2010 Panasonic Tv Lineup

[andys]

Apparently Panny Australia will be releasing the V in 50", 58" & 65". No mention wether it's the V20 or V25. Should be here mid-year. They'll come with 2 sets of glasses.

More here;

http://www.current.com.au/2010/01/11/artic...2010/XABWEUZSGK

Andys.

Edited January 11, 2010 by andys

[hien]

In my opinion, it 'll take at least 3 to 5 years for the so called 3D Home cinema

to be matured and is consumable. The reasons are:

1) The 3D format must be standardized or we 'll have another format war like

VHS & Beta or HD-DVD and Bluray. Whoever buy the 1st release of the 3D TV

at the end of this year will find themself be the victim of that fornat war

2) Need more 3D contents. At the current release rate, it 'll need 5 years

3) Must get rid of the glasses. It ' s very unpleasant to wear extra glass to

watch 3D. Imaging watching 3D porn with a pair of glass ??!!!It is even worst

to wear it over another pair of glasses for people that are short sight, etc...

Phillip 3D TV is the only that does not require glasses, however, it is very

expensive for home use.

4) The price must come down to a reasonable price. 3D is only enjoyable for

watching on the big TV like 65" or above. There is no point watching it on the

50" TV.

5) Most people just bought their Full HD TV, they 're not going to buy another

immature technology

In conclusion: the release of 3D TV by the end of this year will be a failure.

Only rich guys who want to throw money away will buy it.

[hien]

what movies have you guys seen in 3d that aren't that good? i'm just trying to gauge peoples opinions on this. as i've had friends that have seen, avatar, up, cloudy chance of meatballs, u2 concert and shrek 4d

[munch...]

The only 3D movie that impressed me is "Final Destination". The movie is suck but the 3D effect is awesome.

I accidently watched it because I tried to kill time while waiting for someone. I expected Avatar will be much

much better, however, I was so disappointed, it 's a waste of money.

[SLE3551503562118]

I agree with this 3D being a waste of time, blu-ray movies are still over priced here and i still dont know anyone outside this forum that has a blu-ray player besides myself. Then you will need a 3D player, have to wear them glasses as has been mentioned are hard on alot of peoples eyes and then buy 3D movies.

And i can't see 3D being on FTA stations, i can imagine it would need a fair bit of bitrate?

[andys]

... And i can't see 3D being on FTA stations, i can imagine it would need a fair bit of bitrate?

lol ... look at how we've been screwed over with DTV in this country. How long did it take to get the extra channels (of crap & repeats), and where's the HD content??? Low bit rates. mpeg2. Imagine what FTA would do with 3D content. It's a long, long way off in this country. It would be more likely to hit pay tv first (and at what cost?).

Andys.

[diesel]

Panasonic are obviously making a big song and dance about 3D TVs, Bluray players and HD camcorders because they have invested so much R&D into it, but I wish they spent the same $s on getting better blacks, screen filters and ways of making larger screens much cheaper...

[Owen]

Couldn’t agree more, 3D is crap, give me absolute blacks, accurate colour and 85” for less than $20k.

[Owen]

Panasonic are obviously making a big song and dance about 3D TVs, Bluray players and HD camcorders because they have invested so much R&D into it, but I wish they spent the same $s on getting better blacks, screen filters and ways of making larger screens much cheaper...

Couldn’t agree more, 3D is crap, give me absolute blacks, accurate colour and 85” for less than $20k.

[jordang]

I'm not really surprised by the lack of interest in 3d here - as I was exactly the same. But then i saw Avatar... no headaches, wasn't gimmicky at all and the illusion of depth was amazing in some areas.

3d will initially cause a price premium (but by all accounts, not much) and it will never be used for all broadcast material.. 3d isn't needed for 2 1/2 men and other sitcoms... but for movies, and in particular - gaming, i think it could really take off.

Sony has just shown off one of my favourite arcade-style games of the last decade, Super Stardust HD on the ps3 in it's latest 3d implementation and apparently it worked beautifully. Moving forward, imagining a game like Uncharted 2 with that style of depth given in Avatar??? damn.

I'm going against the grain here and saying... I'm looking forward to it. Should be awesome. If only for Super Stardust.

[Jeffie1503561482]

If it doesnt add to the cost, who cares? Just like the high end TVs have frame interpolation, no ones forcing you to use it, or buy the higher model with the only difference being 3D.

[diesel]

3d will initially cause a price premium (but by all accounts, not much) and it will never be used for all broadcast material.. 3d isn't needed for 2 1/2 men and other sitcoms... but for movies, and in particular - gaming, i think it could really take off.

Seems sports are pushing 3d broadcasts

3D World Cup and again here for other sports

IIRC, the EPL broadcasted a game in 3D sometime last year?

Also, seems the LEDs Panasonic are producing will be edge-lit

Edited January 12, 2010 by diesel

[diesel]

...and now it seems Rugby Union will also be shot in 3D

Rugby Union not Rugby League is set to be the first rugby code to be shot in 3D with all of the upcoming 6 Nation rugby union games in Europe set to be shot in 3D and shown live in cinema's.

[bradp51]

Couldn't agree more, 3D is crap, give me absolute blacks, accurate colour and 85" for less than $20k.

I am in the market for 65 in plus I would certainly rather see a bigger screen rather than 3d at the moment. 85 or 90 inch plasma for less than 10k would be nice

cheers

[hien]

I'm not really surprised by the lack of interest in 3d here - as I was exactly the same. But then i saw Avatar... no headaches, wasn't gimmicky at all and the illusion of depth was amazing in some areas.

3d will initially cause a price premium (but by all accounts, not much) and it will never be used for all broadcast material.. 3d isn't needed for 2 1/2 men and other sitcoms... but for movies, and in particular - gaming, i think it could really take off.

Sony has just shown off one of my favourite arcade-style games of the last decade, Super Stardust HD on the ps3 in it's latest 3d implementation and apparently it worked beautifully. Moving forward, imagining a game like Uncharted 2 with that style of depth given in Avatar??? damn.

I'm going against the grain here and saying... I'm looking forward to it. Should be awesome. If only for Super Stardust.

No, don't take me wrong. I love 3D. It 's just that the technology is not matured enough,

the price is not reasonable enough to bring it to home. Additionally, you don't know

how it feels when one have to wear 2 pairs of glasses to watch the program.

[Guest bradsm87]

G25 series looks like a winner. No "3D tax" and "infinite black" 5,000,000:1 native contrast ratio

[geese]

I'm not really surprised by the lack of interest in 3d here - as I was exactly the same. But then i saw Avatar... no headaches, wasn't gimmicky at all and the illusion of depth was amazing in some areas.

3d will initially cause a price premium (but by all accounts, not much) and it will never be used for all broadcast material.. 3d isn't needed for 2 1/2 men and other sitcoms... but for movies, and in particular - gaming, i think it could really take off.

Sony has just shown off one of my favourite arcade-style games of the last decade, Super Stardust HD on the ps3 in it's latest 3d implementation and apparently it worked beautifully. Moving forward, imagining a game like Uncharted 2 with that style of depth given in Avatar??? damn.

I'm going against the grain here and saying... I'm looking forward to it. Should be awesome. If only for Super Stardust.

I recently watched avatar in 3D having seen it previously in 2D. To be honest I think that the 2D version was better. To achieve the 3D effect they have intentionally blurred some parts of the scene which is really quite annoying. Normal sight has the human eye focusing on what you direct it to view. In these movies they decide what you are to focus on and blur the rest. I don't know about the rest of you but when I watch a movie, especially one like avatar, I want to be able to look at whatever I want to look at. To have it blurred just sux all for the sake of some bodgey 3D effect.

I have a feeling that the TV version from panasonic will be better because of the way it displays the image, but for the moment the 3D effect in the cinema sux as far as I am concerned.

[xylenefree]

G25 series looks like a winner. No "3D tax" and "infinite black" 5,000,000:1 native contrast ratio

I found cnet's preview of the range interesting, especially this; "We asked Panasonic's rep whether the the new TVs, like the current V10 series, would include a 96Hz refresh rate, to better display native 1080p/24 content. We were told that the VT25 would have a 96Hz option, but that the new G25 and G20 models would have the same flicker-prone 48Hz refresh rate option found on the current G10 models" CES: Panasonic makes 3D HD official with VT25 plasma TV series

Makes this year's V series look all the better...Unless you want/need the awesome* 3D glasses.

*awesome in a "8-track is the future of audio" way

[bradp51]

I recently watched avatar in 3D having seen it previously in 2D. To be honest I think that the 2D version was better. To achieve the 3D effect they have intentionally blurred some parts of the scene which is really quite annoying. Normal sight has the human eye focusing on what you direct it to view. In these movies they decide what you are to focus on and blur the rest. I don't know about the rest of you but when I watch a movie, especially one like avatar, I want to be able to look at whatever I want to look at. To have it blurred just sux all for the sake of some bodgey 3D effect.

I have a feeling that the TV version from panasonic will be better because of the way it displays the image, but for the moment the 3D effect in the cinema sux as far as I am concerned.

I saw Avatar in 3D today with my family and really enjoyed the movie. They did not go all out in trying for that 3D effect the same as they did in Journey to the centre of the Earth. I read that James Cameraon (Director) did that on purpose. I found that when I took of the 3 D glasses and then back on quickly in the same scene that it did not appear to make that big a difference. I do agree I did notice some of the blurry backgrounds that you speak of in this post. I would not say it sux but I am not sure it added that much to the movie. The sound was great and made the seats rumble. I am going to reserve judgement on the Panasonic 3D TV until I can see one in the flesh set up with all the right gear in a good display. I was all set to go out and buy the current 65" buy I might just wait month or two and see when the 3D 65 is actually going to arrive and what it looks like. It could be "the one" excuse the pun for those old enough to remember Panasonic's old promotion.

cheers

Brad

[diesel]

I was all set to go out and buy the current 65" buy I might just wait month or two and see when the 3D 65 is actually going to arrive and what it looks like. It could be "the one" excuse the pun for those old enough to remember Panasonic's old promotion.

The 65" Panasonic models usually arrive around October or November (after the volume selling models), so you'll be waiting longer than a few months Brad

[BadBeachBoy]

If it doesnt add to the cost, who cares? Just like the high end TVs have frame interpolation, no ones forcing you to use it, or buy the higher model with the only difference being 3D.

I would agree with this point, but it's interesting to note that the cost element is negigable or non-existent. Obviously we all appreciatte that the reality is the technology will have added to the cost, if only in reasearch and development, although probably also in the implementation of higher refresh rates that otherwise are not really necessary. This expense has got to be absorbed somewhere, even if it isnt from the customers pockets. As much as #D interests me (as I note below) I would persinally prefer that the development went into areas that improve everyday usage.

I must confess that as a fairly recent owner of a V10, I was initially a little jealous of the new screens (primarily for the 3D reasons, as until reviewed I am a little sceptical of the true difference in black levels) but as many have alluded, it really is a niche thing. Im sure had I had a 3d capable screen I would have endeavored to try a couple of films and purchased another headset for the missus, and I am not doubting that it would be impressive BUT Im still in awe of the quality of 2D blu ray, and I am sure I will be for a time to come, so for me there is aready a backlog of films that I long to see in 2DHD and Im convinced this will keep me impressed and entertained for long enough for the technology to mature.

It seems also that there are still no true standards, so purchasing player hardware is a bit of a gamble at the moment as well.

What makes me happiest though, is that my purchase originally marked the end of any plans to replace my aged projector, but if the technology becomes more mainstream over the next couple of years I reckon that will give me as good excuse as any to upgrade that

[BadBeachBoy]

I recently watched avatar in 3D having seen it previously in 2D. To be honest I think that the 2D version was better. To achieve the 3D effect they have intentionally blurred some parts of the scene which is really quite annoying.

I probably shouldnt comment upon this without "revisiting" the film, but as that isnt going to happen any time soon.....

My recollection is that "blur" was primarily evident dependant upon where you were physically focussing your eye, in other words you could bring parts of the picture into focus in much the same way that you would - in real life - change focus for close or distant objects? As I say, I am saying this from memory, and even then I wasnt 'testing' this scenario, but just left with the impression that this was the case? Is this definately not the case?

[hobey123]

What's with the 5,000,000:1 native contrast ratio. Will this be better than the Pio 9G's? Sounds like a rediculous figure to me...

[Guest EZYHD]

The 65" Panasonic models usually arrive around October or November (after the volume selling models), so you'll be waiting longer than a few months Brad

I ordered my 65"Panny 1st week December 09 from Myer, was told 2 weeks ago mine would arrive around mid Jan, all this 2nd batch are sold, 3rd batch due March April most sold, not many huge discounts on now due to this massive demand.

[ttn]

I ordered 1 too in Dec & was advised in mid Jan for delivery & been told it is now due in Feb instead.

Will be looking at a PJ soon so it could be fate that I might cancel the plasma & go for a PJ.

Just wonder if someone else will be interested in a Pana in Feb if I decide to cancel it?

[Tweet]

What's with the 5,000,000:1 native contrast ratio. Will this be better than the Pio 9G's? Sounds like a rediculous figure to me...

Only in the remotest parts of the Universe would you ever appreciate that level of contrast ratio but then it would hardly be cheerful at 3 degrees above absolute zero.

C.M