or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › Panasonic ZT60 first review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Panasonic ZT60 first review - Page 5

post #121 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by agkss View Post

Personally i trust more in David Mackenzie's numbers. AVForums has a little discrepancy between reviewers.
I agree. But the reviewer of the ZT60 at AVForums used a Klein K-10, the same as what David uses.
post #122 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahzel View Post

I agree. But the reviewer of the ZT60 at AVForums used a Klein K-10, the same as what David uses.

I know...i said that for other stuff like options how measure luminance, what makes a panel luminance HIGH to an image, an ANSI Checkerboard measure, and another sutff.

Is more "in depth review"
Edited by agkss - 4/29/13 at 1:07pm
post #123 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

unacceptable exceptions? Say it ain't so.

When I ditched my Samsung LCD in 2007 and went for a Pioneer plasma, the "horrible" whites were the last thing on my mind, meaning their "horribleness" didn't stand out as much as some are trying to accentuate.

agree. as i already stated, the eye sees everything relative. and unless there's a bright white reference right beside the TV whatever the brightest shade of grey is will become 'white' to your brain.

i bought a new projector screen and was concerned about getting darker blacks so went with a grey screen material. i was a little concerned after watching my projector on my current white screen and a light grey bedsheet side by side. the blacks looked WAY better on the sheet, but the whites, weren't white. then i tried doing just the bedsheet, no white screen beside it and like magic it looked like it was displaying white again. i was convinced.

it's the same way bias lighting tricks our eyes into thinking dark grey is black. and of course this means it all comes down to where and how you want to use the tv. in a dark room, worry about your blacks. outside, or beside a bright window, you need more brightness/whites. it just happens that not many enthusiasts do critical viewing in the brightest rooms they can. and that why more enthusiasts are concerned about blacks
post #124 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by agkss View Post

I know...i said that for other stuff like options how measure luminance, what makes a panel luminance HIGH to an image, an ANSI Checkerboard measure, and another sutff.

Is more "in depth review"
Nm, thought you were just doubting the black levels for some reason.
post #125 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahzel View Post

Nm, thought you were just doubting the black levels for some reason.

That happen because they said 0.002cd/m2 on 50" GT60...And then said 0.004cd/m2...In HDTV Test always was 0.008cd/m2
post #126 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahzel View Post

Nm, thought you were just doubting the black levels for some reason.

I think everyone is jsut seeking clarification on the ANSI checkerboard numbers....I dont think anyone is questioning the dynamic contrast...the ANSI numbers were off to me and started thi whole mess wink.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by agkss View Post

That happen because they said 0.002cd/m2 on 50" GT60...And then said 0.004cd/m2...In HDTV Test always was 0.008cd/m2

Im sure well see different numerbs again even if slightly so.....We'll also ahve to wait for the NA reviews as I am sure we may get different numbers again wink.gif.....
post #127 of 257
Something to consider is that panel size has to be considered when comparing any white measurements, whether it's peak luminance or ANSI white. Smaller panels are usually a bit brighter. Not to mention meters can have slight variances, too. But ~53 cdm2 / 15.5 fL does seem low for ANSI white, even for a 60" panel.
Edited by rahzel - 4/29/13 at 2:16pm
post #128 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glashub View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheshechic View Post

Hmmm, you assumed, but I understand how you got there. By "people, like you" I only meant to say that you are not alone, otherwise I would have left the comma out. wink.gif I did not intend to "attack" you.

I understand your argument regarding perception, which is how you arrived at the conclusion that you were being "attacked". However, in talking about Ken, I was attempting to be kind in choosing the word "sarcasm" and thus soften the attack that I would receive for my post. What I find interesting is your choice of response, in print and otherwise. cool.gif

Very clever but not really -- "I don't understand why so many people, like you, disapprove of others who disagree or find his "analysis" and bias," You grouped me in with "so many people" for no reason at all. And you have failed to identify who those people so, yes, it felt like an attack because it seems you don't hold those people in high regard.

I have no time for linguistic legerdemain.

I have never expressed any dissapporval of anyone nor have I written a word about the Samsung vs. the Panasonic. I could care less who makes the best looking display.


LOL

I'm sorry, but despite your intent to attack others (and you did), my intent was not to attack you. As you stated previously, "It's written words. The tone, subtext, perceived sarcasm, etc. are delivered by your inner voice in your head as you read his written words. In other words, I'd argue, it's a projection of your reality." I was merely answering the question you asked, of which you are not the first. Shall I post it for you to refresh your memory?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glashub View Post

Why do so many people have a hard-on for Ken? He's said many times that he is display agnostic. I find his reporting to be fair and with appropriate caveats.
post #129 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glashub View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

I agree, the comma made all the difference in the meaning, and there was not necessarily any subtextual (I made this up) delineation of "people" that you were referencing, per se'.

*grabs flamesuit*

I strongly disagree. The commas are simply good grammar. The commas (note that there are 2 commas) don't exclude me from the group she is referring to. The fact remains I asked a question that's all. Sheshe has never adressed me in the past and included me, "people, like you, disapprove" in reply. Not needed. Answer the friggin' question from your perspective or don't.

I've never been accused of good grammar. eek.gif

Your twisting things. Seriously, you are. I've explained my intent, if you choose not to accept it then the problem is yours alone.
post #130 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph8te View Post


They dont say what mode it dropped off for only that it dropped off when ANSI was taken...

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Hitman- View Post

Thanks and agree and so I have posted a question asking him to give more detail on this!

In response to this, the ANSI checkerboard pattern was used in "Pro" mode, this was the reply....

Quote

No this was in the Pro mode but the same thing happened with the Kuro, the brightness dropped off to 60-70 cd/m2 when measuring the ANSI checkerboard. It's curious that the measurements using the ANSI checkerboard matched the peak brightness of the EBU mode, especially as luminance is one of the factors they take into account when certifying a TV.
post #131 of 257
That would be a shameful calibration if AVForums would use EBU mode for the ANSI contrast measurements. This relates also for blacks and peak whites. A true calibrator never measures contrast ratio without having a set calibrated correctly first.
And if you read over the AVFforums review, it is quite clear. The reviewer is a certified calibrator and he states, quote:

"In the THX Cinema and Professional modes the P60ZT65 was also able to maintain highly effective shadow detail just above black, so these impressive numbers weren't being achieved simply by crushing the blacks in the image. However in the EBU mode the blacks were crushed and thus shadow detail was compromised in this setting."

He cant go further with that setting. This is the same also for peak whites measurements. He states, quote:
"We measured the Professional mode at 92 cd/m2 using the Mid Panel Luminance setting but if we used the High setting we could get up to 108 cd/m2. However in this setting the blacks were crushed, which again compromised shadow detail, so we would recommend using the Mid setting."

So he cant use the high setting, measure and post the settings as reference in the review. He needs to follow the standards (THX/ISF).
post #132 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Hitman- View Post


In response to this, the ANSI checkerboard pattern was used in "Pro" mode, this was the reply....

Quote

No this was in the Pro mode but the same thing happened with the Kuro, the brightness dropped off to 60-70 cd/m2 when measuring the ANSI checkerboard. It's curious that the measurements using the ANSI checkerboard matched the peak brightness of the EBU mode, especially as luminance is one of the factors they take into account when certifying a TV.

Indeed it was worded poorly IMO, but even then it still doesnt explain the steep drop off.If the Kuro dropped to 60-70 It would still be "brighter"...Im not trying to bash the set at all, it just seems "off" that it would be this far off form the previous sets we have seen as far as white luminance goes on the checkerboard......I understand there will be a drop off there always is, but when you have the GG\VT getting the ANSI luminance numbers they have it makes me just wonder why isnt the ZT out doing them.....What goes on in my head is that in order for the blacks to get that low the peak white take a hit when displayed together.......Its almost the exact opposite of what the other sets do, where they arebrighter, but the bottom black luminance level takes a hit....
post #133 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plutotype View Post

That would be a shameful calibration if AVForums would use EBU mode for the ANSI contrast measurements. This relates also for blacks and peak whites. A true calibrator never measures contrast ratio without having a set calibrated correctly first.
And if you read over the AVFforums review, it is quite clear. The reviewer is a certified calibrator and he states, quote:

"In the THX Cinema and Professional modes the P60ZT65 was also able to maintain highly effective shadow detail just above black, so these impressive numbers weren't being achieved simply by crushing the blacks in the image. However in the EBU mode the blacks were crushed and thus shadow detail was compromised in this setting."

He cant go further with that setting. This is the same also for peak whites measurements. He states, quote:
"We measured the Professional mode at 92 cd/m2 using the Mid Panel Luminance setting but if we used the High setting we could get up to 108 cd/m2. However in this setting the blacks were crushed, which again compromised shadow detail, so we would recommend using the Mid setting."

So he cant use the high setting, measure and post the settings as reference in the review. He needs to follow the standards (THX/ISF).

Im not sure if they will be able to get higher levels out of the checkerboard ANSI, which is how it is coming across in the review and the response without effecting the picture\calibration in some way. By using the Pro mode (which is what they say they used for the ANSI checkerboard) they reached ~97cdm peak white and .001 CDM Black level...However when both were displayed in ANSI checkerbaord fashion the peak white luminance goes to 50's and the black lumiance level goes to .002/003....

They could ahve used THX Cinema which had 2cdm higher for peak white, but Im not sure if that would ahve made a difference in the checkerboard.......

Hopefully a calibrator will come by or someone whos more knoledgeable about the subject to help clear things up.....I dont know if I m looking at it wrong and everything looks "fine" to them, or if this is a head scratcher since the GT\VT were also calibrated to 120cdm...white the light output was "hit" would the peak whites look "dull" when comapred to a VT\ZT because of this difference?They will still be white, thats not what I am saying, but it appears that the GT\VT would be "brighter". This of course then has to go into comparrison of the black levels so it may not seem as big of a difference when watching conent as the delta between the darkest dark and brightest bright (lamens term) is greater, thus the comments on contrast levels....
post #134 of 257
They used Pro mode when measuring ANSI contrast and unfortunately in ANSI the whites went down to 50s, confirmed by the reviewer now:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18930591&postcount=61
post #135 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plutotype View Post

They used Pro mode when measuring ANSI contrast and unfortunately in ANSI the whites went down to 50s, confirmed by the reviewer now:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18930591&postcount=61

yes Hitman verified this....Im thinking it may not matter what mode they are in they see the same thing happen (50's when checkerboard)....Otherwise why not sue THZ Cinema which starts off with the highest cdm.....
post #136 of 257
du du dun!
post #137 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

du du dun!




biggrin.gif

bahhh I thought it would be something simple to explain but turned into way more than I ever thought it would be when I brought it up.....
post #138 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by jh901 View Post

Only two? Even though the VT60 will likely be the #2 best plasma of 2013 I'm surprised you dropped the Samsung already.

Best by whose definitions?
post #139 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glashub View Post

Why do so many people have a hard-on for Ken? He's said many times that he is display agnostic. I find his reporting to be fair and with appropriate caveats.

Thanks Flashub, but it's only some of the close-minded Panasonic zealots that attack me. AVS can be a strange place as I've learned over the years. We've had some beauts! wink.gif
post #140 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Thanks Flashub, but it's only some of the close-minded Panasonic zealots that attack me. AVS can be a strange place as I've learned over the years. We've had some beauts! wink.gif

I think anybody here with more than 20K posts deserves respect.
post #141 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheshechic View Post

His gruffness, or sarcasm fail to hide that fluff and only serve to generate resentment, and/or make him a target.

On the other hand, instead of feeling as though Ken needs defending, consider that his reputation is what it is because it's the reputation he wanted. wink.gif

Gruffness? Fluff? My 'reputation'? My my, you've made me so very sad. I guess we'll never be buds. smile.gif

Still trying to figure out what my 'reputation' is. smile.gif
post #142 of 257
An
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Thanks Flashub, but it's only some of the close-minded Panasonic zealots that attack me. AVS can be a strange place as I've learned over the years. We've had some beauts! wink.gif
d we all know there are no Samsung or kuro zealots around here lol
post #143 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plutotype View Post

They used Pro mode when measuring ANSI contrast and unfortunately in ANSI the whites went down to 50s, confirmed by the reviewer now:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18930591&postcount=61

With this boring brightness i think Panasonic did a very good job to stop making plasma TV.
post #144 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheshechic View Post

His gruffness, or sarcasm fail to hide that fluff and only serve to generate resentment, and/or make him a target.

On the other hand, instead of feeling as though Ken needs defending, consider that his reputation is what it is because it's the reputation he wanted. wink.gif

Gruffness? Fluff? My 'reputation'? My my, you've made me so very sad. I guess we'll never be buds. smile.gif

Still trying to figure out what my 'reputation' is. smile.gif

I don't dislike you. I do respect you. I just don't think that you need, or want, a pedestal or body guard. smile.gif
post #145 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slickman View Post

I'm not sure I like that they sacrificed the whites to get those deep blacks.

I'm not sure we have a handle on the brightness limitations of the ZT. Let's wait for the shootout to be sure.

But I agree in principle. If they really did sacrifice brightness to achieve that last bit of black, it would be an issue for me too. Didn't the ZT literature talk about enhanced brightness or am I thinking of something else? I mean I never expected it to achieve the brightness levels of the 8500, but I did think it was going to be brighter than previous Panny plasmas.

So let's see if the shootout reveals anything about this.
post #146 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

Grayer whites? Shades of gray are nothing more than white at varying lumanance levels. Equal parts red, green and blue from the brightest white down through the grayscale until you reach black.

Also, here is what constitutes picture quality and it looks like the ZT might just be the winner until OLED or something else comes along. I'll wait for the Shootout but there could be a ZT in my future.

Well, It sounds like I just may be asking you to calibrate my new ZT60 instead. I actually ordered the F8500 from Amazon, but they said they could not ship it to my area, so I ending up ordering it from Crutchfeild, as a result, I have a 60 day return window instead of 30 days. The extra 30 days will allow me to see the results of the shootout and the Samsung firmware update...then make a decision. I wasn't happy with Amazon at the time, but it may have been a blessing in disguise smile.gif
post #147 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plutotype View Post

They used Pro mode when measuring ANSI contrast and unfortunately in ANSI the whites went down to 50s, confirmed by the reviewer now:
http://www.avforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18930591&postcount=61

So maybe the GT is the sleeper display in the entire Panasonic line. smile.gif
post #148 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by slimoli View Post

I think anybody here with more than 20K posts deserves respect.

Even if they're all biased and sarcastic? wink.gif

BTW, having 20K posts qualifies me as 'lifeless' according to my son. It's sad to say he's probably right.
post #149 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by chunon View Post

An
d we all know there are no Samsung or kuro zealots around here lol

No denying that, but i don't think there's a problem with zealots, bias or fanboys, as long as we keep it civil, don't name call or attack.
post #150 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheshechic View Post

I don't dislike you. I do respect you. I just don't think that you need, or want, a pedestal or body guard. smile.gif

I'm not crazy about the Samsung pedestal but I did like the Bodyguard. Good movie. smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Plasma Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › Panasonic ZT60 first review