Panasonic UB820/UB9000 4K UHD Blu-ray player

[Naiera]

Originally Posted by Tok

As far as the constant fiddling with JVC HDR settings it’s one parameter to adjust.

One too many.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Naiera

One too many.

I’d rather a JVC with DTM than a Sony with degrading panels.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Tok

I’d rather a JVC with DTM than a Sony with degrading panels.

Partial DTM, partial static mapping.

[sapiendut]

Originally Posted by Tok

I’d rather a JVC with DTM than a Sony with degrading panels.

Plus the fact that their “object based DTM” never worked.

[sapiendut]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Partial DTM, partial static mapping.

On the NX, not on the NZ

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

On the NX, not on the NZ

Yes, on NZ. There is a deep dive discussion into it on the other forum. There is no dynamic mid-tone EOTF for brighter and darker scenes.

[Naiera]

Originally Posted by Tok

I’d rather a JVC with DTM than a Sony with degrading panels.

I have a Lumagen Radiance Pro, so I'm good with my combo, thanks. Sony's shipping my XW5000ES tomorrow, too.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Naiera

I have a Lumagen Radiance Pro, so I'm good with my combo, thanks. Sony's shipping my XW5000ES tomorrow, too.

So your locked at 18Gbps for the foreseeable future.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Tok

So your locked at 18Gbps for the foreseeable future.

Unless you are some rabid gamer who thinks they need 120 Hz, there is really no reason for HDMI 2.1. 8k really is a joke compared to 4k. There simply is no reason for it in a consumer setting... at all... and I've seen pro demos.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

There simply is no reason for it in a consumer setting... at all...

I wholeheartedly agree, but the industry knows that non-tech savvy people (and even some that claim to be savvy) are fascinated by numbers and they'll monetize on it, as always.

[Naiera]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

Plus the fact that their “object based DTM” never worked.

Did you miss the part where I had a Lumagen Radiance Pro that craps all over JVC’s supposed DTM?

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Naiera

Did you miss the part where I had a Lumagen Radiance Pro that craps all over JVC’s supposed DTM?

In cherry picked scenes... All any of these devices are doing is compressing HDR closer to SDR. Plenty of other ways to do it besides a $5k standalone box. The Panasonic players do a pretty good job of converting HDR down to SDR. And I’ve never heard a professional reviewer saying any of these devices crap all over the JVC DTM. Fact is I can do 120Hz gaming on my JVC whereas your Sony is locked at 60Hz. The Sony 5000 has a junk plastic lens that relies on its RC to artificially sharpen everything. Sony panels also sacrificed significant contrast to stop their panels from degrading. The new units measure significantly less than their old problematic panels when new. Enjoy your Radiance HDR on that garbage Sony unit.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

I wholeheartedly agree, but the industry knows that non-tech savvy people (and even some that claim to be savvy) are fascinated by numbers and they'll monetize on it, as always.

Those numbers aren’t meaningless… send your projector a 4K120 signal. If it shows ‘out of range’ it means the train left the station without you.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Tok

Those numbers aren’t meaningless… send your projector a 4K120 signal. If it shows ‘out of range’ it means the train left the station without you.

ONLY if you are a gamer who absolutely needs a 120 Hz refresh rate.


The NFL can't even program in 4k, let alone sports at 120 fps... they are upscaling 1080p for goodness sake! At this rate it will be years more and then HDMI will have something other than version 2.1 and your gear will again be outdated.

[Naiera]

I never based my purchase of projector on 120Hz or not

[pbz06]

You guys are confusing 120fps with 120hz. One is a frame rate, the other is a refresh rate. A 120hz refresh rate is absolutely a good thing for a display to have when playing back movies, since it evenly fits with 24fps content without any interpolation of the content (it can display every frame as is for the same amount of time...each frame has 5 refresh cycles).

[Naiera]

I’m not confusing anything. What you’re talking about has nothing to do with HDMI 2.1, 8K, 120Hz videogames and whatever.

[Hedrox]

Originally Posted by Naiera

I’m not confusing anything. What you’re talking about has nothing to do with HDMI 2.1, 8K, 120Hz videogames and whatever.

There's no such thing as 120hz videogames, those are fps.

[thebarnman]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

I read an article that claims Panasonic's mid and higher end 4K players (UB420 and up) contributed to Oppo closing up shop - any truth to this?

I think it all started with Vincent's review comparison of the Oppo UDP-203 vs Panasonic's DMP-UB900 six years ago.

Oppo wasn't happy.

OPPO UDP-203 vs Panasonic DMP-UB900: Picture Quality Comparison - YouTube

[thebarnman]

Originally Posted by pbz06

You guys are confusing 120fps with 120hz. One is a frame rate, the other is a refresh rate. A 120hz refresh rate is absolutely a good thing for a display to have when playing back movies, since it evenly fits with 24fps content without any interpolation of the content (it can display every frame as is for the same amount of time...each frame has 5 refresh cycles).

I like how my older Pioneer Plasma Kuro has a refresh rate of 72hz like how some 35mm film projectors have three blades providing the same flicker rate. There are 2 bladed film projectors so that would be a flicker rate of 48.

Because OLED has a display and hold characteristic, I do not know if a faster refresh rate means anything for movie watching. I'm guessing if OLED had a lower the refresh rate, there'd possibly a better chance of OLED dimming a tiny bit before being refreshed? I don't know. However for gaming, I do know faster refresh rates on OLED are better for that.