibration, my asumption would be it is the same for the VT/ZT since light output is usually an issue
post #1756 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by BizMarkie View Post

THANKS PH8TE,

BIZ IS MY DOG NAME....I GOT SAMSUNG LED 60' E7100 RIGHT NOW AND LOOKING TO REPLACE WITH SOMETHING BETTER AND BIGGER..MY LIVING ROOM HAS ALOT OF LIGHTS FROM WINDOWS ..HERE IS THE PIC SO MAYBE YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOME IDEA.....

THE BIGGEST SIZE I CAN GET IS 65' SO IT WILL BE MATCH TO MY FIREPLACE...DONT WANT TO GET TOO BIG...IT WILL LOOK UGLY ON FIREPLACE...

]

Nice setup !
post #1757 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermans View Post

Extremely impressive is a strong praise and one that can be used on either set we are talking about here. However the color accuracy as impressive as it can be when newly calibrated on the VT60 in 3D mode, the differences in color accuracy between a newly calibrated F8500 in 3D mode would be so close, only a machine would be able to tell them apart. In other words our human eyes wouldn't be able to see the differences. If we could, there would be little need for meters as we would be adjusting the color for accuracy ourselves.

I would say these errors would be visible, really no comparison from a calibration point of view:

https://www.tweaktv.com/images/stories/EditorialImages/KevinMiller/Samsung/pn60f8500%20%20movie%203d%203-23-13.pdf
post #1758 of 3096
Wow, that's rough. Worse than I recall seeing.^
post #1759 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auditor55 View Post

3D is dead. I don't understand all the arguments and pontificating over it when it comes to the F8500 vs the VT/ZT.

I just ordered a 60VT (which I might cancel), I probably would have purchased a F8500 if not for the high price.

I know there are still many fans of 3D, but I tend to agree with you (which scares me wink.gif) even though it's not really 'dead'. If you read online publications from sources like "Next TV-Today", you'll see frequent articles on how 3D is struggling. Sales are not good, the general public according to surveys is not particularly interested, ESPN just recently abandoned their 3D and most people just don't like wearing glasses to get the effect.

My current two displays do very well with 3D, but I guess I'm like many people, it really does little for me. I find too often it's an excuse for many producers to do a less effective job in movie production to simply draw in those that like 3D. The movie ticket premium for 3D is absurd IMO, and my wife and I notice that too often the movie times are such that you are almost forced to see a 3D presentation to see the movie at a reasonable time.

IMO you can count on one hand those movies that are truly impressive and the 3D doesn't seem like it was 'tacked on' to simply draw a certain segment to the theaters.
post #1760 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

...and even some to rent at my local Family Video store. smile.gif

Those still exist? eek.gif
post #1761 of 3096
Ok, I could use some advice. This will be my first plasma. Still undecided about which to get. The Samsung has been reviewed as the brightest plasma ever. But the Panasonic has been reviewed as the best TV reviewed - ever. It is also an inch larger, and I can get the 65 inch Panny for only $400 more than the 64 inch Samsung at my local BB. (I've seen them both there). It will be used for watching a lot of sports and regular TV with the lights on, and the occasional family movie night with the lights dimmed or off. This is a basement setup, so there is no natural light to worry about. But I do have 8 recessed lights for a total of 520 watts of light in that room (8x 65 watts = 520watts). That is a lot of light. My initial thought is go with the Samsung since it is brighter, but the Panny is supposed to do well in bright rooms too, and it has that extra inch and it's "the best ever". So here is my question "If Chad B. were to calibrate both sets in my room, would the final brightness of both displays be exactly the same? Or will the Samsung still be brighter after the calibration? Never had a TV calibrated before, so I don't know hao that all works.

I have attached a picture of the room showing the lights and colors of the room. I would appreciate your opinions as to which set would work better in that setting.

20130704_074946.jpg 1193k .jpg file
post #1762 of 3096
Is that the typical viewing lighting or more subdued ?
post #1763 of 3096
That is lights on full bright - 520 watts from 8 recessed cans. It is on a dimmer, so they can be dimmed to a little less than 1/2 full brightness. I would say that for typical viewing (sports, regular TV, games) that the lights would be at or slightly less than full bright.
post #1764 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by fr8doggr View Post

So here is my question "If Chad B. were to calibrate both sets in my room, would the final brightness of both displays be exactly the same? Or will the Samsung still be brighter after the calibration? Never had a TV calibrated before, so I don't know hao that all works.

The ABL on the F8500 is less aggressive, so I'd guess that a full white screen (or mostly white) will turn out better after calibration. I take it that the F8500 rejects light better too (less glare).

With either set, hopefully you will find yourself turning out the lights and watching movies far more often. Chad B recently did my VT60 and I couldn't be more thrilled with the ISF Day or Night. That said, nothing beats recreating a mini-theater experience when the lights are out (using ISF Night). I doubt you will be so picky with fine details when viewing football (1080i), etc.

It's a tough call, but you have such a nice room to black out and pop on The Dark Knight, Star Trek, Cars, etc. The F8500 will likely impress when the lights are out, but the edge is going to go ever so slightly to the VT60. Ask Chad B if he agrees.
post #1765 of 3096
fr8doggr, it's debatable as to which one is the 'best ever' as opinions vary. But regarding size, the Panasonic is not actually an 1" bigger. The Samsung is unusual is that when it says it's 64", it actually does measure 64" of diagonal screen size. The Panasonic is a 65" 'class' which generally means something like a 64.5". So in reality, there's probably a 1/2" difference in size. Hardly anything worthy of being a weighting factor in a decision.

However if you actually choose to watch with those lights on, there's little doubt in my mind the 8500 is the better option. The 8500 screen is much less reflective than the VT but more reflective than the ZT (if you were considering that option). But with either the ZT or VT, the 8500 retains a significant advantage in overall brightness and better controlled ABL.
post #1766 of 3096
I did email Chad, but have not gotten a response. I don't know if he monitors this site or not.

Thank you for your input. I know both sets will look phenomenal when the lights are turned down or off. But a large portion of viewing will definitely be with the lights on or only slightly dimmed. I am just not sure if the ZT will be able to handle the lighting as well as the F8500. I am afraid it will look washed out. ( And to be clear, I am not talking about reflections, no. I am just talking about the ambient light in the room). When reviewers talk about a TV's ability to handle bright rooms, I assume they mean natural light through picture windows and doors. But no one mentions how they will perform in a light-colored room with overhead lighting.
post #1767 of 3096
Thank you Ken. After reading your post, I checked both sites. Indeed, the 64 inch Samsung is a full 64 inches diagonal. The 65 inch Panasonic is 64.7 inches diagonal. So the size differential is weighing less in my mind now.
post #1768 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by fr8doggr View Post

I did email Chad, but have not gotten a response. I don't know if he monitors this site or not.

Thank you for your input. I know both sets will look phenomenal when the lights are turned down or off. But a large portion of viewing will definitely be with the lights on or only slightly dimmed. I am just not sure if the ZT will be able to handle the lighting as well as the F8500. I am afraid it will look washed out. ( And to be clear, I am not talking about reflections, no. I am just talking about the ambient light in the room). When reviewers talk about a TV's ability to handle bright rooms, I assume they mean natural light through picture windows and doors. But no one mentions how they will perform in a light-colored room with overhead lighting.
The ZT60 will *not* wash out under any lighting thanks to its superior filter. The only risk is it may look dimmer in comparison to the F8500 in a brighter environment.
post #1769 of 3096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polaris Cipher View Post

Those still exist? eek.gif

There are several which are fairly close to me.
post #1770 of 3096
My experience...

As a long time, happy Panny pro plasma owner, I fully intended to purchase a ZT or VT depending on PQ differences and price. However, after seeing all three displayed side by side with the same content, I chose the 8500. Settings were THX Cinema (Panny) and Movie (Samsung). I did not go in expecting to purchase a 8500. The performance in a bright room (my wife likes to have the lights on in the kitchen, den area where the TV is at), picture quality, whites, sharpness and "pop" we're the deciding factors. I also think the exterior looks better (hate chrome border on Panny) but that was a nice bonus. Felt the VT/ZT had slightly richer color (esp. red), and ZT had better filter. VT filter is a bit too reflective for my situation. Black detail on Avengers beginning and Dark Knight Rises fight scene slightly better.
I was able to get Best Buy to price match Abe's so 8500 was 40% cheaper than ZT price and, with the whites and ability to watch in well lit room (80+% of my viewing), 8500 was a no brainer.
The lag is an issue, even with blu-ray, as my preamp doesn't have delay settings. Reds look fine at home. The brightness and whites along with inky blacks, are amazing. I think I would have been happy with any of the sets,but the Samsung meets my needs best.
Wasn't going to post, as showing preference for Samsung seems to get attacked here, which is disappointing. Just giving my view, as someone who nearly ordered a VT/ZT sight unseen and dismissed Samsung initially. YMMV.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Plasma Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › F8500.. OR .. ZT60 ?????