Panasonic DP-UB154 review: a cheap 4K Blu-ray player with great performance

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by bhampton

If you resort to making stuff up, yeah I agree it's been enough already.

What do you have against this player ? Does it threaten your player's resale somehow...?

Agree

Vincent isn't that dumb and if he does make a mistake he will usually correct it.

I think most of the Panny players are almost identical when it comes to overall picture quality.

I am unsure if the 9000 does a good job with DVDs which I think remains the weakest link with the Panny UHD players.

[Geoff D]

Does Vincent even review players any more? And I'll be damned if I can find him talking about the 150 anywhere.

[joshinminn]

I have a UB154 and, lacking anything to compare it to, it seems basic but fine to me. It was the right price when I was looking for a player. I now wonder what I am missing in terms of picture quality...

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Does Vincent even review players any more?

Nope. He did a good comparison between Oppo and the Panny but a long time ago.

Pity those blindly trusting publications like what low-fi

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by joshinminn

I have a UB154 and, lacking anything to compare it to, it seems basic but fine to me. It was the right price when I was looking for a player. I now wonder what I am missing in terms of picture quality...

You're not. It's a competent little disc spinner, and as a bonus it's a FAR betterer player of USB files than the 420/820/9000 series (the 150/450 series uses a different chipset than those).

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Heh, this is why I always put "trusted" in brackets because that comparison is so wildly inaccurate I don't know whether to laugh or cry. The player they're using has been set up so poorly it beggars belief, the fact that it's crushing black and clipping white is a honking great sign that the HDMI levels are way off.

I've got the 450 which is just the doblified version of the 150 and apart from it being a plasticky piece of shit for build quality there's no outstanding issue with image quality, it's on my GF's TV rather than my own but I've gone through it with the Spears & Munsil UHD and everything is in order. Apart from things like leaving DNR on by default - which all Sony UHD players are guilty of, funnily enough - there's no big shift in image quality from one brand to another, and I've long been leery of any site that claims as such.

Still, it's yet another site that I can handily dismiss in future if anyone cites anything on it as proof/evidence of whatever point they're trying to make. Just...wow.

Well, the OP stated the 150 was one of the worst 4K players one could buy based on a review from Vincent, and other poster lost his shit because it happened to be a player he had purchased.

All I pointed out was simply there was some confusion specific to the source, that Vincent wasn't the only one to trash this player, and that yes, the low-end MediaTek SOC specific to the 150 is one of the worst you can buy, and while it's highly unlikely that the 150 has the same picture quality as the Panasonic HCX processor, well, I guess that's really in the eye and mind of the beholder.

It's not as if it's some big secret. It's the lowest entry in the product line, a stripped down version of the SOC in the 450, which means when SOC or other shared components fail QA during assembly, they dump them in this player.

Yes, the player adds DNR by default, and based on everything that has been published, does funky stuff with audio, upscaling, interlaced content, etc., on top of no WiFi and no DV.

If you're happy with the player because it plays whatever you throw at it, plus it plays 'files' better, well great, then who cares what anyone else thinks or posts about it?

It's the cheapest player you can buy, not that there's anything wrong with that, but that's what it is, and not a reason to be unreasonably defensive.

For the record, if someone asks me is the 150 a good buy, I say no, it's not, save and spend a little bit extra, $50, for the next step up, as anything else is a better buy than this player as it has nothing in common with what makes Panasonic players better than other players. You can always use a backup or a player for an extra room, so spend wisely. You can buy a used Xbox or PS with a rock solid disc drive for the same money, and probably get some of that cash back with a resale.

But that's just one opinion. No one has to listen to me.

According to you and the others, the image quality for all of these players is all the same, so there's some more opinions you can choose to follow.

Especially when playing 'files.' Ha ha ha. Who cares about disc playback when you've got files. There's a keeper.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by cgpublic

Well, the OP stated the 150 was one of the worst 4K players one could buy based on a review from Vincent, and other poster lost his shit because it happened to be a player he had purchased.

All I pointed out was simply there was some confusion specific to the source, that Vincent wasn't the only one to trash this player, and that yes, the low-end MediaTek SOC specific to the 150 is one of the worst you can buy, and while it's highly unlikely that the 150 has the same picture quality as the Panasonic HCX processor, well, I guess that's really in the eye and mind of the beholder.

It's not as if it's some big secret. It's the lowest entry in the product line, a stripped down version of the SOC in the 450, which means when SOC or other shared components fail QA during assembly, they dump them in this player.

Yes, the player adds DNR by default, and based on everything that has been published, does funky stuff with audio, upscaling, interlaced content, etc., on top of no WiFi and no DV.

If you're happy with the player because it plays whatever you throw at it, plus it plays 'files' better, well great, then who cares what anyone else thinks or posts about it?

It's the cheapest player you can buy, not that there's anything wrong with that, but that's what it is, and not a reason to be unreasonably defensive.

For the record, if someone asks me is the 150 a good buy, I say no, it's not, save and spend a little bit extra, $50, for the next step up, as anything else is a better buy than this player as it has nothing in common with what makes Panasonic players better than other players. You can always use a backup or a player for an extra room, so spend wisely. You can buy a used Xbox or PS with a rock solid disc drive for the same money, and probably get some of that cash back with a resale.

But that's just one opinion. No one has to listen to me.

According to you and the others, the image quality for all of these players is all the same, so there's some more opinions you can choose to follow.

Especially when playing 'files.' Ha ha ha. Who cares about disc playback when you've got files. There's a keeper.

You may have confused me for Bhampton when composing that reply. I wasn't attacking you in that post, in case that wasn't clear, but the cited review is simply nonsense. Utter, utter nonsense relayed by the usual incompetent halfwits, i.e. most of the "pro" reviewers on the internet, that people take as being some infallible source. Ditto What Hifi, they've been a laughing stock for as long as I can remember, their eulogising about £500 cables is the stuff of infamy. And I've still yet to see/find this video of Vincent trashing it. A citation really *is* needed there if people are going to keep referencing it.

BTW there's no need for the 'files' whataboutery which isn't even mentioned in my reply to you and is brought up as a "bonus" to another poster, not the be all and end all of this player. But yeah, if we're going there then as a player of files it's 100x betterer than the astonishingly bad support Panny put into their HCX-based series. Doesn't mean anything to you, fine, but it does to me.

The underlying SoC is the same in both the 150 and 450, hence the same firmware being issued for them, it just has features disabled in firmware and doesn't have hardware for the others. As the basic image quality is untouched from the 420 thru the 9000 as they all share the same underlying processor, so it is for the 150/450 line and their own processor. And regarding image quality I'll repeat that I've gone through a battery of the usual checks with the S&M UHD Benchmark and there is literally nothing wrong with colour, contrast, gamma, sharpness etc.

It's not being "unreasonable" to call out nonsense wherever it's found (not you, but your sources), even if it's in defence of such a piddly little player as this.

[Hedrox]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You're not. It's a competent little disc spinner, and as a bonus it's a FAR betterer player of USB files than the 420/820/9000 series (the 150/450 series uses a different chipset than those).

You piqued my interest, might have to grab one just to fill the UB820's gaps.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You may have confused me for Bhampton when composing that reply.

He is also confused about who the OP is.

He's confused about everything which is why his posts are often confusing.

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with BS.

This applies to all of his posts.

He reasserts that Vincent trashed the player which is pure fiction but none of that matters to him. He's trying to maintain his own reputation but some people know him already. It doesn't take long to get to know him, there's not much there.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Hedrox

You piqued my interest, might have to grab one just to fill the UB820's gaps.

It's dat MediaTek chipset, unlike with Panny's own Uniphier/HCX line they haven't locked out things like lossless audio and it just plays more files in general. A few still won't go, it's not like the mighty OPPO which damned near plays anything, but it's so much betterer than the HCX series players.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by cgpublic

Well, the OP stated the 150 was one of the worst 4K players one could buy based on a review from Vincent, and other poster lost his shit because it happened to be a player he had purchased.

Can you read? The OP did not state that. Vincent never did that review. I, for one, didn't lose my shit. I just wanted to know the facts of the matter.

Your "truth drop" was found to be as useful as your opinions are. You reposted a review that I have to imagine you failed to look at. I mean, if you did read that review then I know what to think about all of your future advice.

[ronand]

My main concern about the 150/450 is the dreadful build quality of the drive unit. The drive in my 450 became noisy after a few months. I couldnt return the player as I had fitted a region free mod. It still works but it is so noisy especially with 4k discs. The rest of it is fine - plastic is expected at that price point but I wouldn't expect the drives to last with regular use so I can't honestly recommend these players.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by cgpublic

Yes, the player adds DNR by default, and based on everything that has been published, does funky stuff with audio, upscaling, interlaced content, etc., on top of no WiFi and no DV.


But that's just one opinion. No one has to listen to me.

Do you have any information backing the claim that the player adds DNR? does funky stuff with audio?

Because I think those may be things you made up on the spot.

I don't think I would listen to you but I read your posts because it's fun to try to decipher them.

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by ronand

Thats not new - the UB150/154 has been out for a few years. Its the baby brother of the UB450 and its a pile of plastic junk.

Originally Posted by Yogi6807

Vincent teoh made a video trashing it. It can’t display the video properly unlike every other player. It is literally the worst player to buy.

Originally Posted by Yogi6807

I’ve explained enough on here. I’m not doing it again. It’s not like I keep links to everything I read and see.

Originally Posted by Yogi6807

What benefit do I have to lie to you over this? I think you are going a little extreme.

Originally Posted by bhampton

I, for one, didn't lose my shit. I just wanted to know the facts of the matter.

In search of the truth? The "...facts of the matter."

You bought a Panasonic DP-UB150, there's the only truth and fact that matters.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by ronand

My main concern about the 150/450 is the dreadful build quality of the drive unit. The drive in my 450 became noisy after a few months. I couldnt return the player as I had fitted a region free mod. It still works but it is so noisy especially with 4k discs. The rest of it is fine - plastic is expected at that price point but I wouldn't expect the drives to last with regular use so I can't honestly recommend these players.

Ja, I literally called it a plastic piece of shit re: build. No denying that.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by cgpublic

In search of the truth? The "...facts of the matter."

You bought a Panasonic DP-UB150, there's the only truth and fact that matters.

I am very glad I did. At the time, I had no idea people would resort to making up things about this player.

Between my PS5, my UB150, and my UB9000 each has quirks but there's no need to make something up to put something down.

[cgpublic]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's not being "unreasonable" to call out nonsense wherever it's found (not you, but your sources), even if it's in defence of such a piddly little player as this.

Perfectly understood. My understanding is that it's a completely different animal from the HCX-based 420/820/9000 and badged as a Panasonic.

All I know is when you buy the cheapest player on the market, you get what you pay for from a feature, component and build quality perspective.

As far as TR, it's true there's something funky going on with the screenshots, but the screenshots don't match the actual review, because if they did, the reviewer would have savaged the player, which he doesn't, he simply cites its weaknesses, which are in fact more or less the same as the poster who commented that it's the worst player you can buy.

So, either that poster read the TR review and confused it with Vincent's, or Vincent took his review down because he thought better of it, or he never reviewed in the first place. It's irrelevant, because there are plenty of comments about the 150 from actual owners on various boards that speak to their experience.

It's perfectly reasonable to be more or less happy it's routinely playing discs, and files, and leave it at that. It's not as if I haven't purchased players on the cheap end of the spectrum, such as the LG 90 and Sony x700, and in the case of the X700, at one time struggled to simply play certain discs until a FW update.

It's unreasonable to suggest that the player is anything more than it is, and that some people are going to comment inline with the facts, or that there exists some great conspiracy over a $150 player.

It's a $150 player.

[Yogi6807]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Ja, I literally called it a plastic piece of shit re: build. No denying that.

I had the reviewer wrong it’s still a piece of crap. The way I described or did you not read that far.

[Bernardo A.]

How does it compare to the PS5?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Yogi6807

I had the reviewer wrong it’s still a piece of crap. The way I described or did you not read that far.

I'm...not sure what you're saying here bro. But good luck with it anyway!