HDTVTEST (Vincent Teoh) Discussion Thread

[Geoff D]

Yeah, it seems to have gone backwards in a few key areas. Oh well, here’s to the KZ2000 next year!

[BrownianMotion]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

As with some early HDMI 2.0 chips not being able to do 18 Gb/s and HDCP 2.2 at the same time I’m sure these kinks will be worked out in the near future, but yeah: it’s a shame that image quality is being compromised as a result. It’s annoying on a personal level because I could not give a shit about 120Hz playback or any of those other gaming features, when it comes to movie watching those things are wholly useless.

But as Vincent said, if the manufacturers don’t include this shite then they’ll get lambasted by all the moronic bloggers and youtubers who just wank over specs, irrespective of whether those specs are going to be of use to every punter.

I don't think it's about appealing to bloggers, but rather to actual gamers. I would bet that most of these TV manufacturers make more money from gamers than from film enthusiasts.

[Geoff D]

Are that many of them buying four grand TVs? Huh. But it’s still about prioritising the needs of one group over the rest, if the future of TV tech lies with pandering to gamers then I hope my ZD9 never dies.

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by NeilZ

I think the compromises due to the change to the new chip is one thing, but not using a new panel is the biggest issue to me. Compared to the A90J this will mean less sustained brightness and overall reduced brightness on all windows but the 10%, which I assume Panny is still achieving by pushing the white subpixel. On the whole longevity will be reduced too cause Panny is pushing the panel harder than Sony is.

Panasonic OLEDs in general have relaxed ABL and higher peak brightness. They normally prefer preserving details over pop.

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Are that many of them buying four grand TVs? Huh. But it’s still about prioritising the needs of one group over the rest, if the future of TV tech lies with pandering to gamers then I hope my ZD9 never dies.

HDMI 2.1 and rushing it out to consumer market is indirectly impacting us folks who prefer watching movies.

[Fendergopher]

Originally Posted by BrownianMotion

I don't think it's about appealing to bloggers, but rather to actual gamers. I would bet that most of these TV manufacturers make more money from gamers than from film enthusiasts.

I sincerely doubt the average TV gamer is buying the flagship Panasonic OLEDs over the significantly cheaper and better equipped LG OLEDs, or even Samsung QLEDs.

[BrownianMotion]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Are that many of them buying four grand TVs? Huh. But it’s still about prioritising the needs of one group over the rest, if the future of TV tech lies with pandering to gamers then I hope my ZD9 never dies.

I'm certain that in absolute terms, gamers buy more of these OLEDs. High end gamers drop several thousand on just PC upgrades every one or two years, and there are just far more gamers than film enthusiasts. Not sure about Panasonic specifically, because they aren't as widely available as the rest, but perhaps Panasonic sees value in starting to cater to that segment.

To get an idea of what kind of impact they have on sales, just look at the OLED sales charts. Gamers will keep the LG as the #1 seller of OLEDs for a long time, even if they are arguably the 3rd best OLED manufacturer at the moment in terms of image quality for movies.

[BrownianMotion]

Originally Posted by Fendergopher

I sincerely doubt the average TV gamer is buying the flagship Panasonic OLEDs over the significantly cheaper and better equipped LG OLEDs, or even Samsung QLEDs.

The average consumer, be it a gamer or a film enthusiast, will not be touching these TVs. So it makes no sense to talk about the average consumer. The high end consumer is who we should be focusing on.

Obviously, LG OLEDs are the highest selling, but they are also more widely available. However, I'm sure Panasonic is looking at the revenue LG is pulling in from gamers, and they want a piece of it.

[NeilZ]

Originally Posted by lgans316

Panasonic OLEDs in general have relaxed ABL and higher peak brightness. They normally prefer preserving details over pop.

The new LG panel used on the A90J and the G1 would have allowed for both, no compromises needed.

It's a mystery why Panasonic opted to not use them. The only explanation I can think of is that LG might have wanted more money for them due to supply difficulties, and Panasonic didn't want to pay.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by NeilZ

The new LG panel used on the A90J and the G1 would have allowed for both, no compromises needed.

It's a mystery why Panasonic opted to not use them. The only explanation I can think of is that LG might have wanted more money for them due to supply difficulties, and Panasonic didn't want to pay.

Or maybe Panasonic need a fair bit of lead time to tweak the panels that they’re given and they didn’t get to delve into the “evo” ones until late on? So perhaps they stuck with the older one as a result.

Originally Posted by BrownianMotion

The average consumer, be it a gamer or a film enthusiast, will not be touching these TVs. So it makes no sense to talk about the average consumer. The high end consumer is who we should be focusing on.

Obviously, LG OLEDs are the highest selling, but they are also more widely available. However, I'm sure Panasonic is looking at the revenue LG is pulling in from gamers, and they want a piece of it.

But Panasonic have such a tiny share of the market, in part owing to that premium price, that I wonder why they’d bother. Obvious answer is that they want to increase their market share but just putting HDMI 2.1 on a TV isn’t going to do that. It feels more like a box-ticking exercise than anything, especially if it makes picture quality worse as a result.

[Agent Kay]

Panasonic did the heatsink "evolution" thing first and on better sets. They made a miss here and it's a shame, they will be back next time I would bet.

[Fendergopher]

Originally Posted by BrownianMotion

The average consumer, be it a gamer or a film enthusiast, will not be touching these TVs. So it makes no sense to talk about the average consumer. The high end consumer is who we should be focusing on.

Obviously, LG OLEDs are the highest selling, but they are also more widely available. However, I'm sure Panasonic is looking at the revenue LG is pulling in from gamers, and they want a piece of it.

And still, Panasonic is playing catchup with LG and Samsung, who have had gaming features like ALLM, VRR & 4K@120 on last year's models, all at cheaper prices. The "high end gamers" who didn't buy a HZ2000 because it lacked those features is unlikely to buy a JZ2000 when they can get the same gaming features elsewhere, with (to most people, even "high end gamers" negligible) reduction in image quality for films and video.

[Agent Kay]

I'm a gamer, I have a Panasonic OLED.
I wouldn't buy a Samsung or LG and they were never a consideration.

[Fendergopher]

Originally Posted by Agent Kay

I'm a gamer, I have a Panasonic OLED.
I wouldn't buy a Samsung or LG and they were never a consideration.

So them adding in new gaming focused features literally has no bearing on your choice of buying a Panasonic OLED, thanks for proving my point.

[MisterXDTV]

Panasonic choices are always puzzling: they don't sell TVs in North America for no particular reason, and in Europe they are by far the most expensive brand for OLED TVs

They had one thing going: the picture quality for movies enthusiasts. Now they risk losing the leadership to implement gaming features that still suck compared to LG OLEDs because of that crap Mediatek SoC

End result:

- Gamers that want OLED will go with LG C1 for much cheaper with much better HDMI 2.1 VRR implementation (LG uses a proprietary SoC)

- Movie lovers will go with the Sony A90J because of better processing

And once again Americans will never know they still make TVs

[NeilZ]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Or maybe Panasonic need a fair bit of lead time to tweak the panels that they’re given and they didn’t get to delve into the “evo” ones until late on? So perhaps they stuck with the older one as a result.

Possibly, but not sure why'd they'd have had less time with it considering their model released many months after Sony's and LG's.

Originally Posted by MisterXDTV

Panasonic choices are always puzzling: they don't sell TVs in North America for no particular reason, and in Europe they are by far the most expensive brand for OLED TVs

They had one thing going: the picture quality for movies enthusiasts. Now they risk losing the leadership to implement gaming features that still suck compared to LG OLEDs because of that crap Mediatek SoC

End result:

- Gamers that want OLED will go with LG C1 for much cheaper with much better HDMI 2.1 VRR implementation (LG uses a proprietary SoC)

- Movie lovers will go with the Sony A90J because of better processing

And once again Americans will never know they still make TVs

I love the Panasonic brand but all the above is point on.

Unless they come back next year with a heavy hitting model again, their return to glory will have been short lived, and I say this as a big Panasonic fan from back in their CRT days where my favorite non Sony aperture grille tubes were the Panny's, and later a huge fan of their glorious Plasma era.

[Agent Kay]

Originally Posted by Fendergopher

So them adding in new gaming focused features literally has no bearing on your choice of buying a Panasonic OLED, thanks for proving my point.

Quality over features.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It’s annoying on a personal level because I could not give a shit about 120Hz playback or any of those other gaming features, when it comes to movie watching those things are wholly useless.

It's bit of an odd choice considering how they market themselves as the filmmakers choice, they could in theory have two models, but I'd imagine if they pushed a "Hollywood" model prices would jump up a bit.

I do wonder about OLEDs and gaming, I know they're improving near black performance, but (and I'm not a hardcore gamer) most of the games I've enjoyed live and die around shadow details, some folks bump up the brightness for an advantage, but aren't you're defeating the point of an OLED?

Originally Posted by BrownianMotion

I'm certain that in absolute terms, gamers buy more of these OLEDs. High end gamers drop several thousand on just PC upgrades every one or two years, and there are just far more gamers than film enthusiasts.

Aren't most of those enthusiasts rocking multiple monitors (or ultra wide displays)?

[BrownianMotion]

Originally Posted by chip75

It's bit of an odd choice considering how they market themselves as the filmmakers choice, they could in theory have two models, but I'd imagine if they pushed a "Hollywood" model prices would jump up a bit.

I do wonder about OLEDs and gaming, I know they're improving near black performance, but (and I'm not a hardcore gamer) most of the games I've enjoyed live and die around shadow details, some folks bump up the brightness for an advantage, but aren't you're defeating the point of an OLED?



Aren't most of those enthusiasts rocking multiple monitors (or ultra wide displays)?

Not all of them. There are a significant amount who use OLEDs.

[I DO BLU]

Why has the video been removed from hdtv you tube?