Panasonic GX800 (TX-58GX800) 4K LED LCD TV Review & Comments

Phil Hinton

Editor
Staff member
Joined
Jan 18, 2001
Messages
11,712
Reaction score
12,833
Points
6,438
Location
AVForums
a peak brightness of 291 nits in the True Cinema accurate out of the box D65 setting.
Ough... That's much lower than the DX750, EX750 and FX750, which already had limited peak brightness compared to other competitors.
Much HDR content is still HDR10 nowadays so HDR10+ and Dolby Vision support is not enough to balance in my opinion. Panasonic should try to improve the peak brightness instead of lower it every year (on LCD models I mean).

Moreover I wish you had the opportunity to evaluate the downgrade from 100/120 Hz to 60/50 Hz panel. Is it noticeable and problematic ?
The part about motion could have been more detailed in this regard.
 
Sony almost nailed it with X930e. I would say it is better than many of the newer FALD TVs including Sony's own.
 
Been looking forward to this review as it's had some good reviews elsewhere. The 58 inch is now £799 in most sites. Unless I missed it in the review there was no mention of input lag and gaming performance @Phil Hinton?

Was gonna get a hisense b7500 for my spare/gaming room but I've been considering this as a living room replacement for my Sammy mu7000 and then move that into the spare room. The gaming performance is key though as I'd likely use this for one console and one for the other...
 
Thanks for that full review Phil - one of my interests in this TV was related to it's screen size.

My current TV is a 4K TV - but 50in. I can't fit a 65in TV and the increase in size from 50in to 55in seems unlikely to 'impress' - BUT I think I can just fit a 58in TV and 50 to 58 seems worthwhile - especially if it has a good review ....

This being edge lit (current TV full backlight but with no dimming zones) and only 290 nits in the tested mode is a diappointment - although understandable at this price-point.

I need something 'better' but I am interested in this new size option :)
 
B Unless I missed it in the review there was no mention of input lag and gaming performance @Phil Hinton?
Sorry, my Leo Bodnar is on the blink and I need to get it checked out. A new system I was trying is not entirely consistent with its results so I don't want to use it just yet. So apologies for missing it out on the GX800 review.
 
Sorry, my Leo Bodnar is on the blink and I need to get it checked out. A new system I was trying is not entirely consistent with its results so I don't want to use it just yet. So apologies for missing it out on the GX800 review.
No apologies necessary. It's been mentioned on other reviews, I just like to see it from avforums before I believe it ;)
Edit: should mention other sites quoted it at sub 15ms which seems too good to be true...
 
Last edited:
Shame it’s not a bit brighter, but looking at the smaller versions as a “can’t squeeze in a 55” OLED” option.

Good to know that the DV/HDR10+ makes a difference.
 
So glad I'm not in upgrade mode this year.
I have been 110% happy with my DX902 and my XE9405, both FALD TV sets and I have seen nothing that even tempts me to sell either of them for something newer.
Its really a shame that TV manufacturers seem to be staying away from proper FALD TV sets in favour of OLED. I understand FALD is expensive but its a proven technology and if they get it right (Sony ZD, XE9045, Panasonic etc etc) then the consumer is rewarded with a fantastic viewing experience.
 
I wonder how bright the 75-inch flagship GX920 will be
 
Shame it’s not a bit brighter, but looking at the smaller versions as a “can’t squeeze in a 55” OLED” option.

Good to know that the DV/HDR10+ makes a difference.

48” oled coming next year.

Disappointed to see Panasonic not including a WCG; that alongside hdr metadata could prove a winner.

Out of the box accuracy also appears to be poor, which only confirms Panasonic only care about oled now. Disappointing.
 
Been looking forward to this review as it's had some good reviews elsewhere. The 58 inch is now £799 in most sites. Unless I missed it in the review there was no mention of input lag and gaming performance @Phil Hinton?

Was gonna get a hisense b7500 for my spare/gaming room but I've been considering this as a living room replacement for my Sammy mu7000 and then move that into the spare room. The gaming performance is key though as I'd likely use this for one console and one for the other...

Your Samsung is far better, besides the hdr format support.
 
Disappointed to see Panasonic not including a WCG; that alongside hdr metadata could prove a winner.
I think it does have a wide colour gamut, its just no better than the WCG they had on their TVs in 2016.

Its a good little TV, but I wouldn't buy it until prices come down closer to £500-600 at 55". I fear they have added all the dynamic meta data bells and whistles but are fighting a losing battle. It may be suited when it comes down in price for someone who knows they are going to use a lot of dynamic meta data HDR but the fact it will be so poor with static meta data HDR immediately makes it a poor choice for anyone wanting to enjoy games in HDR or titles that don't have HDR10+/Dolby Vision yet.
 
Sony almost nailed it with X930e. I would say it is better than many of the newer FALD TVs including Sony's own.
I'd have to disagree, The q9fn and q90 r wipe the floor with it. Better contrast, viewing angles and operating system. The Sony was good but it was mid range at best.
 
I think it does have a wide colour gamut, its just no better than the WCG they had on their TVs in 2016.

Its a good little TV, but I wouldn't buy it until prices come down closer to £500-600 at 55". I fear they have added all the dynamic meta data bells and whistles but are fighting a losing battle. It may be suited when it comes down in price for someone who knows they are going to use a lot of dynamic meta data HDR but the fact it will be so poor with static meta data HDR immediately makes it a poor choice for anyone wanting to enjoy games in HDR or titles that don't have HDR10+/Dolby Vision yet.

The review says it doesn’t meet the standards expected of a WCG.
 
The review says it doesn’t meet the standards expected of a WCG.
The review is 'incorrect' o_O. ~90% of DCI P3 xy coverage meets UHD Premium standards (ok, so in this review it's 2% short), on what planet is this not a wide colour gamut?? It's barely any less than a Q90R in Movie mode ...
At Rtings they consider over 67% of BT2020 UV coverage wide colour gamut and this does 74% UV according to the review here.
The Dutch 40" review measured 91% DCI P3 (xy) coverage

Also everyone and their grandmother these days use the Bodnar device for input lag measurement and an AVF measurement is no better than your actual grandmother's measurement with the same device :rolleyes:.

How this set can only measure 291 nits in True Cinema mode, yet the 50" in the same mode does 378 nits ona 5% window (and 100%; plus 92% DCI P3) and the 40" 425 on a 10% window (and fullscreen as well) would almost make you think the Bodnar device wasn't the only thing broken :eek::p
 
Last edited:
The review is 'incorrect' o_O. ~90% of DCI P3 xy coverage meets UHD Premium standards (ok, so in this review it's 2% short), on what planet is this not a wide colour gamut?? It's barely any less than a Q90R in Movie mode ...
At Rtings they consider over 67% of BT2020 UV coverage wide colour gamut and this does 74% UV according to the review here.
The Dutch 40" review measured 91% DCI P3 (xy) coverage
I'm not talking JUST about 100% points, which is not actually the most accurate way to measure, Looking at actual colour points (like saturation) is more accurate and combining all those results gives you more of an idea of actual performance, than just one measurement at a level no content will be played back at. Panasonic quote it as Wide colour spectrum, not wide colour gamut, but for a budget LCD TV it does fairly well. What I actually say in the review is:
review said:
The wide colour gamut coverage is also slightly disappointing as the GX800B is not capable of reaching the DCI-P3 wide colour gamut coverage, but although that is the case, the colour points on the tracking chart do get pretty close in the lower saturation points and track there or thereabouts and this bodes well for some good colour reproduction with actual content.
I don't say anywhere in the review that it doesn't meet any standards when it comes to WCG, I state that it is short, especially in Red, Yellow and Green which is in the chart just above that quote above. There is nothing incorrect about my review or findings.

Also everyone and their grandmother these days use the Bodnar device for input lag measurement and an AVF measurement is no better than your actual grandmother's measurement with the same device :rolleyes:.

My Bodnar is on the blink, as pointed out above and why I won't use it. I won't publish data that I think is incorrect for whatever reason... I also have an HD Fury device I am testing, but again it is not proving to be consistent at the moment, so I am not using it yet.

How this set can only measure 291 nits in True Cinema mode, yet the 50" in the same mode does 378 nits on a 5% window (and 100%; plus 92% DCI P3) and the 40" 425 on a 10% window (and fullscreen as well) would almost make you think the Bodnar device wasn't the only thing broken :eek::p

There is quite a difference between 5% and 10% windows. A 5% window will in most cases be brighter when measured. The industry-standard test is a 10% window which is what we use. But of course, peak brightness is only one very small measurement to give you a true understanding of what is actually going on performance-wise. Plus we use meters that not every publication uses and we measure accurate image modes, which not everyone else does as they try and get the biggest number, which doesn't actually mean that much in the real world. Oh and a 50" is going to measure brighter than a 58" we tested. That's pretty obvious to work out and explain the difference in numbers.

Thanks for your feedback.
 
Last edited:
I'm not talking JUST about 100% points, which is not actually the most accurate way to measure, Looking at actual colour points (like saturation) is more accurate and combining all those results gives you more of an idea of actual performance, than just one measurement at a level no content will be played back at. Panasonic quote it as Wide colour spectrum, not wide colour gamut, but for a budget LCD TV it does fairly well. What I actually say in the review is:

I don't say anywhere in the review that it doesn't meet any standards when it comes to WCG, I state that it is short, especially in Red, Yellow and Green which is in the chart just above that quote above. There is nothing incorrect about my review or findings.



My Bodnar is on the blink, as pointed out above and why I won't use it. I won't publish data that I think is incorrect for whatever reason... I also have an HD Fury device I am testing, but again it is not proving to be consistent at the moment, so I am not using it yet.

There is quite a difference between 5% and 10% windows. A 5% window will in most cases be brighter when measured. The industry-standard test is a 10% window which is what we use. But of course, peak brightness is only one very small measurement to give you a true understanding of what is actually going on performance-wise. Plus we use meters that not every publication uses and we measure accurate image modes, which not everyone else does as they try and get the biggest number, which doesn't actually mean that much in the real world. Oh and a 50" is going to measure brighter than a 58" we tested. That's pretty obvious to work out and explain the difference in numbers.

Thanks for your feedback.
Thanks for the reply :).

I did write 'incorrect', meaning that you were technically right but as can be seen in one or two replies here it leads people to believe it doesn't do any or much better than Rec.709 coverage.
"The wide colour gamut coverage is also slightly disappointing as the GX800B is not capable of reaching the DCI-P3 wide colour gamut coverage"
Since there are only a handfull of sets that just about reach full DCI P3 and many more that don't come close to 90% coverage I would think this is a positive for this set. To me it seems to be in (more or less) direct competition with the Philips PUS7304 and if you want to talk about not reaching DCI-P3 wide coverage that is a much stronger contender ;).

Brightness wise 5 or 10% shouldn't really matter here should it with the lack of dimming capability. The reviews measure the same for 100% as for a 5 or 10% window (the 421 on the 40" was with a 10% window as mentioned). And I also encounter claims that the higher pixel densitiy of smaller sizes makes it harder for the light to pass through so you would expect higher, not lower values for bigger sets. But in this case it might just be a case of edge lighting performing better on the smaller sizes in terms of brightness?

The input lag measured with Bodnar device was 14.5ms btw. Good and hardly incredulous, Panasonic FX600 measured around 10ms already and I believe the Samsung RU8000 does 9.5ms iirc ...
 
Last edited:
I was looking at getting the TX-50GX800B but I'm concerned about the leaning back issue reported by some on the owners thread. From what I've read (and I must admit I've not read the entire thread) it seems to be a batch that is shipping from John Lewis specifically.
 
Got the 40'' gx820b. Really pleased with it at £599 from Currys. I cannot go any higher in size (might have stretched to 43'') due to tv room space so this was ideal. Would anyone have gone for an alternative just out of interest? It's received 5 star reviews. The tv does not lean back by the way kipper. Maybe ensure screws are secured properly for anyone that has this issue?
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom