Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Ularg
Mar 2, 2010

Just tell me I'm exotic.

Mister Macys posted:

Yeah, I don't know what it is about television tech, but I love reading up on it, watching them, and all that.
I just want people to get the most out of their money when making a purchase.
Like a car guy I guess, only I can't shut up about it.

To answer your question though, if your looking at 82°F even with AC, I'd have to recommend against a plasma.
They can raise the room temp by another 1-5°, maybe more; depending on the size of the living room.
I didn't dare turn mine on this year without my AC(s) running.

Yeah the 82f is the height of summer. Mainly because my room is at the end of the AC chain so I would have to turn the entire house down to 75 for me to go down to 78. It's doable. Also a big contributor to the temperature is my gaming computer, which I was trying to soft-replace with a PS4.(Xbox one later down the line maybe)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

Mister Macys posted:

2.) Internet features are the new digital clocks. Processing power has advanced to where anything can have a microcomputer in it, and if it's powerful enough to run Netflix/Hulu/Vudu/Goatse, then what the Hell; throw IE6 and Angry Birds in too. In a world of black rectangles, high prices, thin margins, and slow sales, you need all the bullet points you can get. And firmware updates rule, as they can improve how the image processor does it's magic.

Well, not quite. Smart features introduce some significant lag still.

Mister Facetious
Apr 21, 2007

I think I died and woke up in L.A.,
I don't know how I wound up in this place...

:canada:
Nobody in corporate cares about actual gamers. :jerkbag:

Ularg
Mar 2, 2010

Just tell me I'm exotic.
I really don't notice input lag unless it's like super ridiculous "No one buy this!" reviews type of input latency. At least with playing console games it's harder to notice, but maybe it's because my reaction time sucks on consoles.

duodenum
Sep 18, 2005

I'm considering buying an ST60 Panny Plasma myself on Black Friday. I'm concerned that quite a bit of the shows watched end up being 4:3 content (kids cartoons). Do I need to worry about those black side bars?

Mister Facetious
Apr 21, 2007

I think I died and woke up in L.A.,
I don't know how I wound up in this place...

:canada:
I once watched 4 straight hours of DBZ Kai anime animated content in 4:3. There were temporary borders (only visible in bright screens), but they disappeared not long after.

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

Plus if you're really scared, just stretch it. Kids don't care.

TheAngryDrunk
Jan 31, 2003

"I don't know why I know that; I took four years of Spanish."
I've pretty much settled on this Samsung. Is there anything else I should be looking at in this price range?

Mister Facetious
Apr 21, 2007

I think I died and woke up in L.A.,
I don't know how I wound up in this place...

:canada:
The TC-P55ST60 is about the same price if you want to consider plasma.
Otherwise, the Samsung looks like it has a good feature set.

potentiometer
Dec 31, 2006

TheAngryDrunk posted:

I've pretty much settled on this Samsung. Is there anything else I should be looking at in this price range?

I got the 42" size of this model for the bedroom and its got really good PQ, all the extras, and has been working flawlessly in the 4/5 months I've had it.

Can't say anything input lag or gaming as that's reserved for the 7000 series 55" Sammy downstairs.

Overall for the money I'm pleased with the purchase, hope you are too!

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

DisplayLag has it in the "Okay" area, which is fine.

Kilazar
Mar 23, 2010
I went to best buy Friday to do some in person comparison. Both the vizio and the 55 version of the pany st series were there and on the "best buy promo loop" video. Unfortunately that video kind of sucks. So I have an odd question that might be hard to explain.

Looking over at the theater room where the 6k tv's are, or even at some of the "adjusted" 2k samsungs that were on an actual movie, I noticed that the movies have a kind of surreal eye popping almost 3d but not 3d look. As if the video was so clear that you can conceptualize real depth in the picture. Are the Vizio and pany's images that crisp?

I mean, breaking bad looked as if I could reach out and touch everything as if I was standing right next to Walter. I asked the bb dude if they could change the feed on the two TV's I came to see, and he said he can only put them over to the cable channels.



Also with the bb loop vid, I could discern no difference in image quality between the two panels other than the pany being way dimmer than the vizio.

Comfy Fleece Sweater
Apr 2, 2013

You see, but you do not observe.

At least on my recently bought TV (a samsung), it has a "Dynamic" color mode that is probably meant for these kinds of showroom "pop" visuals. Yes, it looks loving awesome at home too, but after a while you might want to try other color modes for certain content (Movies/sports).

About the Smart TV features, after playing a couple of months with my TV, I'd argue that they're worth it. gently caress, every single thing I thought I didn't care about in this TV turned out to be awesome - the 3D (I can't get enough of 3D movies), the internet features (Netflix etc), the "Soap Opera" auto smooth effect, etc. The only thing that really just doesn't work right is voice commands and gestures.

Kilazar
Mar 23, 2010
I figured it would be hard to explain.

This is not a Dynamic color setting. Here is an example they had two identical samsungs side by side playing the same blue ray content synced ( a multi vid blue ray I believe) One TV is "calibrated" by geek squad, and the other is out of the box settings. Now as far as colors and what not go the pictures were totally different on the exact same scenes. What was uniform between the two tv's was that everything still looked "hyper real", it felt like I was looking at a 3d movie without 3d glasses just due to how clear the image is.

But not a single other tv on the "wall" had an image that crisp/clear. But I think it is due to the feed they are receiving being the generic best buy video ad loop. So I want to know if the Pany Plasma (ST60 and S60) or the Vizio M60) can even come close to that quality. I don't have a BR player I can just take in and ask them to hook up, otherwise I would. I'm planning on getting a player with my TV purchase.

As a note, I don't care about the geek squad calibration, I just threw that in to note that it probably was not a color/dynamic contrast thing.

Dr Tran
Dec 17, 2002

HE'S GOT A PH.D. IN
KICKING YOUR ASS!
Sounds like the soap opera effect to me.

Comfy Fleece Sweater
Apr 2, 2013

You see, but you do not observe.

Dr Tran posted:

Sounds like the soap opera effect to me.

That, or maybe they were 4K displays? Those look ridiculously real, almost like you're looking through a windows.

Kilazar
Mar 23, 2010

Don Tacorleone posted:

That, or maybe they were 4K displays? Those look ridiculously real, almost like you're looking through a windows.

This, right here.

Soooo maybe I need to save a bit more money than the 1400 I got ready to go...

Gozinbulx
Feb 19, 2004
Most Best Buy screens (on the huge wall of tvs) are connected to a distributed feed of coaxial poo poo aka it looks like poo poo and the signal strength is not even the same for half the tvs. Its a really terrible way to try to compare tvs when the signal sucks and it doesnt even suck at the same level for different tvs. I have just got the Vizio 55 inch E Series and i think it rules. If you have the apprpriate hd content (even in 720p) its looks amazing. Maybe not the so called soap opera effect but I really hate that so I'm good. Watching HD sports (like shiny Formula 1 cars) is a treat.

DaddyBigBucks
Sep 28, 2003

Should the input lag between the same model but different sizes be the same?

For example: (KDL47W802A) vs (KDL55W802A)

Don Lapre
Mar 28, 2001

If you're having problems you're either holding the phone wrong or you have tiny girl hands.

DaddyBigBucks posted:

Should the input lag between the same model but different sizes be the same?

For example: (KDL47W802A) vs (KDL55W802A)

Not necessarily

DaddyBigBucks
Sep 28, 2003

I am having a really hard time trying to decide between a few models, CNET's article providing the list of 2013 with the lowest input lag has a Sony at the top (albeit the review wasn't glowing). Of course the S60 is on that list and the price here in Canada is ridiculously low from futureshop at $889.29 with taxes included. The Sony is $1920!

I have some prejudice against plasma or something because the S60 has everything I want for a TV where my main uses are PS3/PS4 and watching hockey and football. I did have my heart set on LED.

Mister Facetious
Apr 21, 2007

I think I died and woke up in L.A.,
I don't know how I wound up in this place...

:canada:

DaddyBigBucks posted:

Should the input lag between the same model but different sizes be the same?

For example: (KDL47W802A) vs (KDL55W802A)

Going by the Leo Bodnar system, size is a factor, adding a few milliseconds.
Vizio however, has upgraded tech in their 50" M series (120Hz refresh vs. 60Hz) compared to the smaller models, so it never hurts to double-check.

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

It's a factor but those look like Sony 2013 model numbers so the lag is probably excellent even still.

The W9 has both extremely low lag and amazing picture but probably costs $500 more.

The Gunslinger
Jul 24, 2004

Do not forget the face of your father.
Fun Shoe
Looks like it's official now, Panasonic Plasma production ending in December :(

My 2010 TV isn't old enough to consider upgrading, I hope it holds out until OLED is affordable.

cbirdsong
Sep 8, 2004

Commodore of the Apocalypso
Lipstick Apathy
So I should try to buy one of those before then, if I was thinking of getting one in the next year or so? I'm guessing prices will not be dropping like crazy.

Comfy Fleece Sweater
Apr 2, 2013

You see, but you do not observe.

cbirdsong posted:

So I should try to buy one of those before then, if I was thinking of getting one in the next year or so? I'm guessing prices will not be dropping like crazy.

Why would you buy an outgoing piece of tech? From what I've read, the reason they're terminating the Plasma line is because they're moving to a more efficient, better looking technology (of which I forget the name of). Unless they're heavily discounted, I don't see the urgency.

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

Don Tacorleone posted:

Why would you buy an outgoing piece of tech? From what I've read, the reason they're terminating the Plasma line is because they're moving to a more efficient, better looking technology (of which I forget the name of). Unless they're heavily discounted, I don't see the urgency.

That technology is OLED, and it currently costs $10000. It's not like that's the 2014 models.

Twerk from Home
Jan 17, 2009

This avatar brought to you by the 'save our dead gay forums' foundation.

Don Tacorleone posted:

Why would you buy an outgoing piece of tech? From what I've read, the reason they're terminating the Plasma line is because they're moving to a more efficient, better looking technology (of which I forget the name of). Unless they're heavily discounted, I don't see the urgency.

Plasma is dying also because consumers are underinformed and for the most part don't give a flying gently caress about image quality. People buy the biggest cheapest, thinnest TV they can even if it looks like edge-lit horseshit.

Comfy Fleece Sweater
Apr 2, 2013

You see, but you do not observe.

Weinertron posted:

Plasma is dying also because consumers are underinformed and for the most part don't give a flying gently caress about image quality. People buy the biggest cheapest, thinnest TV they can even if it looks like edge-lit horseshit.

Plasma never really shook the bad reputation it had from the early 00's (and at the time it was well deserved), but I don't think the consumers who buy the cheapest thinnest TV would care that Plasma was now (arguably) better. It's just a reality of the market, if they don't sell, they're going out, and I'd be more concerned about support after they're discontinued, and in that case I'd rather buy a new, supported model.

If you research your TVs you can probably find a decent LED equivalent anyway, it's not 2005, LEDs are great now.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.


Don Tacorleone posted:



If you research your TVs you can probably find a decent LED equivalent anyway, it's not 2005, LEDs are great now.

The issue is, the only LED equivalent in picture quality of the Panasonic xTx0 plasma line are the Sharp Elite TVs that cost $5k-$7k. Yes, the picture quality of plasma was that good and LED backlit LCDs still can't replicate it easily for low cost.

That's the main lament, the Panasonic Plasmas were the cheat sheet to top of the line picture quality without emptying your bank account. Sure, you can get 90% of the way there with an equivalently priced LED backlit TV, but now we are being forced to leave that other 10% on the table.

I mentioned this before in this very thread, but 4k is the worst thing to happen to TVs. At this point, the resolution race in TVs is much like the megapixel race on digital cameras. I would much rather the manufacturers spend more R&D on improving panel uniformity, increasing color accuracy, and deepening black levels without artifacts than pumping out panels with more pixels that no one can use anyways. Leave 4k to the projectionist folks and just give us a very high quality 1080p display.

bull3964 fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Oct 31, 2013

The Gunslinger
Jul 24, 2004

Do not forget the face of your father.
Fun Shoe

Don Tacorleone posted:

Plasma never really shook the bad reputation it had from the early 00's (and at the time it was well deserved), but I don't think the consumers who buy the cheapest thinnest TV would care that Plasma was now (arguably) better. It's just a reality of the market, if they don't sell, they're going out, and I'd be more concerned about support after they're discontinued, and in that case I'd rather buy a new, supported model.

If you research your TVs you can probably find a decent LED equivalent anyway, it's not 2005, LEDs are great now.

If you're worried about support they will be honoring warranties for years to come and sell extended warranties. There's also local repair options that are pretty cheap if you're out of warranty. If someone is buying a TV before Panasonic plasmas end production then there is really no harm in considering it. The thing isn't going to break on you in a year and leave you without any options. Most TVs only have 1-2 firmware updates that you will get in the first year as well.

If my TV was a little older I would just pick one up but I can't justify it to the GF right now :(

The Gunslinger fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Oct 31, 2013

El_Matarife
Sep 28, 2002
I'm sure Panasonic will just replace dead plasma TVs with a similarly priced LCD.

It's too bad really, this really is a huge setback for picture quality and the issues with plasma are all long fixed. I convinced my parents to replace their dying living room TV with Panasonic plasma and they liked the quality so much they ended up buying a second to replace their semi-busted bedroom TV a month later.

55-60" OLEDs are maybe 3-4 years from being in a practical price bracket. And I'm convinced the wear and tear issues and failure rate on the first few generations of OLED is going to be as bad as early plasma, maybe worse. I do wonder if 4K is the defining factor here, apparently a 4K plasma would be a total power hog.

The Gunslinger
Jul 24, 2004

Do not forget the face of your father.
Fun Shoe

El_Matarife posted:

I'm sure Panasonic will just replace dead plasma TVs with a similarly priced LCD.

It's too bad really, this really is a huge setback for picture quality and the issues with plasma are all long fixed. I convinced my parents to replace their dying living room TV with Panasonic plasma and they liked the quality so much they ended up buying a second to replace their semi-busted bedroom TV a month later.

55-60" OLEDs are maybe 3-4 years from being in a practical price bracket. And I'm convinced the wear and tear issues and failure rate on the first few generations of OLED is going to be as bad as early plasma, maybe worse. I do wonder if 4K is the defining factor here, apparently a 4K plasma would be a total power hog.

The TV market in general took a big hit too. The HDTV rush is over and most people aren't replacing them any time soon unless Apple decides to make one. Panasonic's LCD division was down 30% last year and the plasma division has lost billions in the past few years alone. They've got LG and Samsung making GBS threads out cheap but serviceable plasmas and LCD still dominates the mid-range due to the wide pricing grid across products and its marketability. It was pretty much a lose-lose for Panasonic.

Comfy Fleece Sweater
Apr 2, 2013

You see, but you do not observe.

bull3964 posted:


I mentioned this before in this very thread, but 4k is the worst thing to happen to TVs. At this point, the resolution race in TVs is much like the megapixel race on digital cameras. I would much rather the manufacturers spend more R&D on improving panel uniformity, increasing color accuracy, and deepening black levels without artifacts than pumping out panels with more pixels that no one can use anyways. Leave 4k to the projectionist folks and just give us a very high quality 1080p display.

It's all academic to me since I'm not going to upgrade TVs for years (hopefully, barring someone stealing mine), but what's so bad about the 4K race? Once everyone's there, they'll start to focus on image quality like they do now, no? From a business standpoint, it's much easier to sell a higher resolution than some vague "color clarity, black level" claims that you can't even check at the store anyway.

Truth be told I was very, very impressed with the image quality of even small 4k displays at the store, images just jump out at you.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.


Don Tacorleone posted:

It's all academic to me since I'm not going to upgrade TVs for years (hopefully, barring someone stealing mine), but what's so bad about the 4K race? Once everyone's there, they'll start to focus on image quality like they do now, no? From a business standpoint, it's much easier to sell a higher resolution than some vague "color clarity, black level" claims that you can't even check at the store anyway.

Truth be told I was very, very impressed with the image quality of even small 4k displays at the store, images just jump out at you.

What's bad about the 4k race over everything else is very very few people have the right seating distance/screen size ratio to even be able to enjoy 1080p, let alone 4k.

You hit exactly WHY it's being pushed though, it's more easily marketed. You are going to have people rushing out to buy 4k 37" TVs to be viewed at 12ft in their living room. It won't make things better once 4k TVs are out because they'll probably then start talking about 8k or some other buzzword tech.

Also, content just isn't going to be there. It's great that TVs in the stores look so nice, they are carefully engineered to create that impression. At the end of the day though, 4k content just flat out doesn't exist in most cases.

Even content that claims to be 4k likely isn't. Most movie workflows are still 2k at this point. Take The Hobbit. Probably the biggest special effects extravaganza of 2012 and you never be able to watch it in native 4k. All SFX were rendered in 2k. To ever get a true 4k master of The Hobbit, all the effects work would have to be re-rendered and re-edited.

Basically, anything post 2000ish era is pointless in 4k because they likely moved to a digital workflow and many of the assets simply don't exist at a higher resolution. Even the 35mm masters were probably struck from a 2k intermediate.

The ONLY advantage 4k has in the foreseeable future is to reduce screen door effect on very large screens. Otherwise, it's a bit pointless.

bull3964 fucked around with this message at 04:43 on Nov 1, 2013

1997
Jan 20, 2008

calmer than you are
I need a new TV to play PS4/PC games on. I currently have a Vizio 60" E-601i-A3 in the living room which does pretty well but black levels aren't the best. I'm going to use this TV in another room and since Panasonic is almost out of the game I was thinking I could get in on that before they're gone. How do you all feel about the TC-P50S60? Don't really need anything more than 50" for this other room.

Bad Munki
Nov 4, 2008

We're all mad here.


bull3964 posted:

The ONLY advantage 4k has in the foreseeable future is to reduce screen door effect on very large screens. Otherwise, it's a bit pointless.

I use my tv as a monitor and would love to have a 4k desktop, and to play games at 4k. So there's at least one (very admittedly niche) purpose.

Comfy Fleece Sweater
Apr 2, 2013

You see, but you do not observe.

I still think 4K is just going to remain a more objective measure of how good a display basically is - image color quality is just too subjective to point to, and old people with money are more likely to go "Oh, it has 4 times the resolution! Let's get that one" even if they couldn't tell it was a 720p source.

Could you even market image quality in non bullshit terms? Every company already has their own and proprietary (mostly worthless) trademarks regarding how good their display looks, but there's just no widely known standard to point to color quality, is there? It would probably even backfire.

bull3964
Nov 18, 2000

DO YOU HEAR THAT? THAT'S THE SOUND OF ME PATTING MYSELF ON THE BACK.


Don Tacorleone posted:

image color quality is just too subjective to point to

No, it's not.

It's very very objective to say "display covers 95% of the sRGB color gamut".

Content is created within very specific parameters so it's rather trivial to quantify how well a particular display is able to accurately reproduce that range. Calibrators do it on a daily basis when they are setting up displays. There's also standards for measuring black level and contrast and gamma. You could get a full info dump on the side of the box detailing how well a display does any of these things.

The real reason why it's not done is QC is pretty drat loose and most manufacturers don't take the time to even attempt to calibrate their displays before they leave the factory. You turn on two of the same TVs using the same menu settings and you are likely to get very different results because the variance from set to set is rather high.

At the end of the day quality does not matter to the vast majority of the user-base and 4k isn't going to be any guarantee of quality (especially when it becomes commoditized very soon here.) Compromises are going to have to be made in the manufacturing process to get the yields they need at that pixel density and size.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Spider2414
Apr 17, 2013
For the upcoming PS4 release, I want to order a new television for my own use. That means I'll only use it for gaming on my PS4 and maybe watching porn when I get bored of my games.

I can choose between a 22" Full HDTV or a 32" HD Ready TV. Which one do I pick? Both TV's have their pro's and con's and I really don't know which one to pick here.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply