Panasonic UB820/UB9000 4K UHD Blu-ray player

[Geoff D]

I've been testing various discs and whatnot, will chime in with more thoughts when I've got them refined a bit more. One super weird-ass thing to whet your appetites is that the Dolby Vision performance is DIFFERENT between the OPPO and the Panny, at least in how my TV interprets it.

With the exact same picture settings on the ZD9 across the two HDMI inputs I'm using (making sure to use the 600MHz HDMI 2 & 3 sockets for the respective players, just for argument's sake) then the Panasonic is presenting a brighter DV image that clips quite a bit more of the highlight range, while the OPPO is noticeably dimmer in comparison but reveals >4000-nit highlight information.

While I can adjust the contrast on the TV upwards when playing the OPPO to achieve the same effect of the Panny, i.e. trading off highlight clipping for luminance, if I try to do the reverse with the Panny and lower the TV's contrast to sacrifice luminance for more highlights then there's nothing else there in the Panny's DV signal - even though that unresolved highlight detail is clearly there in both the underlying HDR10 image and the OPPO's DV output. So, at first glance, the Panny appears to be clipping the Dolby Vision output at source which is exceedingly ironic for a player that's built its reputation around its 'HDR Optimisation' credentials.

[MisterXDTV]

I'm confused Geoff: shouldn't Dolby Vision be the golden proprietary standard?

Now we discover that two different players give VERY different results with the same Dolby Vision output on the same TV?

What's the point of Dolby Vision then??

[elwaylite]

DV is and has been a BUST.

[DJR662]

So far I have only watched one UHD in DV (Halloween 1978).

My receiver isn't DV capable, and I can't be bothered hooking up the 820 directly to my TV each time a disc has DV. Reading about issues regarding DV on Sony TVs doesn't help much either.

I think good ol' plain HDR10 will do just fine for me.

[wesslan]

Problem with DV seems to be diffrent implementation depending on your tv and player so the "rule" that DV is locked and everybody would see the same exact thing is already thrown out the window sadly. My AF8 is too dim (in my opinion) with the sony software DV that needs to be compensated to look same or better than HDR10.

Even the successor Sony AF9 seems to have DV problems and pro reviewers like Vincent T. prefer HDR10 that have internal tonemapping that rivals DV in that tv.

Haven't seen or compared to LGs hardware DV solution but if my guess is correct the Sony+Dolby software trick (profile 5?) seems to be the way most are leaning since it's easier and that is the way PC/computers will get it.

I wonder if panasonic is going hardware or software in the new Oled from this years CES.

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

DV is and has been a BUST.

That's an interesting perspective, given:

• The best movie theater image and sound quality can be found in a Dolby Cinema.
  
• The best home theater image and sound quality reflects a combination of OLED, Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos.
• Some buyers are influenced and/or will restrict their home theater purchases to DV-capable equipment.

Now, for some the difference between OLED and LCD, DV and HDR10 is marginal and content-specific, down to the format (stream vs. disc) or title (endless variations based on original source, etc.).

And that's OK. Everyone is entitled to see want they want to see and disregard the rest.

As well, Sony made a decision to implement DV via SW, and some consumers will make a decision based on the implications, performance and/or lack of compatibility, of that fact.

Samsung made a decision to forego DV all together, and some consumers may also be influenced by that fact when it's time to choose their next set.

It just doesn't support that DV is a bust. It just means some people are unaware of the difference, or don't believe there is a difference, or don't care if there is a difference.

What it also means is simply that manufacturers and studios are willing to take their own path and fragment the marketplace if they believe it will give them a competitive edge and/or save them a few dollars.

[MisterXDTV]

Originally Posted by wesslan

Problem with DV seems to be diffrent implementation depending on your tv and player so the "rule" that DV is locked and everybody would see the same exact thing is already thrown out the window sadly. My AF8 is too dim (in my opinion) with the sony software DV that needs to be compensated to look same or better than HDR10.

Even the successor Sony AF9 seems to have DV problems and pro reviewers like Vincent T. prefer HDR10 that have internal tonemapping that rivals DV in that tv.

Haven't seen or compared to LGs hardware DV solution but if my guess is correct the Sony+Dolby software trick (profile 5?) seems to be the way most are leaning since it's easier and that is the way PC/computers will get it.

I wonder if panasonic is going hardware or software in the new Oled from this years CES.

Ok then, Dolby Vision is basically a scam based on what you you wrote

I have been told for years Dolby Vision would be a locked video standard that adapts to the TV screen with a proprietary "formula".

Now we see a Panasonic player and a Oppo Player give completely different results....

That's unacceptable for a Premium format that is supposed to make everything better

[wesslan]

I would never go so far saying it's a scam or bust since I love the idea of dynamic tonemapping but just saying it's worrying with all these different implementations of DV seems to give diffrent results dependning on how the manufacturer handles it. Looking forward reading more on Geoff findings.

The big problem I see is there is no true HDR standard to follow and calibrate towards and everybody do "their" thing.

I think dolby vision is the best thing (right now) with dynamic tonemapping and 12-bit source when done correct, which I probably haven't seen yet since I have no dolby cinema close by and using a year old Sony oled+oppo 203 and tv is still uncalibrated...

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by cgpublic

That's an interesting perspective, given:

• The best movie theater image and sound quality can be found in a Dolby Cinema.
  
• The best home theater image and sound quality reflects a combination of OLED, Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos.
• Some buyers are influenced and/or will restrict their home theater purchases to DV-capable equipment.

Now, for some the difference between OLED and LCD, DV and HDR10 is marginal and content-specific, down to the format (stream vs. disc) or title (endless variations based on original source, etc.).

And that's OK. Everyone is entitled to see want they want to see and disregard the rest.

As well, Sony made a decision to implement DV via SW, and some consumers will make a decision based on the implications, performance and/or lack of compatibility, of that fact.

Samsung made a decision to forego DV all together, and some consumers may also be influenced by that fact when it's time to choose their next set.

It just doesn't support that DV is a bust. It just means some people are unaware of the difference, or don't believe there is a difference, or don't care if there is a difference.

What it also means is simply that manufacturers and studios are willing to take their own path and fragment the marketplace if they believe it will give them a competitive edge and/or save them a few dollars.

DC in not better than real IMAX, sorry. And I also think the people with the 25K projectors that DO NOT support DV would disagree with your second point as well. Tribalism hubris at its worst.

[wesslan]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

DC in not better than real IMAX, sorry.

Well "real" IMAX is dying or soon to be right? Those big ass reels that a few cinemas still can use but most going digital/inferior.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by wesslan

Well "real" IMAX is dying or soon to be right? Those big ass reels that a few cinemas still can use but most going digital/inferior.

Dying doesn't mean its dead. All physical projectors using film are dying. Real IMAX still blows away the comp, IMO. And yes....12 bit color depth...show me devices that use it? 8K and 4k at CES, 12 bit is missing...what happened? Whats the point of 12 bit if the TV companies aren't gonna utilize it?

[wesslan]

Well "real" imax is dying even if not dead yet, that's a fact and that means no movies in the future will have that quality and my point was what lies ahead for PQ.

I'm all in for Imax and not sure what I would like more if I could choose on all movies but for me that's is keep saying 3D is the best when no "new" tv has the ability. It was great and I still like "some" movies in cinema in passive 3D but I'm fine with it "dead" and move on.

DC vs imax PQ debate is highly personal like all matters but "I" think DC is the high bar right now even if we haven't got a 12-bit chain at home yet. But you do know that a better/higher source will produce a better PQ, downsampling is good a thing.

[King Crimson]

Well just because they will does not mean it is yet...so I'm not sure what the point is. Even LieMax in a real IMAX venue is still the best theatrical presentation of a movie you can get. IMO

[wesslan]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

Well just because they will does not mean it is yet...so I'm not sure what the point is. Even LieMax in a real IMAX venue is still superior to DC so...

Seen a few liemax, not always impressed but I won't debate a comparison since I haven't been to a Dolby Cinema yet

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by wesslan

Seen a few liemax, not always impressed but I won't debate a comparison since I haven't been to a Dolby Cinema yet

I have last night with Bumblebee(previously saw it in 2D) making a comparison to Aquaman seen in real IMAX all less than 3 weeks apart. The biggest bump I'll give Dolby Cinema is the sound, its amazing. But visually I didn't see to much of a difference in the color of the movie compared to the 2D other than the Cybertron scenes. The darker blacks though? ehhhhhh. All in all it's an awesome alternative experience but no way was is it worth more(ticket value) than real IMAX.

[elwaylite]

Originally Posted by cgpublic

That's an interesting perspective, given:

• The best movie theater image and sound quality can be found in a Dolby Cinema.
  
• The best home theater image and sound quality reflects a combination of OLED, Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos.
• Some buyers are influenced and/or will restrict their home theater purchases to DV-capable equipment.

Now, for some the difference between OLED and LCD, DV and HDR10 is marginal and content-specific, down to the format (stream vs. disc) or title (endless variations based on original source, etc.).

And that's OK. Everyone is entitled to see want they want to see and disregard the rest.

As well, Sony made a decision to implement DV via SW, and some consumers will make a decision based on the implications, performance and/or lack of compatibility, of that fact.

Samsung made a decision to forego DV all together, and some consumers may also be influenced by that fact when it's time to choose their next set.

It just doesn't support that DV is a bust. It just means some people are unaware of the difference, or don't believe there is a difference, or don't care if there is a difference.

What it also means is simply that manufacturers and studios are willing to take their own path and fragment the marketplace if they believe it will give them a competitive edge and/or save them a few dollars.

• Raised black level in letterbox bars on OLEDS
• Poor implementation on streaming devices (dim)
• Multiple versions which caused already certified devices to get recertified and delay customer enjoyment
• Low support on UHD releases
• Shall I go on?
• Oh yeah, the HDR Optimizer fixes the DV vs HDR10 issue for many of us, so BUST
• Oh yeah, it is costly, whereas HDR10 and HDR10+ are FREE. It has been out 2 years now and has little traction other than marketing. BUST

I'm glad you bought the marketing material hook line and sinker.

[elwaylite]

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Ok then, Dolby Vision is basically a scam based on what you you wrote

I have been told for years Dolby Vision would be a locked video standard that adapts to the TV screen with a proprietary "formula".

Now we see a Panasonic player and a Oppo Player give completely different results....

That's unacceptable for a Premium format that is supposed to make everything better

Shouldn't be surprising. DV is wonky among "certified" streaming devices too.

The basis of the marketing was a controlled ecosystem that offers the best PQ available, they even sold fools on that it wouldn't need calibration. First, 1-2 year model tv's with it didn't even allow you to calibrate that mode, so the HDR10 mode calibration was more accurate LOLOLOL.

And not we find out different devices keep offering different PQ results from a "controlled ecosystem" LOLOLOL.

Dolby also threw out there about controlling the audio side of your AVR, screw them.

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

DC in not better than real IMAX, sorry.

I was careful to say best movie theater image and sound quality can be found in a Dolby Cinema, and based on my experience in NYC, which includes a number of original classic IMAX screens in addition to Lincoln Square, I'd have to go with DC.

I'm not arguing that 15/70 IMAX isn't spectacular, but when we're discussing standards and what should be reference for a typical movie theater projection, I find it hard to believe that other than those films which take full advantage of the format should be projected in IMAX as opposed to DC.

That said, if your bag is field of vision and/or 3D, I'd like to know which specific IMAX theater you found to be superior to a specific Dolby Cinema?

Originally Posted by King Crimson

And I also think the people with the 25K projectors that DO NOT support DV would disagree with your second point as well.

And how many consumers have 25K projectors in their homes? Once again, everyone has their own personal preference, but it's generally accepted that OLED + DV + Atmos in equal settings will provide the platform for superior image and sound compared to the dominant projector and LCD platforms.

Originally Posted by King Crimson

Tribalism hubris at its worst.

The tribalism hubris is stating Dolby Vision is a bust in the face of the facts, i.e., Dolby Cinema hit 100 theaters hit 100 venues in 2018, seven years ahead of projections, and will be heading to global markets in 2019.

Dolby Vision continues to grow titles for both streaming and disc media titles, and some of the best UHD titles to date feature DV.

But like I said, everyone is entitled to see want they want to see and disregard the rest.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by cgpublic

I was careful to say best movie theater image and sound quality can be found in a Dolby Cinema, and based on my experience in NYC, which includes a number of original classic IMAX screens in addition to Lincoln Square, I'd have to go with DC.

I'm not arguing that 15/70 IMAX isn't spectacular, but when we're discussing standards and what should be reference for a typical movie theater projection, I find it hard to believe that other than those films which take full advantage of the format should be projected in IMAX as opposed to DC.

That said, if your bag is field of vision and/or 3D, I'd like to know which specific IMAX theater you found to be superior to a specific Dolby Cinema?

And how many consumers have 25K projectors in their homes? Once again, everyone has their own personal preference, but it's generally accepted that OLED + DV + Atmos in equal settings will provide the platform for superior image and sound compared to the dominant projector and LCD platforms.
The tribalism hubris is stating Dolby Vision is a bust in the face of the facts, i.e., Dolby Cinema hit 100 theaters hit 100 venues in 2018, seven years ahead of projections, and will be heading to global markets in 2019.

Dolby Vision continues to grow titles for both streaming and disc media titles, and some of the best UHD titles to date feature DV.

But like I said, everyone is entitled to see want they want to see and disregard the rest.

https://www.imax.com/theatres/airbus...ar-hazy-center Biggest screen and theater in Virginia

and this

https://www.imax.com/theatres/imax-m...science-center Which is True IMAX, same as above but projector

The Dolby Cinema I am comparing to is the local one found in AMC Theaters. With the signature reclining chairs and such.

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by elwaylite

• Raised black level in letterbox bars on OLEDS
• Poor implementation on streaming devices (dim)
• Multiple versions which caused already certified devices to get recertified and delay customer enjoyment
• Low support on UHD releases
• Shall I go on?
• Oh yeah, the HDR Optimizer fixes the DV vs HDR10 issue for many of us, so BUST
• Oh yeah, it is costly, whereas HDR10 and HDR10+ are FREE. It has been out 2 years now and has little traction other than marketing. BUST

I'm glad you bought the marketing material hook line and sinker.

I'm not experiencing any of issues listed above or cited by others. Not saying they don't exist for those users, but it's not my business nor my problem. All I can tell you is this: Every DV title I've screened is either the equal or superior to the HDR10 layer, and some DV titles are significantly superior.

Having said that, some users have sets, configurations or preferences that minimize the points of difference. It's their boat, let them drift in it.

That said, on one hand you are critical of Dolby and Dolby Vision as 'snake oil,' when the standard has been published and the basis of the technology is self-evident, and on the next line you extol the virtues of Panny's HDR 'Optimizer.'

Let's face it, it's funny.