Panasonic DMP-35K vs PS3 ?

[cartman781]

Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis

Looks like the PS3 has always been 1.3a...
http://www.gizmocafe.com/blogs/gizmo...04/101815.aspx

Acording to this site, no

http://www.blu-ray.com/players/playe...=65&show=specs

[Blu-Meanie]

I now have both units and I can say that there are valid points made for both players. My first player was the PS3 60 gig and I have had this unit over 18 months and it has performed flawlessly. Never an issue with my Denon 3808CI or my Panny 50" plasma. I've been pleased with both the PQ and AQ in both lossless and lossey playback. I've enjoyed the PS3 games I've played and music in SACD as well as CD. I really have only a few complaints with the
PS3 and it's the fact that it doesn't bitstream and the fan is noisy at times. The WI-FI remote isn't really a problem, but the ability to update firmware via a router is nice!

The Panny 35 does it very well (bitstreaming) but the load times are slower than the PS3 and it's noticable. The one noticable visual difference is in the SD DVD's. The Panny definitely is better. And I agree that bitstreaming (to my ears) gives the Panny a slight edge over the PS3. Not huge, slight.

The versatility of the PS3 in my opinion is it's greatest asset. It's not the one player to rule them all, but it does have a lot of features and very few complaints. The Panny 35 does what it's suppose to do and does it well. A great stand alone player. Not as fast or flexable, but great PQ and AQ and SD DVD playback. I can work it with my Harmony remote and drop a disc and play. Quieter (no fan noise) during quiet passages of music and movies. Between the two I have the best of both worlds. A great movie player, game console, music maker.

I'm sure when Oppo's player hits the shelf there will be many comparisons between the above two players and many other players. These debates will go on forever. But to me value is important, quality is important, reliability is important, and performance is important. I think I have it covered pretty well with these two units and would highly recommend both. Just comes down to preference.

[Electric_Haggis]

Originally Posted by cartman781

Acording to this site, no

http://www.blu-ray.com/players/playe...=65&show=specs

Hmmm... Come to think of it, a friend swears his PS3 could bitstream audio with a previous firmware version.

[Electric_Haggis]

Originally Posted by Blu-Meanie

The Panny 35 does it very well (bitstreaming) but the load times are slower than the PS3 and it's noticable. The one noticable visual difference is in the SD DVD's. The Panny definitely is better. And I agree that bitstreaming (to my ears) gives the Panny a slight edge over the PS3. Not huge, slight.

Are you not seeing any differences with Blu-ray picture quality?

[cartman781]

Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis

Hmmm... Come to think of it, a friend swears his PS3 could bitstream audio with a previous firmware version.

You can set it to bitstream but it will not do the lossless codecs

[Electric_Haggis]

Is it at all possible that the latest 80gb PS3 can bitsream HD audio with a future update?

I can't see why not... The bandwidth is there, even if it is only 1.3.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis

Looks like the PS3 has always been 1.3a...
http://www.gizmocafe.com/blogs/gizmo...04/101815.aspx

Originally Posted by Electric_Haggis

Is it at all possible that the latest 80gb PS3 can bitsream HD audio with a future update?

I can't see why not... The bandwidth is there, even if it is only 1.3.

The PS3 simply cannot bitstream the new codecs. It does DD and DTS, but not DD+, TrueHD, DTS-HD HRA, or dts-MA. It has to do with the chip the PS3 uses. Bitstreaming the new codecs would require a hardware change and there's no indication anything like that is in the works. The PS3 is is an excellent player, but it's not likely that it will ever offer HD bitstreaming.

[cartman781]

Originally Posted by BIslander

The PS3 simply cannot bitstream the new codecs. It does DD and DTS, but not DD+, TrueHD, DTS-HD HRA, or dts-MA. It has to do with the chip the PS3 uses. Bitstreaming the new codecs would require a hardware change and there's no indication anything like that is in the works. The PS3 is is an excellent player, but it's not likely that it will ever offer HD bitstreaming.

OK, I guess I was wrong about the reason but I knew there was a reason it could not get it with a FW update, THANKS

[callas01]

after reading through this entire thread, I have come to realize that many people think that the bd-35 better in terms or PQ and SQ, plus its cheaper.... and that the PS3 loads faster. Since both have the ability to update firmware over the net, that is now a mute point.

I guess this just justifies my purchase and my upgrade over my previous bd-10A. And if I have to wait an extra 5-10 seconds for better PQ and SQ, well, then perfection will have to wait 5-10 seconds.

[-diVe-]

Originally Posted by alain turgeon

I have both the ps3 and the bd 35,ps3 is a bit faster but it can't pass dolby true hd and dts hdma through bitstream and i've found that the sound is a little better decoded by my Denon receiver. Anyway you can't go wrong with any of these players,the ps3 can do so much so it's higher price is justified imo.

The PS3 destroys the BD35 in speed. Not just in load times, but in navigating Blu-ray menus. There is a lag/delay present when navigating any menus on the Blu-ray disc you're watching on the BD35 that is not present on the PS3. It's not a huge lag, but you'll notice it if you've ever used the PS3 as a Blu-ray player. The BD35 is definitely one of the faster standalones, but that's not saying much when the PS3 still dominates standalones as far as speed goes.

With all that said, I still love my BD35. I love it for the fact it uses about five times less power than my PS3, yet produces a picture/sound equal to the PS3.

As far as bitstreaming or decoding the new audio codecs, it's nice seeing "Dolby Digital True HD" or "DTS-HD Master Audio" on my Denon 2809. However, it's really not a big deal. Even though the PS3 can't bitstream the new codecs, it can decode them. The sound is the same either way. It's just a matter of whether you want the PS3 unzipping the new audio codecs or you want your receiver doing it.

[Electric_Haggis]

Originally Posted by -diVe-

With all that said, I still love my BD35. I love it for the fact it uses about five times less power than my PS3, yet produces a picture/sound equal to the PS3.

Sounds like you've not noticed any PQ/SQ improvements with the BD35?

I can understand how the audio would vary slightly between the two units, but I'm still very intrigued by the supposed "improvement" in picture that some are seeing.

I can't help wondering if it's just a tiny difference in output levels, and if it's the sort of "improvement" you'd get by simply tweaking the Sharpness/Brightness/Color/etc on your display!

[hagar852]

I purchased this unit for my parents for christmas and when the boxed arrived it looked like someone used it for a seat. So I set it up on my system where I have had a PS3 since it came out and recently had to purchase the new 80gig model.

Anyway I was interested in seeing if there is any difference in PQ or AQ. I threw in a movie I have watched over a dozen times(Casino Royale) and started to compare.

PQ.. No difference what so ever.. Exactly the same on my Sammy Plasma.. For this comparison I played through the first 20 min of the movie on both players and watched it very closely. I used the same cables on the Panny player as well, as I just unhooked the PS3 and plugged in the Panny.

AQ.. Also no difference playing through my 3300ES receiver. I spent more time with this playing numerous scenes over and over trying to hear any audible difference. I could hear none. I had both players decode the audio signal since my receiver can't decode DTS or TRUE HD.. Casino Royale is PCM anyway so that doesn't much matter. The decoding of each player sounded identical. The sound level itself was also the same as I left the receiver on the same volume level of -15db on the Sony scale.

I must have spent an hour doing this going back and forth switching the cable back and forth, and I was trying to see if I could find a difference as large as some people claim there to be. In the end I couldn't find any difference between the players in PQ or AQ. In terms of load times the PS3 was a bit faster but the Panny surprised me how fast it was. Almost as quick as the PS3 which is a big deal for my parents as they are not patient with this sort of thing. They put in a movie and they expect it to load right away.

So from what I can tell.. PS3 = Panny 35 in AQ and PQ

[aiman04]

I've owned BD35 for a week and PS3 for 14 months. From my comparison, I can immediately see the difference in PQ. To me the BD35 gives better colors and sharper picture, and the grain is somewhat more noticeable. No setting changes were applied on both the TV and the players.

For AQ, no difference for PCM tracks or if decoding the DTS-HD MA/Dolby TrueHD internally. But when bitstream the DTS-HD MA/Dolby TrueHD to my Onkyo 875, there is some improvement, the sound stage is like more opened up and has real weight. But like everyone is saying, it's minimal, but still noticeable.

The loading time/responsiveness is still slower than the PS3, but still the fastest I've seen for a standalone player. Plus, the BD35 is really quiet. For PS3 owners, this will be very noticeable.

[Electric_Haggis]

Originally Posted by aiman04

I've owned BD35 for a week and PS3 for 14 months. From my comparison, I can immediately see the difference in PQ. To me the BD35 gives better colors and sharper picture, and the grain is somewhat more noticeable. No setting changes were applied on both the TV and the players.

That's funny... Some people claim the BD35 is sharper with more grain. Others say it's smoother with less grain.
I must confess, my alarm bells always go off when people speak of colors being "better". What's better? More red? More green? More saturated?

Contrast, gamma and black level settings have an enormous influence on color.

I have a pretty solid feeling that if I were switching between both units on my projector - output levels being equal - I'd see the kind of difference Hagar saw... zero.
Even if there is any difference with the outputs levels the same, the projector could be slightly tweaked to compensate.

Sorry to be such a skeptic, but the more I think about it, the harder it is to believe.
Maybe someone could post some pictures!!

[HeavyHitter]

I spent several hours over different days comparing the PS3 and BD35 at 1080p/24. At times maybe depending on the scenes, the BD35 is a hair crisper. The image also seems to be a hair brighter or more contrasty...again VERY slight. The differences were extremely small and I saw NO difference in color.

However, the BD35 is noticeably better bitstreaming audio over the PS3 internal decoding regarding lossless codecs.

SD DVD upscaling is also very close between the two on film-based DVDs. I didn't test video.

I cannot recommend someone getting rid of their PS3 for the BD35 just for PQ even if you just watch movies and don't play games. The differences are ever so slight. The audio differences are more noticeable and the BD35 uses a lot less wattage so that could play some factor into electric bills I suppose.

[hagar852]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

I spent several hours over different days comparing the PS3 and BD35 at 1080p/24. At times maybe depending on the scenes, the BD35 is a hair crisper. The image also seems to be a hair brighter or more contrasty...again VERY slight. The differences were extremely small and I saw NO difference in color.

However, the BD35 is noticeably better bitstreaming audio over the PS3 internal decoding regarding lossless codecs.

SD DVD upscaling is also very close between the two on film-based DVDs. I didn't test video.

I cannot recommend someone getting rid of their PS3 for the BD35 just for PQ even if you just watch movies and don't play games. The differences are ever so slight. The audio differences are more noticeable and the BD35 uses a lot less wattage so that could play some factor into electric bills I suppose.

Only problem with the audio comparison is that it isn't a fair one. Decoding on the PS3 vs. Your receiver. I would expect that to be different based on your AVR setup with EQ and what not. If the PS3 could bitstream then once again you would find no difference in sound quality.