Picture quality, maybe. Resolution? Not a chance.
Plasma, LCD, OLED, LED, best tv for next gen
- Thread starter spannicus
- Start date
Picture quality, maybe. Resolution? Not a chance.
FrankNitty
Member
Well one bug difference between the ZT and VT is the VT can get brighter in ISF mode. That is for all models US and across the pond in the UK. Difference is only about 5-7 fL but that could be a thing for some people. Myself not so much as my ZT is set to 33.4fL which is more then bright enough for me personally.
ZT peaks at about 37fL in ISF if you push it.
ZT peaks at about 37fL in ISF if you push it.
I tried out both a ZT60 and a w900a in my home, and definitely preferred the w900a (which is now my current TV). Both are great TV's and perhaps its my setup, but the ZT60 couldn't get bright enough for me to fully appreciate it. The w900a has great picture quality, amazingly low input lag, and I'm able to set its backlight to work for the room I have it in.
Some very good extensive reading there, thanks for taking the time.
I guess im in a position then when I have a 16-33ms LED TV, only 1.5 year old, which is pretty decent for gaming, my issue was its LED and in some games can notice a tiny bit of motion blur or pixel holding?
I look forward to buying something smoooooth with gaming in mind, that also will double half decently for movies, gaming top priority. As far as I know, There is no point going for a Sony 905 equivilent, I think as far as LED goes, iv got as good as it gets for gaming, so my future options are a retiring plasma? or OLED (which seems ages off a good gaming OLED in a good pricerange?
tbh im not massively worried about 4k, but a gaming tv (ideally that would still improve on my already good iewing quality TV)
Try not watching TV with lights on... jeez.
I'm gonna order my 65" VT60 right now. Hopefully get a good price on it.
Well yeah. Now you just gotta wait.
Tathanen
Get Inside Her!
Is Samsung stink an.. actual thing.
Do you think it's probably fair to say that a top-of-the-line Samsung Plasma these days outdoes 2010 Panasonic sets? I've got a TC-P50V10. Maybe worth waiting for whatever this year's sets end up being?
Yes. Last years Samsung blows that set out of the water. Better black level and much much higher brightness. It really is only worse at black level.
In pretty much all other categories it is either on par or better.
They will have new sets later this year (possibly the last year for them too) so I would just wait for those if you definitely want a Plasma again.
If you want to help me modify my living room to block out all ambient light, then come on over!
Although the fiance may not be too pleased...So if I run a PC game at 4k on 50" set, side by side with the same game at 1080p on my 50" plasma I won't be able to tell a difference at 8 feet? The only thing I'll notice is less aliasing? I have a hard time buying that after all of the various panels and distances I've tinkered with on my PC over the last few years and seeing a 4K display recently.
If you want to help me modify my living room to block out all ambient light, then come on over!
I'm buying huge blankets as we speak. It's time for the "theater dungeon"!!!
Tathanen
Get Inside Her!
Wait so.. is it better or worse at black level than my current set. I have been brainwashed to think black levels are like the only thing that matters.
Better blacks than a 2010 set, worse than a 2013 Panasonic
Unknown Soldier
Member
Samsung plasmas have a worse black level than Panasonic's but they get much brighter.
Just watch out for the Samsung Buzz, their plasmas buzz much worse than Panasonic's.
YuriLowell
Member
I think my costco still has a 60" S60 plasma set.
I wonder if I should go pick it up now.
I wonder if I should go pick it up now.
Tathanen
Get Inside Her!
Gotcha.
:\
Is it like, an endemic thing that's in all of their sets? I'd get a PN60F8500 if I was gonna go for this before waiting for any new things they put out this year, is it pretty buzzy then?
[Edit] Hm I'm reading that maybe it's not so great at input lag.
Unknown Soldier
Member
You won't know until you buy one and get it in your living room and watch it from your usual sitting position. Plasma buzz is hard to quantify, some people can't hear it at all and other people are driven insane by it. But Samsung's plasmas are known for their buzz.
TV doesn't have an ARC? Or receiver doesn't accept it?
Maybe it does, it is a brand new TV and a Denon receiver. I was under the impression that it would be output in 2.0 even via HDMI...
On the subject of the receiver. It keeps shutting down for no reason. I've seen this before, but I can't remember what causes it. Not enough electricity because too much plugged into the same outlet?
ARC carries 5.1. Try a different outlet for receiver, how much is on the one outlet?
TV, receiver, PS3, Directv box, modem, and router lol. Pretty much everything. Unfortunately his setup isn't ideal in that there is only one outlet close to the entertainment center.
That's good info on ARC though. I have a 2010 Panasonic, I didn't realize this was happening. God this reminds me of trying to get 5.1 out my pc's mobo. Took me quite a while to realize that the only way was to buy a new receiver, but I'm certainly glad I did. Guess I could have gotten a sound card, but high end Nvidia gpu->1.4 receiver->panny plasma is pure bliss.
Rex_Harrison
Banned
Absolutely, the F8500 plasma is better than anything Panasonic has ever put out aside from the VT60 and ZT60.
This doesn't make sense. The F8500 has waaay better black levels than a V10. It does everything better than a V10.
You say it has better blacks, then you say it's only worse at black levels. What ?
The F8500 has very slightly lighter blacks than a V/ZT60. It's been said that's it's only noticeable when you view them both side by side in a pitch black room though.
Exactly how I get 5.1 from my 2011 Panny for TV. Only way possible. That doesn't seem like too much, but I would have to look at the amps each pulls and what the amperage in the house to that outlet is. Definitely try an extension cord from another outlet to rule it out or not, could be power saving option, or maybe it's a lemon.
Mattlikewhoa
Member
Yes, it will outclass your current set...
Like I had mentioned above, it's a lot better then your current set.
I have a Samsung flagship plasma and I love it. And this is coming from a guy who had a Panasonic GT and VT before exchanging them for the Samsung and haven't looked back.
I had the chance to have both the VT and 8000 in my house, and the difference in black levels to my eyes was marginal. I wish I would have measured them both when my friend was calibrating my sets (He's CEDIA certified).
thebigkahuna
Member
What is "Samsung stink" exactly? Is this something you've read on forums or have you actually had a bad experience with one? The f8500 is one of the best TV's ever made. It has slightly less black levels than a Panasonic VT or ZT, a noticeably sharper image and can get much brighter for daytime performance. I have no allegiance to Samsung or Panasonic and wanted the best TV I could buy and after months of looking at VT's, ZT's, and the F8500 at Best Buy and reading as much as I could on AVS, I bought the Samsung. This is hands down the best TV I have ever seen. Ymmv.
this is one of the things that have kept me away from Samsung plasma. even with tinnitus I can hear them buzz. sounds like this for those wondering.
the 4 Panasonic plasmas we have don't have any buzz. I really hope Samsung improves the quality of parts used to eliminate the issue when they refresh their plasma line later this year. some one needs to make a good TV now that Panasonic is out.
Rex_Harrison
Banned
I have yet to see a plasma that doesn't buzz, and that includes Panasonic. My VT60 buzzes on an all white or even just light colored screens. It's really only audible when the volume is low or it's a quiet scene.
Mattlikewhoa
Member
The first GT series display I had buzzed, as well as the VT (though not as much). My current Samsung does not (Nor does the ST in my bedroom).
The build quality for me was rather hit or miss with Panasonic too...
To my knowledge, all plasmas will buzz to some degree. My Samsung and Panny both do.
I can say that my Samsung 8500 is much better than my Panasonic VT30 I had from 2011. This includes black levels. I'm sure it would be a major improvement over the V10.
down 2 orth
Member
Does anyone have some good insight on how the Samsung PS60E550 is for gaming or what the North American equivalent of this model is? Thanks in advance.
Have you checked that the TV is set to full pixel mode, and that sharpness is 50 or higher? Seems like on the 2013 bravias, neutral sharpening is 50, anything below starts to soften the image (earlier bravias were 0=neutral)
Can anyone makes sense or concur with my limited basic understanding of frame rate/interpolation etc.
My LG LED TV can do
16ms - 1 Frame refresh in PC Input in game mode
33ms - 2 Frames? in GAME input in game mode
(You label the HDMI port Game/PC/Satalite etc, ontop of that there is game mode)
So am I correct in thinking, on what im seeing that a 60fps game will play better in PC input and a 30fps game will have less interpolation in TV's Game input 33ms? as It seems to have what I can describe as a kinda blur if I play PC-Input 16ms on a 30fps game, its as if in PC-Mode the TV is refreshing/moving faster than the frames of the game, but a 60fps game in PC-Mode in smoooth
However a 60fps game in Game input 33ms, The TV seems slower to move around, but looks slightly better
PC input 16ms - seems to play smoother, less vibrancy in colours, may suit 60fps games
Game input 33ms - Still good but not optimal refresh,better colour vibrancy, (will add tv seems to match refresh rate of game, even if tv moves slower than 16ms) may suit 30fps games
I of course want to play with the best looking picture, but will opt for a higher response time. 60fps games Im happier with the frame responce, colours matter less, 30fps games to look better, response matters less.
Would be good if someone that knows what their talking about can confirm or explain
My LG LED TV can do
16ms - 1 Frame refresh in PC Input in game mode
33ms - 2 Frames? in GAME input in game mode
(You label the HDMI port Game/PC/Satalite etc, ontop of that there is game mode)
So am I correct in thinking, on what im seeing that a 60fps game will play better in PC input and a 30fps game will have less interpolation in TV's Game input 33ms? as It seems to have what I can describe as a kinda blur if I play PC-Input 16ms on a 30fps game, its as if in PC-Mode the TV is refreshing/moving faster than the frames of the game, but a 60fps game in PC-Mode in smoooth
However a 60fps game in Game input 33ms, The TV seems slower to move around, but looks slightly better
PC input 16ms - seems to play smoother, less vibrancy in colours, may suit 60fps games
Game input 33ms - Still good but not optimal refresh,better colour vibrancy, (will add tv seems to match refresh rate of game, even if tv moves slower than 16ms) may suit 30fps games
I of course want to play with the best looking picture, but will opt for a higher response time. 60fps games Im happier with the frame responce, colours matter less, 30fps games to look better, response matters less.
Would be good if someone that knows what their talking about can confirm or explain
mitchman
Gold Member
I dislike those charts claiming to be gospel. Real life testing shows otherwise:
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/4k-resolution-201312153517.htm
uh no. With the Panasonic set to 0 and the Samsung closer to 10 there is no visible sharpness difference. LCDs are also not sharper than Plasmas if set up correctly. All sharpness difference you see comes from the manipulation the sharpness control adds.
King Mac of Furry Frog
Member
There's a 55" OLED LG disiplay at Best Buy (7k$), but it uses some compressed LG video that doesn't make the it look any better. I got kinda mad.
Since we are on a gaming forum that is terrible advice. Both OLEDs have high input lags.
lostinblue
Banned
Only because you don't control the source. Trust me, those studies are very very precise, as precise as they are though, they're not covering the nuances people are appreciating as "improvements",
I was trying to kill this early yesterday, hence all the "motherfucking" being used which is not my style at all (and I apologize if I came across cocky, in reality I'm not to eager to discuss this if I can avoid it). I know it always escalates to this or "I saw it on a store and it blew me, like looking through a window".
I already touched on the biggest difference against a normal LCD, which is final colors your eyes perceive. By Panasonic's own admission at this CES, their current flagship (WT600) is 20% akin to the marketed DCI 98%, it's not a bad LCD, but take a 10 step gradation of any sort and 20% means a lot specially if you have something better to compare it to... LCD's always had problems with color reproduction. Anyway, Triluminos and Sharp Quattron (not Quattron 4K as I haven't seen those yet, nor seen reviews) are closer than that but still not there in color reproduction (to DCI 98%).
Still, the comparisons are valid:
Triluminos vs regular LCD
It's quite silly to see them through a regular LCD just the same, kinda like gasping at the pictures of the black levels of a plasma... On a IPS LCD. Relation though, makes that a possibility, but it's still not overly representative.
When a color can't be reproduced it falls back onto other, and that's a huge problem the crappier a screen is it means you might see a big red blur and think it looks exactly as it should despite the fact it subsided a bunch of different nuances you could actually see if the screen displayed them (this is different than dithering). No LCD out there hits the DCI 98% marketing term Panasonic penned last year though, which means that if a color doesn't match the originally meant color the error will never amount to more than 2% variation on a calibrated screen.
With 4K you have 1:4 ratio to make up for it with 1080p (providing you use a look up table to create macroblocks to represent each and every color "missing" by solid pixel representations, and natural grain and oscilations to further mask it in native 4K. It's a tech best suited to benefitting crappy LCD's than proper good screens with good color accuracy, like Plasmas or OLED's, even because pixels in Plasma and OLED are not nearly as cheap as they are on a TFT as of now. Had it not been for this we might have flagship OLED's ready for market before, yields would be better for the simple reason of there being less pixels to it.
I've told you I've already been everywhere we're going here so I'll proceed, the other "advantage" of 4K is, drumroll, natural supersampling.
In a no-AA console game environment 1:1 1080p means seeing this:
if you pull 4K/2160p and keep your original viewing distance though, you'll get something closer to this:
(note: that's multisampling 8x, whereas 4K/2160p would be the equivalent of 4x)
It's not that you can take in more detail, that's a falacy, you're not taking all that detail in for the very simple reason that pixel by pixel it really didn't change, it just increased 4 fold and your eyes are doing the rest, because it surpassed their ability to distinguish between them - at ideal distance.
Thing is pixels are really not the way we perceive things, just like frames are not "it" and hence a natural image will never be comprised of rectangles, the point is achieving the degree of softness you expect just so you don't notice, kinda like the frames in games, nobody bitches a 24 fps movie is a slideshow, but we'll bitch to no end with a videogame. The reason is simple, we're seeing still images, 24 of then instead of 24 moving ones. Of course though the ramifications of what I'm saying are huge and I don't intend to go there in detail, everyone can connect the dots once pointed in the right direction.
Fact is, pixels without AA are of substandard quality, but pushing pixels in quantity is really the single most expensive thing to do on a graphics chip to this day and hence, it's a better tradeoff to pull 1080p looking like 4K/2160p at ideal viewing distance than 2160p just being rendered so you downsample it anyway (and if you get close you'll see the same crappy image quality the original game picture showed). If you must ask though, 2160p and 2K with better pixels won't appear the same, because one is filtering the edges, making them softer, the other is not doing anything and thus it'll appear slightly sharper.
I could make it so that my game whilst being merged down via super sampling was sharper, because the only way to properly pull sharpen is doing sharpening on a higher resolution source and then merging it down. Results then could be impossible to discern.
This also applies to films, because they'll try to play out 4K content as being sharper even if it's artificially sharpened which is why Sony is pulling these, 2K blurays, ironically advertised to sell 4K TV's whose difference is apart from a very good encode job, were sharpened at 4K and then merged down so 2K (the link has a comparison going on). The difference? slightly more sharpening going on, and ironically they benefit 2K TV's more than they do 4K ones; specially if you had the aforementioned mastering (sharpened or not) running on a 4K and pinning it against a 2K, 99.9% of the people would see no difference providing I can control the source.
Hence: 4K bluray is actually exciting, for 2K TV's because whilst downsampling it I can control control the sharpness of the source (hence the difference will effectively be 0 on a cuttting edge TV of today) and attain something close to 4:4:4 reproduction... On a perfectly fine 2K set (same can't be said at 4K where 4:2:0 will keep being the standard). But it's not better than proper mastering (sharpening on the original higher resolution source has been done loads of times in the past too, it always worked to some extent but now we've achieved decreasing returns).
This changes nothing, 4K is the next big thing and you'll have dudes swearing their desktop screen is so much better due to being 4K and taxing a top range graphics card for no good reason in the process to churn out pixels they won't see anyway (and at some point they'll surpersample or antialiase those pixels they can't discern anyway). But one might as well understand why is that, this is a tech forum after all.
All of us will have 4K screens eventually if anything because quality TV sets will move there fast, that's also not necessarily a bad thing as there are some, minor I insist, advantages - if I need to plug in and use said TV as a working PC screen (not respecting ideal view distance for a TV, which we often don't do on PC's because the point is not seeing the whole screen at once but focusing on parts of it); but right now 4K means the death of Plasma and good OLED yields being further apart. It only benefits LCD - and that means it's a huge set back.
H_Prestige
Banned
The Samsung F8500 has much better blacks than a 2010 Panasonic. It's equal to the ST60 in blacks. Meaning it's very close to the ZT. Oh, and it has a much blacker anti glare screen coating than the Panasonics, so the set will actually maintain its inky blacks in a bright room.
If you missed the Panasonic boat, jump on a Samsung plasma ASAP. They will supposedly have a new line this year based on the 8500, but they won't be making plasmas after this year.
lostinblue
Banned
No it's not.
It's more akin to a VT30 (and I believe VT30 actually wins by a hair); it doesn't touch a ST60.
But no matter, F8500 is an impressive TV from a company who never really focused on Plasmas anyway (and thus, plasma budget was limited, unlike Panasonic's own), and had a Panasonic Plasma been that much brighter blacks would also rise a little, their engineers deserve lots of praise - they clearly couldn't compete on absolute black so they focused on brightness, the decision to differentiate is always worthy of praise.
I'll insist that what Panasonic plasmas mean is not just MLL values though, the thing that calls me the most on them is that Panasonic is very professional driven, Samsung and LG would never be advertising their Plasmas as lasting 100.000 hours had not been for Panasonic, why? Because it really doesn't matter for them, who sell consumer products whose warranty will be 5 years at most being used sparingly.
A professional grade product though? it has to last at least 10 years of continuous usage, that's 87.600 hours. You see where I'm going. Color accuracy is also next to none, out of the box, no less. Because it's really a pro TV on sheep's clothes. Samsung has no professional plasma range, they're not professionally driven and they don't have a bluray conversion studio. The way they'll survive time is thus much more questionable (as complex as plasmas are) against a company whose biggest changes year on year were to ensue lasting durability, Panasonic was really on a league of it's own.
So as much as a F8500 matches a VT30 whilst being brighter, and that's impressive, I probably prefer a series 30 panasonic plasma just the same if what I'm looking for is good old spot-on color accuracy.
Also notice that a) Samsung TV's are known to be more resistent to IR and burn-in, that's probably a byproduct of more undefeatable subpixel shifting and interpolation going on, Panasonics opt to not be all that agressive and make it defeatable in order to increase final image quality, I'd wager Samsung prefers their TV's to be more idiot proof and that's fine, but it also means slightly decreased quality and market positioning as they don't believe their customers should have the choice. B) Subfield driving method is definitely binary, not contiguous like Kuro's but they never gave comparable figures to recent Panasonic TV's on their spec sheets, and the reason is simple - They can't possibly compete. Telltale signs are everywhere, first of all the more subfields a Panny TV has the darker it gets (hence a super bright panny plasma would be a very hard thing to do without increasing power consumption a lot), VT50 was very dark compared to a ST50, something Panasonic clearly tried to even out with the 2013 line of screens and... 3D on it is NOT single-scan 3D like series 30, 50 and 60. No, it's just like VT20.
VT20 had 6144 steps of gradation. It's half that of a ST60, 1/4 of a GT60, and... 1/5 of VT60 and ZT60.
I think of the F8500 as a super bright ST50 "lite" or something like that, it can't compete in a lot of things, but you can't help but like it, I just disliked the price a lot.
Don't get me wrong, it's a very good TV, and if you mean to use it on a well lit environment it's practically a OLED sneak peak. But it's not even close to a top Panny in a lot of things.
It's the H7000.
The name is out, but that's the only thing we got so far.
That's because of the improved anti-glare.
Which is the other reason why I really wouldn't pay extra for it.
I just got my tax return and am thinking about upgrading from my 1080i RCA Scenium DLP. Thinking about this one
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/toshiba...p?id=1219074792528&skuId=2610002#overview-tab
Anybody know if this is a good purchase, or can anyone recommend anything around the 500 range between 40 and 50 inches? Any help is much appreciated!
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/toshiba...p?id=1219074792528&skuId=2610002#overview-tab
Anybody know if this is a good purchase, or can anyone recommend anything around the 500 range between 40 and 50 inches? Any help is much appreciated!
So 50W829 is much better than previous W8 series... 9/10 stars.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/sony-kdl-50w829_TV_review
http://www.trustedreviews.com/sony-kdl-50w829_TV_review
thebigkahuna
Member
My eyes say different.
This is covered in many reviews. It is not sharper.
H_Prestige
Banned
If you have actual MLL numbers to prove this, I'd like to see them. Because every professional review (CNET, VE shootout to name a couple) place the Samsung on equal footing with the ST60 in terms of blacks and just a smidgen below the VT/ZT. If the F8500 only had VT30 blacks (.004fL), it would not have been voted as best display at the shootout.
thebigkahuna
Member
From the Value Electronics Shootout 2013 where the participants voted it their favorite;
They saw the F8500 as even sharper, which I would assume is also because of the brighter image in low and high ambient light conditions, Zohn explained in a statement announcing the winner. Many participants told me the F8500 whites looked cleaner, brighter and in their opinion, whiter.
December 12, 2012 at 9:48am
http://www.twice.com/articletype/news/samsungs-f8500-series-pdp-wins-2013-shootout/106912
Why does this seem to bother you? It looks sharper. I've seen them side by side multiple times. Many people on the AVS forums bought the 8500 for the same reason.