Mar 26 2008, 06:12 AM
Playstation 3: Not the best Blu-ray player you can buy
Posted by XanTium | 26-3-2008 0:12 EST
A lot of debate is currently going on concerning the Blu-ray capabilities of the Playstation 3.
Many people (including myself) consider it one of the best Blu-ray options right now, perhaps only topped by the just-released Panasonic DMP BD30. The main reason for this has been that the PS3 is upgradeable to both Blu-ray profile 1.1 (Bonus View) and coming profile 2.0 (BD Live) and, of course, an attractive price tag compared to dedicated players.
However, many say that the picture quality of the unit is not at par with its stand-alone competition. Being a Playstation 3 owner, my eye caught the following headline in the latest edition of Home Cinema Choice Magazine. "Sony's PS3 is the best Blu-ray player you can buy." The headline was in a "Fact or Fiction" section of the magazine. Guess what: the magazine gave the notion a "Fiction" seal.
The reason they gave: "Increasingly, the Blu-ray performance of the PS3 doesn't really stand up to videophile scrutiny. While its excellent clarity and fine detail reproduction is without question, motion is not the console's strongest point. Fast panning shots in Sony's own flagship 'Casino Royale,' are prone to stutter, whereas the company's own dedicated players render the same scenes perfectly. It is also prone to visual artifacts not seen on the latest dedicated players."
Full Story: dvdtown.com
Mar 26 2008, 12:40 PM
DONT FORGET THE AUDIO!!!
The biggest gripe I have with the PS3 as a BRD player is that it' lacking discrete analog outputs, a feature that even old, low end stand alone players offer, and the only way to get lossless audio out a BRD without a compatible HDMI receiver.
Mar 26 2008, 01:03 PM
Fast panning shots in Sony's own flagship 'Casino Royale,' are prone to stutter, whereas the company's own dedicated players render the same scenes perfectly. It is also prone to visual artifacts not seen on the latest dedicated players."
Not a problem I have seen at all. I got Casino Royale free with the PS3 and it and the problem does not exist on mine. Yes I would notice it.
Having said that I would not expect the PS3 to be as good as a mchine costing a £1000 either, but I am not buying one to compare.
Mar 26 2008, 03:09 PM
ive never come across a console yet that can better a standalone
Mar 26 2008, 04:37 PM
No Mention that it doesn't support DTS-MA? That's my biggest gripe, it may be added with firmware but still... that's a long time for us to be without "high def" audio support for a large volume of movies!
(PS3 doesn't seem to have an hdmi chip that can bitstream dolbly hd or dts Master Audio [i.e. send it to the reciever], however, the PS3 can decond Dolby HD, but not DTS MA at this time)
It's hard not to say that the PS3 is a Great player for the money, if not the best. Hell... you can still buy $200+ dvd players for a reason.
Mar 26 2008, 05:33 PM
I don't have a Blu-Ray title yet still collecting HD-DVD's lol but if I was a serious video collection guru I would get a standalone player, I just view my HD-DVD drive and PS3 Blu-Ray feature as nice little extras if I get a bit bored of gaming.
I'm kinda glad there is a winner though now, at least my friends and family know what to get when they get to DVD player prices.
Mar 26 2008, 06:29 PM
I agree with chancer on this one, maybe they got a PS3 with soem slight playback problems?. All I know is casino royal is one of the best looking movies I have ever seen and there was no grain or stuttering on my mits.
I also agree with twisted about the lack of audio options taking points away.
It is still a good deal in my eyes since it costs the same as a blue ray player but it can do a lot more.
Mar 26 2008, 07:45 PM
I'm just glad that a 1st generation product (PS3), can keep up with Bluray advancements through firmware upgrades. You won't see this w/ a standalone players as they have a shelf life of 1 yr, compared to PS3, 7 yrs.
Mar 26 2008, 11:42 PM
Anyone who cares that much about the quality of video to freaken point out every little difference between movie players should be punched in the throat for being so lame.
Mar 27 2008, 04:23 PM
I think they must've gotten a bad copy.
Of course, I can recall my PS2 aborting movie playback at certain intervals of certain movies (you could always go to the exact same spot and it'd crash again). These titles played flawlessly in my standalone, but my PS2 was in the other room at the time, and it was good to use that TV for movie watching, so I figured I'd exhange one of the movies I bought from wally world for the same title, and proceeded home to immediately find one of the "glitch spots". Wouldn't you know it, the whole movie played back flawlessly!
What many people either don't understand or just overlook is that when optical media (the discs we play) is manufactured, it is molded. This process may be the most efficient for creating replicas, but it's not a process that is without error. Because of how molding works, there's also an error margin (meaning that a perfect replica isn't necessary to achieve 100% functionality of a product).
I'm suprised they're even saying this, considering how long Casino Royale's been out and nobody else has complained, yet PS3 was the most integrated player when CR hit the market (so of course they would've tested it).
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here