Report - Pioneer Generation 8 Rome Launch - May 8th.

PioRow

Active Member
I was listening to the podcast on this launch and was buying into all the hype which Jim was spouting until it got to the end and he started talking about XGA.
He had me sold that this set was revolutionary, a quality brand, not cheap but still top notch. I understood that it was worth paying a premium for the best, the greatest and latest. And then he says its XGA??!!

WHY? Now I know the argument for a quality display doesnt have to be 1080p, it can be brilliant at 720p but if your launching a top notch product, top of the line you want to be at the cutting edge.
Why would anyone buy a xga set at this time, especially one as expensive as a pioneer. If your going to invest in a top end plasma your going to want 1080p. Why bother with any hidef content on these xga plasmas when all the content is being scaled down? Seems like madness to me.
 

madshi

Active Member
I was listening to the podcast on this launch and was buying into all the hype which Jim was spouting until it got to the end and he started talking about XGA.
He had me sold that this set was revolutionary, a quality brand, not cheap but still top notch. I understood that it was worth paying a premium for the best, the greatest and latest. And then he says its XGA??!!

WHY? Now I know the argument for a quality display doesnt have to be 1080p, it can be brilliant at 720p but if your launching a top notch product, top of the line you want to be at the cutting edge.
Why would anyone buy a xga set at this time, especially one as expensive as a pioneer. If your going to invest in a top end plasma your going to want 1080p. Why bother with any hidef content on these xga plasmas when all the content is being scaled down? Seems like madness to me.
There will be 768p models and 1080p models. So calm down and relax.
 

hornydragon

Distinguished Member
Well Phil seems like a very nice way to spend 4 days, Pioneer must have mortgaged the Factory to pay for that lot, i dont suppose they showed you and SD sat TV during the demo did they? I cant wait to see one of these "new tech plasmas" the 5000EX was a dissapointment,
 
U

uzimir

Guest
What do you need 1080p for in a 42"? How near are you sitting to the display? 5 feet?

about 8 feet, are you sure there is no difference at all a that distance between 1080 and 720?

I'm not (may be I'm wrong).
 
U

User Tron

Guest
What do you need 1080p for in a 42"? How near are you sitting to the display? 5 feet?

The difference between 42" and 50" is less then 20% therefore the optimum viewing distance is very close in reality. So if 3.7m is ok for 50" the 3m is ok for 42". As I'm about 3m away from my tv when watching movies and even less when playing videogames, I think a 42" FullHD is right on spot.
 

madshi

Active Member
3m from a 42" you'll most likely not see any difference between 768p and 1080p. At 2.5m from a 50" you'll just *begin* to see a difference between 768p and 1080p. IIRC the average human eye can resolve the full details of 1080p on a 50" only if you sit no further away than 2m.
 
U

User Tron

Guest
3m from a 42" you'll most likely not see any difference between 768p and 1080p. At 2.5m from a 50" you'll just *begin* to see a difference between 768p and 1080p. IIRC the average human eye can resolve the full details of 1080p on a 50" only if you sit no further away than 2m.

Where did you get that numbers? Did you try it yourself?
 

madshi

Active Member
Where did you get that numbers? Did you try it yourself?
I got that numbers from various sources (diagrams etc) which all more or less seem to agree. Here's one I received just a few days ago:

resolution.gif
 
U

User Tron

Guest
I got that numbers from various sources (diagrams etc) which all more or less seem to agree. Here's one I received just a few days ago:

resolution.gif

1.) Well would you be so kind and post atleast a link or something.
2.) Did you try it yourself? The perception of humans differ quite a lot in various parameters, so best is always to test it with your own eyes.
3.) In terms of recreating the original frequence you need twice the frequence when sampling. (Nyquist-Shannon theorem). So to fool the eye you need atleast twice the pixel the eye has in x and y direction! And you've got two eyes at different view points! So while you might not able to see the difference at first sight, your eye and brain might be more capable than you think ;)
 

madshi

Active Member
1.) Well would you be so kind and post atleast a link or something.
Why don't you do a simple google search? I've just done a search for "viewing distance eye 20/20 1080p" and the first five links are all very informative:

http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/
http://www.hometheatermag.com/gearworks/0105viewvrez/
http://www.burnyourbonus.info/hdtv-faq/faq3.html
http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0079/t.1990.html
http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

Let's check out this one:

http://www.burnyourbonus.info/hdtv-faq/faq3.html

With average eye sight and a 3m viewing distance you need a 50" to just begin to see the benefit of more than 720p resolution. If you have average eye sight and want to see the full 1080p resolution, you need a 76" display at 3m viewing distances.

Obviously things change if you have good eyes. E.g. with 20/15 eye sight at 3m viewing distance you need a 38" display to just begin to see the benefit of more than 720p resolution, and you still need a 57" display to resolve full 1080p.

To me that means that most people wouldn't benefit from more than 720p at 3m with a 42" display. Ok, if you have 20/10 - which is the best human eyes can possibly do, you can actually resolve full 1080p at 3m on a 42" display. I have to admit that.

2.) Did you try it yourself?
No. Did you?

If the BBC runs tests, that's good enough for me.
 

hornydragon

Distinguished Member
3.) In terms of recreating the original frequence you need twice the frequence when sampling. (Nyquist-Shannon theorem). So to fool the eye you need atleast twice the pixel the eye has in x and y direction! And you've got two eyes at different view points! So while you might not able to see the difference at first sight, your eye and brain might be more capable than you think ;)

Hmmm THis is indeed true however i dont see the relevance of of Nyquist sampling when looking at optical resolution once you move into video it whole lot more complicated as the artefacts you seen can be very different to those which are there. Video is about far more than pixel pitch which is where so many displays fall down they ar full of pixes but are not able to display and accurate representation of the motion being captured 1080 is far more important at the camera and editing suite than in your living room
 
U

User Tron

Guest

Actually I was look for real scientific papers and not some self declared specialist. I've seen audio magazines which are published for more than 20 years with articles about optical cables and their charateristics like better for low frequences and other BS. So if you can't give a link to a real test with black box tests and relative realistic sample for the test, don't use them. The internet is full of people who want to proof how cool and smart they are.


madshi said:
Let's check out this one:

http://www.burnyourbonus.info/hdtv-faq/faq3.html

With average eye sight and a 3m viewing distance you need a 50" to just begin to see the benefit of more than 720p resolution. If you have average eye sight and want to see the full 1080p resolution, you need a 76" display at 3m viewing distances.

Obviously things change if you have good eyes. E.g. with 20/15 eye sight at 3m viewing distance you need a 38" display to just begin to see the benefit of more than 720p resolution, and you still need a 57" display to resolve full 1080p.

To me that means that most people wouldn't benefit from more than 720p at 3m with a 42" display. Ok, if you have 20/10 - which is the best human eyes can possibly do, you can actually resolve full 1080p at 3m on a 42" display. I have to admit that.


No. Did you?

If the BBC runs tests, that's good enough for me.

I really don't understand how you can argue with me if you didn't test it yourself. But what I even understand less is why you argue at all! Make the test yourself, if you see the difference than you can decide if it's important to you or not. If you don't see the difference great, scratch that from your list and save some money. I really don't know if you can see it and will not claim if you can or not. So please do the same because I tried it myself and I saw the difference at 3m and to be honest I would be suprised if you didn't. If it's worth the money is different story.
 
U

User Tron

Guest
Hmmm THis is indeed true however i dont see the relevance of of Nyquist sampling when looking at optical resolution once you move into video it whole lot more complicated as the artefacts you seen can be very different to those which are there. Video is about far more than pixel pitch which is where so many displays fall down they ar full of pixes but are not able to display and accurate representation of the motion being captured 1080 is far more important at the camera and editing suite than in your living room

If you take one line the eye is a scanner with a finite resolution. So if you look into a display with a picture of a tree, what resolution would you need to reproduce the same scanner result as if looking a the tree in reality -> Al least twice the scanner resolution. But I'm totally with you, resolution is just one point of many for PQ. FullHD alone is never enough.
 

NicolasB

Distinguished Member

madshi

Active Member
Actually I was look for real scientific papers and not some self declared specialist.
So you view BBC research as being "self declared specialist"? That's interesting.

I tried it myself and I saw the difference at 3m and to be honest I would be suprised if you didn't.
Which displays did you compare at 3m?

PS: Nice that you left out point 3
I've never claimed to be a scientist or physics expert. If you believe that you're cleverer than all the professional companies who have researched this topic and who all came to more or less the same conclusion, then just go on. I don't have the knowledge to discuss about physics with you. But if there are multiple sources who I trust and who all agree with something, then I don't need to become a scientist myself to come to a conclusion.

And btw, it's not that easy to do a real objective test. Just putting a 768p display next to a 1080p display is not good enough for a test. Both need to be properly calibrated. Both need to have 100% identical feeds. Both need to have identical deinterlacers. Both need to have artifical sharpening turned off. Both should be as much identical as possible (apart from the resolution difference, of course) etc etc. Did you consider all this in your 3m viewing test? Did you do a real double blind test or did you know which display is which?

I suggest that you have a look here. This thread might be of interest to you:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=799340
 

Filbert

Active Member
I also think its very bad form comparing the new plasmas next to a sony lcd. How about they put their new plasma up against a brand new samsung 1080p lcd, get the both ISF calibrated and put the price on a sign in front of them. Which do you think most people will opt for?
Putting a fully calibrated new plasma up against a sony lcd thats been out for 6 months and not ISF calibrating the lcd is just poor. But I guarantee all the hack journalists from the mainstream press will be reporting on how superior the new Pioneer plasma is over LCD.

The plasmas on display I suspect were not fully calibrated. I went to a recent launch at the Heathrow Hilton, and can confirm these sets were on their factory preset settings (Contrast at 40 everything else at 0, all other advanced settings at factory preset). The Pioneer G8 screens FAR outperformed the Sony LCD screen, and more impressively, Pioneer's own 5000EX screen too. I for one commend Pioneer for having the balls to put their screens next to so called "Great LCDs" (What Hi-Fi love the X series Bravia! :suicide: ) and allowing people to check and change the settings, as they did at the Heathrow launch.
 

madshi

Active Member
@Filbert, can you give us some more details about what you saw? How good were the black levels? How good was shadow detail? How about picture noise? Colors? Sharpness? How about false contouring or other artifacts? Were you able to see some fast motion scenes on the 8G? If so, how well did it show these scenes?

Thanks very much!
 

Filbert

Active Member
OK, before I answer, let me say this, I am a Pioneer dealer. I thought it worth mentioning this straight away, however my opinions below are my honest opinions based on what I saw, not based on the fact that I am a Pioneer dealer!

1. Black Levels.

AMAZING! The difference between previous gen plasmas, including the 5000EX was nothing short of spectacular. In fact on one of the screens showing Star Wars DVD, my colleague and I both had to get right up close to the screen to see where the screen bezel ended and the actual screen began!

2. Shadow detail and Picture Noise.

Both these seem to be improved on previous gen models, however I only saw DVD and Blu-Ray sources on these screens, and I would prefer to see both HD and SD sources before saying that these improvements are significant.

3. Colour/Sharpness.

Again both significantly improved. We were shown some clips off a Blu-Ray dem disc using Pioneer's own BR player, feeding a 508XD and a 5000EX simultaneously. Now keeping in mind that the 5000EX is a 1080 panel and the 508XD a 720, I would say that the 508XD was at least 5 times better, in every respect. Just goes to show resolution ain't everything!

4. Fast motion.

We were shown a dem disc which featured a lot of fast moving images both "real" images (a camera filming a brightly coloured road side from a car as it was driving) and a test card which scrolled across the screen. Now the purposes of the dem was to show how much better the screen was compared to a LCD (Sony W series by the way), however even in isolation you could see how could motion tracking was, each individual detail could be tracked by the eye as it went from right to left.

Would I buy one? Definitely! Overall, I have got to say that the new Pioneer screens really are a massive step up from, in my opinion, an already good screen. Expect pricing to be around £1,800 for the 427XD and £2,500 for the 508XD.
 

Filbert

Active Member
At present, Pioneer have only released pricing for the 508XD, 5080XD-TU (expect same price as the 508XD but comes supplied with a PDK-TS28 fixed matt black pedestal stand, and PDP-S40B undermounted stereo speaker), the 428XD, and the 4280XD (expect same price as the 428XD, but comes supplied with PDK-TS27 matt black fixed pedestal stand).

Expect models with the number 0 on the end to be sold mainly by multiples, and the models without the 0 on the end to be sold by independants.
 

J.A.B.

Active Member
OK, before I answer, let me say this, I am a Pioneer dealer. I thought it worth mentioning this straight away, however my opinions below are my honest opinions based on what I saw, not based on the fact that I am a Pioneer dealer!.
Filbert, do you only sell Pioneer, or other brands as well. If os, how is the 8G compared to the Panasonic screens, especially the new 50" full HD Panasonic
 

Filbert

Active Member
We do sell other brands too. I haven't seen the two screens side by side, being fed with the same source etc. so it's not really appropriate to say how they compare.
 

ozzzy189

Distinguished Member
Hi filbert. I'm waiting impatiently on these new screens, looking for a 50. the 5080 with built in speaker and cut down features is the one i'm looking at. have you seen what difference this optimum mode and this other advanced mode does on the elite models ? thanks in advance.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Sky Glass, Epson Laser Projectors plus Home Cinema Subwoofers and More…
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

PrimaLuna debuts Evo 300 Hybrid integrated amplifier
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Astell&Kern announces AK ZERO1 in ear monitor
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
McIntosh launches MI1250 power amplifier
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 13th October 2021
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Vestel launches Red Bull TV app on European smart TVs
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom