David Fuller:maxflinn:professorhat:
Reviews = subjective.
You think it's the best TV you've seen = Review.
What Hi-Fi thinks other TV is better = Review.
Not sure why you're arguing - are you saying because you and others think it's better, everyone should think that? If not, why are you complaining?
the review seemed a bit short on actual picture quality analysis in relation to other sites reviews , but i guess most whfi reviews are similar , they are a more mainstream magazine , maybe a little more detail could go into the reviews they publish online , to keep the techies happy , i wasnt complaining , i wouldnt really understand the indepth stuff to be honest , white balance , gamma etc , and anyway 4 stars is 4 stars ,no matter how many words are used , it just seemed strange , the review could have been more indepth with very little effort on whfis part and then no one could complain , to be honest though id say some people are just frustrated the tv may not be as good as they were hoping for .....
The V10 is actually the most accurate Panasonic TV for picture quality and colour balance that they have ever released outside the professional ranges. This has been backed up with solid repeatable tests and measurements and can be seen in another review (and US and European tests). Which is why I am surprised with the WHF verdict and some of the Blu-ray comments and SD claims, they look like utter nonsense and anyone who actually knows what the data means can see that.
It's the fact that there appears to be very little detail in any of the WHF reviews and that they don't appear to be using any reference point. I have asked the question of MR Lucas and it has been completely ignored. Fine I won't lose any sleep, but it just makes me think that this is the case. Saying they are a mainstream magazine is not an excuse in my opinion, does that mean that they can just write any subjectove comment and we accept that? What I am getting at is that 'other' review sites actually use 'objective data' to back up their verdicts. WHF reviews feel like they are written using just subjective comment and no mention of what they mean when they say something and it comes accross as fluff. There are standards for picture quality measurement; de-interlacing, cadence detection and scaling tests that are widely available and even though they don't have to go into great detail and post pages of graphs, some comment on these areas are a must if you are testing a display device.
But as the reviews stand at the moment it gives me the feeling that A) WHF don't care about image science or actually use a reference point and B) that they don't have staff that even understand image science and Reference points. Again the excuse that they are a main stream magazine will rear it's head, but what about actually educating the readers in what picture quality is about and how it should look. Maybe its WHF that need some education? An interesting quote from Claire a while back that WHF staff are ISF was also completely fabricated if you read the comments from the European ISF Training guy on another forum, who also spilled the beans about HCC also lying about being ISF certified. So in my eyes we have reviews that need to be more detailed, show that they are actually using repeatable and standardised testing so the readers can put faith in what is being said. WHF can claim to be experts, but actually thats easy to do. Actually working with standards and showing they are qualified would add so much more credibility. Those who just want to know if the picture quality is any good on a TV are kept happy and might even learn something instead of expecting their hands to be held in making a purchasing decision. I won't hold my breath though.
Oh, and I also know that WHF don't like constructive feedback so this will be my last post on the issue, I'm sure the Editor posse will be here soon. It would just be nice at least once for them to actually listen and maybe answer without getting defensive. A wise man is one who listens....
well if you take a magazine like , top gear , say there was two new cars for review , a perudia nipper ( cheap scrap ) and an audi a4 , which one would get the more detailed indepth review ?? obviously the audi , because its a big selling premium brand , and people would want to know what clarkson and his team thought of it ( and top gear know that people value their opinion ), so they would devote a bit of time and a few pages to explain their findings , what they liked and didnt like , where it has improved against the previous model , fuel economy , handling , if it was comfortable , etc etc , its what people expect nowadays ,whfi has given as much ink to reviews of a polaroid lcd ( or perudia nipper if you see where im going ) , who cares ?? , while i honestly dont understand all the technical stuff , i still want to read it , i would have no problem buying the v10 based on the " other " review , because i can see the reviewer left no stone unturned , and while their was a few negatives ( not the hd quality ) the reviewer was very impressed overall, especially with the thx setting , and i like the idea that i could stick on a bluray on thx setting and know that it was virtually calibrated ( near ) perfect , i was hoping the v10 would be great because i might be able to afford one , i cant afford a kuro
, anyway i will wait and see other reviews and hopefully get a look at the tv myself , i think the moral of the story is , while all products deserve a fair review ( and ive no doubt whifis v10 review was fair ) some deserve a bit more substance ......simply because lots of people will care....
the Z-1 is in a different league this set will be the next Kuro the looks of this set are superlative with a beutiful aliminium frame but the picture has to be seen, this wipes the floor with any Sony Lower end panasonics, but then £3,500-£4000
it should be good, anyway the 42-v10 and the 50-v10 are very much the same in terms of picture quality, i am no expert in discripitive terms of Tvs i can only say what i see as far as i am concerned anyone intersted can buy with confidence, but as always check these sets out yourself.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram