Is PS3 Still The Best Blu-ray Player??

[blurayjunkie]

The reason i ask is because my ps3 does not read disc's anymore. and I am in the market for a new blu ray player

[Kynch]

Might help better: https://forum.blu-ray.com/blu-ray-players-recorders/.

[Kryptonic]

The Oppo players now seem to be the best of the lot.

[Johnny Vinyl]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

The Oppo players now seem to be the best of the lot.

And unless you're a gamer, that's what I would buy if I had to.

John

[slaizer2000]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

The Oppo players now seem to be the best of the lot.

I thought the LExicon one was now the one to have<j'king>

[BarkingGhost]

Originally Posted by blurayjunkie

The reason i ask is because my ps3 does not read disc's anymore. and I am in the market for a new blu ray player

After the HDMI output on my 60GB PS3 failed after a couple of years of just playing movies, and Sony's only option was give them $149 or f-off, I chose to f-off and buy a non-Sony product as the replacement.

[tiger roach]

I recently got an Oppo BDP-83 and it is a sweet machine.

[ajvdbg]

Originally Posted by blurayjunkie

The reason i ask is because my ps3 does not read disc's anymore. and I am in the market for a new blu ray player

Your "best" may be different than others...WRT BD PQ you won't see much of a difference between players. For DVD the OPPO will give you better upconversion. Why not just pay to have the laser replaced? That way you still have all of the other things that the PS3 has going for it (i.e. multimedia player, updates, gaming, etc.)

[bhampton]

Yes.

[tilallr1]

Originally Posted by bhampton

Yes.

Ditto

[bhampton]

The Oppo is the only player that competes with the PS3 and it costs more and does less.

I would consider an Oppo someday but if my PS3 stopped working I could get a exchange from Sony for $149 and my PS3 does many things the $500 Oppo can't.

It has better build quality as well.

PSN network adds a lot to the PS3's capabilities and offers many free videos and games and so on.

New FW is coming to make the PS3 3D compatible for games and movies if your interested in that.

I use my PS3 to read content from my home's Media Server and also use the PS3's web browser.

(This is the longer version of my answer.)

-Brian

[tilallr1]

Originally Posted by bhampton

New FW is coming to make the PS3 3D compatible for games and movies if your interested in that.

I think Brian hit the nail on the head with this comment.

Ultimately, the PS3 is the most future proof player out there. It's Sony (Inventor of Blu-ray) flag ship player. Honestly how can you go wrong.

Plus, it really does do everything. Really, really well.

[gonk]

Originally Posted by bhampton

The Oppo is the only player that competes with the PS3 and it costs more and does less.

The BDP-80 costs less than the PS3 and offers some things that the PS3 doesn't (multichannel analog output, DVD-Audio support, IR remote without paying extra). If you want the PS3's gaming capabilities, then the equation changes, but that's true of any standalone player.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by bhampton

New FW is coming to make the PS3 3D compatible for games and movies if your interested in that.

This and the gaming aspect of the PS3 were the two issues I was going to comment on.

[Exist2Inspire]

Originally Posted by bhampton

The Oppo is the only player that competes with the PS3 and it costs more and does less.

I would consider an Oppo someday but if my PS3 stopped working I could get a exchange from Sony for $149 and my PS3 does many things the $500 Oppo can't.

It has better build quality as well.

PSN network adds a lot to the PS3's capabilities and offers many free videos and games and so on.

New FW is coming to make the PS3 3D compatible for games and movies if your interested in that.

I use my PS3 to read content from my home's Media Server and also use the PS3's web browser.

(This is the longer version of my answer.)

-Brian

Yes, but here is the real kicker. To get full 3D-HD Picture, you will need an HDMI 1.4 spec machine. The PS3 is HDMI 1.3 spec. So even when the update comes out, the best that one would be able to get is 3D in 1080i. And, yet another possible issue is the connection from a 1.3 spec player to a 1.3 spec receiver.

But to answer the OP's question, it depends. If you play games on the PS3 then you should pay to have Sony fix it (or buy a new one, whatever is cheaper). If you just use it for playing Movies, then buy yourself an Oppo.

[Sparky4life]

I think its the best plus PS3 owners don't have to go buy another blu ray player for 3-D movies. We get the firmware update for free!!

[slaizer2000]

Originally Posted by blurayjunkie

The reason i ask is because my ps3 does not read disc's anymore. and I am in the market for a new blu ray player

The ps3 is no longer the best blu-ray player on the market. There are other newer players that are faster and may have a bit better image quality.

The PS3 however is still the best all round media device which provides more than just a movie playback system. And they have plenty of room to grow on what they can support with it in the future. Also seems to have the best support for having firmware updates ready when newer blu-rays come out that require addiotnal java support. And because of this it seems to be the best future proof blu-ray player out there. 3D support, DVR support in the future are all on the horizon. Granted many may not care for it, but shows the device has the ability to grow with future needs.

[ajvdbg]

Originally Posted by slaizer2000

The ps3 is no longer the best blu-ray player on the market. There are other newer players that are faster and may have a bit better image quality.

The PS3 however is still the best all round media device which provides more than just a movie playback system. And they have plenty of room to grow on what they can support with it in the future. Also seems to have the best support for having firmware updates ready when newer blu-rays come out that require addiotnal java support. And because of this it seems to be the best future proof blu-ray player out there. 3D support, DVR support in the future are all on the horizon. Granted many may not care for it, but shows the device has the ability to grow with future needs.

Your first sentence you state that it is no longer the best. Yet you make a pretty good argument in the second paragraph that it still is, and will continue to be. "Best" depends on the individual user wrt to features etc. Plus there is no evidence that suggests that any other player beats it in BD PQ.

[rollon1980]

I'm sorry to ruin your day, but here's the deal:

I have set up a few home cinemas in my lifetime. Most recently one with a JVC-550 projector (wow, LCOS is the first technology to even better 3-chip DLP projection.) and one with a lower end HD20 from Optoma (DLP).

The contrast difference between the two is vaaaaast, but the Optoma has amazing shadow detail so projecting onto reflective grey cinema paint makes the images glooow (after proper calibration!).

Why do I start with this? First of all, you need to calibrate your display properly for D65 colour and greyscale tracking needs to be smoooooooooth. Why?

Ok, first colour: all these modern codecs (AVC, VC-1, mpeg-2) rely on your eyes shortcoming in seeing detail in colour as well as detail in the grey scale. I can look at an image and tell you how the grey scale is set. Colour is VERY hard for me. It’s the same for you, btw. Just how we were made. ;-) so these codecs compress colour MORE than luminance, but even so not all colours are compressed the same amount and actually REDs will be compressed more than blue (slightly less compression) and green (least compression). Just talk to any of the guys coding for these compression methods. It’s one of the tricks in the book, so to speak. This is why red can appear blocky on some mpeg-2 compressed video. The encoder used this trick to allocate more to the other channels. Yuk. Now if you have any red shift in the image (it being too warm), your eyes may actually perceive that as a drop in resolution! Why? Because your eyes are a lot more sensitive to green and blue detail and when those colours are de-emphasised, you will perceive it as such.

Generally speaking encoders will compress the colour information 4x as much as luminance(related to greyscale). Ok so how can the players compensate for this when playing back? Well, they can either just pass the decoded info to the display and let the display interpolate or it can do the interpolation and display a better variation of colour than was on the disk to begin with. This is where hi-precision colour (10-12bits per channel) comes into play even though the disks are encoded with only 8bits per channel (and even then some channels are compressed more to save bits). Panasonic’s latest Uniphier processor (the higher end 2009 version with adaptive interpolation) does this quite brilliantly even for SD de-interlaced material. Pioneer has been doing this (without putting a marketing term on it) amazingly. Just have ONE look at a pioneer playing back DVDs or Blu ray and you will know what I mean. Player DO differ in how they interpolate the loss in compression in colour and no, the PS3 is not the best. Maybe on your un-calibrated 40”-50” plasma you can’t see because it’s already overblowing colours, pushing towards red in any part of that greyscale but definitely not on a 102” screen after proper calibration. There is a HUUUGE difference between a player using uniphier or pioneer’s own chips and the PS3. The PS3 is simply passing the compressed colour AND on top of that it’s overblowing them to make them have more “pop”. All it does is make the image lose fidelity.

Greyscale: you will see a non-linear greyscale as a crushing of blacks, loss of shadow detail, bleaching of whites, less detail in other parts of the image. Now this is again a huge difference in players. The pioneers and higher end Denons, Marantz and some other brands simply excel at this. Mind you, with Pioneer, they are setting the black level a tad low so you need to increase it a notch not to crush blacks. But once properly calibrated, the image will appear to have more detail, more 3D-like look, etc. The PS3 doesn’t do very well here I’m afraid. The shadow detail is average, the whites are bleached. Looks fine until you see what high-end players are capable of.

I have compared the PS3 with other players on a 102” screen with projectors having AMAZING contrast levels and also with lower-end models. Once properly calibrated, the difference is night and day in colour reproduction and greyscale tracking. The PS3 is a great machine. The audio jitter is amazingly low (for the first generation model. The PS3 slim is a lot worse). But no, it’s a basic blu ray player and there is a big big difference to some dedicated players if your screen allows for it.

I just wanted to clear that up because I’ve seen so much bull from even “experienced” people until I decided to have a look myself.

[Buddy Christ]

Originally Posted by rollon1980

I'm sorry to ruin your day, but here's the deal:

Wow, can I have my five minutes back? Though thoroughly thought out and these are your opinions (no actual scientific data), I have to say that most of us do not have 102 inch screens to see the difference. Most people have average HT's. So the answer is: Total value/Quality/Future adaptability, the PS3 is the best Blu-ray player on the market.

As I am also sorry to ruin your day