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 6

post #151 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackobots View Post

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

Get both, get them calibrated and report back to us prior to the shootout. We can start a collection for this project.
post #152 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Get both, get them calibrated and report back to us prior to the shootout. We can start a collection for this project.

Yea right! My name is not Jacko-Trump wink.gif
post #153 of 257
Waiting for David Mackenzie numbers...and then work to buy (If it arrives) a ZT60 on 2014. smile.gif
VT60 is another option...
post #154 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph8te View Post

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....

I'm thinking the same, it is confusing as to why it drops so much, especially as the earlier model is much brighter, has Panasonic taken a step back concerning whites - sacrificing the output to give a lower black level?

It's seems something is a miss and could better manipulation of the controls give a better ANSI, is this because it has the new EBU standard for Europe or due to the UK power supply regulations?

Interested in what the NA version ZT60 will produce.
post #155 of 257
Spec sheet on the ZT60 shows about 189 watts average power consumption for the 65". That strikes me as a bit low relative to the 8500. Great for your electric bill, but perhaps indicative of the power supply and the luminance levels?

Just guessing here.
post #156 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Spec sheet on the ZT60 shows about 189 watts average power consumption for the 65". That strikes me as a bit low relative to the 8500. Great for your electric bill, but perhaps indicative of the power supply and the luminance levels?

Just guessing here.
Ken it seems pretty clear that you have a preference for the Samsung. Why do you take every opportunity to knock the VT/ZT? It seems as if most here already know your position. I'm not sure what it adds to the mix to continually knock the Panny's.
post #157 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackobots View Post

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


I already have the 2013 ControlCal upgrade so if you get one we can open up the ISF modes.
post #158 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Spec sheet on the ZT60 shows about 189 watts average power consumption for the 65". That strikes me as a bit low relative to the 8500. Great for your electric bill, but perhaps indicative of the power supply and the luminance levels?

Just guessing here.

I've hit a whopping 450w with my 8500 on certain content.eek.gif
post #159 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

I already have the 2013 ControlCal upgrade so if you get one we can open up the ISF modes.

You can enable ISF modes on the VT60 and ZT60 without controlcal.You turn it on in the tool settings menu....

Granted you can still use controlcal to avoid popping up the osd continously when calibrating.
post #160 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

I already have the 2013 ControlCal upgrade so if you get one we can open up the ISF modes.

I'm leaning that way! I don't think I can resist at least trying it rolleyes.gif
post #161 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Hitman- View Post

I'm thinking the same, it is confusing as to why it drops so much, especially as the earlier model is much brighter, has Panasonic taken a step back concerning whites - sacrificing the output to give a lower black level?

It's seems something is a miss and could better manipulation of the controls give a better ANSI, is this because it has the new EBU standard for Europe or due to the UK power supply regulations?

Interested in what the NA version ZT60 will produce.

Yeah, its too early really to tell anything, I just found it "odd".....Hopefully as we get more reviews and the NA models to compare to we'll see if there is any difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Spec sheet on the ZT60 shows about 189 watts average power consumption for the 65". That strikes me as a bit low relative to the 8500. Great for your electric bill, but perhaps indicative of the power supply and the luminance levels?

Just guessing here.

Just found this:
http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/model/TC-P65ZT60?t=specs

On mode Average Power Consumption

189 W



Rated Power Consumption

620 W


http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/PN64F8500AFXZA-specs


Typical Power Consumption

218 W



Maximum Power Consumption

653 W

So you are not wrong as the F8500 uses more power, but since they are using different terms to describe the power usage who knows.....
post #162 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterLewis View Post

You can enable ISF modes on the VT60 and ZT60 without controlcal.You turn it on in the tool settings menu.... Yeah, forgot about that.

Granted you can still use controlcal to avoid popping up the osd continously when calibrating. ControlCal is 2-3 times faster than using the remote - i'll never forget that. smile.gif
post #163 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by airgas1998 View Post

I've hit a whopping 450w with my 8500 on certain content.eek.gif

Impossible seeing how my 60" kuro hovers around 300 and below.
post #164 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post

Impossible seeing how my 60" kuro hovers around 300 and below.

how is that relevent at all?

there's no way your corvette used 14mpg because my viper gets 17mpg...

they are two completely different tv's...
post #165 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post

Impossible seeing how my 60" kuro hovers around 300 and below.

oh..ok... i guess my APC must be flawed. thx for pointing that out to me.rolleyes.gif
Edited by airgas1998 - 4/30/13 at 2:11pm
post #166 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuralSex View Post

Ken it seems pretty clear that you have a preference for the Samsung. Why do you take every opportunity to knock the VT/ZT? It seems as if most here already know your position. I'm not sure what it adds to the mix to continually knock the Panny's.

Hmm, my post was 'knocking' the ZT by stating what its power consumption is and conjecturing as to its impact? Alrighty then.
post #167 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by airgas1998 View Post

I've hit a whopping 450w with my 8500 on certain content.eek.gif

And Air, that was my point precisely. There may be a large difference in power consumption between these two sets and perhaps that manifests itself in some way. It's stunning to me that stating this could be construed as knocking the ZT. If anything, it's probably more a knock on the Sammy as an energy guzzler.

You can't win with some.
post #168 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

And Air, that was my point precisely. There may be a large difference in power consumption between these two sets and perhaps that manifests itself in some way. It's stunning to me that stating this could be construed as knocking the ZT. If anything, it's probably more a knock on the Sammy as an energy guzzler.

You can't win with some.

no you can't, and now even what my own eyes see and read on my APC is not correct either.
post #169 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph8te View Post

Yeah, its too early really to tell anything, I just found it "odd".....Hopefully as we get more reviews and the NA models to compare to we'll see if there is any difference.
Just found this:
http://shop.panasonic.com/shop/model/TC-P65ZT60?t=specs

On mode Average Power Consumption

189 W



Rated Power Consumption

620 W


http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/PN64F8500AFXZA-specs


Typical Power Consumption

218 W



Maximum Power Consumption

653 W

So you are not wrong as the F8500 uses more power, but since they are using different terms to describe the power usage who knows.....

Good find! The spec sheet I saw (a nice .pdf) on the ZT only showed the average power consumption, not the rated power consumption as your spec sheet showed.

So there may not be a significant difference between the two. I think that's good news as the power supply may not be hindering the brightness.

We'll see what happens at the shootout.
post #170 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post

Impossible seeing how my 60" kuro hovers around 300 and below.

Huh? What???
post #171 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by airgas1998 View Post

no you can't, and now even what my own eyes see and read on my APC is not correct either.

I think you may need to get your eyes, checked because I still say its impossible that you are getting those readings biggrin.giftongue.gif
post #172 of 257
Dunno where Saprano was coming from with that one. confused.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Good find! The spec sheet I saw (a nice .pdf) on the ZT only showed the average power consumption, not the rated power consumption as your spec sheet showed.

So there may not be a significant difference between the two. I think that's good news as the power supply may not be hindering the brightness.

We'll see what happens at the shootout.
Yes, one would think with power ratings like that, the ZT60 can get plenty bright for most applications.
post #173 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Dunno where Saprano was coming from with that one. confused.gif
Yes, one would think with power ratings like that, the ZT60 can get plenty bright for most applications.

That remains to be seen. Plenty bright possibly, but with the possibility of crushed blacks per the review.

On to the shootout. smile.gif
post #174 of 257
The SRP is too too high for such a "crippled" panel.
post #175 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

The SRP is too too high for such a "crippled" panel.

From reading many of your posts and understanding your wit, I trust you're joking since this "crippled" panel has yet to be released. tongue.gif;) I believe you have a ZT pre-ordered too... cool.gif

So crippled, in fact, that it won't win the shootout by as much as it would have otherwise!
post #176 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

The SRP is too too high for such a "crippled" panel.

Yup, all these panels are 'crippled' in one way or the other. wink.gif
post #177 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5150zx View Post

From reading many of your posts and understanding your wit, I trust you're joking since this "crippled" panel has yet to be released. tongue.gif;) I believe you have a ZT pre-ordered too... cool.gif

So crippled, in fact, that it won't win the shootout by as much as it would have otherwise!
I am, perceptive one. wink.gif...it's hard to imagine that Panasonic's flagship model would only be suitable for a batcave. Perhaps they will title this setting with only around 53 cd/m2 max brightness as the Batcave setting in NA.eek.gif
post #178 of 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

I am, perceptive one. wink.gif...it's hard to imagine that Panasonic's flagship model would only be suitable for a batcave. Perhaps they will title this setting with only around 53 cd/m2 max brightness as the Batcave setting in NA.eek.gif

WEll supposedly they did meet the 120CDM so maybe its "bright enough" wink.gif
post #179 of 257
Here's a thought on the crushed blacks issue resulting from pumping up the ZT's brightness. Does it matter?

If you're raising the brightness, then presumably you're adjusting to a brighter room environment. If that's the case, would you even see this 'near black' information given the brighter room conditions?

So it may be that you can pump up the brightness with no real-world tradeoffs. Measured yes, but real world?
post #180 of 257
Pretty funny people thinking "only" black level determiens which tv is better. To "dethrone", it must have the same color accuracy, the same antireflective properties, etc... And I can tell you it will not have as good of antireflective, as far as it will have much worse vertical viewing angles, as all Panasonics due, in comparison to the elites. I ahven't bothered reading about it, but I doubt the color accuracy will be as good, etiher, and also every panasonic i've tried had worse buzzing and more noticeable flicker, compared with the elite.

edit: also, that site has some weird ways of doing thigns sometimes. I forget now what they did thatw as odd, but seems like they didn't use local dimming on the hx929 or something similar to that. I don't care onew ay or another because I don't want a 65. Just saying, though, you shouldn't jump to conclusions on "dethroning" based on one review. Last year anotehr site even listed the WT50 as so great it would be mindbobblign to people how perfect it was, only to get a terrible review on CNET, one of their worst reviews in years. lol
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