Best Blu-ray Player to Date Suggestions

[MJailme]

Originally Posted by arush5268d

Sure...the DMP-30. I bet the price will drop once the -50 comes out. I'm just very anti-PS3. I have no interest in owning a gaming console.

If you don't use it for games and just watch movies, then it's not a game console, its a blu-ray player.

[arush5268d]

Originally Posted by MJailme

If you don't use it for games and just watch movies, then it's not a game console, its a blu-ray player.

Yes, but I don't like the way it looks or how loud it is.

[ack_bak]

I have owned a Samsung standalone which I sold for a PS3 and have not looked back. I highly recommend a PS3 if you want a reliable player that is fast (loading, response time), supports all the Blu-Ray specs (Bonus View, BD Live), decodes all the audio codecs, and has a great picture.

The fact that the PS3 has built in wireless is a major plus for many folks as well. Cnet recently reviewed the Panasonic BD50 and compared it to the PS3 and Samsung 1500. Here are some of the highlights of the comparison:

http://reviews.cnet.com/video-player...tag=prod.txt.1

The main takeaway from these tests is that the differences between these Blu-ray players is slight, but that if you're a videophile the DMP-BD50 is a notch better than the BD-P1500, and just a tiny bit worse than the reference PS3. Also note that if you plan on using these players in 1080p/24 mode, the differences essentially disappear, as we noticed virtually no differences between the players in 1080p at 24 frames per second mode.

...These speeds were all significantly faster than the Samsung BD-P1500, and among all of the standalone players we've tested, only the LG BH200 loaded discs as quickly as the DMP-BD50. Of course, the PS3 is still the speed champ, and we're constantly frustrated by how unresponsive standalone players feel in comparison.

Standard DVD performance
DVDs are still plentiful and cheap, so DVD performance is still a big factor on Blu-ray players. We popped in the standard DVD version of the HQV test suite to see how the DMP-BD50 looked with test patterns. The first resolution test looked good, displaying the full resolution of DVD and with no image instability. The following tests, however, were a disappointment. A test with three shifting white lines was filled with jaggies, as was the following test with a rotating white bar. We were also disappointed to see the DMP-BD50 perform particularly poorly on a test with scrolling titles, with both vertically and horizontally scrolling text was mangled. Granted, most of the DMP-BD50's failures were on video-based tests--which are less common than film discs--but it's still unacceptable on a disc player at this price. And it did pass the difficult 2:3 pull-down test, which many players choke on. Still, the cheaper Samsung BD-P1500 performed much better on these tests, as did the PS3

So it looks to me like the $399 PS3 bests the BD50 (a $699 MSRP player) on PQ, loading and response times, and DVD upscaling. I honestly have a hard time not recommending the PS3 to people based on the current state of standalone players. Sony has two new standalone players coming out in July, so perhaps the PS3 will have some better competition.

[jerm4512]

I really appreciate all the thoughts and opinions I am still trying to way all my options and want to have what is best overall and will have a great picture. I am sure the PS3 will do well but I also think to myself is there a stand alone player out there now that can be compared to the PS3 and not cost $700.

[rrios28]

Originally Posted by jerm4512

I hate to ask so many questions but I just want to get something that technology will be effiencient and will have all the bells and whistles if I need it down the road.

Jeremy

BD-50

[jerm4512]

Like I mentioned above I am not wanting to spend $700 for a blu-ray player when the PS3 can do the same things right? or is the BD-50 or 30 more superiror?

J

[spaceball1]

Originally Posted by ack_bak

So it looks to me like the $399 PS3 bests the BD50 (a $699 MSRP player) on PQ, loading and response times, and DVD upscaling. I honestly have a hard time not recommending the PS3 to people based on the current state of standalone players. Sony has two new standalone players coming out in July, so perhaps the PS3 will have some better competition.

Especially the response times, even the fast Panasonics are slower than the PS3. You might as well start making yourself a sandwich waiting for discs to load on the standalones. The PS3's audio capabilities are superior to any player in its price range, and are very comparable to those in the $600-700 MSRP range.

[ack_bak]

Originally Posted by jerm4512

or is the BD-50 or 30 more superiror? J

According to Cnet above no. The Panasonic is not more superior in terms of PQ, response/load times, upscaling, and price.

[KingRadicalPhil]

the ps3 loads fast because of the cell procesoor in bluray mode all seveen cells are devoted to load time the audio and video are read by the laser and sent to the source they need to go to

this has been explained to many times im tired of it

[kingofgrills]

Originally Posted by jerm4512

Like I mentioned above I am not wanting to spend $700 for a blu-ray player when the PS3 can do the same things right? or is the BD-50 or 30 more superiror?

J

You've answered your own question. Right now, and for the foreseeable future, the PS3 is the best option based on the information you've given us. The PS3 as a Blu-ray player also benefits from having the Cell processor, 256 MBs of XDR main memory and 256 MBs of GDDR3 video memory, and a built-in hard drive on board. With that feature set and firmware upgrades, it is the most future proof Blu-ray player on the market.

With the PS3 you pick up a lot of other features like PC media streaming and SACD playback (20, 60, and 80 Gig models only) that no other standalone player will perform. If you're looking for the best bang for the buck, and you don't need multichannel analog outputs or bitstreaming of new audio codecs, the PS3 simply cannot be beaten today.