Panasonic TH-50PF9UK (1080p panel) what do we know about it? - Page 8

csundblom,

I hope you are wrong! Frame rate conversion to 60Hz would be a disaster for PAL.

Anyway, according to this, even 24Hz should be supported on the DVI:

http://www.avforums.com/forums/showt...=421377&page=5

Of course this is the European 65" model, but I don't think that should make any difference.

We started an "official" thread over here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=773869

Maybe I'm wrong. I don't have a 1080/24p source to test from. 48 and 72 were not working however. The PAL model could be different, for obvious reasons.

carl, how much do you think your external processor is influencing the picture you're getting and the settings you're using? The reason I ask is that most people considering this display do not have an external processor/scaler. Also, your comparisons seem to be to the 6th generation model, but have you seen the 9th generation non-1080p model for comparison? (particularly in regard to black levels)

For 1080i/p content, very little, since I have the scaler set in pass-through mode for those resolutions. For SD, it makes a much bigger difference. The settings should be applicable to anyone using DVI with reference video signals since the scaler doesn't do any translation of the levels in my setup.

I have worked on several 9 series non-1080p sets, but I've never had the opportunity to compare them side-by-side with the 1080p models. From what I can recall, the black level seems comparable. It's very acceptable, and certainly better than most (if not all) LCD/Plasma panels on the market. CRTs can produce better blacks, but it's hard to find them in 50" size. :-)

Carl, is your DVD source HDDVD/BluRay ?

No, standard def DVD.

My 8G commercial 768p Panasonic is driven at whatever rate I feed it. It does 50Hz just fine and 48Hz, too. I can check that with the moving motion bar test screen of my iScan. I would suppose that the 1080p models support this, too, otherwise Panasonic can forget me as a customer!

Are you using the DVI blade?

Nope, cause the DVI blade doesn't allow native rate with anything but 60Hz in the 768p models. However, several people in the US forums are using 720p50 and 1080i50 with the DVI blade, and I'm sure I would have heard if that was FRCed to 60Hz internally.

Hello all, my first post. I am looking at buying the TH-50PF9UK and appreciate your comments. Very helpful. - thank you. Why are you not using HDMI instead of DVI? Something woring with HDMI or is it just because the DVI came with the TH-50PF9UK? Also, I just wanted to confirm that the HDMI and DVI both support HDCP? Thanks again.

1. HDMI is a much poorer physical connector than DVI since it doesn't screw in.
2. DVI blade comes with the set for free.
3. DVI supports 1080p native resolution, current HDMI blade does not.

They both support HDCP.

Thanks Carl.

Question: If I plan on connecting both DirecTV and Cable - (both HD STB's), a gaming console, a DVD player (ultimately an HD player but SD for now), and have a 5.1 sound system, do I have to get the consumer version? Also, what if any, are the advantages of getting the commercial version?

Thanks for posting that, VFR.

"Yes, this monitor does support 1080p with 24Hz, 24Hz sF, 25Hz, 30Hz, 50Hz, and 60Hz refresh rates, through the DVI, RGB, or HDMI inputs."

Really? This is I do doubt. It contradicts what is stated in every piece of Panasonic literature.

I have not kept up with the 65" PF owners thread, but surely someone would have tested this by now, and it would be well known if true. No? I realize that the 65" and 50" are different displays but the circuitry and firmware should be nearly identical if not exactly identical. And we know for sure that the input boards the two displays use are exactly the same.

That's the good news/bad news part of owning this monitor. I can now clearly see the flaws in almost every HD broadcast source, especially the evil multicasters.

Black level was measured at 1.54 nits. I found a article that stated that 1 fL = 3.426 nits. Based on that the black level is FL is .43FL. That is not good at all, so I must be doing the math wrong.

What would the black level be in Foot Lamberts?

- Rich

That all depends on the viewing conditions. A 50" putting out 30 fL Full white field) is too bright to watch in a dark room, comfortably. As you add bias lighting (Ideal-Lume), or add ambient light, .043 fL can look very black. There is also a factor of how the .43 fL ?? was measured and with what instrument. I can see .43 fL for 10 IRE, but too high for 0 IRE.

I did a recent Pioneer Elite (not 1080p) that measured 10 IRE at .386 fL, (with my Sencore equipment).

I was actually surprised at that measurement too. I expected it to be higher than the non-1080p models, but that seems a bit high. For instance, that reviewer (P. Putman)
wrote in an article now several years old:

"The Panasonic panels typically produce a black level of .2 nits, equivalent to my Princeton CRT monitor."

http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages/shmontrast.htm

So it's surprising to me to see a measurement of 1.54 nits for the new model, while Putman still remarks about the excellent black levels. (I would have expected he'd point out the difference between this 1080p model and the lower res Panasonic plasmas he's been measuring and reviewing for years now).

I am glad you reminded me of that. I think it is a typo since it looks to off by a decimal point. Does anyone know how to send him an email or PM?

- Rich

I've got a simple question for those who have seen this set in person. Is it 250% better than the 50PH9UK (720P)? That's the current price difference, as you can purchase approximately 2 1/2 50PHs for the price of the 50PF.

Thanks to your post I looked on his site for an e-mail address and asked him your question.

It is corrected on the site this morning to .154 nits.

He said that he uses the Colorfacts 6000 to make flat panel measurements.

Because there is such wide variation in low light level measurements this is criticial to know. However it is not enough as various light measuring devices can be attached to the Colorfacts. For example I have three attached to mine. In additon how you actually perform the measurements can result in some variation.

Based on my Colorfacts measurements on my FHD1 my guess is that they are close(+ or - .02 nits) to each other.

Could somebody please confirm this? I'm also very interested to know whether this is true.

No 1080p with HDMI

The Panasonic literature does indeed show that 1080p/24, 1080p/24sF, 1080p/25, 1080p/30, and 1080p/50 are supported on one or more inputs (see the blade specs on the link). It may not be the input that you desire, however.

Oops I can't post a link yet. See the product specs for the TH-50PF9UK on the Visual Apex website. There's a pdf that shows what you are looking for. See the 3rd page.

Terry

P.S. mine arrives tomorrow!

Right - very familiar with the specs.

You can do all those rates, yes, however DVI accepts only 1080p/50 and 1080p/60, while HDMI does not accept 1080p at all. All of the other rates are via analog RGB only.

As stated in the article the claim in ambiguous and misleading. It reads as if all the rates given are supported on all three types of inputs.

Pete Putnam seems to claim that the 50PF9 can accept 1080p24 over DVI just fine (see http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages_b/Pa...H-50PF9UK.html ). Whom should I believe now? Has anybody actually explicitly tested this?

Yes, if you follow the chain of responses in this thread you will see that it is that very article that prompted my response to begin with.

I think its pretty safe to say with certainty that Pete's comment is at least partially incorrect since the HDMI board has been on the market for over a year now and we know with pretty good certainty that it does not support nor otherwise accept 1080p. Regarding DVI, the specs claim 1080p at 50Hz and 60Hz are supported. I suppose it may accept 24Hz, 25Hz and 30Hz if you run it out of spec. That would be nice. But I don't think we can assume from Pete's article that he has tried this and verified it at all. He may have, but I think he just chose his words poorly when making the claim in question. I am quite happy to be proven wrong of course.