[THREAD HIJACK]
dxben wrote:Best image quality you can get in any TV period,
darrenf wrote:I would be stunned but I'll grant you that I haven't viewed the Fuji plasma. I would put my Pioneer Elite Pro 510 from 6 years ago up against any plasma. Last time I checked plasmas had adjacent color elements like CRT/LCD, poor black levels, low resolution (1080i can't be properly represented with fixed pixels unless the monitor supports 1080p), and as compared to LCDs, burn-in sensitivity, weight and heat. The positives are cabinet size/depth, brightness and viewing angle, none of which are concerns in a properly constructed home theater.
Wow, darrenf, I hate to say this but you are way off base and I mean that in a nice way. The black levels on the commercial Panasonic and the Fuji (which uses the Panasonic glass) is the best you can get and noticeably better than any current plasma. Compared to plasmas from 2 years ago or more, it is night and day, no pun intended.
There is no burn-in sensitivity any more, heat has been markedly reduced (I don't feel any warmth when placing my hands an inch in front of my screen). These aren't picture quality issues anyway, so let's not muddy the debate here, but I will note them because you're incorrect in your criticisms on today's plasmas.
dxben wrote:the only thing that beats it would be a front projector in the $10K vacinity and upwards, like the new one from Sony (the Ruby chip).
darrenf wrote:FRONT-projector? I can see that black levels aren't important to you at all.
Although to be consistent with my statements above, in a totally dark room you would get good black levels out of this.
Well uhm yeah, we're talking best case of each display type. Obviously LCDs work better in well lit rooms, plasmas and and FP CRTs work better in dark and completely dark rooms respectively. And the black level on a $10k sony ruby projector is better than anything you get with Plasma, LCOS and almost matches direct view CRT.
dxben wrote:Unless you mean the 34" Sony XBR HD CRT, which while it has better black levels, it does not have nearly the quality in video processing, it has convergence problems, and its pretty unuseable at 34"..
darrenf wrote:How can a direct-view CRT have convergence problems? By definition it has only one electron gun. Geometry problems, perhaps, drift or ghosting, perhaps, but not convergence. I hate CRTs (unless they are guns in an RPTV) and I hate Sony -- or at least I did until they came out with LCOS. The Qualia 006 is one helluva display.
Here you're right. My vocab gaffe, I concede. I meant to say geometry problems. The 70" Qualia 006 is very nice, but it does not best the 50" Fuji plasma for picture quality. But its not as obviously behind it as its lesser LCoS siblings from Sony.
dxben wrote:Until SED displays release, Plasmas at this level are unbeatable for PQ in displays this size.
darrenf wrote:If by size you mean overall dimensions, then perhaps -- there are no good flat-panel display technologies, IMHO. If you mean in screen size then I would disagree. CRT and LCOS RPTVs (in that order) give the best pictures that I have seen.
You're getting me grumpy
You've already agreed you haven't seen the Fuji but you're ready to disagree with me. I have seen them all. I spent the last 6 months with a price no object search for the best image quality possible in a non front projector technology and a 50" minimum. That excludes the CRT and leaves DLP, LCOS and LCD.
If you don't want to take my word for it, ask any certified member of the Imaging Science Foundation (ISF), the people who know how to calibrate these screens. They will tell you, for PQ with the constraints we're outlining, the Plasma is the best and the Fuji specifically. Lesser plasmas don't easily best those other display types, so maybe that is where your disagreement is stemming from.
darrenf wrote:It's a shame really that manufacturers took CRT RPTVs off the market. Consumers are paying the kind of dollars now for Plasma and LCD that would have bought a fantastic RPTV a few years ago with a picture that would blow away anything currently on the market. I guess the manufacturers don't want to deal with the shipping expense and consumers don't want to deal with geometry and convergence and have their monitors ISF calibrated and cleaned annually. In some applications I can understand it, but to watch movies or HD boradcasts on most of today's TVs is quite disappointing.
RP CRTs don't compete in image quality any more, you're just not right on this
I don't know how else to say it nicely. You have to refresh your viewing experience.
dxben wrote:Btw, I get the feeling you have not seen a Plasma from Fuji. They are remarkable. They are nothing like the mid ranged plasmas and nothing like Plasmas from even 2 years ago. They are absolutely stellar and I am an old CRT fanboy, so that's where I'm coming from.
darrenf wrote:You are correct that I haven't seen the Fuji plasma. I'll see if I can locate one to take a look at, but knowing the underlying technology, I doubt that I'll be terribly impressed. If you like direct-view CRT then I can understand that you would like plasma. It has the same pixel color cell layout, the same brightness and viewing angle. On the flipside the inter-pixel gap is usually huge, black levels are poor (sans XBR I hear) and color cells are adjacent instead of overlapping. Wear sunglasses and watch from across the room and it will look fine.
There is no inter-pixel gap on the 50" Fuji unless you sit 3 feet in front of it, and that would be true of any display type. I wish you weren't so definitely wrong about it in publice
Meant all in good fun of course, do yourself a favor, go to a certified Fuji dealer. Ask them to turn down the lights and run an HDMI cable from a D-VHS deck to see the image quality possible on this display. It will give you an idea of how good BlueRay will look.
Most dealers don't have DVHS decks anymore so they'll most likely show you cable HD, which will still show you 90% of what the Fuji can do, but realize that any flaws you see will most likely be the compression artifacts of the cable feed, or the fact that most cable HD is not true HD source, but upsampled 480i back at the station. Try to find a channel like StarzHD that has the HD logo on the movie info, that will mean its actually an HD transfer.
Also keep in mind that most places that you are likely to view these displays don't have them calibrated properly or specifically have them set on a setting meant to jack up the contrast and brightness for the showroom floor. The proper place to evaluate all of these is at a high-end AV shop. Otherwise you will walk away with the wrong impressions.
I have one of the founding members of the ISF coming to my office soon to calibate my Fuji. So all my praise is for a TV that is still not showing what it truly can do. I can hardly wait to see how much better it will get, I've heard after calibration there's a good 15% improvement. Since its already quite stunning, I am eagerly waiting.
[/THREAD HIJACK]
Homepage
Forum
Drivers
HMM
MTM
Feed
)
