To Ketan Bharadia
Yes of course but it's a huge one. I talked to users on your forum and they provided me with links to Toshiba zl1 review from DV where I found this stats.
Black level: 0.035 cd/m²
Gamma quality: 4.5 / 5
Average discrepancy across display: 5%
Viewing angles: 3.1 / 5
Energy consumption: 165 W
Multimedia player: 1.8/5
This years best 55" LCD according to your review is Philips 8008 stats
Black: 0.08 cd/m²
Gamma: 4.6 / 5
Delta E: 1.5
Average discrepancy across display: 17%
Viewing angles: 1.5 / 5
Power use: 108 W
Media player: 3.2 / 5
Toshibas contrast is twice as better..Black levels twice as better Gamma:even, Delta E: Should be less than 3 (When this value falls below 3.0, any remaining discrepancies are invisible to the naked eye.) Viewing angles are much better.
Even last years Sony 853 got better stats than this years Philips 8008
Black: 0.05 cd/m²
Gamma: 4.4 / 5
Delta E: 2.3
Average discrepancy across display: 6%
Viewing angles: 2.8 / 5
Power use: 153 W
Media player: 2.1 / 5
So how is this years Philips is better?
As far as the clouding goes I guess it depends on how lucky you get but I often heard that people have issues with it.
Here are the photos of the test subjects
We never judge a TV by the published specifications. In our experience the TV with the best numbers doesn't always produce the best picture.
They are not vendors published specifications. This are the stats measured from an actual test. And I find it a bit odd that a TV with twice lower contrast levels, twice lower black levels and significantly lower viewing angles shows better 2D picture than even last years Sony 853. How do you test TVs, what methods do you use?
Doesn't that suggest specifications don't tell the whole story?
In our dedicated test room we place two comparible TVs side by side. There'll be a reference (our favourite at that size and price level), and the set under test. They are both set-up using a THX test disc (the kind any of our readers may have). We could go the full-blown calibration route, but this would produce results that the vast majority of readers wouldn't be able to replicate. We would rather recommend products that shine in the way most of our readers would use them. We then start watching and comparing. Sources will be Blu-ray, 3D, DVD, broadcast and games. We also fully test any smart functionality. During this process we will fine-tune the performance, trying the various active processing modes until we feel we've got the best overall picture.
I didn't say specification! I am talking about actual results. And I doubt that twice the difference in contrast. black levels and viewing angles isn't visible.
Do you vary environment conditions like daylight. Night etc.
Yes, we vary light conditions.
Did you turn Philips Ambilight on with the best settings you configuered.
If a TV has a specific feature such as Ambilight we always try it.
Ambilight adds light to the room. extra light makes black stand out. Otherwise I do not understand how two times the difference in black and contrast can't be seen.
I am looking for 55" tv with the best 2D picture. So far the best i have seen were
Philips 55PFL8008 -greate detail
and an old
Toshiba 55ZL1-deeper black Full Led backlighte
Which one of these whould you recommand?
How about an opinion from experts at WHF? Why did you not review Toshiba 55 ZL1?
We didn't review the ZL1, but have tested the ZL2:
If I am correct ZL2 has EDGE LED backlight vs unique ZL1 512-zone Full LED backlighting system which relies on three thousand individual LEDs. I am surprised you didn't review it because its unique and yet to be topped . I haven't found any reviews for any TV with full led backlight from WHF exept Philips 46PFL9706. I am interested how do full backlight TVs 2D picture stand up to 2012-2013 Edge LED rival TVs like Sony 853 or Philips 8008. However right now I am probably choosing between Toshiba ZL1 and Sony 853 due to Toshiba's 66ms input lag. I am probably going to buy a TV next week so I hope to hear your opinion ASAP.
Sorry SwordfishV, but we never received a review sample of the ZL1 so can't compare that to other sets we've seen.
How about Philips 9706 you have reviewed or Sony KDL- HX920 or Sony KDL- HX953. P.S.
I am interested how in general 2D picture on TVs with full led backlight stand up to best 2012-2013 TVs with EDGE LED like Sony 853 and Phillips 8008
I am shure I am not the only one who whould be interested
The method of back-lighting is just one aspect of delivering a good quality picture. In our experience the best of this year's TVs are better than last years (in general). That's with both 2D and 3D.
I posted at the top so it will be easier to read.
Enjoy the silence.
One thing WHF constantly seem to ignore in their reviews of LCD/LED tv's is light homogeneity issues, such as "clouding" and "bleeding". Obviously their sample might have been spared from this to some degree, or they just didn't notice it, but I've seen this tv in two different store demo rooms and homogeneity is a problem on this set! So much so that it was pretty horrendous during dark scenes in movies. It's 2013, Philips... get it together! Same goes for other manufacturers... this is STILL a problem with this technology and it's pretty lame. For me personally all the picture benefits in the world are ruined if the homogeneity is uneven!
It's most certainly not something we ignore. We've mentioned clouding and backlight bleed in many TV reviews over the years when we've come across it. But it wasn't an issue in this case.
I own this tv since 25-05-13 and I haven't seen any clouding or backlight bleed either...!
Does anyone know where this are regularly stocked? They are not on the web sites of my usual suspects John Lewis and Richer. I was really disappointed with the PQ of the 2013 Panasonic LEDs, and also with them dropping the fourth HDMI, so I want to audition the Philips asap.
I am sure it is a performance beauty, but the back TV cover is just plain hidious? The stand doesn't get any plainer than that?
All the top end TV say except from Samsung(PVC) have a metallic back. But this Philips set isn't Philip's top TV, so it is understandable to an extent.
I really do not think many will pay over 2 thousand for this TV over the samsung or sony and the panasonic?? I personally don't get excited looking at this TV set and if I am to pay over 2k I need to be drooling over it. is the screen cover glass?
I know some dealers do not stock this.
Philips have produce some really knock out looking appearance sets in the past but not in 2013. Granted the set has greater consistent check box performance than others.
The one time I looked at the back of this tv was when I installed it, since then I only look at it's great picture on the front...!
I don't mind this stand at all. At least it's not too big and noticeable like some other makes have. I have also placed my decoder in between the frame, which stands now in the middle right under the tv and it looks like it's part of the set.
The screen is not from glass.
Login or register to post comments
A seriously talented performer that has a few design issues
This is a top-notch surround package for the money. It’s a worthy alternative to the award-winning KEF R100 5.1
A great amp with some notable musical skills, but it loses a star compared with its better-performing, better-specified rivals
© 2014 Haymarket Publishing