Is my plasma too old?

[ShockWave]

JJ, that's great that you do have both. I by no means am I saying one is better then the other and your observations are not truthful.

But comparing a non elite kuro without the ability of a ISF calibration is not a fair comparison. Side by side with my 141s one set to pure one set to ISF. The difference is significant. ISF truly makes any panel more realistic, accurate and deeper blacks.

I am not supporting either panels. Both are beautiful. No panel is perfect. What one does better the other lacks and vice versa. You can't go wrong with either panel. If I was starting from scratch. I would not buy a kuro. It's old (in years) and warranties are out of date. It's worth having zero hours and warranties. Congrats who all bought the new panels!

[PriSM]

Originally Posted by JJ

Sometimes I find the elitism of Kuro owners combined with the uppityness of the ZT owners hilarious.

Kuro owners are like Bimmer owners.

In all seriousness, I absolutely love my Pioneer panel even 4 years after getting it. I also placed an order for a new VT60 a few days ago. I'm glad that Panasonic was able to meet the bar that Pioneer set several years back. Hopefully, it'll wow me as well.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by JJ

- Sometimes I find the elitism of Kuro owners combined with the uppityness of the ZT owners hilarious. You can see it all over any AV forum as of late. Personally, since I have both a Kuro and a ZT, I will say the ZT is better.

Whether or not that's just the screen size difference talking is up for debate.

For whatever reason, Kuro is still the benchmark for video. Mine is as flawless as the day I got it, and I have not seen better. They're on par, as far as I'm concerned, and that's not faint praise. I've got the 151, and I've heard too many times that the 141 is better, but only by a gnat's whisker.

It's all good. At the very twilight of plasma, something on par with Kuro shows up, and then sells out. That's sad

I don't know if OLED will best Kuro, or this new stuff with new lighting methods, or whatever. We'll see.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I've read multiple reviews of these units, since I was looking for something for my youngest son. There's more than one review.

It's a superb unit, which I recommend as the best 1080p unit currently available (probably not past the end of January). But by concensus - and I've seen calibrated units - it's definitely on par with the Kuro, but does not exceed it in any way. It's close enough, for my book. I don't really see much difference between the two.

Maybe but there is no substitute for an accurate review like the one I have linked to. The black level reading was taken with the KlienK10A, so very accurate indeed.............but we are splitting hairs here.
If I were the OP I would definitely upgrade to one of these units though.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

For whatever reason, Kuro is still the benchmark for video. Mine is as flawless as the day I got it, and I have not seen better. They're on par, as far as I'm concerned, and that's not faint praise. I've got the 151, and I've heard too many times that the 141 is better, but only by a gnat's whisker.

It's all good. At the very twilight of plasma, something on par with Kuro shows up, and then sells out. That's sad

I don't know if OLED will best Kuro, or this new stuff with new lighting methods, or whatever. We'll see.

OLED has far bettered the KURO, 0.00 black level.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by ShockWave

But comparing a non elite kuro without the ability of a ISF calibration is not a fair comparison. Side by side with my 141s one set to pure one set to ISF. The difference is significant. ISF truly makes any panel more realistic, accurate and deeper blacks.

Oh, of course! I'm not saying that. I know I have a 5020. I've only seen/studied the Elite displays probably for - maybe, 30 minutes combined tops?

Originally Posted by PriSM

Kuro owners are like Bimmer owners.

In all seriousness, I absolutely love my Pioneer panel even 4 years after getting it. I also placed an order for a new VT60 a few days ago. I'm glad that Panasonic was able to meet the bar that Pioneer set several years back. Hopefully, it'll wow me as well.

Yes.

In any case, the general consensus amongst the ever-so-prickly "internets" is that the ZT has surpassed the Kuro - by a smidge.

[Mr Kite]

Well this conversation died a death.

[mrchallenge]

Thanks alot for some great advice everyone, appreciate it. Some of you think I should upgrade while other say I should just stick with my current set. I'm still not determined on whether I'm buying a new set or not, but if I do I'll look into the Panasonic ZT.

I am very happy with my now ancient panel but if I can do even better (assuming its within my budget), than why not upgrade. Who knows.

[saprano]

I don't go by owners opinions, i go by numbers--facts. The numbers say the kuro still holds the crown.

Blacks are still deeper(0.001 for 9G's, 0.0005 for 9.5G's vs 0.0012) and it gets brighter. But that's because Panasonic used an aggressive filter on the ZT60 limiting its brightness. The ZT/VT are impressive displays, it's better in some areas like daytime viewing, not denying that, but if you want to get picky(lets be honest that's what we're ALL doing), the kuro still wins overall.

I don't even know why it matters to be honest, both displays are not made anymore.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by saprano

I don't go by owners opinions, i go by numbers--facts. The numbers say the kuro still holds the crown.

the kuro still wins overall.

These statements would be valid points, if the product was still being manufactured, but it's not. The only way to buy a Kuro, is to purchase one used on the internet, and I don't think investing in a old, used HDTV (with no warranty, in case if something goes wrong with it) is a wise decision. Why would anybody want to get rid of their Kuro anyway, if the TV is so great, and can't be replaced? If they're selling it, then apparently they want to upgrade, and buy a newer model HDTV, or a projection screen! The Kuros are not equipped to be compare to new video technology and features on modern HDTVs, to justify any comparisons. There are people who are loyal Pioneer Kuro fanboys, they refuse to acknowledged, and give credit to other competitive HDTVs on the market, that will give the Pioneer Kuro a run for its money, and much more.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by saprano

I don't go by owners opinions, i go by numbers--facts. The numbers say the kuro still holds the crown.

Blacks are still deeper(0.001 for 9G's, 0.0005 for 9.5G's vs 0.0012) and it gets brighter. But that's because Panasonic used an aggressive filter on the ZT60 limiting its brightness. The ZT/VT are impressive displays, it's better in some areas like daytime viewing, not denying that, but if you want to get picky(lets be honest that's what we're ALL doing), the kuro still wins overall.

I don't even know why it matters to be honest, both displays are not made anymore.

Sorry but if you read the earlier Review your figures are a little out, but we as I say we are splitting hairs on this. Just that for now best tv ever is still available................... but not for much longer.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by tele1962

Sorry but if you read the earlier Review your figures are a little out, but we as I say we are splitting hairs on this. Just that for now best tv ever is still available................... but not for much longer.

You want to point out how my figures are wrong? I assure you they are 100% right.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by saprano

You want to point out how my figures are wrong? I assure you they are 100% right.

I want to point out the review above. As the Reviewer said there is not much in it but the black levels on the ZT are better than any Kuro or any Plasma Panel to date.
As you said you go off scientific facts and they are presented in the review.

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/panas...1305062961.htm

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/panas...ge=Performance

Can you tell me what you used for your black level readings?

[saprano]

I don't know what you're trying to prove with those links or what that reveiwer is talking about. It's known the kuros mll is 0.001 and 0.0005 for the 101 and 500m. The numbers are there for anyone to check out. As I told the other guy, look it up. Again, I don't go by impressions I go by numbers.

And Pioneer did this without any tricks. You don't need to activate something to get deep blacks.



Here's one review of the 141 with proof-

The full-on/full-off contrast ratio above (sometimes referred to as the peak contrast ratio, the sequential contrast ratio, or the dynamic range) is about as good as it gets. The black level shown here was the most conservative reading taken. With a black image, you can still see some illumination on the screen, but it is extremely dim and difficult to measure. I took 20 full-screen black-level readings. Eighteen of them measured 0.000, and two measured 0.001—the lowest reading possible with our Minolta LS-100 light meter.

http://www.soundandvision.com/conten...-labs-measures

Edit-

Another from a 6020

Full-On/Full-Off Contrast Ratio: Infinite

All of the measurements here, unless otherwise noted, were taken in Standard mode. The contrast readings were taken with both Energy Save and the Room Sensor turned Off. Energy Save in Mode 1 reduced the peak light output by about 30 percent, from the figures shown. It dropped by another 20 percent (in a darkened room) with the Room Sensor engaged.

A full-screen white pattern measured 17.4 foot-lamberts. (A decreasing light output as the average picture level increases is characteristic of all plasmas.)

The 0.00-ft-L reading for video black is not a typo. While some light could be seen on the screen with a full black image, it was too low to register on our Minolta light meter. As a result, the contrast ratio was also too high to measure.

On some occasions, when I switched from a bright white test pattern to video black, the black level appeared slightly elevated (measured at 0.008 ft-L). After a few seconds, it dropped to the 0.000-ft-L level. After another 15 seconds or so, it would drop further, to total black (judged by eye). Most of the time, the first drop was to the 0.000-ft-L “measured” level. In the 30 to 40 hours I spent watching real program material, however, I only recall seeing that 0.008-ft-L level once or twice.

http://www.soundandvision.com/conten...-labs-measures


And that's not even an elite model.



Here's a 500a owners measurements-

http://www.avforums.com/threads/pion...#post-18515096

Even darker than the 0.0005 I was talking about.



If you're wondering then how that reviewer got 0.001 cd/m2 for the ZT60, which converts to 0.0002-- D-nice was asked about that and he said, if I remember correctly, that it was a difference in meters or something like that. At the shootout that same reveiwer and D-nice got 0.0012 for both the ZT and VT.

[saprano]

I'm not talking about any kuro at the shootout or kuros being tweaked. I just provided you proof that kuros measure at 0.001 and 0.0005. With the ZT/VT at 0.0012. In that same video you posted D-nice even says the ANSI contrast is 0.0014........it went up by 1. Which would make full screen black 0.0013. Did you even you watch what you posted?

which normally would have been 0.005 so it was equal to the ZT after the tweak. With this in place there was nothing between them.

Your numbers are wrong. And it wasn't equal to the ZT after the tweak. Again, in the video you posted, which clearly you didn't watch, he said he made a compromise and put it at 0.0003 from the stock 0.0005. The ANSI contrast was 0.0007. And i quote...."so it's twice as dark"........He's comparing it to the ZT.

In another video i saw where he was talking about his tweak, he said even if he didn't do the tweak the 500m would still be darker than the ZT and VT. Which is correct since the 500m and 101 measures 0.0005 vs the ZT's 0.0012.


Can we end this now?

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by saprano

I'm not talking about any kuro at the shootout or kuros being tweaked. I just provided you proof that kuros measure at 0.001 and 0.0005. With the ZT/VT at 0.0012. In that same video you posted D-nice even says the ANSI contrast is 0.0014........it went up by 1. Which would make full screen black 0.0013. Did you even you watch what you posted?



Your numbers are wrong. And it wasn't equal to the ZT after the tweak. Again, in the video you posted, which clearly you didn't watch, he said he made a compromise and put it at 0.0003 from the stock 0.0005. The ANSI contrast was 0.0007. And i quote...."so it's twice as dark"........He's comparing it to the ZT.

In another video i saw where he was talking about his tweak, he said even if he didn't do the tweak the 500m would still be darker than the ZT and VT. Which is correct since the 500m and 101 measures 0.0005 vs the ZT's 0.001.


Can we end this now?

Both TV's are very close but the ZT just edged it I think, and my figures are only what have been posted by using the latest tech for Black Level readings.

PS
Look at the date of the review and what is said again...............

PS PS
He (Dnice) said to ignore Ansi contrast as it is not a true representation and I think you are skewing things a little to suite your argument which I have seen many times before when Kuro owners are confronted with the evidence. But we are splitting hairs.

[saprano]

Contnue arguing with yourself as you have no clue what you're talking about or how to read MLL. The same video you posted even proved you wrong.......wow. I gave you the kuros black level measurements. Those are real. That's what they are. Those are facts. Believe what you want. I'm sure there are others who have an understanding of the kuros black level and MLL can back up what i'm saying. I'll say with certainty that your post above has a buch of stuff mixed up and plain wrong. I'm not defending the kuro, i'm defending facts. Which alot of people choose not to believe.


You have a nice day.

Edit-

Nice editing of your post.



For the record, i believe the ZT and VT are wonderful displays. Both are reference for PQ. I'm not saying they are bad displays. I'm just saying the kuro still has things it does better overall.

[saprano]

That's his opinion on what he see's. He's not wrong. But the numbers tell a different story.

David from cnet felt the same way about the ZT's black level. But guess what? He said he doesn't how the ZT appears darker since the 111FD measured lower than the ZT. Is it placebo? I think it's the filter that's giving the impression of darker blacks. It is a very good filter.

And i already explained to you about the readings David M got. I don't remember his exact words but D-Nice said something about that on AVS when he was asked. All i remember is that the 0.0012 number is the correct one.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by saprano

That's his opinion on what he see's. He's not wrong. But the numbers tell a different story.

David from cnet felt the same way about the ZT's black level. But guess what? He said he doesn't how the ZT appears darker since the 111FD measured lower than the ZT. Is it placebo? I think it's the filter that's giving the impression of darker blacks. It is a very good filter.

And i already explained to you about the readings David M got. I don't remember his exact words but D-Nice said something about that on AVS when he was asked. All i remember is that the 0.0012 number is the correct one.

That is not an opinion, but physical scientific readings (numbers) using the KlienK10A, what more do you want?

[saprano]

I don't want anything. I already explained David's numbers. You really think the ZT60 and VT60 black level is 0.0002? lol. That would be lower than the 500m and 101.

The ZT's MLL is 0.0012. The 9G's are 0.001. The 9.5G's are 0.0005.


I like how you're only referencing those U.K measurements. Take a look at any U.S review, they would correlate with the numbers i gave.


I think i'm really done here. No point in continuing with you.