Panasonic is a victim of its own hype. They used to post conservative numbers, then the competition went insane with claims like 9 million to 1 contrast claims. When that number would only be possible in certain conditions, not on average screen viewing. So, Panasonic started to play the game too, newer sets boasted much higher contrast ratios. But, a new set with a higher ratio may have actually had an average lower than a prior model using the old calculation method.
Panasonic will probably win the case because they will be able to show they can hit the insane number under the right conditions (well I assume they can get it to happen in the lab, or they would not have claimed it to start with). Since there is no standard for measurement manufacturers just have to show they can produce it in some way. Even if it means having a black screen settle for 10 minutes and measuring how dark it is then lighting a single pure white pixel to see how light it is, even if they have to turn the brightness all the way up.
Real plasma numbers calibrated with checkerboard patters usually run in the 1-4k contrast ratio... very far from the millions to one they claim now.
A different extreme if you look at a company like JVC which for their projectors puts out a number like 70,000:1 which reviewers have been able to verify using a calibrated picture, not some crazy brightness picture with blown highlights that you would never watch.
Sorry but I agree with this.
I think they have gone down hill with Black levels and contrast.
The Pictures are not nearly as vivid as the earlier models,and the black remind me of LCDs.
This was never the case 3 years ago.
I spent months looking for a New Panny, becuase of the past great reviews and having a great reputation for plasma brand tv's.
I'll tell you what, I was greatly disappointed on the 2009-2010 42"50" models.
Exact opposite on my 4 year old 42 inch Panny, that has better PQ then the New ones.
Having a 2005, then a 2008, I disagree. That being said, the real story here is that voltages are set to change over time, but according to people at AVS, Panasonic goofed on the algorithm so it jumps too much. The black level it has after the jump is still awesome, its just not as good as when the tv was purchased.
I personally do not think they have a leg to stand on, even though I think Panny screwed up. Lets face it, all tv's lose some sort of PQ as they age, and everyone knows a plasma ages in a certain way, and colors shift badly (at times).
Also, Panny never guaranteed that it would a certain light output at black, so its a hard one to prove.
Maybe I should sue toyota because my transmission does not shift as smoothly at 100k miles as it did at 0. To me this, this is a small band of AVS fellows with meters who are complaining about a black level in a 2009 tv thats still better than the 2008, and anything Samsung offers...
The CR of my LED local dimming set blows stuff outta the water, but that does not translate into real world performance.
That being said, the real story here is that voltages are set to change over time, but according to people at AVS, Panasonic goofed on the algorithm so it jumps too much. The black level it has after the jump is still awesome, its just not as good as when the tv was purchased.
you hit the nail on the head. It is about black levels changing over time after purchase not about claiming an outragous number for contrast ratio. All manufactures will keep doing this as there are no standards for cr at this time.
Yepp. It is my understanding that they are gonna change regardless, but Panny was too aggressive on the software and it makes this big, noticeable change.
The thing where I do not think anyone can sue, is because there is really nothing to prove. Panasonic is just going to claim that it is a design of the tv for longevity. Maybe they'll add a disclaimer to the manual next year