As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The TV Thread: Holiday 2010 has ALREADY begun!

15658606162

Posts

  • The_SpaniardThe_Spaniard It's never lupines Irvine, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited December 2010
    chasm wrote: »
    Shiiiiiiiiiiit.

    Yeeeeessss? 8-)

    The_Spaniard on
    Playstation/Origin/GoG: Span_Wolf Xbox/uPlay/Bnet: SpanWolf Nintendo: Span_Wolf SW-7097-4917-9392 Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Span_Wolf/
  • EddEdd Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Scrublet wrote: »
    Edd wrote: »
    Is it going to hit the black levels of the Samsung/Sony local dimming sets? No. Is it going to suffer a little more from the difficulties of local dimming in situations where black scenes have lots of points of light, such as a space movie? Probably. Is that contrast number as useless as all other contrast numbers such that it doesn't even bear consideration? Absolutely.

    So to what degree if at all should I be considering contrast ratio? Is it that the numbers themselves are unreliable labels imposed for marketing's sake, or is it that the number alone is less meaningful than other indicators of quality black levels?

    Edd on
  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Edd wrote: »
    Scrublet wrote: »
    Is it going to hit the black levels of the Samsung/Sony local dimming sets? No. Is it going to suffer a little more from the difficulties of local dimming in situations where black scenes have lots of points of light, such as a space movie? Probably. Is that contrast number as useless as all other contrast numbers such that it doesn't even bear consideration? Absolutely.

    So to what degree if at all should I be considering contrast ratio? Is it that the numbers themselves are unreliable labels imposed for marketing's sake, or is it that the number alone is less meaningful than other indicators of quality black levels?

    Only compare Contrast Ratio to other sets made by the same manufacturer, not between brands.

    Burtletoy on
  • Fatboy RobertsFatboy Roberts Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Mr_Grinch wrote: »
    Draper wrote: »
    Why would you ever want to get used to it? It's like saying heroin seems really unappealing at first but once you acclimate to it you're hooked.

    You're right, less information on the screen at once is worse and instead of watching tv at 60 or 120 fps, we should all watch it at juddery poop 24 fps, and while we're at it, since we hate making things have more visual information than they did before, let's toss out these high definition sets, we only need 480 lines of resolution anyways.

    I'm also going to get rid of my iphone 4 and trade it's 960-by-640 display for a motorola RAZR, since that has the much better display size of 176×220. LESS IS MORE MIRIGHT?

    You're sort of missing the point. You're watching it at 60fps but the content isn't at 60fps. The information ISN'T there. If the source material was 60fps or 120fps (which I think we should be moving towards by now, it baffles me we're still at 24fps) then yes I can see the benefits but as it is you're letting the tv create frames for you, and unlike, say, an emulator upscaling a game, it just doesn't have the information to do it very well.

    That's why it looks so unnatural and that's why people complain about it. However it is a person preference, some people like the slightly weird, smooth unnatural look and as you say, you get used to it. I just prefer to see films as they were intended, not as my tv best guesses they should look.

    Then again you really SHOULDN'T see judder with a decent tv that's capable of outputting a 24hz signal natively, with motion smooth switched off. Pans should be smooth anyway.

    Most directors will, even if given the opportunity to shoot digitally, and at a framerate higher than 24 fps, will still shoot at 24fps. The human eye registers 24p as "movies," almost instinctually at this point. TRON Legacy, Avatar, Pixar movies - they run at 24fps. Not because they're limited by technology, but because the people behind the movie prefer 24fps. Things shot at 30fps look like TV shows/soap operas. Your eye can tell. I'm unsure your brain can even process 60fps correctly - it's like saying your ears can hear 25,000 hz. I'm sure the signals are hitting your brain, it's just you're not really doing anything with it. Complaining about motion blur in a film is weird to me. Wave your hand really fast in front of your face. Motion blur occurs. Your eyes are processing real life imagery, in real time, with the same "flaws" as the camera does at 24fps.

    if you're seeing "judder," it's due to the fact that the TV isn't processing the 24p image correctly. If the tv is at 60hz and the blu-ray player is outputting 24fps, you're gonna get some flicker/judder. If your TV is at 1080p and either 48, 72 or 120hz, it'll look smooth as hell without artificial motion enhancement gimmicking up the works. Since blu-rays are encoded at 1080p/24fps, owning a TV that doesn't do 120hz is going to introduce judder if you've forced the player to output 24fps. If your TV only does 60hz, make sure your player is outputting at 60hz, and the judder will cease.

    Gimmicks like motion smoothing are the 21st century version of old CRT gimmicks like "Sharpness." Sure, you could train yourself to enjoy ghosted images and sharp dark lines around everything, but that didn't actually IMPROVE the image. Same with "Vivid" settings that started showing up in the late 90's. Trained a lot of people to believe that their movies were SUPPOSED to be all blue-hued and blown out.

    I don't think we're ever going to move off that 24fps standard for films. Not too sure we need to, either.

    Fatboy Roberts on
  • battledrillbattledrill Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    This is how I feel about Samsung and others "Smooth Motion Technology"

    2dc9v80.jpg

    battledrill on

    ______________________
    battlerep on STEAM.
  • ZiggymonZiggymon Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Motion smoothing for me works best on live action stuff such as sports games or wildlife docs. The smoothing gives the eye the impression that it isn't a movie but actually happening in front you you if you get my drift.

    Ziggymon on
  • Jam WarriorJam Warrior Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I've not had time to research the issue but my wife has taken the reigns in TV shopping and is looking toward a SONY KDL-32EX503.

    Anyone able to give a quick look and a yay/nay? I'm not looking for awesome, just good will do.

    Can't find the response time anywhere, but then response time doesn't seem to be a factor in the OP. Is this not a problem these days?

    Jam Warrior on
    MhCw7nZ.gif
  • SerpentSerpent Sometimes Vancouver, BC, sometimes Brisbane, QLDRegistered User regular
    edited December 2010
    I've not had time to research the issue but my wife has taken the reigns in TV shopping and is looking toward a SONY KDL-32EX503.

    Anyone able to give a quick look and a yay/nay? I'm not looking for awesome, just good will do.

    Can't find the response time anywhere, but then response time doesn't seem to be a factor in the OP. Is this not a problem these days?

    That tv is probably really a EX500, with either a digit change or a different tuner. Many resellers request digit changes so they can avoid price matching. TVs in different countries sometimes have digit changes to identify different tuners, as well.

    I have a kdl-46EX500 and love it.

    The official word on the response time is ~40ms which is crap. In my own experience I haven't had a problem with it at all. However, I do not play rock band nor do I play shooters online.

    It's the cheapest 120hz TV you'll get from a 'major' brand like sony, samsung, etc. It has some of the best blacks LCDs can give. It has a matte screen to avoid screen glare. 4 hdmi inputs and 2 component inputs.

    There is no network connectivity.

    CNET rates it pretty highly -- it makes their 'best LCDs' list. The only things better are the equivalent samsung (which costs more), and a variety of very expensive TVs.

    CNET review

    CNET best LCD TVs

    Serpent on
  • Jam WarriorJam Warrior Registered User regular
    edited December 2010
    Excellent news. Cheers.

    Jam Warrior on
    MhCw7nZ.gif
  • maximumzeromaximumzero I...wait, what? New Orleans, LARegistered User regular
    edited January 2011
    So the only difference I can tell between LED & LCD judging by what I've seen is that LED uses less energy and is thinner.

    I'm looking for a Sony or a Samsung 32" and I've narrowed it down to a half dozen or so.

    maximumzero on
    FU7kFbw.png
    Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
  • Captain VashCaptain Vash Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    So the only difference I can tell between LED & LCD judging by what I've seen is that LED uses less energy and is thinner.

    I'm looking for a Sony or a Samsung 32" and I've narrowed it down to a half dozen or so.

    look up the difference between local dimming led and edge lit led. it's been explained SO MANY times in this thread.

    Captain Vash on
    twitterforweb.Stuckens.1,1,500,f4f4f4,0,c4c4c4,000000.png
  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Or you could just say, Local Dimming LED is the shit, whereas Edge Lit LED is kinda shitty.

    Burtletoy on
  • maximumzeromaximumzero I...wait, what? New Orleans, LARegistered User regular
    edited January 2011
    I'm just going by what CNET says on that opinion:
    LED
    Size: 32 inches and larger
    Manufacturers: All
    Pros: Uses slightly less power than LCD; thin panels; some models have improved picture quality.
    Cons: Expensive; most models offer little to no picture quality benefit compared with LCD.
    Best for: Big spenders who want thin panels or videophiles who understand the differences between LED technologies and don't want plasma.

    It's for my parents--they want a new TV, so I doubt they'd notice the difference.

    It needs to be 32" to fit into their current entertainment center, I and I tend to like Samsung, so this is what I've narrowed it down to:

    Samsung LN32C530 32-Inch 1080p 60 Hz LCD HDTV (Black)
    Samsung LN32C550 32-Inch 1080p 60 Hz LCD HDTV (Black)

    Samsung UN32C5000 32-Inch 1080p 60 Hz LED HDTV (Black)
    Samsung UN32C6500 32-Inch 1080p 120 Hz LED HDTV (Black)

    The top two are LCD TVs and the bottom two are LED TVs. The major difference between the two LED TVs as far as I can tell is that the 6500 has all the fancy Samsung Apps and whatnot. Regardless, they don't want to spend much more than $500 so I'm currently leaning towards the more expensive LCD at $549, unless someone can give me a good reason why I should add another $150 and go for the first LED set.

    maximumzero on
    FU7kFbw.png
    Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
  • Captain VashCaptain Vash Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    I really don't want to burst your bubble here, but you're coming to the videophile television enthusiast thread, making false generalities about a product, and then when someone tells you to educate yourself, you quote your original misinformed source?

    Either you want the information or you don't, you can't have it both ways.

    Captain Vash on
    twitterforweb.Stuckens.1,1,500,f4f4f4,0,c4c4c4,000000.png
  • maximumzeromaximumzero I...wait, what? New Orleans, LARegistered User regular
    edited January 2011
    I really don't want to burst your bubble here, but you're coming to the videophile television enthusiast thread, making false generalities about a product, and then when someone tells you to educate yourself, you quote your original misinformed source?

    Either you want the information or you don't, you can't have it both ways.

    CNET has never steered me wrong in the past.

    maximumzero on
    FU7kFbw.png
    Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
  • SerpentSerpent Sometimes Vancouver, BC, sometimes Brisbane, QLDRegistered User regular
    edited January 2011
    I really don't want to burst your bubble here, but you're coming to the videophile television enthusiast thread, making false generalities about a product, and then when someone tells you to educate yourself, you quote your original misinformed source?

    Either you want the information or you don't, you can't have it both ways.

    CNET isn't misinformed -- they state in a few areas over the website that LED almost always means edge-lit, and that local dimming is going the way of the dodo.

    His false generalities are only false in a few specific instances -- which is why they are generalities.

    Serpent on
  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    CNET wrote:
    Full-array with local dimming: The original and still the best. There are exceptions, but in general, TVs with this LED backlight configuration are the best-performing LCDs you can buy. They're similar to full-array models, but the individual zones of LEDs can be dimmed or brightened independently.
    Picture quality impact: Can have significantly better black levels and uniformity than normal LCD, but will also exhibit "blooming," or stray illumination, to some extent.
    Examples below: Vizio XVT3 series, Sony XBR-HX909 series

    Burtletoy on
  • maximumzeromaximumzero I...wait, what? New Orleans, LARegistered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    CNET wrote:
    Full-array with local dimming: The original and still the best. There are exceptions, but in general, TVs with this LED backlight configuration are the best-performing LCDs you can buy. They're similar to full-array models, but the individual zones of LEDs can be dimmed or brightened independently.
    Picture quality impact: Can have significantly better black levels and uniformity than normal LCD, but will also exhibit "blooming," or stray illumination, to some extent.
    Examples below: Vizio XVT3 series, Sony XBR-HX909 series

    And the price ranges on these TVs are?

    maximumzero on
    FU7kFbw.png
    Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
  • ackack Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Ziggymon wrote: »
    Motion smoothing for me works best on live action stuff such as sports games or wildlife docs. The smoothing gives the eye the impression that it isn't a movie but actually happening in front you you if you get my drift.

    man i had never even thought of it that way

    maaan

    ack on
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    CNET wrote:
    Full-array with local dimming: The original and still the best. There are exceptions, but in general, TVs with this LED backlight configuration are the best-performing LCDs you can buy. They're similar to full-array models, but the individual zones of LEDs can be dimmed or brightened independently.
    Picture quality impact: Can have significantly better black levels and uniformity than normal LCD, but will also exhibit "blooming," or stray illumination, to some extent.
    Examples below: Vizio XVT3 series, Sony XBR-HX909 series

    And the price ranges on these TVs are?

    With some few exceptions, expensive. Most current local dimming TVs are in the 2K+ range, particularly from Samsung or Sony. Maximumzero's post from CNET needs two things added to it for the purposes of local-dimming:

    1. Local-dimming LEDs are not for people who want thin panels. The thinnest panels are all edge-lit LEDs. Putting that array of backlights in naturally increases the thickness.
    2.All local-dimming LEDs are going to have better picture quality than LCDs. I can almost buy Serpent's statement that the article was recognizing that most "LED"s are edge-lit, giving the statement more credibility, but I'd still put an edge-lit LED over most LCDs.

    I will agree that local-dimming is going to be phased out. It is too expensive to manufacture given the marginal difference it provides versus a good edge-lit LED, and considering that plasma beats it and is much cheaper.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • LavaKnightLavaKnight Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    This Panasonic LCD seems to be a pretty great deal for $499 for today only. I'm in the market sometime this year for a new set, and this price is almost impulse buy for me. Is it possible that around Super Bowl time there will be even better deals? I'd prefer to get an LED LCD, but I doubt that they'll be dropping below $800 any time soon.

    The info I could find on that Panasonic was generally that it was a pretty good set, with one thread on AVS Forum giving me pause. That poster concludes that
    "What this means is that the TC-L42U25 and TC-L42D2 both subsample the color - a fact which handily removes both models from my consideration."

    What does that mean? Is the tv still a good buy?

    LavaKnight on
  • GuibsGuibs Weekend Warrior Somewhere up North.Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Scrublet wrote: »
    Burtletoy wrote: »
    CNET wrote:
    Full-array with local dimming: The original and still the best. There are exceptions, but in general, TVs with this LED backlight configuration are the best-performing LCDs you can buy. They're similar to full-array models, but the individual zones of LEDs can be dimmed or brightened independently.
    Picture quality impact: Can have significantly better black levels and uniformity than normal LCD, but will also exhibit "blooming," or stray illumination, to some extent.
    Examples below: Vizio XVT3 series, Sony XBR-HX909 series

    And the price ranges on these TVs are?

    With some few exceptions, expensive. Most current local dimming TVs are in the 2K+ range, particularly from Samsung or Sony. Maximumzero's post from CNET needs two things added to it for the purposes of local-dimming:

    1. Local-dimming LEDs are not for people who want thin panels. The thinnest panels are all edge-lit LEDs. Putting that array of backlights in naturally increases the thickness.
    2.All local-dimming LEDs are going to have better picture quality than LCDs. I can almost buy Serpent's statement that the article was recognizing that most "LED"s are edge-lit, giving the statement more credibility, but I'd still put an edge-lit LED over most LCDs.

    I will agree that local-dimming is going to be phased out. It is too expensive to manufacture given the marginal difference it provides versus a good edge-lit LED, and considering that plasma beats it and is much cheaper.

    You obviously haven't followed TV and saw quality Full Backlit Led TV with Local dimming. They are the pinacle of TV right now. High end beat most Plasma Tv. The LG LE8500 and Sony Hx909 had deeper black than any other TV still currently being manufactured (it's debatable that the Kuro are the best in that regard).

    Local dimming is more expensive and thus release in the higher end model. Sony, LG are still releasing their best TV with full backlit LED with local dimming. LG new Nalo LED allow them to have this is a TV as thin as Edge led TV can be right now. Local Dimming will be perfected, maybe even morph into something else but until then, they are still the best option for the best picture on today's LCD/LED tvs.

    Guibs on
    jswidget.php?username=Guibs&numitems=10&header=1&text=none&images=small&show=recentplays&imagesonly=1&imagepos=center&inline=1&domains%5B%5D=boardgame&imagewidget=1
    PSN: Guibs25 | XboxLive: Guibs | Steam: Guibsx | Twitch: Guibsx
  • DjeetDjeet Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    LavaKnight wrote: »
    This Panasonic LCD seems to be a pretty great deal for $499 for today only. I'm in the market sometime this year for a new set, and this price is almost impulse buy for me. Is it possible that around Super Bowl time there will be even better deals? I'd prefer to get an LED LCD, but I doubt that they'll be dropping below $800 any time soon.

    The info I could find on that Panasonic was generally that it was a pretty good set, with one thread on AVS Forum giving me pause. That poster concludes that
    "What this means is that the TC-L42U25 and TC-L42D2 both subsample the color - a fact which handily removes both models from my consideration."

    What does that mean? Is the tv still a good buy?

    If that's your only concern then I wouldn’t worry too much about mystifying gripes on AVSFORUM. If you fall into that trap the only way out is to buy a KURO ... maybe. The performance/specs trap is an expensive one to mire yourself in. They're linking various comparisons of a single vertical line of pixels, which probably doesn't matter much to you unless your content features single vertical lines of pixels.

    I'm not saying there's nothing to what they're saying, but I have no idea what that guy is saying.

    Djeet on
  • chasmchasm Ill-tempered Texan Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Yeah, LG's new Nano line is 0.35" thick. Ridiculous stuff.

    chasm on
    steam_sig.png
    XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    So my Onkyo receiver is finally fixed, I was poor so it took me forever to send it in to the shop.

    In the meantime I've acquired a PolkAudio powered Subwoofer. But I'm highly confused as to how I'm supposed to be hooking it up.

    It has a Line In which are Stereo Plugs which I have going to the receiver, so that's all good.

    But it also has 8 clips for speaker wire and it says Speaker Level Output (Left, Right, Left, Right)

    Am I supposed to be passing my speaker wires from the Receiver through the Subwoofer, then to the speakers? These clips are really confusing to me. What are they for?

    Burtletoy on
  • BurtletoyBurtletoy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Never mind, found the manual online. I guess it is a redundant hookup, either or.

    Anyone have a preference for which is better?

    I'm going with the plugs for now cause I don't want to cut more wires.

    Burtletoy on
  • LavaKnightLavaKnight Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Djeet wrote: »
    LavaKnight wrote: »
    This Panasonic LCD seems to be a pretty great deal for $499 for today only. I'm in the market sometime this year for a new set, and this price is almost impulse buy for me. Is it possible that around Super Bowl time there will be even better deals? I'd prefer to get an LED LCD, but I doubt that they'll be dropping below $800 any time soon.

    The info I could find on that Panasonic was generally that it was a pretty good set, with one thread on AVS Forum giving me pause. That poster concludes that
    "What this means is that the TC-L42U25 and TC-L42D2 both subsample the color - a fact which handily removes both models from my consideration."

    What does that mean? Is the tv still a good buy?

    If that's your only concern then I wouldn’t worry too much about mystifying gripes on AVSFORUM. If you fall into that trap the only way out is to buy a KURO ... maybe. The performance/specs trap is an expensive one to mire yourself in. They're linking various comparisons of a single vertical line of pixels, which probably doesn't matter much to you unless your content features single vertical lines of pixels.

    I'm not saying there's nothing to what they're saying, but I have no idea what that guy is saying.

    Heh heh, good to know. I'll pay attention to the normal metrics used to describe these tvs then, like "black levels" and "picture quality." :)

    LavaKnight on
  • AntihippyAntihippy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    So CES is happening, there are tons of technology stuff happening, and I'm seriously hoping that this becomes a product in the near future.

    http://www.tested.com/ces-2011-hands-on-sony-3d-headset/47-248/

    Antihippy on
    10454_nujabes2.pngPSN: Antiwhippy
  • Two Headed BoyTwo Headed Boy Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Indeed, but it would no doubt cost a pretty penny. Also, I love Tested.com.

    Two Headed Boy on
    4hNKbHH.png
    Twitter 3DS: 0860 - 3257 - 2516
  • contrabandcontraband Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Hey guys. I don't know much about teevees, but I've been reading through this thread. My parents want a new TV to replace their dying CRT, and I'd like to help them make an informed purchase. The only requirements are for it to be ~32-34" and affordable without skimping too much on quality. Am I correct in surmising Vizio displays are a pretty good choice for a basic TV? It'll spend most of its life (in the forseeable future) playing non-HD content (SDTV and DVDs).

    contraband on
    sigxw0.jpg
  • ImprovoloneImprovolone Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Vizio.

    Improvolone on
    Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
  • Folken FanelFolken Fanel anime af When's KoFRegistered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Wasn't toshiba supposedly good for SD cable?

    Folken Fanel on
    Twitter: Folken_fgc Steam: folken_ XBL: flashg03 PSN: folken_PA SFV: folken_
    Dyvim Tvar wrote: »
    Characters I hate:

    Everybody @Folken Fanel plays as.
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Guibs wrote: »
    You obviously haven't followed TV and saw quality Full Backlit Led TV with Local dimming. They are the pinacle of TV right now. High end beat most Plasma Tv. The LG LE8500 and Sony Hx909 had deeper black than any other TV still currently being manufactured (it's debatable that the Kuro are the best in that regard).

    Local dimming is more expensive and thus release in the higher end model. Sony, LG are still releasing their best TV with full backlit LED with local dimming. LG new Nalo LED allow them to have this is a TV as thin as Edge led TV can be right now. Local Dimming will be perfected, maybe even morph into something else but until then, they are still the best option for the best picture on today's LCD/LED tvs.

    You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. They are not the pinnacle. The high-end LED local dimming LEDs still got beat by last year's Panasonic VT25 and GT25 sets. Keep in mind their sole strength against other LEDs, their sole method of achieving a dark black level, is by turning their backlight off. Which is fine, up until you have very deep blacks against brightness (as an example, space movies). The only possible way you might be correct is if you measure a pitch black screen on both sets, which is not indicative of ANY normal TV viewing and also one of the chief reasons why dynamic contrast ratio is a meaningless number. The penalty for this technique is the blooming mentioned in earlier posts, which results because no matter how good the set is it can't help the fact that the light from a locally-dimmed bright section is going to bleed into the locally dimmed dark section. The highest end sets you mentioned minimize this by using more individual lights than the cheaper sets but it's still there. Most importantly, the darkest levels measured are from straight-ahead...these sets still lose their "perfection" at off-angles, again something that doesn't affect plasmas.

    And for all that, the highest end LED local-dimming sets are usually at least $1000 more than the plasmas that beat them. They may be the pinnacle of LCD/LED technology, but as far as picture quality goes the best plasmas still win for way less cost. The only reason to avoid the plasmas is if energy/heat inefficiencies are a concern.

    I can quote literally every home theater review site of worth to back up these claims, but this CNet summary hits every single point I can think of to talk about in one place.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Wasn't toshiba supposedly good for SD cable?

    Yes. Even the now-defunct Kuros, for all their awesomeness, are deficient in that respect. In fact I'd hazard to say that my Kuro's SD viewing is beaten by the Panasonic U2 upstairs in my house. I never got around to checking how the high-end Regzas from Toshiba did last year but I assume that they continued to do well with SD.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • GuibsGuibs Weekend Warrior Somewhere up North.Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Scrublet wrote: »
    Guibs wrote: »
    You obviously haven't followed TV and saw quality Full Backlit Led TV with Local dimming. They are the pinacle of TV right now. High end beat most Plasma Tv. The LG LE8500 and Sony Hx909 had deeper black than any other TV still currently being manufactured (it's debatable that the Kuro are the best in that regard).

    Local dimming is more expensive and thus release in the higher end model. Sony, LG are still releasing their best TV with full backlit LED with local dimming. LG new Nalo LED allow them to have this is a TV as thin as Edge led TV can be right now. Local Dimming will be perfected, maybe even morph into something else but until then, they are still the best option for the best picture on today's LCD/LED tvs.

    You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. They are not the pinnacle. The high-end LED local dimming LEDs still got beat by last year's Panasonic VT25 and GT25 sets. Keep in mind their sole strength against other LEDs, their sole method of achieving a dark black level, is by turning their backlight off. Which is fine, up until you have very deep blacks against brightness (as an example, space movies). The only possible way you might be correct is if you measure a pitch black screen on both sets, which is not indicative of ANY normal TV viewing and also one of the chief reasons why dynamic contrast ratio is a meaningless number. The penalty for this technique is the blooming mentioned in earlier posts, which results because no matter how good the set is it can't help the fact that the light from a locally-dimmed bright section is going to bleed into the locally dimmed dark section. The highest end sets you mentioned minimize this by using more individual lights than the cheaper sets but it's still there. Most importantly, the darkest levels measured are from straight-ahead...these sets still lose their "perfection" at off-angles, again something that doesn't affect plasmas.

    And for all that, the highest end LED local-dimming sets are usually at least $1000 more than the plasmas that beat them. They may be the pinnacle of LCD/LED technology, but as far as picture quality goes the best plasmas still win for way less cost. The only reason to avoid the plasmas is if energy/heat inefficiencies are a concern.

    I can quote literally every home theater review site of worth to back up these claims, but this CNet summary hits every single point I can think of to talk about in one place.

    There is no denying that LED are more expensive than plasma but you make the local dimming tech sounds horrible when it fact, it's far from it. Blooming, like you mention, is visible only if you watch TV off-angle. This is the limitation of the LCD tech and a positive when it comes to plasma. Still, within a 20 to 30 degree angle, blooming isn't visible on most of the higher end tv including sony's hx909. Again, you didn't bother to make tests with local dimming sets and I urge you to go see pictures on the AVSforums or better, go watch one with your own eyes. The blooming, espicially on space starfield aren't showing blooming unless you are watching the TV at more than 30 degree view.

    I said LED Local dimming beat "most" plasma and I still believe I am right, the only TV you can arguably mention is Panasonic's VT20/25 and I say arguably because it comes with it's own list of flaws.

    Let's talk then about black level. panasonic's vt20-25 is doing great in that regard but will probably only remin greats for a year. After this, as per panasonic own specification, the blacks will rise, and will end looking grayish a few years after purchases. Granted the problem isn't as widely present as last year's panasonic G10 sieries and early G20/25 series but owner have reported rises of their black within a year to some degree. LCD/LED won't do this. Also, Sony's hx909 and LG's LE8500 have been measured with better blacks than the G25 series

    While plasma often have the edge on black, they are still doing a piss poor performances when it comes to display whites.

    Let's also talk about the panning issues of the VT25, which create artifacts and makes panning view horrible to watch on it. While plasma as been amazing regarding motion blur for years, we are now at a point where good 240hz TV will produce a more cleaner picture on panning and fast action scenes compare to most plasma. Granted, this varies depending some manufacturer but the end results remains the same. Some like the results, other don't. Some have a more natural feeling than others. Personaly, I think Sony strikes at a very good balance between correcting motion blur without giving an soap opera effect.`

    You do have a point on the price point, Plasma are way cheaper than top of the line, blacklit led with local dimming sets and I think it's unfortunate.

    There is also one more reason to stay away from plasma. If you are, like me, part of the 15$ of the population who is sensible to 60hz flickering. I can't stand it personally. I keep seeing flickering on all plasma, espicially on bright colors and scenes. It drives me crazy. The day Plasma can display regular content at something more than 60hz is the day I might finally buy one. In the meantime, the VT25 is the only one displaying content à 96hz but it's limited to 3D only unfortunately. From what I read from panasonic at CES2011, nothing will change on that front for next year.

    Guibs on
    jswidget.php?username=Guibs&numitems=10&header=1&text=none&images=small&show=recentplays&imagesonly=1&imagepos=center&inline=1&domains%5B%5D=boardgame&imagewidget=1
    PSN: Guibs25 | XboxLive: Guibs | Steam: Guibsx | Twitch: Guibsx
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Guibs wrote: »
    There is no denying that LED are more expensive than plasma but you make the local dimming tech sounds horrible when it fact, it's far from it. Blooming, like you mention, is visible only if you watch TV off-angle. This is the limitation of the LCD tech and a positive when it comes to plasma. Still, within a 20 to 30 degree angle, blooming isn't visible on most of the higher end tv including sony's hx909. Again, you didn't bother to make tests with local dimming sets and I urge you to go see pictures on the AVSforums or better, go watch one with your own eyes. The blooming, espicially on space starfield aren't showing blooming unless you are watching the TV at more than 30 degree view.

    You are correct that I do not have the ability to buy local dimming sets and put them through tests myself (which is unfortunate). So I'm going to defer to virtually every major review site I've gone to that references the problem, including CNet, Hometheatermag, HDGuru, etc., and believe that somehow they're not all confused. I encourage you to post an authoritative source that claims blooming is only an issue off-angle, cause I've never seen that. No, a forum post is not an authoritative source. I'm talking professionally run, well-known AV sites. The idea that AVSforum screenshots are indicative of anything is hysterical. To be absolutely clear here, I'm not saying that local-dimming is horrible...I'm saying that if it's going to be significantly more expensive it sure as hell better be better, and I have yet to see a major source say "This more expensive TV justified its higher price over the high-end plasmas."
    I said LED Local dimming beat "most" plasma and I still believe I am right

    You're welcome to believe this. A huge caveat to this statement is what one's definition of "beat" is. If it is "deeper black levels with an all black test screen non-indicative of normal viewing from straight in front of the TV" you may be right too.
    Let's talk then about black level. panasonic's vt20-25 is doing great in that regard but will probably only remin greats for a year. After this, as per panasonic own specification, the blacks will rise, and will end looking grayish a few years after purchases. Granted the problem isn't as widely present as last year's panasonic G10 sieries and early G20/25 series but owner have reported rises of their black within a year to some degree. LCD/LED won't do this. Also, Sony's hx909 and LG's LE8500 have been measured with better blacks than the G25 series

    I'll partially concede this. Plasmas will have a measurable black difference after a couple thousand hours. Whether it's noticeable enough to push them below local-dimming sets is debatable, but you're right. Though quoting the G10 is a bit unfair as it is generally accepted everywhere that Panasonic screwed up...even in their press release they basically said "this happens because of this but we didn't screw up", and everyone knows what an official statement like that means. As far as your Sony/LG comment, I repeat my guess about your sources and the situation they are measured on, and just in doing some background research to verify some of my comments in this post I came across repeated complaints about the Sony's blooming in a set of its price, which kind of defeats the purpose of its black level doesn't it?
    While plasma often have the edge on black, they are still doing a piss poor performances when it comes to display whites.

    That is an extremely bold assertion to be making without anything to back it up. For my part, I stopped bringing up the brightness differences in plasmas after seeing repeated mid-level sets hold up in extremely bright settings. And let's face it...if you put a TV in a bright room where this matters no set of any tech is going to look its best.
    Let's also talk about the panning issues of the VT25, which create artifacts and makes panning view horrible to watch on it. While plasma as been amazing regarding motion blur for years, we are now at a point where good 240hz TV will produce a more cleaner picture on panning and fast action scenes compare to most plasma. Granted, this varies depending some manufacturer but the end results remains the same. Some like the results, other don't. Some have a more natural feeling than others. Personaly, I think Sony strikes at a very good balance between correcting motion blur without giving an soap opera effect.

    The only thing I'm going to comment on in the HOST of inaccuracies in this paragraph is that you are comparing the frame-interpolation "feature" of 240Hz TVs required to prevent motion lag in LCDs to the lack of said feature in plasmas which don't have motion lag.
    In the meantime, the VT25 is the only one displaying content à 96hz but it's limited to 3D only unfortunately. From what I read from panasonic at CES2011, nothing will change on that front for next year.

    What the hell are you talking about? 96Hz has nothing to do with 3D...that's for 1080p/24 input (if kept in the default refresh rate, 24fps blu-ray has to do the 3:2 pulldown).

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    One other thing for everyone to watch out for as some of the cheaper local-dimming sets that have been announced hit the market...one of the chief factors determining how well the set will perform is how many of those LEDs they're using (not to mention their quality). And I haven't seen any manufacturers ponying up on that info. So even if the local-dimming sets DO go down in price, I would read around a bit on them and try to find one in a dark room (not a store display) to check out.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
  • chasmchasm Ill-tempered Texan Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Vizio's talked up the number of LEDs in their VXT line. But for the most part, you're exactly right. I can't lie, though...the LG Nano line has me intrigued.

    chasm on
    steam_sig.png
    XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
  • GuibsGuibs Weekend Warrior Somewhere up North.Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Scrublet wrote: »
    Guibs wrote: »
    There is no denying that LED are more expensive than plasma but you make the local dimming tech sounds horrible when it fact, it's far from it. Blooming, like you mention, is visible only if you watch TV off-angle. This is the limitation of the LCD tech and a positive when it comes to plasma. Still, within a 20 to 30 degree angle, blooming isn't visible on most of the higher end tv including sony's hx909. Again, you didn't bother to make tests with local dimming sets and I urge you to go see pictures on the AVSforums or better, go watch one with your own eyes. The blooming, espicially on space starfield aren't showing blooming unless you are watching the TV at more than 30 degree view.

    You are correct that I do not have the ability to buy local dimming sets and put them through tests myself (which is unfortunate). So I'm going to defer to virtually every major review site I've gone to that references the problem, including CNet, Hometheatermag, HDGuru, etc., and believe that somehow they're not all confused. I encourage you to post an authoritative source that claims blooming is only an issue off-angle, cause I've never seen that. No, a forum post is not an authoritative source. I'm talking professionally run, well-known AV sites. The idea that AVSforum screenshots are indicative of anything is hysterical. To be absolutely clear here, I'm not saying that local-dimming is horrible...I'm saying that if it's going to be significantly more expensive it sure as hell better be better, and I have yet to see a major source say "This more expensive TV justified its higher price over the high-end plasmas."
    I said LED Local dimming beat "most" plasma and I still believe I am right

    You're welcome to believe this. A huge caveat to this statement is what one's definition of "beat" is. If it is "deeper black levels with an all black test screen non-indicative of normal viewing from straight in front of the TV" you may be right too.
    Let's talk then about black level. panasonic's vt20-25 is doing great in that regard but will probably only remin greats for a year. After this, as per panasonic own specification, the blacks will rise, and will end looking grayish a few years after purchases. Granted the problem isn't as widely present as last year's panasonic G10 sieries and early G20/25 series but owner have reported rises of their black within a year to some degree. LCD/LED won't do this. Also, Sony's hx909 and LG's LE8500 have been measured with better blacks than the G25 series

    I'll partially concede this. Plasmas will have a measurable black difference after a couple thousand hours. Whether it's noticeable enough to push them below local-dimming sets is debatable, but you're right. Though quoting the G10 is a bit unfair as it is generally accepted everywhere that Panasonic screwed up...even in their press release they basically said "this happens because of this but we didn't screw up", and everyone knows what an official statement like that means. As far as your Sony/LG comment, I repeat my guess about your sources and the situation they are measured on, and just in doing some background research to verify some of my comments in this post I came across repeated complaints about the Sony's blooming in a set of its price, which kind of defeats the purpose of its black level doesn't it?
    While plasma often have the edge on black, they are still doing a piss poor performances when it comes to display whites.

    That is an extremely bold assertion to be making without anything to back it up. For my part, I stopped bringing up the brightness differences in plasmas after seeing repeated mid-level sets hold up in extremely bright settings. And let's face it...if you put a TV in a bright room where this matters no set of any tech is going to look its best.
    Let's also talk about the panning issues of the VT25, which create artifacts and makes panning view horrible to watch on it. While plasma as been amazing regarding motion blur for years, we are now at a point where good 240hz TV will produce a more cleaner picture on panning and fast action scenes compare to most plasma. Granted, this varies depending some manufacturer but the end results remains the same. Some like the results, other don't. Some have a more natural feeling than others. Personaly, I think Sony strikes at a very good balance between correcting motion blur without giving an soap opera effect.

    The only thing I'm going to comment on in the HOST of inaccuracies in this paragraph is that you are comparing the frame-interpolation "feature" of 240Hz TVs required to prevent motion lag in LCDs to the lack of said feature in plasmas which don't have motion lag.
    In the meantime, the VT25 is the only one displaying content à 96hz but it's limited to 3D only unfortunately. From what I read from panasonic at CES2011, nothing will change on that front for next year.

    What the hell are you talking about? 96Hz has nothing to do with 3D...that's for 1080p/24 input (if kept in the default refresh rate, 24fps blu-ray has to do the 3:2 pulldown).


    LE8500 review with measurement of black level measured at 0.0cd/m2

    http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1272872392
    Above you see my results when the local dimming feature was activated. What you see is not a mistake. Actually my measuring equipment gave me 0,0 cd/m2 for black and this suggests that black levels on LE8500 are perfect or very close to perfect.

    There are also pictures of white symbols on black background to check for blooming. If you notice, you see a bit in an angle, but there is absolutely no blooming when viewing the screen on axis.

    here is a link to a post on the avsforum on the Sony HX909. Please point me where you see blooming:

    http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=19237003#post19237003

    Here is another post that shows you that off-angle (30+ degree off) will show blooming but when on axis or less than 30 degree angle, no blooming is visible

    http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=19095455#post19095455

    http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=19100140#post19100140

    These are also from the sony hx909. Notice any blueish blacks? Right, I am not either even if Cnet said they were on the hx909. Haven't seen blueish blacks either when I tested the Tv in store although I agree that lighting wasn't perfect to show this.

    Guibs on
    jswidget.php?username=Guibs&numitems=10&header=1&text=none&images=small&show=recentplays&imagesonly=1&imagepos=center&inline=1&domains%5B%5D=boardgame&imagewidget=1
    PSN: Guibs25 | XboxLive: Guibs | Steam: Guibsx | Twitch: Guibsx
  • ScrubletScrublet Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Before I even get started, there's something that I should probably add to the OP. Quoting AVSForum screenshots as if they are indicative of anything is the most ridiculous way to argue TV quality that I have ever seen. It's even worse than talking about TV quality at the store as if the store isn't bright as shit and doesn't tailor the TV settings to sell the ones they want. When you look at screenshots from AVSForums, I want to point out the following points:

    1. You have no idea what the room lighting conditions are. None. One of the most important factors in bringing out what a TV can do, and all you have to gauge that is the quality of the camera in its environment.
    2. You have no idea what the TV settings are. No, you REALLY don't. You have people that say what they're settings are, and that they haven't adjusted them because they really want to win an argument. Because trolls never try sketchy moves because winning at the internet beats all.
    3. You are judging TV quality from the quality of the camera. The Pioneer Kuro is going to look like a shitty TV in most screenshots from most cameras. Like all TVs. Like all those screenshots you posted.
    4. All those pictures are static, which makes discussing the issues of moving pictures completely pointless. That's a pretty obvious fact as it is, but it becomes more important when I dissect the LE8500 review.

    For all of the above reasons, I'm not even addressing the AVSForum screenshots you posted. Bringing screenshots into a TV discussion to me is on par with Bobby Boucher debating science with the college professor by bringing up what his mama said (Waterboy, for those whom it's been awhile). One other thing just so I'm not misunderstood. I will never say that local dimming LEDs are a bad technology. They do produce the best picture for LED TVs! What I'm saying is that at the quality level that they can even come close to plasmas, they cost way more for no picture benefit. So what the hell is the point? That said:
    LE8500 review with measurement of black level measured at 0.0cd/m2

    http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1272872392
    Above you see my results when the local dimming feature was activated. What you see is not a mistake. Actually my measuring equipment gave me 0,0 cd/m2 for black and this suggests that black levels on LE8500 are perfect or very close to perfect.

    There are also pictures of white symbols on black background to check for blooming. If you notice, you see a bit in an angle, but there is absolutely no blooming when viewing the screen on axis.

    If nothing else I'm glad you showed me this site because I liked this guy's review and hadn't been here before. However, I think the review you chose to support your idea that LEDs beat plasma (at least I think that's your argument) actually is supporting my idea that they don't. I'll get to the black level in a moment, but first:
    I wasn't able to get the colors completely spot-on but accuracy is fair and color gradation is fair, too. I see some minor small bands in our gradient tests but nothing worrying. It’s not on par with the best plasma-TVs but pretty much similar to most LCD-TV in this price range.
    (emphasis mine) Fair is not BAD. However, we are at the top-end price range. There is no room for fair in TV here, so in my mind "fair" is a bad mark. This TV, for all its black level, cannot hit the colors.
    Still, I don't feel that SD content is as good as on the best plasma-TVs that deal with the SD resolutions better.
    Enough said.
    This also contributes to motion resolution that is very high, although not 100 % on par with the best plasma TVs today.
    A quote in direct contrast to the assertion that 240Hz TVs are on par or better at motion than plasmas. Not to talk about the difference behind the fundamental technology and the optionally added motion interpolation (Sony calls theirs TruMotion) that is often debated around here. Side note: for the proponents of that system, this reviewer specifically calls out the high amount of input lag it causes so watch that on gaming.
    Spoilered this one cause holy shit our posts on this drag out on length.
    In practice we also saw a few disadvantages from the LED system. For example, because of the local dimming in zones and the very slim profile, LE8500 sometimes have some horizontal bands (going across the screen and following the LED strips from the backlight) and variations in light homogeneity. For example if you see a sky changing from blue to light blue you might experience a horizontal band.

    It's not always visible but when you start noticing it you might notice it more often. It enhances from angles but is also visible sitting in front of the TV. See the picture below. The effect has been enhanced and by the camera but notice the horizontal bands.
    Horizontal bands? On a TV of this price? In high enough detail that even his shitty camera picks it up?

    Spoilered the black level stuff out of respect for people who don't give a shit about this discussion:
    Now, the black level of that review. It's impressive. I'm a little irritated their equipment is only to two decimal places. For example, the equivalent HomeTheaterMag reviews measured .002 on the LG and .004 on the VT25, while this guy measured .02 on the VT25 (I'll get to his review at the end.) Of course the HTM guy had no problem with the LG's color.

    However, like I mentioned in my last post, that black level to the best of my knowledge is measured on a completely black screen. In that totally non-typical setting, all the LED has to do is turn itself "off", whereas the plasma is still emitting light. Given that scenario, it's not surprising that the LED beats a plasma. The question is how well it can maintain that level once a real-world situation is used. The downside here is that there is no way to "prove" this, but let's look at the reviewers quotes.
    But deep black reproduction is not worth much if shadow detailing is poor. Luckily this is not the case with LE8500 and most of the time I see quite good shadow detailing. The problem with LED local dimming systems is the shadow detailing varies according to the picture content...Because when the LED zones reduce light you might experience that gamma is altered and that shadow detailing is reduced. I saw this on LE8500, too, and sometimes the dark shades of gray that are close to black are not distinguished... On a static image displaying shadow detailing steps the LE8500 appears to get most of the grey tone steps into the picture but when images move and the images are more dynamic you might experience a small loss in shadow detailing on LE8500... the LED system is not perfect yet and has some issues with loss in shadow detail and the before mentioned horizontal banding issues. Also, we see this halo effect that we also talked about on previous LED local dimming TV sets...The effect is much less subtle than on the Philips 9704H and mostly visible form an angles but it's there.
    (bolding mine)

    Also, running parallel to my post that started this whole discussion:
    The way forward is to include more LED zones but by doing that we're also approaching the technological principle of the OLED technology.
    Which is why I said my gut tells me this technology will be phased out before it reaches a point that it surpasses plasma.

    I think we both agree that LED viewing angles also cost it against plasmas (this review is no exception). What did surprise me was how bad this guy trashed the thing's daytime viewing, while in a different review praising the plasma's daytime viewing (a reversal of the usual roles). Not good for a TV at this cost. He concludes by giving it a Highly Recommended award, that I'm sure is well deserved. It's a good set! But let's check Amazon, and compare the 54" VT25 to the 55" 8500: VT25 - $2215. 8500 - $2900. $700 more. Now it might just be me but that guy used "not as good as the top plasmas" just a bit much for me to recommend this TV in ANY case over the VT25 with the exception of energy consumption concerns. And I find this to be the case whenever I compare LED to plasma (though this is definitely the most exhaustive look I've done). Finally, the VT25 is known as the best 3D performer on the market...the 8500 doesn't even offer it. (Not that I care about this feature one bit)
    Now just cause I'm an obsessive prick who likes to talk about this stuff, I read the guy's VT25 review. Hitting some of the points on the LG review:

    On color:
    Color reproduction is good but not perfect. We explained before that color accuracy is very good but color gradation is also an important factor in color reproduction on a flat panel TV today...We saw some bands in the smooth gradients indicating that color gradation is not perfect. This happened primarily in the very dark colors. The result is good and VT20 has no critical problems...This is also visible to the critical user in fast motion scenes sometimes because the plasma technology is creating some colors by mixing new colors from existing one (called dithering). We saw the same thing on the G20 and this is not improved on VT20. Plasma dithering noise in general is also visible if you watch the panel closely but it's not visible from a distance.

    I'm reading into the word good over the word fair, and the repeated statements that there are no critical problems versus the continuous harping on the LG's horizontal banding.

    On SD
    SD content is reproduced well. Panasonic had some scaling and de-interlacing issues in the past but VT20 has no critical issues. De-interlacing is very good ensuring that jaggies (stair like lines that appear where there should be smooth straight lines or curves) are greatly reduced.
    Together with the good scaling processor VT20 creates a detailed and nice SD picture that is the best so far from Panasonic and I really enjoyed watching SD content on VT20.

    In contrast to when he said the 8500's SD didn't compare to the best plasmas.

    On motion:
    Phosphor trailing on Panasonic VT20/VT25 is indeed reduced. I still see some phosphor trailing but compared to G20, the VT range is much better with motion handling. Motion resolution is also very high on VT20. Moving pictures are very detailed and plasma TVs still has the edge compared to even the new LCD-TVs with scanning backlight such as the LG LE8500.

    Which TVs?

    He does mention that he saw "very minor retention". I don't usually bring that up anymore and I'm surprised to see him say it. Small point to LEDs here I guess. This guy seems to know enough of his shit I'm not inclined to argue.

    On black levels: his measurements do give it to LG. I talked about that up there. However, these VT25 measurements seem a little high compared to everywhere else. I also don't like seeing him comment that the Pioneer measured .02 (I've seen it measured as low as .001-.002 in several other places). This all calls into question for me a little bit about how these are being performed here. However, it's not about the raw value, but how well it can be held:
    Shadow detailing is very good. I can distinguish almost all dark shades and this ensures fantastic detail in dark scenes. I did see some plasma dithering noise (PWM) in some of the dark grey tones but it's only visible if you move very close. Good shadow detailing is important but when it's combined with very deep blacks it really contributes to picture reproduction and depth.

    Definitely a different story than his LG review. And as far as light homogenity goes: "VT20 has no light homogeneity problems. I expereinced no floating blacks either." He also talks about the daytime viewing and how surprisingly good it is throughout the article.

    The VT25 supports 3D. The 8500 doesn't. And for the record, virtually every review out there has the VT25 has the best 3D TV...no other TV regardless of 2D image quality has come close with 3D quality. If you're into this. Finally, the review conclusion: "And with Pioneer KURO out of the picture (no longer available in stores) it will be fair to say that VT20/VT25 is the best TV on the market today".

    Not much more to add to THAT.

    Scrublet on
    subedii wrote: »
    I hear PC gaming is huge off the coast of Somalia right now.

    PSN: TheScrublet
This discussion has been closed.