Originally Posted by jrref
I said a lot of this when i first got my CX when everyone was saying, no, it's just a C9 with BFI motion processing. I'm glad Vincent confirmed a lot of what we saw when we got these sets about a month ago.
Yes. But I don't recall him talking about either this dimensionality
or the more balanced brightness
that I noticed on the CX.
Matt Dameon in his space suit on Mars that I was mentioning - Vincent put this up for the sole purpose to show the difference in smooth gradiation between the sets. But as I was watching this, the dimensionality (whether real or youtube distorted), was screaming at me. Also, the luminosity of every CX slide "appeared" more balanced, providing a richer, more focused look.
IF I'm correct, there are more advancements on these sets than is even being discussed by some reviewers or being acknowledged beyond the con/pro - 48/40, BFI, 120, motion improvements, pixel variation, ABL, brightness, upscaling, etc.
(I probably simply missed some posts that have already independently discussed what I have noticed with an actual accurate frame of reference. Based on your response to my post, it is clear that I need to go back and re-read your earlier posts about this jrref. I look forward to it).
Without Vincent speaking to this and without me having an actual CX in front of me, my youtube observations are quite meaningless. But the consistency of what I was observing did compel me to point this out and inquire about it.
Can you confirm/refute adjust the two things I am seeing on this mirage called youtube? Very curious. (Thanks in advance).