ellisdj said:
Yeah, that would be cool. Anyone got one?
-
CES Hands On - Samsung HW-Q990F review
Yeah, that would be cool. Anyone got one?
Its not having it I dont think - clever systems but pain in back side as well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lK7DOuUHNg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lK7DOuUHNg
I have done a video of Star Wars Return of the Jedi, I will upload it sometime, not sure when though.
gel said:
That still doesnt want to work tried with no name at all - image of the Grey looks good, mega detailed.
I will try and do different vids if I get a chance - manic day
ellisdj said:
Yep, different video with a different name would be the route to take, mine take about an hour to upload! You have to keep an eye on it too.
That was done this morning, this GT50 performs well during the day too, the other two I had were not so good.
That depends on contrast seeting though - higher contrast more luminance output for daytime viewing.
You cna blast the contrast on the Lx5090 but it hurts your eyes its so bright
You cna blast the contrast on the Lx5090 but it hurts your eyes its so bright
Interesting read:
http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/mobile-phones/panasonic-tx-p55vt65-review-50011105/
http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/mobile-phones/panasonic-tx-p55vt65-review-50011105/
I find the concluding lines of the cnet review rather odd:
"Samsung's F8500 plasma that we'll be reviewing soon has more TV catch-up services and excellent HD picture quality, but isn’t quite as good as the VT65 when it comes to upscaling standard-definition pictures.
"So, if standard-definition performance is more important than catch-up TV series to you then the VT65 is the TV to buy."
There are many important distinctions between the F8500 and VT65. To reduce the decision to a question of better upscaling or better OD services seems superficial commentary at best.
"Samsung's F8500 plasma that we'll be reviewing soon has more TV catch-up services and excellent HD picture quality, but isn’t quite as good as the VT65 when it comes to upscaling standard-definition pictures.
"So, if standard-definition performance is more important than catch-up TV series to you then the VT65 is the TV to buy."
There are many important distinctions between the F8500 and VT65. To reduce the decision to a question of better upscaling or better OD services seems superficial commentary at best.
strapped for cash said:
This is a very interesting video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrPeMPgHV6g
Obviously shows nothing but there looks to me to be nothing between the 2. in this demo
If both were calibrated would be near identical
Obviously shows nothing but there looks to me to be nothing between the 2. in this demo
If both were calibrated would be near identical
ellisdj said:
Yep, most Blu-rays look the same. Pretty cool you can now pay £800 for the GT50 if you can get a good one, or the GT60 is said to be better.
BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW said:
Thats the setup / video - Pioneer does perfect white 0DE when setup properly,
http://imageshack.us/a/img40/6195/calibrationresults1gamm.jpg
There is not a lot in it at all, maybe more in real life. The image does look more colourful on the Pannys - the colours look stronger, the Kuro has a softer image especially in the colours.
Now I had to boost colour +6 to calibrate it in to get the colours as they are - any more or less threw the near perfect white off and then worsened the rest. I wonder how many owners know roughly this much colour boost is necessary
ellisdj said:
In your situation, I guess it's a question of whether those extra 10" and any subtle improvement in performance are worth £3,500.
For anyone interested, my VT65 is going strong and, beyond extreme nitpicking, hasn't put a foot wrong. The improvement in native contrast really pays off. Images look extremely dynamic, with great depth, yet natural and comfortable to watch.
There are very occasional, minor glitches with 50Hz motion (and I mean very occasional), but that's my only criticism. The "Minimum" IFC setting smooths these issues out without nasty side effects. Every once in a while there's a mild soap opera effect. It's down to individual preference whether you prefer IFC at "Min" or "Off." (IFC should always be set to off with 60Hz and 24p content.) Overall, motion is better than last year's models.
I recall BBB stating that he loved his Kuro and merely liked his GT50. I'm gradually becoming besotted with the VT65, which is looking better with every day that passes. Lovely TV!
Yep, I did love my Kuro, and so did my wife.
She asked me if we could buy a second hand one to replace the GT50, which is when I told her of my plan to replace it with the VT65.
Totally forgot to ring JL today.
She asked me if we could buy a second hand one to replace the GT50, which is when I told her of my plan to replace it with the VT65.
Totally forgot to ring JL today.
strapped for cash said:
Well, not really that positive.
There are other things we need more, like a new sofa, and a new bed.
Still getting the tv though.
BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW said:Well, not really that positive.
There are other things we need more, like a new sofa, and a new bed.
Still getting the tv though.
Audition first; don't take my word for it! Seven hundred pounds is a fair outlay over the GT50 price. You want to be sure the VT65 is worth the extra.
As I noted last week, my requirements are subtly different from yours. The twin tuner and PVR functionality are particularly important to me. I like the fact that you can timer record (if the TV is on standby), meaning I have the equivalent of a 1TB dual-tuner PVR. (There's no series link, but otherwise it's all I need.) For me, the dual tuner helped justify the extra over the GT60, since an equivalent PVR would have cost a couple of hundred and taken up valuable space in my cluttered AV cabinet.
strapped for cash said:BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW said:Well, not really that positive.
There are other things we need more, like a new sofa, and a new bed.
Still getting the tv though.
Audition first; don't take my word for it! Seven hundred pounds is a fair outlay over the GT50 price. You want to be sure the VT65 is worth the extra.
As I noted last week, my requirements are subtly different from yours. The twin tuner and PVR functionality are particularly important to me. I like the fact that you can timer record (if the TV is on standby), meaning I have the equivalent of a 1TB dual-tuner PVR. (There's no series link, but otherwise it's all I need.) For me, the dual tuner helped justify the extra over the GT60, since an equivalent PVR would have cost a couple of hundred and taken up valuable space in my cluttered AV cabinet.
So Strapped, are you thinking that the GT60 would be good enough for me?
It's true that the the twin tuner and PVR functionality aren't essential for me, and if I do get rid of Sky, I have a good Echostar PVR in the bedroom I can use.
To be honest, I just want the best picture I can afford, and the VT looks like it edges the GT just. From what I can see from the reviews, the blacks are ever so slightly better than the GT's, and the reflective filter is slightly better too. The other difference that might make it worth buying for me, is the design, the VT definitely looks better than the GT.
So are those 3 points worth an extra £400-£500? I guess I'll just have to think about it. Plus, this is all dependent on JL saying they will exchange my GT of course.
Whle watching football yesterday, I genuinely could barely see the vertical banding, even when looking for it. So another option is to stick with the GT50 until the price of the GT60 and VT65 come down, then sell the GT50, and buy one of the other two.
Let's see whay JL have to say.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram