or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › Which display wins the shootout? Let's have some fun. Make your predictions here.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Which display wins the shootout? Let's have some fun. Make your predictions here. - Page 35

post #1021 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by JW1212 View Post

Thanks for you feedback. So you'd rank the filters: ZT60, F8500, VT60? Where would/should that have impacted the voting scores? And in your opinion, is the better filter on the ZT better for brighter room or the 5 extra ftL from the VT?

Not to interrupt, but I asked a similar question earlier in the thread to Ken Ross, and he believes that the extra light output of the F8500 will help significantly with well-lit/natually-lit rooms, if the F8500 is a consideration for someone.
post #1022 of 1489
Yeah- apparently zt60 delayed at mht until end of month I just heard and given that it seems it is not worth it to wait or pay up, it is going to be a choice between the f8500 and the vt60. will go in later to compare the two and decide which to switch the zt order to.
post #1023 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post


And now Ken I will leave you alone to carry on both sides of the debate with yourself!biggrin.gif

I'm seeing no contradiction here. Help me out.
post #1024 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5150zx View Post

Anyone, is there a Google Translate for this?? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

"my English is perfect" - Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Have you put it up to a mirror. It reads easier that way. biggrin.gif
post #1025 of 1489
B
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptlurking View Post

I was at the shootout and can confirm I saw a big difference in the filters.
To my eyes...The VT60 did a worse job rejecting reflections vs. the ZT60 and F8500
Big difference? Can you go into more detail? Should one with a semi natural bright room stay away from the VT?
post #1026 of 1489
Actually AlltimeTvs dot com, has it 100 less then the VT60, which is 1,300 off list price, free shipping and includes 4 3d glasses. Now you really have something to think about.
FYI: Was in BB with Samsung glasses on, and they work fine on the VT60.
post #1027 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by degobah77 View Post

So in summary, if you want your plasma to look like a cheap, bright LCD, then Samsung really delivered this year.

But if you want quality over blinding, low-rent, section 8 light, the VT60 is the silent king of all things that are actually important.

Glad we could clear that up.

Can anyone tell me if this is just a case of delusion or an odd sense of humor? All the posts lean the same way, so at least there is a pattern to it.
post #1028 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Can anyone tell me if this is just a case of delusion or an odd sense of humor? All the posts lean the same way, so at least there is a pattern to it.

I'm gonna go with delusion. Undoubtedly. biggrin.gif
post #1029 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanii19 View Post

B
Big difference? Can you go into more detail? Should one with a semi natural bright room stay away from the VT?

From what I've gathered the VT60's AR filter is actually an improvement over last year's VT50. If this is indeed the case, or even if the AR filter is right on par with last years VT50, then the VT60 will hold it's own more than adequately in a well lit room, no question.
post #1030 of 1489
@Pinger- Really F8500 and VT60 are close? Did you see the F8500 side by side to the VT60? Clearly F8500 is 2x bright, superior in sharpness, shadow details and VIVID color. It is not even close! The F8500 looks like and LED next to the VT60. Was in BB saw 3-Vt50's, 2-VT60's next to 2-F8500 in a darkened room. Not even close. How can the experts even pretend the VT60 had higher Contrast ratio. I hope Samsung releases the Contrast Ratio soon so all the experts can hang their heads in shame.
post #1031 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangjim1 View Post

@Pinger- Really F8500 and VT60 are close? Did you see the F8500 side by side to the VT60? Clearly F8500 is 2x bright, superior in sharpness, shadow details and VIVID color. It is not even close! The F8500 looks like and LED next to the VT60. Was in BB saw 3-Vt50's, 2-VT60's next to 2-F8500 in a darkened room. Not even close. How can the experts even pretend the VT60 had higher Contrast ratio. I hope Samsung releases the Contrast Ratio soon so all the experts can hang their heads in shame.

Samsung releasing a contrast ratio number means absolutely nothing, those are never accuarate. An accurate number would come from an adequate professional calibration done by a competent, proven calibrator(s), which was the case with the VE Shootout.
post #1032 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by chunon View Post

I see this thread has returned to the gutter sad really frown.gif Why can't people just accept they are all great tvs and be done with it ! Not directly at you Ken just to clarify

I know. It seems to me that with the crowning of the new "King", quite a bit of hostility has been released. Just an observation.
post #1033 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoozthatat View Post

+1.. Why can't people appluad Samsung for their R&D efforts and acknowledge that they have a fantastic product in their F8500 series? (and in the F8000 for that matter)
All 3 of the top performing FP's are just that, top performing, and they'll have their ups and downs, regardless. That being said, I agree with whats been stated above, you can't go wrong with any of the three and which one you choose will be a personal preference and ultimately a great choice. Congrats to Ken and his new F8500! I'd love to be picking one up myself. (Except for that god awful pedestal it comes with) wink.gif

Thanks hoozthatat. Agreed, the pedestal isn't winning any beauty contests. Perhaps an incentive for dark room viewing? biggrin.gif
post #1034 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangjim1 View Post

@Pinger- Really F8500 and VT60 are close? Did you see the F8500 side by side to the VT60? Clearly F8500 is 2x bright, superior in sharpness, shadow details and VIVID color. It is not even close! The F8500 looks like and LED next to the VT60. Was in BB saw 3-Vt50's, 2-VT60's next to 2-F8500 in a darkened room. Not even close. How can the experts even pretend the VT60 had higher Contrast ratio. I hope Samsung releases the Contrast Ratio soon so all the experts can hang their heads in shame.

Possibly perceived vs measured. Really the only reason they would make that choice which makes sense since theirs would be acurate based of actual numbers vs what was perceived
post #1035 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph8te View Post

Did you watch day 2? they hooked up one of the Sony 4k players and the attendees were able to watch native 4k content......

I didn't realize that. That would have been nice to see on the first day. I've seen the Sony with 4K content before, but it might have given it a bit of a leg up on the first night.
post #1036 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by jh901 View Post


The F8500 is clearly a reference level panel, but is anyone going to argue that a typical, well transfered blu ray movie demo'd in a proper room (dark) is going to look better on the F8500 than on a VT60? Skin tones? Shadow details?

Um yeah, perhaps almost everyone that buys the F8500...that would include me too. I will agree though that shadow detail is a bit better on the Pannys.

Can we summarize it this way so that we don't go back & forth forever? You prefer the VT60's picture in almost all respects and I prefer the F8500's picture in almost all respects. Fair? No? I didn't think so. wink.gif
post #1037 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinger View Post

The difference in the VT-F8500 is so minimal that its totally subjective to the viewer, hence there reason it was so close for both experts and the audience..

One might even argue that the difference in the outcomes doesn't qualify as statistical significance. But either way, the closeness speaks volumes, especially because everything was considered "really good".
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

It should be noted too, the audience people were not just a bunch of average joes. You had enthusiasts (some from this forum), people in the field, people in broadcasting, etc. etc. They were not just pure average joes. I would not completely write off the audience in this case.

I would never write off the audience. They spend the money...
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

At the beginning of the first night Robert declined to identify the VT60 vs. the ZT60—the bezels look identical. The audience was asked to identify which was which. Although only half the audience had the guts to guess, nobody who did got it wrong—even though those two plasmas really do look and measure nearly identically.

... and apparently are knowledgeable too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph8te View Post

Rogo, I pretty much agree with you smile.gif everyone heard ABL and is running with it...However its the luminance that they are worried about which can be limited by ABL, but that is not the only factor, yet it is the most taked about....They then haveto ask themselves how much do I need for my situation? Not everyone is the same so they may find that the 30-35 limitation (in isf mode) will not effect them as much as it sounds like it will....For instance last years shootout the VT50 was calibrated to 33ftl, yet as far as I can remember we did not have this same talk....Of course I believe the VT50 can go higher in ISF mode as well without much ill effect......I encourage everyone to take a step back evaluate what your needs are and choose the best set for you[/]...We seem to get so caught up in what others think about the TV, the numbers, the flaws, etc and forget to sit back and enjoy the TVs we have....

Again, I find this to be a really well thought out summary that a lot of people would be well served to read. I will note that my ISF Day is calibrate significantly above 33 ft/L and I just don't find it wanting except in a very specific set of circumstances I will reiterate below for those shopping (as I believe they apply to some 2013 buyers, too.)

There was more or less no ABL talk in 2012, 2011, 2010, etc. etc... That doesn't mean we should ignore that the Samsung can do more with light output than any plasma has recently (maybe ever?), but it also means that we shouldn't overstate the importance of it. If it were that important, we'd have been railing against this "flaw" for a much longer period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptlurking View Post

I was at the shootout and can confirm I saw a big difference in the filters.
To my eyes...The VT60 did a worse job rejecting reflections vs. the ZT60 and F8500

As a VT50 owner (who had a previous generation Panasonic before then), I want to point out that I see filters having a number of different functions:

1) Ambient light rejection
2) Reflection resistance

But within (2), there are subtle differences between resisting reflections generally and resisting explicit reflections of light sources (which sort of loops (2) back to (1)).

On my set, function (1) is handled very well except with incident light sources where the angles of reflection of 0 and roughly 90 degrees are noticeable and irritating. Other than that, light sources tend to disappear. General reflection is apparent only when there is associated light. In my extensive viewing experiences with other sets, there is a wide variance in ability to handle (2) that is often disconnected from (1). Samsung's LCDs are fantastic at (1) and often dreadful at (2). I can easily comb my hair in a Samsung E, ES or F series LCD even though the ambient rejection is near flawless. But the display is reflective as all get out anyway.

The major flaw with my TV is that (1) and (2) conspire to make the "pendant"-type fixture in my eating area visible on screen from my main couch if it's illuminated. The filter can't reject that light while viewing on axis. The same light, turned on, cannot be seen hitting the screen when viewed from my "side" couch. (It's easy in my room to shut that light off when we watch TV, by the way, and we'll eventually be putting in recessed lighting that will completely render it irrelevant for entirely different reasons, but I digress....) The same light also cannot be seen when viewing the TV from a longer distance at the table where the light is sitting overhead. The angles are such that the light doesn't reflect back at the viewer. The filter is that good.

When you don't have the light "in the screen", there is no reflection of any kind either that is visible to a viewer. When you do, the TV acts as a poor man's mirror. I can't speak to the VT60/ZT60/F8500 filters in this context, but I think these are the kinds of issues people will run into.

* Does light reflect off where I'm sitting?
* Does the TV deal with general light well?

Etc. etc... For me, my TV does well on most of these, most of the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoozthatat View Post

Not to interrupt, but I asked a similar question earlier in the thread to Ken Ross, and he believes that the extra light output of the F8500 will help significantly with well-lit/natually-lit rooms, if the F8500 is a consideration for someone.

It should. The actual behavior of the filter will also matter, though. Without seeing one live, I can't add much more, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I know. It seems to me that with the crowning of the new "King", quite a bit of hostility has been released. Just an observation.

It seems to me that a lot is being made over a really small audience preference for one model over the other that doesn't even get followed by an "expert" preference for the same model. It also seems to me that a new "king" is crowned every year since last year's TV is replaced by a current year's model.

I'd suspect that if we could measure hostility on the forum, we'd find it roughly equal to previous years. But my Hostility Meter (tm) no longer functions, so I can't be certain.
post #1038 of 1489
I feel like the F8500 really deserved the win. If it hed it's own against the VT/ZT even when running the KUro demo content 95% of the time, plus the added brightness and apparent (but not quite real) sharpness it seems to give, I don't see why it shouldn't so long as the color can be made accurate to the naked eye.
post #1039 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoozthatat View Post

Given that the F8500 did win the shootout, albeit by a very close margin of victory, I would say yes, people would absoutely argue that.

And the audience had the F8500 besting the VT60 in contrast ratio, and moving resolution and had the two as equals in color accuracy. The experts had the F8500 only beating the VT60 in "Day Mode."

And that's a good point re the CR. Although I think (not sure) the CR measured higher at the shootout on the VT60, most attendees, including myself, thought the F8500 clearly had a greater CR to the eye. So why would that be? Because, IMO, it takes so very very little on the low end to greatly increase the CR and yet so very much to increase it on the top end. The top end of the 8500 was significantly brighter and that's what attendees saw. They also saw black levels that for the vast majority of material looked to be the same.

So what we tend to see with the naked eye (not a light meter measuring the lowest black levels) is the great dynamic range of the 8500, with the bright whites courtesy of both the expanded brightness and less aggressive ABL, together with great blacks that look so very close to the blacks of the VT & ZT for the vast majority of material.
Edited by Ken Ross - 5/14/13 at 3:03pm
post #1040 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

There's a narrative of half truths that includes 3D as not being important to the vast majority of current HDTV consumers.

Because it isn't. Every survey I've ever seen on 3D at home shows that the vast majority of viewers just don't care about it. It is what it is. I know that some on AVS are very in to 3D, but they surely don't represent the majority. It is no secret in the video community that 3D doesn't sell very well. So I see no half truth whatsoever.
post #1041 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangjim1 View Post

@Pinger- Really F8500 and VT60 are close? Did you see the F8500 side by side to the VT60? Clearly F8500 is 2x bright, superior in sharpness, shadow details and VIVID color. It is not even close! The F8500 looks like and LED next to the VT60. Was in BB saw 3-Vt50's, 2-VT60's next to 2-F8500 in a darkened room. Not even close. How can the experts even pretend the VT60 had higher Contrast ratio. I hope Samsung releases the Contrast Ratio soon so all the experts can hang their heads in shame.

Are you diegobah77's evil twin ? These extreme opinions on both sides benefit no one imo

As far as the contrast ratio numbers it was measured by "professionals" with the same meter, whether those numbers translate to your perception of which has a higher contrast ratio is really immaterial imo
Edited by chunon - 5/14/13 at 2:30pm
post #1042 of 1489
Ken, I understand your half of the truth, but I'm interested in both sides. Just because nighttime viewing represents the majority doesn't mean we neglect the daytime minority. If you don't think 3d is going to be selling very well in the very near future as displays get refreshed and prices keep going the way they are, then you will be by the wayside, if you aren't already of course.

Enjoy your new toy. I'm truly surprised by the way you sell it that you don't already own one by now.
post #1043 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

According to D-Nice, the three 2013 plasma sets were all in 96Hz mode.

I'm learning more about the shootout as I read here. So are we saying the 8500 would have had 2X as good a black level as it showed if it had been set to 60hz..assuming David K is right? I've always kept the 8500 at 60hz and saw no issues. So if true, black levels would have been even more competitive? Interesting.
post #1044 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I'm learning more about the shootout as I read here. So are we saying the 8500 would have had 2X as good a black level as it showed if it had been set to 60hz..assuming David K is right? I've always kept the 8500 at 60hz and saw no issues. So if true, black levels would have been even more competitive? Interesting.

I would love to have a definitive answer to that question.
post #1045 of 1489
i see today this thread has taken a direct hit from the solar flare biggrin.gif
post #1046 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph8te View Post

......everyone heard ABL and is running with it...However its the luminance that they are worried about which can be limited by ABL, but that is not the only factor, yet it is the most taked about...

Yup. IMO I think it's a big mistake to think this can only occur on commercials with full-screen whites. If that was it, I could give a rat's tush about it. But it isn't, it simply is not. I did the comparisons on normal content between a Pro 151 and a Sharp Elite for a month. They were both in my house. I've done the comparisons between an 8500 and a VT60 at more MHTs than I care to mention. In fact, I've yet to see a commercial in my comparison of the latter, just actual content. The ABL's throttling is unmistakeable. This is not an illusion, it's not a trick your eyes are playing on you and it's not just the result of an A/B. I can see it clearly watching an ABL hindered display all by itself.

Perhaps some are more sensitive to it than others. Perhaps some have never really seen what can happen when an ABL is less aggressive or simply doesn't exist.
post #1047 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoozthatat View Post

Not to interrupt, but I asked a similar question earlier in the thread to Ken Ross, and he believes that the extra light output of the F8500 will help significantly with well-lit/natually-lit rooms, if the F8500 is a consideration for someone.

But just keep in mind that if a light source is falling directly on the screen, even an F8500, it still will be 'unpleasant'.
post #1048 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimerrian View Post

So was the Samsung in 96hz mode??? David Katzmier says the 8500 mll doubles from 0.002 to 0.004 mll. Anybody else factor this during the shootout?

The calibration reports will show what the actual black levels were. I believe they will also show the ANSI black levels as well, which are more relevant to actual content.
post #1049 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustangjim1 View Post

@Pinger- Really F8500 and VT60 are close? Did you see the F8500 side by side to the VT60? Clearly F8500 is 2x bright, superior in sharpness, shadow details and VIVID color. It is not even close! The F8500 looks like and LED next to the VT60. Was in BB saw 3-Vt50's, 2-VT60's next to 2-F8500 in a darkened room. Not even close. How can the experts even pretend the VT60 had higher Contrast ratio. I hope Samsung releases the Contrast Ratio soon so all the experts can hang their heads in shame.
The Samsung has floating blacks and a higher brightness, which creates the illusion of greater contrast. Dark / low APL scenes will look similar enough, but bright scenes the Samsung will stand out. The experts calibrated the displays so they know the CR measurements... that's probably why they gave the VT/ZT the edge for CR. On/Off contrast the Samsung clearly wins, but ANSI contrast the Panasonics are better. Or in simpler terms, if the Samsung was calibrated to the same brightness level as the Panasonics, it would be a different story.

All this arguing over which brand is better is pretty pathetic. All 3 sets are obviously very good and it really comes down to your lighting conditions. The Samsung is definitely the more versatile of the 3, though. The experts chose the Panasonics mainly because it would perform slightly better in what would be their viewing environment. That may not be the case for everyone.
post #1050 of 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

It seems to me that a lot is being made over a really small audience preference for one model over the other that doesn't even get followed by an "expert" preference for the same model.

"Expert's" opinions and "user's" opinions are so often diametrically opposed. Just look at so many products reviewed on CNET from audio equipment to cellphones to routers...you pick the product. You'd think that two different products were being looked at, one by the 'experts' and the other by the 'users'. I personally gave up using these reviews to gauge the merits of a product for my own use since my experience has been the same as many other users. I can't tell you how many times I've bought a product, looked at a review and thought "this can't be the same product they reviewed".

And this can work either way from the expert review saying the product was fantastic and my experience being the opposite to them feeling the product was crap and me thinking it was great.

In the end it's what we see, hear or experience that is the truth as to what's 'best' for us. 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 › Which display wins the shootout? Let's have some fun. Make your predictions here.