Panasonic HZ2000 Flagship OLED TV Review & Comments

AndretheTVguy

Active Member
Everyone in this forum hurt because they want it but can't afford it :laugh:. Thats life some times guys

Its like saying a "LaFerrari £1,000,000 I can get 4 Ferrari F8s for that price" .... yeh but its not a LaFerrari is it

This model is clearly priced to compete with the WX OLEDs (£4799) and 950TS 8K QLEDs (£5399) of the world
 

Coulson

Distinguished Member
Everyone in this forum hurt because they want it but can't afford it :laugh:. Thats life some times guys
There are instances where that is true but for me personally this is not one of them. Side by side with other OLED TVs, most people would struggle you see the difference. It's like the difference between the Nvidia Shield 2015 and 2019. The remote is better but the other differences are more subtle and in general not worth the upgrade.
 
Everyone in this forum hurt because they want it but can't afford it :laugh:. Thats life some times guys

Its like saying a "LaFerrari £1,000,000 I can get 4 Ferrari F8s for that price" .... yeh but its not a LaFerrari is it

This model is clearly priced to compete with the WX OLEDs (£4799) and 950TS 8K QLEDs (£5399) of the world
Most people actually prefer LG OLED TVs and they get just as good reviews as this Panasonic.
 

lgans316

Distinguished Member
Most people actually prefer LG OLED TVs and they get just as good reviews as this Panasonic.
Remember the LG C9 won the HDTVTest shootout against Panasonic GZ2000 flagship. Shows how close these TVs are.
 
Remember the LG C9 won the HDTVTest shootout against Panasonic GZ2000 flagship. Shows how close these TVs are.
Yes basically comes down to personal preference but some TVs offer similar performance at a much cheaper price.
 

BRAKKUS1

Distinguished Member
Everyone in this forum hurt because they want it but can't afford it :laugh:. Thats life some times guys

Its like saying a "LaFerrari £1,000,000 I can get 4 Ferrari F8s for that price" .... yeh but its not a LaFerrari is it

This model is clearly priced to compete with the WX OLEDs (£4799) and 950TS 8K QLEDs (£5399) of the world
That is a ridiculous thing to say, and kinda implies that people can't actually use their brains, to work out what's going on, but I'm gonna give you the chance, to educate me.

Tell me, aside from a 150nit advantage, what does the HZ2000 bring to the table, that the £2799 HZ1000 doesn't?
 

Gerry76

Member
Great tv , needs lower pricing and more marketing exposure. It does seem to have incremental improvements over the GZ2000. No matter what some LG fans say, side by side this tv looks better, that's from the mouth of a local calibrator i have known since long. For a movie buff, it would be immaterial that a C9 beat the GZ2000 in a shootout because that is weighing in the gaming aspect which is not relevant to movie watchers, LG has never beaten panasonic in the best home theater TV category. And it's the same case with the CX vs HZ2000.
 

connon

Active Member
Great review. I just wish Panasonic would bring out a cheaper panel only version without speakers like their Plasma pro range back in the day. I suspect most people who would buy one of these already have a separate surround sound setup.
 

wesslan

Member
Getting kind of tiresome seeing people annoyed that the company behind the best plasmas have only focused on movies and PQ and not gaming. Move on, you like LG and really need 2.1, fine go for it. There will be 1% AAA titles that might run [email protected] native on ps5 and xbox x. 60hz is fine, it's fine for top tier PC setup and will be fine for consoles and even 30 been fine for most since ps4 and xbox released all those years ago. And yes they promised 60hz then also but we didn't get much.

I bought the hz2000 for a few things. I don't like LGs motion, out of the box performance, fw bugs like with raised blacks on pretty much all DV content and flickering chroma with VRR. I had a sony before, very happy with motion and colors but not with how they handled DV with software. And I prefer the tonemapping on panasonic that retains details without brightening the whole picture that LG love.

I chose panasonic because they have the best near black handling, highest nits, great tonemapping and better APL handling compared to other brands but that that is my view.. And with the 2000 you get less retention problems, better cooling and a great atmos system if you don't want to buy a good soundbar.

I chose 2000 over 1000 because of the higher nits, better remote, better design in my eyes and the metal slab for improved cooling and hopefully less prone to retention in the long years.

Premium tvs cost more like anything premium, audio, speakers, cars, apartments, GPUs and so on. It's up to you if it's worth it or not.

And seeing CX and Denon only this year using 40gbit hdmi is kind of proof the hardware hasn't been ready. And probably why sony, panasonic, philips and others have waited.
 

John Hother

Active Member
Its not marketed as a gaming TV.

Btw, this now confirms that the peak brightness on 2020 panels have dropped since last year. Not sure if this is to combat burn-in or the sub-pixel structure.
My 65HZ2000 was calibrated this morning, and the brightness is about the same as my former 65GZ2000. Measured to 962 nits on a 10 percent window.
 

lgans316

Distinguished Member
My 65HZ2000 was calibrated this morning, and the brightness is about the same as my former 65GZ2000. Measured to 962 nits on a 10 percent window.
That's interesting as measured peak brightness on 10% window is a full 100 nits lower (panel variance maybe).
 

dion 6

Active Member
Great review. I just wish Panasonic would bring out a cheaper panel only version without speakers like their Plasma pro range back in the day. I suspect most people who would buy one of these already have a separate surround sound setup.
A panel only a tiny bezel would be great panasonic could save some money on the speaker system and give us a cheaper tv I personally never use the tv speakers on my GZ950
 

MEGATAMA

Well-known Member
Its not marketed as a gaming TV.

Btw, this now confirms that the peak brightness on 2020 panels have dropped since last year. Not sure if this is to combat burn-in or the sub-pixel structure.
So we should have one tv for movies one for games one for sport.....
I dont support this logic.
 

lgans316

Distinguished Member
So we should have one tv for movies one for games one for sport.....
I dont support this logic.
You need not but it is the way it is. Look at Samsung. They have gone out of depth and completely lost the plot year on year despite having all the resources.
 

RAINS

Active Member
Great tv , needs lower pricing and more marketing exposure. It does seem to have incremental improvements over the GZ2000. No matter what some LG fans say, side by side this tv looks better, that's from the mouth of a local calibrator i have known since long. For a movie buff, it would be immaterial that a C9 beat the GZ2000 in a shootout because that is weighing in the gaming aspect which is not relevant to movie watchers, LG has never beaten panasonic in the best home theater TV category. And it's the same case with the CX vs HZ2000.
I agree, not sure the HZ has much more over and above my current GZ requirements to justify the change especially when you can pick up a GZ for less than £2k. It took me 11 years to move from my Kuro and now my GZ has been pro calibrated not sure i'll need to change again soon !
 

BRAKKUS1

Distinguished Member
And seeing CX and Denon only this year using 40gbit hdmi is kind of proof the hardware hasn't been ready. And probably why sony, panasonic, philips and others have waited.
I'm not saying it isn't good, I personally have no bias to any brand (you think they give a sh*t about us?) I go where the best is pic/features, and for that eye watering amount of money, it's pretty dubious what you are really getting extra, we have to question things in life, or we are no better than Lemmings honestly.

As for 40Gbps, why on earth spend more money on a 48Gbps chipset? As far as I'm aware, there isn't one 12bit panel on the market..what the hell is the point.
 

AndretheTVguy

Active Member
That is a ridiculous thing to say, and kinda implies that people can't actually use their brains, to work out what's going on, but I'm gonna give you the chance, to educate me.

Tell me, aside from a 150nit advantage, what does the HZ2000 bring to the table, that the £2799 HZ1000 doesn't?
  1. Extra image retention and screen burn mitigation (I'm sure the 100s of people that have got screen burn over the last couple of years would agree this is an important thing)
  2. The extra 150nits you are quoting effects more than just having that number. It allows for better dynamic range, allowing more accurate colours and better ABL for bright room viewing. Having actually seen them side by side whites look blue on other OLEDs and white on the GZ/HZ2000.
  3. Inbuilt 140w Dolby atmos speakers. Whether you need them or not it is clear as all brands have shown that the mass market prefer an all in one system rather than separate units for sound.
Again again again. It was said about the GZ2000 last year and its the same this year, you are not spending £1500 more because its £1500 better (side by side). You are spending £1500 more to get the 'best TV' and it cost a lot for Panasonic to make it that way. From a completely different engineering process of the Panel, to a different production line, to different R&D.

£1500 is a lot of money to me but at least I understand to some people its pocket change and not every TV has to be for the mass market
 
  1. Extra image retention and screen burn mitigation (I'm sure the 100s of people that have got screen burn over the last couple of years would agree this is an important thing)
  2. The extra 150nits you are quoting effects more than just having that number. It allows for better dynamic range, allowing more accurate colours and better ABL for bright room viewing. Having actually seen them side by side whites look blue on other OLEDs and white on the GZ/HZ2000.
  3. Inbuilt 140w Dolby atmos speakers. Whether you need them or not it is clear as all brands have shown that the mass market prefer an all in one system rather than separate units for sound.
Again again again. It was said about the GZ2000 last year and its the same this year, you are not spending £1500 more because its £1500 better (side by side). You are spending £1500 more to get the 'best TV' and it cost a lot for Panasonic to make it that way. From a completely different engineering process of the Panel, to a different production line, to different R&D.

£1500 is a lot of money to me but at least I understand to some people its pocket change and not every TV has to be for the mass market
From my experience 150 nits is nothing you need at least 400 nits difference to see a change in dynamic range.
 

BRAKKUS1

Distinguished Member
  1. Extra image retention and screen burn mitigation (I'm sure the 100s of people that have got screen burn over the last couple of years would agree this is an important thing)
  2. The extra 150nits you are quoting effects more than just having that number. It allows for better dynamic range, allowing more accurate colours and better ABL for bright room viewing. Having actually seen them side by side whites look blue on other OLEDs and white on the GZ/HZ2000.
  3. Inbuilt 140w Dolby atmos speakers. Whether you need them or not it is clear as all brands have shown that the mass market prefer an all in one system rather than separate units for sound.
Again again again. It was said about the GZ2000 last year and its the same this year, you are not spending £1500 more because its £1500 better (side by side). You are spending £1500 more to get the 'best TV' and it cost a lot for Panasonic to make it that way. From a completely different engineering process of the Panel, to a different production line, to different R&D.

£1500 is a lot of money to me but at least I understand to some people its pocket change and not every TV has to be for the mass market
I've literally just had a new TV delivered today, I've deepdived all the relevant sets, and all the reviews (inc this one) can't see much of a difference regarding peak brightness, even side by side videos show it extremely close, with marginal clipping on some scenes, which demonstrate it is a little brighter now and then, but £1900 more than a CX!? It's missing the majority of features for starters, so what you are really laying the cash down on is the audio system, and that is a whacking premium....you could buy a great speaker set up for that, or even the £1600 premium over the HZ1000, just think about that for a minute...
 

Gerry76

Member
I've literally just had a new TV delivered today, I've deepdived all the relevant sets, and all the reviews (inc this one) can't see much of a difference regarding peak brightness, even side by side videos show it extremely close, with marginal clipping on some scenes, which demonstrate it is a little brighter now and then, but £1900 more than a CX!? It's missing the majority of features for starters, so what you are really laying the cash down on is the audio system, and that is a whacking premium....you could buy a great speaker set up for that, or even the £1600 premium over the HZ1000, just think about that for a minute...
So you are here to dissuade people from buying the HZ2000 or to discuss the review that phil hinton wrote? You don't think the extra cost is justified, then fine, there is a LG section here for your needs. With HZ2000, panasonic is not targetting a 'price to performance' value proposition, they are targetting videophiles/movie lovers with a flagship oled who want the absolute best and most refined current oled technology that money can buy. If value is your top concern, you are in the wrong thread.
 

Gerry76

Member
Getting kind of tiresome seeing people annoyed that the company behind the best plasmas have only focused on movies and PQ and not gaming. Move on, you like LG and really need 2.1, fine go for it. There will be 1% AAA titles that might run [email protected] native on ps5 and xbox x. 60hz is fine, it's fine for top tier PC setup and will be fine for consoles and even 30 been fine for most since ps4 and xbox released all those years ago. And yes they promised 60hz then also but we didn't get much.

I bought the hz2000 for a few things. I don't like LGs motion, out of the box performance, fw bugs like with raised blacks on pretty much all DV content and flickering chroma with VRR. I had a sony before, very happy with motion and colors but not with how they handled DV with software. And I prefer the tonemapping on panasonic that retains details without brightening the whole picture that LG love.

I chose panasonic because they have the best near black handling, highest nits, great tonemapping and better APL handling compared to other brands but that that is my view.. And with the 2000 you get less retention problems, better cooling and a great atmos system if you don't want to buy a good soundbar.

I chose 2000 over 1000 because of the higher nits, better remote, better design in my eyes and the metal slab for improved cooling and hopefully less prone to retention in the long years.

Premium tvs cost more like anything premium, audio, speakers, cars, apartments, GPUs and so on. It's up to you if it's worth it or not.

And seeing CX and Denon only this year using 40gbit hdmi is kind of proof the hardware hasn't been ready. And probably why sony, panasonic, philips and others have waited.
So you already bought the HZ2000? I've discussed with you on avsforum.com (that's you right), but you don't post there anymore? I'm still waiting on HZ2000, the pricing is out of bounds for me , as this would be a bedroom tv and there is a limit how much i can spend for that. My dealer told there is no chance of a price drop till december, and if it doesnt happen in december, then have to wait till mid next year (i'm talking of official manufacturer price drop). So I am waiting, even if i have to until the next year but eventually i'll hopefully buy this panasonic. I still have my sony A9G to watch.
 

AndretheTVguy

Active Member
Usually
From my experience 150 nits is nothing you need at least 400 nits difference to see a change in dynamic range.
Usually I'd agree but the HZ2000 has a less aggressive ABL due to the heat management and the effect is seen on everything looking brighter and more dynamic. Thats why just saying 150nits is deceptive as there are other benefits and knock on effects of the custom Panel
 

lgans316

Distinguished Member
I chose panasonic because they have the best near black handling, highest nits, great tonemapping and better APL handling compared to other brands but that that is my view.. And with the 2000 you get less retention problems, better cooling and a great atmos system if you don't want to buy a good soundbar.
I have the 65GZ1000. Near black handling and handling of heavily compressed material is definitely better than my ex-LG C8. Brightness wise both look similar. The biggest issue is this micro stutter/frame skip. I am seeing this often (like 6 to 10 times in every episode of Star Wars Disney+ Dolby Vision). I am sure the HZ2000 will be the TV beat in terms of overall picture quality (if you don't see this micro-stutter) but it certainly is in a different price range.
 

BRAKKUS1

Distinguished Member
So you are here to dissuade people from buying the HZ2000 or to discuss the review that phil hinton wrote? You don't think the extra cost is justified, then fine, there is a LG section here for your needs. With HZ2000, panasonic is not targetting a 'price to performance' value proposition, they are targetting videophiles/movie lovers with a flagship oled who want the absolute best and most refined current oled technology that money can buy. If value is your top concern, you are in the wrong thread.
Dude, people come here to read reviews and discuss it? People need opinions, so they can make up their own minds, nothing I've said is incorrect, but people get defensive about purchases/potential, and go to the ends of the earth to defend their position, regardless of fact. Being a nodding dog in a review thread, doesn't help anyone, if counter points of view, cannot be put forward.
 

Gerry76

Member
Dude, people come here to read reviews and discuss it? People need opinions, so they can make up their own minds, nothing I've said is incorrect, but people get defensive about purchases/potential, and go to the ends of the earth to defend their position, regardless of fact. Being a nodding dog in a review thread, doesn't help anyone, if counter points of view, cannot be put forward.
People come into a HZ2000 review thread to read that the CX is a much better value? This is not a comparison thread, read the thread title again.
And i already have my opinion, im not here to seek help from people on what to buy. The calibrator who's told me the 2000 looks better than CX SBS is ISF level III, that's all i need. The HZ2000, just like the GZ2000, is not a 'bang for the buck' kind of tv as you are complaining, it's not targetted at that market by panasonic in the first place.
 

The latest video from AVForums

The Best Movies and TV Shows Coming to Netflix in November 2020: Tom's Thumbs.

Latest News

Tom's Thumbs: What is coming to Netflix in November 2020
  • By AVForums
  • Published
Melco anniversary edition N10 library announced
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
What's new on Disney+ UK for November 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Denon, Marantz and Yamaha AV receivers hit by HDMI 2.1 bug
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
McIntosh launches MX100 AV processor and MI347 power amp
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom