Has anyone actually got / seen a GT60 yet???

[bigboss]

They have it here:

http://www.panastore-north.co.uk/3d/517-txp42gt60.html

Not sure if they have it in stock though. Despite displaying a price, they're asking to call for price. I don't believe that price anyway. Far cheaper here.

 

[Son_of_SJ]

They have it here:

http://www.panastore-north.co.uk/3d/517-txp42gt60.html

Not sure if they have it in stock though. Despite displaying a price, they're asking to call for price. I don't believe that price anyway. Far cheaper here.

Hmm, confusing. Gel's link for panasonic-north, though named 42gt60, actually takes you to a page showing the 50gt60. If you check gel's and bigboss's "Far cheaper here" links for the same sizes of TVs, whether 42" or 50", there's not much price difference between the two suppliers.

 

[bigboss]

They have it here:

http://www.panastore-north.co.uk/3d/517-txp42gt60.html

Not sure if they have it in stock though. Despite displaying a price, they're asking to call for price. I don't believe that price anyway. Far cheaper here.

Hmm, confusing. Gel's link for panasonic-north, though named 42gt60, actually takes you to a page showing the 50gt60. If you check gel's and bigboss's "Far cheaper here" links for the same sizes of TVs, whether 42" or 50", there's not much price difference between the two suppliers.

Hmmm.....that's interesting! The actual 42GT60 is £1199 and showing as out of stock.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

The 50GT60 says available:

http://www.panastore-north.co.uk/14-plasma

But it does say call for price, so I presume you can get it a lot cheaper.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Hi, just been reading the review can I ask which screen is brighter the GT60 or the VT65? Or is the screen sizes you reviewed to big a difference to start comparing? Cheers.

 

[Joe Cox]

You're quick! Just gone live... Panasonic TX-P42GT60B review

 

[Son_of_SJ]

Hello Mr Cox,

And the answers to gel's two questions are ......??

 

[bigboss]

How did you get hold of Django Unchained blu ray? It isn't releasing until next week!

 

[Nick_Shepherd]

Hi there,

can the review team someone comment on how much better or not the Gt60 is over the Gt50 for just bluray picture quality...? Joe cox said that you could....

 

[bigboss]

Hi, just been reading the review can I ask which screen is brighter the GT60 or the VT65? Or is the screen sizes you reviewed to big a difference to start comparing? Cheers.

I think that's difficult to answer unless you:

1) Compare the TVs side by side.

2) Actually check the peaks of brightness, rather than just the ideal picture based on calibration / room viewing conditions.

3) Compare simular sized TVs.

If WHF still have the VT65, can you compare them side by side please?

 

[strapped for cash]

The GT60 is brighter than the VT65; every reviewer that's measured peak brightness and ANSI contrast confirms this.

Whether that added brightness brings anything worthwhile to the party is another question, since the VT65 can produce considerably brighter images than I'd ever want or need.

 

[bigboss]

Agreed. It's similar to asking "how loud can your amp or speakers go?"

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Not really. Some reviews are saying the VT65 does not have the brightest pictures:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/panasonic-tx-p50vt65_TV_review

I don't see what is hard about that?

WHF have said the GT60 produces bright pictures, they did not say the VT65 did.

Just wondering is this something they noticed when reviewing the two?

 

[rocketrazor]

Says in stock here

http://www.thtdirect.co.uk/panasonic-tx-p50gt60b.html?gclid=CPr-tpGemLcCFWXJtAodv3gAJQ

£1299.99 with 5 year warranty

 

[strapped for cash]

Not really. Some reviews are saying the VT65 does not have the brightest pictures:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/panasonic-tx-p50vt65_TV_review

I don't see what is hard about that?

WHF have said the GT60 produces bright pictures, they did not say the VT65 did.

Just wondering is this something they noticed when reviewing the two?

Hi Gel,

My point, really, is that the VT65 is plenty bright enough, whatever some reviewers say.

If we look at actual measurements, calibrators set a TV up with a peak luminance reading of 30 ft in mind. The 50VT65 measured 26 ftl on an ANSI checkerboard pattern (roughly 90 cd/m2).

The GT60's numbers are almost identical. The 50GT60's ANSI peak luminance reading was marginally higher at 27 ftl (or 92 cd/m2).

In other words, there's so little in it that you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference. Also bear in mind that contrast is not set at full when professionally calibrated, but rather set at a level that doesn't clip whites. Both the GT60 and VT65's screen will look brighter if the contrast is set higher, but whites would clip more as a consequence. (In principle, though rarely in practice, raising contrast above the calibrated level means you'd lose a small amount of detail in the brightest areas of the picture.)

To give this discussion some context, I set my VT65's contrast at 52 (just over halfway, as the numbers go up to 100 this year), with a gamma setting of 2.4 (i.e. darker than the 2.2. out of the box setting); and I'm not concerned by a lack of brightness.

The ZT65 struggles quite a bit more in terms of peak luminance, with an ANSI peak brightness reading of 16 ftl (or 54 cd/m2). I'm guessing this isn't the TV for you, as I know you like bright images. The ZT65 is really designed for use in a batcave.

As a point of comparison, the GT50 goes brighter than both the GT60 and VT65, with an ANSI peak luminance reading of 32 ftl (or 109 cd/m2). If you're hoping for a brighter image than your current TV can produce, neither TV fits the bill. Nevertheless, the VT65 is a notably better TV than the GT50 in my opinion. Shadow detail, depth and dimensionality are in another league.

Hope that's some help...

 

[strapped for cash]

To add to the above, the 64" Samsung F8500 had an ANSI peak brightness reading of 32 ftl (or 109 cd/m2). Simply put, the larger Samsung goes as bright as the 50GT50. Chances are, the 51" F8500 will go even brighter (smaller screens typically do, because they don't draw as much power). We'll have to wait for a thorough test of the 51" F8500 to confirm this is the case.

The trade off is that the Samsung's ANSI black level isn't quite as impressive as this year's Panasonics. However, the F8500 arguably outperforms the GT60/VT65 with both standard definition material and 3D (images are brighter and, unlike Panasonic's efforts, full HD 3D). As you perhaps read, the F8500 was crowned "king" (just) at the recent VE HDTV Shootout.

 

[rocketrazor]

To add to the above, the 64" Samsung F8500 had an ANSI peak brightness reading of 32 ftl (or 109 cd/m2). Simply put, the larger Samsung goes as bright as the 50GT50. Chances are, the 51" F8500 will go even brighter (smaller screens typically do, because they don't draw as much power). We'll have to wait for a thorough test of the 51" F8500 to confirm this is the case.

The trade off is that the Samsung's ANSI black level isn't quite as impressive as this year's Panasonics. However, the F8500 arguably outperforms the GT60/VT65 with both standard definition material and 3D (images are brighter and, unlike Panasonic's efforts, full HD 3D). As you perhaps read, the F8500 was crowned "king" (just) at the recent VE HDTV Shootout.

are the panasonic a not full hd 3d this year. The gt50 is?

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Not really. Some reviews are saying the VT65 does not have the brightest pictures:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/panasonic-tx-p50vt65_TV_review

I don't see what is hard about that?

WHF have said the GT60 produces bright pictures, they did not say the VT65 did.

Just wondering is this something they noticed when reviewing the two?

Hi Gel,

My point, really, is that the VT65 is plenty bright enough, whatever some reviewers say.

If we look at actual measurements, calibrators set a TV up with a peak luminance reading of 30 ft in mind. The 50VT65 measured 26 ftl on an ANSI checkerboard pattern (roughly 90 cd/m2).

The GT60's numbers are almost identical. The 50GT60's ANSI peak luminance reading was marginally higher at 27 ftl (or 92 cd/m2).

In other words, there's so little in it that you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference. Also bear in mind that contrast is not set at full when professionally calibrated, but rather set at a level that doesn't clip whites. Both the GT60 and VT65's screen will look brighter if the contrast is set higher, but whites would clip more as a consequence. (In principle, though rarely in practice, raising contrast above the calibrated level means you'd lose a small amount of detail in the brightest areas of the picture.)

To give this discussion some context, I set my VT65's contrast at 52 (just over halfway, as the numbers go up to 100 this year), with a gamma setting of 2.4 (i.e. darker than the 2.2. out of the box setting); and I'm not concerned by a lack of brightness.

The ZT65 struggles quite a bit more in terms of peak luminance, with an ANSI peak brightness reading of 16 ftl (or 54 cd/m2). I'm guessing this isn't the TV for you, as I know you like bright images. The ZT65 is really designed for use in a batcave.

As a point of comparison, the GT50 goes brighter than both the GT60 and VT65, with an ANSI peak luminance reading of 32 ftl (or 109 cd/m2). If you're hoping for a brighter image than your current TV can produce, neither TV fits the bill. Nevertheless, the VT65 is a notably better TV than the GT50 in my opinion. Shadow detail, depth and dimensionality are in another league.

Hope that's some help...

Hi Strapped

Yep, it is really helpful - cheers. Interesting the higher up the range, the less bright the TV gets! I can tell from the images I have seen the VT65 is a great TV. At the moment I think if I had to buy one, that is winning over the GT60.

Great review again of the VT65:

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1368523071

 

[Deleted member 2457]

I had to cut my other post short it kept be deleted!

I was just starting to think there might be a problem with the brightness of the VT range, but hearing what you and other people have said I don't think it is an issue. I know the VT30 was not bright though and the VT50 got critised a bit there too.

Yep, I do like a bright screen.

Cheers.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

To add to the above, the 64" Samsung F8500 had an ANSI peak brightness reading of 32 ftl (or 109 cd/m2). Simply put, the larger Samsung goes as bright as the 50GT50. Chances are, the 51" F8500 will go even brighter (smaller screens typically do, because they don't draw as much power). We'll have to wait for a thorough test of the 51" F8500 to confirm this is the case.

The trade off is that the Samsung's ANSI black level isn't quite as impressive as this year's Panasonics. However, the F8500 arguably outperforms the GT60/VT65 with both standard definition material and 3D (images are brighter and, unlike Panasonic's efforts, full HD 3D). As you perhaps read, the F8500 was crowned "king" (just) at the recent VE HDTV Shootout.

I have seen the Samsung quite a bit now. I think anyone purchasing that TV I would say getting it setting up correct is probably a must. I can see how people liked it. Not for me though.

 

[strapped for cash]

are the panasonic a not full hd 3d this year. The gt50 is?

With the exception of the VT20, Panasonic's 3D plasmas only render certain parts of the 3D image at full HD (1080p) resolution. (So I'm afraid the GT50 doesn't technically do full HD 3D either).

See any HDTV Test Panasonic 3D plasma review for more detailed discussion of this resolution loss and the logic behind this processing decision.

 

[strapped for cash]

Interesting the higher up the range, the less bright the TV gets!




The higher end models use more aggressive filters. As a result, the panel has to run brighter to compensate for the filter's dimming effects. This is why the VT65 uses fans, while the GT60 doesn't need them.

 

[strapped for cash]

I was just starting to think there might be a problem with the brightness of the VT range, but hearing what you and other people have said I don't think it is an issue. I know the VT30 was not bright though and the VT50 got critised a bit there too.

Only way to be sure is to see the TVs for yourself, but there's virtually nothing between the GT60 and VT65 in terms of peak brightness.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

I was just starting to think there might be a problem with the brightness of the VT range, but hearing what you and other people have said I don't think it is an issue. I know the VT30 was not bright though and the VT50 got critised a bit there too.

Only way to be sure is to see the TVs for yourself, but there's virtually nothing between the GT60 and VT65 in terms of peak brightness.

Interesting the sound got criticised on the GT60, I think that pushed me more towards the VT65 too.

 

[strapped for cash]

The sound is surprisingly good on the VT65. Of course it's no substitute for a dedicated 5.1 system, or even a decent soundbar, but with a few tweaks the TV sounds better than I expected.